CIP 189 - Episode 10 - 95 CRS Points at Risk - French, Study, and Sibling
===
[00:00:00] 50 for French, 30 for a Canadian degree, 15 for a sibling in Canada. 95 points total across three factors. IRCC has flagged all of these for removal or refinement, and all three sit on the same fast clock we've tracked all series long. A single ministerial instruction can take all 95 points off the board overnight.
No Canada Gazette, no comment period, no advanced warning. This episode, we're gonna break down each of the three one at a time, what's proposed, what IRCC says justifies it, what's confirmed versus still undecided, and what to do about it before any instruction lands. You ready for this one, Alicia? Yeah.
This is a, a question that we've been getting all the time, Mark, and IRCC did not pick these three for the chopping block at random. There are reasons why they are looking at removing these [00:01:00] specific express entry bonus points or the additional factor points when we look at the CRS breakdown, and it's because they are looking at stronger and weaker predictors of economic success.
And after all, express entry is our primary flagship economic PR pathway, and so they really wanna make sure that everything that is in the CRS calculator that people are going to get points for actually is going to be tracking to something that has a stronger economic predictor for success after people land in Canada.
~You know, ~Alicia, the thing that makes me wonder the most is, ~well ~then, okay, if these are not necessarily strong predictors of success, ~well ~then why did they do them in the beginning? Like, why did they create them in the first place? What caused them to decide to give 15 points for a sibling in Canada?
When I think back, I remember them saying because it's a strong predictor of a person's [00:02:00] ability to st- to settle in Canada. Maybe the distinction, Alicia, is that there's a difference between successfully settling and successfully economically settling according to this new paradigm they're dealing with, which is earning high wages, paying high taxes, recovering our massive federal debt.
Yeah. And I would agree with you, Mark, because we've seen the provinces go through these, too, where they say, "Oh, you can get additional factors in your worker EUI if you have family members that live in the province." And I think it's they're looking at pull factors. They're looking at why people actually stay in Canada, and I think having family in Canada, especially direct siblings in Canada, is a strong predictor of remaining in that province or remaining in the country.
And that is something that IRCC ought to look at as well, because we do see there are other organizations that are talking about studies of, like, the leaky bucket, where we have attrition. We have people who get their PR and then they leave. But if [00:03:00] IRCC is skewing towards, ~well,~ you know what, we're not only looking for retention, we're looking for high economic success and that's our metric, then that is probably why the sibling in Canada points are dropping off.
Yeah. I agree. So according to them, and remember everyone, if you've tune- if you're tuning in kinda late in the series, ~well,~ I hope you'll go back and watch one through nine, ~uh,~ of our episodes. However, I attended a number of meetings. Well, one, Alicia has been heavily involved in one of the working groups that is providing our submissions and thoughts to the government on these changes.
~Um,~ then, ~uh,~ following ~that,~ I attended our National Immigration Conference ~and~ spoke on a panel with, ~uh,~ one of the head, ~um,~ officers within IRCC, ~uh,~ officials that oversees economic immigration. ~Um, ~learned a lot from him as, ~uh,~ during the presentation that he and myself and, ~uh, um, uh, ~Lisa, ~uh,~ Middlemiss and Diana Konach were the other lawyers on that panel in Ottawa at our national conference.
And th- what we're sharing throughout this series is what we know to this point. Now, an interesting little development [00:04:00] is, ~uh,~ very randomly and very, ~uh, you know, ~without a lot of fanfare, ~um,~ the minister, ~uh,~ L- Lina Diab, came to Calgary during the stampede here this past week, and I had a chance to meet with her in a little round table session with some other lawyers, ~um, uh, ~within the Canadian Bar Association.
And it was a good meeting because we haven't seen a lot of the minister, and it's been hard to kinda get a gauge on where she's at, how engaged she is, how much of a fingerprint she's actually leaving on her department, or whether or not she's just kinda coasting along and everyone else is making decisions Well, that meeting, for the first time, gave me an opportunity to speak directly with her.
