warrenjenkins

Thank you very much. What is the procedure and requirement to apply? Is that normal procedure?

Former Lancastrian

For which one? There is no limit or timeframe for super visa and its the easiest route.
Sponsoring for PR status is limited 5,000 spots max of 10,000 applications and probably this years quota already gone.

gulbird

How soon after one arrives with PR, can apply for parent supervisa?

Shirtback

Your parents would apply, not you.

Parent and grandparent super visa

You might find it helpful to do a search of the forum for posts on the subject, &/or posts by dave_j & Jerseygirl who are here on Supervisas. And start a thread of your own.

FelineNation

My sisters and I sponsored our father, who was a fit 87 year old when the process began. They finally called dad for a medical when he was 91. By which time he'd had several TIAs and had begun a downward slide into Vascular Dementia.

After waiting a further 6 months for the results of the medical, we received no response to enquiries. After getting in touch with my sister's local MP, we found out they had "lost" his medical (not sure how you lose a digital medical report!). Following the enquiry from the MP, they miraculously "found" it. He was finally notified that he had passed his medical. This despite vascular dementia, high blood pressure, heart arrhythmia, glaucoma, and various other ailments.

He received his PR in 2015, the whole process took 5 years. He arrived in Canada in October last year. He has his own UK pension. Physically he is still very fit and he makes no demands on the Canadian health care system, as we as a family are caring for him, and his UK pension covers any care we bring into to assist him.

It is sad that now he is finally here, his condition has deteriorated so much that he thinks he is still at home in the UK, and he barely recognised his daughters, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. But at least he will end his days surrounded by his family, instead of isolated in a gods waiting room nursing home in the UK with noone to visit or care for him.

dave_j

It saddens me that your father is unable to fully enjoy his family.
Your post raises an important point, and one no doubt that will apply to a great many others out there.
Where the 'child sponsor' examines the idea that a 'parent sponsoree' might be content to immigrate here to a country where the procedure can prove lengthy, then it would make sense to discuss the issue between each other at as early stage as possible and decide what's best for both parties.
Although not cheap, it may have been possible for your father to have lived here under the supervisa option while awaiting PR sponsorship.
A relevant mantra that I live by is that: 'It's never too late until it's too late', a rule that applies to other issues besides this one.

Steve_

The supervisa was some silly idea dreamt up by Jason Kenney if iirc, to deflect criticism from all the people who had recently got their Canadian citizenship and were thus now voters and were waiting literally forever to sponsor in their parents.

It has the same problem as TN-1 status for Canadians in the US (which may be where he got the idea from), i.e. you have to maintain non-immigrant intent.

In theory you can reapply indefinitely but in reality sooner or later you run into a jobsworth CBSA inspector who says no. Which is much the same with CBP and TN-1.

In reality, you can't maintain non-immigrant intent to return to another country indefinitely. But it's subjective, which is why it's silly.

dave_j

I agree that the rules surrounding the concept of the Supervisa are at odds with how it is viewed and some might describe them as being silly.

For example, the visa holder is under obligation to maintain links with the 'old country' and understand that he or she retains the status of 'Visitor' even though years might pass.

A reasonable person might judge that if living in a country for a set period allows the individual to apply for citizenship then they might also argue that the idea of maintaining a link is simply an unrealistic ideal that exists only in the mind of the applicant.

I would argue, although basing this on hearsay only, that most supervisa applicants recognise the risks associated with how concept may be viewed by the grouchy CBSA official and are willing to accept them.

As you get older with fewer valuable years to waste waiting, you recognise that some silly ideas make more sense if they allow you to overcome difficulties that would otherwise be impossible.

Who cares if the CBSA will say NO after having lived near a much loved child for a few years when the alternative would be Skype at best, and little or no contact at worst.

I can only attest that it has served my purpose well and although I understand that it was conceived as a political expedient, I for one have been pleased to exploit it.

Former Lancastrian

Actually you would be running into a jobsworth IRCC (CIC) employee as CBSA really has nothing to do with the supervise apart from issuing the visitor record

Scribble

On a related note, does anyone have older family back in the UK that need care but they haven;t moved over to Canada? I'd hate to see one of my parents end up in an elderly homecare place eventually but at home care is very expensive too from what I hear.

Jerseygirl

I recommend you open a new thread in our UK forums...

Moving back to the UK - British Expats

Depending I how much income/savings they have they may be entitled to daily visits from social services. Carers came to visit/help my mother 4 times per day.

Steve_

I was under the impression that non-immigrant intent was determined by CBSA at the POE. A visa isn't a guarantee of entry.

So say you work as a CBSA inspector at Peace Bridge and a couple roll up and according to their entry record they've been in Canada the last two years and want to enter on their super visa.

They have a house in Ontario. They have Ontario DLs. Their car is registered in Ontario. They have children who live in Ontario who are Canadian citizens. One of the children has filed for permanent residency for them via family reunification.

When you ask them what their non-immigrant intent is, they vaguely point out they have some ties to another country but no residence there and can't immediately produce anything to prove any ties.

What do you do then? U.S. border guards bar skilled Canadian from his job - British Columbia - CBC News

I remember talking to a Canadian who was from Surrey and he got a job in Seattle on TN-1. Anyway one day he was crossing the border back into the US (bear in mind he wasn't applying for TN-1, he already had it) and the inspector asked him where he lived and he said, "Seattle" and largely on the strength of that answer and the fact his car was registered in Washington, paroled him in for two weeks to collect his things as he lacked non-immigrant intent.

Steve_

But it's not the only alternative, you could just spend the summers in Canada indefinitely. Then you would clearly have non-immigrant intent as you would have to maintain a residence abroad.

I just personally think visa categories that have some stupidly low quota are ridiculous. The classic example being H-1C in the US for nurses, which has a quota of only 500, distributed regionally, mainly because the nurses union in the US objected to the old H-1A category. Or fourth preference (sponsored by a sibling) which has a quota of 65,000 a year and there are literally millions of outstanding petitions. If you applied today, it would take in excess of 40 years to get a visa.

A cap of 10,000 for parents and grandparents doesn't come anywhere near the actual demand. And apparently the sponsor has to promise to provide support for 20 years. How the hell does that work, by then they could have been a citizen for ages.

It's a consequence of MPs having people showing up saying they want to sponsor in their parents and the MP knowing it defeats the purpose of skilled immigration, so they come up with this half-ass compromise which looks as though they've done something but they haven't really. Also having a half-ass compromise is sort of a sop to skilled immigrants so they stick around.

Former Lancastrian

Intent can be determined by a visa officer overseas (CIC employee) or by a CBSA officer at a POE. The introduction of the super visa was done to satisfy in some part PRs or citizens in Canada who wanted their parents/grandparents to come and live with them as processing for the PR route was taking years and there was a huge backlog. The thinking was that these parents/grandparents would not wish to work and be happy being allowed to stay in Canada for a maximum of 10 years by extending every 2 years after the initial issue of the super visa.

The key difference is that the super visa allows multiple entry periods lasting up to 2 years. Those travelling on a 10-year multiple-entry visa can only stay for up to six months per entry.
To extend their stay after 2 years they would apply online and be issued new documents by CIC so CBSA would have no say after the initial entry about non immigrant intent as CIC approved the extension.

Scribble

We had this question further above - not sure if fully answered.
Id it's multiple entry, how long must you leave for to then return for another 2 years?
eg 2 years, leave for 2 days, return for 2 years, leave for 2 days, etc.