Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 9th, 2025

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michelle Rempel]

I call this meeting to order.

Colleagues, welcome to meeting number seven of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking.

For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. For those who are on Zoom, at the bottom of your screen you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation. All comments should be addressed through the chair. Thank you for your co-operation.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on September 16, the committee is resuming its study of the international student program and study permits.

I would like to welcome our witnesses for today's meeting. Today we have, as an individual, Roopa Desai Trilokekar.

We have Dr. John Tibbits, president of Conestoga College, as well as the Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations, as represented by Dr. Rob Kristofferson.

You will each have up to five minutes for your opening remarks, after which we will proceed with rounds of questions. I will intervene if you are approaching overtime with your remarks.

Dr. Trilokekar, I'll start with you for five minutes.

[Roopa Desai Trilokekar, Associate Professor, Faculty of Education, York University, As an Individual]

Thank you so much for this opportunity—

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

On a point of order, we don't have any video in the room.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michelle Rempel]

I'm so sorry. We have a quick point of order. We don't have video in the room. We'll pause momentarily while that is rectified. It is an auspicious start.

I think we're good there.

I apologize. Please resume for five minutes.

[Roopa Desai Trilokekar]

Thank you so much for this opportunity.

My comments are my own and do not represent those of my institution.

I want to reiterate what previous witnesses have stated to this committee: Let's focus on our joint future and not expend our energies and time on assigning blame for our past mistakes or failures.

In the spirit of looking ahead, I focus on three recommendations. The first is that international education and immigration need to be delinked as policy files. The purpose of international education—

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

Point of order, Madam Chair.

It's hard to understand what the witness is saying.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michelle Rempel]

To our witness, we're having some difficulty with your Internet connection. We'll get you to back up maybe two sentences and start again, and we'll see if it persists.

Please go ahead.

[Roopa Desai Trilokekar]

In the spirit of looking ahead, I focus on three recommendations.

Number one is that international education and immigration need to be delinked as policy files.

The purpose of international education and recruitment of international students should not be to meet our immigration or labour market targets and objectives. Certainly, our immigration assessment can value and provide special recognition for Canadian credentials, but we have created issues in the system by linking what should be two distinct—connected, but distinct—policy objectives. By intertwining these policy objectives, we have sent conflicting messages as to why international students should come to study in Canada and why we are interested in hosting them.

We began going down this path with our first international education strategy in 2014, when we welcomed international students to study and stay in Canada as our ideal immigrants. However, their own experiences in the Canadian labour market were far from ideal.

Canada is unique in the sense that whether it was the Conservatives or the Liberals, we have all been pro-international student recruitment and retention. Unfortunately, we turned a blind eye to how this policy shift created a flood of students to programs and institutions and encouraged the growth of associated businesses, both domestically and internationally—some legitimate, others not—that were there to take advantage of the system, paving the way for both students and non-students to join institutions as a pathway to immigration versus pursuing education.

Next, during the pandemic, and even after the pandemic, we lost sight of the difference between international students and temporary workers by enabling the students to take jobs in which they were working over the limit of 20 hours per week, further blurring the line between student and foreign worker status.

My second recommendation is that we need to invest in policy learning, not just policy borrowing.

Canada has been interested in borrowing and copying policy from our competitor countries. Ironically, while we have done this well, we have not been good about studying and learning from the mistakes of other countries. For example, Australia went through this very same experience about 10 to 15 years ago. We wrote about this in 2013 in an article entitled “Imagine: Canada as a leader in international education. How can Canada benefit from the Australian experience?”

Australia went about aggressively recruiting international students, with their higher educational institutions equally incentivized to recruit large numbers to fill their funding gaps. Their student programs were linked to immigration. The outcomes of all of these policies were very negative. There were imbalances and unregulated growth of programs and private institutions. There were challenges within communities, given this high growth rate. Chinese and Indian international students were becoming victims of assaults, and there was overall exploitation of them in the housing and employment market. There are a lot of parallels in how this story has unfolded and continues to unfold in Canada.

My third and final point has to do with why and how international students can benefit Canada and Canadians.

Rather than thinking in terms of immediate benefits by way of income to our institutions and communities or by meeting our labour market and immigration needs, I urge us to consider international students as a strong soft power resource, because the free flow of students and scholars has served and will serve Canada's interests—

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

Point of order, Madam Chair.

There's no interpretation.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michelle Rempel]

I'm sorry. We just had an issue with translation.

Please continue.

