Why is it that we always hear of backlogs when it comes to immigration applications? If there was a backlog anywhere else in the system - passports, licensing, health cards, taxes - all the officials would get reprimanded and the situation would be corrected vely quickly.
It is so pathetic that backlogs are the trademark in this country, which depends so much on immigration. I think that we should make immigration backlogs illegal. Whenever a backlog appears, start a public investigation. Look into the causes, dip into a special emergency fund for immigration backlogs. Hire extra workers and recruit volunteers - as during a census or any public campaign. And replace the management that failed to deal with the backlog early on.
I believe Canada is losing out much because of the backlogs. It is a poor way to keep immigration levels down. A better way would be to make the rules stricter with less qualified applicants, but process the people faster - instead of having weak rules with lots of applicants but processing everyone very slowly and hoping that some will give up. You get less qualified people this way.
Who doesn't agree with me?
I will have to repeat again the very simple fact I am stating almost every week here - there is nothing increase in resources can do to eliminate backlogs. Backlogs are not caused by poor management, low resources or incompetence of processing officers - backlogs are a direct result of the difference between number of applications being submitted every year and the annual immigration targets approved by our Parliament. No matter how much money and people you will throw into processing - if you have 3 to 6+ times more applications than the number of visas to be granted per year then you have a backlog.
Canada's Treasury Board provides the Immigration Department with only sufficient resources to meet its goals. If there are significantly more applications than needed to meet the goals then a backlog becomes inevitable. On top of that there is now increased need to check the bona fides of each applicant.
Then why accept new applications? if you want to accept only a small percentage of them?
I think immigration laws should be changed to a more effecient ones that suit this policy.
I process applications of a different kind on a daily basis.
I accept about 50%, I can process 20 a day and receive about 20 a day, hence no backlog. If my company received 40, and two of us did the job then there'd be no backlog. It's nothing to do with acceptance rate.
But that is exactly my point. It is pathetic to queue up mediocre applicants and then take forever to process them to get just a few. It would be much better to make the rules much stricter, and then quickly deal with the smaller number of the best of the best. We can process them immediately, not shoot over the target, and end up with a much better qualified bunch of immigrants. That would be the right way to deal with the situation.
If you wished to receive only 20 applications per day and accept only 16, and you were resourced for that number, then your system would be in balance. But, what would you do if you received about 60 or more applications per day, and were ethically required to process any that seemed to meet your criteria? Also what if some of the process was done by others and their process was beyond your control?
A very strict cut off mark had been in use until recently, when it was found to be too discouraging and endangered the goal, so that is not a control option either.
This is exactly what we just had for past 18 or so months - the 75 points pass mark that substantially reduced number of qualifying applicants. But for some strange reasons (mostly financial and political) it had a short life, wasn't given the fair chance to be fully tested and it was lowered to 67 (because lower number of applications means less revenue). So, thank politicians who may have just started the biggest backlog in Canadian immigration program ever. Current selection criteria and 67 points pass mark are in overall quite easier to meet than the 70 points pass mark and occupation based selection criteria of the old law that was blamed for creation of backlog in the first place.
Backlogs (at least, with FAMILY CLASS applications) are partly the result of incompetency and inefficiency. I cannot stress this point enough, no matter what anyone else tells you.
If "quotas" was the true reason for backlogs (and again, I can only talk about FAMILY CLASS--I have no idea about Skilled WOrker applications), then applications from AUGUST OF 2003 WOULD NOT BE PROCESSED as quickly as they have been! (we're talking August 2003 to December of 2003--FOUR MONTH PROCESSING)
Why are applications from August 2003 already being completed (in four months), when others before them are still waiting (and waiting. and waiting. and waiting)?
Yes, yes, "no two applications are the same" blah blah blah blah. The fact is that this department is inefficient, and unfair to many. Many applicants with clear-cut cases have had their files "heel-dragged" for eons. Meanwhile, some folks who apply in, say, August of this year, get a free ride.
Makes no sense to me; and it reeks of a shoddy department!
1) CHC Delhi or buffalo , immigration Fee is the same.
From India, around 28000 immigrants were processed in yr 2002
From US it was only 5000 ( atleast 5 times less)
CHC Delhi has only one full service office , processing all types of Visa applications including Student visa( which is increasing every year and has to be processed , atleast within in same month of application)
Bufallo is full service office with Detroit / LA/ Washinton DC/ Seatle/Newyork to take interview load.
This clearly demonstrates that US based CHC facility is better equiped than India. Or even China ( which has atleast two full service offices !!)
I do not agree that Visa offices are fully equipped but applicants are swarming in. One can always regulate applicants by playing with immigration point system.
You are just contradicting yourself my friend. If 5 times more immigrants came from India than from US in 2002 then it is clear that processing resources are 5 times higher in India than in US. If as you claim US offices were better "equipped" then it would be more immigrants coming from US than from India, wouldn't it?
