CIMM Committee Report

House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration

(CIMM)

Study on International Student Program and Study Permits

Dissenting Opinion of Canada’s Official Opposition

Conservative Party of Canada

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner, PC, MP Calgary Nose Hill

Brad Redekopp, MP Saskatoon West

Costas Menegakis, MP Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill

Fred Davies, MP Niagara South

Vincent Ho, MP Richmond Hill South

Introduction

Canada’s immigration system must work for Canadians. The international student program stands as a headstone on the grave of Canada’s immigration consensus, and the mistakes must never be repeated. Mass fraud, provincial buck-passing, and wage-suppressing big corporate interests conspired to create a vacuum of responsibility that destroyed opportunity for Canadians while enriching those in positions of power.

The Committee studied this, in full knowledge that the damage had already been inflicted, in order to present the facts to the Canadian public so as to provide some measure of accountability. What we found was that the rot ran deep, and that when questioned, the key players and decision-makers in this scandal had no satisfactory response. In fact, they had operated in naked self-interest with a mix of willful blindness and the knowledge that their actions were morally wrong to Canadians and the students coming from abroad. Making matters worse, Canadians were betrayed by their government and left to suffer the consequences.

We hope that this report and its recommendations will serve as a signpost to policymakers and concerned citizens, so that these mistakes are never repeated, and we can bring prosperity and stability back to Canada.

1. Tying international students to housing availability, healthcare capacity, and employment.

The Committee repeatedly questioned officials from the Department of Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada on whether they had provided advice to the Minister of Immigration on several important areas. Officials were asked if they advised with regard to the impact of international student permit approvals on housing, healthcare, or jobs in the affected regions. The Committee did not receive clear answers to these questions.

In that same vein, the Committee heard that educational institutions were not consulted by the Government of Canada on whether the local economy could sustain more intake of study permits, taking into account these three pillars: housing, healthcare, and jobs. The Committee posed this question to Seneca College President David Agnew and Conestoga College President John Tibbits. Agnew and Tibbits both clearly confirmed that the government conducted no such consultation. Agnew and Tibbits were also asked, and refused to answer clearly, whether institutions, while collecting record profits from international students and issuing massive executive compensation packages, bear any financial liability when applicants do not receive adequate services. Moreover, in cases where applicants overstay their visas with asylum applications, and continue adding unsustainable pressure to those same areas.                       

Based on testimony, the Government of Canada appeared to allow Institutions to ignore necessary steps and provide adequate availability of these essential services to international students. The Committee questioned Conestoga College President Tibbits, following reports that the institution enjoyed record profits from international student tuition, while students line up at food banks and exacerbate the local housing crisis. Seneca College President Agnew was also questioned whether his institution bears any responsibility for these issues. The Committee did not receive a clear answer. Tibbits went on to confirm that the Government even encouraged his institution to continue to grow its international student population, despite widespread knowledge of the overwhelming intake at Conestoga College. Jérôme Carette, the Director of Education Services at the Centre de Services Scolaire du Lac-Saint-Jean provided testimony showing that smaller regions, when they take the time to control and aid their international students, can offer adequate support to those attending the institutions in their regions.

Recommendation 1: That the Government of Canada, in conjunction with education institutions, establish a comprehensive plan to tie approval of international student permits with housing availability, healthcare capacity, and jobs in the target region.       

Recommendation 2: That the Government of Canada establish a framework of financial liability for educational institutions, tied to asylum claims and visa overstays made by international students.

When the Committee discussed reports that in 2022 federal public servants tried to warn the immigration department about the looming housing crisis, witnesses such as Alex Usher from Higher Education Strategy Associates confirmed that they also published works alluding to the same crisis in 2023. Andre Cote from The Dais at Toronto Metropolitan University stated that he saw no evidence that the Government had initiated talks with institutions to address housing at that time, despite the jaw-dropping influx of international students.

2. Tracking study permit applicants

IRCC officials were asked on asylum inflows, stemming from applications into Canada originally from study permit applicants, and whether they tracked these. Officials were also asked if they tracked non-compliant applicants and removal orders issued to study permit holders, or if they even knew where they were in Canada. Lastly, IRCC representatives were asked how many of these study permits were withdrawn due to criminal activity and whether these cases were tracked. Committee members struggled to collect clear answers on these questions.

Recommendation 3: That the Government of Canada conduct regular and precise tracking, disclosure to Parliament of international student permit applicants that:

• Apply for asylum
• Are deemed non-compliant
• Are issued removal orders
• Have their permits withdrawn due to criminal activity

Seneca College President David Agnew testified in Committee that, regarding the inflow of asylum claims originating from study permits, conversations with the federal government did not begin until the issue became relevant in the media.

