Dozens fined for breaking rules of Ontario immigrant program that has come under scrutiny

Of note. Good that some have been caught:

Ontario has issued $509,100 in penalties against 77 legal representatives and employers for breaking the rules of a program that gives the province the power to pick immigrants who best suit its labour needs.

That’s the total amount of fines levied since the introduction of a provincial law in 2018 that established an administrative and enforcement regime to ensure the integrity of the Ontario Immigrant Nominee Program (OINP). 

The fast-growing program — which has seen a tripling of allocated spots from 6,000 in 2018 to 21,500 in 2024 — was the focus of a critical report by the Auditor General last year that revealed “weaknesses” in its ability to prevent and detect misrepresentation. 

Under the program, a foreign national needs a certificate of nomination from Ontario before applying for permanent residence through the federal Immigration Department. There are nine OINP streams, including three that require a job offer by an employer in the province. 

Those fined include a lawyer, 21 immigration consultants and 55 employers, according to a freedom-of-information request made to the Ontario Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development.

The violations include failing to provide information that is accurate, correct and not misleading, or failing to make “reasonable efforts” to ensure that in applications, the ministry said on its website.

Between 2018 and 2024, program staff issued 6,506 notices of intent to refuse an applicant’s nomination application, said the ministry. Out of those, 2,703 ended up being rejected after further inquiries. Notices of intent are issued when an individual’s qualifications and information are in question….

Source: Dozens fined for breaking rules of Ontario immigrant program that has come under scrutiny

Chinese students take Ottawa to court over study permit delays

Security clearances take time, particularly for citizens of countries with a history of foreign interference and opaque organizations, making some being caught up in the vetting process:

Dozens of Chinese graduate students are accusing Ottawa of discrimination because their study permit applications have been left in limbo for months, preventing them from beginning their advanced degrees at Canadian universities.

“It’s already [done] very serious damage to my life,” Yixin Cheng, a 27-year-old would-be PhD student in computer science at UBC, told CBC News from Hangzhao, China.

Cheng is one of a group of 25 students who have filed a case in Federal Court against Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), alleging their files have been unfairly stalled in the security screening phase. All of them have been accepted into graduate-level programs in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) at universities including UBC, McGill and the University of Waterloo.

All 25 were still in China as the new school year began this week.

“Basically, the IRCC pressed the pause button for my life for over one year,” said Cheng.

Cheng applied for a study permit back in May 2024, and quit a high-paying job because he expected to be at UBC last fall.  The IRCC website says the standard processing time for students from China is four weeks. …

Their lawyer, Toronto-based Vakkas Bilsin, says their similarities  — all Chinese citizens, all seeking graduate programs in STEM — made him think “there is something serious going on.”

He says the lack of transparency is particularly frustrating, saying that four or five weeks after some students had submitted their applications, IRCC’s application tracker said the agency had only just started the background check process.

“We still don’t understand why a detailed, extensive security check is necessary in this specific circumstance of these students,” he said.

IRCC said in an emailed statement it is “committed to a fair and non-discriminatory application of immigration procedures. All applicants seeking to come to Canada — regardless of their country of origin or the program under which they apply — are subject to the same screening processes.”

It says the website only offers a general idea of how long the process may take and that, under the law, all people looking to enter the country must meet admissibility requirements, including a security screening.

Source: Chinese students take Ottawa to court over study permit delays

Clark: There is no flood of newcomers anymore, Mr. Poilievre

Would be helpful if the data on opendata was disaggregated between new permits and extensions for temporary residents but good to have this analysis. And as I indicated in my regular tracking deck, there has been a significant decline:

…Now Ottawa has embarked on a process of reducing the numbers of temporary residents. One part is reducing new arrivals. The IRCC reports there were 214,000 fewer new arrivals of temporary workers and international students in the first half of 2025 than in the same period the year before.

But another part is an effort to turn temporary residents into permanent residents. Many of the 395,000 people to get permanent resident status in 2025 were already here.

