This House of Commons Standing Committee on Health meeting studied the impact of immigration policy on health care and barriers to integrating internationally trained health professionals. Witnesses included Scott Alexander, a medical advisor appearing as an individual; Viren Naik, CEO of the Medical Council of Canada; Rosemary Pawliuk and Douglas Munkley from the Society for Canadians Studying Medicine Abroad; Arun Anand, a physician appearing as an individual; Geoffrey Barnum, Senior Manager of Data at the Canadian Post-M.D. Education Registry; and Eva Slawecki, an advisor from the Canadian Medical Foundation representing Internationally Educated Health Professionals in Canada.
Scott Alexander, a Canadian who studied medicine in Australia, testified that retroactive changes to exam requirements effectively erased his progress toward licensure, preventing him from applying for residency positions. He noted that 58 of his 60 Canadian classmates chose to stay in Australia due to high barriers and lack of transparency in Canada's process. He recommended removing bottlenecks from visa programs, restoring predictability in assessment and licensing, and expanding supervised clinical training capacity for qualified internationally trained Canadians.
Viren Naik stated that the Medical Council of Canada supports national standards through credential verification and workplace-based assessments, noting that a thousand candidates annually demonstrate competency but cannot access enough residency or practice-ready assessment positions. He recommended bringing clarity through a national lens on requirements for international medical graduates, expanding supervised placements including bridging programs and clinical assistant positions, and building upon digital platforms like the National Registry of Physicians for workforce planning.
Rosemary Pawliuk and Douglas Munkley from the Society for Canadians Studying Medicine Abroad testified that 3,500 Canadians study medicine abroad, with 800 graduating yearly, but only 181 applied for Canadian residencies last year due to significant barriers. They advocated for equal opportunity for Canadians who have proven substantial equivalency, uniform exams, and revocation of bulletin 230, which exempts foreign visa trainees from labour market impact assessments. Pawliuk stated that 1,117 Saudi Arabian visa trainees are currently training in Canada, taking capacity that could serve Canadians.
Arun Anand, an anesthesiologist practising in Alberta, testified that immigration targets should be coordinated with health care capacity, noting Canada has 2.8 physicians per 1,000 people versus the OECD average of 3.7. He highlighted that credentialling barriers block physician mobility, with inconsistent pathways between provinces, and that annual college fees and CMPA premiums multiply when registering across provinces. He also noted that federal health programs for refugee claimants allow physicians to bill up to five times more than standard provincial rates, straining the system.
Geoffrey Barnum, from the Canadian Post-M.D. Education Registry, explained that visa trainees are primarily enrolled in clinical fellowships, providing complex care to Canadians while their salaries are paid by foreign governments. He confirmed that 3,487 visa trainees were in Canada in 2024, with the majority required to return to their home countries after training. He noted that a very small percentage of visa trainees later return through legal immigration to practise medicine in Canada.
Eva Slawecki, from the Canadian Medical Foundation, testified that an estimated 260,000 internationally educated health professionals reside in Canada, but only 58% of employed ones work in health-related occupations. She identified barriers including complex and fragmented licensing pathways, outdated online resources, loss of recency of practice requirements, and lack of social capital for newcomers. She recommended investing in navigation, coordination and wraparound supports to improve integration.
The committee briefly debated procedural matters regarding upcoming meetings with ministers, with some members expressing preference for separate one-hour appearances by each minister rather than a joint two-hour session, and concerns about the usefulness of testimony from departmental officials.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors; verify against the official evidence.