WASHINGTON, D.C. — Thanks to changing government policies and political rhetoric in both the United States and Canada, prospective foreign students looking to North America for schooling may have more risks to worry about than benefits when choosing a school.

This is increasingly leading fewer to hop the pond.

The two countries have been able to offer strong schools with a wide variety of majors and flexibility, as well as work-study and post-graduation opportunities. In recent years, that has led to a record number of foreign students in Canada — with nearly 470,000 enrolled in postsecondary institutions in 2023, more than double what it was a decade earlier. American universities in 2024, meanwhile, had between 1.1 and 1.58 million international students enrolled in undergraduate and graduate programmes combined (sources vary), over a 50 per cent rise since 2014.

For both countries, the No. 1 country of origin for their foreign students is India — representing nearly 30 per cent of international pupils at U.S. universities and 40 per cent at Canadian ones.

“I would say there’s been about a 40 per cent drop in the interest in American schools and going to the U.S. (this year),” said Mrinalini Batra, founder and CEO of Delhi-based International Educational Exchange.

Batra has helped thousands of Indian students navigate the process of applying for schools abroad, and while her clients’ number one foreign destination has long been the U.S., she has also helped students land in Canada, Ireland, the United Kingdom, and other parts of Europe.

Indian students are drawn to studying in the U.S. and Canada, Batra said, because the programmes are world-class and allow them to learn a wider array of subjects, switch majors as needed, and study topics beyond their majors for minors and electives.

“These things made the U.S. extremely attractive — you could study what you wanted and how you wanted,” she said.

But now, “it has become really hard” for U.S.-bound students, she added, noting that there’s also been a dip for Canada. Batra noted that she’s seen an uptick in applications for the U.K. as a result of this trend away from North America, but some Indian students are also just deciding to stay home.

Canadian changes

In 2024, Canada introduced a two-year cap on new study permit approvals (though some student categories were exempt) and postgraduate work permit changes amid a national housing shortage and pushback on immigration. The government’s objective, according to Larissa Bezo, president and CEO of Canadian Bureau for International Education (CBIE), was to stabilize growth in the international student population, equating to roughly a 35 per cent decline in new study permit approvals.

But the changes led to a 48 per cent decline from 2023, or nearly 100,000 study permits below the official targets.

“So, from our perspective, this was a severe overcorrection that, as we warned, is having a much more deleterious impact in terms of international student flow to Canada,” said Bezo.

By the end of that first year, Canada’s international student population had declined by 4 per cent relative to 2023, following the 29 per cent increase from 2022-2023, according to CBIE.

And even though the graduate level was initially excluded from the cap, “we saw graduate numbers drop by 25 per cent or more due to the reputational damage of the overall decision to implement a study permit cap,” said Bezo.

Between January and June 2025, there was a 50 per cent decline in study-permit applications, according to ICEF Monitor, and while the fall numbers have not been released, they are expected to be even worse.

The impact has not been universal. Rural and smaller colleges have been hit harder by a lack of interest, leading to more than 35 campus closures, hundreds of programme suspensions, and 10,000 job losses in higher education since last autumn, according to Bezo.

Meanwhile, top schools like the University of British Columbia and the University of Toronto are seeing a dip in international applicants and doing their best to manage the subsequent drop in revenue.

“While domestic enrolment increased, the University of Toronto has seen modest declines in applications from some key international markets for a variety of reasons, including damage to Canada’s reputation as an education destination, evolving demographics and changing patterns in global student mobility,” said a statement from a spokesperson for university, noting that the anticipated 1.5 per cent drop in revenue will be managed with “existing contingencies and reserves” in the school’s budget plan.

UBC, meanwhile, said that like all Canadian post-secondary institutions, it has also seen a decline in international enrolment since 2023 and is doing its best to mitigate the impact. “As of this time, there are no university-wide plans to implement systemic cuts,” Kurt Heinrich, associate VP of communications at UBC, shared by email. But he did note that operating budgets and staff reductions have resulted from the decline in international students.

CBIE is calling on Ottawa for no further changes to international student policies to allow for some stability, and it wants to see a comprehensive plan for cultivating talent and a regional and institutional tailoring of international recruitment priorities. “We would like to see a global talent strategy for Canada that helps us support the country’s future economic innovation and demographic skills,” said Bezo.

