Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 23rd, 2025

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre—Don Valley East, ON]

What impacts have these delays had on the applicants whose applications are in the system—for example, on their employment or study opportunities or in regard to family reunification or personal safety? How have these differed between the open work permit and permanent resident streams?

[Aileen Calverley]

All delay is huge to them. For temporary residents, sometimes some jobs take only PRs. Some of the applicants are high-flyers. They're from U.S. Ivy League schools. Some Hong Kongers are making $260,000 and paying $80,000 in taxes. They need to travel around the world for that job, but a temporary resident cannot fly around, so without PR, this kind of job is actually not possible for a Hong Konger.

When the work permit will expire within three years, that's big trouble for these people. For a lot of them, their work permit expires next year, as they applied this year. They then rely on maintained status. I think some employers need IRCC education. A lot of employers don't take maintained status. They don't understand it. They look only at your work permit. If it's expired, that's it. Some applicants may change jobs. They may move to another job. It's not possible when your work permit is valid less than six months. A lot of employers won't take that. With IRCC errors, they reject them because of LMIA. For the Hong Kong pathway, you do need LMIA, but they were rejected, with no appeal system. I think the appeal system is important. If you've not submitted form IMM 5707, which is actually not on the checklist, you're rejected, and then you have to reapply. That takes eight months.

That's why a lot of families have no status in Canada. They cannot go back to Hong Kong for political reasons, or because they're still waiting for PR. They're not supposed to leave the country. Where can they go? They have no legal status. Are they waiting for PR for another 10 years? A lot of Hong Kong—

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

You have one minute.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre—Don Valley East, ON]

Keeping in mind that resources are limited and there are many urgent cases around the world, what specific policy or operational changes would you recommend to reduce the processing time and restore confidence in this program for Hong Kongers?

[Aileen Calverley]

Because a lot of Hong Kongers are going via stream B—they have work experience, but they cannot meet, for example, the express entry score of 500—I would recommend that we lower it to match health care or STEM. Then we can fast-track, at least, a few thousand applicants, who can go via express entry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you so much, Ms. Zahid.

Thank you, Ms. Calverley.

Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe, go ahead for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank the witnesses for joining us today.

Ms. Calverley, we saw each other yesterday. I'm very happy to see you again.

In your opinion, how would transferring candidates eligible for the permanent residence pathways for Hong Kong residents to the express entry system alleviate the current problems?

[Aileen Calverley]

I'm sorry, but I couldn't hear the translation. Is it express entry? Can you repeat it? I'm sorry.

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

Is my time starting over, Madam Chair, since there was a problem with the interpretation?

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Yes, you can repeat it, please.

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

Ms. Calverley, in your opinion, how would transferring candidates eligible for the permanent residence pathways for Hong Kong residents to the express entry system alleviate the current problems?

[Aileen Calverley]

Right now I don't know what the solution is, but this is the best solution, because, as I understand it, the levelling plan will be cut down—although maybe not the economic stream. A lot of Hong Kongers can contribute very well economically. They're entrepreneurs. I understand that quite a lot of them have around 450 points. Two years ago, that could get you through EE, but now it's around 500. The points are very high right now, so I think this is a good way to fast-track some of the applicants.

Also, I think it is the new government's goal to help with our economy, so they want young professionals to contribute to the economy. I think this group of people is possibly the best way to get some economic allocation to clear the backlog.

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

You talk a lot about the economic impact, and we hear you. I would like you to tell us about the importance of Hong Kong applicants to the Canadian economy.

According to you, one option would be for the express entry point system to take into account candidates' economic contributions, such as tax payments and job stability. Is that what you're telling us?

[Aileen Calverley]

I'm not sure of the question. I'm so sorry.

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

You're telling us about the economic contribution of Hong Kongers. Do you establish a link between the economic contribution that these people could make to Canada and the number of points they could collect under the express entry point system?

