Stuck in Security Screening for months/years? Let's take action! (Official Petition e-7259)

[zhzd97163com]

>checking information against their own databases, which is done very quickly.

Fetching data vs inferring data are two different things. Later takes more time. Again, as I said before, a petition by non-citizens that demands expedition when the general sentiment of citizens is completely opposite won't fly.

The effectiveness of a security process is not measured by how long it takes, but by how accurately and efficiently it identifies genuine risks.


Many individuals stuck in extended security screening are already residing in Canada. If someone truly represents a national security threat, leaving their case unresolved for several years does not meaningfully improve security outcomes. In fact, it suggests a system that struggles to assess risk in a timely manner.


A strong security system should be both rigorous and efficient. Prolonged administrative delays without transparency do not inherently make the country safer. What is needed is a process that is fast, accurate, and accountable, rather than one where cases remain unresolved for years.

 

[iSaidGoodDay]

The effectiveness of a security process is not measured by how long it takes, but by how accurately and efficiently it identifies genuine risks.


Many individuals stuck in extended security screening are already residing in Canada. If someone truly represents a national security threat, leaving their case unresolved for several years does not meaningfully improve security outcomes. In fact, it suggests a system that struggles to assess risk in a timely manner.


A strong security system should be both rigorous and efficient. Prolonged administrative delays without transparency do not inherently make the country safer. What is needed is a process that is fast, accurate, and accountable, rather than one where cases remain unresolved for years.

Why are you using ChatGPT to write simpler responses? Internal security isn't something that needs a lot of explanation or transparency when something has already been flagged as "comprehensive security screening".

>What is needed is a process that is fast, accurate, and accountable

That's a very idealistic view of the world and idealism never translates to reality.

 

[iSaidGoodDay]

The argument seems to conflate different issues.

No one is requesting to remove security screening. The concern raised is about multi-year delays without transparency or timelines. Requesting accountability in administrative processes does not weaken security screening.

Second, the claim that large numbers of criminals are entering Canada through skilled immigration channels is a serious allegation, but it would require evidence. All pr applicants already undergo security and admissibility checks involving IRCC, CBSA and CSIS.

Third, the definition of “skilled workers” is not subjective. Canada’s immigration system uses the noc framework, which clearly defines TEER 0–3 occupations as skilled. Redefining “skilled” as the 75th percentile of a field is simply not how the system operates.

Finally, Canada’s parliamentary petition system explicitly allows residents and applicants, not only citizens, to participate. If Parliament designed the system this way, participation by non-citizens cannot reasonably be described as interference in Canada’s internal affairs. In addition, transparency and efficiency in security screening benefit everyone, including citizens. An inefficient and prolonged process does not necessarily strengthen security; it often creates uncertainty and administrative backlog. No one should assume that an opaque, ineffective and prolonged process automatically results in better security outcomes.

The petition is simply asking for transparency and reasonable timelines in a process that currently leaves many applicants waiting for years without explanation. That is an administrative issue, not a security threat.

>Third, the definition of “skilled workers” is not subjective. Canada’s immigration system uses the noc framework, which clearly defines TEER 0–3 occupations as skilled. Redefining “skilled” as the 75th percentile of a field is simply not how the system operates.

Again, that "skilled" definition fails to bring skilled people. You aren't skilled if you manage a bunch of people who shovel garbage for a living. But, because of broken definitions, we see everyone claim themselves as "skilled". The number of immigrants who claim to be skilled and then complain about "lack of jobs", "economic hardship", etc empirically supports what I just stated.

75th percentile and above is a benchmark that most compensation management systems used if you have never heard of that. At this point, my observation is immigrants cherry pick what you want e.g. skilled definition from IRCC, but are very selectively against other issues. I get that it is human nature, but, that's the whole point. You think it is "fair", when there's hardly anything fair about this entire topic.

Let's not hijack this thread with this spam and let it exist for the purpose it serves.

 

[vkamath]

Interesting thread. Security is 100% necessary and should never be compromised yet people who are criminals, who brandish weapons and spread hatred get their PR and Citizenship faster than people who are honest. The system absolutely needs an overhaul. If this is outsourced to any 3rd party enforce standards.

1. Enforce Strict Standards: Mandate that applications exceeding 100% of standard processing times be finalized immediately unless a written justification and firm completion date are provided: This should never be done. Its a bad decision. But yes there needs to be transparency as to who is blocking the file or to which agency the request has been sent.