“Our future prosperity hinges on that talent pipeline. So we need to get this right and we’re not getting it right at the moment.”

U.S. changes

The U.S., meanwhile, has ramped up its visa vetting this year, including reviewing applicants’ social media profiles, narrowing access to F-1 and J-1 visas for several countries, and revoking thousands of student visas on national security grounds. It has also introduced travel restrictions, affecting nationals from about 19 countries that make it harder for students from those nations to visit home and re-enter the U.S. Separately, Washington has imposed a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa applications, the type of visas many international students aspire to obtain for work placement and residency in the U.S.

“This is the first year I found that kids could not get a slot for visas,” said Batra. “I’m not talking about visa rejections; they just could not get a slot,” noting that this didn’t even happen during the pandemic.

The White House has also made significant cuts to federal research funding and higher education support programs.

According to a recent Keystone survey of 42,000 prospective students in more than 150 countries, 57 per cent said they were less likely to study in the U.S. owing to the prospect of having their social media accounts scanned by U.S. authorities. The number one factor thwarting their interest, however, was funding cuts to higher education.

As a result of visa uncertainties and concerns about being able to complete their degrees, international enrolment in U.S. undergraduate and graduate programs has fallen by at least 19 per cent — and possibly as much as 40 per cent — from a year ago. As in Canada, elite institutions are more insulated from these declines, though some are beginning to see drops as well.

“In Boston, which has many top colleges, they’ve actually seen a downturn in the housing market and apartment rentals, which they believe is because they have fewer international students coming to the Boston area to go to school,” said Sarah Spreitzer, VP and chief of staff of government relations at the American Council on Education.

Spreitzer said the data for this year should come out next month. “If it is the [anticipated] 40 per cent drop, then it’s likely going to hit every school in some way,” she added.

Right now, if you are enrolled and making academic progress, your student visa remains valid, Spreitzer explained. But that could soon change as well, adding even more uncertainty to the process.

The Department of Homeland Security has proposed the elimination of the “duration of status” rule that allows foreign students with F-1 visas to remain in the country if they maintain their academic status. DHS wants international students limited to just four years, with limited options for changes one major or transferring schools – those key attractions for Indian students that Batra mentioned.

To extend, “you would have to apply for an extension of status, which the administration has said will be granted very rarely,” Spreitzer added, noting that she expects the measure to be implemented later this year.

Studying in the U.S. or Canada as a foreigner is expensive — not an investment decision to make lightly.

“Our international students have to demonstrate as part of the visa process that they have enough money to support themselves during their studies,” said Spreitzer, noting that there are very few exceptions allowing them to work while they’re in the U.S. That means they have to prove they can pay for four years of tuition, housing, and supporting themselves just to get into the country.

As a result of this spending, international students contributed a whopping $43.8 billion to the U.S. economy last year, propping up 378,000 jobs. Since they tend to pay higher tuition and fees, many schools rely on international tuitions being paid.

But with all the uncertainty over visas and the ability to finish one’s degree, parents of prospective students are growing wary of sending their children abroad and risking such a big investment.

“They’re reconsidering whether they want to spend about $90,000 per year to go there for the next four years,” said Batra.

National Post

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.

OTTAWA — Canada’s spy agency says it never intended for new warrantless information powers proposed in the Liberals’ spring national security bill to target medical providers and believes part of the legislation needs additional “precision”.

During a background briefing, two senior Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) officials argued that changes to the agency’s powers contained in the Liberals’ Strong Borders Act (C-2) are “reasonable and modest” and noted they’ve been surprised at some of the pushback.

National Post requested the briefing to better understand the intelligence agency’s challenges to lawfully access communications and the ongoing debate on C-2. The officials were granted anonymity because CSIS does not disclose the identity of most of its employees.

Bill C-2 — the first bill tabled by Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government — is a contentious piece of legislation in part because it proposes new unwarranted powers for the RCMP and CSIS to compel any service provider to fork over limited subscriber information.

If C-2 passes intact, law enforcement would be able to compel any service provider — be they doctors, lawyers, therapists, clinics or banks, etc. — to say if they’ve served an individual, during what period and in which province or municipality.