In total, the immigration plan calls for slightly more people to leave in 2025 than arrive. Already, population growth in the first quarter of 2025, according to Statistics Canada, was 0.0 per cent.

The Liberals certainly deserve mountains of blame for the failures of 2021 to 2024, but Mr. Poilievre has no business pretending the number of immigrants is still going up.

That’s especially true when there are so many other big problems in the immigration system to fix – the things that Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government has so far failed to correct.

The labour market impact assessment system used to determine whether a company can hire temporary foreign workers is an utter failure. The low-wage stream of the temporary foreign workers program, which brings in occupations such as fry cooks, should be completely scrapped. The selection of economic immigrants, turned into a hodgepodge by the Liberals, should be returned to a predictable, points-based system. Those are real immigration issues. 

But there is no flood of newcomers. Rapid population growth has stopped. There are other things to fix.

Source: There is no flood of newcomers anymore, Mr. Poilievre

Danella Aichele: Canada’s immigration policy must address the growing number of students who don’t speak English or French

Surely the provinces should ensure this input as part of the annual levels plan consultations. In general, Canada scores highly on PISA for immigrant integration and outcomes:

…A better approach would involve genuine intergovernmental coordination. If Ottawa intends to maintain high levels of immigration, it should consult with provinces and large urban school boards before announcing new targets. Federal funding should be aligned with provincial education budgets so that school systems can hire more ESL teachers, develop tailored curricula, and ease the transition for newcomers.

This wouldn’t be administratively burdensome. Immigration is heavily concentrated in a relatively small number of urban centres. The challenge isn’t complexity, it’s negligence.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has framed immigration as central to Canada’s growth strategy. He is right. But growth cannot come at the expense of cohesion. If immigration is to succeed, it must be matched by the resources and the planning required to make integration work.

That means Ottawa can’t simply drop new arrival numbers into the system and hope for the best. It needs to start in the classrooms where integration is lived and learned every day. Immigration targets should reflect not just national ambitions but the realities in Brampton, Calgary, and Montreal schools.

Canada’s future prosperity and social cohesion depend on getting this balance right. Immigration works best when it is ambitious and realistic—when it opens doors but also equips schools, teachers, and communities with the tools they need. Anything less risks undermining public confidence and shortchanging the very students who will shape the country’s future.

Danella Aichele is a former teacher with the Calgary Board of Education with a Master’s of Public Policy from the University of Calgary.

Source: Danella Aichele: Canada’s immigration policy must address the growing number of students who don’t speak English or French

Thousands in Australia march against immigration, government condemns rally

Of note. Hopefully will not be replicated in Canada:

Thousands of Australians joined anti-immigration rallies across the country on Sunday that the centre-left government condemned, saying they sought to spread hate and were linked to neo-Nazis.

March for Australia rallies against immigration were held in Sydney and other state capitals and regional centres, according to the group’s website.

“Mass migration has torn at the bonds that held our communities together,” the website says. The group posted on X on Saturday that the rallies aimed to do “what the mainstream politicians never have the courage to do: demand an end to mass immigration”.

The group also says it is concerned about culture, wages, traffic, housing and water supply, environmental destruction, infrastructure, hospitals, crime and loss of community.

Australia – where one in two people is either born overseas or has a parent born overseas – has been grappling with a rise in right-wing extremism, including protests by neo-Nazis.

“We absolutely condemn the March for Australia rally that’s going on today. It is not about increasing social harmony,” Murray Watt, a senior minister in the Labor government, told Sky News television, when asked about the rally in Sydney, the country’s most-populous city.

“We don’t support rallies like this that are about spreading hate and that are about dividing our community,” Watt said, asserting they were “organised and promoted” by neo-Nazi groups.

March for Australia organisers did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the neo-Nazi claims.

Laws banning the Nazi salute and the display or sale of symbols associated with terror groups came into effect in Australia this year in response to a string of antisemitic attacks on synagogues, buildings and cars since the beginning of Israel’s war in Gaza in October 2023.