2. Ensure Accountability: Require the Minister to appear quarterly before the Standing Committee to report on backlog reduction progress and mandate independent audits of administrative bottleneck: 100% agree on this.

3. Increase Transparency: Require IRCC, CSIS, and CBSA to provide proactive 90-day status updates specifying the current agency, processing stage, and updated timelines for delayed files. This should be done instead of 1.

Unless we know how the security screening works in details escalation won't help. I want to sign it but I am not in favour of point 1.

 

[xy65893]

Why are you using ChatGPT to write simpler responses? Internal security isn't something that needs a lot of explanation or transparency when something has already been flagged as "comprehensive security screening".

>What is needed is a process that is fast, accurate, and accountable

That's a very idealistic view of the world and idealism never translates to reality.

Even the Federal Court disagrees with that view. The Canadian courts have already addressed this issue in multiple decisions dealing with prolonged immigration delays and security screening. For example--

Federal Court judges have repeatedly emphasized that the existence of security screening does not automatically justify prolonged or indefinite delay.

...this Court has consistently rejected bald or conclusory assertions of ongoing screening as a sufficient justification for prolonged delay.

The Court has also clarified that simply stating that security screening is ongoing is not enough to make a delay reasonable:

to assess whether the length of a security review is reasonable, [the Court] must have some information about the review and the reason for its length.

In such situations, the government must still explain why the delay remains justified:

The Respondent has provided no evidence explaining the cause of the extended timeline for security screening, despite bearing the onus to do so.

In other words, while security screening may legitimately require confidentiality and careful review, the courts have made clear that it cannot be treated as an open-ended explanation for years-long delays without accountability.

https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/529882/index.do

 

[Alex Q]

>Also, portraying all applicants in screening as “high-risk profiles” is simply inaccurate.

I think you are underestimating just how many criminals are entering Canada through these channels and just HOW MUCH SUPPORT exists for even more stricter assessments.

Very few ACTUAL "skilled workers" come to Canada. I'd argue it is 5% of less of the total immigration. What you are rather talking about the losely defined "skilled" definition that goes around. Skilled by definition is 75th percentile and above in a field that can even be considered a skilled field.

>If the system itself allows residents and applicants to participate, dismissing their voices simply because they are not citizens misses the point of public consultation entirely.

This at the same time crosses the definition of interference in internal matters of Canada. If you take the petitions of non-citizens at face value, then the integrity of parliamentary processes becomes questionable. This at a time, when citizens need far more support/resources to go about their day-to-day lives makes it a much lower priority item to even be considered.

You need to look beyond this limited view of "we need faster processing" when citizens feel uncomfortable about the state of immigration security checks. I still don't see how/why it would fly.

First, let’s get it straight. The indefinite delays in PR processing by IRCC, CBSA, and CSIS are purely an example of the 'banality of evil'. This is not the mistake of a bunch of individuals. It is a systemic fault. It stems from people occupying institutional roles who stop thinking, stop taking responsibility, and merely obey their assigned tasks mechanically. The result is that no one explicitly intends to harm you, yet the outcome is that thousands of families have their lives systematically ruined.

As government employees, got to learn from history so they won't repeat its mistakes. More troubling is that no one even realizes it is a mistake—we are repeating errors once committed by those we once considered our greatest adversaries. Between IRCC, CBSA, and CSIS, responsibility is passed back and forth like a football: no one explicitly refuses a case, yet no one takes responsibility either.

As a result, the lives of the people protesting today are placed in suspension. Their life plans are frozen, and their families, careers, and mental well-being suffer long-term harm, while they have almost no meaningful path for redress. Officials across departments simply say, “I’m just following the procedure,” or “This belongs to another department,” in order to avoid responsibility. This is one of the most difficult forms of wrongdoing to identify and to correct.

Second, every individual living in Canada should enjoy equal legal and political rights, whether a citizen or a non-citizen. This principle is written into the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and it is also the standard reason that attracts top global talent to strive and build their lives here. Canada’s economic system, legal order, political institutions, and educational philosophy are built upon ‘A Theory of Justice’. It is everywhere—people step on it every day. If this principle is violated, it means departing from the very soul of Canadian.

 

[xy65893]

Interesting thread. Security is 100% necessary and should never be compromised yet people who are criminals, who brandish weapons and spread hatred get their PR and Citizenship faster than people who are honest. The system absolutely needs an overhaul. If this is outsourced to any 3rd party enforce standards.

