CIM#34: What government should do to address the processing delays crisis

I'd like to ask the representative from LUSO Community Services this question. You raised, I think similarly to the other witnesses, the significance of the delay in processing and what it means. Oftentimes, the government does not even follow its own processing standards. If you look at the website right now, they don't even give you a time; they only say not to expect your application to be processed expeditiously.
Given that this is the situation, I wonder what you think the government should do or what your recommendation is for the government to address this crisis in processing delays within immigration.

Citizenship and Immigration Committee
Oct. 7th, 2022, 2:20 pm
Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses as well for their presentations. I apologize for the delay in getting the matter going.

I'd like to ask the representative from LUSO Community Services this question. You raised, I think similarly to the other witnesses, the significance of the delay in processing and what it means. Oftentimes, the government does not even follow its own processing standards. If you look at the website right now, they don't even give you a time; they only say not to expect your application to be processed expeditiously.

Given that this is the situation, I wonder what you think the government should do or what your recommendation is for the government to address this crisis in processing delays within immigration.



Irena Sompaseuth
Settlement Services Manager, LUSO Community Services

Well, I think consistency with processing times.... I think a few of the witnesses mentioned that there is inconsistency, because some applications are processed faster than others, not really for any particular reason, and that communication is not available to applicants.

As I mentioned, we have seen recent applications being processed much faster compared to 2019 and 2020, so just keep that trend going but really focus on the backlog of all those applications that are sitting in the inventory as well. I think allocating staff and resources to specific applications and focusing on getting those processed will help reduce that backlog, as well as training for staff and hiring more staff to be available so applicants will be able to receive information.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Of course, when the government says they've hired new staff and set processing standards, it's for new applicants coming in from that day going forward. It's not for the people who are already in the queue who have already been waiting for a year, two years or longer for their application to be processed.

Do you think that's right? If not, how do you think the government should address that, those who have already applied and are waiting?



Irena Sompaseuth
Settlement Services Manager, LUSO Community Services

With all of the new employees who have been hired to focus and work on all the immigration applications with the goal of reducing the backlogs, there should be designated teams, separate teams, to focus on specific issues. That way, the older applications would also be processed and not just left in the inventory without attention.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you.

I'd like to ask the same question of Ms. Gagné. I'm sure you're seeing that in the system. What's your response? Should the government be processing new applications and then be able to say, “Oh, look, we're meeting standards”, when all the people who are stuck in the backlog are just waiting and waiting?



Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe
Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ

The government should really set a deadline for dealing with the backlog. For example, it could decide that all backlogs have to be cleared within six months and hire the resources needed to administer the process.

At the moment, resources are assigned to processing new files. However, applications and the backlog are not always being dealt with, and 20% of applications are not being processed within the prescribed time periods. We have no idea what's going on.

There should therefore be very clear direction from the government requiring all backlogs to be processed within something like six months. After that, there should be an accountability requirement if the deadline is not met.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much for that.

Is my time up, Madam Chair?

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

You have one minute and 10 seconds.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you.

One of the issues is the lack of transparency, really. People don't really know why their application has just been rejected. Often the government just cites, “We don't believe you're going to return to your country of origin”, even though there's ample evidence to indicate otherwise.

Ms. Gagné, I wonder what your response is to that and what your recommendation is to address this issue.



Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe
Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ

First of all, I would recommend that the reasons be more detailed. At the moment, generic and highly subjective reasons are given. We don't understand why. When we submit an access to information request, we never get any further details.

Officers' notes should therefore be clearly detailed and the reasons given need to be explained at greater length. It's not enough to say in a short sentence that the officer did not believe the applicants would return to their country owing to their financial status. Details about what precisely is missing from the application are needed to answer questions or address officers' concerns. At the moment, the same application might be submitted twice and receive a different response depending on which officer processed it.

The reasons really need to be spelled out and clear instructions given with respect to what is required. For example, for financial means, a definition of the minimum required has to be identified and communicated clearly. At the moment, it's up to the discretion of the officer, and there are no guidelines.
https://openparliament.ca/committees/immigration/44-1/34/jenny-kwan-10/

Latest posts

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Hallelujah to progress being made on the bill.

NDP-2 requires the Minister of Finance to report to Parliament and the public on how reducing the lowest federal personal income tax rate affects the value of non-refundable tax credits, which are calculated using that same tax rate. This is a critical measure, because lowering the personal income tax rate not only reduces the amount of tax owed; it also diminishes the value of tax credits such as the disability tax credit, the age credit and the caregiver credit. These are important supports, particularly for lower-income Canadians, seniors and people with disabilities. For individuals who claim these tax credits, the net benefit of the government's proposed tax cut will be significantly reduced.

