That’s why I said the next PGP will very likely be based on financial contribution. Just look at Australia’s parent program—you’ll see what I mean.
PR for Mother
- Thread starter adipadi
- Start date
I've looked at it, briefly. As far as I can tell, they've ended up with a system where they charge 'extra' - but not enough to cover actual anticipated (actuarial) expenses, while remaining too low to significantly restrain demand.
So they end up with a system where they charge 'extra' but still end up with long (five year plus?) waiting lists, and a 'free' list with an extra-long waiting list.
Now this is from a vague memory from some articles, so if wrong, mea culpa.
I see the 'permanent' one for aged parents is ~$50k - of which about $45k for the 'contributory' one that gets you on the quicker list? I'm not clear. My guess is that for it to offset increased costs, it would have to be more like $200k, and be VERY unpopular with the public at that rate.
On the other hand: it may be instructive for Canadians / Canadian applicants to check out the Australian fees. They're quite a bit higher than here. I see a fair amount of complaints about IRCC fees - looks to me like IRCC isn't overcharging, far from it.
https://www.longtonmigration.com.au/blog/parents-visa-australia-cost/
I’m not suggesting that IRCC should replicate the Australian parent visa program exactly, but we could have taken valuable lessons from it.
Furthermore, IRCC should implement limits on the number of immigrants accepted from individual countries. They should have done this 5 years ago.
Agree that this is a group that gets very little attention in terms of temporary residents. The majority of Canadians are unaware that supervisa or even PGP exist. International students and temporary workers get most of the attention from the media, politicians and IRCC. Would be shocked if IRCC knows how many parents are currently visiting Canada and how long they have been visiting. The issue of parent sponsorship and supervisas are so politically toxic nobody wants to discuss what is feasible. The fact that PGP quota was cut by Marc Miller would have received huge pushback but Trudeau gvt had increased quotas dramatically compared to Harper gvt.
There have been discussions about higher income requirements in the past which got huge pushback.
I have to echo @canuck78's comments here: my own experience / understanding is that one weird specificity of Canadian politics is that in some areas, the idea that some things from government should be decided based on money is political kryptonite.
The other side of that coin is that Canadians are incredibly cheap about government spending, and absolutely unrealistically so.
Unrealistic in both directions, really.
Strongly believe LICO is way too low for PGP and given the low income levels I assume many are accessing support services/government programs/charities to afford to live in Canada with their parents either visiting or getting PR. Some may have been already accessing these things without their parents. That said things like healthcare costs are not typically related to a child’s income. Seen many lower income families doing the majority of the caring at home with no outside help and many higher income who are more likely to outsource some or all of the care. It is a complex issue but actually reflecting the true cost of living in Canada while adding 1 or 2 seniors would be a good start. Proof that you aren’t already dependent on things like food banks or subsidized rent may be a good start. LICO is not high enough to ensure most could pay if family member needed to go into longterm care for 20 years (10yrs QC). If you make 60k/yr and that qualified you for PGP how can you afford +2.5k/month if your parent needs LTC unless the parents have significant savings.
IRCC should consider setting a cap on immigration from each individual country, using 2019 as the baseline for determining these limits. If a country has seen an excessive number of immigrants over the past five years, applicants from that country should face longer wait times to enter the PR pool. This approach would help ensure a more balanced and sustainable immigration flow. Additionally, programs like the Parent and Grandparent Program (PGP) and others should also fall under this framework.
As the Americans do, it only makes sense. It's the only way to ensure diversity in our immigration system.
American immigration system is a crappy one. Also, good way to import people who hate western values. LA protests and other events in the US show very well, just how bad the system really is. The cohort of immigrants that's coming to Canada hasn't ever violently protested or sympathized with terrorists. Shows, immigrants being extremely ignorant (beyond being unskilled) in Canada.
If you list the biggest problem in our immigration, it is skills and the right labor needs. But unfortunately, we are importing idiots from all parts of the world. Idiots who feel every other immigrant group is the problem, but their own. More and more bullshiters land here with circular economic bs motivation that ruins the country even more.
We need better quality, doesn't matter where it comes from.
Canada could have more balanced immigration but the reality is that there are a few large source countries for the large portion of worldwide immigration. Canada also benefits if these source countries are fluent in English or French and have good education systems. In terms of PGP it makes no sense to limit by country of origin. Whether the program is currently feasible is the first test but the only allocation that would make sense would be by location of the children in Canada given a large portion of PGP applicants are concentrated in a few locations. Dispersing PGP candidates across Canada would make them easier to absorb.
Similar threads
