Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 20th, 2026

[Karen Hogan]

My office has done work in the past on removals, but it has been quite some time. As we sit down and look at what audits to do in a coming year, we always debate when to go back to certain things. As I mentioned, it is our intention to start following up on recommendations in a much more rigorous fashion every year, so those might eventually get scooped in.

I can't tell you whether I will do an audit. I'll definitely make sure it gets added to our list of things to consider as we move forward.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

I would deeply appreciate it if you gave it some serious consideration.

I understand Mr. Gallivan is new to the job, and admittedly he has inherited a mess. I can understand why he has to focus on implementing things that will change the way the department has functioned and focus on the future.

The 153,000 number is astounding, given that only 2,000 people per year were looked into over two years because there was a budgeting issue. At that rate, children in day care today would be 80 years old before you get through the list of the 153,000. All kinds of people could be in the country in the meantime, creating, in some instances, havoc. Admittedly, not all are major issues, but some are, and they seem to have found a way to game the system.

Your report found that 1,600 investigations into non-compliant students were simply dropped because the individuals failed to respond. IRCC's policy is to make just two contact attempts over six months before marking the file inconclusive. Does this mean, in your opinion, that for a student looking to evade the law, the most effective strategy would be to simply not respond to the government's emails or the government's requests?

[Karen Hogan]

I think young individuals today would say this is “ghosting”. Ghosting the department seemed to have no consequences, but I am hearing very clearly that the deputy minister is intending to make sure that there are consequences with follow-ups, so time will tell whether that changes going forward.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

When these 1,600 individuals didn't respond, did you find that IRCC took any enforcement action, or were they allowed to keep their permits and remain in Canada, despite being under active investigation for non-compliance?

[Karen Hogan]

I don't think it was active investigation. The files were closed when communication stopped, and then no further action was taken.

That isn't actually what the investigation was supposed to do. The investigation was supposed to identify whether or not the person was complying with the terms of their study permit. In this case, it would mean studying full-time. It's very likely that there are some who are genuine students, and they need to be given the opportunity to demonstrate that. However, when they're not, then an action should be taken.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

You also said that there are clearly tools in the tool kit, things they can do when fraudulent documentation was used or when a student isn't following the conditions of their permit. You said we didn't see them consider doing that in these 800 cases. What are those tools, and why do you think the government wasn't willing to use them?

[Karen Hogan]

We've heard the deputy minister talk about some of those tools. There could have been a flag placed on the file to ensure that in any subsequent immigration application, it would have to be contemplated and considered that the initial application used fraudulent documentation. They could work through the process and ban an individual. They could cancel their permit and take whatever action was needed to remove them.

Those are elements that are in the tool kit, but we saw in these 800 cases that none of them had been considered.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Then it is our hope, Mr. Gallivan, that you will take all of this into consideration, because it is a mess that you have inherited, sir, and it's going to take a lot of work to fix it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Mr. Menegakis, and thank you to everyone who responded.

Next, we have five minutes for Mr. Fragiskatos.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Gallivan, you already referenced the report that this committee worked on. Thank you very much for looking at it, for reading it. It's an important report that committee members worked on together, and I'd say quite well.

Can you explore the issue of the provinces? I know the provincial role has been touched on by Ms. Graham here today, at least in brief, but what we heard in those various hearings was the critical role that the provinces play with respect to the international student program.

I think one of the things that somehow transpired over the previous years is the blame, and no one's hiding from it. There were very serious issues that came up—challenges that came up, mistakes that were made—that led to where we are now. However, this was placed entirely on the previous federal government's shoulders, and the provinces have a very important role in all of this and in what transpired.

How is IRCC engaging provinces to ensure better outcomes that ultimately aim at integrity?

[Ted Gallivan]

There are a number of formal and informal mechanisms.

I've had bilateral meetings with three or four of my provincial colleagues, and I will meet all of them in short order. There's also a multilateral forum at the ministerial level. I think our next meeting is in June, so there is an ongoing dialogue with all of the provinces around their needs.

I also think the educational institutions are active stakeholders. I have met with representatives of Universities Canada, and a number of other individual institutions have reached out. I do think the stakeholders are ready to speak, and it's our role in the department to take those meetings. We'll always listen. Maybe we don't always agree, but we keep that feedback in mind. Sharing information is really important. People can only make decisions and recommendations based on the information they have.

