PR Card and government incompetence
Dec 20th 2003, 5:35 pm
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
PR Card and government incompetence
It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
let you on board bound back for Canada.
There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
"on hold".
Foreign carriers are already saying that all they'll look at is if
people have a valid passport and if they need a visit for the country
they're visiting, and that they can't get into the details whether the
people are in fact landed immigrants and then look for special cards
to see if special requirements are met.
In short, this whole PR Card can not be effective the way it is to be
implemented. It will cause huge scandals coming 2004 if they don't
"put it on hold".
Here's how I think the thought process of the people we look to to
govern:
Mr Jones: Terrorists pissed off the Americans.
Ms Jinks: I know, I heard, what will that mean for all of us?
Mr Jones: The Americans are starting to throw their weight around.
Ms Jinks: No kidding.
Mr Jones: We're expected not to stand by and do nothing.
Ms Jinks: What can we do?
Mr Jones: The Americans are saying the threat is from abroad.
Ms Jinks: I guess the immigrants are the threat.
Mr Jones: We can't get immigrants to carry around their passports.
Ms Jinks: Yes, they're too big. People carry around their drivers
licenses.
Mr Jones: Great idea, we can require people to apply for a special
Permanent Resident Card.
Ms Jinks: Sounds good, but how can we make people apply for one?
Mr Jones: We can simply require them to.
Ms Jinks: People will ignore it, or not know about it.
Mr Jones: We can tell people that the old immigrant paper will not be
allowed for travel. After all, terrorists will be "traveling", so the
key is "requiring" the card for entry.
Ms Jinks: What do we do with all the people at the airport though,
lock them all up?
Mr Jones: No, we make the commercial carriers forbid boarding without
the card.
Ms Jinks: But how do they know which people are immigrants and which
ones are tourists?
Mr Jones: Doesn't matter, let's just move ahead, it'll intimidate
people, and they will apply for the card. I know people will leak
through left and right, I realize that commercial carriers could never
filter people this way, but, we got to do something.
Ms Jinks: I want to go home before rush hour, can we wrap this up?
Mr Jones: Ok, we'll put this in effect, post it on our website. "The
airline in the country you are visiting will leave you standing at the
airport if you don't have a PR Card". There, done.
The government is losing huge credibility with this total and utter
lameheaded thinking. There is no way in the world that remote
carriers are going to sifting through people and pissing people off by
leaving them standing at airports. It is simply proposterous, and
liable to all kinds of lawsuits.
The government knows this, and I bet you $ 1,000,000 that the
government will put this whole "PR Card" requirement "on hold" to
prevent a huge scandal. They will truly appear completely imcompetent
if they don't.
In the meantime, myself, I was intimidated by this whole thing, and
don't have my PR Card yet. I canceled my plan to spend Christmas in
Holland. A "limited use travel document" would have required me to
travel all the way to Berlin (Germany). The Canadian Embassy in
Berlin is open between 9 and 11am. For a 2 week vacation to see my
parents and relatives, it is rediculous I have to sacrifice my time,
and worry during my vacation that I must prove I'm not a terrorist and
need special permission to return home.
How much headache has this caused for people? I canceled my plans,
how many other people have chosen not to travel back home for a
holiday or something?
I lived here for over 10 years, and although I could have picked up
Canadian Citizenship, I wasn't ready to give up my European passport.
I have lots of things to contribute to society, both to Canada and
Europe, I work very hard, never do anything wrong, help people all the
time, and government is slapping me around just in case I'm a
terrorist or something.
Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
I'm really quite pissed off.
their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
let you on board bound back for Canada.
There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
"on hold".
Foreign carriers are already saying that all they'll look at is if
people have a valid passport and if they need a visit for the country
they're visiting, and that they can't get into the details whether the
people are in fact landed immigrants and then look for special cards
to see if special requirements are met.
In short, this whole PR Card can not be effective the way it is to be
implemented. It will cause huge scandals coming 2004 if they don't
"put it on hold".
Here's how I think the thought process of the people we look to to
govern:
Mr Jones: Terrorists pissed off the Americans.
Ms Jinks: I know, I heard, what will that mean for all of us?
Mr Jones: The Americans are starting to throw their weight around.
Ms Jinks: No kidding.
Mr Jones: We're expected not to stand by and do nothing.
Ms Jinks: What can we do?
Mr Jones: The Americans are saying the threat is from abroad.
Ms Jinks: I guess the immigrants are the threat.
Mr Jones: We can't get immigrants to carry around their passports.
Ms Jinks: Yes, they're too big. People carry around their drivers
licenses.
Mr Jones: Great idea, we can require people to apply for a special
Permanent Resident Card.
Ms Jinks: Sounds good, but how can we make people apply for one?
Mr Jones: We can simply require them to.
Ms Jinks: People will ignore it, or not know about it.
Mr Jones: We can tell people that the old immigrant paper will not be
allowed for travel. After all, terrorists will be "traveling", so the
key is "requiring" the card for entry.
Ms Jinks: What do we do with all the people at the airport though,
lock them all up?
Mr Jones: No, we make the commercial carriers forbid boarding without
the card.
Ms Jinks: But how do they know which people are immigrants and which
ones are tourists?
Mr Jones: Doesn't matter, let's just move ahead, it'll intimidate
people, and they will apply for the card. I know people will leak
through left and right, I realize that commercial carriers could never
filter people this way, but, we got to do something.
Ms Jinks: I want to go home before rush hour, can we wrap this up?
Mr Jones: Ok, we'll put this in effect, post it on our website. "The
airline in the country you are visiting will leave you standing at the
airport if you don't have a PR Card". There, done.
The government is losing huge credibility with this total and utter
lameheaded thinking. There is no way in the world that remote
carriers are going to sifting through people and pissing people off by
leaving them standing at airports. It is simply proposterous, and
liable to all kinds of lawsuits.
The government knows this, and I bet you $ 1,000,000 that the
government will put this whole "PR Card" requirement "on hold" to
prevent a huge scandal. They will truly appear completely imcompetent
if they don't.
In the meantime, myself, I was intimidated by this whole thing, and
don't have my PR Card yet. I canceled my plan to spend Christmas in
Holland. A "limited use travel document" would have required me to
travel all the way to Berlin (Germany). The Canadian Embassy in
Berlin is open between 9 and 11am. For a 2 week vacation to see my
parents and relatives, it is rediculous I have to sacrifice my time,
and worry during my vacation that I must prove I'm not a terrorist and
need special permission to return home.
How much headache has this caused for people? I canceled my plans,
how many other people have chosen not to travel back home for a
holiday or something?
I lived here for over 10 years, and although I could have picked up
Canadian Citizenship, I wasn't ready to give up my European passport.
I have lots of things to contribute to society, both to Canada and
Europe, I work very hard, never do anything wrong, help people all the
time, and government is slapping me around just in case I'm a
terrorist or something.
Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
I'm really quite pissed off.
Dec 20th 2003, 5:51 pm
#2
Forum Regular
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 137
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
We all understand your frustrations but to my best knowledge European passport holders will still be able to travel without this card.
Go have a merry xmas with your family and dance an Irish Jig.
Go have a merry xmas with your family and dance an Irish Jig.
Originally posted by hondacivic
It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
let you on board bound back for Canada.
There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
"on hold".
Foreign carriers are already saying that all they'll look at is if
people have a valid passport and if they need a visit for the country
they're visiting, and that they can't get into the details whether the
people are in fact landed immigrants and then look for special cards
to see if special requirements are met.
In short, this whole PR Card can not be effective the way it is to be
implemented. It will cause huge scandals coming 2004 if they don't
"put it on hold".
Here's how I think the thought process of the people we look to to
govern:
Mr Jones: Terrorists pissed off the Americans.
Ms Jinks: I know, I heard, what will that mean for all of us?
Mr Jones: The Americans are starting to throw their weight around.
Ms Jinks: No kidding.
Mr Jones: We're expected not to stand by and do nothing.
Ms Jinks: What can we do?
Mr Jones: The Americans are saying the threat is from abroad.
Ms Jinks: I guess the immigrants are the threat.
Mr Jones: We can't get immigrants to carry around their passports.
Ms Jinks: Yes, they're too big. People carry around their drivers
licenses.
Mr Jones: Great idea, we can require people to apply for a special
Permanent Resident Card.
Ms Jinks: Sounds good, but how can we make people apply for one?
Mr Jones: We can simply require them to.
Ms Jinks: People will ignore it, or not know about it.
Mr Jones: We can tell people that the old immigrant paper will not be
allowed for travel. After all, terrorists will be "traveling", so the
key is "requiring" the card for entry.
Ms Jinks: What do we do with all the people at the airport though,
lock them all up?
Mr Jones: No, we make the commercial carriers forbid boarding without
the card.
Ms Jinks: But how do they know which people are immigrants and which
ones are tourists?
Mr Jones: Doesn't matter, let's just move ahead, it'll intimidate
people, and they will apply for the card. I know people will leak
through left and right, I realize that commercial carriers could never
filter people this way, but, we got to do something.
Ms Jinks: I want to go home before rush hour, can we wrap this up?
Mr Jones: Ok, we'll put this in effect, post it on our website. "The
airline in the country you are visiting will leave you standing at the
airport if you don't have a PR Card". There, done.
