On September 1, 2016, the British Columbia Provincial Nomination Program (“BC PNP“) published changes to its program guide.
Here is a summary of the changes.
If you are invited to apply and your employer is using a representative, your employer must also complete their own use of representative form, even if your employer is appointing the same representative.
If you are invited to apply and you are using a representative, your employer must also complete their own use of representative form, even if your employer is appointing the same representative.
If invited to apply, you must submit the $550 application fee with your online application before your application will be processed. Incomplete applications will not be processed and fees may not be refunded.
If invited to apply, you must submit the $550 application fee with your online application before your application will be processed. Incomplete applications will not be approved, and application fees will only be refunded if you withdraw your application before the BC PNP begins to assess it. You may contact the BC PNP at PNPinfo@gov.bc.ca to withdraw your application and find out if you are eligible for a refund. Please provide your full name, your date of birth, and your BC PNP application file number in your email.
Minimum Incomes Threshold
All thresholds have an average increase of $100-600
Paid Co-Op Counting as Experience
Experience obtained in paid co-op work terms is eligible if it meets the following criteria:
- paid co-op work term must be full-time (minimum 30 hours per week)
- paid co-op experience must be at a NOC skill level equal to or greater than the NOC code of the B.C.
It is not uncommon for refusal letters to contain some variation of the following statement:
I find that letters or affidavits made by the applicant, who has a personal interest in this matter, require a degree of corroboration in order to contain much weight.
As the Federal Court of Appeal held in Maldonado v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration),  2 FC 302 at para 5 (FCA), this is inappropriate. There, the Court noted that:
When an applicant swears to the truth of certain allegations, this creates a presumption that those allegations are true unless there be reason to doubt their truthfulness. On this record, I am unable to discover valid reasons for the Board doubting the truth of the applicant’s allegations above referred to.
In Hilo v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration),  FCJ No 228 (FCA), the Court further noted that:
The appellant was the only witness who gave oral testimony before the Board. His evidence was uncontradicted. The only comments as to his credibility are contained in the short passage quoted supra. That passage is troublesome because of its ambiguity. It does not amount to an outright rejection of the appellant’s evidence but it appears to cast a nebulous cloud over its reliability. In my view, the Board was under a duty to give its reasons for casting doubt upon the appellant’s credibility in clear and unmistakable terms. The Board’s credibility assessment quoted supra is defective because it is couched in vague and general terms. The Board concluded that the appellant’s evidence lacked detail and was sometimes inconsistent. Surely particulars of the lack of detail and of the inconsistencies should have been provided. Likewise particulars of his inability to answer questions should have been made available.Read more ›
Last updated on July 6th, 2018
In a previous blog post I wrote about how IRCC’s internal reasons for refusal are often much more detailed than what is in the refusal letters that IRCC sends to refused applicants.
The recent case of Aguilar v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2016 FC 947 illustrates this.
There, the refusal letter stated:
The checklist reasons for refusal further added that the reasons for refusal were “employment prospects of country of residence” and “current employment situation.”
The internal reasons for refusal, which could only be obtained through filing an Access to Information Act request or going to Federal Court were much more detailed, and stated that:
As you can see, it would be impossible for people who did not have the internal reasons to fully understand why their application was refused. It is for this reason that people with refusals should always seek to obtain the full reasons for refusal before re-applying.Read more ›
Justice Diner in Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Rooney discussed the issue of the lack of legislation dealing with stateless people in Canada. The relevant portions of his decision provide interesting commentary, and reads (citations removed for ease of reading):
Imposing an obligation to prove a negative in these circumstances may give rise to a Catch-22 situation for the stateless, nameless, mentally ill, and other vulnerable individuals who may not be able to establish identity. While I do not contest the Member’s finding that the Respondent may not be de jure stateless as understood by international instruments, the issue of statelessness and persons unable to establish nationality merits comment.
In a 2010 paper on de facto statelessness, Senior Legal Adviser to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Hugh Massey explains that the inability to prove nationality may be linked to a number of causes, including the fact that “[s]ome people may have never been registered in the civil registration system of the country of their nationality.” Mr. Massey further notes the difficulty to establish nationality in the case of unaccompanied children, especially if the “child is so young as to be unable to provide any information at all about his or her origins, e.g. if the child is a foundling”.