1. Enforce Strict Standards: Mandate that applications exceeding 100% of standard processing times be finalized immediately unless a written justification and firm completion date are provided: This should never be done. Its a bad decision. But yes there needs to be transparency as to who is blocking the file or to which agency the request has been sent.

2. Ensure Accountability: Require the Minister to appear quarterly before the Standing Committee to report on backlog reduction progress and mandate independent audits of administrative bottleneck: 100% agree on this.

3. Increase Transparency: Require IRCC, CSIS, and CBSA to provide proactive 90-day status updates specifying the current agency, processing stage, and updated timelines for delayed files. This should be done instead of 1.

Unless we know how the security screening works in details escalation won't help. I want to sign it but I am not in favour of point 1.

Thank you for joining the discussion.

I think point 1 may have been misunderstood.

It does not mean that applications must be approved once they exceed the standard processing time. Rather, it means that if a file goes beyond the expected timeline, the government should either finalize the case or provide a written justification and a firm completion date.

More importantly, the intention of the petition was never to oppose security screening. On the contrary, the petitioners fully support security screening as a legitimate tool to protect Canada.

What the petition calls for is fairness, transparency, and reasonable timelines. The goal is not to weaken national security, but to ensure that prolonged delays are accountable and explained, rather than indefinite. In this way, the process can both protect Canada and remain consistent with fundamental principles such as fair treatment, individual rights, and the rule of law.

 

[zhzd97163com]

Why are you using ChatGPT to write simpler responses? Internal security isn't something that needs a lot of explanation or transparency when something has already been flagged as "comprehensive security screening".

>What is needed is a process that is fast, accurate, and accountable

That's a very idealistic view of the world and idealism never translates to reality.

No system is perfect, but how can that be used as an excuse to avoid improvement? Keep defending an approach that clearly does not operate well does not solve the issue...

Also, can you explicitly respond to the points raised?

If they are a real security risk, why this process is unable to identify that in a timely and accurate manner? If they are not, isn't taking years to investigate them a significant waste of administrative resources?

And if the system cannot determine the risk within a reasonable timeframe, why not simply refuse the application on security grounds and close the case? That would at least remove the potential risk and provide clarity for both the country and the applicants.

 

[zhzd97163com]

>Third, the definition of “skilled workers” is not subjective. Canada’s immigration system uses the noc framework, which clearly defines TEER 0–3 occupations as skilled. Redefining “skilled” as the 75th percentile of a field is simply not how the system operates.

Again, that "skilled" definition fails to bring skilled people. You aren't skilled if you manage a bunch of people who shovel garbage for a living. But, because of broken definitions, we see everyone claim themselves as "skilled". The number of immigrants who claim to be skilled and then complain about "lack of jobs", "economic hardship", etc empirically supports what I just stated.

75th percentile and above is a benchmark that most compensation management systems used if you have never heard of that. At this point, my observation is immigrants cherry pick what you want e.g. skilled definition from IRCC, but are very selectively against other issues. I get that it is human nature, but, that's the whole point. You think it is "fair", when there's hardly anything fair about this entire topic.

Let's not hijack this thread with this spam and let it exist for the purpose it serves.

The high unemployment rate is caused by the economic shrinkage after covid rather than the fact that new immigrants have low qualifications...

Qualifications are assessed during the eligibility stage of an immigration application, which is a completely different part of the process from security screening

But yeah, you're right. The definition of "skilled" used in other compensation systems is irrelevant to the topic of immigration security screening. If you disagree with how IRCC defines "skilled" you can raise that concern with IRCC or start another petition against that, like what this thread is about

 

[tripko]

I am one of many applicants whose application has been stuck in security screening for a long time. I submitted my application on February 28, 2023, and received my AOR on April 4, 2023. My background check has been in progress since November 28, 2023.
I am originally from Europe and have never lived in another country for longer than two or three weeks for vacation. I have only traveled within European countries. I work as an architect and have always been employed in the private sector. I have never worked for any government institution.
Regarding military service, I did not serve in the regular army. Instead, I completed civilian service at an association for people with disabilities, which was an available alternative. I recently learned from MP that documents related to my military service were requested and received by ircc or cbsa, and that these documents have been under review since June 2025.
Additionally, I was informed that my file was transferred to a different office in mid-February of this year.

In one month, I will be traveling back home to visit my family, so receiving any request right now might complicate my situation. After I return, if there is still no progress, I am considering pursuing a mandamus.
Its not fair to play like this with people life's.