COUNTER-PROTESTERS EXPRESS ‘DISGUST, ANGER’

Some 5,000 to 8,000 people, many draped in Australian flags, had assembled for the Sydney rally, the Australian Broadcasting Corp reported. It was held near the course of the Sydney Marathon, where 35,000 runners pounded the streets on Sunday, finishing at the city’s Opera House.

Also nearby, a counter-rally by the Refugee Action Coalition, a community activist organisation, took place.

“Our event shows the depth of disgust and anger about the far-right agenda of March For Australia,” a coalition spokesperson said in a statement. Organisers said hundreds attended that event.

Police said hundreds of officers were deployed across Sydney in an operation that ended “with no significant incidents”.

A large March for Australia rally was held in central Melbourne, the capital of Victoria state, according to aerial footage from the ABC, which reported that riot officers used pepper spray on demonstrators. Victoria Police did not confirm the report but said it would provide details on the protest later on Sunday.

Bob Katter, the leader of a small populist party, attended a March for Australia rally in Queensland, a party spokesperson said, three days after the veteran lawmaker threatened a reporter for mentioning Katter’s Lebanese heritage at a press conference when the topic of his attendance at a March for Australia event was being discussed.

Source: Thousands in Australia march against immigration, government condemns rally

Canadian Immigration Tracker First Quarter 2025

My regular update on key immigration programs. Given the various articles on whether or not the government is meeting the reductions announced earlier, here is where we stand for January to June for the current and previous two years:

Permanent residents admissions: From 255,015 in 2024 to 207,510 in 2025, decline 18.6 percent, (from 2023, decline 21 percent), about 50 percent of 2025 target  

TR2PR (Those already in Canada): From 148,020 in 2024 to 126,365 in 2025, decline of 14.6 percent (from 2023, decline 13 percent). 

TRs-IMP: From 420,070 in 2024 to 295,505 in 2025, decline of 29.7 percent (from 2023, decline 23.4 percent), already exceeds 2025 target

TRs-TFWP: From 110,910 in 2024 to 106,105 in 2025, decline of 4.3 percent (from 2023, decline 7.2 percent), already exceeds 2025 target for both agriculture and non-agriculture workers

Students: From 248,820 in 2024 to 152,775 in 2025, decline of 38.6 percent (from 2023, increase 26.1 percent), about 50 percent of 2025 target (likely to overshoot given third quarter has highest number of admissions (between 40-45 percent for post-secondary albeit only 34 percent in 2024)

Asylum Claimants: From 93,315 in 2024 to 57,810 in 2025, decline of 38 percent (from 2023, decline 3.7 percent)

Citizenship: From 205,363 in 2024 to 151,804 in 2025, decline of 26.1 percent (from 2023, decline 14.2 percent)

Visitor Visas: From 868,234 in 2024 to 568,195, decline of 34.6 percent (from 2023, decline 40.5 percent)

Geoff Russ: Immigration is how Poilievre will get back on top

Reasonable foreshadowing of likely Conservative attack lines, some more valid than others:

Expect the Conservatives to come out swinging on immigration like never before when the House of Commons reconvenes next month.

Donald Trump gave the Liberals a lifeline to eke out another term in government in the spring, but the Liberals’ failure to get immigration under control is negatively impacting Canadians across the country.

In a statement released on August 25, the Conservatives pointed out that the government set an annual cap of 82,000 temporary foreign workers (TFW), but 105,000 had already been issued.

As for applicants to the International Mobility Program, they wrote 302,000 had been admitted by the first six months of the year in June, despite a promised cap of 285,000 permits.

“Moreover, their so-called caps on permanent residents were already among the highest in our history, yet they’re on track to exceed their own reckless targets, welcoming the equivalent of twice the population of Guelph and four times the population of Abbotsford,” read the statement, credited to Poilievre and Shadow Immigration Critic Michelle Rempel Garner.

