Federal projections showing a steep rise in healthcare spending for refugees and asylum seekers are reigniting debate over priorities within Canada’s already strained healthcare system.
New estimates from the Parliamentary Budget Officer indicate that costs tied to the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) are expected to grow substantially in the coming years, potentially surpassing $1.5 billion annually by the end of the decade. The IFHP provides temporary healthcare coverage for refugees, asylum claimants, and other eligible groups who are not yet enrolled in provincial or territorial health plans.
The program covers essential medical services — including physician visits and hospital care — and often extends to prescription drugs, mental health supports, dental care, and vision benefits. Rising expenditures are largely attributed to an increase in asylum claims, longer eligibility periods, and greater use of healthcare services.
The projected cost growth comes at a time when many Canadians continue to face significant barriers to accessing care. Millions are without a family doctor, emergency departments are grappling with staffing shortages, and wait times for diagnostics and procedures remain lengthy in many regions. Health policy researchers have linked prolonged delays to preventable complications and, in some cases, premature deaths, underscoring the broader pressures on Canada’s publicly funded system.
Critics argue that although refugee healthcare is a federal responsibility, the rapid escalation in IFHP spending raises questions about sustainability and fairness when provincial systems are already under heavy strain. Some point to the contrast between comprehensive federal coverage for newcomers and the challenges many long-term residents face in obtaining timely care.
The Liberal Party of Canada has defended the program, emphasizing that providing healthcare to refugees and asylum seekers is both a humanitarian obligation and a public health necessity. Federal officials note that untreated conditions can lead to more serious outcomes and higher long-term costs, and that access to care helps reduce pressure on emergency services.
Supporters also highlight that refugees and asylum seekers often arrive with unmet health needs and limited financial resources, and that healthcare access is central to Canada’s international commitments.
Opposition parties and advocacy groups are calling for greater transparency and oversight. Some are urging a detailed review by the Auditor General or further analysis by the Parliamentary Budget Officer to clarify cost drivers, patterns of benefit use, and whether adjustments are needed to balance humanitarian goals with system capacity.
The debate unfolds as provinces continue pressing for increased federal health transfers and long-term reforms to address physician shortages, staff burnout, and aging infrastructure. With healthcare access already a top concern for Canadians, the anticipated rise in refugee health spending is likely to remain a sensitive political issue in the months ahead.