And I had lots of things to say, thanks to all of you, ~uh,~ wonderful people who, ~you know, ~who join us on our live streams and offer comments, our own clients, the ~many, ~many consults we do. I have to imagine, Alicia, that we do as many immigration consults with individuals as any firm out there in the country.
So we get a real f-flavor and a real feel for [00:05:00] what's happening on the ground. So I had a lot of share, lot to share with her. But one thing was very clear, ~and,~ and that's that the economics are driving all of this. And in their... Really, it goes right down to their campaign promises to reduce the total immigration population of temporary residents down to 5% of our total Canadian population, and to reduce the permanent resident landings to 1%.
So those two figures are really what's driving the ship right now. And she was not terribly sympathetic to us saying, ~"Well,~ that's not fair." And so there's gonna be changes that are gonna come, and all of these are designed to, at least the initial projections suggest, get one million people out of the country by the end of twenty twenty-seven.
And she said that the Canadian people, she speaks, she represents them, not just us as an immigration lawyer ~and, ~and our clients. And remember, ~uh,~ she did practice a little, dabbled a little bit in immigration as well, ~uh,~ when she was a practicing lawyer. [00:06:00] And so the one message that I took away is that things are not gonna get better anytime soon, that they're on track with what they want to do, and that is to have people who are temporary residents who do not have pathways to permanent residence, they want them to leave because of the pressure that is putting on our social network, and she specifically stated that, and it's not a secret.
~Um, ~she-- I, I do believe that the person driving the ship is our prime minister. ~So, um, ~Prime Minister Carney one hundred percent is driving the ship. And she desc- she described the meetings, ~you know, ~that things were much more businesslike. ~They're, ~they're, ~you know, ~they had clear goals. They were on a mission, and they were gonna accomplish it.
And I think Alicia and I can both confirm that from our perspective here, ~um,~ the measures that they've put in place are absolutely working because individuals are just not going to be able to stay. ~Uh, ~individuals are gonna have to go home. So going forward, when we look at these factors and we think about the predictors that the current government is focusing on, for sure it's economics.
And interestingly enough, Alicia, I brought up the TRP [00:07:00] categorical refusals, and she said, "Wait later in the year, because they're gonna be making some moves with HNCs." So I think personally there's going to be mass refusals across the board. If they're disregarding the TRP factors we've been putting in our applications right now that are just amazingly meritorious, if they are just categorically refusing these, I have no doubt in my mind that many individuals who have filed HNCs are going to start seeing a lot of refusals en masse.
So us as immigration lawyers, I came away saying to myself, "Okay, now I know where the government is going. This isn't ~kind of ~a mistake. It's not something just designed to get votes to get reelected, but this is truly their focus." So as an immigration lawyer, I'm going to use every tool that I have left in my toolbox, regardless of whether or not it irritates immigration, to help people in their journey to remain.
[00:08:00] And individuals who do not have an opportunity to stay, ~well,~ I'm going to be even more clear with them that if the writing is on the wall and time's up, that they do go home, so that when this whole craziness settles, they may have an opportunity to come back. So ~that's, ~that's the message that I got, and we obviously discussed a whole bunch of other things, and I'll probably talk about, a little bit about it in ~our, ~our livestreams.
~Um, ~but, ~uh,~ and maybe I'll do a separate session on it. But ultimately they are stuck on this and 2027's gonna be an even darker year than 2026. Yeah. So the writing's on the wall. ~Um, ~that means that, ~you know, ~all is not lost, but everybody out there needs to be extremely strategic. Everything needs to be tailored, ~um,~ properly reported.
You've gotta... When you do your express entry profile, there cannot be mistakes, and you have to understand which points you're claiming, which ones might go away, and what your chances actually are. And so that's what this episode is about, [00:09:00] understanding that some of those points that you are currently relying on are going to go away.
And what is the effect of that? ~Well, ~that, that depends if you're relying on a category-based draw or you're relying on a general draw. Yeah, absolutely. So as we look at these predictors, and we've talked about this in the past, we can see that they've clearly pointed out some of the weaker predictors now are the spousal attributes.
