3 New Canada Immigration Policies & Their Hidden Loopholes | IRCC New Update

Recent adjustments have resulted in major changes to the environment as Canada continues to refine its immigration policy to accommodate changing requirements and difficulties. But even with these improvements, some of the new regulations still have significant flaws that might affect applicants and the system’s overall efficacy.

We will examine the promised benefits of three new Canadian immigration policies as well as the significant gaps that still exist in this post. To successfully navigate the Canadian immigration system, prospective immigrants and stakeholders must be aware of these loopholes.

Introduction

Several adjustments to immigration policy have been announced by the Canadian government to address systemic abuse of the country’s immigration system since August 26 and reduce the number of temporary residents that are becoming more and more numerous.

These policies, which Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spearheaded, have drawn criticism, though, for what is seen as their flaws and ill-thought-out approach that only partially addresses the problem. In particular, these criticisms suggest possible political agendas, especially as Canada approaches the federal election in 2025.

The way the administration is going about things makes one wonder if these measures are intended to reform or if they are just a way to placate people’s worries without actually making any significant changes. Announced between August 26 and 28, new immigration reforms will simply add to the complexity of the elephant in the room story.

These actions don’t seem to have been carefully considered; rather, they appear to have been planned solely in response to Canadians’ expectation that liberals would say something significant about immigration.

In this post, we discuss the practical implications and criticism of the three new immigration policies that the Canadian government has revealed in the previous three to four days. While many have expressed interest in the policies, their impact has only been marginal.

1. Freeze on Low-Wage LMIAs

The suspension of Labor Market Impact Assessments (LMIA) for low-wage streams in census metropolitan regions with unemployment rates below 6% is one of the most notable developments that was announced on August 26. The government has presented this action as a significant step in lowering the quantity of low-wage temporary foreign workers in Canada as well as systemic abuse.

But closer inspection indicates that this strategy might be more of a band-aid fix than a sincere attempt to solve the problem. Even though these industries—primary agriculture, food processing, seafood processing, construction, and healthcare—are crucial to the Canadian economy, the policy contains several noteworthy exclusions that let companies and sectors continue applying for low-wage LMIAs.

The policy’s efficacy is compromised by the wide exemptions, which permit the processing of numerous LMIA applications as usual. This lessens the intended effect of the freeze in an efficient manner. Furthermore, the policy does not deal with the fundamental problem of LMIA abuse. Many firms have been abusing the LMIA system for years by posting job openings only as a formality and having no real intention of hiring locals.

It appears that the government is not entirely dedicated to stopping these practices given the lack of actions to examine previously issued LMIAs or apply harsher fines to firms who take advantage of the system. Employers who have already applied, advertised, or received approval solely under the low-wage stream should have had their applications temporarily frozen by the government since such employers know the system

Further Details

One of the harshest penalties for someone detected abusing the system should be the size of the penalty and the closure of such firms. This proposal may have the unintended consequence of driving up the price of LMIAs on the illicit market.

Unscrupulous firms exempt under this new regulation may take advantage of the situation by charging greater costs to temporary foreign workers who are desperate to get employment in Canada, as the demand for valid LMIAs surges owing to the moratorium. Thus, the cycle of exploitation is maintained and the very objectives of the policy are compromised.

2. New Work Permit Extension Policy

A temporary policy was covertly adopted by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to allow qualifying foreign nationals to obtain open work permits. This regulation applies to those who have been placed in an Expression of Interest pool by a Provincial Nominee Program and who have a job offer, a valid work permit, or a work permit that expires on May 7, 2024.

This legislation seems to be a good move at first, helping foreign nationals who are already in Canada and boosting the country’s economy. But the legislation also opens doors for abuse, especially as there are no regulations around job offers, making it easy for unscrupulous firms and foreign nationals trying to maintain their immigration status to take advantage of.

The problem is that LMIA is not even required. This form opens a door for dishonest businesses to take advantage of, enabling them to offer jobs to foreign workers directly without going through the official LMIA procedure. This exposes vulnerable workers to exploitation in addition to undermining the integrity of the immigration system.

The use of provincial nominee programs adds even more complexity to the situation. A job offer is often a prerequisite for participation in PNPs, and now that a new policy has been implemented, there’s a chance that businesses would use backdoor tactics to obtain these offers.

There are concerns over the government’s transparency and motivations for this action given that it was decided to quietly execute this policy on August 11, 2024, without making a public statement until later on August 27, following a pronouncement against immigration.

It implies a tactic of shutting one door while opening another, maybe to curry favor with influential employer associations without genuinely tackling the problems at hand. The government ought to make it mandatory for employment offers to be supported by an LMIA that is not in a low-wage stream.

3. Ending the Visitor-to-Work Permit Policy

The interim governmental policy that let foreign visitors to Canada submit applications for work permits from within the nation was terminated, marking the third significant change in recent weeks. This regulation was first implemented amid the COVID-19 pandemic as a practical solution to the difficulties firms were having finding temporary employees from outside of Canada.

During a crucial time, it offered a pool of workers who were already in the nation, helping to meet labor shortages. Nevertheless, the policy’s basic objective was repeatedly exceeded by extensions. Due to the policy’s protracted prolongation, a large number of tourists entered Canada believing they could quickly change their status to a work visa.

The government’s decision to terminate the policy on August 28, 2024, is widely seen as being long overdue. For example, travelers can still apply for a work visa and obtain an LMIA through a procedure called flag pole, which involves traveling to the US-Canada border to modify their status. This workaround essentially renders the policy null and void, since tourists can still get work permits inside Canada.

The government’s inaction on this matter is indicative of a larger pattern of chances lost and compromises made in its immigration policy. Even though some may now believe that they should not apply for a visiting visa, many still recommend doing so. To make this more successful, the government ought to have discontinued the flag poll for this reason, just as they did with work permits for graduates.

Conclusion

The most recent adjustments to Canadian immigration law expose a government more concerned with political posturing and optics than with carrying out substantive and practical improvements. These policies’ flaws imply that their purpose is to appear as though they are taking action rather than producing results.

Politicians in Canada need to confront the fundamental problems with the immigration system rather than just banding around band-aid fixes as the country gets closer to its 2025 federal election. Important steps in this direction include tightening the enforcement of laws, plugging vulnerabilities that permit exploitation, and putting in place accountable and transparent policies.

In the absence of these reforms, the Canadian government runs the risk of further undermining public confidence in the immigration system and falling short of meeting the demands of the labor market in Canada as well as the foreign nationals who fuel the nation’s economy. Now is the moment for real, workable, and efficient immigration reform.