Family work permits no longer available for some foreign students and workers starting next week

Further curbs:

Starting next week, the federal government will impose further restrictions on access to open work permits for families of international students and temporary foreign workers.

Following an announcement last fall of reductions in the number of temporary residents in Canada, Ottawa released further details Tuesday on changing the eligibility for family members of study and work permit holders to get authorization to work legally in Canada.

Effective Jan. 21, only spouses of the following international students and foreign workers will be able to apply for the family open work permits:

•Students enrolled in master’s programs that are 16 months or longer and in doctoral programs or undergraduate programs in select professions such as medicine, laws and nursing;

•Foreign workers classified as in high-skill, high-wage managerial positions or occupations generally requiring a university degree;

•Foreign workers in the lower-wage, lower-skilled spectrum in so-called TEER 2 or 3 occupations with labour shortages or in natural and applied sciences, construction, health care, natural resources, education, sports and military sectors.

In addition, the foreign worker must also have at least 16 months remaining on their work permit at the time when their spouse applies for the family work permits. Dependent children of foreign workers will no longer be eligible for this work permit.

Source: Family work permits no longer available for some foreign students and workers starting next week

En un an, le Canada a accueilli 550 réfugiés palestiniens

To note:

Un programme fédéral de regroupement familial prévoit depuis le 9 janvier 2024 d’offrir 5000 visas de résident temporaire (VRT) aux réfugiés de la bande de Gaza ayant de la famille au pays. Un an après son lancement, seules 550 personnes ont pu en bénéficier.

Selon les chiffres transmis au Devoir par le ministère de l’Immigration, des Réfugiés et de la Citoyenneté du Canada (IRCC), 4663 demandes de VRT avaient pourtant été acceptées pour traitement au 14 décembre dernier.

« Ces demandes de visa de résident temporaire sont en cours d’examen afin de déterminer leur recevabilité et leur admissibilité préliminaire », avance IRCC dans un échange écrit avec Le Devoir.

De ce nombre, seules 979 personnes ayant quitté la bande de Gaza par leurs propres moyens ont pu déposer leur demande, en Égypte pour la plupart, et ont été autorisées à venir au Canada. Et parmi elles, seules 550 sont effectivement arrivées au pays, soit moins de 12 % des demandes de VRT acceptées….

Source: En un an, le Canada a accueilli 550 réfugiés palestiniens

Canadian Immigration Tracker – November 2024

Highlights:

  • PR Admissions: Increase from 34,360 in October to 36,820 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2022 in parentheses): Economic – PNP 25.0% (22.8%), Economic – Federal 38.2% (51.6%), Family 52.4% (84.0%), Refugees -19.3% (-12.6%)
    • Applications: Given time delays in entering application data, am using a six month time lag. Decrease from 54,001 in April to 44,040 in May. May year-over-year change (change from 2020): -10.7% (81.9%).
    • Express Entry and Arrima Invitations to Apply: Decline from 5,507 in November (0 Arrima) to 2,561 in December (0 Arrima). December year-over-year change (change from 2022): -84.2% (23.3%)
    • TR to PRs transition (i.e., those already in Canada): Increase from 13,135 in October (38.2% of all PRs) to 17,390 in November (47.2% of all PRs). November year-over-year change (change from 2022): 65.3% (347.0%)
  • Temporary Residents:
    • TRs/IMP: Decrease from 60,945 in October to 48,560 in November. November year-over-year (change from 2022): Agreements: 29.0% (-30.4%), Canadian Interests: -11.4% (-7.5%), Other IMP Participants -47.7% (105.2%), Not stated -39.8% (-43.4%)
      • IMP by occupation code: not meaningful given only about 10 percent have NOC codes
    • TRs/TFWP: Stable from 11,860 in October to 11,540. November year-over-year change (change from 2022): Caregivers 12.2% (19.6%), Agriculture -1.1% (-20.0%) and Other LMIA 6.3% (32.6%).
    • TRs by occupation code (September, updated quarterly): 39.8% low-wage (D), year-over-year (D) change (change from 2022) 14.0% (157.4%)
  • Students: Decrease from 32,100 in October to 28,470 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2023): All -3.1% (22.0%), post-secondary -1.4% (22.7%)
    • Applications: Decrease from 40,846 in October to 39,759 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2021): -53.6% (-49.3%)
    • Web Get a study permit: Increase from 29,396 in October to 51,416 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2022): -0.1% (-25.0%) (December data not released)
  • Asylum Claimants: Decrease from 14,155 in October to 12,590 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2022): -22.9% (28.5%)
    • Irregular arrivals (Roxham Road etc): Increase from 62 in October to 79 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2021): 21.5% (-97.9%).
  • Settlement Services (2023): Increase from 1,941,480 in 2022 to 2,960,330 in 2023 (most recent data, services, not unique clients). 2023 year-over-year (change from 2021): 52.5% (53.3%)
  • Citizenship: Stable from 26,082 in October to 25,234 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2022): -28.9% (-29.1%)
    • Applications (2023): From 264,231 in 2022 to 317,538 in 2023. 2023 Year-over-year change (change from 2021): 20.2%% (36.3%)
  • Visitor Visas: Stable from 102,304 in October to 100,845 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2022): -34.2% (-24.9%).

