CIMM#114: Recent Reforms to the International Student Program

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 May, Director 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

Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 7th, 2024
Evidence of meeting #114 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session

11:20 a.m.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

No. On the second issue, Mr. Chair, I want to put on notice the following motion:

That, in light of the failure of IRCC's special immigration measure to reunite Canadian Gazan family members to facilitate a safe and timely exit from the besieged Gaza Strip for family members of Canadians and permanent residents, and pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study to examine the development and execution of the Government of Canada's special immigration measures to reunite and help bring Canadian Gazan family members to safety, including extended family; that the committee also consider Canada's use of its diplomatic relations to help facilitate the free movement of persons authorized to travel to Canada; and that this study consist of no less than four meetings; that the committee consider testimony from affected families as well as Canadian civil society; that the Minister of Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship appear for one hour with departmental officials along with the officials to appear for one additional hour; that the Minister of Foreign Affairs appear for one hour with departmental officials along with the officials to appear for one additional hour; and further that pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a), the committee order the production of all documents and records related to the policy-making considerations that led to the specific dimensions of the temporary public policy that opened on January 9, 2024, including the 1,000-person cap, the gradual issuance of access codes and delays in receiving codes experienced by many applicants, and the information requested from applicants on additional screening forms; that while respecting s. 19, s. 23, and s. 69 of the Access to Information Act, these details be provided within 30 days of the adoption of this motion and relevant documents are released in full to the public; that the committee report its findings to the House; and that pursuant to Standing Order 109 the government table a comprehensive response to the report.

I'm just tabling this motion at this time, Mr. Chair.

The Chair Sukh Dhaliwal
Liberal

Thank you, MP. Kwan.

I would like to welcome our witnesses for today's meeting.

I will tell committee members way in advance that we have resources available until 1:15 today. My thought process is that, because we took a bit of time from the witnesses and it is important to listen to them, we can go to 1:15. If any members have difficulty with that, they can come to me. No motions will be entertained after one o'clock if a member wants to leave. That's the consensus I would need from committee members. Is that okay?

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The Chair Sukh Dhaliwal
Liberal

Thank you.

The clear purpose of the study is the recent reforms to the international student program. However, every member has a right to ask questions on whichever topic they wish. I cannot stop them, as long as it isn't out of order. It is up to the officials. I want to make it very clear that this study is focused on students, and I agree with you that it's focused in particular on the recent reforms to the international student program.

With that in mind, I'm going to stop the watch and reset it.

I'll go to MP Kwan for six minutes. Please go ahead.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for their appearance here today.

My first question is for IRCC officials.

With respect to the fraudulent letter numbers you just shared with us, do you have any indication that particular individuals or organizations are issuing these fraudulent letters? Is there any pattern or trend emerging?

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

The enhanced letter of acceptance system has been in place now for about 10 months, so we're in the process of analyzing the data associated with the 10,000-plus letters of acceptance. It's something we will be paying very close attention to and taking a very close look at.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

I think it's important to have that analysis.

Once that analysis is complete, will you share that information with the committee? When do you expect the first round of analysis to be completed?

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

I'll need to revert to the committee at a later point to confirm when it will be possible to share that information.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

All right.

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 May
Director 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
NDP

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
NDP

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?

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Bronwyn May

We can look into that, for sure.

You're speaking about, I assume, the country of origin of the applicant to whom the letter was issued. That can be looked at as well.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC

Yes, that's correct. That will also tell us a lot about which student bodies are being taken advantage of or facing fraudulent activities.

All that said, I think this analysis is critical. Having collected this much information, you'll be able to do your preliminary analysis. That should be done as soon as possible, and that information should be shared with the committee. It will be critical, for the purpose of this study, for us to receive that information before we write the final report.

I will leave that there and hope we can get the information.

On the flip side of that, I'd be interested to know how many of the applications that have come through your screening process at this point indicate valid letters of acceptance.

