Canadians’ support for immigration is slipping, polls show. Some say misinformation is partly to blame, Spectaculaire bond de la résistance à l’immigration au Canada

More coverage of declining public support for current high levels of immigration. Starting with the Toronto Star (arguably, there has been greater misinformation by the advocates of high levels of immigration than from those advocating caution):

A pair of new polls point to a continuing decline in Canadians’ support for immigration — findings one pollster describes as a “clarion call” for the federal government.

The two surveys were released Monday, ahead of the expected unveiling this week by Immigration Minister Marc Miller of the government’s latest immigration plan, which will set the number and composition of the various classes of permanent residents welcomed to Canada over the next three years.

The federal government’s current immigration plan, unveiled in 2022, aimed to bring in 465,000 new permanent residents this year, 485,000 in 2024 and 500,000 in 2025. The Immigration Department is on track to meet the 2023 target.

Over the past year, amid surging interest rates and the increasing cost of living, Canada’s high immigrant intake has been tied to the housing crisis as well as a strained health-care system and per-capita productivity.

The poll by the Environics Institute for Survey Research and Century Initiative found the number of respondents who agreed “immigration has a positive impact on the economy of Canada” has dropped 11 per cent from last year and reached its lowest level since 1998.

Lisa Lalande, CEO of Century Initiative, said the data is a “clarion call” for proactive economic planning, improved integration policies and investments in infrastructure such as housing in order to preserve the confidence of Canadians.

“Immigration makes us a more prosperous, diverse, resilient and influential country — but only if we do the work to grow well,” said Lalande, whose group advocates for responsible population growth.

The separate poll of 1,500 people by the Association for Canadian Studies and Metropolis Canada revealed similar trends. It found 57 per cent of respondents in Greater Toronto felt there are too many immigrants, compared to 41 per cent in Montreal and 49 per cent in Vancouver.

Respondents in Greater Toronto were also most likely to feel there were too many refugees admitted to Canada, with 55 per cent of them agreement with the statement, followed by 40 per cent among those from Montreal and 39 per cent of those from Vancouver.

“These surveys were indicative of a shift in sentiment around the numbers of immigrants coming to the country, a lot of which, I think, is connected to issues around housing,” said Jack Jedwab, president of the ACS and Metropolis.

Those sentiments are fuelled in part by the lack of knowledge among Canadians of the country’s immigration landscape, he said.

Thirty-seven per cent of participants in the survey thought Canada received more than 250,000 refugees a year, when only about 76,000 were accepted. They also overestimated the number of permanent residents admitted to the country, with 27 per cent of people believing that Canada had already been taking in 500,000 newcomers a year.

The misinformation speaks to the need to better educate and inform the public about Canada immigration, Jedwab said.

“Policymakers have to pay more serious attention to how we manage immigration and manage opinion around immigration,” he said. “They need to explain to people why immigration continues to be so vital to the future of our country.”

At an event on Friday, the immigration minister said discussions about the upcoming immigration plan were ongoing but hinted that reducing immigrant intake was not an option, even though he said he understood the public concerns.

“This is one of the most significant economic vehicles to our country, but we need to do it in a responsible way,” Miller told reporters. “The net entrance into the workforce is 90-plus per cent driven by immigration, so any conversation about reducing needs to entertain the reality that would be a hit to our economy.”

The Environics and Century Initiative report showed 44 per cent of Canadians said they were strongly or somewhat in agreement with the statement, “there is too much immigration to Canada,” up 17 percentage points from a year ago, the largest one-year change recorded on this question since the annual survey started in 1977.

It said those who agreed with this statement were most likely to cite concerns that newcomers may be contributing to the current housing crisis (38 per cent of this group give this reason) compared to only 15 per cent in 2022.

Respondents continued to identify inflation, cost of living, the economy and interest rates as the most important issue facing the country. Overall, just 34 per cent of people said they were happy with the way things are going in Canada, down 13 percentage points from last year.

The silver lining is that the negative public sentiments toward immigration do not appear to have translated into Canadians’ feeling about immigrants themselves, the survey said.

Forty-two per cent of respondents said immigrants make their community a better place, compared to just nine per cent who believed newcomers make it worse, with the rest saying it makes no difference. Those with a positive view cited local diversity, multiculturalism as well as the role immigrants play in economic and population growth.

Of the various admitted classes of permanent residents, the respondents also want the federal government to prioritize those with specialized skills and high education, followed by refugees fleeing persecution and overseas families of Canadians.