This month, Poilievre released a series of graphics on social media highlighting the disparity between the Carney government’s promised targets, and how they are on-track to be exceeded.

This is a taste of what to expect for the fall session of Parliament, and Canadians will be receptive.

Sixty-two per cent of respondents in a Leger poll conducted in July believe there are too many newcomers arriving in Canada, and just 42 percent think they can be trusted. The poll also found that there was little disagreement between immigrant and native-born citizens in this regard.

Last year, Abacus Data found that 53 per cent of those surveyed had a negative view of immigration, and 72 per cent thought that the government’s immigration targets were “too ambitious”.

Abacus published the results of another survey earlier this month, finding that 25 per cent of Canadians now consider immigration to be the top issue facing Canada, and the Conservatives lead the Liberals 56 per cent to 15 per cent when respondents were asked which party was best equipped to handle the issue.

During the last federal election, young Canadians swung heavily towards the Conservatives, 44 percent to 31.2 per cent among 18 to 34 year olds, and with good reason.

Youth unemployment is the highest it has been since the late 1990s, with almost 15 per cent of Canadians aged 15 to 24 unable to find work before returning to school in the fall.

Employers have been greatly incentivized by the TFW program to hire foreigners instead of hiring and training their fellow Canadians.

The reliance on surplus foreign labour is dragging down productivity, while suppressing wages and per-capita GDP. There is no long-term upside to flooding the country with low-skill labour that pushes Canadians out of the job market, and the short-term effects have been socially and economically undesirable.

Investigations by the Toronto Star in 2024 found that government officials in Ottawa told their staff to skip fraud checks on TFW applications. Predictable wrongdoing ensued, such as no confirmation with employers to confirm that posted jobs actually existed, while migrant workers paid up to $70,000 for fake jobs.

As of now, it is estimated that there are somewhere between 600,000 and over 1 million undocumented people within Canada, and federal and provincial agencies seem incapable of remedying the issue.

Expelling people from the country is not a pleasant task when so many people have been duped by villainous immigration consultants who sold them fake dreams. The job must still be done.

You cannot have trust in a government that fails to meet its own immigration caps and enforce deportations.

It is unfair to Canadians, and unfair to newcomers who went through the proper channels.

One of the most infuriating aspects of it all is that Canada should not have an immigration crisis. Our geography gives us the privilege of being generous, and up until 2015 we were more selective about newcomers.

Stephen Harper’s government ran a very tight ship on immigration, and this should be the expectation of every Canadian government, not an exception.

This all started going downhill when Justin Trudeau became prime minister in 2015, and the numbers started climbing sharply. For example, his government lowered the benchmark for Express Entry from 866 out of 1200 points, to just 75.

Nearly five million people have entered the country since 2014, and few can say this country is fairer, more prosperous or more hopeful for it. Those who want Canada to continue as a welcoming country for new arrivals would do well to push for reform.

We are bordered by three oceans and an undefended border with the world’s most powerful economy. Our admission of newcomers is something we can control, and there is no reason why Canada should not have one of the most well-run, careful immigration systems in the world.

The idea that Canadians have been almost unanimously in favour of immigration since the Second World War is a pervasive myth. It has always been controversial among the public, but rarely has it been debated with ferocity in the House of Commons.

Canadians want a debate on current immigration levels to happen, and they will get their wish this fall.

Mark Carney will need creative excuses for why his government blew past its own caps, did not release immigration data for months, and presented no plan to end the economy’s dependence on cheap foreign labour.

For the Conservatives, this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to finally turn immigration into an issue our politicians can openly and honestly debate.

The Liberals got us into this avoidable mess, and they must be held accountable for it.

Source: Geoff Russ: Immigration is how Poilievre will get back on top

Canada’s border agency plans to use AI to screen everyone entering the country — and single out ‘higher risk’ people

Inevitable given the numbers involved and the need to triage applications:

Canada Border Services Agency is planning to use AI to check everyone visiting or returning to the country to predict whether they are at risk of breaking the law. 