The government is losing huge credibility with this total and utter
lameheaded thinking. There is no way in the world that remote
carriers are going to sifting through people and pissing people off by
leaving them standing at airports. It is simply proposterous, and
liable to all kinds of lawsuits.
The government knows this, and I bet you $ 1,000,000 that the
government will put this whole "PR Card" requirement "on hold" to
prevent a huge scandal. They will truly appear completely imcompetent
if they don't.
In the meantime, myself, I was intimidated by this whole thing, and
don't have my PR Card yet. I canceled my plan to spend Christmas in
Holland. A "limited use travel document" would have required me to
travel all the way to Berlin (Germany). The Canadian Embassy in
Berlin is open between 9 and 11am. For a 2 week vacation to see my
parents and relatives, it is rediculous I have to sacrifice my time,
and worry during my vacation that I must prove I'm not a terrorist and
need special permission to return home.
How much headache has this caused for people? I canceled my plans,
how many other people have chosen not to travel back home for a
holiday or something?
I lived here for over 10 years, and although I could have picked up
Canadian Citizenship, I wasn't ready to give up my European passport.
I have lots of things to contribute to society, both to Canada and
Europe, I work very hard, never do anything wrong, help people all the
time, and government is slapping me around just in case I'm a
terrorist or something.
Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
I'm really quite pissed off.
It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
let you on board bound back for Canada.
There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
"on hold".
Foreign carriers are already saying that all they'll look at is if
people have a valid passport and if they need a visit for the country
they're visiting, and that they can't get into the details whether the
people are in fact landed immigrants and then look for special cards
to see if special requirements are met.
In short, this whole PR Card can not be effective the way it is to be
implemented. It will cause huge scandals coming 2004 if they don't
"put it on hold".
Here's how I think the thought process of the people we look to to
govern:
Mr Jones: Terrorists pissed off the Americans.
Ms Jinks: I know, I heard, what will that mean for all of us?
Mr Jones: The Americans are starting to throw their weight around.
Ms Jinks: No kidding.
Mr Jones: We're expected not to stand by and do nothing.
Ms Jinks: What can we do?
Mr Jones: The Americans are saying the threat is from abroad.
Ms Jinks: I guess the immigrants are the threat.
Mr Jones: We can't get immigrants to carry around their passports.
Ms Jinks: Yes, they're too big. People carry around their drivers
licenses.
Mr Jones: Great idea, we can require people to apply for a special
Permanent Resident Card.
Ms Jinks: Sounds good, but how can we make people apply for one?
Mr Jones: We can simply require them to.
Ms Jinks: People will ignore it, or not know about it.
Mr Jones: We can tell people that the old immigrant paper will not be
allowed for travel. After all, terrorists will be "traveling", so the
key is "requiring" the card for entry.
Ms Jinks: What do we do with all the people at the airport though,
lock them all up?
Mr Jones: No, we make the commercial carriers forbid boarding without
the card.
Ms Jinks: But how do they know which people are immigrants and which
ones are tourists?
Mr Jones: Doesn't matter, let's just move ahead, it'll intimidate
people, and they will apply for the card. I know people will leak
through left and right, I realize that commercial carriers could never
filter people this way, but, we got to do something.
Ms Jinks: I want to go home before rush hour, can we wrap this up?
Mr Jones: Ok, we'll put this in effect, post it on our website. "The
airline in the country you are visiting will leave you standing at the
airport if you don't have a PR Card". There, done.
The government is losing huge credibility with this total and utter
lameheaded thinking. There is no way in the world that remote
carriers are going to sifting through people and pissing people off by
leaving them standing at airports. It is simply proposterous, and
liable to all kinds of lawsuits.
The government knows this, and I bet you $ 1,000,000 that the
government will put this whole "PR Card" requirement "on hold" to
prevent a huge scandal. They will truly appear completely imcompetent
if they don't.
In the meantime, myself, I was intimidated by this whole thing, and
don't have my PR Card yet. I canceled my plan to spend Christmas in
Holland. A "limited use travel document" would have required me to
travel all the way to Berlin (Germany). The Canadian Embassy in
Berlin is open between 9 and 11am. For a 2 week vacation to see my
parents and relatives, it is rediculous I have to sacrifice my time,
and worry during my vacation that I must prove I'm not a terrorist and
need special permission to return home.
How much headache has this caused for people? I canceled my plans,
how many other people have chosen not to travel back home for a
holiday or something?
I lived here for over 10 years, and although I could have picked up
Canadian Citizenship, I wasn't ready to give up my European passport.
I have lots of things to contribute to society, both to Canada and
Europe, I work very hard, never do anything wrong, help people all the
time, and government is slapping me around just in case I'm a
terrorist or something.
Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
I'm really quite pissed off.
Dec 20th 2003, 6:05 pm
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
Why haven't you applied for PR Card in time? New immigration act has been
signed into law in November 2001 and since June 2002 CIC was running rather
large media campaign informing everyone about new PR Card requirement.
More - if you hold Dutch passport then you don't really need PR Card nor any
visa to board the plane to Canada. So, cancellation of your plans was not
only unnecessary but also a result of lack of attention to press
announcements and not reading the rules. Don't blame the government for your
own fault. No offence intended, just a reality check... :-)
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
> their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
> special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
> let you on board bound back for Canada.
> There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
> "on hold".
> Foreign carriers are already saying that all they'll look at is if
> people have a valid passport and if they need a visit for the country
> they're visiting, and that they can't get into the details whether the
> people are in fact landed immigrants and then look for special cards
> to see if special requirements are met.
> In short, this whole PR Card can not be effective the way it is to be
> implemented. It will cause huge scandals coming 2004 if they don't
> "put it on hold".
> Here's how I think the thought process of the people we look to to
> govern:
> Mr Jones: Terrorists pissed off the Americans.
> Ms Jinks: I know, I heard, what will that mean for all of us?
> Mr Jones: The Americans are starting to throw their weight around.
> Ms Jinks: No kidding.
> Mr Jones: We're expected not to stand by and do nothing.
> Ms Jinks: What can we do?
> Mr Jones: The Americans are saying the threat is from abroad.
> Ms Jinks: I guess the immigrants are the threat.
> Mr Jones: We can't get immigrants to carry around their passports.
> Ms Jinks: Yes, they're too big. People carry around their drivers
> licenses.
> Mr Jones: Great idea, we can require people to apply for a special
> Permanent Resident Card.
> Ms Jinks: Sounds good, but how can we make people apply for one?
> Mr Jones: We can simply require them to.
> Ms Jinks: People will ignore it, or not know about it.
> Mr Jones: We can tell people that the old immigrant paper will not be
> allowed for travel. After all, terrorists will be "traveling", so the
> key is "requiring" the card for entry.
> Ms Jinks: What do we do with all the people at the airport though,
> lock them all up?
> Mr Jones: No, we make the commercial carriers forbid boarding without
> the card.
> Ms Jinks: But how do they know which people are immigrants and which
> ones are tourists?
> Mr Jones: Doesn't matter, let's just move ahead, it'll intimidate
> people, and they will apply for the card. I know people will leak
> through left and right, I realize that commercial carriers could never
> filter people this way, but, we got to do something.
> Ms Jinks: I want to go home before rush hour, can we wrap this up?
> Mr Jones: Ok, we'll put this in effect, post it on our website. "The
> airline in the country you are visiting will leave you standing at the
> airport if you don't have a PR Card". There, done.
> The government is losing huge credibility with this total and utter
> lameheaded thinking. There is no way in the world that remote
> carriers are going to sifting through people and pissing people off by
> leaving them standing at airports. It is simply proposterous, and
> liable to all kinds of lawsuits.
> The government knows this, and I bet you $ 1,000,000 that the
> government will put this whole "PR Card" requirement "on hold" to
> prevent a huge scandal. They will truly appear completely imcompetent
> if they don't.
> In the meantime, myself, I was intimidated by this whole thing, and
> don't have my PR Card yet. I canceled my plan to spend Christmas in
> Holland. A "limited use travel document" would have required me to
> travel all the way to Berlin (Germany). The Canadian Embassy in
> Berlin is open between 9 and 11am. For a 2 week vacation to see my
> parents and relatives, it is rediculous I have to sacrifice my time,
> and worry during my vacation that I must prove I'm not a terrorist and
> need special permission to return home.
> How much headache has this caused for people? I canceled my plans,
> how many other people have chosen not to travel back home for a
> holiday or something?
> I lived here for over 10 years, and although I could have picked up
> Canadian Citizenship, I wasn't ready to give up my European passport.
> I have lots of things to contribute to society, both to Canada and
> Europe, I work very hard, never do anything wrong, help people all the
> time, and government is slapping me around just in case I'm a
> terrorist or something.
> Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
> I'm really quite pissed off.
signed into law in November 2001 and since June 2002 CIC was running rather
large media campaign informing everyone about new PR Card requirement.
More - if you hold Dutch passport then you don't really need PR Card nor any
visa to board the plane to Canada. So, cancellation of your plans was not
only unnecessary but also a result of lack of attention to press
announcements and not reading the rules. Don't blame the government for your
own fault. No offence intended, just a reality check... :-)
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
> their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
> special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
> let you on board bound back for Canada.
> There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
> "on hold".
> Foreign carriers are already saying that all they'll look at is if
> people have a valid passport and if they need a visit for the country
> they're visiting, and that they can't get into the details whether the
> people are in fact landed immigrants and then look for special cards
> to see if special requirements are met.
