Jason HafsoAt a time when Canada can ill afford policy missteps, Ottawa has managed to stumble into one of its own making. The move from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to reduce international student numbers over the past two years now seems less like a calibrated reform and more like a case study in poor planning and putting optics over substance.
Canada’s auditor general recently released a report that outlines how the federal government’s attempt to restore balance to the rapidly expanding international student program failed to achieve its goals. Not only that, it also brought serious harm to post-secondary institutions and communities, and revealed deep structural weaknesses in policymaking at the highest levels of government.
The report assessed the main goals of the federal immigration agency as it implemented policy changes over the past two years. This includes efforts at controlling program growth, strengthening integrity controls, and protecting and diversifying the student population. Giving any kind of passing grade to this would be difficult for anyone.
On the first goal of controlling growth, approved applications for new international student study permits saw drastic reductions. In 2024 there was a 67 per cent reduction in study permits, and 2025 saw fewer than 20 per cent of forecasted permit approvals granted by September. This trend shows that the intention to control growth and stabilize the international student population has instead led to new student numbers falling off a cliff, likely driven by reduced interest from potential applicants and confusing administrative changes. This has produced widespread and well-documented negative impacts on colleges and universities across the country, as institutions that have traditionally relied on international tuition to fund programs and services face a drastic decrease in revenue.
As to strengthening integrity controls in response to concerns over fraud and abuse, the auditor general’s report found that a new letter-of-acceptance verification system enacted by IRCC did not play a significant role in rooting out fraudulent documents — 94 per cent of submitted acceptance letters were genuine. It’s impossible to know whether the system is flawed or doing a good job. But, it definitely feels more likely that the system has overlooked too many fraudulent documents. In a sample of cases examined by the auditor general’s office, processing officers did not follow standard procedure in addressing actual potential fraud in 27 per cent of applications, and significant issues associated with permit extensions for students already in Canada remain unaddressed.
The report also found that there were no clear goals or indicators established to achieve the goal of diversifying the student population through policy changes. The immigration department also did not assess impacts of other program reforms on permit approval and refusal rates, nor did it know whether these program reforms impacted the diversity of the student population or equitable access to the program.
Taken together, the auditor general’s report paints a damning picture of poor policy planning and co-ordination, limited follow-through, and a lack of data-driven decision-making. The well-documented consequences of these failures have spread far and wide. International students’ tuition is often several times more than that of domestic students, and a significant loss of revenue from this source has led to cutbacks across several areas of post-secondary institutions. Colleges across the country have reduced administrative positions and restricted course offerings. Important services such as access to academic advisers have been pulled back. This worsening of the student experience affects all post-secondary students. As more domestic students apply to and enter post-secondary, ensuring adequate funding to support student needs is more important than ever.
None of this is to say reform of the international student program is unnecessary. The federal government was responding to real pressures brought on by dramatic increases in international students and other temporary residents. However, effective reforms must be evidence-based, carefully considered, and effectively implemented. On all these counts, Ottawa fell far short.
Unfortunately, this outcome was predictable from the beginning. An international student policy needs to be fit-for-purpose to maintain and strengthen the post-secondary system. Instead, it was lumped into the broader goal of hitting blunt population targets for temporary residents. This came at a time when public sentiment was quickly souring on immigration. Post-secondary education is essential to Canada’s future prosperity, and international students are a vital part of that. Weakening that system undermines not only today’s students, but also the country’s long-term competitiveness and vitality. Staying the course risks turning a failed policy into a national setback.
