我已经根据Felix提供的数据更新了给MP，媒体和CIC的信。请大家使用这个有具体数据的版本，并在约见自己所属MP时将Felix贴出的表格一并 打印附上，（PDF版本我已经传到 Group 的 Files 里，文件名：Evidence-CIC-2.pdf，您可以根据需要下载打印）。在ROLIA上看到国会会在4月初到4月16日开会 决定新的移民配额分配。如果错过这段时间，就要再等到明年了。我们要尽快将自己的意见反馈上去。需要大家配合做如下事宜：
1. 尽快见本区的MP，如果实在无法成行，请发送信件或EMAIL。信件中我们的诉求是加快北京的处理速度，不是个人父母单独案例的速度。
2. 我们要以一个团队的名义给CIC的官员写信申述（以下面的信为主体）。为增加力度，现在征集签名。包括：姓名，电话，所在城市和email。我们 保证您的信息将严格保密，并只用于给CIC和媒体的申述信中。请不要在此讨论贴中回复您的信息。请您将个人信息发送至： parentsimmi@gmail.com 中。您的信息不会在网络上和成员中公开。
3. 成员中如有熟悉和电子及传统媒体打交道的，了解投稿途径的，请和我联系。
另：Felix将尽快联系网页制作，争取一周内推出。
谢谢大家！
Display
Dear MP’s name/ Media’s name/ CIC officer’s name:
We are a group of people (Canadians or Permanent Residents in Canada) who sponsored our parents to apply immigration to Canada. As sponsors of applicants who submitted their immigration application to the Canadian Visa Office in Beijing, P. R. China, we are writing this letter to express one of our biggest concerns regarding the application processing.
The following table provided by CIC is summarizing the immigration processing data of Family Class in Canadian Visa Offices in different countries. It contains information of number of Persons processed during Oct, 2008 - Sep, 2009; number of persons in Inventory as of Oct 2, 2009 and projected Processing Time (PPT, number of years for an application to be processed). We noticed that the processing time and the amount of cases been processed for Family Class (parents and grandparents) vary dramatically among different visa offices located in different places around the world. The difference between Beijing office and some other offices makes us feel that such difference is unacceptable and need to be addressed here to seek for a solution. First of all, let’s have a close look at this table. You will surprisingly find that just a few simple comparisons can reveal very shocking facts. With the second largest number of people in inventory (5865), Beijing office has third longest projected processing time (5.6 years) in this table. Largest number of applicant dose not necessarily mean the processing time has to be the longest. It is very obvious when you look at the much shorter PPT (1.5 years) for New Delhi office which has the largest amount of persons in its inventory (9392). New Delhi has 1.6 times more applicants than Beijing, but 3.7 times shorter PPT than Beijing.
The extra longer PPT in Beijing office is partially because of the longer waiting time than that in other offices. As indicated in CIC website, from Oct 1st, 2008 to Sep 30, 2009, the officially announced waiting time at Beijing office was 23-27 months, but it was only 13-18 months at Hong Kong and New Delhi. This means applications of the same category are held almost double the length of time in Beijing than in the other two offices. We think this is quite not understandable and not acceptable considering the criteria and documenting for Family Class applications are all the same at all these offices.
Secondly, when we compare the processing speed at different offices, we found it is even unfair for Beijing applicants. During Oct. 2008 to Sep. 2009, the number of persons processed in Beijing is 1040, but New Delhi office processed 6.14 times of this number, ending up to 6388. Manila has similar number of persons processed as Beijing (1012), but with only 3.0 years as the projected processing time. The processing speed in Hong Kong for the same period of time is even faster, only 0.9 year as projected processing time. We are questioning: why the case processing speed has such giant difference among these offices? Why Beijing office is so sluggish comparing with other offices? We hate to use the term “DISCRIMINATION”, but obviously, there are reasons brought up such strong feelings to us when we look at the above situations. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms claims the principle of non-discrimination in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. But we can not see the consistence of the above situation with this principle.
In addition, some of the announcements made by Beijing Office are not consist to one and another. We are totally confused by the statistical numbers that we saw in the official website of Beijing Visa Office. The website announced that 80% of the inventory applications will be completed in 27 months. If we take a case filed in Sep, 2007 as an example, after 27 months (as of Jan. 2010), this case should be completed say it falls in the above mentioned “80%”. Then how come another announcement from the same website is informing people that by the end of 2010, only the application submitted before Sep 30 2007 will be processed by Beijing Visa Office? If we take the time frame of 27 months as case completion time, the Beijing Office should have finished all the cases they received in Sep 2007 by Jan 2010, which is the beginning of 2010. Then why they say that they can only work on cases received before Sep. 2007 by the end of 2010? This means that in 2010, the time they would finish Sep 2007 cases is 12 month after they should (according to their 27-month time frame) have finish them. This gives us reason to ask: what are they planning to do for the whole 2010, then? Or another conclusion can be clearly drawn: Beijing Visa Office can not keep its 27-month time frame; applicants in Beijing have to wait even longer than 27 months. Based on the above facts, as sponsors of Beijing applicants, we are firmly and strongly requesting the similar case processing speed and time frame for our parents/grand parents’ applications as in Hong Kong or New Delhi. Our request is entirely reasonable. If a case can be processed in 13 months in other offices, we don’t want to wait double or triple the time in Beijing. It is the responsibility of CIC to use whatever resources to keep this application process equivalent to all applicants, no matter the grounds of race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion or sex.
We deeply count on (MP’s name/ Media’s name/ CIC officer’s name) to forward our concern and let our voice heard up to a higher level, so that all the people can get the same attention and treatment during their immigration application.
Name:
Signature:
Address: