These migrants escaped war and disaster to come to Canada. Should they go home or be offered permanent residence? It’s not that simple

Good call for greater care and transparency regarding these programs, including consideration of likely impact should these groups not be able to return:

…Seeking clear criteria for humanitarian programs

Ninette Kelley, chair of the World Refugee and Migration Council, said temporary humanitarian programs have a place but require very clear criteria and a limited time frame. Sometimes there could be benefits if Canada can quickly admit more people at risk on temporary status than it would under slower and more modest permanent resettlement.

She said each of these special programs should be independently evaluated. While Canada can’t take in everyone, she said the intake levels earmarked for humanitarian migrants should be open for debate.

“Government immigration programs change so frequently and not in a transparent manner,” said Kelley. “We could continue in a humanitarian tradition by accepting more than we do, but we should be careful and transparent about how we arrive at those numbers, who we assist, how we process them, and what kind of status they’re afforded, which is not happening at the present.”

The Immigration Department began developing a “crisis response framework” since 2023 to better anticipate, respond to and manage international crises, though little is known about it publicly.

In a statement, the department said the framework has been “formalized” since early 2025 and is meant to be a set of tools and guidelines that helps officials proactively assess emerging situations, determine an appropriate and feasible response, and carry it out from start to finish.

“Any potential new measures would be carefully assessed to balance humanitarian needs against available levels space and existing program capacity,” it said, underlying the need to be more proactive, better co-ordinate with key partners, and align with immigration levels plans and “domestic welcoming capacity.”

Source: These migrants escaped war and disaster to come to Canada. Should they go home or be offered permanent residence? It’s not that simple

Asylum rulings made without a hearing raise security and fraud concerns, C.D. Howe Institute report says

Of note:

The federal refugee tribunal’s practice of assessing some asylum claims without first questioning applicants could heighten the risk of fraud and weaken security screening, a report by a former director of policy at the ImmigrationDepartment says. 

The report, to be published on Thursday by the C.D. Howe Institute, expresses concern that the Immigration and Refugee Board’s assessment of asylum claims from certain countries without hearings removes an important layer of scrutiny. 

An access to information request by the report’s author, James Yousif, found that between Jan. 1, 2019 and Feb. 28, 2023, the IRB accepted 24,599 asylum claims into Canada without personally questioning the applicants in hearings. 

Mr. Yousif, a former IRB adjudicator, says that practice accelerates decision making, but has not reduced the huge backlog of claims. 

By September, 2025, there was a backlog of almost 296,000 pending cases. 

Under a file-review policy established in 2019, the IRB drew up a list of countries, which was removed from public view in 2020, from where claims could be assessed without an interview, the report says. 

Mr. Yousif argues in the report that all asylum claims should be adjudicated through in-person hearings “without shortcuts.” 

He writes that approving asylum claims without a hearing “may facilitate fraud and encourage more fraudulent claims.”

“Asking questions is also a part of Canada’s security screening architecture and cannot be skipped without increasing national security risks.” …

Source: Asylum rulings made without a hearing raise security and fraud concerns, C.D. Howe Institute report says

Urback: It is the right time – socially and economically – to scale back extended health benefits for refugees

Not seeing much pushback:

…The problem plaguing the IFHP both in 2012 and in 2026 is the perception of unfairness: Canada’s public health care system does not include coverage for extended services and prescriptions for Canadian citizens and permanent residents, but it does for those eligible for the IFHP. 

There are various arguments that justify that discrepancy, including the fact that refugees often arrive with complex medical needs after years of neglect, and it may be cheaper in the long run to treat them up front. There are various provincial programs that do cover the cost of prescriptions and extended services for low-income Canadians, but asylum-seekers will have more trouble navigating the complex bureaucracy, especially if there is a language barrier. IFHP keeps it simple. 

