Canada citizenship backlog is smaller due to fees

[dell]

There is an interesting article on the news. The government things that the backlog has been reduced due to increased fees. what do people think about it? I think it would have certainly made it difficult for some people but I can't imagine the huge drop in backlog due to fees alone. below is a link from the article.

https://www.thestar.com/news/immigration/2016/10/12/citizenship-applications-plummet-as-fees-soar.html

 

[McClane]

I cannot imagine that either. Correlation, causation, not the same thing.

If people cannot afford to save 500 CAD for a milestone of this magnitude, then they were an underclass already. The fee did not create it, like the author says.

 

[screech339]

There is an interesting article on the news. The government things that the backlog has been reduced due to increased fees. what do people think about it? I think it would have certainly made it difficult for some people but I can't imagine the huge drop in backlog due to fees alone. below is a link from the article.

https://www.thestar.com/news/immigration/2016/10/12/citizenship-applications-plummet-as-fees-soar.html

That may be one factor but the drop is more likely due to a number of applicants having to wait an extra year or 2 since the 4/6 rule kicked in. The numbers will go back up once PR qualify under 4/6 rule instead in 2017, 2 years after 2015 4/6 rule.

 

[dell]

According to the article, CIC received only 36,000 applicants for the first half of this year. Last year they received close to 150,000 which isn't much either. I am wondering why there is a backlog at all. If they were so slow the backlog should have been completely eliminated.

I am all for increasing the fees to even a $1,000 if that means processing time comes to reasonable 90 days.

 

[imran01]

That may be one factor but the drop is more likely due to a number of applicants having to wait an extra year or 2 since the 4/6 rule kicked in. The numbers will go back up once PR qualify under 4/6 rule instead in 2017, 2 years after 2015 4/6 rule.

agreed.

 

[imran01]

According to the article, CIC received only 36,000 applicants for the first half of this year. Last year they received close to 150,000 which isn't much either. I am wondering why there is a backlog at all. If they were so slow the backlog should have been completely eliminated.

I am all for increasing the fees to even a $1,000 if that means processing time comes to reasonable 90 days.

with you.. LOL

 

[ajithpl]

According to the article, CIC received only 36,000 applicants for the first half of this year. Last year they received close to 150,000 which isn't much either. I am wondering why there is a backlog at all. If they were so slow the backlog should have been completely eliminated.

I am all for increasing the fees to even a $1,000 if that means processing time comes to reasonable 90 days.

This is not rocket science. The new rules came to effect in June-July 2015 and any applicants who applied from July 2015 till July 2016 (12 months) would have easily applied during the 3/4 rules.
Not getting? Take an example of a Feb 2016 applicant (me) who completed 4 years in Jan 2016. I had completed 3 years in Jan 2015 and could have easily applied at that time - but chose not to because of personal reasons.
So, all these 12 months applicants till July 2016 are the "left over" applicants from 3/4 and not new.
From July 2016 onward, there would be a surge in applicants as those who were supposed to apply from July 2015 with old rules were waiting for one extra year. Once the second half data of 2016 comes, this would be held true.
Also, please note that the increase in fees came in Jan 2015 and those people who completed 3/4 were rushing to have their applications send before 4/6 came into effect. Obviously all these had nothing to do with increase in fees.

 

[deerestlovelybear]

The reporter is disgusting, everyone knows the drop is because of 4/6 and 183 days per calendar year rule, nothing related to fee but he still uses fee to redirect the public in other direction. I would think it is neccessary to increase the fee if it is to help the government recruit more office to reduce the backlog. Even if it is $1000, I am sure 99.99% of immigrants can afford. It is hardly believe just a few hundred dollars will stop someone from moving forward with such important matter in their life that affect their future, freedom of movement and stability

 

[747-captain]

The reporter is disgusting, everyone knows the drop is because of 4/6 and 183 days per calendar year rule, nothing related to fee but he still uses fee to redirect the public in other direction. I would think it is neccessary to increase the fee if it is to help the government recruit more office to reduce the backlog. Even if it is $1000, I am sure 99.99% of immigrants can afford. It is hardly believe just a few hundred dollars will stop someone from moving forward with such important matter in their life that affect their future, freedom of movement and stability

Extremely well stated!! The reporter is obviously a stupid, mentally deficient politically correct hack, spreading falsehoods for sensationalism! I too am all for a $1000 fee if it would reduce the processing times to a very reasonable 90 to 120 day max. time frame!

If someone cannot save up a measly $1000 for something as IMPORTANT AND SIGNIFICANT as citizenship, then they DON'T DESERVE TO BE GIVEN IT!! :

Keep in mind that when someone becomes a PR, they have to come to the country with around $12,000-ish (for one person like me), and much more if they are a family. So in light of this, arguing that a $530 fee puts someone in dire straits financially, is beyond preposterous and absurd!

 

[marcher]

"...this risks the overall success of the Canadian model of integration.” Really? This article is a perfect example of very bad journalism that misinforms the reason. First, I still do not understand why citizenship is a MUST to integrate; one can integrate in the Canadian society regardless of what nationality he or she carries. The only aspect he or she will not be able to do is voting; and tons of Canadians do not vote, does that mean they are not integrated in their own culture and communities? Second, this article does not mention at all the impact that the 4-6 Rule had on the number of applicants. The writer is trying to blame it all on the fees; which I doubt had any impact. The average median of employment income of new immigrants is about $20,000. That is a very low income, but enough for one to save $500 over a couple of years for such a crucial aspect such as citizenship that will bring significant benefits.

 

[screech339]

"...this risks the overall success of the Canadian model of integration.” Really? This article is a perfect example of very bad journalism that misinforms the reason. First, I still do not understand why citizenship is a MUST to integrate; one can integrate in the Canadian society regardless of what nationality he or she carries. The only aspect he or she will not be able to do is voting; and tons of Canadians do not vote, does that mean they are not integrated in their own culture and communities? Second, this article does not mention at all the impact that the 4-6 Rule had on the number of applicants. The writer is trying to blame it all on the fees; which I doubt had any impact. The average median of employment income of new immigrants is about $20,000. That is a very low income, but enough for one to save $500 over a couple of years for such a crucial aspect such as citizenship that will bring significant benefits.

It is not just bad journalism, The Star newspaper is allowing this to go through, which shows how bad the newspaper is in itself. I wasn't surprised myself to see articles like this coming from The Star. The only reason the Star allowed this garbage is because the fees were increased during Harper's mandate. They will print anything that would place blame on the conservatives.

 

[willzou]

agree all of you,
the reason is not money.
it's because the residency requirment of 4/6