[Roopa Desai Trilokekar]

This is because, as international students return to their home country or go to a third or fourth country and take vital positions in different sectors, they will be ambassadors for the future of Canada and its interests. This soft power is important to Canada, especially given today’s geopolitical context, where the world order has shifted. Our greatest ally, the U.S., has retreated in its own global position, and we are left to form new strategic global alliances and shape a new future for Canada in the world.

Unfortunately, we have sometimes been far too busy focusing on international students as solutions to our domestic policy issues or holding them responsible for our domestic problems. Restricting student mobility and developing attitudes of suspicion and hostility towards them will severely limit and negatively impact our soft power. International students and international education are very effective forms of public diplomacy for Canada. We need to reinvest in them now more than ever.

To conclude, number one, I urge us not to rush—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michelle Rempel]

Finish up quickly, please. You have about five seconds.

[Roopa Desai Trilokekar]

To conclude, I urge us not to rush once again to consider international students as solutions to our immediate problems, to make the effort to research and learn from policy mistakes of other jurisdictions and think of alternative approaches, and to invest in broader soft power approaches to hosting international students.

Thank you for your time and attention.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michelle Rempel]

Colleagues, I gave our last witness a little bit more latitude because we had so many interruptions and technical difficulties, but I will try to hold our future witnesses to five-minute remarks.

Dr. Tibbits, please go ahead.

[John Tibbits, President, Conestoga College]

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

The committee's study comes at a pivotal moment for Canada's international student program. Colleges, including Conestoga, have been subject to scrutiny about the role internationals play in housing, affordability and community pressures.

I welcome the opportunity to reaffirm that Conestoga's approach has always been about service. Our mission has always been to ensure that the communities we serve have access to the skilled labour force they need to survive.

We are one of Ontario's leading polytechnical institutes and we serve about 20,000 students in Waterloo, Kitchener, Cambridge, Guelph, Brantford, Milton, Stratford and Ingersoll. This is a catchment area that comprises more than 1.2 million people. It's actually one of the economic engines of Canada and is expected to grow substantially over the next 20 years.

We specialize in applied learning, industry partnerships and applied research, with recognized strengths in advanced manufacturing, skilled trades, health sciences, engineering, business and information technology.

For decades—at least 30 years—Conestoga's growth has been aligned with federal, provincial and municipal policies encouraging immigration and skills training to address labour shortages due to changing demographics and the accelerated retirement of baby boomers due to the postpandemic period and Canada's aging population. Immigration has been, and I believe will continue to be, vital to our nation's prosperity.

Our college has always invested deeply in the communities we serve. We have expanded campuses, built partnerships with local employers and created training opportunities that directly support regional labour market needs and encourage domestic enrolment growth.

These investments generate jobs, attract businesses and deliver lasting community benefits. Today, nearly 20% of our local full-time workforce in southwest Ontario are Conestoga graduates, and more than 50% of the local adult population has accessed our continuing education and workforce development programs.

Our graduates add more than $6.2 million annually in employment income to the provincial economy, and since 2018, international students alone have added about $1.6 billion to Ontario's GDP.

We also acknowledge the challenges that communities face in accommodating newcomers. Conestoga has worked proactively to address pressures on housing and settlement supports. Our goal has always been to strengthen, not strain, the communities we serve by preparing students for success and by ensuring that employers have the talent they need.

Looking ahead, we believe this is the time to stabilize the system and to build an international student program that is sustainable, fair, globally competitive and focused on Canada's economic priorities.

As the committee advances its discussions to ensure that immigration policies enhance Canada's long-term competitiveness, we would be pleased to offer input if requested.

Honourable members, thank you for your time today and for the work you do on behalf of Canadians. Conestoga and our colleagues across the college and university sector are ready to collaborate with all levels of government to strengthen the program, protect its integrity and ensure that it continues to serve learners, employers and communities across Canada.

I look forward to your questions. Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michelle Rempel]

Thank you, Dr. Tibbits.

Dr. Kristofferson, go ahead for five minutes, please.

[Rob Kristofferson, President, Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations]

Hello, and thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

OCUFA seeks a sustainably funded university system that educates the best and the brightest. This does not mean using international students as ATMs.

OCUFA has supported the decision to impose restrictions on the number of international students admitted to Canadian post-secondary institutions, but we hold that improvements can be made to ensure that the international students Canada accepts are supported to thrive.

Better coordination between the federal and provincial governments on this issue is needed. The study permit restrictions were suddenly imposed, leaving the universities and provinces to scramble. We need predictable, coordinated policy to allow for long-term planning, not reactive shifts.

