Liberals to open new fast track to permanent residency for 5,000 foreign doctors

2025/12/10 2 Comments

Strange that about one month after issuing the levels plan, the government has effectively increased the levels by 5,000. Hard not to understand why this was not within the current levels, as it appears more sleight of hand as were the other one-time additions. Does not help the overall message that the government is getting immigration more under control (even if it is):

The federal government is promising to open up permanent residency for foreign doctors working in Canada as temporary foreign residents in order to tackle the doctor shortage across the country. 

Immigration Minister Lena Diab announced the policy shift in Toronto Monday, saying 5,000 spots for international doctors would be opened over and above current immigration levels. 

“Many of these doctors are already treating patients in our communities. We cannot afford to lose them,” Diab said. 

The plan involves creating a new express entry category for foreign doctors starting in 2026 for physicians with at least one year of Canadian work experience over the last three years who currently have a job offer. 

A government statement said that physicians eligible for the program include primary care doctors as well as specialists in surgery, clinical and laboratory medicine….

Source: Liberals to open new fast track to permanent residency for 5,000 foreign doctors

Some numbers in the Globe article:

Across Canada, the numbers of physicians coming north this year have increased.

Ontario has issued certificates to 493 U.S.-trained physicians this year, up from 209 last year. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC has seen 405 applications from U.S.-trained physicians this year, nearly double the total from the previous two years. Nova Scotia has issued provincial licences to 34 U.S.-trained doctors this year, more than double the 2024 total.

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

‘You are a very bad minister,’ Conservative immigration critic says at tense committee meeting

2025/12/05 2 Comments

Watched this brutal exchange. Her name comes up periodically as someone who may be shuffled and her appearance yesterday may increase speculation. That being said, MP Rempel Garner is somewhat of a bulldog in her questioning.

As to DM Kochhar’s letter asking MPs to be more respectful of public servants in their questioning, and to be mindful of the risks of posting edited clips that target them, I recall former DM Fadden having the same concerns some 15 years ago or so, albeit in a safer social media environment:

Immigration Minister Lena Diab sparred with her Conservative critic at a tense House of Commons committee meeting Thursday as the two disagreed on everything from immigration levels and deporting non-citizen criminals to what kind of salad they prefer.

Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner put Diab in the hot seat throughout her two-hour committee appearance, grilling Diab about her file and accusing her of being “a very bad minister” when she struggled to give a clear answer on whether she will use powers under the government’s pending C-12 legislation to mass extend temporary visas.

A section in that bill gives the government the ability to stop accepting applications or cancel, suspend or change documents for an entire immigration class — something critics on both sides of the issue say could be abused either to turbocharge the number of newcomers or cancel visas en masse.

Asked if she plans to use that power to keep more people in Canada rather than expelling them when their visas expire, Diab said “that’s not the purpose” of the legislation but wouldn’t say how it would be used.

A frustrated Rempel Garner interrupted Diab.

“When you ask a question I think you should be able to have decency to let someone respond,” Diab said.

“I don’t like your word salad, it’s true. You are a very bad minister,” Rempel Garner said.

“You know what, I prefer fattoush and tabouleh to your salad, at any time,” Diab said.

“That is the oddest thing any immigration minister has said at this committee. It’s very weak and will likely be added to your performance reviews,” Rempel Garner said.

“It’s my culture,” said Diab, who is Lebanese Canadian.

At one point, another Liberal MP, Peter Fragiskatos, stepped in as the two exchanged words.

Rempel Garner said she wasn’t speaking to him about these issues.

“He’s going to have your job,” she said to Diab of Fragiskatos, suggesting the minister was about to be shuffled out of cabinet. “I’ll likely be having this conversation with him in a couple of months.”

Rempel Garner also asked Diab about some recent non-citizen criminals getting more lenient sentences so they can avoid deportation.

Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, a permanent resident or foreign national can be deemed inadmissible if they engage in “serious criminality,” which includes any crime that results in being sentenced to prison for more than six months.

In one recent case an Indian national paid for sex with what he thought was a teenager at a Mississauga, Ont., hotel. That teenage girl was actually an undercover cop.

