Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Sept. 25th, 2025

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Mr. Usher, you helped put matters into context here today. For example, in your initial presentation you talked about a policy put in place in 2007—a link to permanent residency. You said that colleges could come along and monetize the policy as a result. Do you include within that the diploma mills, for lack of a better phrase? Would you include those types of colleges in this, those that are not reputable and were a big part of this problem?

[Alex Usher]

All of those mills—I hate that term—were teaching the public college curriculum—every last one of them. I know people hate when they see the word “private” in front of “education”. They just assume things are bad. Every single one of them was delivering a public sector education. Some of them were doing it better than others. We don't know, because the provincial government declined to actually have any quality assessment processes for these things, which was a disaster. We could have solved lots of problems with that.

Were public colleges, via the use of public-private partnerships, monetizing the system? Absolutely, it was 100% what they were they doing.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London Centre, ON]

I use that term for lack of a better term. The point is taken on the narrative.

Mr. Côté, you talked about the postgraduate worker program, and you gave a specific recommendation on what needs to change. It sounds like you're calling for a decentralized approach, such that labour market needs in particular regions are recognized and decisions are made on that basis, rather than a 30,000-foot view taken by the federal government.

Do I understand your argument correctly?

[André Côté]

Yes, I think that's right. That type of intervention was probably designed to respond to what Mr. Ma was talking about in terms of this over-indexation around things like those general business programs. I think the challenge is that IRCC, in terms of availability of economic data to link to where the labour market is headed, will probably be challenged in the first place. Also, in terms of regional or provincial development, the provinces are probably better equipped to understand the types of in-demand fields that they want to be directing to.

My view would be to either do away with that or push it down to the provinces.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Mr. Côté.

Thank you, Mr. Fragiskatos.

That concludes our first round of witnesses and testimony for this study today. I want to give a huge thanks to all of our witnesses. That was excellent. Thank you so much for your time and your patience during this hour.

We will suspend for five minutes so the witnesses can leave. We will come back with the second panel.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Welcome back, everyone.

Good afternoon to all of our panellists. Thank you for being here today.

I will be formally introducing you in a few minutes. First, I would like to make a few comments for your benefit, just to remind you of a few things. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. If you are participating by Zoom, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic. Please mute yourself when you're not speaking. At the bottom of your screen, you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation: floor, English or French. As a reminder, all comments should be addressed through the chair.

I would now like to welcome our witnesses for the second panel.

From Seneca Polytechnic, we have David Agnew, president. From U15 Canada, we have Robert Asselin, chief executive officer. From Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, we have Christian Blanchette, president.

You each have up to five minutes for opening remarks, after which we will proceed with rounds of questions. Just to remind everyone, in terms of rounds of questions, I'll mention how many minutes you have for the question period, just so you know how much time you have to answer. As you know, the members have lots of questions, so please be as quick and precise with your answers as possible. Thank you.

We will start with Mr. Agnew from Seneca Polytechnic.

You have five minutes, please.

[David Agnew, President, Seneca Polytechnic]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you for the invitation from the committee to appear before you in your review of the international student program.

Seneca Polytechnic has campuses in Toronto, King City, Markham and Peterborough and has a long history in international education. In addition to academic partnerships with institutions around the world, we've had many student and faculty exchanges, done international development work, delivered corporate training overseas and recruited thousands of international students over the decades.

I'm particularly proud of our responsible approach to geographic diversity in our recruitment, with a cap of 30% of our international student body from any one country. Seneca has routinely had students from 120 or more countries on campus.

We're a comprehensive polytechnic that has programs across the disciplines, many of them subject to accreditation and quality standards set by organizations such as Transport Canada, the College of Nurses of Ontario, engineering bodies, the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association and many others.

Our degrees are reviewed by the Postsecondary Education Quality Assessment Board and other credentials by the Ontario College Quality Assurance Service. We have industry advisory committees for every program, which ensures that we are responsive to labour market needs.

Some of the leading programs that have attracted international students over the years are in health care, early childhood education, aviation, advanced manufacturing, information technology and, of course, business.

We're known for our work in bringing artificial intelligence technologies into our classrooms, services and operations. We recently launched our very first master's degree, and it is in AI.

Investments in curriculum development, lab equipment, mental health services, work-integrated learning, a housing office, applied research projects, tutoring, modernizing campuses and more are ways we support our domestic and international students and set them up for success in their careers.

Seneca, like virtually every other post-secondary institution in Canada, has seen the number of overseas applicants fall since the January 2024 announcement of changes to the ISP. We are also experiencing steep drops in approval rates for those who do want to come to Canada. Let me share with you some numbers.