~Well, ~that, that whole factor is just ~kind of ~goofy because not only do we feel it's a weaker predictor, it's the inverse ~of, ~of siblings studying in Canada and French. So for all intents and purposes, I have said repeatedly that it was idiotic to punish couples just because an accompanying spouse didn't have the same level of human capital as the principal spouse, and in fact, up to forty points could be lost.
And we had this crazy strange dynamic where people were trying to list their spouses as non-accompanying solely for the purposes of keeping their CRS scores [00:10:00] competitive with single applicants, and I never could figure it out. I've brought it up with IRCC numerous times. So that is on the chopping block, and I am so grateful, and it can't come soon enough because ~it's a, ~it's a such an arbitrary distinction, and if they don't feel it really is a predictor one way or another, ~well ~then why was it ever instituted?
And, ~uh,~ so we'll leave that aside. But siblings in Canada study in Canada with a qualifier because they did leave a caveat, which we'll get to a little bit later on maybe higher level education is a stronger predictor. ~But, but you know, ~the seventy-six percent or whatever of individuals in the one to two-year diploma category maybe isn't as good.
And then of course, French, which all along we've known it has nothing to do with economics, especially when you're encouraging someone, ~um,~ to immigrate outside of Quebec to an English-speaking area when they may not have strong language skills in English. So that one ~is, ~is, has other factors involved that are non-economic, but it's so interesting how there's a picking and choosing.
And then of course, our strong predictors. [00:11:00] Alicia, do you want to cover some of these that are maybe kept or are going to be reinforced? Yeah. So one of the things that immigration practitioners had concerns about was age, right? We have a lot of people who are senior in their career who are earning really high wages, but if you're penalized after turning 30, it is really difficult, especially if you need to have a master's degree and then work experience.
It's really difficult to, ~uh,~ not lose points in age. Usually people are losing significant points in age, but it doesn't seem like that's going to change in the new reforms. There's nothing indicating that the age brackets or the points will change. ~Maybe, ~maybe I'm wrong, but there's been no discussion about the age, ~um,~ bracket moving up.
Education, ~uh,~ we know ~that ~that is usually a strong predictor for economic success in Canada, and speaking the majority language in the country is also a very strong predictor. Canadian work experience has been a stronger predictor, and then of course, how much the temporary [00:12:00] resident is earning in Canada and the job offer, just like Mark and I, ~uh,~ talked about in our previous episodes when we talked in depth about this high-wage occupation factor.
Those were all things backed up by studies that had stronger economic predictions for success. Yeah. All right. When you look at these, Alicia, ~um, you know, ~we know that obviously age, education, official language, work experience isn't going- Canadian work experience isn't going anywhere. ~Um, ~the whole concept of these TR earnings in Canada and the job offer obviously ~are, ~are this great mystery.
And maybe, Alicia, there's gonna be so many points awarded ~for the, ~for the temporary resident earnings that it compensates for age, ~kind of ~like the 200 job offer points that were instituted because they just recognized that CEOs and executives in C-suite level positions ~are, ~are not 29 years old usually.
Yeah. And so that accommodation was made to give them 200 points instead of 50. So maybe the TR earnings ~are, ~are just going to be enough to compensate for that. But, ~you know, ~there's a lot of people that, ~you know, ~are in [00:13:00] high-paying jobs that are fresh out of school, and so they're still gonna bump the older candidates.
And at the end of the day, Alicia, it comes down to how many... ~you know, ~how much tax you're ultimately gonna pay in a life spa- in a lifetime. And so we'll see how it plays out. We always ~are, ~are pushing back and doing what we can, but this is ~kind of ~how IRCC sees it. Understand, everyone, this is IRCC, not necessarily us.
Now, let's take a little shift here, and this is more general 'cause we've covered this in a lot of, ~uh,~ our previous episodes. But we know the direction they're going, but once again, it's just the date when they're actually going to implement this. And these ones we're talking about today are generally b- via ministerial instructions.
