Yes.
There are a lot of irregularities happening in the visa posts. For example, in the case of work visas, even if the applicant has strong ties with India and he is financially well to do in that country, the visa is refused because the person will not come back.
In cases where the applicants have already applied for permanent residency for Canada, such as for family class, the applicants are denied visitor visas and told, “You have dual intent and you will not leave Canada”.
Why would a person who has applied for permanent residency jeopardize their chances of permanent residency for the sake of temporary status? Maybe the reason for their temporary visit is to explore Canada and to develop social ties and finally settle in Canada.
The visa officers, whether in Canada or overseas, do have some guidelines from the government, but these guidelines must be reviewed from time to time. Between the time I became an immigration consultant and now, I can distinguish what I have learned from experience and client interactions. The same applies to all professions, including that of visa officers overseas, who must be trained and be given proper experience in order to make decisions on something as important as uniting a mother with her child.
Now I am going to present solutions to these problems.
My first solution to this problem is that there should be a good faith bond. Let's say there is a scenario involving an overseas applicant who has weak or strong ties but is financially sound. An optional good faith bond for applicants would assure compliance with the terms and conditions of their temporary stay in Canada. If asked by the visa officer, the applicant could enter into a contracted bond for a certain amount with the visa issuing authority. The good faith bond's value could be determined based on the applicant's financial grounds. The applicant could explore, learn about, and visit Canada and the bond would remain collateral for his or her lawful visit.
During the 41st parliamentary session, Mr. Sabourin, vice-president, operations branch, CBSA, mentioned in his testimony that the average cost to remove a person varies, starting from $1,500 and, in the worst case, going up to $15,000.
If we had a good faith bond from the overseas applicant in case that applicant tried to violate the terms and conditions in Canada, that good faith bond could be used to remove that person from Canada. This kind of provision is already being practised in provincial nominee programs and in the case of detainees. If a detainee leaves here, then he is released on certain conditions by putting up a bond. In certain provincial nominee programs, such as the Saskatchewan provincial nominee program, applicants are asked for a $75,000 good faith bond, and if the applicant doesn't comply with the conditions, the $75,000 bond is forfeited.
My main concern is, if that kind of provision exists in those kinds of programs, why does it not in visitor's visa cases where we are losing a lot of revenue that we could raise from this industry?
The second scenario is humanitarian grounds. As I mentioned earlier with regard to the two cases in which family unification is important, in such cases visa posts must make a decision based on their actual circumstances, as in the case of Mrs. Kaur and Mr. Cui. The decision-makers must empathize with the applicant and thoroughly investigate with due diligence the reasons for the visit. Doing so would help avoid erroneous decision-making and unnecessary embarrassment for the authorities. In exceptional cases where a visa officer is still not satisfied with the humanitarian grounds, then the visa officer may ask for a good faith bond at the applicant's disposal.
When the visitor arrives in Canada, there is another option, which is CBSA monthly monitoring. Under this provision, if an applicant arrives in Canada, at the port of entry a visa officer may impose conditions such as monthly monitoring or attendance at the visa office if they find it is a necessity for a particular case. A condition may be imposed upon an applicant such that he would have to inform and update CBSA about their stay and/or intentions. In exceptional cases, CBSA may hold the passport of the foreign national.
I have another practical solution for refused cases. The solution is an appeal process. A person, when he is denied overseas—