Last year, 2024, there was a 45% decline in study permit approvals, which was well beyond IRCC's stated target of a 35% reduction. In the first half of this year, study permit approval rates in Ontario have fallen from 64% of applicants to 25%. This is, of course, on a much smaller base of applicants. For Seneca, across our international programs, the number of applications for the fall fell more than 80% in two years, from nearly 81,000 two years ago to less than 15,000 this year.

Let me address the asylum seeker issue, which I know is of interest to the committee. I learned about this issue from a media story, not through any official channels. I wish I could shed more light on what is behind the numbers, but I don't know any more than what I read and hear in the public domain. From an institutional perspective, let me just say that it makes no sense for us financially or reputationally to recruit a student who we know wants to claim asylum status in Canada.

We offered to the last IRCC minister to work together and share data to better understand the issue, and the same offer has been extended by our national association, Colleges and Institutes Canada. Unfortunately, so far, those offers have not been taken up. We stand ready to collaborate to address this issue.

Looking forward rather than reliving the past, I would like to offer some suggestions for the future direction of the ISP. We need much closer consultation with provinces, territories and the post-secondary system about any proposed changes to the ISP, including to the list of programs that are eligible for PGWPs. The roller coaster of policy changes during the last 21 months or so has taken its toll on Canada's reputation, and we need more predictability for all involved.

If we are to tie immigration to Canada's labour market needs, it's important to engage all the relevant players, such as the provincial and territorial governments, local and regional governments, the business community and the higher education sector. Regional variations of in-demand skills are considerable, and a one-size-fits-all approach will disadvantage local economies.

We need stability in the ISP and to start the long and hard journey of rebuilding the trust and credibility of the Canadian education brand. We want to be partners in building a sustainable immigration system that serves the needs of the Canadian economy and society.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you so much, Mr. Agnew.

Next, we have Robert Asselin from U15.

[Robert Asselin, Chief Executive Officer, U15 Canada]

Madam Chair, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.

My name is Robert Asselin. I serve as CEO of U15 Canada, Canada's 15 leading research universities. Together, our institutions conduct more than 75% of all university research in Canada, enrol 70% of the country's full-time doctoral students and generate much of the nation's innovation, from patents to private sector research contracts. Collectively, our universities are a national strategic asset; they are anchors of talent, research and innovation.

International students, especially graduate and post-graduate students, are essential to that mission. They bring skills and ideas that make Canada more innovative and more productive, thereby strengthening both our economy and our communities.

International graduate and postgraduate students are a crucial pool of highly skilled talent. More than half of those who took a master's or doctorate in the 2000s became permanent residents of Canada within a decade.

Canada ranks just 25th among OECD countries for the proportion of graduate degrees awarded. We can't allow ourselves to turn away top talent.

We recognize that changes to immigration policies were necessary, but treating all international students with a one-size-fits-all approach has created uncertainty, damaged Canada's reputation and reduced international enrolment.

At U15 universities, the share of international students has been stable at 18%-20% since 2018. However, for the first time in decades, we're now seeing steep declines. First-year international bachelor enrolments have dropped 19%. Graduate and doctoral programs are also seeing major reductions, particularly in engineering, computer science, health and life sciences. These are precisely the fields that underpin Canada's future economy and security. In graduate computer engineering programs, enrolment has dropped by more than 20% in a single year. This is the talent we need to build nuclear reactors, advance AI supercomputing, and strengthen our defence industrial base.

Because graduate students play such a central role as research assistants, these declines are already eroding the capacity of Canada's research ecosystem to deliver the discoveries and innovations our society and businesses depend on. Including graduate students in study permit caps has weakened Canada's research capacity at the very moment when sovereignty and competitiveness demands the opposite. Even the Speech from the Throne emphasized the importance of attracting the best and the brightest.

We, therefore, recommend three steps: one, rebuild Canada's reputation by sending a clear signal that we welcome top global talent, including the timely processing of study permits; two, exempt graduate students from study permit caps; three, target bad actors while supporting institutions that uphold the highest standards through a distinctions-based approach that recognizes excellence.

In a world where ideas, talent and technology define prosperity and security, our ability to attract and retain the brightest minds will determine our future. If we send the wrong signal now, we risk losing a generation of talent to our competitors, and with it, the innovations in industry that will shape the 21st century. If we act with urgency and clarity, however, Canada can cement its reputation as a global destination for excellence in research and discovery.

This is not just about universities. It's about our economy and security. We must choose ambition.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Mr. Asselin.

Our next witness is Mr. Blanchette from the University of Québec at Trois‑Rivières.

Mr. Blanchette, you have the floor.

[Christian Blanchette, President, University of Quebec at Trois-Rivieres]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank everyone who is with us today.

International students are essential to Canadian universities for both research, as others have mentioned, and to keep certain programs in a number of universities going.

