I commend Arron for a fair and analytical piece.
If people who have already passed through the process, and those who are currently enduring it, were to write short, dispassionate and analytical letters to their local MP, that might stir things up in CIC.
If the letter were copied to the local media, that would put pressure on Jason Kenney to make changes to the process, because the one thing a Minister hates is publicity that makes it look like he or she is not doing the best job possible.
It`s not necessary to be negative toward Kenney; just point out flaws in the system, and suggest ways to eliminate those flaws.
I agree that the forms are unclear at times. A brief upfront definition of what is meant by “family member” would be helpful. There are so many members of this forum who have asked for clarification of this simple point.
Surely is should be mentioned upfront that there is a regional checklist to complete, as well as the main checklist, to make sure that applicants don’t miss the regional checklist. The regional checklist for Beijing is buried deep – I almost missed it! And while I’m on the topic of regional checklists, why is the Hong Kong checklist different from the Beijing checklist? The order of documents is different, and they call for somewhat different information, so an application to be processed through Beijing would look different from an application processed through Hong Kong. The problem is that the applicant from China doesn’t know which office CIC will assign the application to, so he/she must cover both bases, and organizing the application becomes unnecessarily difficult. Not an insurmountable problem, but one of the many unnecessary difficulties in the process that could easily be eliminated.
How to organize the application should not be left to individual inspiration (and uncertainty). This is not an exercise in creative imagination. CIC should issue a short directive on how to organize the application. So easy.
Etc etc.
Good post Arron.