> In short, this whole PR Card can not be effective the way it is to be
> implemented. It will cause huge scandals coming 2004 if they don't
> "put it on hold".
> Here's how I think the thought process of the people we look to to
> govern:
> Mr Jones: Terrorists pissed off the Americans.
> Ms Jinks: I know, I heard, what will that mean for all of us?
> Mr Jones: The Americans are starting to throw their weight around.
> Ms Jinks: No kidding.
> Mr Jones: We're expected not to stand by and do nothing.
> Ms Jinks: What can we do?
> Mr Jones: The Americans are saying the threat is from abroad.
> Ms Jinks: I guess the immigrants are the threat.
> Mr Jones: We can't get immigrants to carry around their passports.
> Ms Jinks: Yes, they're too big. People carry around their drivers
> licenses.
> Mr Jones: Great idea, we can require people to apply for a special
> Permanent Resident Card.
> Ms Jinks: Sounds good, but how can we make people apply for one?
> Mr Jones: We can simply require them to.
> Ms Jinks: People will ignore it, or not know about it.
> Mr Jones: We can tell people that the old immigrant paper will not be
> allowed for travel. After all, terrorists will be "traveling", so the
> key is "requiring" the card for entry.
> Ms Jinks: What do we do with all the people at the airport though,
> lock them all up?
> Mr Jones: No, we make the commercial carriers forbid boarding without
> the card.
> Ms Jinks: But how do they know which people are immigrants and which
> ones are tourists?
> Mr Jones: Doesn't matter, let's just move ahead, it'll intimidate
> people, and they will apply for the card. I know people will leak
> through left and right, I realize that commercial carriers could never
> filter people this way, but, we got to do something.
> Ms Jinks: I want to go home before rush hour, can we wrap this up?
> Mr Jones: Ok, we'll put this in effect, post it on our website. "The
> airline in the country you are visiting will leave you standing at the
> airport if you don't have a PR Card". There, done.
> The government is losing huge credibility with this total and utter
> lameheaded thinking. There is no way in the world that remote
> carriers are going to sifting through people and pissing people off by
> leaving them standing at airports. It is simply proposterous, and
> liable to all kinds of lawsuits.
> The government knows this, and I bet you $ 1,000,000 that the
> government will put this whole "PR Card" requirement "on hold" to
> prevent a huge scandal. They will truly appear completely imcompetent
> if they don't.
> In the meantime, myself, I was intimidated by this whole thing, and
> don't have my PR Card yet. I canceled my plan to spend Christmas in
> Holland. A "limited use travel document" would have required me to
> travel all the way to Berlin (Germany). The Canadian Embassy in
> Berlin is open between 9 and 11am. For a 2 week vacation to see my
> parents and relatives, it is rediculous I have to sacrifice my time,
> and worry during my vacation that I must prove I'm not a terrorist and
> need special permission to return home.
> How much headache has this caused for people? I canceled my plans,
> how many other people have chosen not to travel back home for a
> holiday or something?
> I lived here for over 10 years, and although I could have picked up
> Canadian Citizenship, I wasn't ready to give up my European passport.
> I have lots of things to contribute to society, both to Canada and
> Europe, I work very hard, never do anything wrong, help people all the
> time, and government is slapping me around just in case I'm a
> terrorist or something.
> Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
> I'm really quite pissed off.
Dec 20th 2003, 6:25 pm
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
P.S.
If by any chance your "European passport" is not from the country on
Canadian visitor visa waiver list and you need PR Card then government put
in place a procedure for expedited issuance of PR Card for those who didn't
read the news, didn't follow changes in law and have to travel - see here:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pr-card/urgent-cases.html
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"Andrew Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:x31Fb.6416$6b2.1449@edtnps84...
> Why haven't you applied for PR Card in time? New immigration act has been
> signed into law in November 2001 and since June 2002 CIC was running
rather
> large media campaign informing everyone about new PR Card requirement.
> More - if you hold Dutch passport then you don't really need PR Card nor
any
> visa to board the plane to Canada. So, cancellation of your plans was not
> only unnecessary but also a result of lack of attention to press
> announcements and not reading the rules. Don't blame the government for
your
> own fault. No offence intended, just a reality check... :-)
> --
> ../..
> Andrew Miller
> Immigration Consultant
> Vancouver, British Columbia
> email: [email protected]
> (delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
> ________________________________
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
> > their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
> > special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
> > let you on board bound back for Canada.
> > There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
> > "on hold".
> >
> > Foreign carriers are already saying that all they'll look at is if
> > people have a valid passport and if they need a visit for the country
> > they're visiting, and that they can't get into the details whether the
> > people are in fact landed immigrants and then look for special cards
> > to see if special requirements are met.
> >
> > In short, this whole PR Card can not be effective the way it is to be
> > implemented. It will cause huge scandals coming 2004 if they don't
> > "put it on hold".
> >
> > Here's how I think the thought process of the people we look to to
> > govern:
> >
> > Mr Jones: Terrorists pissed off the Americans.
> > Ms Jinks: I know, I heard, what will that mean for all of us?
> > Mr Jones: The Americans are starting to throw their weight around.
> > Ms Jinks: No kidding.
> > Mr Jones: We're expected not to stand by and do nothing.
> > Ms Jinks: What can we do?
> > Mr Jones: The Americans are saying the threat is from abroad.
> > Ms Jinks: I guess the immigrants are the threat.
> > Mr Jones: We can't get immigrants to carry around their passports.
> > Ms Jinks: Yes, they're too big. People carry around their drivers
> > licenses.
> > Mr Jones: Great idea, we can require people to apply for a special
> > Permanent Resident Card.
> > Ms Jinks: Sounds good, but how can we make people apply for one?
> > Mr Jones: We can simply require them to.
> > Ms Jinks: People will ignore it, or not know about it.
> > Mr Jones: We can tell people that the old immigrant paper will not be
> > allowed for travel. After all, terrorists will be "traveling", so the
> > key is "requiring" the card for entry.
> > Ms Jinks: What do we do with all the people at the airport though,
> > lock them all up?
> > Mr Jones: No, we make the commercial carriers forbid boarding without
> > the card.
> > Ms Jinks: But how do they know which people are immigrants and which
> > ones are tourists?
> > Mr Jones: Doesn't matter, let's just move ahead, it'll intimidate
> > people, and they will apply for the card. I know people will leak
> > through left and right, I realize that commercial carriers could never
> > filter people this way, but, we got to do something.
> > Ms Jinks: I want to go home before rush hour, can we wrap this up?
> > Mr Jones: Ok, we'll put this in effect, post it on our website. "The
> > airline in the country you are visiting will leave you standing at the
> > airport if you don't have a PR Card". There, done.
> >
> > The government is losing huge credibility with this total and utter
> > lameheaded thinking. There is no way in the world that remote
> > carriers are going to sifting through people and pissing people off by
> > leaving them standing at airports. It is simply proposterous, and
> > liable to all kinds of lawsuits.
> >
> > The government knows this, and I bet you $ 1,000,000 that the
> > government will put this whole "PR Card" requirement "on hold" to
> > prevent a huge scandal. They will truly appear completely imcompetent
> > if they don't.
> >
> > In the meantime, myself, I was intimidated by this whole thing, and
> > don't have my PR Card yet. I canceled my plan to spend Christmas in
> > Holland. A "limited use travel document" would have required me to
> > travel all the way to Berlin (Germany). The Canadian Embassy in
> > Berlin is open between 9 and 11am. For a 2 week vacation to see my
> > parents and relatives, it is rediculous I have to sacrifice my time,
> > and worry during my vacation that I must prove I'm not a terrorist and
> > need special permission to return home.
> >
> > How much headache has this caused for people? I canceled my plans,
> > how many other people have chosen not to travel back home for a
> > holiday or something?
> > I lived here for over 10 years, and although I could have picked up
> > Canadian Citizenship, I wasn't ready to give up my European passport.
> > I have lots of things to contribute to society, both to Canada and
> > Europe, I work very hard, never do anything wrong, help people all the
> > time, and government is slapping me around just in case I'm a
> > terrorist or something.
> > Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
> > I'm really quite pissed off.
If by any chance your "European passport" is not from the country on
Canadian visitor visa waiver list and you need PR Card then government put
in place a procedure for expedited issuance of PR Card for those who didn't
read the news, didn't follow changes in law and have to travel - see here:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pr-card/urgent-cases.html
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"Andrew Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:x31Fb.6416$6b2.1449@edtnps84...
> Why haven't you applied for PR Card in time? New immigration act has been
> signed into law in November 2001 and since June 2002 CIC was running
rather
> large media campaign informing everyone about new PR Card requirement.
> More - if you hold Dutch passport then you don't really need PR Card nor
any
> visa to board the plane to Canada. So, cancellation of your plans was not
> only unnecessary but also a result of lack of attention to press
> announcements and not reading the rules. Don't blame the government for
your
> own fault. No offence intended, just a reality check... :-)
> --
> ../..
> Andrew Miller
> Immigration Consultant
> Vancouver, British Columbia
> email: [email protected]
> (delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
> ________________________________
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
> > their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
> > special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
> > let you on board bound back for Canada.
> > There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
> > "on hold".