The international student situation is a regional problem for which some have sought a national solution. This has resulted in tragedy for many of the country's universities.

I'd like to go over how responsibilities are shared among the major players in this file—universities, the federal government and the provincial government.

Universities are responsible for evaluating the quality of education that applicants have received. Provincial governments assess students' financial ability. The federal government looks at financial ability, but is fully responsible for security screening of applicants to ensure national security.

That said, universities take steps to maintain the integrity of the system. All universities have procedures in place to ensure that the documents they receive and review are genuine. Sometimes they go much further than that.

Case in point, the Université du Québec à Trois‑Rivières, UQTR.

In 2021, we noticed an unusual situation with the number of applications from certain countries. We also observed a new phenomenon, an unusual number of applicants from certain countries withdrawing early in the semester.

That situation prompted me to write a letter to the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, the Honourable Sean Fraser, on November 17, 2021. In my letter, I indicated that we had noticed our admissions system could be used improperly to get around the usual official immigration rules and procedures. I invited him to take action by addressing this matter, and I assured him of our co-operation.

We've been co-operating with IRCC offices since 2022. We started using two-factor authentication two years before it was rolled out across Canada, and we validated the identity of visa holders with IRCC.

We also instituted other measures. There were unusual elements in applications we received from six countries in the spring of 2021, and we implemented user fees for those countries.

In October 2022, we added three more countries to the list, bringing the total number of targeted countries to nine. In 2021, we expanded that to all countries from which we were receiving applications. We saw a dramatic decline in the number of applications we received that seemed irregular, and suddenly agencies were no longer in the picture.

That said, new public policies limiting the number of international students have a detrimental effect on universities' ability to conduct research and provide quality education to their students.

Case in point, in April 2025, Quebec universities as a whole saw a 43% drop in the number of applications for admission. At UQTR, the number of applications dropped by 56%. We are currently compiling the data for September 2025, the semester that just started.

Every Quebec university is allowed to accept a limited percentage of international students. UQTR was only able to reach 36% of its limit. The figures I am seeing from the system as a whole indicate an average of around 35%.

Overall, in a single year, the number of international students enrolling in Quebec institutions has dropped by close to 20%. In addition, the administrative measures put in place to control the arrival of international students are causing significant processing delays for study permits, which is leading to a marked drop in enrollment.

International student recruitment is a competition for talent. The decline I just mentioned is a strong indication that Canada lost that competition in 2024. It lost again in 2025. This is bad for universities, and it is really bad for Canada's economic development.

I believe that the international student issue is not an immigration issue. It is, first and foremost, about university development, Canada's development, and research and economic development in Canada.

We need to send a strong signal if we want Canada to become a welcoming country again and if we want to approach the competition for talent in 2026 in a more welcoming manner.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Mr. Blanchette.

I want to thank all of you for your remarks. That was excellent.

I now invite Ms. Rempel Garner to begin our first round of questions.

You have six minutes.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I'll direct my questions to you, Mr. Agnew. From 2021 to 2024, you guys took in over 50,000 international students. That's a lot. You opened a campus a few years ago. Then you had to shutter a campus. You attributed that to the loss of international student permits.

Did the federal government give you the impression that the level of permits you were receiving would go on indefinitely?

[David Agnew]

No, I don't think they gave us the impression that it would go on indefinitely. What we were responding to when we dedicated one of our campuses to international students was, frankly, the demand—the very high demand, as you note—for international education and—

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

I'm sorry. I don't have a lot of time.

I'm sure there was a demand, but there's a permitting process from the federal government. You must have known that you were dependent on that. Why did you persist? You must have been under the assumption that these numbers would carry on forever.

[David Agnew]

Nothing lasts forever. It was a campus that was available to us. Because of the demand, we decided to use that and put our capital to good use.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you. It just seems like a pretty poor business choice to me.

Did the federal government ever ask you to demonstrate that there was adequate housing for the number of students you brought into the region? Just give a yes or a no.

[David Agnew]

No.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Did the federal government ever ask you to demonstrate that there were adequate numbers of jobs in the region for those 50,000 people? Just give a yes or a no.

[David Agnew]

No.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Did you ever raise any alarm bells with the federal government that there might be kids sleeping under a bridge, or food bank usage? Did you ever have that conversation with the federal government on the student permitting numbers you were having?

[David Agnew]

Well, as far as I know, we did not have any students sleeping under bridges, so that wasn't—

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

As far as you know.... Okay.

[David Agnew]

We have a housing office that works very closely with our students. Most of our students stay off campus, not on campus.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

You talked about the asylum claim rates and the fact that you didn't know about this. I'm assuming—just to re-emphasize that this was the case—that you didn't talk to the federal government about this and they weren't talking to you.