The origins of Express Entry can be traced back to 2008.
Since its launch in 1967, the Federal Skilled Worker Program (FSWP) was relatively predictable. So long as you met the points threshold and met all other eligibility criteria, you were guaranteed to receive a permanent residence visa. The most unpredictable component of this process was the in-person interview at a Canadian embassy which you also needed to “pass” to get the visa.
This process hummed along until the Canadian government felt it was no longer tenable. Canada had become a victim of its own success. The FSWP was revolutionary in that it was the world’s first-ever immigration points system. Canada had done away with discriminatory elements of its immigrant selection process earlier in the decade but wanted a more objective way of assessing candidates. The points system resolved this issue.
However, over time, the number of FSWP applications in the queue far exceeded the number of immigration spots made available by Canada. This meant it was common for applicants to wait five years or more for their application to be processed. The other challenge, according to the Canadian government, was that by the time the application was process, the applicant may no longer have had the skills required by the Canadian economy (I’d also personally note they would be 5 or more years older which would reduce the amount of time they had to integrate into the Canadian labour market).
Why did IRCC introduce Ministerial Instructions in 2008?
This led to the introduction of “Ministerial Instructions” in 2008 through Bill C-50. At that time, Canada had some 640,000 FSWP applications in backlog. Ministerial Instructions authorized Canada’s Immigration Minister to instruct visa officers to limit the number of applications processed, prioritize certain groups of applications, or refund and return applications that IRCC no longer wanted to process. Unsurprisingly, IRCC’s evaluation determined Ministerial Instructions were “relevant and necessary” (it’s always nice to have positive reinforcement). The department stated that Ministerial Instructions brought the FSWP backlog down from a potential of at least 850,000 people to under 470,000 people, and processing times fell from 5 years down to 6-12 months.
IRCC then harnessed its newfound authority to launch Express Entry in January 2015. Contrary to common belief, Express Entry is not an immigration program, but rather a system to manage the FSWP, Canadian Experience Class program (CEC), Federal Skilled Trades Program (FSTP), and a portion of the Provincial Nominee Program (PNP). A skilled worker candidate must be eligible for at least one of the FSWP, CEC, or FSTP. If they are eligible, they can create a profile on IRCC’s website. The department then holds draws periodically whereby Ministerial Instructions are issued inviting whomever the department sees fit to apply for Canadian permanent residence status.
Is Express Entry achieving its goals?
Upon its launch, Express Entry had three main objectives:
- Provide IRCC with flexibility in selection and application management
- Allow IRCC to be more responsive to labour market and regional needs
- Make application processing quicker
There’s no doubt that the first goal has been achieved. From Express Entry’s launch until early on during the pandemic, IRCC mainly ranked and invited candidates with the highest scores to apply for permanent residence. IRCC has really flexed its muscle since the pandemic by using other methods to select candidates, such as only inviting those who are eligible under a certain program (e.g., the Provincial Nominee Program or Canadian Experience Class), or more recently, through what is now known as category-based selection.
IRCC gets a mixed grade for the third goal. Application processing under Express Entry should be quicker than under the previous process, irrespective of IRCC’s operational capacity and global developments including black swan events like the coronavirus pandemic. The reason for this is only those who are invited by IRCC through Express Entry can submit a permanent residence application, and one would think IRCC would only issue such invites if it knew it could process the applications within its service standards. Service standards are the goals that IRCC sets for itself for processing various categories of applications. In the case of Express Entry, IRCC’s service standard is to process most applications within six months or less. Again, the processing of Express Entry applications should always be quicker than the pre-Ministerial Instructions era where IRCC was legally obliged to process every single application it received, even if the applicant did not even meet the department’s eligibility criteria.
Application processing has indeed been quicker than pre-Ministerial Instructions, however IRCC has often struggled to regularly achieve the six month service standard. At time of writing, IRCC states it is adhering to the service standard for Express Entry but this has been the exception rather than the norm. Since the pandemic, Express Entry has gone through periods where draws have been inconsistent or have been paused for certain programs altogether to provide IRCC with time to address Express Entry backlogs. To their credit, IRCC notes it has met its service standard for Express Entry since December 2022.
A partial shift away from the points system
The second goal on responsiveness to labour market and regional needs is the one I really want to focus on. The achievement of this goal remains up for debate and whether we are achieving it really depends on who you ask. IRCC will argue their flexible approach to issuing invitations is advancing this goal. Whereas the department previously issued invitations largely based on one’s score, it has increasingly issued invitations based on program, and on category. During the pandemic, it regularly held draws for Provincial Nominee Program and Canadian Experience Class candidates only to promote economic development across the country and to transition more temporary residents to permanent residence amid the pandemic making it difficult for candidates overseas to move to Canada. Then, in June 2023, IRCC introduced category-based selection. Category-based selection enables IRCC to invite candidates who help to achieve a specific economic goal. Currently, there are six categories. In addition to targeting candidates in five occupational categories (health, STEM, transport, trades, and agri-food), IRCC is also targeting francophone candidates.