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Bronwyn May

I believe about 500,000 applications have been run through the system. About 93% of those were positive matches. When I say that, I mean that the application comes in with the letter of acceptance. IRCC pings the institution associated with that letter of acceptance, and then they confirm the authenticity of the letter.

In 93% of cases, there was a match confirmed by the institution. Two per cent were not matched, 1% were indicated as cancelled by the DLI and for about 2.7% we received no response from the DLI.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

I'm sorry. What was the percentage for no response?

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

For 2.7%, there was no response from the DLI.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Okay.

I assume that this analysis is being done with the data points that we mentioned earlier. If you can confirm that and also share that information with the committee when it's available, that would be great.

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

I'm happy to do that.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you.

I want to move on to the conversations the ministry had with institutions. There was some indication that there was a discussion with institutions. I'm particularly interested in public education institutions, colleges and universities.

I wonder if you can share with the committee what the comments were on the government's plan for changes and in what areas they flagged deep concerns.

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

We've had intensive discussions with national education associations, learning institutions and provinces and territories over the course of the last 18 months. That's through the tables that we convene and through ongoing conversations on all of the measures that were highlighted in my opening remarks.

Over the summer in particular, we provided detailed forward plans for a number of additional changes that would be made and announced, and those were subsequently announced in the fall. All provinces, territories and education associations were able to provide comments to us. In addition, we're in the late stages of a regulatory amendment process, and those regulatory changes were posted for public comment as well, so there's been extensive consultation.

In terms of the specific comments provided in the case of the regulatory package, those are available publicly. I think the stakeholders are probably better able to convey their views on the reforms.

12:15 p.m.

The Chair Sukh Dhaliwal
Liberal

Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, the time is almost up. You have 20 seconds. Do you want them to answer?

No. Okay. Thank you.

We will go to MP Kwan for two and a half minutes.

Please go ahead.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you.

My question is a follow-up.

The reason I asked about the consultation process is not that I don't know what they said, since I've been meeting with them directly. The question is whether the government knows what they're saying. That's what I'm trying to glean.

To that point, I wonder if you can spend a bit of time telling us what the government's response is to the concerns that have been raised, particularly by public colleges and universities. Second to that, I would ask the officials to table the government's response to public colleges and institutions.

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Which concern in particular would you like me to address?

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Actually, it's all of them.

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Would you like me to start in one place in particular?

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Well, how many concerns have you heard and what are they? Maybe you can summarize them and tell the committee what the government's response is. Then you can table the rest that you have not been able to cover.

Mr. Chair, more than that—because I'm going to run out of time—I would ask the officials to table documentation on the analysis the government has done on the implications of changes to the levels plan and to the decisions related to international students. What analysis have they done with respect to those changes? What are the implications for institutions and Canada's economy, broken down by province, territory and community? As we already heard from MP Brunelle-Duceppe, implications for Quebec are different from those in British Columbia or Ontario. Even in my own province, there are differences among Vancouver, Cowichan, Ladysmith and other, smaller communities.

What analysis has the government done, and will you table that information with the committee?

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Broadly speaking, there is consensus among stakeholders and other levels of government that there is a need for greater volume controls. There is broad understanding and concern over program integrity issues and the vulnerability of students. I would say all partners in this equation are acknowledging those issues. Where there's sometimes disagreement is the pace of change. The pace of change has been quite rapid. It's been necessary, important work, but it's been a disruptive year and it will take a period of adaptation.

The Chair Sukh Dhaliwal
Liberal

You have 10 seconds.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Obviously, I'm not getting real answers, but just some talking points.

What I would really like is for the officials to table with the committee a detailed breakdown of the concerns that have been raised by category of institution—public colleges, private colleges, public universities, private universities—and by the different kinds of stakeholders, as well as the government's response to the concerns that have been raised and the analysis that has been done.

Mr. Chair, can I get confirmation that we'll get that information before the committee finalizes the writing of this report?

The Chair Sukh Dhaliwal
Liberal

Ms. May, do you want to respond?