These arguments were more persuasive in 2012, when the program was a fraction of its current size, and there wasn’t the widespread perception that Canada’s refugee system was being abused. In 2012, roughly 128,000 people were covered by the IFHP. In 2024-2025, that number exploded to 623,365, with expenses totalling nearly $900-million. …

There’s also a social imperative for bringing refugee benefits closer in line with those afforded to Canadian citizens. That’s because, bluntly, the Trudeau government destroyed the immigration consensus in Canada; it brought in so many newcomers, so quickly, that integration was impossible and resentment inevitable. The Carney government is now tightening the rules for student visas, work permits, and asylum claimants, but it will take a lot more than a change in numbers for Canadians to again believe that immigration is a good thing, and to trust that our processes are rigorous and fair. 

Asking refugee-claimants to budget for prescriptions and extended coverage, as many other Canadians do, helps to ameliorate that wounded perception of fairness. Arguably the changes to the IFHP needs to go further, but this is a necessary first step. 

Source: It is the right time – socially and economically – to scale back extended health benefits for refugees

Canada will require refugees and asylum seekers to co-pay for health care starting in May

Significant change. Major expenses still fully covered however:

Starting May 1, Ottawa will require sponsored refugees and asylum seekers to co-pay for their health-care coverage, a move that critics worry will lead to delayed and possibly denied access to care.

The co-payment plan — first revealed in Ottawa’s 2025 budget in November — will apply to refugees sponsored to Canada by the federal government and community groups in their first year in the country, as well as asylum claimants who arrive at the border for protection.

Patients will still be fully covered under the Interim Federal Health Program’s basic plan to see doctors and specialists, access hospital care, and for diagnostics.

However, they will now be asked to pay out of pocket 30 per cent of the costs of services such as dental, optometry and physiotherapy under its supplemental benefit plan. They will also be charged a $4 flat rate on each prescription….

Source: Canada will require refugees and asylum seekers to co-pay for health care starting in May, Co-payments for supplemental health benefits

ICYMI – ‘A win on all fronts’: Federal Court quashes Ottawa’s attempt to stop legal challenge on cabinet secrets in Canada-U.S. refugee deal

Not all that surprised:

A Federal Court judge has rejected the Canadian government’s attempt to throw out a challenge by advocacy groups seeking greater transparency on how Ottawa decides to designate the United States as a safe country for refugees.

The legal challenge by the Canadian Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and the South Asian Legal Clinic of Ontario asked the government to pull back the curtain on its internal reviews regarding the Safe Third Country Agreement with the U.S. In its application, the groups argue that Ottawa must be transparent about the process and ensure it complies with Canada’s Charter of Rights and its international legal obligations.

Under the bilateral refugee pact, which was introduced in 2004, most asylum seekers are required to claim protection in the first safe country they arrive in. This means Canada can turn back refugees arriving from the U.S. on the basis they should pursue their claims in the U.S.

The government brought forward a motion to strike the legal challenge last year, before the case could start. In a ruling on Monday, Justice Alan Diner rejected that request, saying the application was not “doomed to fail” and is strong enough to warrant a full hearing.

Diner wrote that at the core of the government’s argument is the question of what constitutes a decision when it’s required to conduct an ongoing review — “a legal question that should not be answered on a truncated record.”

The judge also granted the applicants “public interest standing,” while recognizing that the advocacy groups themselves are not “directly affected” individuals like refugee claimants.

While the government argued the challenge was filed too late, Diner granted an extension and agreed with the applicants in finding that the delay was reasonable because the legal pathway to challenge the review process only became clear following a 2023 Supreme Court of Canada decision.

Maureen Silcoff, a co-counsel for the refugee lawyer association, described the ruling as “a win on many fronts.”

The question of why the Canadian government is continuing to designate the U.S. a safe country is more pertinent now than ever, Silcoff told the Star. “All we have to do is look south of the border and we see that the current administration has essentially eradicated the asylum process,” she said….

Source: ‘A win on all fronts’: Federal Court quashes Ottawa’s attempt to stop legal challenge on cabinet secrets in Canada-U.S. refugee deal

How claiming to be a refugee became a get-out-of-jail-free card

Pretty clear case of abuse of asylum that undermines support for refugees:

This month, B.C.’s newly minted Extortion Task Force was zeroing in on 14 foreign nationals accused of participating in an extortion crime wave currently terrorizing the Lower Mainland.

