Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 27th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 15 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. A number of people, including Ms. Zahid, one of our committee members, will be joining us on Zoom.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and the members. For those on Zoom, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic. Kindly mute yourself when you are not speaking. At the bottom of your screen, you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation: floor, English or French. For those in the room, we would encourage you to use your earpiece and select the desired channel, whether it's English or French.

In terms of making sure that everyone stays on time, I will let you know when you have one minute left. I will then let you know when your time is up and your microphone is shut off.

Kindly wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. I will remind everyone to please not speak over each other, as that makes it difficult for our translators. Please make sure that all your comments are addressed through the chair. If you would like to speak, please raise your hand. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can.

Thank you in advance for your co-operation.

I would also like to welcome Mr. Mario Simard, who is replacing a member of the committee today.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on September 16, 2025, the committee is resuming its study of Canada's immigration system.

I would like to welcome the witnesses for our first panel at today's meeting. As an individual, we have Margareta Dovgal, a public policy analyst. We have Allan Ralph Basa, caregivers policy reform advocate and founder, Canadian Caregivers Assistance Organization. From Toronto Global, online via Zoom, we have Daniel Hengeveld, vice-president, investment attraction.

Welcome to all of you. You will each have five minutes for opening remarks, after which we will proceed with rounds of questions.

We will go to Ms. Dovgal first for five minutes.

[Margareta Dovgal, Public Policy Analyst, As an Individual]

Thank you so much.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and committee members. It's a pleasure to be here.

While I am equipped to offer a perspective on Canada's immigration system as an employer and a policy analyst in natural resources, there are many such perspectives out there. They can speak to the importance of getting immigration right for Canada's economy. Today I want to speak to this issue as an individual and as someone who thinks deeply about these issues so that I can address the cultural and social dimensions that must be considered in the design and implementation of Canada's immigration policies.

The success of Canada's immigration system must be defined by the needs and demands of Canadians. It must be ethical and fair to those seeking to come to Canada for a better life, whether for a short stay or for the rest of their lives. Most crucially, it must be conducive to a high-trust social fabric and cohesive national identity.

Perfect unity is not likely in a diverse, pluralistic society, but we can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Immigration is about more than just the composition of a fraction of our labour market. In an era of birth rates far below the natural replacement rate—right now we're at 1.25 per woman—the choices of who we attract and how we admit them are essentially creating our future social and demographic composition. There is no value-neutral approach here. Anything that espouses such a thing is conceding to the values of whoever most effectively moves through the system.

The value-neutral approach has failed at cultivating public trust, ensuring administrative fairness for newcomers and advancing a culturally informed view of population growth. It has also empowered those who don't respect Canadian laws or values to behave with impunity, exploiting our immigration process in the system. According to polling conducted by Abacus last month, a plurality of Canadians, 49%, view immigration somewhat or very negatively. Only a quarter view it positively. Other surveys point to a more negative view by those who have immigrated in decades past.

I imagine that you have heard considerable evidence through this study, if not prior to it, that immigration programs have been gamified. The rampant side-door stream that emerged in recent years via post-secondary institutions is one such example. Living in Vancouver, many of my friends—

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Chair, I have a point of order. I am sorry to interrupt the witness, but I hope my friend the interpreter can make it to the end of the meeting. I think she is going to run out of air if our friends the witnesses do not slow down.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

It is true. Ms. Dovgal, you're speaking very quickly. Just for our translators, I'll need you to slow down a little bit. Thank you.

[Margareta Dovgal]

Thank you. I appreciate that.

Reunification is taking place, and it's having an unfair impact on Canadians and also on immigrants who are newcomers. Those who are law-abiding immigrants are being encouraged to consider all sorts of unethical schemes like fake jobs, dodgy refugee claims and fictional marriages to stay in the country, all under the guise of.... Well, many others are doing this too.

Non-immigrant Canadians are not naive, and they see this happening as well, further contributing to declining trust in immigration.

I support the principles that MP Rempel Garner intends to advance in amendments to Bill C‑12, particularly efforts to ensure that criminals are held accountable for crimes, which is a crucial aspect of ensuring system functionality, but I would consider the broader questions here too.

In lieu of more stats or facts, which I'm sure this committee has heard of a lot, I have a little story to tell.