The intention is to inform law enforcement if it’s worth going through the more complex process of obtaining a warrant for a production order from that service provider. It also aims to help authorities circumscribe dates and locations when seeking a warrant targeting a specific individual suspected of posing a threat to national security, the CSIS officials said.

Much of that information is already forked over voluntarily by service providers when asked, much like when police enter a shop to ask a shopkeeper if they’ve served an individual before, the officials said. The law would make it obligatory to cooperate.

During the briefing, the officials candidly admitted that CSIS never intended for the new warrantless powers to target medical professionals or lawyers (whose work with clients is protected by solicitor-client privilege).

The officials agreed there are “reasonable” concerns about which service providers should be included and that the section “needs some additional precision”, signalling the agency is not opposed to medical professionals and lawyers being excluded.

Two weeks ago, Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree admitted that the Liberals’ first attempt to

improve warrantless search powers was imperfect

and said he was open to amendments to C-2.

C-2 also proposes a new law, the Supporting Authorized Access to Information Act (SAAIA), that compels organizations that use any form of electronic services geared towards people in Canada or that operate in the country to implement tools to ensure data can be extracted and provided to authorities with a proper warrant.

The ability to obtain Canadians’ information and intercept communications, known as “lawful access,” is one of the most intrusive powers afforded to police and intelligence agencies. But NSICOP said its also necessary for law enforcement to be able to protect national security in the digital age.

The fact that C-2 proposes a new lawful access regime for electronic communications is “really, really positive development for us,” said one CSIS official.

In a comprehensive review of lawful access in Canada

, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) called on the government to modernize outdated lawful access laws.

The review noted that Canada is the only member of the Five Eyes intelligence sharing alliance (with the U.S., U.K., Australia and New Zealand) that doesn’t have a lawful access regime for the digital era.

“The Committee thinks Canadians would be surprised to learn how difficult it actually is for security and intelligence agencies” to “conduct lawful access techniques”, NSICOP wrote.

On Friday, the senior CSIS officials shed further light on some of the challenges the lack of lawful access framework has had on their work.

They noted that because there is no standard among communications companies (such as telcos) about what type of data they must retain and for how long, CSIS will sometimes go through the complex process of obtaining a judicial warrant to intercept communications… only to discover the company doesn’t have what they’re looking for.

Because of their private data management policies, “some communications service providers have literally nothing we want. We can go through all the hoops (to obtain a judicial warrant) and they have nothing,” they explained.

Some companies retain information for five days, while others retain it for five years, they added.

The new bill would compel impacted providers to maintain certain data for a specified amount of time and in a way that can be extracted for law enforcement with a warrant.

The CSIS officials also said that the absence of predictability in what information electronic service providers maintain has become a major irritant for international partners such as members of the Five Eyes.

They also pushed back on some privacy advocates’ claim that SAAIA

created a “back door” for law enforcement

to access some of Canadians’ most sensitive information.

“Our view is that this is the best and most modest version” of a lawful access update, they added, saying that they learned lessons from both the mistakes of

a failed lawful access reform by the Conservatives in 2013

and debates over the U.K.’s 2016 Investigatory Powers Act.

Some of commentary on the new lawful access regime appears driven by a “haunting” of past government proposals that went much further, the CSIS official added.

“There is no back door, and if a vulnerability is identified (in a provider’s systems), we can’t ask them to maintain it,” one senior official said. “We’re not going to ask for decryption keys” to help unlock encrypted communications either, said the other.

But much of the detail of the proposed SAAIA will be determined via regulation, leaving much uncertainty that concerns civil rights and privacy advocates.

Critics also argue that forcing all electronic service providers to create “technical capabilities” for authorities to access their data with a warrant creates new cybersecurity risks.

“These types of technical surveillance capability systems, and the vulnerabilities they create, are regularly, successfully and secretly

targeted

and compromised by

foreign spy agencies

and criminals alike,” wrote

a coalition of civil liberty groups opposed to C-2

.

Despite major hiccups with C-2 that pushed the government to split the bill in two and table a new bill (C-12) two weeks ago without the contentious law enforcement changes, both Anandasangaree

and Prime Minister Mark Carney

said they are

committed to a new lawful access regime

.

Last month, intelligence watchdog NSICOP concluded as much.

“It is time for the government to act and provide the security and intelligence community with the tools, policies, and lawful authorities they require to do the work asked of them in the manner expected by Canadians which is responsive to and protective of their privacy,” the committee wrote.