And in a 2012 discussion paper written for UNHCR, referenced at pages 543-544 of the Respondent’s Record, author Andrew Brouwer highlights the consequent difficulties created by the dilemma:
In Canada, as elsewhere, stateless persons who do not have authorization to stay in the country live in a condition of legal limbo. Some stateless persons are refugees and, once recognized as such, enjoy the full set of rights which attach to refugee status. However, non-refugee stateless persons are in an extremely precarious situation.Read more ›
On the 6th podcast episode, Dani Willetts joins Peter Edelmann and I to discuss the decision making process at Canada’s immigration department, her experience transitioning from a career working for CIC to being an immigration consultant, some recent cases impacting international graduates in particular with regards to the Post-Graduate Work Permit program, a recent Parliamentary report on the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, and the discovery that Canada has started negotiating an extradition treaty with China.
Dani Willetts is an immigration consultant at TDWImmigration. From 1989 – 2012 she worked in numerous capacities with Canada’s immigration department, including as a Supervisor in Vancouver.
First, using three recent cases as examples we discussed how Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada officers view themselves. Do they see themselves as administering the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act or as administering Canadian immigration programs. Three recent cases from the Federal Court were used to guide our discussion.
The first was Zhang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2016 FC 964, where the Federal Court determined that a visa officer was correct when it determined that a person had engaged in unauthorized study in Canada while in Canada as a visitor. Ms. Zhang had arrived in Canada on a visitor’s visa on August 23, 2014, which was valid until February 23, 2015. On January 16, 2015, she applied for, and was eventually granted an extension of that visa, until August 30, 2015. On January 5, 2015, she began a 14-week English as a Second Language [ESL] program. The Officer determined that the study was unauthorized because Ms. Zhang did not complete the studies within the initial period authorized by her stay. When Ms. Zhang argued that this was unfair because the IRCC said that she could study,Read more ›
The Canadian Council for Refugees (the “CCR“) has just distributed the following two PDFs to its followers. In brief, the Federal Court has issued an order saying that the best
interests of non-detained children can be considered in detention reviews (e.g. of a parent who is accompanied in detention by a child who is in detention, but not legally detained).
As copied from the CCR e-mail, the Order confirms that:
- the factors to be considered by the Immigration Division when deciding whether to detain or release are not limited to those enumerated under R. 248 of the Regulations;
- the Immigration Division has the jurisdiction to consider the interests of a child who is a Canadian at an immigration holding centre (i.e. residing there with her detained parent) even if that child is not under a detention order herself and therefore not directly subject to the Immigration Division’s jurisdiction; and
- the interests of a child may be taken into account (but are not a primary consideration) when determining whether a person is a flight risk.
Also, according to the CCR, Canada Border Services Agency Hearings Officers have been instructed to bring this Order to the attention of Immigration Division members. The following instructions have also been provided to officers.Read more ›
Last updated on August 19th, 2019
The latest ESDC wiki on LMIA name changes can be found here. Perhaps the most interesting change has been that the restriction on one name change has been removed, but employers must send their request to ESDC within 3 weeks of the LMIA expiring.
Read more ›
John McCallum, Canada’s Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (“IRCC”), has spent much of the summer conducting a speaking tour about upcoming changes to Canada’s immigration system. He has particularly focused on how he wants to welcome more international students as permanent residents.
This will be a welcome development, because so far Minister McCallum’s tenure as immigration minister has been a disaster for international graduates whose post graduate work permits have already or are soon expiring. Mr. McCallum’s March 2016 cuts to Canada’s economic immigration levels have resulted in IRCC’s Comprehensive Ranking System’s points requirement for foreign nationals to receive an Invitation to Apply for Canadian permanent residency remaining out of reach for most international graduates.
Minister McCallum has promised that improvements are coming in the fall, although the details are vague. Given that the Minister recognises that the current situation is untenable, it is incomprehensible why he has not introduced temporary measures to alleviate the frustration and dashed dreams that many international graduates living in Canada are experiencing, if they have not already had to return home. Mr. McCallum’s decision to not introduce temporary measures is especially galling given how simple and easy to implement they could have been.