And so when we're trying to factor in, okay, ~well,~ what impact does this wage ~really, ~really play, we go back to the data, we go back to the statistics they relied upon, and there was ~kind of ~a general broad range ~of, ~of what we call median employment earnings across these core score bands. [00:14:00] And, ~um- ~They tracked it from basically from admission ~through, ~through five years, at least within ~their, ~their studies.
And like we've talked about before, they showed a, a, a very broad range of, ~um,~ of employment earnings. And unfortunately, individuals in certain positions with lower wages, the increase or their ability to, ~um, you know, ~to earn more money after they become a permanent resident, ~well,~ the higher wage you have, the greater ~the, ~the increase after you become a PR.
We've also talked about the fact that while it's ~kind of ~unfair and it's a little bit of a mishmash trying to compare the low-wage folks to the high ones, at least on landing, ~um,~ because generally people who are in survival jobs, once they get permanent residence, the first thing they're looking to do is to increase their education and employability.
So they will go back to school, and, ~uh,~ that's not something that they've done a lot of, ~um,~ incorporating into their statistics because the stats, the way they present them, just support their case stronger, and so why would you like to include [00:15:00] anything that might dilute those figures? What I'd love to see is these individuals in these positions, after they complete, ~you know, ~four or five years, then let's take a look at them and see where they're at.
Because generally speaking- Yeah ... I suspect they would have gone back to school, they would have leveled up, they would have, ~you know, ~had lots of Canadian experience, language would have been rock solid, and ultimately away they went. ~So, um, ~I guess the question that we ask ourselves a little bit, Alicia, is this urgency.
~Um, like ~why are we so concerned about this right now? ~Mm-hmm. ~And I think it's largely because IRCC wants to make these directional shifts. They want to recalibrate the express entry system so that they are capturing the segment of the population, the temporary residents or even the foreign nationals that they really want to attract and keep as permanent residents.
~You know, ~I was thinking as well, Leisha, about the US, and you can't help but look at how they run things versus us. And yes, there are work permits for agricultural [00:16:00] workers, things like that. But generally speaking in the US, the concept ~of a, ~of a low-skill position, like our tier four and five positions, getting work permits in the US is just...
It just doesn't exist. Even the H-1Bs, our skilled LMIA kind of individuals, tiers three, ~well,~ even tiers two, one, and zero, even they are capped. And so there's this ~major, ~major focus on protecting the local worker. And unfortunately, or fortunately, I don't know, depending on which side of ~the, ~the, the aisle you sit on, ~um,~ there's been this perception that kids are just not getting their first entry into the labor market.
We've heard this so many times, and it's not just back, ~you know, ~the, our current liberal government, but the conservatives were saying it over 12, 13 years ago. And unfairly, foreign workers tend to be the main point, ~you know, ~the main factor that they look at when they're trying to lay blame for this. Now, there's no doubt that if you have a million people surplus, if the liberal government feels that's what the surplus is, [00:17:00] who are temporary residents, who are, ~you know, ~I have to assume a large portion of those now are foreign workers, because if you're a student, ~um,~ and you're studying in Canada, and you have eligibility for a post-grad work permit, you're not one of the individuals that's gonna be caught by this strong desire to get people out of the country.
It's gonna be people on work permits who can't extend them. And so if they feel that there's this surplus of individuals and- By getting them out, it's going to somehow ease pressure on our social network. ~Well, like, ~I'm here to I'm here to try to deal with whatever they're saying the world looks like.
~Um, ~but ~it's, ~it's just ~kind of ~frustrating because I look... Like I said, ~if,~ if th- what they're saying ~is, ~is, is accurate and, ~um,~ th- there's gonna be massive impacts on our labor market, ~um,~ if individuals, ~if they're, ~if they're basically getting a million people out. And why? Because I think Alicia and I, ~um,~ I can probably speak for you, we know that not all Canadians wanna work in these positions.
~Um, ~not all Canadians want to work full-time at McDonald's as a food service supervisor. There's a lot of casual, a lot of part-time [00:18:00] positions, a lot of transition. ~Um, ~but generally speaking, a lot of these people, ~um, are, ~are individuals that are filling positions because Canadians generally just don't want to work that...