3. Strengthening language proficiency requirements

The Committee heard testimony that language proficiency is a major problem within Canadian post-secondary institutions and the International Students Program.The need for strong language proficiency in either English or French is crucial to ensuring a fair learning environment to all those participating in Canadian post-secondary schooling. Alex Usher, President of the Higher Education Strategy Association, outlined that business programs are popular due to the fact that they “require the lowest levels of language skills”.

Recommendation 4: That the Government of Canada enforce language proficiency requirements in order to admit international student applicants that have the greatest potential to succeed and contribute to Canadian society.

4. Review and track applicants from countries with high non-compliance, or make fraudulent asylum claims

The Committee received testimony that some countries have high rates of international students who overstay their permit, submit asylum claims or whose permits are withdrawn, compared to others. Addressing these patterns and ensuring study permits are issued responsibility is critical to maintaining public confidence in the immigration system and protecting the credibility of Canada’s post-secondary institutions. Aiesha Zafar, the assistant Deputy Minister of Migration and Integrity at the IRCC confirmed that fraud and non-compliance has been identified disproportionately from specific source countries.

Furthermore, the IRCC provided data showing that the top nationalities among foreign students who later claimed asylum in 2024 and early 2025 included India, Nigeria, Guinea, Ghana, Iran, the Republic of Ivory Coast, Rwanda, Bangladesh, the People's Republic of China and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Recommendation 5: That the Government of Canada more clearly review and track study permit applications by country of origin that apply for asylum, and ensure that legitimate claims are prioritized, while fraudulent claims are not.

5. Tracking Non-Compliance

The committee heard extensive testimony that indicates a clear issue of foreign students entering Canada on study permits but failing to attend their designated learning institution, making them non-compliant. Aiesha Zafar,  the assistant deputy minister of Migration Integrity at the IRCC, stated that “8% of the students we asked for compliance information from were potentially non-compliant”. She then further explained that after IRCC inquired about those 8% of students the DLI, reported back that they don't have information on these individuals. This testimony demonstrates a significant gap in the current compliance framework, as designated learning institutions were unable to confirm the status of students they are responsible for monitoring. By mandating regular reporting from designated learning institutions and suspending institutions that do not comply from accepting new international students, the federal government will be able to uphold the integrity of the study permit system.

Recommendation 6: That the Government of Canada take steps to enforce existing regimes of reporting from educational institutions, to ensure the most accurate data is collected on compliance of study permit holders.

6. Immigration Consultants

The Committee questioned whether immigration consultants, or Regulated International Student Immigration Advisers (RISIA), were partly responsible for the massive influx of international students in Canada, but did not receive precise answers.

Larissa Bezo, the President and Chief Executive Officer for the Canadian Bureau for International Education, testified to the Committee about the significant responsibility and authority entrusted to RISIA consultants. Ms. Bezo outlined that RISIA’s roles and duties are to: “support students as it relates to immigration, advise within the framework of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, ensure that institutions are meeting quality assurance commitments and manage integrity challenges with respect to study permit applications.”

Based on this and other testimony, the Committee looked to clarify whether education institutions are then attempting to enroll as many applicants as possible, noting the fee that organizations such as CBIE receive with each new applicant who is trained. No clarification on these points was provided.

Recommendation 7: That the Government of Canada establish a framework in which immigration consultants report to lawyers to address the widespread fraud affecting international students.

7. Response to Main Report tabled by the Standing Committee

Regarding the recommendations in the main report, Conservative members disagree with Recommendation 7. The Government of Canada has shown that when study permits are expedited, fraudulent activity in applications is not addressed.  A scathing review by the Auditor General, released on March 23, 2026 confirmed what Conservatives have said all along, that there is widespread fraud and dangerous gaps in the Liberals' oversight of foreign student work permits. That report outlined 153,000 suspected cases of fraud in 2023-24 alone, with only just over 4,000 actually investigated. During testimony at the Standing Committee on March 23, 2026, the Minister of Immigration further confirmed that IRCC allocated funding to investigate 2,000 cases per year.

Conclusion

Canada was a leader around the globe, building a reputation for having one of the best immigration systems in the world. It was fair in the process, balanced in its approach, and offered a robust economic outlook to receive newcomers, including students from abroad, so that they may be set up for success. Unfortunately, the Canadian consensus on immigration has been severely eroded by 10 years of Liberal policies that have broken Canada’s immigration system. Polling in Canada has demonstrated this.

The Liberal government must do better. Canadians deserve better.