In 2015, the previous Conservative Government of Canada introduced Express Entry, an application intake management system to reduce the number of people who could apply for permanent residency to Canada.
Under Express Entry prospective immigrants to Canada can no longer immediately apply to economic immigration programs for which they qualify. Rather, people who wish to apply for Canadian permanent residency first have to enter a pool of potential applicants.
Applicants in this Express Entry pool are ranked according to a Comprehensive Ranking System that ranks people using an algorithm that factors age,Read more ›
Last updated on March 15th, 2019
Most Canadian economic immigration programs require that applicants have qualifying work experience. In order to demonstrate that past and current positions qualify, applicants are required to provide references letters from their employers. Such reference letters must state the position title, duration, duties and wage.
Prospective immigrants who are obtaining reference letters should understand how officers determine whether specific employment experience meets program eligibility requirements, why reference letters are needed and how immigration officers will assess them.
Relying on the NOC system
In determining whether work experience is qualifying, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) relies on the Government of Canada’s national occupational classification (or NOC) system.
In the federal skilled worker class, for example, applicants need to have within the 10 years before they apply at least one year of full-time work experience, or the equivalent of part-time work, in their primary occupation that is listed on the NOC website as being skilled.
In the Canadian experience class, meanwhile, applicants need to show that they have acquired in Canada, within the three years before the date on which they apply for permanent residence, at least one year of full-time work experience in one or more occupations that are listed on the NOC website as being skilled.
This reliance on the NOC website applies to almost all economic immigration programs, including determining whether work experience qualifies for Express Entry comprehensive ranking system points, provincial nomination programs and caregiver programs.
Determining your NOCThe NOC system comprises more than 500 unit groups organized according to skill levels and skill types. Each occupational group on the NOC website typically contains a lead statement, example titles, main duties and general employment requirements.Read more ›
In the 2nd episode of Borderlines, Jennifer Bond joined Peter Edelmann and I to discuss refugee resettlement and ensuring that legislation is Charter compliant.
Jennifer Bond is a professor at the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Law, and is also a Special Advisor to Minister of Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship. Jennifer sat on the founding national executive of the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and is founder and current co-director of the University of Ottawa’s Refugee Assistance Project, a multi-year, national initiative aimed at mitigating and researching the access to justice implications of Canada’s new refugee legislation. She is also the Faculty Coordinator of the University of Ottawa’s Refugee Hub, supervisor of the Refugee Law Research Team, and a member of the Public Law Group.
00:26 – 21:31- We discuss international refugee resettlement law. Specific topics include whether countries are obligated to resettle refugees, Canada’s commitment to resettle 25,000 Syrian refugees, and the role private sponsorship programs in the global refugee resettlement effort. Jennifer also explained the security screening that Canada undertakes when it resettles refugees, and how this security process compares to Canada’s other immigration streams. Finally, we asked Jennifer for her take on what we discussed last week, which is whether in the wake of the BREXIT vote and the United Kingdom leaving the European Union, the aslyum crisis in Europe, the potential rise of protectionism and isolationism in the United States with the election of Donald Trump, and now the recently failed coup in Turkey, Canada can continue to buck global trends and remain a nation that loudly and publicly announces its intentions to continue to welcome a record number of immigrants and refugees.
21:31 – 35:50 – We discuss Jennifer’s 2014 paper titled “Read more ›
Please note that none of the information on this website should be construed as being legal advice. As well, you should not rely on any of the information contained in this website when determining whether and how to apply to a given program. Canadian immigration law is constantly changing, and the information above may be dated. If you have a question about the contents of this blog, or any question about Canadian immigration law, please contact the Author.
- Business and Entrepreneur Immigrantion
- Citizenship Applications and Revocations
- Family Class (Spousal Sponsorships, Parents & Grandparents)
- Humanitarian and Compassionate
- Immigration and Refugee Board
- Immigration Consultants
- Immigration Trends
- Judicial Reviews
- Labour Market Impact Assessments
- Maintaining Permanent Residency
- Provincial Nominee Programs
- Skilled Immigration (Express Entry, CEC, FSWC, Etc.)
- Study Permits
- Tax and Trusts
- Temporary Resident Visas
- Work Permits