[Aileen Calverley]

I think that now, for the health care category, IRCC lowered that to 470. I think we can also allow H and C applicants to go through EE with 470, for example. For STEM—that is the science, technology, engineering and mathematics group—I think their points are around 460. The government can allocate lower points for this group of professionals, so why can't it create one system to allow H and C applicants from similar categories? We can say, for H and C applicants—no matter which public policy, Ukraine or Hong Kong—that if you meet 450-460 points, you can go via EE. That is another way to clear the H and C backlog.

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

I want to go back to the mandatory provident fund. Last year, you testified before this committee during its study on pensions and the mandatory provident fund amounts that were being withheld in Hong Kong, particularly by Canadian companies.

About 20,000 people in Canada are affected by this problem and can't withdraw their money. Can you tell us about the financial impact that represents not only for those people, but also for the Canadian economy?

[Aileen Calverley]

The MPF is very important. A lot of Hong Kongers try to withdraw their money from their retirement savings but cannot, because without proof of permanent residency to the Hong Kong Monetary Authority or to our financial institutions like Manulife and Sun Life, they won't let you withdraw the money. You need to have permanent residency. We testified and talked about that. We also have Manulife executives coming here. They make it very clear that, without proof that they are moving here permanently, Hong Kongers cannot withdraw the money. It's a huge amount of money, because it's $40,000 per account, and we are talking about 40,000 to 60,000 people. We are talking about billions of Canadian dollars that can be transferred from Hong Kong to Canada, which will really help our economy.

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

Those companies, such as Manulife, are meeting the Hong Kong government's criteria, but in so doing, they are preventing those people from accessing the money that belongs to them.

Do you think those companies are involved in some form of transnational repression, even if inadvertently?

[Aileen Calverley]

Actually, I think that Canada needs to fast-track Hong Kong pathways applicants. If Canada delays, they have to wait for 10 years, and I don't think they can get the money from Hong Kong anymore. We can see the experience in the old days in the Soviet Union, such as in Poland: “You can go but not your money.” It's another type of what we call financial, transnational repression. You can leave but not your money.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Thank you, Ms. Calverley.

Thank you, Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe.

That ends our first round.

We are now going into our second round, which is a total of five minutes.

Our first questioner will be Mr. Michael Ma.

[Michael Ma, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My questions are addressed to Ms. Calverley.

When the Hong Kong pathways program was launched in the summer of 2021, Hong Kongers were made a promise by the Liberal government. Many vulnerable families used up their life savings to support their initial years in Canada, hoping this was an investment in their future.

Ms. Calverley, has the Liberal government made good on its promise to the legitimately vulnerable people in the Hong Kong pathways program?

[Aileen Calverley]

I think we are grateful for the scheme and to the Liberal government. Throughout the years, a lot of Hong Kongers came to Canada because of this scheme. We were very happy until last year. A lot of Hong Kong people in our community are very disappointed, because we were told that it was unlimited, although there were not a lot of people applying. For example, the U.K. BNO scheme got 230,000 going to the U.K. In Canada, we now have 20,000 cases stuck and another 12,000 already approved. We're talking about 32,000 cases; we're not talking about tons of people flooding Canada. Actually, it's not a lot of people. They choose Canada because they like Canada more than other countries; that's why they're here. They contribute to society as well. Hong Kong people are very entrepreneurial, and they don't rely on the system or on any benefits. They contribute, and they pay taxes.

I will reply to Michael Ma, MP, that they are very disappointed with the government right now, especially when they entered after the submission date of.... If you submitted after July 2024, the answer is that you have to wait for more than 10 years. How can they be happy with that?

[Michael Ma, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

That's great. Thank you.

Those who are in the Hong Kong pathways program—net contributors to our society, as you mentioned earlier—are paying international tuition, mortgages or rents while waiting for permanent residency.

Does your organization have any data on the consolidated economic footprint of those in Hong Kong pathways to Canada?

[Aileen Calverley]

The majority of the new immigrants through the Hong Kong pathways are young professionals between 25 and 35. We don't have an official number, but the contribution is very good. They are mainly in finance, IT, AI and the engineering industry, and they're paying high taxes. An unofficial number is that they are paying, on average, much higher taxes than the average Canadian. Their average salary, even as a temporary resident, is much higher than the average in Canada.