> >
> > Foreign carriers are already saying that all they'll look at is if
> > people have a valid passport and if they need a visit for the country
> > they're visiting, and that they can't get into the details whether the
> > people are in fact landed immigrants and then look for special cards
> > to see if special requirements are met.
> >
> > In short, this whole PR Card can not be effective the way it is to be
> > implemented. It will cause huge scandals coming 2004 if they don't
> > "put it on hold".
> >
> > Here's how I think the thought process of the people we look to to
> > govern:
> >
> > Mr Jones: Terrorists pissed off the Americans.
> > Ms Jinks: I know, I heard, what will that mean for all of us?
> > Mr Jones: The Americans are starting to throw their weight around.
> > Ms Jinks: No kidding.
> > Mr Jones: We're expected not to stand by and do nothing.
> > Ms Jinks: What can we do?
> > Mr Jones: The Americans are saying the threat is from abroad.
> > Ms Jinks: I guess the immigrants are the threat.
> > Mr Jones: We can't get immigrants to carry around their passports.
> > Ms Jinks: Yes, they're too big. People carry around their drivers
> > licenses.
> > Mr Jones: Great idea, we can require people to apply for a special
> > Permanent Resident Card.
> > Ms Jinks: Sounds good, but how can we make people apply for one?
> > Mr Jones: We can simply require them to.
> > Ms Jinks: People will ignore it, or not know about it.
> > Mr Jones: We can tell people that the old immigrant paper will not be
> > allowed for travel. After all, terrorists will be "traveling", so the
> > key is "requiring" the card for entry.
> > Ms Jinks: What do we do with all the people at the airport though,
> > lock them all up?
> > Mr Jones: No, we make the commercial carriers forbid boarding without
> > the card.
> > Ms Jinks: But how do they know which people are immigrants and which
> > ones are tourists?
> > Mr Jones: Doesn't matter, let's just move ahead, it'll intimidate
> > people, and they will apply for the card. I know people will leak
> > through left and right, I realize that commercial carriers could never
> > filter people this way, but, we got to do something.
> > Ms Jinks: I want to go home before rush hour, can we wrap this up?
> > Mr Jones: Ok, we'll put this in effect, post it on our website. "The
> > airline in the country you are visiting will leave you standing at the
> > airport if you don't have a PR Card". There, done.
> >
> > The government is losing huge credibility with this total and utter
> > lameheaded thinking. There is no way in the world that remote
> > carriers are going to sifting through people and pissing people off by
> > leaving them standing at airports. It is simply proposterous, and
> > liable to all kinds of lawsuits.
> >
> > The government knows this, and I bet you $ 1,000,000 that the
> > government will put this whole "PR Card" requirement "on hold" to
> > prevent a huge scandal. They will truly appear completely imcompetent
> > if they don't.
> >
> > In the meantime, myself, I was intimidated by this whole thing, and
> > don't have my PR Card yet. I canceled my plan to spend Christmas in
> > Holland. A "limited use travel document" would have required me to
> > travel all the way to Berlin (Germany). The Canadian Embassy in
> > Berlin is open between 9 and 11am. For a 2 week vacation to see my
> > parents and relatives, it is rediculous I have to sacrifice my time,
> > and worry during my vacation that I must prove I'm not a terrorist and
> > need special permission to return home.
> >
> > How much headache has this caused for people? I canceled my plans,
> > how many other people have chosen not to travel back home for a
> > holiday or something?
> > I lived here for over 10 years, and although I could have picked up
> > Canadian Citizenship, I wasn't ready to give up my European passport.
> > I have lots of things to contribute to society, both to Canada and
> > Europe, I work very hard, never do anything wrong, help people all the
> > time, and government is slapping me around just in case I'm a
> > terrorist or something.
> > Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
> > I'm really quite pissed off.
Dec 20th 2003, 6:41 pm
#5
Forum Regular
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 96
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
Hi,
In my opinion, as long as you do not become a citizen of Canada, and just be as an immigrant, then there is always a need for one to know what is happening with immigration department as any rule may effect one's situations.
Now, the simple question before blaming the government, why did not you apply in advance for the PR Card. We can not say that the government did not inform the immigrants properly, because it did. I did see advertisements where there are time frames given for applying according to the dates when you became landed immigrants. I do not think we can expect the government to send you a personal note or email to apply. There was lot of talk in each community of immigrants about this PR card. Where were you when all of this happened.
If government puts this date limit on hold, guess what, for the new date limit, there will be again some people who did not apply and complain.
It is all my opinion, no need of offence.
Bye for now,
Ganesh
In my opinion, as long as you do not become a citizen of Canada, and just be as an immigrant, then there is always a need for one to know what is happening with immigration department as any rule may effect one's situations.
Now, the simple question before blaming the government, why did not you apply in advance for the PR Card. We can not say that the government did not inform the immigrants properly, because it did. I did see advertisements where there are time frames given for applying according to the dates when you became landed immigrants. I do not think we can expect the government to send you a personal note or email to apply. There was lot of talk in each community of immigrants about this PR card. Where were you when all of this happened.
If government puts this date limit on hold, guess what, for the new date limit, there will be again some people who did not apply and complain.
It is all my opinion, no need of offence.
Bye for now,
Ganesh
Originally posted by hondacivic
It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
let you on board bound back for Canada.
There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
"on hold".
Foreign carriers are already saying that all they'll look at is if
people have a valid passport and if they need a visit for the country
they're visiting, and that they can't get into the details whether the
people are in fact landed immigrants and then look for special cards
to see if special requirements are met.
In short, this whole PR Card can not be effective the way it is to be
implemented. It will cause huge scandals coming 2004 if they don't
"put it on hold".
Here's how I think the thought process of the people we look to to
govern:
Mr Jones: Terrorists pissed off the Americans.
Ms Jinks: I know, I heard, what will that mean for all of us?
Mr Jones: The Americans are starting to throw their weight around.
Ms Jinks: No kidding.
Mr Jones: We're expected not to stand by and do nothing.
Ms Jinks: What can we do?
Mr Jones: The Americans are saying the threat is from abroad.
Ms Jinks: I guess the immigrants are the threat.
Mr Jones: We can't get immigrants to carry around their passports.
Ms Jinks: Yes, they're too big. People carry around their drivers
licenses.
Mr Jones: Great idea, we can require people to apply for a special
Permanent Resident Card.
Ms Jinks: Sounds good, but how can we make people apply for one?
Mr Jones: We can simply require them to.
Ms Jinks: People will ignore it, or not know about it.
Mr Jones: We can tell people that the old immigrant paper will not be
allowed for travel. After all, terrorists will be "traveling", so the
key is "requiring" the card for entry.
Ms Jinks: What do we do with all the people at the airport though,
lock them all up?
Mr Jones: No, we make the commercial carriers forbid boarding without
the card.
Ms Jinks: But how do they know which people are immigrants and which
ones are tourists?
Mr Jones: Doesn't matter, let's just move ahead, it'll intimidate
people, and they will apply for the card. I know people will leak
through left and right, I realize that commercial carriers could never
filter people this way, but, we got to do something.
Ms Jinks: I want to go home before rush hour, can we wrap this up?
Mr Jones: Ok, we'll put this in effect, post it on our website. "The
airline in the country you are visiting will leave you standing at the
airport if you don't have a PR Card". There, done.
The government is losing huge credibility with this total and utter
lameheaded thinking. There is no way in the world that remote
carriers are going to sifting through people and pissing people off by
leaving them standing at airports. It is simply proposterous, and
liable to all kinds of lawsuits.
The government knows this, and I bet you $ 1,000,000 that the
government will put this whole "PR Card" requirement "on hold" to
prevent a huge scandal. They will truly appear completely imcompetent
if they don't.
In the meantime, myself, I was intimidated by this whole thing, and
don't have my PR Card yet. I canceled my plan to spend Christmas in
Holland. A "limited use travel document" would have required me to
travel all the way to Berlin (Germany). The Canadian Embassy in
Berlin is open between 9 and 11am. For a 2 week vacation to see my
parents and relatives, it is rediculous I have to sacrifice my time,
and worry during my vacation that I must prove I'm not a terrorist and
need special permission to return home.
How much headache has this caused for people? I canceled my plans,
how many other people have chosen not to travel back home for a
holiday or something?
I lived here for over 10 years, and although I could have picked up
Canadian Citizenship, I wasn't ready to give up my European passport.
I have lots of things to contribute to society, both to Canada and
Europe, I work very hard, never do anything wrong, help people all the
time, and government is slapping me around just in case I'm a
terrorist or something.
Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
I'm really quite pissed off.
It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
let you on board bound back for Canada.
There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
"on hold".
Foreign carriers are already saying that all they'll look at is if
people have a valid passport and if they need a visit for the country
they're visiting, and that they can't get into the details whether the
people are in fact landed immigrants and then look for special cards
to see if special requirements are met.
In short, this whole PR Card can not be effective the way it is to be
implemented. It will cause huge scandals coming 2004 if they don't
"put it on hold".
Here's how I think the thought process of the people we look to to
govern:
Mr Jones: Terrorists pissed off the Americans.
Ms Jinks: I know, I heard, what will that mean for all of us?
Mr Jones: The Americans are starting to throw their weight around.
Ms Jinks: No kidding.
Mr Jones: We're expected not to stand by and do nothing.
Ms Jinks: What can we do?
