Last Updated On 21 October 2025, 10:43 AM EDT (Toronto Time)
In 2025, Canada’s immigration system is facing one of its most serious credibility crossroads in years.
Legal experts and applicants alike fear that Ottawa may be preparing to cancel large numbers of pending immigration applications amid growing delays and rising frustration.
Renowned Immigration lawyer Steven Meurrens has warned that the federal government appears to be setting the stage for mass cancellations through Bill C-12.
Bill C-12 is a new border security proposal that would grant Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) expanded powers.
“I think it is becoming increasingly likely,” Meurrens said, adding that the department’s silence may be deliberate.
“Part of why they may be being quiet about it is because the solution involves Bill C-12, and they know the panic and reaction that will cause.”
For tens of thousands of people who have been waiting years, the notion of another legislative reset feels chillingly familiar.
And for critics, it confirms what months of data already show: IRCC is losing control of its processing system while quietly equipping itself with new authority to erase its own backlog.
Table of Contents
From Growing Backlogs To Growing Fears
Processing times across almost every major stream have worsened dramatically since May 2024, when IRCC’s own data suggested a temporary improvement.
By October 2025, that trend had reversed, with the department acknowledging double-digit increases in several categories.
The deterioration is not uniform; it is systemic.
Applications for citizenship that once averaged eight months now take thirteen, and family sponsorships that were already long have nearly doubled.
Even supposedly “fast-track” economic programs such as the Atlantic Immigration Program have ballooned from six months to thirty-seven.
Meanwhile, temporary residents—workers, students, and visitors—are caught in cascading delays.
A work-permit renewal inside Canada that required about three months in 2024 now averages more than seven months. Visitor visas from India have more than tripled in waiting time.
Ottawa explains these spikes as the natural result of “admission targets” and “capacity limits,” but the explanation only deepens concern.
Reduced intake goals mean fewer approvals and longer queues, which is precisely the environment where mass cancellation powers become politically tempting.
The Numbers Behind The Breakdown
Programs such as Humanitarian & Compassionate (H&C) and Federal Self-Employed are now labelled as “more than ten years,” which effectively means that IRCC cannot project completion at all.
In programs tied to Canada’s economic priorities, this undercuts the very purpose of immigration.
Entrepreneurs under the Start-Up Visa cannot launch ventures on paper approval timelines measured in decades.
Caregivers, a lifeline for aging households, face nine-year waits. Students lose entire academic years waiting for study-permit extensions.
Even Immigration Minister Lena Metlege Diab has acknowledged that the system must be “restored to balance.” Yet Ottawa’s solution so far has been to lower admission targets, not accelerate decisions.
The story of IRCC’s decline is written in its own statistics. The department’s October 2025 processing times show an unmistakable upward climb since May 2024:
- Citizenship Grant: 8 → 13 months
- Citizenship Certificate: 3 → 8 months
- Spouse/Common-Law Inside Canada (Non-Quebec): 11 → 22 months
- Parents & Grandparents (Quebec): 33 → 44 months
- Atlantic Immigration Program: 6 → 37 months
- Start-Up Visa / Federal Self-Employed: 37 → 120 months
- Work Permit Inside Canada: 92 → 223 days
- Visitor Visa (India): 25 → 86 days
- Super Visa (India): 51 → 167 days
These are not rounding errors; they represent thousands of families and businesses waiting months or years longer than before.
By the government’s own admission, backlog inventories remain swollen.
Can Canada Actually Cancel Mass Applications?
The short answer is yes—and it has done so before.
In 2012, the federal government under then-Immigration Minister Jason Kenney enacted one of the most sweeping administrative resets in Canadian immigration history.
Through amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, Ottawa eliminated roughly 280,000 Federal Skilled Worker applications that had been filed before 2008.
Applicants who had waited years were suddenly told that their files were gone.
The rationale was “modernization”—to clear backlogs and make room for faster digital systems.
For many, it meant lost fees, dashed dreams, and legal challenges that ultimately failed in court.
Just two years later, in 2014, the government did it again, cancelling the investor and entrepreneur backlogs as part of its shift to newer pilot programs.
