加拿大华人论坛 加拿大留学移民为北京申请人写的申诉信，贴出来，大家看看。如有价值请提供给律师，希望对打官司有帮助。

在加拿大

When Minister Kenney talked about fairness, we couldn’t help bursting into laughter.Everytime when Minister Kenney talked about fairness, we PRE-C50 FSW applicants from Beijing couldn’t help bursting into laughter, because the logic of CIC has been far beyond the understanding ability of us.1.When in 2007 we submitted our applications as FSW to The Embassy of Canada - Beijing, we were informed of waiting in queue for 24-30 months before being processed because of the number of applications received previously. However from 2009 up to now 2012, even after our cases had been processed and most of them had reached final decision stage, crediting Minister’s great queue-jumping processing policy from 2008 the queue before us seems stretch to infinity.2.From 2008 to today when CIC began processing newer files in preference to older files, the Minister claimed that the 38 or 29 occupations met urgent labour market demand of Canada. If the Minister was sincere about that CIC should have promptly assessed those applications submitted before 27 February 2008 whose NOC were on those Occupation Lists, or even merely informed the applicants to apply under the new system again. However the only information those applicants got from CIC was that their applications had been being processed at a steady rate and would get a final decision by average processing time published on CIC web site. They trusted in the heretofore widely-held belief that the Government of Canada is honest and continued to wait year after year until they were exclude from the eligible occupations list and lost their probability to apply again. 3.CIC explained that the applicants who had applied years after us jumped the queue because they met urgent labour market demand of Canada better than us. That statement was no longer tenable after CIC imposed its second ministerial instructions (MI 2) on June 26 2010, in which 29, not 38 occupations as in MI 1 were demanded, that mean many C50 FSW applicants applied prior to June 26 2010 no longer met urgent labour market demand of Canada at that moment as we did. This situation occurred again on July 1, 2011. However, CIC kept on prioritizing those C-50 files, while suspended our PRE-C50 files on the Greek calends.4.Frequently, the Minister has stated that Canada is experiencing a huge and growing labour shortage in many industries and regions, while it is extremely obvious that most applicants among us, especially those who had got selection decision made by CIC visa officers, possess the adaptability which had been assessed by CIC, and wishes to adjust themselves to new career among the 29 or further demanded occupations. Instead of giving us half a chance to display our talent CIC lay our cases aside and neglect them.5.In many occasions, the Minister has stressed that CIC had been taking great efforts to reduce the pre-2008 backlog. On the contrary, as a matter of fact CIC had partly in 2010 and totally in 2011 ceased processing the pre-2008 backlog, including cases of those who had passed their selection decision stage and were only two step away from getting their visa issued, and the visa posts in Beijing even kept back a considerable surplus of the skilled immigrant quota in 2011. Despite all the self-contradiction, disorder and inefficiency of CIC, meanwhile we applicants show great patience, tolerance and inclusiveness which is regarded as the quintessence of Canadian spirit. In return, the Minister revealed in the proposed Bill C-38 S.87(3,4,5) that he had lost his last patience, inclusiveness, even interest in our 5 years backlog even if it is of his own making.To conclude this article I would like to cite below information posted on CIC website, please pay attention to the sentence in italics: ‘These criteria affect you only if you applied on or after July 1, 2011. If your application was received before July 1, 2011, it will be processed according to the rules that were in effect at that time.’ (http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/skilled/apply-who-instructions.asp#list) Is CIC still lying?By Cheng, Jiangchen, one of the PRE-C50 FSW applicants from BeijingJune 7, 2012