National Post

cnardi@postmedia.com

• Liberals’ first border bill ‘imperfectly’ tried to give law enforcement more warrantless power: minister
• Carney defends $700K salaries for CEOs of new federal agencies

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our politics newsletter, First Reading, here.

OTTAWA — Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre on Monday sought to clarify his statement that RCMP leadership was “despicable” over its handling of Trudeau-era scandals, by saying he supports the force and was talking about its past commissioner.

Poilievre, through his office, released a statement as question period in the House of Commons got underway and the Liberals called on him to apologize.

“I stand shoulder to shoulder with the brave men and women in uniform who put their lives on the line every day to protect and serve. Today and every day, I thank them for their service,” Poilievre said in a statement, which was also shared internally with Conservatives.

“My comments were directed to former RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki who has a lengthy track record of publicly documented scandals, deception and political interference to the benefit of the Liberal government.”

Poilievre’s comments came after Liberal, NDP and Green MPs blasted his initial statement, which he made in a wide-ranging interview with Northern Perspective, which describes itself on YouTube as an “independent Canadian media channel,” that aired last week.

During the interview, when asked how Poilievre would handle similar scandals like the ones which plagued former prime minister Justin Trudeau such as the SNC-Lavalin affair and his 2016 vacation to the Aga Khan’s private island, the Conservative leader said those should have resulted in “jail time,” saying the leadership of the RCMP was “frankly, just despicable when it comes to enforcing laws against the Liberal government.”

Asked about those comments during a press conference with Prime Minister Mark Carney last week, RCMP Commissioner Mike Duheme said he does not take political orders and encouraged Poilievre to meet with RCMP leadership.

The Conservative leader’s comments prompted staffers in his office to include a set of talking points for the party’s caucus on the matter, which on Monday was obtained by the National Post. Those talking points were first reported by the Toronto Star.

The talking points, sent under the title of “RCMP leadership,” were told to be for “reactive use only.” The memo says that “Canadians expect the RCMP to uphold the law equally, including to those in power,” and outlined past public testimony regarding the scandals.

It is common practice for leaders’ offices to send talking points on key issues.

The earlier talking points, which were included in Monday’s statement to the media, read that “RCMP officers play an important role in protecting our borders and keeping our streets safe,” adding that during this past spring’s election, the party promised to provide it with more resources to deal with human trafficking and organized crime.

As question period got underway on Monday, Liberal House Leader Steven MacKinnon called for Poilievre to apologize for his comments, saying they called into question the independence of the judiciary and the very force responsible for protecting Poilievre’s family, which is a duty of the RCMP.

“We don’t do that in Canada,” MacKinnon charged, as shouts of “shame” could be heard in the House. Poilievre responded by saying the Liberals were trying to “distract” from cost-of-living issues.

NDP interim leader Don Davies told reporters on Monday that Poilievre’s comments were not only irresponsible, but “also reminiscent of Donald Trump,” who he says is “politicizing the justice system, politicizing the police system.”

“These are not only irresponsible comments, but frankly, they undermine our democratic traditions and institutions, and they’re wrong.”

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May echoed the call for the Conservative leader to apologize.

“I don’t like that kind of language in Canadian politics,” she told reporters.

At the time of the scandals in question, Trudeau was found in 2017 by the federal ethics commissioner to have violated the conflict of interest law by accepting a vacation and private flight to the Aga Khan’s island.

In 2019, he was also found by the ethics commissioner to have broken the rules by attempting to influence Jody Wilson-Raybould, the attorney general at the time, into overruling a decision by the Public Prosecution Service not to grant SNC-Lavalin a deferred prosecution agreement.

Poilievre’s comments also prompted Dimitri Soudas, former communications director for Stephen Harper, the country’s last Conservative prime minister, to pen an opinion piece in the Toronto Star last Friday, saying Poilievre has failed to learn lessons from his most recent electoral defeat, saying his rhetoric amounted to “recklessness.”

Anna Tomala, the chief of staff to Harper at his firm, Harper Associates, later posted on social media that the opinion piece does not represent Harper’s views.

Poilievre is due to face a leadership review in January 2026.

Some Conservative candidates said Poilievre’s tone was an issue for them with voters, particularly women and those 55 and older.