Both program-specific draws and category-based selection are notable because they represent a partial shift away from the points system. Back in 2015, I met IRCC Express Entry officials in Ottawa numerous times to better understand the new system. In each meeting, they emphasized that the new Comprehensive Ranking System (CRS) was an evidence-based approach that would be used to score and rank Express Entry candidates. Longitudinal research dating back to 1980 allows Statistics Canada to conduct regression analyses to determine the link between the human capital criteria that IRCC uses to select immigrants, and the wages of these immigrants throughout their careers in Canada. Leading up to Express Entry’s launch, Statistics Canada research determined that age, English and French proficiency, and Canadian work and study experience were among the best predictors of salary for immigrants. Put simply, the younger a candidate is, the stronger their English and/or French proficiency they have, and the more Canadian experience they have, the more likely they are to earn higher wages.
Express Entry has clearly been beneficial in this regard. In a recent February 2024 study, Statistics Canada lists Express Entry as one of the main reasons immigrants are performing better in the Canadian labour market. It also points to the increase in temporary to permanent resident transitions (something which also leads to more CRS points), and Canada’s stronger labour market since the 2010s.
So, Express Entry is clearly supporting better outcomes for newcomers, a key goal given the longstanding challenges Canada has had with immigrant under-employment and unemployment. Nonetheless, IRCC has decided to reduce its reliance on the successful CRS model and relied more on program- and category-based selection, resulting in fewer high-scoring Express Entry candidates to receive permanent residence invitations.
Between the introduction of category-based selection on June 28, 2023 and time of writing, IRCC has held 36 Express Entry draws. Fourteen of these have been “General” draws, where those with the highest CRS scores have received invitations to apply (ITAs) for permanent residence. These are the candidates who are invited based on the spirit of Express Entry’s launch in 2015, which is to invite people based on the evidence-based model shaped by Statistics Canada research.
The remaining 22 draws have either been through program- or category-based selection. Whereas you currently need a CRS score of above 530 points to receive an ITA through a General draw, you can earn an ITA with a CRS score as low as 336 if you are an eligible francophone candidate through category-based selection. Health care, trades, agriculture, and transport workers have needed far lower CRS scores to earn an ITA than successful “General” draw candidates. Whereas having a CRS of 533, for example, as a Management Consultant has not been enough in recent months to get an ITA, having a CRS score of some 100-200 points lower in a targeted category has been enough.
Your CRS score still matters in category-based selection, but its relevance is diminished if you fall under one of the six IRCC categories. The same holds true for PNP-only draws. Getting a provincial nomination gives you 600 extra CRS points, which guarantees you will receive an ITA, but among these PNP candidates include those who have less than 200 CRS points for their human capital characteristics.
This isn’t to say the PNP, francophone immigration, and addressing labour shortages in the five occupational categories aren’t important. It’s very important to promote immigration across Canada, francophone communities outside of Quebec, and to address key labour shortages. However, if IRCC wants more discretion to issue ITAs, then why have the CRS to begin with?
Moreover, one of the rationales for relying more on human capital than occupations is that IRCC rightfully understood its limitations in determining what the labour market needs. Labour markets are dynamic and skills and occupations in demand are always evolving more quickly than government’s ability to keep up. But we’ve now done a 180, whereby IRCC wishes to prioritize candidates who it purportedly believes are in greatest demand in the labour market, rather than the candidates who Statistics Canada research shows are more likely to earn higher wages. One of the other limitations with selecting lower-scoring Express Entry candidates is that such candidates may have more difficulty adapting to the labour market. While they may initially work in a targeted sector, that sector may eventually experience a downturn, making it difficult for them to reintegrate into the labour market. Conversely, back in 2015, IRCC argued that higher-scoring Express Entry candidates were more adaptable, since their high human capital would allow them to more easily transition to other sectors and occupations as the labour market evolved.
Some final thoughts
Express Entry is a good system and much better than its predecessors. It is more responsive to Canada’s immigration objectives, has led to quicker application processing, and better economic outcomes for newcomers. On the other hand, the recent departure from the CRS makes me feel a bit of unease. One of the great advantages we have in Canada is the amount of longitudinal data at our disposal to shape our immigration policies and programs. Statistics Canada has provided us with analyses that appears to have shaped a winning formula with respect to Express Entry invitations. Why then, does IRCC feel the need to exercise more discretion on who it issues ITAs to? If it feels keen to target certain categories, why not do so outside of the Express Entry system, so that the highest-scoring candidates can continue to receive ITAs and perform well in the labour market? The department already has a number of regional- and occupation-driven programs outside of Express Entry such as the Atlantic Immigration Program and Agri-Food Immigration Pilot. It could do the same for category-based selection, rather than diminish the excellent CRS it has created.
Another shortcoming of category-based selection is it has created even more uncertainty for candidates. Whereas previously Express Entry draws occurred every two weeks, typically on Wednesday, with a predictable CRS cut-off and number of ITAs, there is no longer any certainty whatsoever on the cadence of draws, score requirements, or ITAs. This is making it increasingly difficult for prospective immigrants to plan their lives, creating the risk of Canada losing out on very high calibre immigrants. Moreover, the uncertainty creates even more work for IRCC. Many of the candidates waiting in the Express Entry pool are temporary residents living in Canada with high CRS scores, and in the absence of ITAs to them, they will need to continue to submit additional applications to IRCC to either maintain their legal status in Canada, or to eventually re-enter the country.
All this to say, the points system has served Canada well since 1967, and more recently since Express Entry’s launch in 2015. The department has the right to exercise some discretion, but this should be limited, up to a point.
Read more:
I really hope IRCC leadership team read your articles, I say this because you hit the nail on the head with the impacts recent changes has on the temporary residents.