Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 20th, 2026

[Ted Gallivan]

I think the department lacked what I would describe as a framework for dealing with this question of fraud in the student applications, from telling people what the rules are upfront to following up to promote voluntary compliance with something like departing the country when the visa's expired. It's practices and techniques like nudge.

I think the department hadn't thought through what interventions were required to make sure that students followed the rules and that they departed the country when their student visa expired. It's not always a removal straight to CBSA. There are a lot of things that ought to happen over the life cycle and the relationship between IRCC and the student to promote voluntary compliance with the laws of this country.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Do you get a sense that the department was being pressured by the government to process applications and maybe that was affecting some of the thoroughness that was being taken?

[Ted Gallivan]

I would describe the direction from this government as control. We control these programs. That would mean that no-risk applicants to the country get handled quickly and smoothly. People who don't meet the eligibility criteria get an intervention to ensure compliance.

My sense is that we need to demonstrate that we've turned our minds to, in this case, people with a discrepancy. We need to figure out when the discrepancy is a timing issue or an actual mistake versus real fraud. When there's real fraud, we ought to be taking action.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

I think it's safe to say, based on what the Auditor General found, that this was not being followed and there were definite gaps in the department.

I'll go back to the Auditor General.

You found that IRCC did not identify which students were expected to leave. This has to do with removal tracking after permits had expired. The report says, “We identified”, which means your office. You talked about 39,500 individuals who shouldn't have been in Canada because they'd lost their status.

Was IRCC not aware of that number?

[Karen Hogan]

I think this is an example of where the department was just not acting on information it had. We had to go through their database with them to identify that there were 549,000 or so students who had expired permits, and then determine who had applied for another permit or not. That's when we identified about 39,500 who didn't apply for another permit and should have left the country, so we worked then with Canada Border Services Agency.

This collaboration is where I would expect the department to use that information to do this on a regular basis. We issued a recommendation to the immigration department, and we shared with them our analysis. I trust that they'll act on it now, going forward, with the Canada Border Services Agency.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Ms. Hogan.

Thank you, Mr. Redekopp.

Before we go to our next interviewer, I'm still recuperating from some jet lag from travel I had last week, so I should have warmly welcomed our new Deputy Minister Gallivan.

Thank you for being here.

Mr. Redekopp beat me to the punch, so thanks for doing that, Mr. Redekopp.

Next, we have six minutes for Ms. Sodhi.

[Amandeep Sodhi, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all of our witnesses for being here today.

My first question is for you, Deputy Minister. Can you share with us your department's response to the feedback shared in the Auditor General's report? What steps will your department be taking to address these concerns?

[Ted Gallivan]

I'll start with managing the expiration of a visa because there are rules around the visas, not just for students but more generally. In 2023, IRCC started warning students up front that an overstay has repercussions, including up to a five-year ban from readmittance to the country. To go back to my earlier response, I know I've asked the team to start pilot work around aggressively managing the end of the visa as a management control. We have IT work under way. By the end of May, we'll have an indicator in the system indicating whether somebody is present in the country or not. I found it surprising that we hadn't previously had that, but we're going to have that indicator.

That's just a step in terms of changing the culture and our operational priorities around letting people know their obligation to depart Canada when their visa expires, and this is beyond students' visas. Just in time...and we have yet to learn if it's two weeks before or a month before. However, it's communicating with people—does a phone work, does a text work, or how do you go about it?—and encouraging them saying that if they don't have another status in Canada, they ought to leave and there are consequences. It's purifying the list.

The OAG did talk about the hand-off to CBSA, but we don't want to send them a list of 100,000 people for removals when a lot of work needs to be done, first, to encourage people to do the right thing in the first instance; second, to nudge and get them to do it; and finally, to get the list down to a core number where perhaps an enforced removal is necessary.

[Amandeep Sodhi, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

You mentioned encouraging people to do the right thing. If you could further elaborate on that, that would be great because to do the right thing ultimately is the right thing, but to get people to do that can sometimes be a lot easier said than done. What are some steps that you would take to encourage people to do the right thing?

[Ted Gallivan]

The first is that you can't rely on people doing the right thing totally, so there has to be a consequence past that. We have to make sure there's a full continuum, from telling people the rules and reminding them nicely to reminding them forcefully, and then we have to ensure there's a follow-through.

I know the CBSA has made efforts to increase enforced removals. Part of it is the threat of no return visa. To be really candid and direct, we have to make sure that's a real threat. We have to make sure that IRCC is applying that rigorously and then use that to nudge people to do the right thing.

To go back to the question about culture change, we can't fully rely on people to do the right thing. I think we want to create opportunities for them to do the right thing. I think we want to create an environment that incentivizes them to do the right thing, and then I think we also have to be clear that if they don't leave in the first instance, then there is a second and a third instance where more aggressive actions are taken.

[Amandeep Sodhi, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

Perfect. Thank you.

Are you or any of the other officials from IRCC able to share with this committee what measurable improvements IRCC has observed in terms of application integrity and system integrity since certain reforms have been implemented?

[Ted Gallivan]

I think I'll turn to Tara for some of the specifics, but beyond just the straight refusal-approval rate, we've seen a change in terms of promoters and people who are incentivizing or colluding with students around some of the fraudulent applications, but maybe Tara will come in with some specifics on the improvements.