Starting in earnest in 2023, organized gangs have been roving through Surrey and Abbotsford demanding large sums of cash from South Asian businesses, and then attacking non-payers with arson or gunfire.

More than 130 such incidents have occurred just in 2025, yielding a weekly tally of shootings and vehicle fires. This rash of violence is one of the main reasons that Ottawa declared India’s Bishnoi Gang a terrorist entity in September, accusing them of generating terror among Canadian diaspora communities “through extortion and intimidation.”

But according to an exclusive report by Stewart Bell at Global News, just as the Canada Border Services Agency began investigating 14 alleged extortionists, all of them claimed to be refugees, instantly stopping the investigation in its tracks.

In a Thursday statement, Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke called out how the “international thugs and criminals” abused the asylum system in order to “extend their stay in Canada.”

Guests in our country who break our laws need to be sent home,” she said.

The case of the Surrey 14 is one of the more brazen abuses of the refugee system to date. But it’s nothing new that a foreign national would claim refugee status to evade deportation. Or that asylum status would be used as a tool of foreign criminal gangs.

Because, as the Surrey case illustrates, it works.

If the accused are indeed extortionists, they’re likely to eventually face some kind of removal order or criminal prosecution. But by merely telling border authorities “I am seeking asylum,” they’ve potentially obtained up to two additional years on Canadian soil.

As of the most recent estimates of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, there is a backlog of at least 24 months until refugee claimants can have their case put before an immigration officer.

As such, any foreign national claiming to be a refugee can be assured of at least two years of living in Canada under the status of an asylum claimant….

Source: How claiming to be a refugee became a get-out-of-jail-free card

ICYMI – Saunders: A better way to manage the border after the collapse of the Safe Third Country Agreement

More practical than most of the other ideas floated. The Biden administration’s similar approach was starting to deliver results:

…A new, simplified and better-designed version of Safe Mobility should be launched, in the hands of Canadians in partnership with our southern neighbours who share the same problems. It might be online-only or phone-based at first, and widely publicized among migrant communities.

It would allow prospective migrants and refugees, including those living in the United States and along the road in the Americas, to have their case considered and their background screened before coming to the border. Worldwide experience shows that most migrants prefer to apply for legal programs even if there’s only a slight chance of succeeding, rather than the vast expense and mortal danger of overland migration and smuggling. If rejected, they mostly apply for somewhere else, rather than trudge further north.

A new study by the Denmark-based Mixed Migration Centre proposes Safe Mobility schemes as one of the best ways to end human smuggling. They’re considered the best solution to Britain’s and Europe’s boat-migration crises. I recently conducted a study of migration-governance initiatives for a report by the Canadian Council for the Americas on improving Canada-Latin America relations, and found a big appetite for Safe Mobility schemes across the hemisphere.

Best of all, they could be launched without the participation of the United States – even while the STCA still exists. They’re the best way to take pressure off our border, now that Washington isn’t helping.

Source: A better way to manage the border after the collapse of the Safe Third Country Agreement

Canada takes longest to settle refugees from this region, report reveals, calling it ‘systemic racism’

Of note. Lower staffing in African countries appears to be the cause according to the CCR report:

Refugees from Africa continue to face longer wait times for resettlement to Canada than applicants from other regions, two years after a government audit identified inequities in immigration processing, says a new report. 

“The persistence of disproportionately long processing times in Africa and chronic under-resourcing of visa offices in the region reflect systemic racism in Canada’s immigration program,” said the study by the Canadian Council for Refugees, released on Friday. “Whatever the intentions of the decision-makers, the result is that Africans are treated inequitably.”

Based on data provided by the Immigration Department, the report showed African applicants sponsored by the Canadian government had an average 42-month wait time for all cases finalized between Feb. 1 and July 31, followed by those from the Middle East (26 months), Europe and Maghreb (15 months), Americas and the Caribbean (15 months), Indo-Pacific (13 months), and two months if they are processed by the resettlement operations centre in Ottawa.