The National Disability Network, March of Dimes Canada and Inclusion Canada have also raised these concerns that some claimants may be worse off overall, as the drop in credit value could outweigh the savings from the lower tax rate.

Recent testimony before this committee from the finance minister, François-Philippe Champagne, and senior finance official Stefania Bartucci confirms that the government is aware of the unintended consequences of the reduction in the lowest personal income tax rate on non-refundable tax credits. On October 6, 2025, the finance minister, François-Philippe Champagne, told this committee, “we heard concerns regarding unintended consequences of the tax cuts on some disability tax credit recipients. I can assure you, Madam Chair, that we are working on resolving them.”

By mandating a transparent, timely report to Parliament and the public, this amendment ensures that the full impact of the tax change is understood and that vulnerable groups are not unintentionally disadvantaged. This amendment also holds the minister accountable to his commitment to addressing these impacts and ensures that Parliament can monitor progress on mitigating harm to vulnerable Canadians.

Madam Chair, I hope committee members will support this amendment.

James McNamee, Director General, Family and Social Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I would say that's generally the case. If the work permit they obtained was originally connected to the public policy, that's correct. I don't know if that's the situation in all cases. In some cases, applicants may have had an LMIA-based work permit to begin with.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC, NDP
That's right. However, under the special immigration measure, the LMIA is not required.  I have a list of applicants in those circumstances. Their work permit renewal application was rejected. They were asked to submit an LMIA, which makes no sense. I want to flag that as a deep concern now emerging for people whose open work permits are being rejected as they wait for their permanent resident status. At this rate, given the immigration levels plan numbers and the processing delays happening, and with the number of applicants in place, you can imagine that it's going to take something like eight years to get through the backlog of people getting their PR status. This means that if they are trying to get their pension, they will not be able to do so for eight years, because they are required to provide proof of permanent residence.
I want to flag this as a major concern. I hope the department will take action to fix the error being applied to applicants whose open work permits are being rejected under this stream.  Can I get a confirmation from officials that this will be undertaken?

James McNamee, Director General, Family and Social Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Yes, that issue has been raised with the department already, and we're looking into it to see what exactly happened in those situations.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC, NDP
Okay. Officials are aware of it, and yet it's still happening.  I have cases coming to me that are happening. I'm about to prepare a giant pile of this stuff for the minister, so I hope the officials will fix that.  The other thing related to the pension, of course, is lengthy delays for people to get their permanent status.  Based on the immigration levels plan and the number of applicants in place, is it the officials' anticipation that it will take about eight years to get those applications processed?

James McNamee, Director General, Family and Social Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
We have looked at that possibility. Certainly, it will take longer than we had previously indicated to the committee. I would note that the first year of the levels plan is the fixed year. The years that follow, in this case, 2026 and 2027, are flexible. There are opportunities to adjust those numbers in the future, and that could affect that timeline. It's hard to say whether eight years will be the timeline, but it will be longer than had been originally predicted because the numbers have gone down.

Click to read the full discussion from the Committee meeting

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
Aside from looking at patterns of potential violators—the groups and organizations taking advantage of students with these fraudulent letters of acceptance—will you be including in the analysis what types of institutions are being utilized for these fraudulent letters? In other words, is it private institutions versus public institutions, colleges versus universities and so on? Will that be part of the analysis?

Bronwyn MayDirector General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
It's not always the case that a letter originates from an institution. We would need to look at various possible sources.

 

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
Maybe I can reframe that.
Obviously, as these are fraudulent letters of acceptance, they wouldn't be issued by the institutions. However, regarding the list of institutions being used for the purpose of these fraudulent letters, I would be interested in obtaining information to determine what percentage are private institutions and public institutions, how many of them are colleges, how many of them are universities and so on. That will tell us very specific information that I think is important when trying to tackle fraudulent activities.

 

Bronwyn May, Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I completely agree. That's a very important line of analysis.

 

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
I will make the further request to make sure you share this information with the committee. I'll argue that this information should not be kept secret. It should be public and transparent—shared with all Canadians—so that we're aware of what the landscape is and of how international students are being taken advantage of. With respect to that analysis, will there be information and data on what countries are being targeted?

Click to read the full discussion from the Committee meeting

Are you ready to take action?

Constituent Resources
Mobile Offices
Contact Jenny

Sign up for updates