https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/canadian-immigration-tracker-key-slides-november-2024-pdf/274868539

Qian: Canada halts new parent immigration sponsorships, keeping families apart

A useful reminder. Also check out the detailed analysis in the 2012 Canadian Ethnic Studies paper that provides a more nuanced portrait of P&Gs than in the media (time for updating but unlikely to have changed significantly):

…A frequent argument against parent and grandparent immigration is that they will prove to be a burden on Canada’s welfare and health-care system. 

But research has demonstrated that older immigrants are not burdens on Canadian society as commonly assumed. Rather, according to an article in Canadian Ethnic Studies, “sponsored parents and/or grandparents make significant economic contributions to Canadian society as well as other non-economic ones that are often overlooked.”

For example, given the shortage of affordable child care in Canada, many immigrant families rely on grandparents to care for young children, so that their parents, especially women, can continue to work outside the home. Many elderly immigrantsalso contribute to Canada’s economy by working paid jobs and enrich Canada’s communities through their diverse volunteer services.

Canada is competing against other countries for talented workers. Allowing immigrants to reunite with their parents (and grandparents) is not only the right humanitarian choice; it is also one that will help Canadian families in their day to day lives, not to mention boost Canada’s efforts to retain much-needed talent.

Source: Canada halts new parent immigration sponsorships, keeping families apart

Housefather and Baker: What Liberals must do to regain Canadians’ support [Immigration]

Reasonable approach:

…• Restoring integrity to our immigration system: Our immigration and visitor levels and mix must be regularly adjusted by taking into account not only economic benefits and costs, but Canada’s capacity to welcome newcomers by considering our housing supply and our ability to deliver critical services like health care. We must also work closely with the U.S. to share information and use the most modern technology to better screen applicants to protect our continent from bad actors and those with links to terrorist organizations, detect fraud and strengthen the system’s integrity. Finally, we need to strengthen our ability to ensure anyone moving to Canada will respect the values we hold as Canadians and will not import hatred to this country….

Source: Opinion: What Liberals must do to regain Canadians’ support

Survey shows more newcomers choose immigration consultants over lawyers — and that can be risky, experts say

General rule of thumb. When something or some offer appears to good to be true, it generally is. As always, the “bad apples” undermine trust in all:

The legal challenge comes as more newcomers are choosing the services of immigration consultants over lawyers, according to a new survey commissioned by CBC News.

The survey, conducted by market research firm Pollara in November, asked 1,507 people who arrived in Canada in the past 10 years about their immigration experiences and found 33 per cent used consultants, while 16 per cent used lawyers. A national survey of that size would normally have a margin of error of +/- 2.5 per cent.

Immigration experts say newcomers may prefer consultants because they’re convenient and affordable. But they also say the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants (CICC) hasn’t done enough to punish bad actors in the industry.

They also say victims need better recourse, including a compensation fund promised years ago that has yet to come to fruition.

“I’ve worked with excellent immigration consultants, but the problem is that there are bad actors that are unscrupulous,” said Vancouver immigration lawyer Jae-Yeon Lim, who also teaches immigration law at Queen’s University to those seeking to become consultants. She clarified that she was speaking about her own experiences with clients and not on behalf of her employers….

Overhaul of regulatory body

In 2019, the federal government announced an overhaul to the regulatory body for immigration consultants and the creation of the CICC, which opened about two years later.

Since 2004, two other bodies were not able to effectively regulate consultants because they lacked legislative authorities, the federal government said in briefing notes obtained by CBC News.