Universities aggressively pursued international students, not because of a lack of domestic students but because they needed revenue. International students have not taken away seats from domestic students; they have supported the education of additional domestic students. Ontario caps the number of funded domestic students, but many universities go above these caps to educate more domestic students. International tuition revenue has effectively subsidized the education of these unfunded domestic students. In Ontario, international students pay nearly six times the domestic tuition average. This means that nearly six domestic students are needed to equal the tuition revenues of one international student.

International students enhance the vibrancy of our classrooms, support the development of valuable intercultural competencies among all students, provide this country with global talent—and yes, they do bring money. The federal government's 2019-2024 “International Education Strategy” noted that “educational expenditures by international students have a greater impact on Canada’s economy than exports of auto parts, lumber or aircraft.” The decisions made by the government on this issue will have major economic implications.

Already we are seeing the consequences of the permit restrictions. Universities are increasingly cutting or pausing programs, and large numbers of contract academic faculty are finding that their contracts are simply not being renewed. Many other staff are being laid off or are being offered voluntary retirement incentives.

This is a concern for local economies, because universities are major employers. In Oshawa, educational services are the third-largest employment category. This is larger than the auto industry. As a representative of the Canadian Automotive Museum put it recently, Oshawa is a university town. In times of economic uncertainty, universities play an important dual role as major sources of employment and as avenues for training and reskilling Canadian workers.

OCUFA encourages the government to link any potential changes to the number of permits available to the ability of institutions to properly support international students. Any increases to the number of international students should be tied to the availability of student housing and student services, with universities required to show that they can provide these supports.

The restrictions on study permits were motivated by so-called “bad actors”. These bad actors were primarily outside the university sector. They were international recruiting agents, whose compensation depends on volume rather than quality, as well as private educational providers. OCUFA shares the government's concerns about these actors.

In Ontario, OCUFA fights against private providers that do not properly support international students. We are at the forefront of opposing Navitas, which offers privatized first-year university education. Navitas students use public university facilities, but they do not always have full access to the wraparound services that universities provide.

Faculty have also resisted partnerships with private universities that target international students with non-degree programs that have little currency in the labour market. When Algoma University pursued such a partnership with the private Yorkville University, Algoma faculty led a vote of non-confidence in Algoma's president.

In summation, OCUFA calls for additional long-term predictability around study permit numbers that is built on the effective coordination of provincial and federal governments. Any upward revisions to the number of available study permits should be tied to the ability of institutions to support these students via appropriate housing, student services and program quality. Stringent quality standards will ensure that international students are properly supported and provided with high-quality education.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe]

I thank the witnesses for their remarks.

We'll start the first round of questions.

Ms. Rempel Garner, you have six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll be directing my questions to Dr. Tibbits.

Conestoga College took in 84,000 international students in four years. In 2023, they took in more than U of T, UBC and Calgary combined. This had an incredibly negative impact on the cost of housing and the availability of health care services and created a youth jobs crisis in the region, but yet Conestoga College's operating surplus went from $3 million in 2015 to $252 million in 2024.

Dr. Tibbits, in 2024 in an article in Guelph Today, you were quoted as saying that some of them—international students—live like that, 14 to a house, in slumlord housing, because they don't want to pay more than $400. You are still requesting a record number of foreign student permits. Is that correct?

[John Tibbits]

We've always worked with the federal government, provincial governments and the local communities. That's why we took in that many students.

We've been finding places for all of those students. This is a massive area. We're not just in Kitchener, Waterloo and Guelph. We're across Brantford, Milton—

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

But the cost of a one-bedroom rent in your region went up by 35%, by over $500, in a very short period of time.

Did the federal government ever ask you to tie your requests for foreign student permits to housing costs and availability in your broader region?

[John Tibbits]

No.

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

Do you think you'd be able to have juiced foreign student permits to the levels that you did if the federal government had tied the number of foreign student permits they issued to your institution to housing availability and cost?

[John Tibbits]

Well, it's more than the federal government. We were encouraged to grow in downtown Kitchener. We added 3,500 students there because we helped the city revitalize downtown. It was the same in Guelph and the same in Brantford and Milton. There was a huge demand.

I think that in Ontario in the fall of 2022, there were 323,000 job vacancies, and we were asked to try to help solve that problem.

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

Thank you.

We just heard testimony that we should be decoupling foreign student permits from jobs. Now there is a substantive youth job crisis in Canada and also in your broader region. Did the federal government ever ask you to link permit availability to job availability in the region?