Canada’s spousal open work permit policy faces criticism amid new restrictions 

Immigration lawyers Mark Holthe and Igor Kyryliuk have raised concerns about the new restrictions, which took effect in January 2025.

Immigration News Canada (INC) reports that these changes are impacting families and job seekers, which is leading to widespread criticism of the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) approach.

The spousal open work permit system has seen significant changes as of January 2025. According to the new policy, spouses of international students can only apply if the student is enrolled in specific programs.

Holthe describes the policy overhaul as part of a broader immigration strategy aimed at controlling the number of temporary residents in Canada. Holthe also highlighted concerns over how applications are processed, noting that some spousal open work permits are being handled before or immediately after the principal applicant’s post-graduate work permit, which often results in refusals.

Reports inform that the changes to the spousal open work permit policy have a direct impact on families. Holthe shares stories of families where one spouse, often the primary income earner, has lost the right to work following the refusal of a spousal work permit application. This has led to financial strain, affecting housing stability and basic living expenses.

Holthe labeled this pattern as “sharp practice,” which he believes is aimed at reducing the number of temporary residents in Canada, as part of a broader immigration agenda under Minister Miller’s policies.

The recent changes to spousal open work permits are part of a larger trend in Canada’s immigration policy.

Holthe and Kyryliuk suggest that public perception of immigration has influenced these policy shifts. As immigration becomes a point of political debate, the government may be feeling pressure to appear more stringent, which has contributed to aggressive enforcement tactics.

For those applying for spousal open work permits under the new system, both lawyers offer strategic advice. Holthe stressed the importance of securing a job offer in an eligible occupation before submitting an application. He also recommends submitting both post-graduate and spousal work permit applications at the same time to avoid potential refusals.

Kyryliuk advises applicants to stay informed about changes to the list of eligible occupations and consult legal experts when necessary. He underscores the complexity of the process, which requires attention to detail and understanding of evolving policy nuances.

Both lawyers agree that seeking legal advice is essential in navigating the new system, as the rules have become more complex and restrictive.

The new system has raised ethical questions about fairness in immigration decision-making. Holthe and Kyryliuk believe that the timing of refusals and the deliberate sequencing of applications to achieve policy goals undermine fairness. Holthe further notes that for those facing refusals, judicial review may be an option, though the process is lengthy and costly.

Kyryliuk also discusses the potential human rights implications of the new policies, particularly concerning the right to family life and non-discrimination in administrative decisions.

As Canada continues to evolve its immigration policies, it remains to be seen how these shifts will affect the future of temporary and permanent residency pathways in the country.