The wait time for African sponsorships by private community groups is even longer, at 47 months, compared to 42 months for those processed in Europe and Maghreb, 40 months in Indo-Pacific, 39 months in the Middle East, and 30 months in Ottawa.

African visa offices lack staff

“One of the major findings from the report is that the structural inequity comes through largely in terms of the under-resourcing of the visa offices in the African continent,” Asma Faizi, president of the refugee council, said in an interview. 

“Yes, there might be a larger number of people seeking refugee protection and resettlement. Historically, that has been the situation. In our opinion, where you have regions where there’s a large need, there should be a large amount of resources dedicated to that region to ensure that the processing is not delayed.”

She said slow processing of African refugees has been a long-standing concern for the council, and the study aimed to examine if there has been progress following a 2023 Auditor General report that identified serious inequities in how refugee applications are processed. 

The audit, for example, found the visa office in Nairobi, Kenya, had about half the staff but almost double the workload as Ankara, Turkey, while the office in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, had similar staff levels to Rome but five times the workload. Due to staff shortages, some offices in Africa could not even meet the targets assigned to them for family and refugee programs….

Source: Canada takes longest to settle refugees from this region, report reveals, calling it ‘systemic racism’

Immigration Minister warns foreign nationals to not abuse asylum system as U.S., U.K. tighten rules

Right message but unlikely to have much impact, just as the impact of former PM Trudeau’s 2017 infamous ‘To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada,’ was overstated:

…Asked about the implications for Canada, Ms. Metlege Diab warned asylum seekers against trying to take advantage of the Canadian system.

“If you’re coming just because you think it’s a way to side-step our system, don’t do that,” she said in her first major interview since taking on the role.

“We are telling people, no matter who you are, where you are, the asylum system in Canada is here to protect those that desperately are [in need], not for everyone,” she said. 

She said the borders bill, also known as Bill C-12, which is now going through Parliament, would “tighten up” the asylum system and “ensure that those that are not eligible to apply are weeded out earlier.” 

The bill, which would ban those who have been in the country for more than a year from claiming asylum, will “signal to the global community that Canada is not here for people to take advantage of,” she said.

Canada is known for its humanitarian efforts, and should “protect those that really need protection,” she said. But the country is also dealing with “capacity issues,” such as the availability of housing and health care. 

In this year’s immigration targets, Ottawa dramatically cut the number of international students it plans to admit and effectively froze the numbers of permanent residents over the next three years. The cuts followed waning support among Canadians for increasing immigration in recent years. 

Ms. Metlege Diab said “the mood of the country, going door to door,” has changed….

 Source: Immigration Minister warns foreign nationals to not abuse asylum system as U.S., U.K. tighten rules

UK: Windrush tsar fears repeat of citizenship scandal

Understandable concern:

The new Windrush commissioner has warned of the danger of “unintended consequences” from tougher UK asylum laws.

In a wide-ranging BBC interview about his government-appointed role, the Reverend Clive Foster said he wanted discussions with ministers about how to prevent a repeat of the Windrush scandal.

Government proposals designed to tackle illegal migration would give people granted asylum only a temporary refugee status, subject to review every 30 months.

Mr Foster is concerned about potential mistakes and said lessons needed to be learned from Windrush, when thousands of Commonwealth citizens were wrongly classed as illegal immigrants.

The scandal involved people from the Caribbean who responded to an invitation to rebuild the UK after World War Two, but the commissioner said it also affected Commonwealth citizens from Africa and South Asia, particularly Bangladesh.

Many were later denied jobs, housing and NHS treatment and some were wrongly deported because the Home Office failed to keep records or issue paperwork confirming their indefinite leave to remain.

Mr Foster, a senior pastor at the Pilgrim Church in Nottingham, was appointed in Juneto oversee the government’s response to the Windrush scandal and represent its victims.

He has met more than 700 people on a UK-wide Windrush Listening Event tour, where he said some victims wore military medals to show how proud they were to be British.

“I’m hearing the pain, I’m hearing the trauma, and my responsibility is about looking at how we can build relationships, build back trust,” he said….

Source: Windrush tsar fears repeat of citizenship scandal