Multiple Conservative MPs entering the House of Commons on Monday did not directly respond to questions about whether they supported Poilievre’s comments on the RCMP, but said they supported him as leader.

National Post

• Feds announce agency to tackle online scams and money laundering
• DEI is ‘illiberal, anti-merit,’ says analyst as Poilievre pushes to end government DEI programs

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our politics newsletter, First Reading, here.

The City of Richmond is warning residents their property ownership might be compromised by a recent B.C. Supreme Court ruling that granted the Cowichan Nation title over 7.5 square kilometres of land in the southeast section of the city.

Mayor Malcolm Brodie recently sent a letter to residents who could be affected, which includes a map showing properties inside the area covered by the decision.

“The court has declared aboriginal title to your property which may compromise the status and validity of your ownership — this was mandated without any prior notice to the landowners,” Brodie wrote.

In August, the court determined the Cowichan Tribes have title to the land, ruling that land titles granted by government were invalid and “unjustifiably infringed the Cowichan’s Aboriginal title.”

In her Aug. 7 ruling, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Barbara Young said, “these interests may be resolved through negotiation, challenged in subsequent litigation, purchased, or remain on the Cowichan Title Lands.”

Both the city and British Columbia are appealing the decision.

“Given the serious implications of this court decision and the pending appeal,” the mayor invited residents to attend an Oct. 28 meeting at Richmond City Hall to learn more about the matter.

In an interview Monday, Brodie said his letter went out to about 150 people who own land and rent property in the area.

“It’s not just residential; there are businesses there, too,” said the mayor.

He noted that “every party, including the Cowichan, have appealed. The claim of the Cowichan was reduced from about 1,800 acres down to 800 acres, and the Cowichan have appealed because they want to make the claim on the wider area.”

He’s unsure how aboriginal title and fee simple title, a term referring to ownership of full, permanent property rights, will stand side-by-side.

“The court has said that’s not inconsistent,” Brodie said.

“I believe it’s directly contrary and it’s hard for me to speculate where this could all end. But it’s certainly a very big development for anybody who lives in this specific area and finds that their title is affected by aboriginal title. Not only that, it’s not just the people in this area, it is the people throughout the province that could ultimately be affected by this sort of approach because now fee simple is not sacrosanct. Fee simple is on the table for aboriginal claims.”

The mayor said he “can’t imagine” that Young’s decision will survive on appeal.

“It just seems so basic that people invest in their homes and their businesses, and a result like this compromises your ownership of your home, and it affects your business in a very substantial way. How can anybody be expected to invest in businesses and property when there is this possibility looming directly ahead?”

He said the trial spanned more than 500 days “without anybody in this area knowing anything that was going on, and waking up to read media reports to find out that their homes and businesses are affected by the possibility of aboriginal title.”

There was a suggestion during the trial on at least two occasions that homeowners and businesses in the area should be advised of the situation, Brodie said.

But that didn’t happen, said the mayor.

“This is a multi-billion-dollar decision which could affect virtually all of the province and most of the country and I think that people need to know all about it,” Brodie said.

Richmond city councillor and former B.C. attorney general Kash Heed is confident Young’s decision will be overturned on appeal.

“I think it’s a very flawed decision and the judgement is counter-intuitive to what Canadians are actually looking for and how we want to deal with these constitutional issues,” Heed said Monday.

Kash called Young’s ruling “an unreasonable decision” by one judge. “The reasonableness of the court will be played out in the appeal and, eventually, the Supreme Court of Canada.”

Richard Laurendeau, who manages a real estate office in the city, described the Richmond real estate market as “fair,” noting sales were down 10 per cent from January until August when compared to last year.

“The market hasn’t stopped as a result” of the recent court decision, Laurendeau said. “Might it cause some people to visit the subject of what are the implications as a homeowner? For sure.”

But he trusts “that there will be other elements of the government that will challenge the ruling and that will bring clarity to the notion that the fee simple title system will not be challenged in the courts. That your home is your home is your home. It’s a basic principle of our title system.”

He’s hoping the decision will be overturned on appeal.

“It needs to be pushed up at every level,” Laurendeau said.

“If we don’t win this appeal, I think homeowners are going to want that they continue to appeal it at the highest level so we can defend that simple principle of your title is indefeasible.”