~Like, ~they don't want to ~make them, ~make them a career. So as we go forward, it's gonna be interesting to see how this unfolds. We know that the Liberal government is really pushing to high tier. So all of this means that we don't actually want to support anyone in tier four or five, and that's part of the reason I believe they've reduced the numbers for the provinces, because generally, a lot of the nominations for the provinces are taken up by individuals who can't otherwise qualify through express entry.
Why would you go to a provincial nominee program if you had a fast track through express entry? So it- like I said, it'll be interesting to see what happens, but there's a clear emphasis on high wage, which means high tier, generally speaking, and there's gonna be a lot of these individuals in that one million-plus whatever that are going to be, ~uh,~ kindly asked to leave, ~um,~ that are gonna fall in those lower ranks.
[00:19:00] Yeah. And so I think we've laid out really ~kind of ~the direction that we've been noticing from IRCC, the commitment we've been noticing from IRCC, and maybe Mark, we can whip through, okay, let's talk about what this means- Yeah ... specifically for French and for studies, 'cause that's where we had a whole episode on the spousal points, but let's drill down quickly on French and education.
So We know that French is probably going to have those bonus points removed, but everybody keeps asking us, "Do I stop studying French? Is French not a pathway for me to pursue?" And there's been zero indication that IRCC is taking away the category-based draws for French. So yes, every year they have to announce what their categories are.
So in 2027, they will announce the category-specific draws for 2027, and presumably French will still be there. And so even if they take away the 50 bonus points, it doesn't prevent a category-based [00:20:00] draw. And the consultation on the reforms document from IRCC said category-based draws are just a more effective tool if we want to attract Francophone speakers.
So everybody out there, are you studying French? Continue studying French because it gives you a category-based route where the CRS score is much, much lower than in any of the general draws. So it actually gives people a chance. Yeah. And ~you know, ~this obviously, if they're continuing to go down the path ~of, ~of ensuring French is a big part of the express entry regime or whatever it might be called after the regulatory changes, ~um,~ I think it's gonna create at least a little bit more fairness for other applicants so that French don't dominate the ranks.
And when you have individuals who are getting all of those bonus points, and really I think there's up to 74 total extra points you can be awarded if you're completely fluent in French. And when you're competing in a general CEC draw, it's a ~massive, ~massive advantage. So individuals who speak French who happen [00:21:00] to submit their profiles after a French language draw, ~um,~ they're also taking up a sizable portion of the CEC category.
~Mm-hmm. ~So by this shift and moving French language just to their own category-based, I think it's just gonna give a better indication of how many are actually receiving ITAs and open the door more for people who don't speak French, ~uh,~ to then be assessed on their actual human capital, the things that theoretically express entry was created to attract and target in the beginning.
Yep. Exactly. So ~I think, ~I think everybody is on board with this shift with respect to the removal of the 50 bonus points for French. Yeah. The other thing that we definitely wanted to talk about are the Canadian studies, and this is really difficult because people literally structure their future plans around their pathway for a study permit, showing funds, showing the ability to support themselves while they study, and then once they graduate, working for that [00:22:00] PGWP and working under a PGWP to try to find that high-tier job to make sure that they have a pathway to PR.
And that's ~kind of ~been the game plan for ~many, ~many people for probably the last 15 years, and this is really going to change that. And so IRCC has said, "Okay, we've crunched the data. We've taken a look," and many people, so within the last few years, many people have landed, and they only had a one or two-year diploma in Canada.
Their Canadian education was usually they already have a bachelor's degree, and they just ~kind of ~tack this on, and they do it to-- and they pay those international tuition fees because they think that it's going to give them a better chance to PR. And when they look at the economic outcomes, and this is what you were talking about earlier, Mark- ~Mm-hmm~
probably if you don't have a bachelor's degree, if you only graduated from high school and you came directly to Canada and you did a one or two-year diploma, you're probably, once you get PR, going to go [00:23:00] back and finish a bachelor's. That's what many people seem to be doing, and that probably is why the earnings go down.