That history is precisely why the current Bill C-12 alarms experts.
If passed, it would give the Immigration Department the power to invoke similar powers under the guise of efficiency.
IRCC insists these powers would not target any specific group, but the precedent of 2012 makes that assurance difficult to accept.
At the time, Ottawa argued that the wipeout was necessary to “focus on applications that could be processed more quickly.”
Today, the same language—“restoring balance,” “streamlining processing,” “managing capacity”—has returned to official talking points.
The parallel is unmistakable: a government overwhelmed by delays, promising modernization, quietly preparing the legal groundwork for another purge.
Historical Echoes And Human Consequences
The 2012 wipeout left deep scars in Canada’s reputation abroad.
Applicants from India, China, the Middle East, and Europe who had spent years gathering documents and funds suddenly learned that their efforts meant nothing.
Many had received file numbers, passed preliminary checks, and were simply waiting for final review when the axe fell.
Civil-society groups and immigration lawyers at the time argued that the move undermined the rule of law.
If the government could unilaterally erase pending cases, they warned, no applicant could ever rely on Canada’s promises of procedural fairness again.
Fast-forward to 2025, and the same anxiety is spreading.
Social media forums for international students and skilled workers are filled with speculation about potential cancellations if Bill C-12 passes.
What makes today’s situation even more volatile is scale.
IRCC’s inventories are far larger than in 2012, covering millions more files across multiple categories.
A blanket cancellation would therefore affect far more people, including those already inside Canada on temporary permits.
For those applicants, the question is existential: after years of compliance and contribution, could they simply be told their applications no longer exist?
The Political Layer Behind The Policy
Behind the administrative language lies a political calculus.
Canada’s immigration levels plan for 2026-2028 is expected to modestly reduce permanent-resident targets after several years of record inflows.
The government presents this as a reset to manage housing and affordability pressures.
But lower targets without a matching reduction in applications inevitably worsen the ratio between new intake and available spots.
In other words, it manufactures longer queues. For the governing Liberals, that creates a dangerous narrative.
They face criticism for welcoming too many newcomers too quickly and simultaneously for processing them too slowly.
A mass cancellation clause, even if used sparingly, offers a quick way to reset numbers before the next election cycle.
That is why critics see Bill C-12 as more than bureaucratic housekeeping.
It is a political safety valve: the ability to clear the books when promises outpace performance.
Minister Diab’s office continues to emphasize transparency, insisting that publishing processing-time tables is part of being accountable.
Yet applicants counter that transparency without action is meaningless. The numbers keep climbing, and Ottawa’s main response has been to post them online.
The Human Cost Of Waiting
Behind every statistic is a family waiting for a decision that never seems to come.
Across Canada, stories of prolonged separation, expired job offers, and uncertain futures are becoming the norm rather than the exception.
For spouses waiting under inland sponsorship, a 22-month delay means nearly two years of living apart or surviving on temporary status without access to full benefits.
Parents and grandparents remain uncertain as 44-month waits stretch toward half a decade.
Students face the risk of losing their study seats when their permit renewals exceed the start of new semesters.
For businesses, the damage is equally tangible. Employers in sectors from tech to agriculture report losing international hires because work permits are issued months after start dates.
Delayed approvals can derail project timelines and erode global competitiveness.
For applicants inside Canada, the emotional toll is immense.
Living year to year on temporary documents creates anxiety, financial strain, and a sense of exclusion from the country they already contribute to.
What was once marketed as a fast, efficient immigration model now feels like a lottery determined by bureaucracy and scammed by non-deserving candidates, rather than merit.
Even temporary relief through pilot programs like the Home Care Worker or Agri-Food Pilot has backfired.
Processing times of nine to nineteen years make those pilots symbolic rather than functional.
Workers who fill essential roles—caregivers for aging Canadians, labourers keeping farms running—face decades-long uncertainty.
The most striking irony is that these backlogs contradict the very goals of immigration policy.
Canada needs workers, students, and families to sustain its economy and demographics.
Yet the mechanisms meant to bring them in are now driving them away.