Mr Jones: The Americans are saying the threat is from abroad.
Ms Jinks: I guess the immigrants are the threat.
Mr Jones: We can't get immigrants to carry around their passports.
Ms Jinks: Yes, they're too big. People carry around their drivers
licenses.
Mr Jones: Great idea, we can require people to apply for a special
Permanent Resident Card.
Ms Jinks: Sounds good, but how can we make people apply for one?
Mr Jones: We can simply require them to.
Ms Jinks: People will ignore it, or not know about it.
Mr Jones: We can tell people that the old immigrant paper will not be
allowed for travel. After all, terrorists will be "traveling", so the
key is "requiring" the card for entry.
Ms Jinks: What do we do with all the people at the airport though,
lock them all up?
Mr Jones: No, we make the commercial carriers forbid boarding without
the card.
Ms Jinks: But how do they know which people are immigrants and which
ones are tourists?
Mr Jones: Doesn't matter, let's just move ahead, it'll intimidate
people, and they will apply for the card. I know people will leak
through left and right, I realize that commercial carriers could never
filter people this way, but, we got to do something.
Ms Jinks: I want to go home before rush hour, can we wrap this up?
Mr Jones: Ok, we'll put this in effect, post it on our website. "The
airline in the country you are visiting will leave you standing at the
airport if you don't have a PR Card". There, done.
The government is losing huge credibility with this total and utter
lameheaded thinking. There is no way in the world that remote
carriers are going to sifting through people and pissing people off by
leaving them standing at airports. It is simply proposterous, and
liable to all kinds of lawsuits.
The government knows this, and I bet you $ 1,000,000 that the
government will put this whole "PR Card" requirement "on hold" to
prevent a huge scandal. They will truly appear completely imcompetent
if they don't.
In the meantime, myself, I was intimidated by this whole thing, and
don't have my PR Card yet. I canceled my plan to spend Christmas in
Holland. A "limited use travel document" would have required me to
travel all the way to Berlin (Germany). The Canadian Embassy in
Berlin is open between 9 and 11am. For a 2 week vacation to see my
parents and relatives, it is rediculous I have to sacrifice my time,
and worry during my vacation that I must prove I'm not a terrorist and
need special permission to return home.
How much headache has this caused for people? I canceled my plans,
how many other people have chosen not to travel back home for a
holiday or something?
I lived here for over 10 years, and although I could have picked up
Canadian Citizenship, I wasn't ready to give up my European passport.
I have lots of things to contribute to society, both to Canada and
Europe, I work very hard, never do anything wrong, help people all the
time, and government is slapping me around just in case I'm a
terrorist or something.
Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
I'm really quite pissed off.
Dec 20th 2003, 7:46 pm
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
> their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
> special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
> let you on board bound back for Canada.
> There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
> "on hold".
<snipage of major part>
> Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
> I'm really quite pissed off.
"Hondacivic", I'll agree with your emotion. The way things are being
handled, is really quite pissing. Those bozos at CIC are not only unable to
make a decision based on real world scenerio, they are not even able to come
up with something concrete. The whole Immigration system is being screwed
around last 2-3 years. Making drastic change with the selection system then
applying retroactively, then change again, then again adding that it might
change in future and will be applied retroactively. Now, the PR card issue -
they don't have any definitive answer. To add salt to the injury, saying
that only PR's from non-visa exempt countries must show PR card to board a
carrier. See the news from The Toronto Star:
http://tinyurl.com/2hruk
This is totally ridiculous and discriminatory rule! What the heck are those
immigration officials smoking? Don't they see it is totally discriminatory
and out of the whack? Why one permanent resident from under-developed
country should require to produce PR card while a PR of some privileged
country should not? Laws should me made equal for everybody.
If the issue was with regular travel visa then it would be reasonable. It
could be said that there are some fear of those travelers from
under-developed countries not going back after their visa expire (from
statistics). But what is the issue with Permanent Residents? They are
already landed immigrant. No matter what country they are from all of them
should be treated equally - as permanent residents. Why do CIC think that
only citizens from under-developed countries are guilty and should be
punished? That is complete rubbish.
Now they are making thousands of people stranded outside of the country or
let them cancel the trip because of the confusion. Those bozos from the CIC
are completely incompetent, they have been proved over and over again. I
only wish those people from the CIC were in the same shoe as the immigrants
and make the decision.
news:[email protected]
> It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
> their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
> special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
> let you on board bound back for Canada.
> There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
> "on hold".
<snipage of major part>
> Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
> I'm really quite pissed off.
"Hondacivic", I'll agree with your emotion. The way things are being
handled, is really quite pissing. Those bozos at CIC are not only unable to
make a decision based on real world scenerio, they are not even able to come
up with something concrete. The whole Immigration system is being screwed
around last 2-3 years. Making drastic change with the selection system then
applying retroactively, then change again, then again adding that it might
change in future and will be applied retroactively. Now, the PR card issue -
they don't have any definitive answer. To add salt to the injury, saying
that only PR's from non-visa exempt countries must show PR card to board a
carrier. See the news from The Toronto Star:
http://tinyurl.com/2hruk
This is totally ridiculous and discriminatory rule! What the heck are those
immigration officials smoking? Don't they see it is totally discriminatory
and out of the whack? Why one permanent resident from under-developed
country should require to produce PR card while a PR of some privileged
country should not? Laws should me made equal for everybody.
If the issue was with regular travel visa then it would be reasonable. It
could be said that there are some fear of those travelers from
under-developed countries not going back after their visa expire (from
statistics). But what is the issue with Permanent Residents? They are
already landed immigrant. No matter what country they are from all of them
should be treated equally - as permanent residents. Why do CIC think that
only citizens from under-developed countries are guilty and should be
punished? That is complete rubbish.
Now they are making thousands of people stranded outside of the country or
let them cancel the trip because of the confusion. Those bozos from the CIC
are completely incompetent, they have been proved over and over again. I
only wish those people from the CIC were in the same shoe as the immigrants
and make the decision.
Dec 21st 2003, 1:50 am
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
Elmar,
Your outburst is unfortunate and in wrong direction. CIC will have no
problem admitting Permanent Residents without PR Card to Canada if they show
up at the port of entry and are able to document in any other way that they
have PR status. So, accusation of discrimination is misguided to say
politely - it is airlines and other commercial carriers that will not allow
you to board if you don't have Canadian visa, PR Card or Travel Document if
you are not from visa exempt country. You had 18 months to apply for PR
Card, were you in a coma for all that time or what? More, CIC introduced
procedure for expedite issuance of PR Card for people who overslept anyway -
so, they are doing everything they can to ease the problem for those who
didn't apply on time.
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"Elmar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
> > their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
> > special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
> > let you on board bound back for Canada.
> > There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
> > "on hold".
> <snipage of major part>
> > Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
> > I'm really quite pissed off.
> "Hondacivic", I'll agree with your emotion. The way things are being
> handled, is really quite pissing. Those bozos at CIC are not only unable
to
> make a decision based on real world scenerio, they are not even able to
come
> up with something concrete. The whole Immigration system is being screwed
> around last 2-3 years. Making drastic change with the selection system
then
> applying retroactively, then change again, then again adding that it might
> change in future and will be applied retroactively. Now, the PR card
issue -
> they don't have any definitive answer. To add salt to the injury, saying
> that only PR's from non-visa exempt countries must show PR card to board a
> carrier. See the news from The Toronto Star:
> http://tinyurl.com/2hruk
> This is totally ridiculous and discriminatory rule! What the heck are
those
> immigration officials smoking? Don't they see it is totally discriminatory
> and out of the whack? Why one permanent resident from under-developed
> country should require to produce PR card while a PR of some privileged
> country should not? Laws should me made equal for everybody.
> If the issue was with regular travel visa then it would be reasonable. It
> could be said that there are some fear of those travelers from
> under-developed countries not going back after their visa expire (from
> statistics). But what is the issue with Permanent Residents? They are
> already landed immigrant. No matter what country they are from all of them
> should be treated equally - as permanent residents. Why do CIC think that
> only citizens from under-developed countries are guilty and should be
> punished? That is complete rubbish.
> Now they are making thousands of people stranded outside of the country or
> let them cancel the trip because of the confusion. Those bozos from the
CIC
> are completely incompetent, they have been proved over and over again. I
> only wish those people from the CIC were in the same shoe as the
immigrants
> and make the decision.
Your outburst is unfortunate and in wrong direction. CIC will have no
problem admitting Permanent Residents without PR Card to Canada if they show
up at the port of entry and are able to document in any other way that they
have PR status. So, accusation of discrimination is misguided to say
politely - it is airlines and other commercial carriers that will not allow
you to board if you don't have Canadian visa, PR Card or Travel Document if
you are not from visa exempt country. You had 18 months to apply for PR
Card, were you in a coma for all that time or what? More, CIC introduced
procedure for expedite issuance of PR Card for people who overslept anyway -
so, they are doing everything they can to ease the problem for those who
didn't apply on time.
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"Elmar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > It's in the news today. Because of confusion immigrants are canceling
> > their travel plans. People are told that without a PR Card or a
> > special Limited Use Travel Document that the carrier abroad will not
> > let you on board bound back for Canada.
> > There is presure within the government to put the PR Card requirements
> > "on hold".