So in the short term, there's slightly less earnings, but just like you said, in the long term it's gonna be probably higher. However IRCC's whole trajectory has been we want to get rid of international students who are scamming the system, who are in non-degree, ~um,~ private institutions that are not maybe a public education institution that doesn't have a rigorous academic program.
And so the whole sen- the whole sense for international students recently has been everything is narrowing, everything is going to get smaller and harder. And this is the same direction that IRCC is going to reproduce with express entry. So they are looking at removing the Canadian study permit study bonus points.
So anybody who is relying on that, who's finishing their program right now, who thinks, "Oh, ~well,~ [00:24:00] it's good. I have 15 points if I did a one or two-year Canadian program. I've got 30 points if I've got a Canadian bachelor's." It is possible that they will wipe away these points, and that is huge. That has a significant effect on people because people have structured their life and invested literally so much money in terms of how they, ~um,~ people have sold their farms, their families are supporting them.
Yeah. Everything's turning on this. But there is a little bit of commentary when we look at what IRCC is saying in the consultations to reforms that people are actually doing better if they have a Canadian bachelor's degree. And so they have said it is possible that they would award Canadian study points only to candidates with the strongest economic potential, and this is their words.
For example, those who have completed graduate-level studies in Canada. And they didn't say bachelor's, they said graduate. So what we don't know is [00:25:00] are they gonna keep those points for a bachelor's degree, or is it only going to be a master's level or higher? Yeah. So Siblings. We talked about this a little bit earlier, and the reality is at some point someone thought, "This makes sense."
~You know, ~if you have a sibling, you're gonna be able to come, they're gonna help you to find that first job ~in the, ~in the labor market, they're gonna help you to get settled. And maybe to some extent, Alicia, in that world where you have a candidate who's outside of Canada that has no connection to anything, hasn't ever worked in the Canadian labor market, maybe that factor makes sense at the time.
But when an individual has been living and working here, going to school for, ~you know, ~three, four, five years, ~then,~ then it becomes less of a factor because people are ~kind of ~settled. So I can see initially maybe why they created it, and I can clearly see now why they're removing it. But once again, these things happen in waves.
And ~so, um, ~those 15 points, although they seem small, when you're at the very top of the category and one point can make the difference between you getting an [00:26:00] ITA or not, these 15 points for a Canadian citizen or permanent resident sibling are quite massive. And, ~uh,~ it might seem, ~you know, ~like a weak predictor, ~um,~ at least in terms of economic establishment for- but for the purposes of succeeding in this very, very tight race, these tight draws, ~um,~ people that lose this when it's stripped away, it could inish- at least initially make the difference between them being able to get an ITA or not.
~So, um, ~yeah, 15 points, ~it's,~ it's crazy to think how much of an impact that has really ended up having in ~the, ~the draw system. Okay, let's put it together, Alicia. ~So, um, ~ultimately there's the three factors, and we can see ~kind of ~a pattern emerging ~Mm-hmm. ~And so this is where who needs to worry or who needs to ~kind of ~change their, ~uh,~ method for how they go forward in the future?
~Well, ~it's probably the people who only have a one or two-year Canadian college program. It's also probably the people who might have been relying on those sibling [00:27:00] points. ~Um, ~the French is probably gonna be less of a factor just because there will likely still be category-based draws. But the people who have only a one or two-year Canadian college program, those are the people I'm having conversations with to say, "Is it possible for you to get your full bachelor's degree by doing, ~you know, ~online studies from your home country?"
~Um, ~make sure that you get that bachelor's, then go and get your education credential assessment because you might now need to have higher education in order to even qualify to have a high competitive CRS score in the new scheme. ~Um, ~other people who probably need to look at possible ways to increase scores would be people who might be able to go into a higher paying job, right?