Lower Mainland realtor Keith Roy said Monday that he wouldn’t buy property right now in the area of Richmond affected by the recent court decision.

“I am afraid that buyers will become cautious in Richmond about buying properties in and around this particular claim,” Roy said.

The court decision about the Cowichan claim has created “immediate uncertainty” in the real estate market, he said.

“Everybody inside of this land claim has an illiquid asset while this plays itself out in court,” Roy said.

“This why we need to move expeditiously and very publicly on these things to give people the confidence to make decisions to move forward, because right now there are hundreds of people who have illiquid assets.”

He doubts anyone would buy assets now in the area designated by the courts.

“You’re just gambling on a court case that saves you,” Roy said.

The property in question is “effectively no longer freehold land,” he said.

“We’ve put Canadians in a position where they have to negotiate to buy back land that they already own,” Roy said.

“That’s scary.”

• Adam Pankratz: The Cowichan ruling is already causing a property rights panic in B.C.
• Liberals say they’re confused by Poilievre’s call to ‘argue’ against B.C. land-claims ruling they’ve already appealed

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.

Canadian snowbirds on their way to the United States may find a new wrinkle at the border this autumn. New regulations in the U.S. require fingerprints and photographs to be taken as part of documentation upon entering the country for an extended period. And there’s a $30 fee attached.

What are the regulations?

The

Alien Registration Form (G-325R)

was introduced by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in April and requires most non-citizens who are in the country for 30 days or longer to officially register their presence and provide biographic information; i.e., a photograph and fingerprints.

Does this apply to snowbirds?

Yes. The requirement includes Canadians who spend winter months in the U.S.; retirees who spend part of the year there; Canadians visiting friends or family for a month or more; and Canadians working remotely from the U.S. for more than a month without a work visa.

What about shorter visits?

As a Canadian, if you are not planning to be in the U.S. for more than a month, you do not need to register your stay with USCIS.

Are children exempt?

Children under the age of 14 are exempt from fingerprinting, but still need to be registered by their parents if they are going to be in the U.S. for a month or more.

What is the cost?

According to a U.S.

Customs and Border Patrol

website, effective Sept. 30, 2025, the fee for

Form I-94

has increased to $30 per person from the previous $6. (Notably, this fee only applies at land border crossings.)

Isn’t it called form G-325R?

Yes. Form G-325R is the Alien Registration form, but the I-94 is your arrival-and-departure record, so you basically need both — one to register as a visiting alien, and the second to indicate you’re actually in the country. Getting the I-94 at the border is also when you’ll get fingerprinted and photographed.

What if someone enters the U.S. by air?

That changes things. According to

Richards Jurusik

, an immigration law firm operating in both the U.S. and Canada, Canadians who enter the U.S. by air are automatically issued an electronic I-94 free of charge on arrival, whereas those who cross by land are not.

Can you register as an alien after you arrive in the U.S.?

Yes. In fact, you must register after arrival, which you can do through the

USCIS website

.

Is there any way around the fingerprint requirement?

Yes, but it seems to be at the discretion of border agents, who are still getting used to the new rules. A

CBC investigation

that spoke to several Canadian snowbirds found a variety of cross-border experiences.

Some travellers were told they had to be fingerprinted and photographed and had to pay $30 each, while others were informed that an online application was available without the biometrics, and were free to choose that.

An immigration lawyer told CBC that some of the confusion stems from the fact that two agencies — Customs and Border Patrol but also U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services — are involved.

It’s also true that the goalposts are moving quickly. The new regulations have all come into effect since last autumn, which is the last time most snowbirds would have travelled to the U.S.

The U.S. embassy in Canada notes on its website: “

Canadian citizens are generally exempted from the fingerprint requirement.” However, that site was last updated in March.

How important are the new rules?

Very. Failing to register or providing false information can lead to fines of up to US$5,000 as well as up to six months in jail, and/or deportation for fraudulent registration.

• What we know about unusual spike in asylum claims at this Quebec border crossing
• Hundreds of Americans turn out for ‘Elbows Up for Canada’ rally

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.

OTTAWA — Advocates are calling on the Carney Liberals to start with

the biggest line item

when deciding where to cut spending ahead of the upcoming federal budget.