> <snipage of major part>
> > Well, you get my drift anyway, perhaps a little emotional here, but
> > I'm really quite pissed off.
> "Hondacivic", I'll agree with your emotion. The way things are being
> handled, is really quite pissing. Those bozos at CIC are not only unable
to
> make a decision based on real world scenerio, they are not even able to
come
> up with something concrete. The whole Immigration system is being screwed
> around last 2-3 years. Making drastic change with the selection system
then
> applying retroactively, then change again, then again adding that it might
> change in future and will be applied retroactively. Now, the PR card
issue -
> they don't have any definitive answer. To add salt to the injury, saying
> that only PR's from non-visa exempt countries must show PR card to board a
> carrier. See the news from The Toronto Star:
> http://tinyurl.com/2hruk
> This is totally ridiculous and discriminatory rule! What the heck are
those
> immigration officials smoking? Don't they see it is totally discriminatory
> and out of the whack? Why one permanent resident from under-developed
> country should require to produce PR card while a PR of some privileged
> country should not? Laws should me made equal for everybody.
> If the issue was with regular travel visa then it would be reasonable. It
> could be said that there are some fear of those travelers from
> under-developed countries not going back after their visa expire (from
> statistics). But what is the issue with Permanent Residents? They are
> already landed immigrant. No matter what country they are from all of them
> should be treated equally - as permanent residents. Why do CIC think that
> only citizens from under-developed countries are guilty and should be
> punished? That is complete rubbish.
> Now they are making thousands of people stranded outside of the country or
> let them cancel the trip because of the confusion. Those bozos from the
CIC
> are completely incompetent, they have been proved over and over again. I
> only wish those people from the CIC were in the same shoe as the
immigrants
> and make the decision.
Dec 21st 2003, 4:10 am
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
"Andrew Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:0U7Fb.9540$ss5.5001@clgrps13
> Elmar,
> Your outburst is unfortunate and in wrong direction. CIC will have no
> problem admitting Permanent Residents without PR Card to Canada if they
> show up at the port of entry and are able to document in any other way
> that they have PR status. So, accusation of discrimination is misguided
> to say politely - it is airlines and other commercial carriers that will
> not allow you to board if you don't have Canadian visa, PR Card or Travel
> Document if you are not from visa exempt country.
Andrew, I think your statement is contradictory. If CIC will admit a
permanent resident to Canada when they show up at the post of entry then why
the heck airlines and other carriers around the world would not allow him to
board in? I hope that you are not saying this rule were not dictated by CIC
or Canadian government. Just to say that this is set by airlines carriers,
is misleading at the best. No airlines will give a hoot about the
passenger's visa or legal documents unless the destination country ask them
to.
Taking your word that CIC will admit any PR if arrived at the POE, it is
clear that CIC is making a discriminatory rule to ask airlines and other
commercial carriers only to reject PR's from non-visa exempt countries. In
what basis those visa-exempt country citizens can board the airlines? If
they are returning to Canada they should produce PR card. If they are coming
as a visitor then it is reasonable to let them in just based on visa-exempt
country citizen status. But then, they have to be admitted in Canada as
visitor not as PR. One can not simply claim as a visitor (or anything except
PR) to the airlines and claim as returning resident at POE on the same trip.
> You had 18 months to
> apply for PR Card, were you in a coma for all that time or what?
Where did you read in my previous post that I didn't apply for PR card yet?
I already have my PR card and it was done soonest I was eligible to apply.
> More, CIC introduced procedure for expedite issuance of PR Card for people
> who overslept anyway - so, they are doing everything they can to ease the
> problem for those who didn't apply on time.
It's not what they are doing to accommodate something. It is their
incompetency not to take action in timely and non-discriminative fashion.
These things should be planned well ahead. They should either allow
permanent residents to return without PR card or reject them. And should
make every employee at CIC and commercial carriers know the clear cut
answer. Look at the news on the newspapers recently, CIC employees
themselves don't know the answer clearly, making thousands of people to
cancel their trips.
news:0U7Fb.9540$ss5.5001@clgrps13
> Elmar,
> Your outburst is unfortunate and in wrong direction. CIC will have no
> problem admitting Permanent Residents without PR Card to Canada if they
> show up at the port of entry and are able to document in any other way
> that they have PR status. So, accusation of discrimination is misguided
> to say politely - it is airlines and other commercial carriers that will
> not allow you to board if you don't have Canadian visa, PR Card or Travel
> Document if you are not from visa exempt country.
Andrew, I think your statement is contradictory. If CIC will admit a
permanent resident to Canada when they show up at the post of entry then why
the heck airlines and other carriers around the world would not allow him to
board in? I hope that you are not saying this rule were not dictated by CIC
or Canadian government. Just to say that this is set by airlines carriers,
is misleading at the best. No airlines will give a hoot about the
passenger's visa or legal documents unless the destination country ask them
to.
Taking your word that CIC will admit any PR if arrived at the POE, it is
clear that CIC is making a discriminatory rule to ask airlines and other
commercial carriers only to reject PR's from non-visa exempt countries. In
what basis those visa-exempt country citizens can board the airlines? If
they are returning to Canada they should produce PR card. If they are coming
as a visitor then it is reasonable to let them in just based on visa-exempt
country citizen status. But then, they have to be admitted in Canada as
visitor not as PR. One can not simply claim as a visitor (or anything except
PR) to the airlines and claim as returning resident at POE on the same trip.
> You had 18 months to
> apply for PR Card, were you in a coma for all that time or what?
Where did you read in my previous post that I didn't apply for PR card yet?
I already have my PR card and it was done soonest I was eligible to apply.
> More, CIC introduced procedure for expedite issuance of PR Card for people
> who overslept anyway - so, they are doing everything they can to ease the
> problem for those who didn't apply on time.
It's not what they are doing to accommodate something. It is their
incompetency not to take action in timely and non-discriminative fashion.
These things should be planned well ahead. They should either allow
permanent residents to return without PR card or reject them. And should
make every employee at CIC and commercial carriers know the clear cut
answer. Look at the news on the newspapers recently, CIC employees
themselves don't know the answer clearly, making thousands of people to
cancel their trips.
Dec 21st 2003, 4:47 am
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
What you read in newspapers is just the opinion of misinformed reporters
looking for sensation, nothing else.
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"Elmar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> "Andrew Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:0U7Fb.9540$ss5.5001@clgrps13
> > Elmar,
> >
> > Your outburst is unfortunate and in wrong direction. CIC will have no
> > problem admitting Permanent Residents without PR Card to Canada if they
> > show up at the port of entry and are able to document in any other way
> > that they have PR status. So, accusation of discrimination is misguided
> > to say politely - it is airlines and other commercial carriers that will
> > not allow you to board if you don't have Canadian visa, PR Card or
Travel
> > Document if you are not from visa exempt country.
> Andrew, I think your statement is contradictory. If CIC will admit a
> permanent resident to Canada when they show up at the post of entry then
why
> the heck airlines and other carriers around the world would not allow him
to
> board in? I hope that you are not saying this rule were not dictated by
CIC
> or Canadian government. Just to say that this is set by airlines carriers,
> is misleading at the best. No airlines will give a hoot about the
> passenger's visa or legal documents unless the destination country ask
them
> to.
> Taking your word that CIC will admit any PR if arrived at the POE, it is
> clear that CIC is making a discriminatory rule to ask airlines and other
> commercial carriers only to reject PR's from non-visa exempt countries. In
> what basis those visa-exempt country citizens can board the airlines? If
> they are returning to Canada they should produce PR card. If they are
coming
> as a visitor then it is reasonable to let them in just based on
visa-exempt
> country citizen status. But then, they have to be admitted in Canada as
> visitor not as PR. One can not simply claim as a visitor (or anything
except
> PR) to the airlines and claim as returning resident at POE on the same
trip.
> > You had 18 months to
> > apply for PR Card, were you in a coma for all that time or what?
> Where did you read in my previous post that I didn't apply for PR card
yet?
> I already have my PR card and it was done soonest I was eligible to apply.
> > More, CIC introduced procedure for expedite issuance of PR Card for
people
> > who overslept anyway - so, they are doing everything they can to ease
the
> > problem for those who didn't apply on time.
> It's not what they are doing to accommodate something. It is their
> incompetency not to take action in timely and non-discriminative fashion.
> These things should be planned well ahead. They should either allow
> permanent residents to return without PR card or reject them. And should
> make every employee at CIC and commercial carriers know the clear cut
> answer. Look at the news on the newspapers recently, CIC employees
> themselves don't know the answer clearly, making thousands of people to
> cancel their trips.
looking for sensation, nothing else.
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"Elmar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> "Andrew Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:0U7Fb.9540$ss5.5001@clgrps13
> > Elmar,
> >
> > Your outburst is unfortunate and in wrong direction. CIC will have no
> > problem admitting Permanent Residents without PR Card to Canada if they
> > show up at the port of entry and are able to document in any other way
> > that they have PR status. So, accusation of discrimination is misguided
> > to say politely - it is airlines and other commercial carriers that will
> > not allow you to board if you don't have Canadian visa, PR Card or
Travel
> > Document if you are not from visa exempt country.
> Andrew, I think your statement is contradictory. If CIC will admit a
> permanent resident to Canada when they show up at the post of entry then
why
> the heck airlines and other carriers around the world would not allow him
to
> board in? I hope that you are not saying this rule were not dictated by
CIC
> or Canadian government. Just to say that this is set by airlines carriers,
> is misleading at the best. No airlines will give a hoot about the
> passenger's visa or legal documents unless the destination country ask
them
> to.