Anyone identified as “higher risk” could be singled out for further inspection.

The traveller compliance indicator (TCI), which has been tested at six land ports of entry, was developed using five years of CBSA travellers’ data. It assigns a “compliance score” for every person entering Canada. It will be used to enforce the Customs Act and related regulations.

The AI-assisted tool is expected to launch as early as 2027 and is meant to help border services officers at all land, air and marine ports of entry decide whether to refer travellers and the goods they are carrying for secondary examination, according to an assessment report obtained under an access to information request. 

“We use the obtained data to build predictive models in order to predict the likelihood of a traveller to be compliant,” said the report which was submitted by the border agency to the Treasury Board.

“TCI will improve the client experience by reducing processing time at the borders. The system will allow officers to spend less time on compliant travellers and reduce the number of unnecessary selective referrals.”

However, experts are alarmed by the lack of public engagement and input into the tool’s development. They worry that the system may reinforce human biases against certain types of travellers such as immigrants and visitors from certain countries because the quality of the analytics is only as good as what is inputted.

“If you’ve historically been very critical over a certain group, then that will be in the data and we’ll transfer that into the tool,” said Vancouver-based immigration lawyer Will Tao, who obtained the report.

“You look for the problems and you find problems where you’re looking, right?”

The government report said the border agency serves more than 96 million travellers a year, and trying to keep up with expected growth would require the addition of hundreds of border officers. In addition, physical limitations make it impossible to add extra booths at some points of entry.

The AI tool, the report said, will help keep border processing times at current levels even with an expected increase in the number of travellers. 

“No decisions are automated,” the report said. “Rather the current primary processing is being supported with a flag indicating whether a traveller’s information matches a compliance pattern.”

However, if an officer follows a mistaken recommendation from the tool, it could have impacts that could “last longer,” the report added.

“Once a risk score or indicator is presented to an officer, it can heavily influence their judgment, which in practice means the system is shaping outcomes even if the final authority is technically still human,” said University of Toronto professor Ebrahim Bagheri, who focuses on AI and the study of data and society.

“A false positive is when the system flags someone as risky or non-compliant even though they are in fact compliant. In the border context, that could mean a traveller is singled out for extra questioning or secondary examination even though they’ve done nothing wrong.”

The system is designed to display information of interest to an officer, such as a traveller’s means of transport and who accompanied them. 

It also captures “live determinants” which can include information such as whether the person is travelling alone, the type of identification they presented and the license plate of the vehicle they used, as well as any data from the traveller’s previous trips in CBSA’s records….

Source: Canada’s border agency plans to use AI to screen everyone entering the country — and single out ‘higher risk’ people

StatsCan: Temporary foreign workers in health care: Characteristics, transition to permanent residency and industry retention

Points of interest:

  • Numbers of healthcare workers increased dramatically during COVID
  • Similar numbers under the TFWP and IMP but IMP growth greater than TFWP
  • Provincial average of 2.7 percent of temporary workers in healthcare sector
  • Country shift from Philippines to India
  • Almost 60 percent have transitioned to permanent residency
  • Women form about three quarters of TFWs in healthcare that transitioned to permanent residency

…Using an integrated administrative database, this study examines the number of TFWs who worked in Canada’s health care sector from 2000 to 2022, their distribution by permit type, their transition to PR and their retention in the sector.

The number of TFWs working in the health care sector has increased considerably since the new millennium, from 3,200 in 2000 to 57,500 in 2022. The composition of program types among TFWs in the health care sector has also changed over time. In the early 2000s, most TFWs held health-occupation-specific work permits, but other IMP work permit holders have become more prominent over time. In addition, TFWs’ distribution across health care subsectors also shifted over time. In the 2000s, nearly 40% of TFWs in the health care sector were in hospitals, but since 2019, more than 40% of TFWshave been employed in nursing and residential care facilities.