In 2017, I was moving from Ottawa to Vancouver. My moving truck with most of my household belongings was stolen in the greater Toronto area. Unlike many of these cases, my belongings were recovered in the Brampton area. I got back my family photos and my mother's ashes; not all victims of crime are this lucky.

There's a reason I share this story. Charges were laid by Peel police for multiple crimes related to the theft, including cheque fraud and possession of stolen property. There was a ring of perpetrators, most of whom police told me were foreign nationals. One guy was apparently deported for other offences before the trial date. Another one was at large and of no fixed address when I last heard from the police, who informed me that they would be seeking deportation for him as well, if he ever resurfaced. Police informed me at the time that this was relatively common and that, in fact, Canada is a ripe target for transnational criminals accused of crimes ranging from petty crime to drug, arms and human trafficking.

On top of this, I add to this the reality that we are also doing nothing to avoid the import of sectarian tensions, and it is clear that the value-neutral approach to immigration is no longer serving Canadians.

My own run-in shattered my sense of security and my trust that Canada is a relatively safe place. The reality is that as a country—

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

You have one minute.

[Margareta Dovgal]

—we've chosen to...I'm sorry; was my time removed?

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

You have one minute left, and then, if you don't finish, don't worry. There are going to be questions, and you'll have a chance to finish that.

[Margareta Dovgal]

I appreciate that. Thank you.

Essentially, we've chosen to advance a naive, idealistic view of immigration that assumes that all newcomers are boy scouts, that any systems failures are merely coordination or resourcing issues, and that everyone comes here as a blank slate with exactly the neutral views on everyone else in the country that our own immigration system seems to hold about newcomers themselves.

Under public pressure, the federal government is looking seriously at immigration numbers and pathways. That's important work. I encourage this committee to also seriously consider whether the current program design promotes public safety and societal cohesion and, if not, what can be done to improve it.

I look forward to your questions, and I thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you so much, Ms. Dovgal.

Next we will turn to Mr. Basa for five minutes.

[Allan Ralph Basa, Caregivers Policy Reform Advocate and Founder, Canadian Caregivers Assistance Organization]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

First of all, I would like to express my deep appreciation for the honour and privilege to be part of this very important discussion, especially to MP Salma Zahid, who has been helping us for very long years.

As a witness in this august body, I will focus on the topic of immigration levels, though I believe it is impossible to speak meaningfully about levels without also considering the immigration process. These two are inseparable, and addressing them together will strengthen the position I put forward today.

One of the most prominent changes in the 2025-27 immigration levels plan is a reduction in overall immigration targets. The hashtag “in-Canada focus” highlights the government's intent to prioritize immigrants already working in Canada under temporary permits, offering them a clearer pathway to permanent residency, but this raises a critical question: Should we be lowering immigration levels, or should we be fixing the system itself?

Let me illustrate this with the case of caregiving.

Caregivers play a unique and essential role in Canadian society, yet under the home care worker immigration pilot, the cap is set at just 2,750 applications each for child care and home support.

As of September 2025, there were 34,000 applications across all caregiver programs. From January to December, IRCC processed only 4,200 applications. With a processing rate of only 14%, they will manage to process just another 4,816 applications this year. Meanwhile, the cap for the home care worker immigration pilot remains at 5,500 applications in total.

With such limited processing capacity, thousands of in-Canada caregivers' applications will remain in limbo. This plan negatively impacts caregivers not only because of the low cap but also because Canada's need for caregivers continues to grow. Restrictive immigration levels and slow processing exacerbate existing problems.

Many caregivers are forced to remain with abusive employers, enduring exploitation simply because their status is tied to their job. The backlog is massive and the narrow window of opportunity worsens the situation.

Caregivers are not just workers. They are the backbone of Canada's social support system, saving the government billions in social services. They enable families to thrive, allow parents to fully participate in the workplace and ensure seniors live with dignity. Their contributions strengthen both Canada's economy and its social fabric.

I submit to you that the immigration limit and caregiver cap are far too low, and I say this for several reasons.

One is the human impact. Caregivers endure years of family separation, exploitation and abuse because of limited chances for permanent residency.

Another reason is labour market needs. Canada faces a persistent shortage. Many caregivers are skilled professionals whose education and expertise could benefit our economy if given a chance to transition to permanent residency.