评论
回复: 为北京申请人写的申诉信，贴出来，大家看看。如有价值请提供给律师，希望对打官司有帮助。文章中的观点应该是老生常谈了，部分来自430以前moi的抗议信，部分来自家园网的一个帖子。不好意思没与作者联系擅自引用了。自己只是做了提炼总结工作。感觉2,3,5点是其中最有力的证据，可能会对打官司有帮助。其中第4点原本想爆料，C-50之后的档案，尤以体力工种申请者，造假嫌疑极大。有大学以上学历，有英语，在第三世界会下井采矿，开吊车，当建筑工人？这一点用脚丫子也想得明白。真不明白CIC智力底线在哪里！后来想想打击别人抬高自己不太合适，哈哈。不过这一点大家可以和律师讨论一下，看怎么提出来合适。如要找证据会损害一些人的利益的。原来还以为西方是最讲诚信的，呵呵天真啊。这几天家园网内部一点小矛盾，其实算不了什么，更谈不上什么派系！！真理是越辩越明，这才是民主，只要别搞毛的那一套，无限上纲上线，打击报复就行。也希望家园网继续成为大家各抒己见，各展所能，团结对外的场地。移友们上来交换信息，发泄情绪，交几个真心好友，不也是人生一大快事！

评论
回复: 为北京申请人写的申诉信，贴出来，大家看看。如有价值请提供给律师，希望对打官司有帮助。好贴！针针见血！谢谢北京TX！我们91都是一条船上的难友！

评论
。。。。。。 超赞 赏 C cheng1971 0$(VIP 0) 1772012-06-23#4 回复: 为北京申请人写的申诉信，贴出来，大家看看。如有价值请提供给律师，希望对打官司有帮助。当时NDP议员建议，给总理的信，还是要谦卑-humble，所以没采纳。后来现场有Globe and Mail记者Mark极其热心的采访，就爆料给他了。没想到全无结果，甚至一封email回信也没有。现在看来，找媒体和给议员写信似乎效果不大。NDP说加拿大主流英文媒体都是保守党出钱养活的，看来不假。这件事让大家也见识一下西方的新闻自由和民主。接下来似乎只剩下三权分立了。打官司的同学如果觉得有价值，可以提供给律师。至于论据，网上数据和CIC的邮件都容易找到，大家参考moi的原始信，我只做了一点点逻辑分析。衷心祝愿后面的官司全部胜诉！！！！

评论
回复: 为北京申请人写的申诉信，贴出来，大家看看。如有价值请提供给律师，希望对打官司有帮助。写的很好，支持。建设广发各论坛（国外），群发EMAIL。

评论
2007.10.1递北京;2009.10.16 S2邮件;2010.1.19日S2补料寄北京。(补充：之前状态5）2010.1.29变12;2010年12月CAIPS无果；2011年7月CAIPS查询74分.2011.11.7地址栏消失了几天。2012.3.10Litigation. 超赞 赏 岁 岁月无声 0$(VIP 0) 2492012-06-23#6 回复: 为北京申请人写的申诉信，贴出来，大家看看。如有价值请提供给律师，希望对打官司有帮助。写的好！真的考验的是制度和法律的公正性了。

评论
FN(BJ) 16/01/2008变5 24/02/2010s2妥投 10/06/2010变12 18/06/2010当时NDP议员建议，给总理的信，还是要谦卑-humble，所以没采纳。后来现场有Globe and Mail记者Mark极其热心的采访，就爆料给他了。没想到全无结果，甚至一封email回信也没有。现在看来，找媒体和给议员写信似乎效果不大。NDP说加拿大主流英文媒体都是保守党出钱养活的，看来不假。这件事让大家也见识一下西方的新闻自由和民主。接下来似乎只剩下三权分立了。打官司的同学如果觉得有价值，可以提供给律师。至于论据，网上数据和CIC的邮件都容易找到，大家参考moi的原始信，我只做了一点点逻辑分析。衷心祝愿后面的官司全部胜诉！！！！点击展开...赞同！起诉是最有效的途径！衷心希望我们都能胜诉！胜诉的意义不仅仅在于我们的案子可以得到审理，许多人多年的梦想能得以实现，更为重要的是证明了公平和正义能够得到伸张。如果败诉，这样的国家不去也罢！

评论
。。。。。。 超赞 赏 B beidiao 0$(VIP 0) 3,4182012-06-23#8 回复: 为北京申请人写的申诉信，贴出来，大家看看。如有价值请提供给律师，希望对打官司有帮助。up

  ·中文新闻 悉尼铁路工会纠纷：避免火车混乱的协议细节浮出水面
·中文新闻 为什么比尔·肖顿体现了澳大利亚政治最好和最坏的一面