The man was ultimately sentenced to a conditional discharge for committing an indecent act and was sentenced to 12 months of probation, including three months of house arrest. Rempel Garner said the man should have been dealt with more harshly by the courts and ultimately deported.

Asked if she will send a message to judges that are letting non-citizen criminals off easy to avoid being forced out of Canada, Diab said that’s not her role.

“Sentencing decisions are made independently by the courts,” she said, while assuring the Conservative critic the government will remove foreign criminals when appropriate.

“So, you’re pro-raper,” Rempel Garner asked provocatively.

“The courts have already indicated that serious offences will be dealt with seriously,” Diab said, while adding she wasn’t familiar with the case Rempel Garner raised.

“Can’t you just say it’s wrong and we’ll look into it?” Rempel Garner asked in return. “You just defended a guy who sexually assaulted somebody. It’s rampant in our justice system.”

“A wise person once told me you debate the issues and the policy and you don’t debase the individual,” he said, urging his colleagues to follow that mantra.

Deputy minister cites cases of bullying

The meeting started with the committee chair, Julie Dzerowicz, reading a letter from Diab’s deputy minister — the top bureaucrat in the department — saying some public servants have been subjected to bullying and intimidation after appearing before the committee.

That letter, written by Harpreet Kochhar, relayed that some unnamed politicians have posted videos of the public servants testifying at the committee, and they have been targeted online and in person as a result.

Dzerowicz said Kochhar was concerned about the “well-being” of these government workers who he said have endured “significant harassment and abuse” and “hostile emails.”

The letter, shared with CBC News, relays Kochhar’s fear that MPs posting “short, decontextualized clips of committee appearances” by bureaucrats could lead to violence.

“One of our colleagues was recently confronted in a public space by an angry individual referencing material shared online,” Kochhar wrote.

“I want to implore all committee members from all parties to be very cognizant of how we use the information from this committee, whether it’s online or offline,” Dzerowicz said, adding she doesn’t want appearing before a committee to be a “security risk.”

Rempel Garner said Kochhar was trying to “censor” Conservatives and stop them from questioning the department about what she described as a failed immigration policy.

“I will not be silenced,” she said, saying she will fight to get the government to “do the right thing” on this file.

“Giddy up,” she said.

Diab was ostensibly before the committee to talk about the government’s immigration targets for the coming years — figures that were included in the recent federal budget, an unusual move given they are generally delivered publicly by the minister….

Source: ‘You are a very bad minister,’ Conservative immigration critic says at tense committee meeting

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

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

2025/12/05 Leave a comment

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

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with ,

Feds helped push through citizenship for English soccer player in time to join Canadian squad

2025/11/20 Leave a comment

So let me get this straight.

While Minister Diab was making the case this Monday for passing C-3 quickly to avoid the absence of legislation that “it will open it up so that citizenship by descent will have no limit, and that’s exactly what I think a lot of people don’t want,” the government was fast tracking citizenship for a soccer player who apparently did not meeting the substantial connection case of having a parent who met the 1,095 day residency requirement.

In other words, skipping a generation and taking advantage of the legislative vacuum.

Depending on your perspective, clever or hypocritical move (latter in my opinion):

He is not the first soccer player to fly a flag of convenience in the run up to the World Cup, nor is he the only foreign-born player on Canada’s national soccer team. 

But few will have left it so close to their first match for Canada to take the citizenship oath. 

The Canadian national soccer team’s newest recruit is Alfie Jones, a Bristol-born defender who plays for second-tier English team Middlesborough. 

On Monday he took the citizenship oath in time to play for Canada on Tuesday in a pre-World Cup friendly match against Venezuela. 

Jones’s application for Canadian citizenship – made possible because he had an Alberta-born grandmother – was pushed through with the help of a government minister and a senior public servant in time for Tuesday’s kick off. …

Source: Feds helped push through citizenship for English soccer player in time to join Canadian squad

Filed under C-3, Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Trigger for new immigration powers ‘intentionally not defined’ in border bill: Diab

2025/11/01 Leave a comment

Not reassuring as some guidelines or principles would be useful:

Immigration Minister Lena Diab says the definition of a “public interest” event that would allow her department to pause or revoke immigration applications is “intentionally not defined” in new legislation.