Alexis may want to add to this, but I think giving them data about their own programs and provincial responsibilities in the area of education is vitally important, so I did take careful note that this is something that we need to be better at.

I know Alexis has had a couple of meetings with Ontario already. Alexis, do you want to add anything in terms of provinces?

[Alexis Graham]

Sure.

There are, as the deputy mentioned, many ways, formal and informal, that we engage provinces and territories. We are starting to work with them on an overall engagement plan that takes into consideration the priorities that they would like to discuss, rather than having us simply impose an agenda. We're really taking this work quite seriously and trying to develop a more robust set of discussions that bring all of our programming into that conversation so that links can be made between programs and we can explore how we can complement each other's work and use all of our various levers together.

When it comes to this program specifically, there are a number of working groups, both at senior levels and at working levels, to work through the details. Part of that is empowering ourselves with data and being more transparent around that in terms of who's in which location on which type of permit. Those are all things that are ahead and are planned for the subsequent discussions we're having with them shortly.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

I have about a minute left and I have a question that's not simple. I think there's another round that we'll probably get to, so I might follow up there.

Mr. Gallivan, you mentioned the U15 universities. As a result of changes that have happened, they have continued questions about the place of the international student program and what the federal government's message is. What is a message that you would put forward to universities, whether it's to those in the U15 or to all post-secondary institutions in general, not just universities, on the direction forward?

I represent London. That's where Western is, so this question comes from that point of view.

[Ted Gallivan]

I think there's short term and medium term. Short term is probably what the game plan is for 2027, and then the medium term is beyond. My ask of them was to set an agenda for both. It's a little tight for the 2027 plan. We'll consult on that and even more ambitiously on 2028 and onwards.

Very transparently, I open the door to talking about a regime that seems to make sense. It feels a little bit like an accounting exercise in terms of the pockets and the numbers and the rules, and maybe a little bit of simplification would be good so that legitimate students could get through it a little more quickly and we could focus on those people who are trying to game the system.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Mr. Fragiskatos.

Thank you, Mr. Gallivan.

It's your turn, Mr. Champoux. You have two and a half minutes.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Ms. O'Gorman, is the Canada Border Services Agency involved in the process at any point, before all resources are exhausted? At what point is the agency informed that there is an investigation, for example into possible cases of people in an irregular situation, and at what point can it provide support to the department? Is the agency involved in any way?

[Erin O'Gorman]

We are not involved in the processes Mr. Gallivan mentioned, namely pressuring people to co-operate and informing them of the possible consequences if they do not, including the fact that they will not be able to return to Canada for five years.

I think the most effective approach for us would be to let IRCC manage the program. As we have said, we can search our data to determine whether certain individuals are in the country. However, we really want the shortest list possible, after the department has done all its work.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Let's take, however, a case like the one Mr. Gallivan mentioned earlier, where we're trying to contact students because they're suspected of providing fraudulent information to obtain their permits. Why isn't the agency immediately called upon when people don't respond? Otherwise, we're forced to abandon investigating them, for all sorts of reasons. Couldn't the Canada Border Services Agency be called in at that point?

The department could tell you when it has trouble locating certain people and they aren't providing answers. That way, it would be clear: Either you track them down and send them to the department so they can get answers, or we kick them out. At some point, people need to talk to each other so we can have a little more leverage in cases like this. Don't you agree?

[Erin O'Gorman]

Yes, but I would say that we are no better positioned than IRCC to pursue these people, up to a certain point in the process. If the department really can't find them and has done everything it can, then we have a role to play—I absolutely agree. However, if we don't have any numbers—

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Ah, okay, so these people really do disappear from the scene.

Mr. Gallivan, I see you want to speak.

[Ted Gallivan]

I think one of the points we agree on is that we need to communicate information better. There could be a flag in the system so that, if the person we're trying to reach attempts to cross the border, a conversation can take place.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Are you already doing this, or do you think it would be a good idea to do it better?

[Ted Gallivan]

We are considering doing this going forward. It is not a process that is currently in place.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Why hasn't there been, historically—

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Mr. Champoux. Your two and a half minutes are up.

Thank you, Ms. O'Gorman.

Thank you, Mr. Gallivan.

Next, we have five minutes for Mr. Davies.