H&C Humanitarian Ground with/or Without Failed refugee claim

[wiener]

It is purely data and history. Also pretty high consensus between the immigration lawyers and consultants I interact with. When immigration programs in the past (as recently as last year) became no longer functional the government decided to cull the program and start all over again. If IRCC was not going to do something dramatic to general H&C they would have allocated a much higher yearly quota to the program which they didn’t. Culling the whole program would be the easiest and the least legally complicated than trying to separate out groups from the existing pool. The pool is so big that even if you tried to separate out certain groups you would still likely be left with a large pool. It will also become more legally complicated for IRCC. The other big sign is the fact that there was very little movement in H&C until around December 2025 when it became clear that bill c-12 was not going to be passed in 2025. IRCC doesn’t always work logically but I see no other way but to start from scratch. Processing times of decades when H&C doesn’t stop removals doesn’t help applicants. We are seeing more people who have applied for H&C being removed. Trying to remain in Canada without status until an H&C case is processed decades from now also not a good option for most people. IRCC also has to make a drastic change to stop adding to the backlog.

There is no evidence whatsoever that there will be a mass cancellation of H&C applications. Recent amendments to Bill C-12 restrict cancellation powers to exceptional cases (like fraud or public safety) and require oversight and transparency, so cancellations are very unlikely with the amended Bill C-12. The easiest fix for H and C would be to remove weak ground cases from the backlog, such as parent/grandparents/sibling cases. These represent a big chunk of the backlog. Also, removing cases not involving BIOC.

 

[canuck78]

There is no evidence whatsoever that there will be a mass cancellation of H&C applications. Recent amendments to Bill C-12 restrict cancellation powers to exceptional cases (like fraud or public safety) and require oversight and transparency, so cancellations are very unlikely with the amended Bill C-12. The easiest fix for H and C would be to remove weak ground cases from the backlog, such as parent/grandparents/sibling cases. These represent a big chunk of the backlog. Also, removing cases not involving BIOC.

Many cases including parent/grandparent involvement BIOC. Excluding anything but BIOC would be a legal nightmare for IRCC and would still leave a large number of applicants. Many who work in immigration also see no other way to deal with general H&C but to start from scratch. We’ll all have to wait and see.

Added after posting: many who have applied for H&C no longer have status or will lose status soon so will all be targets for removal. That is not a great option for those who have applied for H&C.

 

[canuck78]

Even if I have always been critical of IRCC's policies, I admit that the importance they give to Francophonie is positive, even if as a Francophone, I am unfortunately not eligible for their programs...
The federal should correct the mistakes of the past and reaffirm the country's Francophone identity which is not limited only to Quebec but should be seen above all as a Canadian identity as a whole, since it exists across the country and played an important role in the foundation of Canada. Francophonie is an immense universal richness that must be valued !

Believe more newcomers should learn French and especially school aged children. Canada doesn’t benefit if the score needed to get PR as a francophone is incredibly low while a masters student, NOC in demand in Canada, etc. struggle to get PR. If all the Francophones had the higher education/skilled training, skills in demand in Canada, etc. then that wouldn’t be an issue. The last cut-off for francophone draw was in the 300s while CEC has been in the 500 for a long time yet we added more francophone spots. That isn’t actually beneficial to Canada.

 

[sting 000]

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[Dany Alchavo]

 

[Dany Alchavo]

Believe more newcomers should learn French and especially school aged children. Canada doesn’t benefit if the score needed to get PR as a francophone is incredibly low while a masters student, NOC in demand in Canada, etc. struggle to get PR. If all the Francophones had the higher education/skilled training, skills in demand in Canada, etc. then that wouldn’t be an issue. The last cut-off for francophone draw was in the 300s while CEC has been in the 500 for a long time yet we added more francophone spots. That isn’t actually beneficial to Canada.

What do you think about having several passport?