Temporary foreign workers in lower-skilled jobs and international students were ranked the lowest, with only about one-third of people saying those two groups should be a high priority, the report found.

The 2024-26 immigration plan is expected to be tabled in Parliament on Wednesday.

Source: Canadians’ support for immigration is slipping, polls show. Some say misinformation is partly to blame

In Le Devoir:

L’appui aux cibles d’immigration actuelles est en chute libre. Entre 2022 et 2023, la proportion de Canadiens susceptibles de dire qu’il y a trop d’immigrants dans le pays a bondi de 17 points de pourcentage, ce qui vient renverser radicalement une tendance qui remonte à des décennies.

Quelque 27 % des Canadiens considéraient l’an dernier que « le Canada accueille trop d’immigrants ». Cette année, ils sont 44 % à affirmer une telle chose, une croissance record de 17 points.

Ces données sont tirées d’un sondage probabiliste en partie réalisé et financé par l’organisme Initiative du siècle, qui promeut l’idée d’une population de 100 millions d’habitants d’ici 2100.

« On a déjà vu des périodes où l’opinion restait en mouvement, mais là, c’est un saut. On peut dire que c’est du jamais vu », explique Andrew Parkin, l’un des chercheurs de cette étude. Il faut remonter au début des années 2000 pour observer une telle frilosité à l’égard des seuils d’immigration.

Ce changement d’opinion touche autant les Canadiens les plus fortunés (+20 %) que les immigrants de première génération (+20 %). Il touche aussi les partisans libéraux (+11 %), néodémocrates (+9 %) ou encore conservateurs (+21 %).

Économie et crise du logement

Ce n’est pas le malaise culturel que peuvent susciter les néo-Canadiens qui cause cette volte-face dans l’opinion publique, souligne le rapport. C’est plutôt le contexte économique difficile et la pénurie de logements qui fondent cette nouvelle réticence.

« Ça ne veut pas dire que les immigrants sont la cause de la crise du logement ou du manque de logements abordables, soutient Andrew Parkin. C’est plus : “Est-ce que c’est le bon moment pour avoir plus d’immigration étant donné qu’il y a une crise du logement ?” C’est une nuance. […] Le contexte économique touche tout le monde également. Ça touche aussi les immigrants, qui cherchent aussi à acheter une maison. »

Malgré tout, une majorité (51 %) de Canadiens rejettent encore l’idée que les niveaux d’immigration seraient trop élevés. Et ils sont très peu nombreux à voir l’immigrant comme un problème en soi.

« Certains disent qu’on utilise la crise du logement comme excuse pour se tourner contre les immigrants. Ce n’est pas ça. Le nombre de Canadiens qui disent que l’immigration empire leur communauté, c’est juste 9 %. Au Québec, c’est 4 %. »

Le Québec plus ouvert

Le Québec suit la tendance canadienne, mais demeure le territoire où le sentiment général reste le plus ouvert aux nouveaux arrivants. Environ un tiers (37 %) des Québécois considèrent que les immigrants sont trop nombreux, contre 50 % en Ontario et 46 % dans le reste du Canada.

La vision du Québec sur cette question a grandement évolué depuis les années 1990. Pas moins de 57 % des Québécois considéraient en 1993 que les immigrants « menaçaient la culture du Québec » ; ils ne sont plus que 38 % à avoir cette opinion aujourd’hui.

Le Canada a franchi cette année le cap des 40 millions d’habitants, en raison notamment d’un flux migratoire toujours plus important.

Source: Spectaculaire bond de la résistance à l’immigration au Canada

Focus Canada: Public support for immigration falls sharply amid affordability concerns

Yet another poll showing a decline in support for current high levels of immigration over the past year given the impact on housing, in particular.

Public support for immigration has fallen sharply over the past year as Canadians increasingly tie affordability and housing concerns to a historic influx of newcomers, according to survey results published on Monday.

Forty-four per cent of Canadians think immigration levels are too high, up from 27 per cent last year, according to a survey conducted by the Environics Institute for Survey Research, in partnership with the Century Initiative, an organization that advocates for Canada’s population to hit 100 million by 2100. This was the largest change in sentiment between surveys that Environics has observed in four-plus decades of polling on the topic.

Just a year ago, public support for immigration was stronger than ever, Environics found. But since then, Canadians have been consumed by a number of economic worries, including high inflation, rising interest payments and a worsening housing crisis, which is pushing up resale prices and rents across the country.

