Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 23rd, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number nine of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.

We have two panels of witnesses today. For the last 15 minutes of our second hour, we're going in camera so we can discuss committee business.

I have a few general comments off the top.

Today's meeting is taking place in hybrid format, so we have someone joining us by video conference. 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 participating by video conference or Zoom, at the bottom of your screen you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation. You can choose “floor”, “English” or “French”. Of course, for those in the room—and these remarks are specific to the witnesses—you can use the earpiece if you need to listen to either French or English.

I have two cards, which I will whip out of my knapsack when one of you guys starts speaking. If I hold up a yellow card, it means you have one minute left. Red means your time is up and your mic goes off.

Always kindly wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. Please do not speak over each other. It will be very hard for our translators to translate, and it makes their job very difficult. Of course, please ensure that all comments are addressed through the chair.

Members, as you know, raise your hand if you wish to speak. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can.

I thank you very much in advance for your co-operation.

I want to give a warm welcome to Mr. Fergus, who is here in place of Ms. Sodhi.

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

It is with great pleasure that I announce our witnesses for the first hour of today's meeting. As an individual, we have Mario Bellissimo, lawyer and certified specialist, Bellissimo Law Group Professional Corporation.

I think you are someone who is well known to this committee, sir. I welcome you.

From Hong Kong Watch, we have Aileen Calverley, co-founder and chair. From Stats Canada, we have Laurent Martel, director, centre for demography, and Ron Gravel, director general, who is with us via video conference.

It's nice to welcome you all as well.

Each of you—Mario, Hong Kong Watch and Stats Canada—will have up to five minutes for opening remarks, after which we will proceed with rounds of questions.

I'm going to ask Mr. Bellissimo to start us off for five minutes.

[Mario Bellissimo, Lawyer, Certified Specialist, Bellissimo Law Group Professional Corporation, As an Individual]

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

Canada's immigration system stands at an inflection point. It faces many challenges. Those specific to my comments today include over two million applications pending, processing times extending into decades, and the absence of timely communication. The lack of redress for minor issues and years of digital stampedes have created cascading effects, duplicating declining transparency and mounting pressure on tribunals, courts and Parliament itself. These problems point to a widening gap between policy ambition and administrative capacity and delivery.

IRCC has made real progress through digital transformation and client service reforms that reflect genuine commitment. The issue, however, is not commitment or dedication, but architecture and delivery.

This study arrives at a pivotal moment. Our brief, which will be before the members once translated, hopefully, draws upon the CBA's 2025 report, “Law, Technology, and Accountability: Reimagining Canadian Immigration for the 21st Century”, and its recommendations to strengthen governance, fairness and transparency, a must-read for those committed to co-creating a new way forward. I encourage the committee to hear directly from the CBA.

Our brief builds on that foundation, as well as others: COSTI, C.D. Howe, TMU and Broadbent.

We've put forward 10 fiscally realistic recommendations to make immigration delivery more transparent, predictable and accountable. At the heart of our proposal are two imperatives that are often seen as competing but are in fact complementary: facilitation and enforcement.

Facilitation will demand a new ethos of communication, transparency and timely delivery at IRCC. Enforcement must be firm but proportionate and focused on integrity, not control.

Bill C-2, the strong borders act, illustrates the risk of overcorrection. It consolidates broad executive powers without adequate parliamentary oversight and clear procedural safeguards. It does risk deepening the very instability it seeks to correct, with serious consequences, including constitutional vulnerabilities.

We call for more parliamentary oversight, widespread consultation and collaboration, and a statutory immigration ombudsperson so applicants can seek redress without turning to the Federal Court simply to learn at what stage their application is.

We also urge binding service standards through the Service Fees Act and a universal expression-of-interest model to transparently align application intake with delivery, ending the cycle of runaway inventories, security check delays and siloed decision-making. For example, families in need of care for elderly loved ones should not wait years for the support to live with dignity.

We cannot allow false narratives around immigration to take hold. We must better communicate the essential role that immigrants play, at every level of our society, in pushing back against division, hate and otherness.

Parliament should link levels to indicators in housing, health care and labour, while ensuring the vitality of francophone communities across Canada, preserving both growth and cohesion.

Also, we make suggestions toward an enhanced refugee system that will protect humanitarian commitments while reinforcing timely border integrity. As technology reshapes immigration decision-making, we need stronger legislative AI and automation oversight and digital equity. As well, statutory recognition of counsel to safeguard fairness and due process in the immigration world is essential.

These measures reflect global best practices and would free resources through smarter upstream reform. They do not require major new spending, just enhanced coordination, accountability and openness across departments and across ministries, tribunals and courts.

