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

[AlexZhang]

Hi everyone,

I know so many of us here are exhausted and frustrated. We’ve been waiting for months, or even years, with our PR applications completely stuck in "Security Screening - In Progress" , comprehensive security screening with no end in sight.

Instead of just waiting silently, a group of us decided to take action. With the support of MP Jenny Kwan, we have officially launched a parliamentary e-petition (e-7259) to demand IRCC, CSIS, and CBSA fix this broken system, provide transparent 90-day updates, and clear the massive backlog.

We already have over 4,339 signatures in just a day, but we need as many as possible to force the government to respond!

Here is the link to sign: https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7259

Who can sign? Anyone currently residing in Canada (Work Permit, Study Permit, PR, etc.) or Canadian citizens worldwide.

VERY IMPORTANT STEP: After you submit your info on the website, you MUST check your email (including the spam/junk folder) and click the confirmation link!
If you don't click that link, your signature will NOT be counted.

Let’s stand together, raise our voices, and get the transparency and fairness we all deserve. Please sign and share it with anyone you know who is also affected by this!

Thank you so much for your support!

 

[Naturgrl]

How is it the fault of IRCC, CBSA and CSIS if those groups are waiting for immigration, security and background information from countries where one has resided or a citizen of. How is it broken then? So clearing a backlog is just allowing passing of security checks without any information from foreign countries. Isn't that a security risk?

 

[zhzd97163com]

done

 

[zhzd97163com]

How is it the fault of IRCC, CBSA and CSIS if those groups are waiting for immigration, security and background information from countries where one has resided or a citizen of. How is it broken then? So clearing a backlog is just allowing passing of security checks without any information from foreign countries. Isn't that a security risk?

Security screening is necessary and we fully support it.

However, many applicants have been stuck in screening for many years without any updates or explanation.
Other immigration systems such as the U.S. and Australia also conduct security checks, yet applicants generally receive clearer timelines and case updates.
The concern raised in the petition is not about removing security screening, but about improving transparency and ensuring that cases are processed within reasonable timeframes.

 

[Naturgrl]

Security screening is necessary and we fully support it.

However, many applicants have been stuck in screening for many years without any updates or explanation.
Other immigration systems such as the U.S. and Australia also conduct security checks, yet applicants generally receive clearer timelines and case updates.
The concern raised in the petition is not about removing security screening, but about improving transparency and ensuring that cases are processed within reasonable timeframes.

First bullet states...
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.

So if applications exceed processing times they should be finalized immediately. That doesn't sound like security screening would be completed. If countries don't give the security information then what is a reasonable time frame. It says strict standards but then approve if exceed standards.

 

[zhzd97163com]

First bullet states...
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.

So if applications exceed processing times they should be finalized immediately. That doesn't sound like security screening would be completed. If countries don't give the security information then what is a reasonable time frame. It says strict standards but then approve if exceed standards.

First bullet states: Mandate that applications exceeding 100% of standard processing times be finalized immediately unless a written justification and firm completion date are provided.

The point is not that applications should be approved without completing security screening. Security screening should absolutely be completed.

What the proposal suggests is that when a case exceeds the standard processing time, the responsible agency should provide a written justification and a clear estimated completion timeline.

At the moment, many applicants remain in security screening for several years with no explanation or timeline. The concern is about transparency and accountability in the process, not bypassing security checks.

In any administrative system, delays can occur. But indefinite delays without explanation or estimated completion timelines indicate a process management issue rather than a security requirement.

 

[xy65893]

Passed 7K milestone! https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7259

 

[iSaidGoodDay]

First bullet states: Mandate that applications exceeding 100% of standard processing times be finalized immediately unless a written justification and firm completion date are provided.

The point is not that applications should be approved without completing security screening. Security screening should absolutely be completed.

What the proposal suggests is that when a case exceeds the standard processing time, the responsible agency should provide a written justification and a clear estimated completion timeline.

At the moment, many applicants remain in security screening for several years with no explanation or timeline. The concern is about transparency and accountability in the process, not bypassing security checks.

In any administrative system, delays can occur. But indefinite delays without explanation or estimated completion timelines indicate a process management issue rather than a security requirement.

You want what as an explanation? You'll only receive responses like "waiting for partner agency to respond" -> how will that solve anything? You'll still be waiting with uncertainity as that "govt body in Iraq" isn't going to be bound to CBSA/CSIS's mandate to respond. Tell me, will some random agency in Iraq give CSIS a timeline to respond within X days? Not sure about you, but I doubt it.

Also, you are implying that we burden our resources with more paperwork because someone from a high-risk area/profile wants it to be sped for them - that's not a good look for 2026 where security is being seriously questioned. This will be a political suicide for anyone who supports it. Also, if a petition is only supported by non-citizens, does it even hold a merit?