Diab told the House of Commons immigration committee today the definition was left open-ended in the government’s new border security bill, C-12, to allow Ottawa to respond to unforeseen events.

“It is intentionally not defined in the legislation, as I said, to allow for maximum flexibility for the government to respond in a range of unforeseen circumstances that threaten the public interest,” Diab told the committee. 

Diab was asked repeatedly during the committee hearing when the government would be permitted to use the new powers to pause immigration applications or cancel existing documents.

The minister said they could be deployed in a national security emergency or health crisis, adding the government could have made good use of the power to pause immigration applications during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Tara Lang, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada director general of integrity policy and programs, told the committee the public interest power also could have been used for a mass extension of healthcare worker visas during the pandemic.

Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel Garner repeatedly asked Diab to explain what safeguards exist in the legislation to prevent the power change or revoke immigration documents en masse from being abused. 

“You want Parliament to give the government the ability to kick mass groups of people out, undefined, who they don’t like. That’s what it sounds like to me,” Rempel Garner said. 

“How could I go to ethnic groups in my community and say I could vote for this? This is actually bananas and so anti-Canadian. So what are those specific safeguards?”

Diab replied that these powers would “only be used in exceptional circumstances. She said the use of the powers would have to be Charter compliant and the decision would have to be made in consultation with other ministries and cabinet. 

More than 300 civil society organizations, including civil and migrant rights groups, have called on the government to withdraw this legislation due in part to the proposed power to mass cancel immigration documents. 

Justice department officials at the committee said that it’s their opinion the legislation being put forward is Charter compliant. 

The rationale for using these powers would be published in the Canada Gazette and through a cabinet order, with specific reasoning on why the powers are being used and who is affected.

Lang said that while the powers could be used to revoke an immigration document, they would not remove someone’s legal status in Canada as that is a different process. 

Lang added that if people feel they are “improperly named” in one of these orders there is an opportunity for them to request to the immigration department that they be removed from the order revoking or modifying a document. 

Source: Trigger for new immigration powers ‘intentionally not defined’ in border bill: Diab

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Federal minister plans to hold consultations this summer on immigration intake

2025/06/30 Leave a comment

Early test of Liberal government and Minister Diab regarding maintaining or easing restrictions (most of those consulted will ague for the latter):

The federal government will use this summer’s planned consultation on immigration targets to guide future decisions about how many study visas it will issue to international students in the future, Immigration Minister Lena Diab said.

In a recent interview with University Affairs magazine, Diab said the annual immigration levels consultations will reach out to the provinces, university administrators and students themselves, as the government looks to ensure the visa system for students is “sustainable.”

This summer’s annual immigration levels consultations come as multiple universities and colleges face budget constraints after Canada began clawing back on the number of student visas last year amid concerns the number had grown so quickly schools could not provide adequate supports, including housing.

Julie Lafortune, an Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada spokeswoman, says the government expects schools to only accept students they can “reasonably support” by providing housing and other services.

“The annual growth in the number of international students couldn’t be sustained while ensuring students receive the support they need. Study permit applications subject to the cap require an attestation letter from a province or territory,” Lafortune said in an emailed response. 

The current immigration levels plan lays out targets for admitting permanent and temporary residents through 2027, and Lafortune said the upcoming consultations will help the government decide how many newcomers will be admitted in coming years.

Post-secondary institutions across the country are posting deficit budgets this year, laying off staff and cutting programs as international student enrolment drops. Schools had become increasingly reliant on international student fees to balance their books.

Universities Canada president Gabriel Miller previously told The Canadian Press that international student tuition acted as a “stopgap” to make up for years of “inadequate” funding at the provincial and territorial level. …

Source: Federal minister plans to hold consultations this summer on immigration intake

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Immigration minister defends sweeping new powers in border bill

2025/06/07 Leave a comment

Early tests for Minister Diab:

Immigration Minister Lena Metlege Diab is defending controversial new measures in the Strong Borders Act, such as giving her office the power to cancel immigration documents en masse and placing time limits for asylum seekers to make their applications.