Before closing, I want to acknowledge the dedication of many government officials, settlement agencies and legal professionals who continue to deliver under immense pressure. Their commitment is not in question, but they need a stronger framework, one consequential to all current and future Canadians.

Thank you. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you so much, Mr. Bellissimo. That's excellent timing.

Next we will hear from Ms. Calverley, from Hong Kong Watch.

[Aileen Calverley, Co-Founder and Chair, Hong Kong Watch]

Chair and honourable members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to testify today.

The Hong Kong pathway is a special and temporary public policy launched in 2021 in response to Hong Kong's national security law. This policy was designed to provide a lifeline for Hong Kongers seeking freedom and safety. Alongside the U.K.'s BNO visa, it represents a remarkable collaboration between Canada and the U.K., two countries united by shared democratic values and compassion for those seeking refuge.

However, the Hong Kong pathway was placed under the humanitarian and compassionate category, the H and C, along with several other special public policies. This immigration structure is unsustainable. All public policies, whether for Hong Kong, Afghanistan, Ukraine or Sudan, should have their own dedicated admission quotas, rather than being restricted by the limited H and C quotas. The H and C admission target for 2025 is only 10,000.

As of this year, more than 20,000 Hong Kong pathway applications remain in the backlog, and fewer than 2,000 PR approvals have been issued in 2025. According to IRCC's website, those who applied after July 2024 now face estimated wait times of more than 10 years. That's a sharp contrast to the 6.5 months back in February 2024, when priority processing was still in place.

The backlog of PR approvals has created uncertainty and stress for those whose work permits have expired. I spoke to a mother in Markham whose work permit has been pending for more than eight months, leaving her 10-year-old son unable to attend school. I have seen families in tears in my community centre after their open work permits were wrongly rejected. One applicant, who was expecting a baby, even lost her job and her health care coverage because of a missing form, IMM 5707, a document that was not listed on the checklist.

These are not isolated cases. They show the human cost of slow, inconsistent processing and the heavy psychological toll placed on those waiting in limbo.

There is also a significant economic impact. Without PR, Hong Kongers cannot transfer their MPF retirement savings from Hong Kong to Canada. I testified in the committee last year about this. With an average balance of around $45,000 per account, billions of dollars are trapped in Hong Kong right now, funds that could help families settle and could be reinvested in the Canadian economy to create businesses and also to create jobs.

Moreover, Hong Kong–trained doctors cannot practise in Canada without PR status, yet, without Canadian work experience, they cannot qualify through the economic stream of the express entry, even as Canada faces a national shortage of doctors.

The Hong Kong pathway was established as a lifeboat for those seeking freedom, and Canada must ensure this lifeboat reaches shore and fulfills its promise.

Here are my recommendations:

Ensure that all remaining H and C quotas for the Hong Kong pathway are used this year, and allocate additional slots to clear the backlog.

Allocate economic-class quotas to qualified H and C applicants, and lower the points threshold, similar to professions such as health care and STEM, to fast-track their applications.

Grant AIP, approval in principle, status earlier in the process, allowing applicants immediate access to work, health care and education. This would stabilize families, support employers and prevent loss of status due to administrative delays. In addition, fix the system errors that have led to wrongful rejections, and establish an appeal system.

Finally, allocating a 20,000 admission target to the Hong Kong pathway would be a win–win solution, upholding Canadians' humanitarian values, unlocking billions in private savings to boost our economy, and reaffirming Canada's commitment to the Hong Kong community, which has contributed immensely to our country for the last four decades.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you. That literally took you to exactly five minutes, so thank you very much.

Mr. Martel, will it be you, or will it be Mr. Gravel speaking?

[Laurent Martel, Director, Centre for Demography, Statistics Canada]

It's going to be my colleague, Ron Gravel.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Mr. Gravel, we cannot hear you. Perhaps you can unmute yourself or turn up the volume. You will have to disconnect and reconnect.

It might have to be you, Mr. Martel.

[Laurent Martel]

My colleague Mr. Gravel just sent me a message to tell me that it was the technician who muted him.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Mr. Martel, are you able to give the remarks?

[Laurent Martel]

I am currently looking for the speech. I will call my colleague, Ron Gravel, to send it to me. I should be able to find it somewhere. Let me finalize this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Mr. Gravel, you've unplugged and replugged. Yes. It's like a computer, you know.

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

I'm just wondering if we could proceed to questions.

[Laurent Martel]

I can probably deliver the remarks in five minutes, if needed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

We have Mr. Gravel, so let's get going, please.

