Citizenship and Immigration Committee on March 1st, 2022

[Shamira Madhany]

Basically, one of the recommendations that World Education Services is making is to make sure these international students have supports while they're studying. At this point, the criteria that the federal government has are that if you're an international student, you don't have eligibility for settlement services, or in fact employment services that the provinces provide.

You end up with international students who are either getting individualized services within the institution, or they might have their own community or ethnic group supporting them. We think there should be a coherent approach with organizations working together. It would be the federal government, resettlement agencies, and employment services that already provide services to immigrants.

In terms of labour market entry, they're taking particular courses. Sometimes, for the courses they are taking, they might need longer working hours or experience. Again, what does that look like in terms of the 20-hour cap?

The recommendation we're making is that there has to be an intentional approach to providing services to these organizations to support international students while they're studying and working, whether it's 20 hours or more, depending on the occupation. After they graduate, they will be able to enter the labour market pretty seamlessly, rather than trying to sort out where they're going to end up. Studies have shown that if international students are not getting the relevant work experience while they're studying and then they try to enter the labour market, they might not be able to enter the occupation in a way that is commensurate with the education they've received.

We need to bring all the various parties together to actually talk about what is the best way to support them while they're studying, before they enter the labour market, and once they get into the labour market.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

The department and the Canadian government recently established programs to enable students who have completed their studies to apply for permanent residence, more specifically in the labour market sectors where Canada needs that high-quality labour force. What can you tell us about those programs? Where do we stand with regard to those programs?

[François Dornier]

Once again, who's the question for?

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

It's for Ms. Madhany.

[Shamira Madhany]

As I understand it, what the federal government did last year was create 40,000 spots for international students who were here on a temporary basis to become permanent. Those spots filled up in 24 hours, which meant that there was a huge motivation for these students to stay. After the 40,000 spots were filled, students couldn't apply anymore. That's what I'm aware of in terms of what the federal government is doing.

Again, the question—and one of the recommendations that World Education Services has put on the table—is to make sure that international students know the steps that it takes to become a permanent resident and have the processes in place so they're able to apply and quickly get a response.

There is a program in Nova Scotia called Study and Stay. As I understand from the province, it was a highly successful program. The program included policy coherence around coming here as a student and then staying, and they support you with services so that you can become a contributing member of the province.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Mr. Dornier, would you please describe the issues facing foreign students both before and after they arrive in Canada and, more particularly, in the province of Quebec?

[François Dornier]

When we recruit foreign students throughout the francophone world, the most important thing isn't so much to convince them to come and study in French in Quebec or elsewhere in Canada. That's quite easy. The bureaucracy and admission process are discouraging. The students, during that process—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting. The time is up.

Maybe you will get an opportunity in the next round.

We will now proceed to Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, you will have six minutes for your round of questioning. Please begin.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First of all, I'd like to welcome our witnesses for this important study, which is particularly important for me.

Thanks to my colleague Mr. Genuis for saying it: I more or less initiated this study, and so I'm pleased to have you here today.

Figures cited in previous meetings show that there's a significant discrepancy between the refusal rates of francophone students, more particularly from Africa, and those of students from other countries. There's even a considerable discrepancy between the refusal rates of anglophone and francophone post-secondary institutions.

Mr. Léger and Mr. Dornier, I'd like you to tell the committee how important francophone African students are for institutions you represent.

[François Dornier]

As I said earlier, foreign students are important to us, no matter where they come from in the francophone world. We can't recruit solely in western Europe, in France and Belgium; we also have to travel the francophone world. We work hard with local authorities to attract potential students in Africa and the French West Indies. The problem is that there's a bottleneck, and we don't clearly understand the reasons for that bottleneck, which results in delays and refusals.

That's a problem for students who have decided to uproot their lives to come and study in Canada. As Ms. Madhany said earlier, these are students who want to come to Canada; they're interested, but when the pathway becomes complicated, they ask us for help, they contact us and ask us what we can do. We don't have the capacity for that. We have to clear the pathway so students can come to our institutions. That takes a lot of effort, and the institutions will get discouraged that some point. We'll eventually wonder collectively why we should recruit around the world, including in Africa and the French West Indies, if students ultimately face too many obstacles, give up and abandon that life plan.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

I've been carefully listening to you for a while, and you also said several times that one of the biggest problems was the department's lack of transparency with the institutions you represent. In any case, that's what I understand from what I heard you say.

[François Dornier]

Yes, absolutely. We aren't implying that there aren't any good reasons; we just don't understand them. So it's hard for us, when we first approach students, to know whether their applications are being held up for technical reasons or whether their profile is the problem. Since we don't know which profiles historically prevent applications from being accepted, we keep approaching students telling them that we see no roadblocks and that they should apply, and we start the process with them.

If we knew a little more about why the profiles of certain students from those regions are problematic, it would be easier for us to give them the right information from the outset and to focus our efforts, energy, time, resources and money on applicants who are more likely to be accepted.

We're convinced that the best way to integrate foreign students who immigrate to Canada is through education, particularly at the secondary level. They have years in which to put down roots, establish a social network, integrate and decide whether that life plan is on track.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Then don't you see any doublespeak or contradiction there, since many of those students are told that the reason for refusal is that they refuse to return to their country after graduation? There seem to be clashing visions here.