Paul Kershaw, the head of

generational fairness group Generation Squeeze

, told reporters in Ottawa that the

$80-billion Old Age Security (OAS)

program desperately needed to be reined in, with federal spending hurtling toward a crisis point.

“(OAS) is now the single biggest driver of federal deficits. It costs $42 billion more than a decade ago and adds more to red ink than child care, than PharmaCare, than dental care, or defence,” said Kershaw.

Kershaw noted that the interim budget watchdog said

in a recent committee appearance

that the federal government was spending at an unsustainable rate.

Generation Squeeze is calling for OAS

payments to be reduced

for retired couples with incomes over $100,000. Under the current rules, couples with incomes

of up to $182,000

qualify for the full $18,000 benefit.

The group says its proposal would save Canadians $7 billion a year, while increasing the benefit for some single seniors.

Kershaw said that OAS has drifted too far from its original aim of “protecting insecure retirees” to “padding the comfort of affluence.”

“Let’s be clear, helping poor retirees is a duty. Subsidizing affluence is a waste,” said Kershaw.

He added that the billions saved from scaling back benefits for better-off seniors would be enough to lift most of the

400,000 Canadian seniors living in poverty

to an adequate standard of living.

Kershaw also called on Prime Minister Mark Carney to reject a

Bloc Québécois-led push

to boost OAS payouts for younger seniors, between the ages of 65 and 74.

“Prime Minister Carney’s first budget must resist the retiree lobby and the Bloc Québécois. Both are pressing Ottawa to pour billions more into (OAS) in ways that would do too little to help seniors that need it, and too much for those who don’t need the help,” said Kershaw.

Under the Bloc’s proposal, the maximum OAS payment for 65 to 74-year-olds,

currently around $740 per month

, would go up by 10 per cent to bring it in line with the maximum payment for seniors aged 75 and over.

A Bloc motion to increase OAS for all people aged 65 and up was

adopted by the House of Commons

last year, with the support of the Conservatives, NDP and Greens.

Bloc finance critic Jean-Denis Garon put the OAS proposal at the top of a

list of six non-negotiable demands

for the federal budget last week.

The Liberals are

three seats short of a majority

, and could use the Bloc’s 22 votes to give them some breathing room in passing the budget, set to be introduced on Nov. 4.

The Bloc’s OAS proposal would add

roughly $3 billion per year

to federal spending, according to figures from the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

Carney has said

the budget will deliver

“austerity and investment.”

Anthony Quinn, the president of the Canadian Association of Retired Persons, said that Kershaw was trying to spark “intergenerational warfare,” rather than put forward constructive ideas for bringing down the deficit.

“I think Mr. Kershaw is short-sighted, not understanding that we all become seniors if we’re lucky. And these programs are entitled to make sure Canadians are aging with dignity,” said Quinn.

Quinn said that Generation Squeeze’s OAS math didn’t account for various “costs of aging” such as at-home care and pricey medical devices and mobility aids.

According to a recent report from

RBC Wealth Management

, a healthy couple between 65 and 74 spends roughly $13,000 a year on health care. This jumps to $23,000 between 75 and 84, and $40,000 over the age of 85.

“There’s no guarantee that everyone is a rich, fat-cat senior, and that’s how Kershaw is framing all his arguments,” said Quinn.

National Post

rmohamed@postmedia.com

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.

OTTAWA — The federal government’s upcoming budget will include plans for a new Financial Crimes Agency designed to improve Canada’s ability to tackle online scams, money laundering and other types of fraud, Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne announced Monday.

In the latest in a series of pre-budget announcements, Champagne said Ottawa will take “bold action” in establishing the new agency because Canadians are besieged with a growing array of financial scams, including fake emails, ghost texts, phishing links, masked voiceover calls and other forms of fraud.

The new organization, first identified as a need about five years ago, will use a whole-of-government approach to specialize in fighting sophisticated plots and schemes, some of which are perpetrated by organized crime.

The new plan will be at the centre of the government’s new strategy to fight fraud and will be supported by new legislative changes to the Bank Act, scheduled to be unveiled this spring. The new legislation will require banks and other financial institutions to play a larger and more proactive role in detecting and fighting various types of fraud.

Speaking to reporters in Ottawa, Champagne said the new plan will “unite the expertise” of existing government organizations who are already tasked in various ways with fighting online scams and fraud.

