RQ Timeline

GotRQ wrote: I think the government/CIC is pretty smart that way. All RQ recipients pay taxes but are prohibited (or not encouraged) to leave the country even travel. The other thing is that Conservative may think we will vote against them once we have become citizens. My colleague told me the number of citizens being processed or approved also depends on politics - like 1995 Quebec Referendum, CIC had transferred CJ's to Quebec to work overtime on citizenship applications. So there were more than 43,800 new citizens in Quebec in 1995, more than 11,000 of them got approved in the month of October before the referendum. That also caused the 1% NO over YES in vote. I know it's a different party now but I believer it may apply. So 48 months wait makes sense that way too. Well, that's just my opinion.

It is not likely that there is any deliberate practice to obstruct citizenship applications. Remember, thousands are still taking the oath week in and week out. While RQ cases are taking too long, and thousands are bogged down in the RQ process, the overall stream of PRs becoming new citizens continues to be thousands each week (on an average).

In the meantime, voting demographics suggest that the Conservative majority may very well be dependent on the strength of its popularity among immigrant voters, perhaps more so among first generation born in Canada, but generally so among immigrants overall.

This pattern has persisted for a long time, and overall it appears to be one that will continue, that is, that the immigrant population tends to vote more Conservative than for the NDP (the opposition) or for third parties like the Liberals or Green Party. So, if it is politics motivating CIC practice and policy, remember more new citizens tends to favour the Conservatives. (It is worth remembering that the NDP, more so, and the Liberals, quite a bit, tend to favour unions and workers over business; thus, while business interests, very much aligned with Conservatives, tend to be pro-immigration, in which the path to citizenship is an important element, whereas the NDP and Liberals balance the interests of the extant workforce in Canada against the demand of business for more immigration -- this does not mean that the NDP and Liberals are generally opposed to immigration, but rather it is not a priority for them like it is for the Conservatives. See news releases yesterday and today, for example: Canada Continued to Welcome Highest Sustained Level of Immigration in Canadian History in 2012 and Canada Welcomes Record Number of Immigrants through Canadian Experience Class, both typical of the Conservative government's efforts to attract more skilled workers to come to Canada and to stay in Canada.)



Risks of going abroad with RQ pending
In the meantime, the only risk a RQ'd applicant takes in going abroad for a short time (less than two weeks), is some inconvenience relative to scheduling, due to the possibility that a notice for an interview or in-person hearing may be sent just at a time such that it might arrive at the applicant's mailbox a day or three after the applicant leaves for the short trip abroad. Even then, if the trip is less than two weeks, the applicant will return in time to have enough notice that the applicant can either make the interview/hearing or at least contact CIC prior to it in time to reschedule. While rescheduling will cause further delay, at that stage the longest part of the queue is done, so the delay should not be more than a month or few months. In the meantime, however, the odds of the notice arriving in the applicant's mailbox just in that narrow window of time is very small. The risk of problems arising due to a short trip abroad is small.

While RQ'd applicants are discouraged to travel abroad while their application is pending, this is mostly about two things:
-- one is the notice issue; the longer abroad the applicant is the more risk the applicant will not timely receive a notice
-- the other has to do with the appearance of continued ties abroad, and the strength/extent of those ties; so a short trip abroad is no problem, but the longer the time spent abroad, the more risk CIC and/or a CJ might infer the applicant's primary residential ties are abroad and due to that approach evidence of residency more skeptically, more critically

The latter is discussed more in depth in the topic about leaving Canada after applying. The issue, as I have emphasized there, is not about the mere fact of traveling abroad, definitely not about short trips abroad, but about extended time abroad indicating continued residential ties abroad, and the inferences (or at least questions) that may arise due to indications the applicant has primary residential ties outside Canada (leading to questions, and CIC''s need to verify, if and when the applicant actually established a primary residence in Canada, and whether the applicant maintained such primary residence in Canada).

The discouragement given RQ'd applicants is rooted, I am quite sure, in conveying to applicants what will be most in their favour. There is no automatic negative impact arising from traveling abroad. The negative impact, again, is potentially missing an important notice, or, as I just noted relative to lengthy times spent abroad, in the appearance of things regarding where one really lives, where one really has maintained their primary residence, given such lengthy times abroad.

freedom10 wrote: This is really unfair - obviously new immigrants would have ties abroad. When you immigrate you don't bring your whole family here. So it is very common for to go for a month or two to visit your parents or other family members who live abroad. Many of them are very old, and cannot travel here, so you visit them. So what do they want - we cut away our ties with them?

While others here disagree with me, as I have oft times said, these things are looked at in context. There is no automatic or directly detrimental inference that arises from traveling abroad.

Getting timely notice is an issue. Obviously, the risk associated with receiving notice is that of the applicant. Even travel within Canada can entail such risks. The longer one is not directly receiving mail, the more risk there is of not timely receiving notice. This is just life.

Otherwise, there is no issue unless and only to the extent circumstances raise questions about where the applicant's primary residence has been. That is what residency is about, after all, and again, CIC does not have crystal ball. They have to consider the evidence. Ties have evidentiary weight. No rocket science. No draconian imposition of technical restrictions. If there is no indication, no appearance, that the applicant's primary residence is anywhere other than in Canada, the vast majority of time there is no issue here.

Again, this is discussed at length, in detail, in the topic about leaving Canada after applying. It is not a problem that arises from routine, ordinary trips to visit family. It is an issue that arises in connection with stays abroad of such a duration so as to raise questions about where the applicant's primary residence really is. (And remember, if the applicant resides abroad, the applicant is obligated to give notice of that to CIC. Failure to disclose material information can result in a denial of citizenship, and even criminal charges, regardless of whether or not the applicant met the residency requirement.)

Beyond that, how fair or unfair life is, or the side effects of particular circumstances in a person's life, is more about variables in people's lives than it is about policy and practice at CIC. Again, they do not have crystal ball. They have to examine the evidence, and if they perceive questions they will often examine things more closely, in order to determine the facts. If the facts show the applicant fully disclosed and accurately declared all material information, and that the applicant was resident-in-Canada as required, there will not be a residency issue problem.

hilary_smith2001 wrote: He got RQ in Feb 2013 before test. The reason for RQ is we went to our home country for 7 months with our new born baby.

GOD KNOWS

peter95 wrote: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/mobile/news/national-news/Only+citizenships+revoked+18month+crackdown+fraud/8030613/story.html After getting so much hard time from CIC waiting for 48 mth if the result is like this in this article then  who is responsible for so much harrassment to us. hilary_smith2001 This is just yr imagination that yr husband got RQ because u travelled.  People are getting RQ even though they never travel. where is your CIC office  from where u applied for citizenship. In  general CIC call agent replies for 48 month wait.