I personally think that people who have a degree are the best candidates for immigration. If they speak French and have established a social circle—

[François Dornier]

Exactly, you've put your finger on it.

Let's start from the assumption that there's a clash of visions. Then we'd have to have a discussion around the table to determine the government's international recruitment vision and that of the institutions. Right away, we'd see that they're the same vision. That's an assumption, for the moment, since were not discussing this.

That would definitely be the best way to integrate immigrants if we need them to increase the Canadian workforce. But has that message penetrated the bureaucracy? That's a good question. We'd have to have a dialogue.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

We've heard a lot of proposals here in committee. From what I understand, you'd very much like to talk to IRCC so you can understand its decisions. That's a request we could include in the committee's recommendations.

We've also discussed the idea of creating an immigration ombudsman position to assist educational institutions and foreign students whose applications are rejected and who have no recourse to challenge the decision and plead their case.

[François Dornier]

Yes, absolutely.

We need tools to enable students who express interest but are refused to understand the reasons for that refusal. They must be able to challenge the decision, and the mechanisms for that purpose must be relatively simple. When students are 5,000, 6,000, 7,000 or 8,000 kilometers away from where they want to go, it's impossible to solve the problem without a simple mechanism.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much for your answers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thanks a lot.

We will now proceed to Ms. Kwan.

Ms. Kwan, you have six minutes for your round of questioning. Please begin.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for their presentations.

One of the issues with students, of course, is that when they make an application they often get rejected. This has been demonstrated with franco-Africans making applications, and there are concerns with internal biases, even possibly discrimination, in the evaluation of the applications.

One issue that has surfaced in our discussion is the notion of dual intent. IRCC indicates clearly that for your study you are able to stay, or you could choose to stay, or there are options to stay. However, people often get rejected on their applications because IRCC does not believe they will return at the end of their study.

In the process of recruitment with the agents who are working with these students, how much do they push the notion that Canada can be a destination where the students can, in fact, stay after their studies?

I will ask this question of both of the witnesses.

[François Dornier]

I'll let Ms. Madhany start.

[Shamira Madhany]

Sure.

That's one of the recommendations that World Education Services is making, because there is inconsistency. You call it “dual intent”. We call it “the catch-22 situation”, because, in fact, when students put in an application to come in as students, they have to demonstrate that they will study and return. Yet, on the other side, we do want young people to come to our country to study, get the work experience and stay, because we have a population that's aging, with not enough young people coming into the system. That becomes a really difficult issue for students: Should they basically lie on the application, or should they tell the truth and then be rejected?

When we were looking at this particular issue, we looked at the province of Nova Scotia. They started a pilot program called Study and Stay. They were very transparent with students: “You come here to study, and we will make sure that you stay, and we'll provide mentoring and other supports.” The program was not just oversubscribed.... They found that a lot of students appreciated this and actually stayed in the province. They're going to expand this program through 2022.

The question that I put on the table, and it's a recommendation that we're making, is that the government—not just IRCC, but the government—should provide transparent and consistent information to international students. The policy coherence around individuals coming to study and the criteria for keeping people here, because we want them to contribute, should balance. It is a recommendation that we shouldn't give dual messages to individuals. We should have clarity. If we want students to stay, we should say, “Yes, please stay. If you come as a student, we will encourage you to stay.”

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

To follow up on that response, some of the previous witnesses suggested that the government should do away with this “dual intent” notion. Is that your recommendation?

[Shamira Madhany]

It really depends. The motivation among students is different. When we looked at research that shows why students are motivated to come, the students from some countries are motivated to stay and contribute. Among students from other countries, the motivation is that our education system is of high quality and stellar. They want to benefit from our education system, and then go back and contribute to their countries.

That's why I'm not suggesting that you do away with “you stay or you don't stay”. It's just about clarity. If individuals choose to stay, then they should be encouraged to stay, rather than face the penalty of getting rejected if they say, “Well, I want to stay, but you're going to reject my application.”

My perspective is about having clarity with respect to what we're saying to students. Don't say, on the one hand, “Are you going to stay? We'll reject you.” Just say, “If you choose to stay, then we will encourage you by providing the supports.”

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Okay.

However, the policy needs to be addressed. Making it clear does not solve the problem. The government has to decide what the decision is and what the policy is, and that is the core of the issue. As long as you have the possibility that you can stay or you can go, I think the problem is going to persist.

Maybe I'll go to the other witness, Mr. Dornier.

[François Dornier]

I entirely agree with Ms. Madhany's remarks, which accurately describe the situation.

I'd even go a little further. Why should we consider whether the student would or wouldn't like to stay? That shouldn't even be a consideration. It's great to see students who, for personal reasons, wish to come and study here and then return to their countries. Good for them. Some students may also come to study in Canada because they see no future in their own countries.

We've seen many examples of those kinds of situations, in Quebec's CEGEPs, for example. Under programs established with Reunion Island, the French government literally paid students to live in Quebec while they studied because there were too many young people at home and no opportunities for them. Those students knew when they left Reunion Island that they were going—