It is important to note that some TFWs without a health-occupation-specific work permit may work in health occupations. Furthermore, not all TFWs in the health care sector worked in health occupations. Therefore, restricting the analysis to work permit holders with specified health occupations would underestimate the overall impact of TFWs on the health care sector. 

TFWs from India have gradually replaced Filipino workers as the largest foreign workforce in Canada’s health care sector, and the role of some traditional source countries has diminished. Meanwhile, the geographic concentration of TFWs in health care became more pronounced over time, with the majority located in the largest provinces: Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec.

The long-term viability of TFWs as a stable labour source depends on two factors: the number of workers who transition to PR and the percentage of those who continue to work in the sector after obtaining PR. This study found that recent TFW cohorts had higher rates of transition to PR compared with earlier cohorts, whereas recent PR policy changes may have had a positive impact on the transition rate. After transitioning to PR, TFWs holding health-occupation-specific work permits had higher industry retention rates in the sector than those who did not have health-occupation-specific work permits.

Source: Temporary foreign workers in health care: Characteristics, transition to permanent residency and industry retention

Here are the top reasons why Canada rejects study permit applications

Useful information:

Almost five per cent of study permit applications were rejected last year because applicants allegedly misrepresented or withheld information, according to a new study that tracks international student refusal trends.

It was a small but noteworthy increase, according to the analysis released Monday by ApplyBoard, one of the largest online platforms for foreign student recruitment. The report looked at study permit applications for 2024 and found that 4.6 per cent of refusal reasons were linked to “authenticity and applicant honesty.”

In all, some 13,000 applicants were rejected based on misrepresenting or withholding facts in their applications.

Under the Canadian law, an immigration applicant can be found inadmissible “for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding material facts.” Last year’s increase was up from 1.8 per cent in 2021, 2.3 per cent in 2022 and 3.5 per cent in 2023. 

In 2024, the Immigration Department rejected about 290,000 study permit applications, bringing the overall refusal rate to 52 per cent from 40 per cent the year before. The data covered applicants for all levels of studies; an application can be refused on multiple grounds.

Of the 81 different reasons given for refusals, 76 per cent were rejected because the officer was not satisfied the applicant would leave Canada — based on the person’s previous travel history. In comparison, this reason accounted for 7.6 per cent of all refusals in 2021.

The second-most common reason for refusal had to do with officers not believing an applicant would leave Canada, based on their financial assets. These rejected applications accounted for 53 per cent last year, up from 25 per cent in 2021.

Rounding the top five reasons for study permit refusals in 2024 were: an officer’s doubt over the purpose of the visit (47 per cent), applicants not having enough financial resources for tuition (19 per cent) and for living expenses (18 per cent).

While officials recognize some future students may want to stay and gain work experience in Canada after graduation, the predominant use of lack of travel history as a refusal ground, said the ApplyBoard study, “suggests that many applicants are perceived as having permanent residency as their primary purpose, instead of study.”

The report made no mention or speculation on the rise of this particular refusal reason, and it’s not known if immigration officials have heightened scrutiny of study permit applications amid integrity concerns raised about the international education program in the last couple years. 

Those alleged of submitting inauthentic documents and those who “didn’t truthfully answer all questions” were cited in 1.7 per cent and one per cent of all refusals in 2024, respectively — up from the correspondingly 0.3 per cent and 0.4 per cent since 2021, the report found.

In 2024, missing documents were also involved in thousands of refusals, with the proofs of financial assets being cited as the most commonly missing papers, followed by biometrics (photo and fingerprints), letters of acceptance by an institution, Quebec acceptance certificate and medical exam results.

“Every refusal reason above is entirely preventable, given enough time to review the application for completeness,” said ApplyBoard. “Having others review study permit applications can also prevent regrettable permit refusals.”

Source: Here are the top reasons why Canada rejects study permit applications