I was thinking 75 was a reasonable mark, or even change or employment-based immigration policy as USA, I really do not understand why they like backlogs?!
5 times more immigrants from India have come or got processed their applications from all sorts of visa posts such as Jamiaca/UK/Paris/Hongkong/Singapore etc. many of them from US too.
So It is wrong to assume 5 times more Indians coming to canada means CHC Delhi is better equipped than CHC US.
If we look into workers Visa than US sent ( processed) 20,000
work visa in Yr 2002 as compared to 1800 from India. ( 10 times more than India and Numerically both are well compensated!!!)
Point is : 2nd highest immigrant contribution from india , which is 5 times higher than US , is now going to be processed almost wholly from CHC Delhi and signs of strain are already visible.
Let us have More comparisons/indicators:
CHC Delhi needs 9 months for confirmiing reciept of application of Skilled workers.( can be checked at the web site). US office gets it done within weeks.
CHC Delhi is non committal about Time taken for First Review/ Interview waiver decision or Final decision. 9Skilled workers)
They need 42 months to reach final decision for family class!!
Year 2003 (Q1&Q2), landed Indian immigrants have already dropped by 33% as compared to 12% drop from US.
33% drop is equal to 100% of US immigrant contribution in a year!!!
Many of yr 2002 applicants from US are already in Canada.
From India CHC Delhi is yet to open yr 2002 files for first review >> 2 years are almost over.
I do not have official data but I can bet , Buffalo conducts more Interviews per 1000 applicants than CHC Delhi. CHC Delhi is lately coming out with more of interview waivers , relying heavily on IELTS.
All this is creating back log.,In case Quota system is another variant than it is all the more necessary to cut back on new applicants and jack up point from 67 to 75!!! Give verdict to old applicants >> whether pass or fail.
I do agree , current 67 point may create a still bigger backlog.
The new rule limiting applicants to submitting their cases to the visa office responsible for their country of residence it going to force some big changes in staffing levels at overseas posts. Unfortunately, this will take a few years to accomplish, and even then, they will always be behind whatever trends arise. There is no such thing as a plan for all seasons.
Why? This is a huge business. It produces lot of immigration related job
I agree , it is indeed taking quite a few years to affect changes.
But why? After all Canada is well developed country. It should be knowing how to plan proactively. How to predict and adjust to changed requirements. Plenty of accurate data can be taken from its stats department and redeployment can be done.
I understand 0.1 million old applicants are still waiting a verdict ,
some 8,000 amongst them went to court on account of retroactivity, from India alone.(CIC has never given accurate picture on this)
They filed applications between 1999 to Dec 2002. With 2.5 average family , around 1000 Cd$ processing fee
In Nov. 2002 CIC promised opening of 2nd Visa post in India and it was planned to be operational by April 2003.
Well April 2003 is gone and in Nov. 2003 , it is nothing less than Honourable Canadian Prime minister making a statement , during his India visit >>> that Chandigarh- India Visa post is planned and shall be operational by April 2004!!!( Without reference to past failed promise)
Mr Andrew Miller has given a hint nothing is lacking , all CIC visa posts are well equipped and capable of handling the load!!! It is quota system coupled with a deluge of applications , which is offsetting . Well that may be partially true but not wholly true.
In case CIC does not want to redeploy or increase strength and wants to operate with a meagre staff in India. ( that is my conclusion). Than, today is the world of fast communication, pending files can be scanned and adobe copy can be processed at Ottawa , back log can be reduced. In the meantime there is no need of lowering pass marks to 67 unless CIC saw a huge drop in prospective immigrants , from other countries of choice.
India was still forwarding potential immigrants with greater than 75 pass marks and better than 7 IELTS score. Ready to drive cab or clean floors while working for a brighter tomorrow for all.
You are experienced person , I trust your statement , it is matching with ground realities. In my case it seems with 82 points under New IRPA , April 2002 applicant at CHC Delhi. I have jeopardised my as well as my family future and career.Many important decisions have come to a standstill in my life. Backlog is indeed killing!!
With the old regulations ielts was not essential. so people who applied generally gave themselves higher points for language than what they would actually get with ielts hoping to make it in the interview.
with ielts in the new rules, i am pretty sure most people may not get 7 in all the bands in high applicant countries like china and india where english is not a native language.
in countries of former soviet union where they do 10 year schooling instead of 12...chances are lower. on top of that the english requirement is high.
getting 6 in the sections reduces the score big time. two 6s you lose 4 points !!!! most single applicants with bachelors degree wont qualify.
some time back i was attending a self evaluation session with a immigration agency.
a whole bunch of the potential applicants were giving themselves "high proficiency" in the english language sections when i could see they were not that fluent at all.
Also now even the online masters are also gone.
Obviously a lot of people would apply looking at the 67 passmark without looking into the fine prints...but would get rejected.
however backlog can be cleaned anytime the cic wants...all that they have to do is increase the pass mark....wipe out the entire inventory.