Back to Bills

Foreign Credential Advisory Committee Act

Full Title:
Foreign Credential Advisory Committee Act

Summary#

  • This bill sets up a temporary advisory committee to help Alberta recognize foreign education and training faster and more fairly.

  • The committee will review Alberta’s laws and rules, look at what works in other provinces, and recommend ways to improve, especially in jobs with worker shortages.

  • It must deliver a report within one year of the law taking effect. The law ends two years after it is approved.

  • Key points:

    • Creates a Foreign Credential Advisory Committee of up to 13 Alberta residents.
    • Members are appointed by the provincial cabinet based on recommendations from several ministries (Immigration and Multiculturalism; Advanced Education; Jobs, Economy and Trade; Health; Technology and Innovation).
    • Focus is on speeding up and improving recognition of foreign diplomas, degrees, and certificates.
    • The committee can set its own internal rules and will get staff support from the Ministry of Immigration and Multiculturalism.
    • Members may receive pay and expense reimbursement (set by cabinet).
    • The Minister must table the committee’s report in the Legislature.

What it means for you#

  • Internationally trained workers

    • No immediate change to licensing or job access.
    • The committee may recommend steps to make recognition faster or clearer, especially in fields with current or expected labour shortages (for example, health care or technology).
    • Any actual rule changes would come later and would depend on the government and professional regulators.
  • Employers

    • No instant change to hiring rules.
    • If the government acts on the recommendations, it could become easier to hire qualified internationally educated workers in shortage areas.
  • Professional regulatory organizations (licensing bodies)

    • Your rules and practices may be reviewed by the committee.
    • You may receive recommendations to streamline assessments or align with successful approaches used in other provinces.
    • The committee cannot force changes; it is advisory.
  • Alberta residents

    • In the short term, nothing changes.
    • Over time, if recommendations are adopted, you could see more qualified workers in key services (like health care), which may help reduce wait times or service gaps.
  • Government of Alberta

    • Must appoint the committee, support its work, and table its report.
    • Decides whether to act on the recommendations after the report is delivered.
  • Timing

    • Takes effect three months after approval.
    • Committee must report within one year after it starts.
    • The law ends two years after approval unless replaced or extended by new legislation.

Expenses#

  • Estimated annual cost: modest administrative spending for a temporary advisory committee; no official dollar estimate is provided.

  • What drives cost:

    • Possible member remuneration and expense reimbursement (amounts set in appointments).
    • Staff (secretarial) support from the Ministry of Immigration and Multiculturalism.
    • Time-limited mandate reduces long-term costs; no new ongoing programs are created in the bill.

Proponents' View#

  • It will help fill labour shortages by speeding up recognition for qualified newcomers in high-need jobs.
  • Learning from other provinces’ best practices can cut red tape and make the process clearer and fairer.
  • A cross-ministry committee ensures the right people are at the table and recommendations are practical.
  • The timeline is focused: report in one year, so action can come sooner.
  • Public transparency improves because the report must be tabled in the Legislature.

Opponents' View#

  • It adds another layer of bureaucracy and may duplicate work already underway in departments or regulators.
  • The committee is advisory only; it cannot change rules, so benefits are uncertain.
  • The short timeline may limit deep consultation or complex reforms.
  • Reviewing regulators’ rules could be seen as pressuring independent bodies, which some worry could affect standards and public safety.
  • There are costs for members and staff, with no guarantee the recommendations will be implemented.