A third reason is policy alignment. Increasing immigration levels for caregivers is aligned with the government's stated priority of transitioning competent temporary foreign workers already in Canada to permanent residency.

Fourth is the fact that there are systemic challenges. The low cap creates a bottleneck. Caregivers lose status and face financial hardship, and employers are burdened with costly LMIA requirements.

Processing delays make permanent residency feel like passing through the eye of a needle. It is noteworthy that Canada's 2025 immigration plan emphasizes two key features: an in-Canada focus and family reunification.

If there is one group of workers who deserve fair allocation under these priorities, it is the caregivers, those who have been in Canada the longest and have contributed immensely to our society and economy yet remain hostage to an elusive dream of permanent residency.

Their prolonged family separation undermines the very pillar of our immigration system: family reunification. As the legal dictums remind us, justice delayed is justice denied.

Colleagues, by increasing immigration levels for caregivers and improving operational capacity and processing times, we can move towards an immigration system that is not only fair and humane but also effective in meeting Canada's labour and development needs.

It is not just about numbers. It is about people, it is about fairness and it is about building a Canada that truly values the contributions of those who care for our children, our elderly and our most vulnerable.

I therefore respectfully urge your reconsideration of the tightened immigration levels. Canada cannot afford to lose these talents and skills, especially in the face of the constant economic and trade challenges it faces. On the contrary, we need a strong and reliable labour force. By supporting caregivers, we secure not only our labour market but also the very strength of our economy and society.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you so much, Mr. Basa.

Finally, we'll go to Mr. Hengeveld for five minutes.

[Daniel Hengeveld, Vice President, Investment Attraction, Toronto Global]

Thank you, Madam Chair, Vice-Chairs and honourable members. It's a privilege to appear before you today.

My remarks focus on one part of Canada’s immigration system: the business immigration pathways that allow skilled workers, founders and senior leaders to build companies and create jobs here.

Toronto Global is the foreign direct investment agency for the greater Toronto area, Canada’s business and financial capital, which generates nearly 20% of the nation's GDP. We’re a non-profit organization funded by all three orders of government, and our mission is to attract international companies to establish and grow operations here. When they do, they create good jobs, diversify our markets and increase prosperity.

We help companies expand into the GTA by pitching the region and advising on sites, data, regulations and partners, often in direct competition with other jurisdictions globally. We do not offer cash incentives as part of our work. When a company chooses the Toronto region, it’s rarely because we outspend competitors, but instead because we have presented a strong value proposition about the fundamental advantages of the greater Toronto area and Canada at large. They come for our talent and for the confidence that their people can build stable lives here. Immigration policy can be a key competitive advantage that encourages companies to choose Canada.

Since our inception, Toronto Global has helped more than 320 companies land in the Toronto region, creating over 37,000 jobs in sectors like advanced manufacturing, life sciences, clean technology and AI. They depend on Canadian workers and on business immigration programs that let firms bring in the specialized international talent needed to get operations off the ground.

Each week, our team speaks with global firms that are comparing Canada with jurisdictions that move senior people quickly and offer clear pathways from temporary to permanent status. Increasingly, these companies are raising concerns and asking us to convey them to policy-makers. I’m here today primarily as a messenger for those clients.

We are hearing three recurring themes.

First, companies worry about predictability at key transition points: work permit renewals, changes of status from intra-company transferee to permanent resident and the final steps to citizenship. Companies understand that security and integrity checks are essential. What they find difficult is the uncertainty of files remaining in extended review with no clear timeline or communication. This makes it hard for senior leaders to plan the next phase of growth for their Canadian operation.

In addition, for those who have moved their family here, they feel that they are left in the dark about things like schooling and housing. For a person who is responsible for a Canadian team, that uncertainty becomes both a business risk and a personal strain.

Second, our clients highlight the experience of workers who are already here in permanent roles, paying taxes and building their lives in our communities. Many tell us that sustaining these workers should be at least as high a priority as bringing in new ones. They see strong economic logic in creating a clearer pathway from temporary status to permanent residence for people who have already shown their commitment to Canada through stable employment, qualifying salaries, in-demand skills, police checks and tax records.