A Legal Grey Zone
Legal experts point out that the uncertainty extends to the boundaries of ministerial power.
Bill C-12, framed as a border-security and modernization bill, contains provisions that would let the immigration minister suspend, defer, or cancel classes of applications if they are deemed incompatible with “public interest” or “operational needs.”
Those terms are undefined. Without clear limits, critics argue, such powers could be applied to any category—from humanitarian cases to skilled workers—without parliamentary debate.
IRCC spokespersons have said the intention is not to target specific groups and that “decisions would not be taken unilaterally.”
But the language mirrors that of past policy resets, and with processing times soaring, skepticism is mounting.
If the government proceeds with cancellations under the guise of efficiency, it could trigger another wave of litigation.
In 2012, when the Federal Skilled Worker backlog was erased, applicants launched a class-action lawsuit alleging breach of fairness.
The courts ultimately sided with the government, ruling that Parliament had the authority to legislate away pending files. That precedent still stands.
In practice, it means that if Bill C-12 becomes law, Minister Diab—or any future minister—could legally repeat history.
What Is Canada’s Immigration Minister Saying?
Minister Lena Metlege Diab maintains that IRCC’s actions are rooted in transparency and responsible management.
Her director of communications, Laura Blondeau, has stated that publishing processing-time data “was not a mistake,” emphasizing that the department is “looking to be as transparent as possible.”
In recent statements, Diab said the government is committed to “restoring the immigration system to balance” and that the steps being taken are “designed to do just that.”
She points to capacity-building, modernization, and better forecasting as evidence of progress.
Yet these explanations ring hollow to those following the numbers. Transparency does not equal accountability.
Publishing longer wait times without reducing them only underscores failure.
Applicants also question the government’s definition of balance.
Admission targets have been significantly reduced, meaning fewer people are approved even as applications keep pouring in.
For many, that feels less like balance and more like rationing.
If IRCC’s objective is to rebuild public confidence, words alone will not suffice.
Applicants are demanding results—shorter waits, consistent service standards, and assurances that their files will not vanish under a new legislative power.
Possible Paths Forward
There are ways to correct this, but they require political courage and administrative discipline.
Experts and former policymakers have proposed a series of measures to stabilize the system:
- Implement a Temporary Intake Pause in categories where backlog exceeds capacity. This would prevent new applications from further inflating wait times.
- Increase Processing Staff and Technology Investments by reallocating part of the immigration budget toward training, AI-based document verification, and decentralized case management.
- Create a Statutory Guarantee Against Retroactive Cancellations to reassure applicants that once accepted, their files cannot be erased by new legislation.
- Simplify Overlapping Pilot Programs to reduce administrative complexity and resource fragmentation.
Without decisive action, critics warn that IRCC will continue drifting from crisis to crisis, responding reactively rather than structurally.
Editor’s Analysis: What This Means For 2026 And Beyond
The deepening delays and legislative shifts suggest that 2026 could become a pivotal year for Canada’s immigration system.
With admission targets already trending downward and Bill C-12 advancing, the government appears to be preparing for a managed contraction—less intake, more control, and potentially, the legal flexibility to erase parts of the queue.
Public trust in IRCC—already weakened—would take another hit.
Future applicants might hesitate to invest time, money, and emotion into a system that can delete their files overnight.
At the same time, slowing approvals will strain the economy. Labour shortages will deepen, family reunifications will stagnate, and provinces reliant on newcomers will face demographic and fiscal pressure.
For Canada to sustain both its economic momentum and its moral credibility, 2026 must be the year of structural reform, not legislative shortcuts.
That means investing in capacity, ensuring fairness across programs, and affirming one simple principle: once you apply in good faith, your place in line should be protected.
Until that promise is renewed, Canada’s immigration crisis will remain not just a backlog of applications, but a backlog of broken trust.
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
You may also like: New Destination Canada Forum 2026 Registrations Are Now Open
New Canada Working Holiday Visa 2026 Season Is Now Open
New CPP Payment Increase Effective January 2026
New Canada Immigration Bill C-12 Set To Bring Stricter Rules