[Tara Lang, Director General, Admissibility, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We're seeing fewer asylum claims made by former students. Fewer LOA verifications in 2025 produced no match results than in 2024, so that's suggesting the system is not only catching fraud but also deterring it. Requiring students to apply for a new study permit when they transfer schools allows us to gather up-to-date data and information, and that helps us with the student compliance pieces.

I think the pilot that the deputy was speaking about is something that will be very concrete, and we're working actively with our colleagues in CBSA.

Just to expand a little bit on what the deputy said, we're talking about letters, so the concept is to send a letter before and send a letter after, and then we would have an alert on file that would show misrepresentation. If the CBSA, again, were being constrained from an enforcement point for the removal stream, we could catch them if they ever applied for another application, and there would be more specific consequences, like the five-year bar. We're trying to be a lot more proactive—help us help you. We want to have the right people in Canada, but if they're not following the rules, then they should not be here.

[Amandeep Sodhi, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

With these reforms now in place—and you talked a little bit about it before too—how is IRCC ensuring a successful international student program and balancing the stability of the system with these new integrity measures, while also ensuring that our immigration programs work efficiently to attract the best and the brightest of students and researchers to our educational institutions?

[Ted Gallivan]

I would just say that's around understanding the client and facilitating the entry of legitimate, sought-after students, and then cracking down on those who are trying to game the system.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Mr. Gallivan.

Thank you so much, Ms. Sodhi.

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My first question is for you, Madam Auditor General.

In your report, you note that, in just three investigations, the department identified 800 cases where study permits had been issued based on fraudulent documents. I imagine that, if you had conducted more investigations, you would have found more. If, in just three investigations, you found 800, one can indeed assume that the number is much higher.

[Karen Hogan]

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, I would like to clarify a few points. These investigations were not conducted by us, but by the department. Furthermore, while we received several reports, we focused on the three in which the department had identified cases of fraud, fraudulent documents, or false statements.

So, yes, it is possible that there are more, but what was more concerning was that, even though these 800 cases had been identified, no action had been taken afterward. That is where the department must act, based on the information it has in its possession.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

You are telling us that after the incident was observed and brought to our attention, no action was taken with the Canada Border Services Agency to identify the fraudsters, so that the agency could at least determine whether some of these individuals were passing through various border crossings, for example.

[Karen Hogan]

Before even sharing information with the Canada Border Services Agency, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration must take action. An alert must be placed on an individual's file.

For our part, we took steps to determine the whereabouts of these 800 individuals. We discovered that the majority of them had already filed another application for a different immigration status and that more than 50% of those applications had already been approved.

If measures had been taken initially, there might have been greater diligence, and we might have been able to prevent the approval of other immigration status applications, even before alerting the Canada Border Services Agency.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Deputy Minister, you said that measures had been put in place. You have a lot of faith that, with a letter or a notice, people will respect the law and leave the country, for example. I don’t know, but from experience, I have my doubts when these people have already entered the country on a fraudulent student visa. For your part, you trust these people and believe that a simple letter might encourage them to leave rather than try to find another way to stay in the country.

Do you believe that the measures you are implementing provide a strong enough framework to achieve your objective?

[Ted Gallivan]

First, I would like to set the record straight. I thought I had said that, ultimately, real consequences would be necessary, including a five-year ban from the country or a removal carried out by the CBSA. So, I want to correct the impression that was conveyed. No, we do not rely solely on letters.

Next, it is clear that, as a first step, fraud must be detected during the processing of the visa application. Second, we must assess the cases that present a high risk. It is completely unacceptable that, in these 800 cases, there was no follow-up.

I asked the team this question and was given no reasonable explanation as to why these cases were not followed up. When managing a pool of 50,000 or 20,000 applications, you always have to sort through them. You try to distinguish between errors due to simple typos and actual problems. However, when you do find actual problems, there must be follow-up. I have no excuse for the fact that there was no follow-up.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

You have a new process. Following the report, which certainly resonated widely within the community and in the media, has the process already under way yielded results? Can you give us examples of students who tried to get through the system by submitting fraudulent documents? Do you already have results to present to us?

Here, we’re talking about data for the period from 2018 to 2023. Of course, you’ve been aware of the situation since well before the Auditor General’s report was published. Your process is active and concrete. I imagine it has yielded results since 2023. Do you have any results to present to us?

[Ted Gallivan]

Yes. The very fact of cancelling a direct access program has helped. My colleagues Ms. Lang and Ms. Graham could elaborate on my answer by discussing the approval process.

We already reject a high percentage of applications. The first line of defence is the detailed review of visa applications. That is done initially. Then, secondly, we require the so-called letters of acceptance from an educational institution. So, in a second step, we verify that students are indeed enrolled in an educational program. It is at this stage—that is, the follow-up regarding these letters—that we have fallen short.

We have committed to intervening, starting this summer, in 100% of cases where the letters present a problem. Let’s be clear: Not all issues are serious. Sometimes it’s simply a matter of transferring schools, but in other cases, it involves fraud. There should be follow-up.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

When you say “this summer,” are you referring to the coming summer?