CICC was given powers to investigate complaints made against consultants and to publish the names of those being investigated on the college’s website.

It has undertaken more than 70 disciplinary actions against consultants, ranging from fines and suspensions to revocations of licences, according to IRCC.

The college has issued about $300,000 in fines and ordered a total of about $365,000 in restitution to be awarded to clients.

But lawyers Logan and Lim have concerns about the length of time the college takes to discipline consultants.

For example, CICC suspended Lucion about 30 months after the college received complaints about her, during which she was able to continue practising.

“The rules on paper are good. There’s a very good code of conduct. But the actual enforcement of these rules has been lacking,” Logan said.

In another case, a consultant was disciplined in 2023 relating to complaints from 2016. (The regulator transitioned into the CICC for part of that period).

Another consultant was suspended in 2024 in relation to complaints made in 2019 and 2020.

“The impact is that they’re re-traumatizing the victims through these lengthy processes … for something that should have been done in a more expedient manner,” Lim said, adding that victims may lose their legal status in Canada and have to leave before the issue is resolved.

CICC declined interview requests from CBC News. In a statement, it said its goal is to handle complaints in a fair and efficient manner….

Source: Survey shows more newcomers choose immigration consultants over lawyers — and that can be risky, experts say

HESA: Credulous Nonsense on Colleges from the CBC

Good analysis and critique. Shameful that the CBC declined to interview Usher as part of their reporting:

…So why did the CBC react as if it did?

This was the question I asked them when a CBC producer tried to get me to comment on the story on December 27th. Why would you do a story on so little evidence? I said I didn’t think the evidence merited a story but agreed to speak to them if they wanted someone to explain exactly why the evidence was so thin. You will no doubt be shocked to learn that CBC then declined to interview me.

Upon reading the story, it’s not hard to understand why. With zero evidence, they got a bunch of experts to repeat talking points about the awfulness of student visas that they’ve been repeating for months now.

Raj Sharma, a Calgary-based immigration lawyer, told said “If the allegations are true, it reveals shocking gaps in our integrity protocols.… This is deeply, deeply concerning and problematic,” adding that the allegations suggest “wide-scale human smuggling.”

(The “if” in that sentence is doing a hell of a lot of work – AU)

Kelly Sundberg, a former Canada Border Services Agency officer who is a professor of criminology at Mount Royal University, said the system has no oversight and is “being exploited” by transnational criminals. “This type of fraud, of gaming our immigration system has been going on for quite some time actually,” he said, noting that the volume of those potentially involved “is staggering.”

Ken Zaifman, a Winnipeg-based immigration lawyer, says that from his experience, the responsibility of oversight should lie with the educational institutions, but that they did not do so because “they were addicted to international students to fund their programs.”

Ok, so, these comments about fraud and oversight are worth examining. I’m trying to imagine how either the government of Canada or an educational institution could legitimately “prevent fraud” or “exercise oversight” in a case like this one. Are colleges and universities supposed to be like the pre-cogs in the movie Minority Report, able to spot criminals before they commit a crime? I mean, there is a case to be made that in the past Canada made such cross-border runs more tempting by allowing students’ entire families to join them in Canada while studying (as was the case in the Dingucha affair), but that loophole was largely closed ten months ago when the feds basically stopped giving open work permits to partners of students unless they were enrolled in a graduate degree.

Anyways, this is where we are now: our national broadcaster sees no problem running evidence-free stories simply as a platform to beat up on public colleges because that’s a great way to get clicks. Crappy journalism? Sure. But it’s also evidence of the disdain with which Canadian PSE institutions are now viewed by the broader public: CBC wouldn’t run such a thin story unless it thought the target was “soft.” And there’s no solution to our funding woes until this gets sorted out.

Source: HESA: Credulous Nonsense on Colleges from the CBC

Human rights tribunal chair showed unconscious bias in dismissing immigration complaint: Federal Court

Of note:

The former head of Canada’s human rights watchdog demonstrated an “apprehension of unconscious bias” and lost “the necessary objectivity” in dismissing a complaint against the Immigration Department for discrimination, a court has ruled.

In criticizing the decision by David Thomas, the former chair of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, the Federal Court concluded the adjudicator breached the duty of procedural fairness by failing to properly address the allegation of bias levelled against him during the human rights complaint proceedings.