Bronwyn May
Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

We'll take back the request to the department and get back to the committee.

1:10 p.m.

The Chair Sukh Dhaliwal
Liberal

Thank you very much. You're over seven minutes.

I'll go to MP Kwan.

Please go ahead.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for their excellent presentations.

What we're seeing is the federal government responding to the housing crisis that, frankly, successive Liberal and Conservative governments created. The first go-to is to blame outsiders. Who are they blaming? They blame international students, migrant workers, immigrants and on and on down the line. This kind of approach has unintended consequences, as both of you mentioned, and they can be very significant.

You also mentioned that the approach the government took was a blunt instrument to address this situation. There's a distinction between the public-private partnerships that have taken place and the escalation of the problems that came out. Instead of taking a specific approach to address that, the government took this other, broader approach with much broader implications.

My first question, for Ms. Alboim, is about unintended consequences. I wonder if you can speak about the students already here who will be impacted by this announcement and likely fall out of status. What do you think is the appropriate approach to address that issue? Should regularization for these students, who have invested their time and money in Canada, be recognized?

Naomi Alboim
Senior Policy Fellow, Canada Excellence Research Chair in Migration and Integration, As an Individual

Many of the students who are already in Canada will go home—many will go to third countries—but many of them want to stay, and the reduction in the permanent numbers, which were also announced in the levels plan, will have a very significant impact on students who are already here.

The provincial nominee programs have been reduced by 50%. Many of the provinces across the country had special streams that would allow international students to transition to permanent residency through PNPs. Other economic programs have also been reduced. Even if students qualify with high levels of points, there won't be enough spaces for them to transition to permanent residency because those numbers have been reduced quite significantly. That's a problem.

Even for the international students who are here now and aren't necessarily looking for permanent residency yet, or who haven't made up their mind or want to get some work experience before they go back to their home countries, the eligibility criteria for post-graduation work permits is being restricted. Many of them will not be able to continue to work, and they cannot get their PGWPs extended or renewed. The tightening on the TFW permits is also being restricted.

I think there is a possibility that many current international students will have no legal avenues to remain in Canada, and that will create a difficulty.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

To that end, the question is, should the government entertain a regularization scheme for people who are already here and who have already contributed? I'm going to park that question for you to think about, Ms. Alboim.

In the meantime, I'm going to Mr. Gaffield. Thank you so much for your testimony.

You indicated that universities have built-in systems to address the housing needs of international students. Back in the day—I came here from the provincial arena—there was a program whereby the province, the federal government and the universities or colleges—the institutions—would create housing in a partnership to address housing needs, not just for international students but for domestic students as well.

Would you support a call for the federal government to bring back a program that divides the funding in, let's say, a one-third split—one-third institution, one-third province, one-third federal government—and creates a plan for developing housing to meet the needs of both international students and domestic students?

Dr. Chad Gaffield
Chief Executive Officer, U15 Group of Canadian Research Universities

Thank you very much for that question.

I have three quick points.

First of all, we totally support and recognize that students need housing. They need food security too, which is an issue. We must provide for our students. That is one of the reasons that our institutions have embarked on policies of modest growth and never excessive, too-rapid growth. It's to ensure they're able to keep pace.

Along the lines of what you're saying, there have been really ingenious and effective ways to try to do this. I know, for example, that some of our universities have bought hotels—sometimes in partnership—to provide extra space.

I'm not aware of the program that you speak of, but I do think that universities have been good in being open to that sort of program.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you. I have very little time left.

What I'm gathering is that you support a federal-provincial-institutional housing initiative to address student needs. That's what I'm hearing.

To go back to Ms. Alboim for the question about regularization—I'd like a quick, short answer—should regularization be considered as part of the approach to addressing the crisis the federal government has created?