So if it's possible for you, you've been working for a few years and you are trying to decide between taking a promotion or maybe getting a job with another employer, make sure, of course, you're allowed to do that with your work permit conditions, that you have an open work permit or can switch to a new closed work permit.[00:28:00]
It's probably going to be worth it to really angle for a higher paying job because that's what IRCC is likely going to reward. And if you're going to have your points taken away because of siblings or because you only have a one or two-year Canadian credential that's giving you a lot of CRS points right now, making sure of course, that you've maxed out your primary language and probably your secondary language with French.
Yeah. ~You know, ~it's interesting, Alicia, as we drill right down to the very core of what's happening here, we have s- we have spent so many of our episodes, live streams, answering questions, basically telling people, "Look, if you have any desire to remain in Canada and you are only studying in a one-year program- Yeah
do not come. Do not come. You never should have come." One year post-grad after completing a one-year post-secondary credential is just not enough, and it never was from the very beginning enough time. There might have been a world where, you know, boy, just through a very sliver ~of, ~[00:29:00] of chance you might have been able to get permanent residence, but now it's just not even on the radar.
And what the federal government is saying, if you come to study in any, any level of education that's lower than at the very least a bachelor's, probably almost a master's, PhD at this stage, ~um,~ do not expect that you have a pathway to permanent residence. Come study, enjoy our education, learn, grow, improve yourself, but then go home.
And over time, that message ~kind of ~shifted a little bit, and I think that's ~kind of ~what's got us into the situation we are right now. But clearly, 76%, ~if,~ if 76% ~of, ~of the, ~you know, ~one to two-year Canadian college graduates are the ones relying on those study points, it's, ~you know, it's, ~it's gonna have a massive impact.
So be, ~uh,~ be aware of this, everyone. ~Um, ~obviously those are the most exposed, the ones that we're talking about now. Those that are largely unaffected, of course, are those that have strong, ~you know, ~human capital, high language ability, work ex- Canadian work experience, and solid education points. ~Um, ~others are candidates who never [00:30:00] claimed any of these points in the first place.
So if you've, you're competing against people who have these points and you don't, and now theirs are stripped away, ~well,~ instantly that's gonna improve your chances. And, ~uh, you know, ~relatively- ~Uh, ~the position for these, ~you know, ~individuals isn't going to change much in, in terms of ~their, ~their ranking, ~um,~ until after these points are stripped away.
But yeah, ~it's,~ it's interesting to see how these things are gonna play out, and the timing's gonna be interesting, Alicia. But, ~uh,~ yeah, but at the end of the day, ~you know, ~this is what we're here for, right? This is trying to figure out where a person is at. And the assessments, you guys, that we're doing right now for our clients and people that book consults is really, okay, what does the world look like if these points don't exist for you?
What does the world look like, ~um,~ and how can we potentially predict your opportunities in the future dependent upon the wage calculations ~and, ~and this concept of high wage, which we've had a little bit of a sneak peek into. There's still a lot of uncertainty, but these are the things that we talk with our clients.
This is what ~we, ~we [00:31:00] discuss in our consultations because you have to think forward. You cannot look current. You can't look at your current situation, the current rules, and then make ~your, ~your long-term decisions based on the way the world looks now. Yes, you have to take that into consideration 'cause we don't know timing.
But in our consultations, we spend a lot of time looking at the future and trying to open up as many possible doorways for our clients, ~um,~ that might be available, and where there are no doors available, counseling people as they should be counseled, that ~you, ~you will need to leave if the pathway isn't clear so that you preserve the right to go, ~uh,~ to come back at a- at another time.
Any final comments, Alicia? ~And, ~and I'll just remind everybody that if you do wanna book a consult, it's pretty simple. Just go to holthelaw.com/consultation, and you can connect with myself, Alicia, Igor, or Nayab. Yeah. So make sure, just like Mark said, that you are planning for the future, and so understand what your points are now.
Understand if all these [00:32:00] points for French and for siblings and for your Canadian education go away, are you still in a relatively strong position? Awesome. All right. Stay tuned. In episode 11, we're gonna talk about the trades, the trades rebuilt, and we'll touch a little bit more on Ken and his, ~uh,~ his little catch-22 problem.
And we'll see you then, everyone. Thanks for joining us.