Mr. Gravel, if you're able to do it in less than five minutes, we'd be grateful.

[Ron Gravel, Director General, Statistics Canada]

Thank you very much for this invitation to contribute to your work on immigration and citizenship.

As the national statistical agency, Statistics Canada is mandated to collect and publish objective and independent data and analyses on a wide range of economic, social and population topics, including permanent and temporary immigration to Canada.

The immigration data used and disseminated by our agency comes from a number of sources, such as the population census conducted every five years, administrative data from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, or IRCC, which is an important partner, as well as social and economic survey data. We also establish linkages between some of those data sources.

Every five years, the population census provides an instant and detailed picture of Canada's immigrant population, including at fine geographic levels. For example, the 2021 census showed that 23% of people living in Canada were born outside Canada, and that number rose to 47% in the Toronto census metropolitan area. The census also helps describe the characteristics of the immigrant population, including socio-economic, family and linguistic characteristics.

Between censuses, we publish quarterly demographic estimates that enable us to track changes in the size of the Canadian population, including the population of permanent immigrants and non-permanent residents. In response to legal obligations, IRCC also uses this data to track the achievement of the targets set out in the annual immigration plan.

The most recent demographic estimates show that after two years of record population growth in 2023 and 2024—approximately 3% annually—this growth has slowed over the past 12 months, primarily driven by a decline of 100,000 people in the number of non-permanent residents.

It's important to know that the non-permanent resident population calculated by Statistics Canada differs from that of temporary residents and refugee claimants recorded by IRCC, with the two organizations having different objectives. For us, the objective is statistical and consists in properly measuring the size and characteristics of the Canadian population, whereas IRCC is responsible for administering various immigration programs.

The longitudinal immigration database is another important source of data to better understand immigrants' economic outcomes, such as their pathway to labour market integration or their income. This is a linkage between IRCC administrative data and tax data from the Canada Revenue Agency.

Our agency's surveys also collect other information that is not usually available in the census or in administrative data. That includes information on health, victimization and social cohesion.

Finally, Statistics Canada produces and disseminates population projections that are used as a planning tool by a number of federal departments. IRCC, in particular, uses these projections in planning future immigration levels, including francophone immigration, as part of the objectives of the modernized version of the Official Languages Act.

I will conclude by saying that we pay close attention to the quality of statistical information, which includes, of course, immigration data and analyses. While our agency is not responsible for the immigration system or migration policies, it works collaboratively with key partners to continuously improve its statistical programs. Therefore, Statistics Canada has acquired entry and exit data from the Canada Border Services Agency in recent months. That data is currently being evaluated to help us understand how it could enable us to further improve the measurement of Canada's non-permanent resident and immigrant populations.

Thank you for your attention. We remain at your disposal. My colleague Laurent Martel will be pleased to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Mr. Gravel.

You were one minute short, so I appreciate that.

With that, I will say thanks to all of you for your remarks.

We're now going to begin with the first round of questions, which will be a total of six minutes.

We'll start with Ms. Rempel Garner, please.

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

Thank you, Chair. I'll direct my questions to Statistics Canada.

The broad topic for legislators is trying to understand the data the government is using to set immigration levels, which I now understand will be embedded within the federal budget this year.

This is for either rep from StatsCan. Does your agency track how many temporary residents—I suppose you use the term “non-permanent residents”—access health care on an annual basis?

[Laurent Martel]

Thank you for the question.

First of all, Statistics Canada releases population estimates on a very regular basis—that is to say quarterly—which are used by various departments, including IRCC, to meet various needs. That's how we work. We provide that information to the Canadian public and to the departments, and it is the responsibility of the departments to use it—

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

Mr. Martel, I'm so sorry to interrupt you. I have only a very few minutes, so I'll keep my questions concise, and I'd appreciate it if you could answer that way.

Do you track how many non-permanent residents access health care in Canada on an annual basis?

[Laurent Martel]

We have various statistics on health. I know, for example, that we've shared information on hospitalization rates for different categories of the population in the past. At Statistics Canada, there is no data currently available on health care costs for non-permanent residents.

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

Okay.

Again, Mr. Martel, do you track how many non-permanent residents access health care? That's just in numbers.

[Laurent Martel]

No, I don't.

I don't have those figures.

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

Thank you. It took me two minutes to get there.

Does your agency track how many births occur to non-permanent residents on an annual basis?

[Laurent Martel]

Deaths of non-permanent residents are included in the population estimates.

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

I'm sorry. The translation didn't come through.

Can we pause?