“There’s a lot of applications in the system. We need to act fairly, and treat people appropriately who really do need to claim asylum and who really do need to be protected to stay in Canada,” Diab told CBC News.

“We need to be more efficient in doing that. At the same time, Canadians demand that we have a system that works for everyone.”

Introduced in the House of Commons on Tuesday, Bill C-2, the Strong Borders Act, is meant to protect Canadian sovereignty, strengthen the border and keep Canadians safe, according to the federal government.

The bill would make dozens of amendments to existing laws. Its proposed changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act would force asylum seekers entering the country, including students and temporary residents, to make claims within a year.

The new law would also require irregular border crossers, people who enter Canada between official ports of entry, to make an asylum claim within 14 days of arriving in Canada.

And it would speed up voluntary departures by making removal orders effective the same day an asylum claim is withdrawn.

Groups such as the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers are raising concerns about these measures. 

“There are a few categories of people who may end up making a claim after they’ve been in Canada for more than one year for fully legitimate reasons,” said Adam Sadinsky, the group’s advocacy co-chair. 

He cited examples such as changes in government in someone’s country of origin, the breakout of conflict or their human rights advocacy in Canada placing a target on them. 

“They may now be in danger returning back home in a way that they weren’t when they first arrived,” he said. 

Federal government data shows some 39,445 asylum claimants processed by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada and the Canada Border Services Agency between January and April.

Sadinsky said if the government’s motivations are about clearing backlogs, it may be creating another problem. 

Asylum seekers who find their application rejected by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada can file appeals to the Refugee Appeal Division. However, shutting them out of the asylum route after a year could make them turn to the Federal Court of Canada for recourse instead, a body that has been public about its own courtrooms facing severe delays with immigration cases.

“It’s a lot more work for the court,” Sadinsky said, “when people start getting removal dates from Canada and they have to ask the court for motions for stays of removal from Canada.” 

Sadinsky suggested the government could have reduced backlogs by issuing blanket approvals for would-be asylum seekers from countries where Canada recognizes there is an imminent danger to sending them back, such as Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.

Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree said Bill C-2, the Strong Borders Act, will ‘keep our borders secure, combat transnational organized crime, stop the flow of illegal fentanyl and crack down on money laundering,’ as well as ‘enhance the integrity and fairness of our immigration system.’ 

Speaking to journalists on Wednesday, Justice Minister Sean Fraser said the government needed to act, though he recognized courts are facing efficiency problems.

“We need to be able to do two things at once,” he said about changing the asylum system and reducing court backlogs.

Reached for comment, the office of the chief justice of the Federal Court said in a statement it would “simply hope that any potential impact on the court’s workload would be taken into account,” citing a previous amendment to immigration law under Stephen Harper’s Conservative government in 2010 that included four new court positions.

Mass cancellation powers

The Migrant Rights Network, an advocacy group, said it is alarmed about the government giving itself the ability to cancel previously issued immigration documents in large groups. 

“What this is, is setting up of a mass deportation machine,” said its spokesperson Syed Hussan. “Just go out and say we’re walking away from the Geneva Convention.” 

Diab said any mass cancellation decisions would be taken by the whole cabinet, not just her office, and they would not be done lightly.

“These are in exceptional circumstances, when you’re talking about mass cancellation or suspension,” she said. 

“For example, when COVID happened, we literally had applications coming in, and the system had no authority to suspend or cancel those applications … we could have health risks again. We could have security risks.” 

Bill C-2 is now moving through Parliament. The legislation would normally be studied by parliamentary committee next, though neither Diab nor Gary Anandasangaree, the public safety minister, could say which committee would pick it up.

Committees have not been named yet for this sitting and it is unclear if they will before Parliament wraps up for the summer at the end of June.

The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers said it intends to write a letter outlining its concerns to the federal government, and would hope to present at committee when the moment arrives.

Source: Immigration minister defends sweeping new powers in border bill

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with , , , ,

Critic calls out border bill’s proposed new cabinet powers on immigration

2025/06/07 1 Comment

As expected. Suspect that the over-reach of the Bill with respect to civil liberties will over shadow concerns of immigration and refugee advocates:

An NDP critic says a provision in the federal government’s border security bill that would give cabinet the power to cancel immigration documents looks like an attempt to “mimic” measures deployed by the Trump administration in the U.S.

