Is there a different method?
I think yes: why doesnt Canada simply ask for airline data? Which would maybe 2-3 pages vs. 500+ of full blown RQ. U.S. already shares data for the land borders so there are no other ways to get out of this country. Why Canada is being so arrogant when it comes to the people who have loved to come to this country and they may not immediately fit into a 9-5 working class which citizenship officers like to see. These are the same people who might have invested a fortune of wealth and time into Canada. It hurts that the system is looking at them as dishonest. It also hurts that when IRCC considers the file non routine for whatever reason then the applicant is just at the mercy of the officer with almost no resource other than waiting for a much longer time. I just find it unfair, unjust, and unlike any other Canadian ways I have seen during my whole years in Canada. The Government can easily invest in ways to get ones exits from Canada. They are just being as conservative as they can be but to the people who go through this process they face a different face of Canada which shoudnt necessarily have to be this way.
If you are mostly venting or advocating changes in the law or policy, which appears to be the case, there are other topics more suited for such commentary.
This topic is focused on particular non-routine RQ-related procedures under the current law and policy, and how these affect the process overall.
Moreover, personally I do not engage much in discussions about what the law, rules, policies, or practices SHOULD be. It is difficult and complicated and time-consuming enough trying to keep up with what the law, rules, policies, and practices ACTUALLY are, and how they apply in various circumstances.
And as you have complained yourself, this topic already is so dense it can be difficult to pick out the more essential information. Side trips into what the policy or law should be would only make this particular topic more complicated and confusing.
I will note, however, you appear to overlook or misunderstand some key elements in the citizenship application process, especially the role and effect of
dates-of-entry and
dates-of-exit.
For the vast, vast majority of applicants,
IRCC calculates presence BASED ON THE APPLICANT'S ACCOUNTING OF DATES. And in doing this, IRCC makes the INFERENCE that the applicant was present in Canada all days from the
date-of-entry (as reported by the applicant) up to and including the next
date-of-exit (as reported by the applicant).
There are solid reasons for this.
The applicant is the ONE AND ONLY PERSON IN WHOLE WORLD WHO FOR SURE CAN KNOW THIS INFORMATION. The applicant was there, in person, each and every time the applicant entered Canada. The applicant was there, in person, each and every time the applicant left Canada. The applicant is the ONLY person who for sure was there. There is NO good reason why the applicant's account should be off at all.
So IRCC generally, almost always, relies on the applicant's account.
But of course that does not mean IRCC does so without making various verification checks to discern whether the applicant has provided complete and accurate information, especially since many people fail to be good or accurate reporters for a variety of reasons. Deception is an obvious one. But there are other more common reasons why people fail to be competent reporters of accurate information, such as the failure to keep good records and the natural fallibility of memory.
So IRCC performs various checks to verify whether or not the applicant's account is sufficiently reliable to PROVE beyond a balance of probabilities that the applicant met the minimum presence requirement. Again, for the vast majority of applicants this assessment has a positive outcome and the applicant's accounting is relied on.
Which leads back to that INFERENCE of presence from the
date-of-entry to the next
date-of-exit.
AS REPORTED BY THE APPLICANT. This is indeed precisely how the online presence calculation works. Applicants are NOT required to specifically designate every date they were present in Canada. They only need to enter dates they left Canada and dates they entered Canada, and the calculator automatically counts all days from a reported
date-of-entry to the next
date-of-exit as days present in Canada.
No problem UNLESS IRCC identifies a reason to question the applicant's information.
And even when IRCC sees a reason to question the applicant's account, IRCC often employs a less intrusive means to resolve the question. Applicants have reported, for example, overlooking and failing to report trips for up to three weeks or so, and being asked about this by the interviewer, and upon recognizing their mistake explaining it was an oversight, which in the scheme of things (including, obviously, a substantial margin over the minimum) satisfied the interviewer AND, importantly, the Citizenship Officer, such that they were soon scheduled to take the oath. No additional requests for information.
IRCC officials are NOT engaged in
GOTCHA-GAMES. Anyone who reads a forum like this for long should readily see that IRCC rolls with all sorts or errors and mistakes and failures to follow the instructions.
But sometimes there are still questions, still concerns. In these instances many applicants have reported limited, specific requests when their responses in the interview did not fully satisfy IRCC. These range from requests to provide an authenticated translation of passports (which applicants should bring to the interview anyway) or specific things like rental receipts, or another country's Record of Movement. Some get RQ-lite, which itself can range from a request with only a couple of the items checked and requested, to the full list being checked.
Based on the PDIs it is IRCC stated policy to request the less-intrusive means to resolve questions.
But in some cases IRCC's concerns rise to the level of essentially requiring the applicant to prove his or her case, and CIT 0171, the full-blown RQ, is issued.
In these cases that INFERENCE of presence the days between a reported
date-of-entry to the next
date-of-exit, is at least compromised if not disregarded. In these cases IRCC is asking for proof of actual presence for all days the applicant claims to have been present. In these cases IRCC is NOT relying much on the applicant's reported
dates-of-entry and
dates-of-exit, except to the extent all the evidence supports a conclusion the applicant was in fact present during that time.
Remember, proof the applicant entered Canada on a given date, say January 15, 2017, does NOT prove where the applicant was the next day, January 16, 2017, let alone the day after that or the days in the week after that.
Canada does not, and there is NO hint at all that in any near future Canada will, rely on government or airline or any other records to document all dates a person left or entered Canada. There is no reason to think it is at all likely Canada might move in that direction.
It is, however, moving in a direction which (like many other countries) is capturing and accessing more and more information, including information which will show if and when a PR has given inaccurate information about his or her travel dates. And it is also utilizing other sources of information which might indicate if a person was outside Canada some dates the applicant claimed to be in Canada (researching online open sources like LinkedIn for example) or had reason to be outside Canada (which increases the likelihood she was outside Canada in the absence of positive proof of being in Canada).
So, to be clear, all that information sharing with the U.S., and entry data captured by CBSA PoE officials, and other data resources, is primarily accessed to determine if the citizenship applicant has truthfully, accurately reported travel dates. For
VERIFICATION.
Which is still good news for many applicants. IRCC should be more comfortable, more assured, that an applicant's accurate accounting of travel is indeed accurate. And can be relied upon. Of course it is NOT good news for those who fail to keep precise records and fail to provide a complete and accurate accounting of travel dates, since the deviations will more likely be noticed.