Naomi Alboim
Senior Policy Fellow, Canada Excellence Research Chair in Migration and Integration, As an Individual

I have written about the need for a regularization program in Canada. I think it would be in the best interests of Canada to implement a regularization program for the many people who have been here and have fallen out of status as a result of all kinds of things, including changes to programs midstream after they have arrived. I would not suggest a regularization program purely for students. I would recognize a regularization program for which students would be eligible if they met the criteria for it.

The Chair Sukh Dhaliwal
Liberal

Thank you very much.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Mr. Chair, before you adjourn, could I just make a broad request to the witnesses? Because we're always limited for time, if they have additional documentation or recommendations they wish to share with the committee, they can submit them. I'm particularly interested in unintended consequences and the implications of them, and what action the government should take to address them.

The Chair Sukh Dhaliwal
Liberal

Thank you.

On behalf of the committee, thank you to the witnesses.

Thank you to the support staff, analysts, clerk and interpreters.

With that, the meeting is adjourned.

https://openparliament.ca/committees/immigration/44-1/114/jenny-kwan-6/?singlepage=1

Latest posts

CIMM#115: Pension Transferability and Access to Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), and Delays in Permanent Residence and Visas for Hong Kongers Recent Reforms to the International Student Program

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.

CIMM#113: Pension Transferability and Access to Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), and Delays in Permanent Residence and Visas for Hong Kongers

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
All right. Thank you.
Hence, we have this problem. You have the Canadian government, which created this lifeboat scheme for Hong Kongers who are fleeing persecution in Hong Kong as a result of the national security law. The government, in its wisdom or lack thereof, created this lifeboat scheme that only provides for temporary residence by way of a work permit or a study permit. Then these people have to go to the queue to make an application for permanent residence, and we know that there is a huge backlog and delay in processing.
In the beginning, there was swift action, but as time has passed, it's been lengthened by way of the delay, to the point where the former minister even made an announcement to further extend people's work permits and study permits for another three years. That is to say, a person could be here for six years—as long as six years—under this current scheme without getting permanent residence. This is because the minister anticipated that people would not be able to swiftly get their permanent resident status. That is the reality.
As a result of that, people are not able to provide proof of permanent residence, because the application is in process. To make it even worse, the government—the minister—just made an announcement about the levels plan, cutting levels to the tune of 105,000 permanent resident status applications.
You can imagine how long the wait-list is for Hong Kongers as they continue to wait. Now, these Hong Kongers have zero intention of returning to Hong Kong, because they know that they would be persecuted if they did. People know that. I think the Canadian government knows that.
This is my question, then, to you as the manager of their pension, which, because of this rule, they're unable to access: Would your organization be willing to write to the regulator to ask for consideration for these applicants who are in a prolonged period of waiting for permanent resident status, to ask that their declaration indicating that they do not intend to return to Hong Kong be accepted as proof that they intend to leave Hong Kong permanently so that they can access their pensions? Is that something that your organization would consider doing?

Maryscott Greenwood, Global Head, Government Relations, The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company
I think I understand the question.
The basic premise of your question has to do with the period of time it takes for the Government of Canada to determine and provide permanent residency or citizenship. It seems to me that this is a function of the Government of Canada, as opposed to a regulated entity. That's how I would answer that.

Laura Hewitt, Senior Vice-President and Head, Global Government Affairs and Public Policy, Sun Life Financial Services of Canada Inc.
Yes. I would say that it's not within our authority to change the criteria.
However, our numbers show that once that permanent residency does come through, we're able to process the applications and approve Canadian permanent residents.

CIMM#114: Recent Reforms to the International Student Program

Click to read the full discussion from the Committee meeting

Latest posts

CIMM#115: Pension Transferability and Access to Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), and Delays in Permanent Residence and Visas for Hong Kongers Recent Reforms to the International Student Program

CIMM#113: Pension Transferability and Access to Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), and Delays in Permanent Residence and Visas for Hong Kongers

CIMM#111: Closed Work Permits and Temporary Foreign Workers

Are you ready to take action?

Vancouver Constituency Office

Ottawa Parliamentary Office