> Taking your word that CIC will admit any PR if arrived at the POE, it is
> clear that CIC is making a discriminatory rule to ask airlines and other
> commercial carriers only to reject PR's from non-visa exempt countries. In
> what basis those visa-exempt country citizens can board the airlines? If
> they are returning to Canada they should produce PR card. If they are
coming
> as a visitor then it is reasonable to let them in just based on
visa-exempt
> country citizen status. But then, they have to be admitted in Canada as
> visitor not as PR. One can not simply claim as a visitor (or anything
except
> PR) to the airlines and claim as returning resident at POE on the same
trip.
> > You had 18 months to
> > apply for PR Card, were you in a coma for all that time or what?
> Where did you read in my previous post that I didn't apply for PR card
yet?
> I already have my PR card and it was done soonest I was eligible to apply.
> > More, CIC introduced procedure for expedite issuance of PR Card for
people
> > who overslept anyway - so, they are doing everything they can to ease
the
> > problem for those who didn't apply on time.
> It's not what they are doing to accommodate something. It is their
> incompetency not to take action in timely and non-discriminative fashion.
> These things should be planned well ahead. They should either allow
> permanent residents to return without PR card or reject them. And should
> make every employee at CIC and commercial carriers know the clear cut
> answer. Look at the news on the newspapers recently, CIC employees
> themselves don't know the answer clearly, making thousands of people to
> cancel their trips.
Dec 21st 2003, 5:22 am
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
"Andrew Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:RtaFb.10603$ss5.3210@clgrps13
> What you read in newspapers is just the opinion of misinformed reporters
> looking for sensation, nothing else.
Do you have any proof to back up your statement? Why would I take your words
and not believe any media or what I am reading in the newsgroups and
Internet? The way CIC is handling immigration matters last couple of years,
it is very clear that they are not competent.
On top of that, what do you say about the discriminating PR card rule based
on one's citizenship? It is just unacceptable from any logical point of
view.
news:RtaFb.10603$ss5.3210@clgrps13
> What you read in newspapers is just the opinion of misinformed reporters
> looking for sensation, nothing else.
Do you have any proof to back up your statement? Why would I take your words
and not believe any media or what I am reading in the newsgroups and
Internet? The way CIC is handling immigration matters last couple of years,
it is very clear that they are not competent.
On top of that, what do you say about the discriminating PR card rule based
on one's citizenship? It is just unacceptable from any logical point of
view.
Dec 21st 2003, 6:03 am
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
Reporters are not experts of any kind in immigration matters, they write
what they hear and how they interpret it without any expertise.
CIC is not mishandling anything - it is the law they have to obey and
follow. Lawmakers are giving CIC the rules and CIC just follows. Old law was
not serving Canada anymore in any efficient nor manageable way and after
years of discussions lawmakers gave us new Immigration and Refugee
Protection Act in November 2001. Backlogs (this is probably what you called
"mishandling") are not CIC's fault - if the law is providing rules so easy
to qualify that each year number of qualified applicants is 3 to 5 or so
times larger than annual targets approved by the same lawmakers then you
have a backlog. Lawmakers are only giving CIC a budget to meet annual
targets, nothing more. Annual targets are set at specific levels for
reasons - Canada cannot simply afford taking in every year more immigrants
than we take in. If you bring 5 times more immigrants then now who will give
them jobs?
Where is the discrimination again? Fact that there are countries on visa
waiver list is a discrimination? Because this is what it is - nationals of
countries on visa waiver list don't need anything except their passports to
come to Canada. Why admit them as visitors if they can prove that they have
PR status? Even those not on visa waiver list if they drive or walk to
Canadian port of entry without PR Card will be admitted as PR if they can
prove their status. So, where is the discrimination?
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"Elmar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Andrew Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:RtaFb.10603$ss5.3210@clgrps13
> > What you read in newspapers is just the opinion of misinformed reporters
> > looking for sensation, nothing else.
> Do you have any proof to back up your statement? Why would I take your
words
> and not believe any media or what I am reading in the newsgroups and
> Internet? The way CIC is handling immigration matters last couple of
years,
> it is very clear that they are not competent.
> On top of that, what do you say about the discriminating PR card rule
based
> on one's citizenship? It is just unacceptable from any logical point of
> view.
what they hear and how they interpret it without any expertise.
CIC is not mishandling anything - it is the law they have to obey and
follow. Lawmakers are giving CIC the rules and CIC just follows. Old law was
not serving Canada anymore in any efficient nor manageable way and after
years of discussions lawmakers gave us new Immigration and Refugee
Protection Act in November 2001. Backlogs (this is probably what you called
"mishandling") are not CIC's fault - if the law is providing rules so easy
to qualify that each year number of qualified applicants is 3 to 5 or so
times larger than annual targets approved by the same lawmakers then you
have a backlog. Lawmakers are only giving CIC a budget to meet annual
targets, nothing more. Annual targets are set at specific levels for
reasons - Canada cannot simply afford taking in every year more immigrants
than we take in. If you bring 5 times more immigrants then now who will give
them jobs?
Where is the discrimination again? Fact that there are countries on visa
waiver list is a discrimination? Because this is what it is - nationals of
countries on visa waiver list don't need anything except their passports to
come to Canada. Why admit them as visitors if they can prove that they have
PR status? Even those not on visa waiver list if they drive or walk to
Canadian port of entry without PR Card will be admitted as PR if they can
prove their status. So, where is the discrimination?
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"Elmar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Andrew Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:RtaFb.10603$ss5.3210@clgrps13
> > What you read in newspapers is just the opinion of misinformed reporters
> > looking for sensation, nothing else.
> Do you have any proof to back up your statement? Why would I take your
words
> and not believe any media or what I am reading in the newsgroups and
> Internet? The way CIC is handling immigration matters last couple of
years,
> it is very clear that they are not competent.
> On top of that, what do you say about the discriminating PR card rule
based
> on one's citizenship? It is just unacceptable from any logical point of
> view.
Dec 21st 2003, 8:42 am
#12
Forum Regular
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 262
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
Canada has introduced PR card , as it is believed to be fraud resistent , than why not every Canadian have something similar to PR card. Well it seems Canada has fraud resistent Passport and so is the case with VISA exempt countries on its list. It seems Canadian govt is satisfied with measure taken by VISa exempt countries. No questions asked. Biometrics may help resolve many such issues.Who knows , tomorrow we may have proprietry fraud resistent implants. No need of documents.
I understand it just costs 50$ to have a PR card. So it is not a big deal either. It is good beginning, some deterrant is in place. We do hear a lot of cases in local news papers, over here in India, when passport with valid visa is reported lost. Actually it is a racket for identity theft , sending some one with similar features abroad. Such passports are reported lost for an amount as high as 15000 Cd$.
I do'nt think it is any kind of discrimination to exempt PR card to Permanent residents of VISA exempt countries. Since they are already VISA exempt. It is just a natural extension.
Every country in the world has right to have certain friendly countries on its VISA exempt list , Canada is not the only country.
All kinds of counter checks going to be implemented, we can not resent much. Each country has its own preception. Some time it will be overkill situation.
Let us look at recent US drive to ask immigrant in India to go through DNA test/mapping to prove family ties. Test costs 1000US $ to 2000 US $. >> I believe they may be asking similar checks to other countries or may be residents of most favoured nations may not be asked to bear such cost.
It seems all of us have to be ready to make sacrifices for a peacefull tomorrow and realize the cost of terrorism and fraudulant practises. It is not at all an issue of discrimination.
I understand it just costs 50$ to have a PR card. So it is not a big deal either. It is good beginning, some deterrant is in place. We do hear a lot of cases in local news papers, over here in India, when passport with valid visa is reported lost. Actually it is a racket for identity theft , sending some one with similar features abroad. Such passports are reported lost for an amount as high as 15000 Cd$.
I do'nt think it is any kind of discrimination to exempt PR card to Permanent residents of VISA exempt countries. Since they are already VISA exempt. It is just a natural extension.
Every country in the world has right to have certain friendly countries on its VISA exempt list , Canada is not the only country.
All kinds of counter checks going to be implemented, we can not resent much. Each country has its own preception. Some time it will be overkill situation.
Let us look at recent US drive to ask immigrant in India to go through DNA test/mapping to prove family ties. Test costs 1000US $ to 2000 US $. >> I believe they may be asking similar checks to other countries or may be residents of most favoured nations may not be asked to bear such cost.
It seems all of us have to be ready to make sacrifices for a peacefull tomorrow and realize the cost of terrorism and fraudulant practises. It is not at all an issue of discrimination.
Dec 21st 2003, 9:42 am
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
"Andrew Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:HAbFb.11247$ss5.531@clgrps13
> Reporters are not experts of any kind in immigration matters, they write
> what they hear and how they interpret it without any expertise.
This is a very broad statement. It really depends whether the reporter
himself has any grasp on that subject matter or not. I am not taking any
reporter's analysis. If you read those news, there were reports of couple of
person getting no definitive answer over the phone or directly from CIC
officials. This is not only from newspaper, I know of a person who got a
similar story from his friend.
