Immigration process needs a 'coherent strategy,' says CILA board member Rick Lamanna
Canada’s immigration system is facing a convergence of structural failures that have pushed it into what is now a crisis, says a board member of the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association (CILA).
The problem is not simply high application volumes or pandemic-era delays, says Rick Lamanna, a CILA board director and partner at Fragomen Canada. Canada is grappling with the consequences of lacking a coherent national immigration strategy, and the federal government’s policy responses are increasingly disconnected from the realities on the ground, resulting in weak public support for immigration and a poor experience for applicants.
While processing backlogs have long plagued certain immigration streams, Lamanna notes that wait times have recently exceeded 10 years in some programs. The federal government’s recent proposal, outlined in Bills C-2 and C-12, which would grant itself the authority to cancel applications unilaterally, only amplifies concerns. On December 19, IRCC cancelled the start-up visa (SUV) and self-employed persons program, hinting at a redesigned system that will launch later. “IRCC’s clients should not be penalized for the government’s own inability to manage the immigration system,” Lamanna says. “Predictability has always been the cornerstone of Canada’s immigration success. Cancelling applications or worse, programs, erodes that predictability and undermines our competitiveness.”
Cuts that undermine confidence
The federal government’s 2026–2028 immigration levels plan does little to restore confidence, CILA argues. It cuts both permanent and temporary resident levels despite growing evidence that Canada’s economy depends on strong intake and timely processing. CILA notes the plan is “disconnected from the realities on the ground” and does not advance Canada’s core immigration objectives: strengthening the economy, reuniting families, and fulfilling humanitarian commitments.
The new immigration procedures come at a time when the population of Canada has declined, driven by a drop in immigration, particularly a reduced number of arrivals of non-permanent residents. Canada’s population now stands at just under 41.6 million, a decrease of about 76,000, or 0.18 percent, over the last quarter, according to demographic estimates published in December by Statistics Canada. That follows nearly a year of virtually zero population growth, agency data shows.
According to Lamanna, the current immigration approach introduces more uncertainty into a system already struggling to meet demand. Reduced processing capacity – especially for spousal sponsorships, work permit extensions, and post-graduation work permit holders – has left applicants in precarious situations or forced some into informal work arrangements.
Processing delays: an economic competitiveness problem
Despite ongoing digital modernization initiatives, IRCC continues to face chronic delays across major streams. Lamanna highlights work-permit extensions and renewals as a key pain point. “These should be the most straightforward files IRCC processes,” he explains. “Applicants are already here, already contributing to the economy, and already vetted.”
Yet the consequences of delay are far-reaching. Employers must navigate unpredictable timelines that upend workforce planning and investment strategies. Foreign workers risk losing income, work authorization, and pathways to permanent residence. Lamanna warns that Canada’s international reputation as a destination for global talent “cannot survive persistent unpredictability.”
He stresses that immigration processing is no longer an administrative matter – it is a matter of economic competitiveness. With Canada under pressure from its trade dispute with the United States, failing to modernize immigration operations will undermine long-term economic development at a critical moment.
Permanent immigration as a demographic imperative
Lamanna’s concerns extend well beyond processing times. He emphasizes that permanent immigration “is not discretionary – it is vital to Canada’s demographic survival.” More than 80 percent of labour-force growth now comes from newcomers, and immigrants represent 29 percent of the labour force while making up just 23 percent of the population.
Yet the federal government is proposing reductions to permanent resident admissions starting in 2026. Lamanna warns these cuts may exacerbate labour shortages, strain public services, and slow economic growth as Canada’s population ages.
Rather than reducing numbers, CILA advocates expanding pathways from temporary to permanent residence, aligning short-term labour flexibility with long-term demographic needs. Without such pathways, Lamanna cautions that Canada risks “the emergence of an underground economy, where individuals without status work informally without protections or long-term options.”
Labour shortages threaten major projects
The stakes are particularly high given the significant increase in infrastructure building that the federal government is envisioning. Canada’s Major Projects Office has identified large-scale projects – from LNG Canada Phase 2 to small modular reactor development – that will require a sustained supply of engineers, tradespeople, and specialized labour over the next decade.
Lamanna notes the contradiction: “Immigration underpins nearly all labour-force growth, yet the government is reducing both permanent and temporary admissions at the exact moment we need more workers to deliver major infrastructure, energy, and housing projects.”
CILA is also sounding the alarm on region-specific challenges, such as Quebec’s restrictive policies that cap the number of low-wage temporary foreign workers at 10 percent for many employers – measures that are already hindering small and medium-sized businesses.
Strain on higher education and research
Temporary resident caps are now producing significant financial instability in universities and colleges, particularly in Ontario and Quebec. Institutions like the University of Waterloo are projecting deficits of $75 million, which will force program cuts and jeopardize Canada’s research and innovation capacity.
Lamanna points out that Canada’s leadership in artificial intelligence has long depended on the ability of universities to attract world-class researchers and students. “If Canada wants to harness AI to modernize its economy, it needs immigration policies that support – not obstruct – its academic institutions.” Although specific immigration pathways have not yet been detailed, in December, the federal government announced a $1.2 billion initiative spanning 10 years to attract over 1,000 doctors, researchers, and scientists in various fields.
Family reunification falling behind legislative intent
Family reunification is one of the pillars of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), yet practice often diverges sharply from the law’s intent. Overseas spousal sponsorships can still take 12 months or longer, despite the low refusal rate of around seven percent.
CILA argues that couples with children should be presumed genuine unless there is compelling evidence to the contrary. Lamanna also criticizes rules that prevent out-of-state spouses from applying for work permits until they receive an acknowledgment of receipt. “It makes no sense that spouses of temporary residents can get work permits more easily than spouses of permanent residents,” he says.
Cuts to the Parent and Grandparent Program (PGP) have been even more severe – nearly 15 percentage points more severe than overall PR cuts. CILA is calling for the lottery to be replaced with a merit-based system that rewards long-term residents, consistent taxpayers, and families with caregiving needs.
For protected persons, the situation is dire: dependents now wait 50 months on average for processing, delaying family reunification and undermining humanitarian commitments.
Unnecessary restrictions in Bills C-2 and C-12
CILA warns that the government’s proposed one-year asylum bar could deny vulnerable individuals the ability to make a claim, even when conditions in their home country change suddenly. Lamanna notes that this bar would apply even to individuals who visited Canada briefly or as children, making Canada’s system more restrictive than the US equivalent.
“This achieves no rational purpose,” Lamanna says, emphasizing that barring access to a full IRB hearing is neither fair nor effective in managing genuine security concerns.
Recommendations for a more coherent, predictable system
CILA proposes a suite of solutions to restore credibility and align immigration policy with Canada’s demographic and economic realities. These include:
- Prioritizing service excellence and eliminating provisions that allow IRCC to cancel applications.
- Maintaining or modestly increasing permanent resident levels.
- Expanding temporary-to-permanent pathways for already-integrated workers.
- Aligning immigration planning with major infrastructure and energy objectives.
- Improving family reunification processes and eliminating unnecessary barriers.
- Stabilizing international student admissions and protecting research capacity.
- Reforming the PGP lottery into a merit-based system.
- Applying temporary resident caps with sector-specific and regional nuance.
- Eliminating or significantly narrowing the one-year asylum bar.
Lamanna concludes that immigration remains one of Canada’s most significant strategic advantages – if the system is aligned with the country’s long-term goals. Without urgent reforms, he warns, Canada risks losing the very competitiveness and humanitarian leadership that have long defined its immigration model.