The relationship between the new agency and existing government bodies in this space, however, is unclear, although Champagne did refer to taking a more co-ordinated approach. He did not specify if any existing government bodies would be folded into the new agency or if their roles might be supplanted. The existing groups include the RCMP, regional and local police, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC), the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) and the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre.

Anthony Ostler, chief executive officer of the Canadian Bankers Association, called the announcement “very welcome news” because online scams are such a growing threat that Canada needs to fight back with an agency that is entirely dedicated to the cause. A national organization will be better placed to implement best practices from around the world and “connect the dots” when scams target individuals across the country, he said.

“If we just have stuff spread across the country, the bad actors will continue to win.”

There’s little doubt, however, that online fraud is a growing threat. According to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre, Canadians were scammed out of $643-million in this way in 2024, almost three times the figure from just four years earlier. Only between five and 10 per cent of these types of scams are reported, the government said.

Champagne said that seniors, new Canadians and other more vulnerable populations are disproportionately affected.

Anthony Quinn, president of the Canadian Association of Retired Persons, said the new plan will “put some teeth” into the fight against online scams. In the past, Quinn said, Canadians’ best defence has been education and it has proven to be inadequate.

The government also said it will work more closely with financial institutions and other stakeholders to detect signs of abuse early, including the creation of a new, voluntary Code of Conduct for the Prevention of Economic Abuse that will be overseen by the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada.

A government press release said “economic abuse” — such as restricting access to money, sabotaging employment, or forcing debt — is an “under-recognized form of gender-based violence and financial harm.”

National Post

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.

OTTAWA

— A federal New Democrat is calling for a parliamentary committee to probe what led a parliamentary secretary to announce that an Irish hip-hop group had been banned from entering Canada. 

Jenny Kwan, the NDP MP for Vancouver East, has penned an open letter addressed to the Liberal chair of the parliamentary committee on citizenship and immigration, urging it to look into what she calls “serious procedural and accountability issues” surrounding the Sept. 19 announcement by Liberal MP and parliamentary secretary, Vince Gasparro.

In a video posted to X, Gasparro announced that, “on behalf of the Government of Canada,” the Irish hip-hop trio, Kneecap, had been banned from entering Canada, saying its members had

“engaged in actions” and made statements that Gasparro called “contrary to Canadian values and laws.”

“While the band has indicated publicly that they have not received communication or confirmation of that fact from (Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada) due to the announcement from MP Gasparro, several concerts in Canada have currently been cancelled,” reads the letter from Kwan, which was sent late Friday to the committee clerk.

Kwan, who has brought the issue to the House of Commons during question period, said that neither Gasparro nor Immigration Minister Lena Metlege Diab has provided clarity about why the announcement was made or whether a ban is in place.

Gasparro has previously told reporters that he was acting on information that had been made available to him by officials, but referred any remaining questions to the government. 

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, a national advocacy group, welcomed his announcement at the time, after having launched an “action alert” back in July about the trio’s upcoming performances, citing concerns that included one of its members’

alleged display of a Hezbollah flag during a 2024 performance.  

That resulted in a terrorism charge against

Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, who goes by the stage name, Mo Chara,

which a U.K. judge recently dropped on the basis that the charge had been filed passed the required timeframe.

In her letter, Kwan, who is not a member of the committee because the federal NDP lacks official party status, said the incident “raises very serious questions about procedural fairness” and a potential misuse of authority.

Kwan said the announcement raises questions about the “discretion” that can be exercised by a minister or parliamentary secretary when it comes to cases involving performing artists, as well as the criteria the immigration department uses to deny entry to Canada, when no criminal record is present.

She wrote that the incident also touches on issues surrounding how such announcements can be made, as well as “the need to ensure that discretionary decisions respect the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Canada’s international obligations, particularly regarding freedom of artistic expression.”

“To that end, I respectfully urge the committee to look into this matter,” Kwan wrote.

“Ministerial accountability includes the role of parliamentary secretary. It is critical that Canadians and the international community are reassured due process is safeguarded, so that public trust in the fairness and integrity of our immigration and cultural exchange policies is (reassured,)” her letter read.

Kwan said looking into the matter would also provide clarity to Canadians who bought tickets to see the band play in Toronto and Vancouver.

National Post

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our politics newsletter, First Reading, here.