“It seems to me … this piece of legislation is Canada’s attempt to mimic some of those measures that the United States is adopting. I actually never thought that this day would come where Canada would go down that road,” B.C. NDP MP Jenny Kwan told The Canadian Press.

“However, it is here, and meanwhile the government is saying, ‘Don’t worry, trust us.’”

Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree said that the immigration minister would only be able to exercise the power to cancel, suspend or alter immigration documents in an “emergency” and after being granted the authority through an order-in-council.

“The tools are in place to ensure the minister of immigration has additional tools to ensure that in a modern era, for example, whether it’s a pandemic or issues around cybersecurity, she will have the tools to make those decisions,” Anandasangaree said during debate on the bill Thursday.

Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel Garner said the legislation contains several “poison pills” that threaten people’s civil liberties. 

This includes the ability for Canadian Security Intelligence Service and police to access customer information from online service providers in certain circumstances.

“The government has not shown Canadians any specific situation, any specific evidence or circumstance in granular detail about why we should be giving up our civil liberties to a government that unlawfully used the Emergencies Act,” Rempel Garner said during Thursday’s debate.

This is in reference to to a 2024 Federal Court ruling that found the government’s use of the Emergencies Act was unreasonable to breakup the 2022 “Freedom Convoy” protests against COVID-19 public health measures.

The government has appealed this ruling. 

Bloc Québécois MP Claude DeBellefeuille said that her party plans to support the bill at second reading so it can be studied by the public safety committee.

Speaking in French, she said the bill needs to be examined closely because it looks to give new powers to government ministers, law enforcement and even Canada Post.

Immigration Minister Lena Diab said Wednesday the legislation is designed to address “one-off” situations like a pandemic or some other “exceptional circumstance.”

“I think people, Canadians should feel safe that we are putting in all these safeguards, but again, as I said, it’s all part of protecting our country and protecting our system that we value and protecting people that come here because we want to ensure that they are successful as well,” Diab said.

Bill C-2 also proposes giving the immigration minister the power to pause the acceptance of new immigration applications and cancel or pause processing of the current inventory of applications in the event of an emergency.

Julia Sande, a human rights lawyer with Amnesty International Canada, said immigration applicants could lose a lot of money because the legislation doesn’t oblige the government to refund affected people.

“People give up their entire lives, in some cases, their life savings or their family’s life savings. People go into debt just to be able to come here,” she said. “And so to have the government be able to pull the rug out from under wide groups of people is concerning.”

Kwan said the proposed new powers are problematic because cabinet decisions are made in secret and there’s no firm definition of an “emergency” in the legislation.

“I don’t accept that the Liberals say, ‘Don’t worry, we’re the good guys, so trust us.’ I’m sorry, that is just not acceptable,” she said, adding there’s no way to know what a future government might do with this power.

The text of the legislation says that if the minister “is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so,” they may trigger the power to cancel, suspend or alter immigration documents through a cabinet order.

“They’re saying in an emergency, but that’s not what’s written. They said if they’re in the opinion that it’s in the public interest … that could really be anything,” Sande said.

“In the fall, we saw migrants and refugees being scapegoated for the housing crisis. And so, you know, what’s in the public interest?”

Last year, then-immigration minister Marc Miller said plans to reduce the number of permanent and temporary visas issued would help stabilize the housing market.

U.S. President Donald Trump has used national security as justification for a host of immigration measures that involve detaining and deporting people, including university students who have condemned the war in Gaza.

Sande said the proposed bill “attacks” the right to seek asylum by making it harder for migrants to make a claim if they are entering Canada from the U.S., or have been in the country for more than a year.

“They’re talking about fentanyl, they’re talking about guns and then all of a sudden they’re attacking the right to asylum,” Sande said.

“They are completely different things and it’s difficult for civil society, for experts to respond when there’s so many things going on.”

Source: Critic calls out border bill’s proposed new cabinet powers on immigration

Filed under C-3, Citizenship Tagged with , , , , ,