> CIC is not mishandling anything - it is the law they have to obey and
> follow. Lawmakers are giving CIC the rules and CIC just follows.
I am not sure whether nitpicking on some word we are going to go very far.
It ultimately falls on the lawmakers, be it CIC or immigration dept. or the
Immigration minister. I guess you got the point.
> Old law
> was not serving Canada anymore in any efficient nor manageable way and
> after years of discussions lawmakers gave us new Immigration and Refugee
> Protection Act in November 2001. Backlogs (this is probably what you
> called "mishandling") are not CIC's fault - if the law is providing rules
> so easy to qualify that each year number of qualified applicants is 3 to
> 5 or so times larger than annual targets approved by the same lawmakers
> then you have a backlog.
There is nothing wrong with changing the old law. It is quite obvious that
the old rules were outdated and needed some change. The issue was applying
the new rule on the already existing applicants. There were already quite a
big fuss about it, thousands of applicants has gone through heavy mental
tortures, monetary loss and not to mention, some lawsuits were made which
left Immigration dept. in a big mess. It is simply illogical to change some
rule in the middle of the game and apply it retroactively. That will be
similar to those commercial "bait and switch" strategy.
Regarding the backlogs, it is, again, the lawmakers' fault. They know
exactly what would be the implication of lowering the passmark. I guess the
reason for that is any of these:
1) Get bigger revenue from larger pool of qualified applicants' application
processing fees.
2) To diversify qualified immigrants from different geographical locations,
who would otherwise not qualify with current scoring system. Or,
3) Those bozos don't have any grasp on the reality, have no statistics, nor
any clue at all.
> Lawmakers are only giving CIC a budget to meet
> annual targets, nothing more. Annual targets are set at specific levels
> for reasons - Canada cannot simply afford taking in every year more
> immigrants than we take in. If you bring 5 times more immigrants then now
> who will give them jobs?
I am aware of this, this is not what my gripe is about.
> Where is the discrimination again? Fact that there are countries on visa
> waiver list is a discrimination? Because this is what it is - nationals of
> countries on visa waiver list don't need anything except their passports
> to come to Canada. Why admit them as visitors if they can prove that they
> have PR status? Even those not on visa waiver list if they drive or walk
> to Canadian port of entry without PR Card will be admitted as PR if they
> can prove their status. So, where is the discrimination?
Visa waiver country list is not discrimination. This is based on statistics
and probability, citizens of certain countries (especially from under
developed countries) tend to overstay after entering through the temporary
visitor visa.
But for the permanent resident this is totally different ball game. If all
PR can get in with or without PR card at the POE, then why bother asking the
airlines to disallow people from certain country to board in without PR
card? After all, there is no fear of a PR everstaying. On top of this, if a
PR from visa-exempt country don't need a PR card for travel purpose, then
why would s/he apply for one? Again, if a PR from non-visa-exempt country
can prove their status by additional documents why should the carrier still
be instructed to bar them from boarding in?
news:HAbFb.11247$ss5.531@clgrps13
> Reporters are not experts of any kind in immigration matters, they write
> what they hear and how they interpret it without any expertise.
This is a very broad statement. It really depends whether the reporter
himself has any grasp on that subject matter or not. I am not taking any
reporter's analysis. If you read those news, there were reports of couple of
person getting no definitive answer over the phone or directly from CIC
officials. This is not only from newspaper, I know of a person who got a
similar story from his friend.
> CIC is not mishandling anything - it is the law they have to obey and
> follow. Lawmakers are giving CIC the rules and CIC just follows.
I am not sure whether nitpicking on some word we are going to go very far.
It ultimately falls on the lawmakers, be it CIC or immigration dept. or the
Immigration minister. I guess you got the point.
> Old law
> was not serving Canada anymore in any efficient nor manageable way and
> after years of discussions lawmakers gave us new Immigration and Refugee
> Protection Act in November 2001. Backlogs (this is probably what you
> called "mishandling") are not CIC's fault - if the law is providing rules
> so easy to qualify that each year number of qualified applicants is 3 to
> 5 or so times larger than annual targets approved by the same lawmakers
> then you have a backlog.
There is nothing wrong with changing the old law. It is quite obvious that
the old rules were outdated and needed some change. The issue was applying
the new rule on the already existing applicants. There were already quite a
big fuss about it, thousands of applicants has gone through heavy mental
tortures, monetary loss and not to mention, some lawsuits were made which
left Immigration dept. in a big mess. It is simply illogical to change some
rule in the middle of the game and apply it retroactively. That will be
similar to those commercial "bait and switch" strategy.
Regarding the backlogs, it is, again, the lawmakers' fault. They know
exactly what would be the implication of lowering the passmark. I guess the
reason for that is any of these:
1) Get bigger revenue from larger pool of qualified applicants' application
processing fees.
2) To diversify qualified immigrants from different geographical locations,
who would otherwise not qualify with current scoring system. Or,
3) Those bozos don't have any grasp on the reality, have no statistics, nor
any clue at all.
> Lawmakers are only giving CIC a budget to meet
> annual targets, nothing more. Annual targets are set at specific levels
> for reasons - Canada cannot simply afford taking in every year more
> immigrants than we take in. If you bring 5 times more immigrants then now
> who will give them jobs?
I am aware of this, this is not what my gripe is about.
> Where is the discrimination again? Fact that there are countries on visa
> waiver list is a discrimination? Because this is what it is - nationals of
> countries on visa waiver list don't need anything except their passports
> to come to Canada. Why admit them as visitors if they can prove that they
> have PR status? Even those not on visa waiver list if they drive or walk
> to Canadian port of entry without PR Card will be admitted as PR if they
> can prove their status. So, where is the discrimination?
Visa waiver country list is not discrimination. This is based on statistics
and probability, citizens of certain countries (especially from under
developed countries) tend to overstay after entering through the temporary
visitor visa.
But for the permanent resident this is totally different ball game. If all
PR can get in with or without PR card at the POE, then why bother asking the
airlines to disallow people from certain country to board in without PR
card? After all, there is no fear of a PR everstaying. On top of this, if a
PR from visa-exempt country don't need a PR card for travel purpose, then
why would s/he apply for one? Again, if a PR from non-visa-exempt country
can prove their status by additional documents why should the carrier still
be instructed to bar them from boarding in?
Dec 21st 2003, 2:52 pm
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
Airlines have the obligation (as per IATA and other rules) to assure that
person boarding the plane has the right to enter the destination country -
so, it must be either national of that country, permanent resident, person
holding valid visa or holding passport of the country on visa waiver list.
The only proof of PR status is PR Card and this is what airlines are looking
for - and unlike officers at POE airlines clerks checking passengers in
don't have access to Canadian immigration database nor any expertise to
determine if any other evidence presented is real or not, so they will
simply not board a PR without PR Card, TD or passport from the country on
visa waiver list.
Story is completely different at POE where many things may be checked
instantly in the database and lack of PR Card won't bar PR from admission
when other verifiable evidence of PR status is present.
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"Elmar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:jOeFb.47$d%[email protected]...
> But for the permanent resident this is totally different ball game. If all
> PR can get in with or without PR card at the POE, then why bother asking
the
> airlines to disallow people from certain country to board in without PR
> card? After all, there is no fear of a PR everstaying. On top of this, if
a
> PR from visa-exempt country don't need a PR card for travel purpose, then
> why would s/he apply for one? Again, if a PR from non-visa-exempt country
> can prove their status by additional documents why should the carrier
still
> be instructed to bar them from boarding in?
person boarding the plane has the right to enter the destination country -
so, it must be either national of that country, permanent resident, person
holding valid visa or holding passport of the country on visa waiver list.
The only proof of PR status is PR Card and this is what airlines are looking
for - and unlike officers at POE airlines clerks checking passengers in
don't have access to Canadian immigration database nor any expertise to
determine if any other evidence presented is real or not, so they will
simply not board a PR without PR Card, TD or passport from the country on
visa waiver list.
Story is completely different at POE where many things may be checked
instantly in the database and lack of PR Card won't bar PR from admission
when other verifiable evidence of PR status is present.
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"Elmar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:jOeFb.47$d%[email protected]...
> But for the permanent resident this is totally different ball game. If all
> PR can get in with or without PR card at the POE, then why bother asking
the
> airlines to disallow people from certain country to board in without PR
> card? After all, there is no fear of a PR everstaying. On top of this, if
a
> PR from visa-exempt country don't need a PR card for travel purpose, then
> why would s/he apply for one? Again, if a PR from non-visa-exempt country
> can prove their status by additional documents why should the carrier
still
> be instructed to bar them from boarding in?
Dec 22nd 2003, 5:13 am
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: PR Card and government incompetence
> Let us look at recent US drive to ask immigrant in India to go through
> DNA test/mapping to prove family ties. Test costs 1000US $ to 2000 US
> $. >> I believe they may be asking similar checks to other countries or
> may be residents of most favoured nations may not be asked to bear
> such cost.
I dont think they are asking for DNA test as of now. They are asking
for affidavit in case of unavailable birth certificates.
> DNA test/mapping to prove family ties. Test costs 1000US $ to 2000 US
> $. >> I believe they may be asking similar checks to other countries or
> may be residents of most favoured nations may not be asked to bear
> such cost.
I dont think they are asking for DNA test as of now. They are asking
for affidavit in case of unavailable birth certificates.