Instead, the court said, Thomas erroneously made his own findings on the accusation in an “unexpected addendum” in rejecting the complaint by Amir Attaran that Ottawa discriminated against parents and grandparents by delaying the processing of their permanent residence applications based on age, race, family status and national/ethnic origin.

“The panel did not give the Applicants an opportunity to know the case against them and to fully and fairly respond,” wrote Justice Henry Brown in a rulingon Friday to send the case back to the tribunal for redetermination.

“The panel lost its necessary objectivity by engaging personally and subjectively in the assessment of the bias allegation against him.”

Thomas, in his analysis, denied having unconscious bias against people of Persian background such as the complainant because “some of my closest friends are from Iran.” 

The court decision has added another side note to the already lengthy legal battle by Attaran, a University of Ottawa law professor and American-born Iranian, who filed his complaint to the rights tribunal in 2010 over the Immigration Department’s processing delays for parent/grandparent sponsorships.

At the time of the complaint, it was taking immigration officials 42 days to screen the sponsors of spouses and children — but 37 months for those who wanted to bring their parents and grandparents to Canada.

After some legal wrangling and delays caused by COVID-19, Attaran’s complaint was heard in 2021 by Thomas, who left the tribunal later that year but continued to preside over the case….

In a written statement, Charlotte-Anne Malischewski, the human rights watchdog’s interim chief commissioner, said the decision was important in the evolving jurisprudence in cases involving racial discrimination.

“It clarifies that the legal test for reasonable apprehension of bias is not about the actual state of mind of the adjudicator, but rather whether a reasonable observer would believe them to be biased,” she said.

“If left unchallenged, the (tribunal) decision could be used to make it harder for people to prove discrimination.”

Source: Human rights tribunal chair showed unconscious bias in dismissing immigration complaint: Federal Court

Newcomers feel Canada accepts ‘too many immigrants’ without proper planning, CBC survey finds

Good long detailed article with a mix of data and testimonies. Not surprising that immigrants have many of the same concerns as non-immigrants regarding lack of planning with respect to housing, infrastructure etc among other issues raised in a fairly comprehensive survey:

More than 80 per cent of newcomers to Canada feel the country is bringing in too many people through its immigration system without proper planning, a poll commissioned by CBC News has found.

The survey conducted by market research firm Pollara Strategic Insights in November asked 1,507 people about their experiences coming to Canada. Among its findings was that four in five newcomers believe the Canadian government has accepted “too many immigrants and international students with no planning for adequate housing, infrastructure or having sufficient job opportunities.”

Shabnoor Abdullateef, a physician who immigrated to Canada from Iran in 2022, says she agrees with this statement.

“There was absolutely no thinking behind this,” said Abdullateef, who graduated from the health-care administration management program at Fanshawe College in London, Ont., last spring….

Source: Newcomers feel Canada accepts ‘too many immigrants’ without proper planning, CBC survey finds

Why Legal Immigration Is Impossible for Nearly Everyone

Wonderful graphic illustrating the complexity of immigration to the USA. Canadian system if anything is more complex, given Provincial Nominee Program and the various “boutique” or targeted programs. Would be nice if IRCC could prepare such a chart as part of the briefing package for the expected incoming Conservative government as a basis for streamlining, simplification and automation:

My latest policy analysis published today explains why it is impossible for nearly all immigrants seeking to come permanently to the United States to do so legally. The report is a uniquely comprehensive and jargon-free (to the extent possible) explanation of U.S. legal immigration. Contrary to public perception, immigrants cannot simply wait and get a green card (permanent residence) after a few years. Legal immigration is less like waiting in line and more like winning the lottery: it happens, but it is so rare that it is irrational to expect it in any individual case.

The figure below shows the U.S. legal immigration system for people who are abroad who presently intend to immigrate permanently to the United States. Below I briefly describe the main problems and choke points in this labyrinth.

Flow chart of the entire legal immigration system

Guilty Until Proven Innocent

Until the Immigration Act of 1924, everyone in the world was eligible to immigrate to the United States unless the government proved they fell into an ineligible category. In other words, innocent until proven guilty. Since then, the foundational principle of U.S. immigration law is that everyone in the world is ineligible to immigrate unless they prove to the government they fit into an eligible category. The result is that over 99 percent of all those wanting to immigrate to the United States cannot do so legally.

Source: Why Legal Immigration Is Impossible for Nearly Everyone