MarylandNed

But as PR's become citizens they fall off the list of PR's. So a small percentage increase in PR's does not tell us how many existing PR's convert to citizens and how many new PR's arrive.

For example, let's say we have 100,000 PR's one year. The next year let's say 30,000 of them become citizens and 32,000 new PR's arrive. Now we have 102,000 PR's. So it looks like we have only a 2% increase in PR's.

Let's say that the next year 40,000 become citizens and 42,000 new PR's arrive. Now we have a 33% increase in citizenship applications (from 30000 to 40000) but only a tiny increase in the number of PR's.

Novocastrian

The CIC statistics, as I understand them, were not cumulative or net population figures, but rather the annual numbers of people being granted PR status.

Of course, as the people on here who know these things often mention, there are many ways of becoming a PR.

Unless you were born here, there's only one way of becoming a citizen.

MarylandNed

Even so, that wouldn't preclude the pool of existing PR's from pushing up the number of citizenship applications by a large amount from one year to the next. There is not necessarily a direct correlation between the number of new PR's and the number of citizenship applications over a short enough time span.

True for an adult who isn't already a Canadian citizen but I believe there are at least 3 ways of becoming a Canadian citizen without being born in Canada:

- By naturalization
- By descent
- By adoption

JAJ

If you can show, based on reasonable evidence from a respected source, that the child isn't Algerian, then it is unlikely that this would be contested by the Australian authorities.



Not usually a problem when it only has to go back to a parent and is documented at an early stage. That's already the case for Canadian citizens by descent.


Apparently the situation in the DR is that they have retroactively annulled the DR citizenship of those born in the country. That's different to what has occurred in Australia, and may occur in Canada.


The United Nations convention does not oblige Australia to grant Australian citizenship to everyone born on its territory. The intention is that everyone should have at least a citizenship, but not necessarily Australian citizenship. As for "proving" someone is stateless, the term "proof" is often used on forums when "reasonable evidence" more accurately reflects the expectation of the statute.

Novocastrian

Sorry, but the fact that the backlog has increased is solely due to Kenney et al.'s interference with the process, introducing more and more bureaucratic paper work for the applicants while decreasing the number of bureaucrats available to do their jobs.

They do this because of xenophobia among their political base.

The little quote in that article about the CIC is just a teensiest bit of flimflam.

danfolkestone

You're not sorry at all. You'd just rather believe in conspiracy theories than facts.

Novocastrian

No, not true, but since I don't have the facts. Since this is your theory it's incumbent upon you to provide them. Good luck.

BTW I never mentioned conspiracy theory. Just reactionary politics. Must do better.

danfolkestone

I haven't espoused any theories - I simply reported information provided by CIC. A source, incidentally that you considered reliable enough to quote when you thought it supported your own prejudices, but then deemed unreliable when I provided further information quoted from the same source. As such, I see no point in wasting further time discussing the matter with you.

Novocastrian

You cited a CBC article which (intentionally or otherwise) misinterpreted some figures stated (without a reference) to originate from CIC.

Let's look at those figures: it said that in 2007 there were 189,000 PR applications for citizenship pending and that the waiting time was 12-15 month. This implies that there were in the period an average of 15,750 applications per month (using 12 months, fewer if using 15).

Now there are 350,000 applications pending and the processing time is quote as 23 months: that's 15,200 new applicants per month.

i.e. the size of the backlog has nothing to do with the rate of applications.

Shard

Based on the above it would appear that the size of the backlog has not changed either (adjusting for processing time)? Am I missing something here?

Novocastrian

I don't think so. What one can conclude is that CIC is roughly half as efficient today as it was about 8 years ago.

I leave you to speculate how and why that has happened.