Third, the current points-based selection system, which quite reasonably favours younger applicants, can have unintended consequences for senior talent. Founders, C-suite leaders and highly experienced specialists in their late forties and fifties may find it surprisingly difficult to qualify for permanent residency, even when they are leading major investments. For firms deciding where to locate head offices or global mandates, the ability to secure a long-term future in Canada for this tier of leadership is often decisive.

Some clients have suggested relatively targeted improvements. These include clearer communication when applications move into complex security or background checks, service standards that are realistic, and respected and dedicated tools or streams for senior leaders whose roles are central to major investments—

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

One minute.

[Daniel Hengeveld]

—while maintaining rigorous vetting.

I want to emphasize that, even with these concerns, Canada and the greater Toronto area remain highly attractive for our clients. They value our stability, our institutions, universities and communities. Their message is not that the system is broken, but that improving predictability and transparency in business immigration pathways would strengthen one of Canada's core advantages in the highly competitive global market for capital and talent.

Thank you for the opportunity to share these perspectives. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Mr. Hengeveld.

That was just under five minutes. Thank you very much.

We're now going to begin the first round of questions Just so our witnesses know, it's for a total of six minutes. I ask you to try to be as brief as you can and to not speak too fast.

For my colleagues, try to be pointed with your questions as well.

For six minutes, we have Mr. Redekopp.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for being here today.

Ms. Dovgal, I read your article here on our national culture.

Under this current Liberal government, we've seen record-breaking levels of immigration and not a lot of planning going into things like housing, infrastructure or integration, for that matter. In your view, has this mass immigration approach, without a cohesive framework, contributed to the social and economic breakdowns that we're seeing in our country?

[Margareta Dovgal]

Evidence is absolutely clear that we have seen this “robbing Peter to pay Paul” phenomenon taking place, where we've been seeing some of the advantages economically and in terms of the demographic sustainability that we've been getting from immigration, at least on paper, and then in reality we've been seeing lots of the pressures.

I also do a lot of housing advocacy. In cities like Vancouver, rental rates are incredibly unaffordable. We see direct ties with inbound immigration numbers, and the price increases we see year over year—

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Ms. Dovgal, I'm just going to stop your time for a second.

Please speak clearly, and go a little bit slower. Just get closer to the microphone. Thank you.

[Margareta Dovgal]

I'm sorry. Thanks so much.

I think there's a phenomenon that you're describing, and it's contributing to cultural breakdown. I think lots of young Canadians in my generation are profoundly stressed and anxious about their futures. It's because we have chosen to fix one problem, which is our collapsing demographics, without doing the deep, necessary and difficult work of ensuring that the infrastructure is there to support all of the people coming into the country.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Do you see people lacking jobs? Maybe we haven't put the effort into getting those people working in some jobs. Do we sometimes bring in immigrants in cases where we shouldn't?

[Margareta Dovgal]

Yes. I think there are lots of things going on. One of those is competition that comes from immigration. I think it's fair to say that there are definitely examples where we don't have Canadian workers who can do certain jobs, or Canadian workers don't want to do certain jobs, whether they be highly skilled or service jobs. Immigration is a solution for some of those things.

I think we've been working a little bit too intensely to increase those numbers uncritically. The result is lots of those pressures are being felt by Canadians. That's why we've seen such abysmally low support for immigration coming out in the last couple of years by the public.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Conservatives have called for immigration levels to be tied to things like our ability to house people, available jobs, health care and those kinds of things, rather than some random numbers pulled out of the air or driven by someone else. Would you support this kind of pragmatic immigration policy to prioritize integration over ideology?

[Margareta Dovgal]

Yes, I would support the idea of pragmatic immigration policies, absolutely.

I think my argument as well has been that we need to not just do it purely with a focus on the economy. If we do that, we're giving up to the system dynamics. Those dynamics aren't creating the types of outcomes that we want in terms of the composition and the high trust that I think Canadians expect from our society. It's one of the reasons immigrants like my parents came to this country and have been coming here for decades, because they want to be safe. They want to have a place where they can respect each other and live in a pluralistic society. I think we failed not only on some of the economic components of immigration recently but also on the cultural components.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Tell me a little bit more about the cultural side, then. What sorts of things would you like to see be different to help us to maintain and improve the cultural side that you're speaking about?