At the same time, Canada is growing rapidly. Over the 12 months through June, the population expanded by around 1.2 million people, bringing the total number of residents to 40.1 million. At 3 per cent, this was the largest 12-month increase since 1957; international migration accounted for almost the entirety of the expansion.

This surge has led to a spirited debate about immigration and Canada’s ability to absorb so many people so quickly. The results from Environics are similar to other recent surveys, including a Nanos poll for The Globe and Mail that found more than half of Canadians want the country to accept fewer immigrants than Ottawa’s plan.

“We see these results as a clarion call for action,” said Lisa Lalande, the chief executive officer of the Century Initiative. “You cannot address demographic decline through immigration without having these corresponding investments” in housing and other areas.

The survey was published just before the federal government unveils its next three-year plan for immigration this week, covering 2024 to 2026. Last year, Ottawa said it was aiming to admit 500,000 permanent residents annually by 2025, part of a steady increase since the Liberal Party came to power in 2015.

As the Liberals struggle with weaker support in the polls, the Century Initiative is hoping the government doesn’t water down its immigration plans. “Now is not the time to pull back on immigration,” Ms. Lalande said.

Of late, the population increase is mostly driven by the arrival of temporary residents, such as international students and workers, many of whom wish to settle permanently in Canada. There are no limits on the issuance of temporary visas, although Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said last week that his government was considering a cap.

Under Mr. Trudeau, the Liberals have made high immigration a cornerstone of their economic agenda. They argue that not only will immigration lead to stronger growth, but it will also help fill jobs as Canada gets progressively older.

David Williams, vice-president of policy at the Business Council of British Columbia, said this is a naive view of how economies work. He pointed to a stagnation in gross domestic product per capita as a sign that average living standards were not improving, despite the high intake of newcomers. Furthermore, there is ample research that indicates immigration has little effect – positive or negative – on per-capita output or average wages.

“Canada’s immigration policy has really become disconnected from the academic evidence,” Mr. Williams said. “There seems to be a view in Ottawa that ever-increasing immigration levels is a panacea for all of the structural problems in Canada’s economy.”

Rupa Banerjee, a Canada Research Chair in immigration and economics at Toronto Metropolitan University, said the country has struggled for a long time to build homes in sufficient quantities. “People are getting this wrong impression that the immigration situation is causing the housing crisis,” she said.

The Environics survey found the largest declines in support for immigration in British Columbia and Ontario. There was a sharp divide by political party: Nearly two-thirds of Conservative Party supporters agreed with the statement that “there is too much immigration to Canada,” compared with 29 per cent of Liberals and 21 per cent of New Democratic Party backers.

Still, the results suggest that Canadians see the upsides of immigration. Around three-quarters of people agreed that immigration has a positive impact on the economy, down from 85 per cent last year.

The survey was based on telephone interviews conducted with 2,002 Canadians between Sept. 4 and 17. The results are accurate to within plus or minus 2.2 percentage points in 19 out of 20 samples.

The Century Initiative was co-founded by Mark Wiseman, chair of Alberta Investment Management Corp., and Dominic Barton, the former global managing partner of consulting giant McKinsey & Co. Mr. Barton also served as chair of the Advisory Council on Economic Growth, which recommended to the Trudeau government in 2016 that it raise its annual intake of permanent residents by 50 per cent over five years.

“We do not believe in growth at all costs,” Ms. Lalande said. “That growth must absolutely be accompanied by investments in infrastructure, both physical and social.”

Dr. Banerjee said the federal government could do a better job of communicating its plans for how these newcomers will integrate into Canada. Otherwise, she said, people are left with the impression that there is no plan.

“For several years now, I’ve been slightly concerned that we shouldn’t take this high support for immigration for granted,” she said. “It’s very precarious, to be honest.”

Source: Focus Canada: Public support for immigration falls sharply amid affordability concerns

Interesting to contrast Canadian and foreign-born along with party. Striking that more immigrants feel levels too high compared to Canadian born. Party differences less surprising:

Overall, there is too much immigration to Canada: Canadian-born 43 percent, Foreign-born 47 percent, Liberals 29 percent, CPC 64 percent, NDP 21 percent

Many people claiming to be refugees are not real refugees: Canadian-born 33 percent, Foreign-born 45 percent, Liberals 29 percent, CPC 49 percent, NDP 21 percent

There are too many immigrants coming into this country who are not adopting Canadian values: Canadian-born 48 percent, Foreign-born 46 percent, Liberals 38 percent, CPC 65 percent, NDP 27 percent

Overall, immigration has a positive impact on the economy of Canada: Canadian-born 72 percent, Foreign-born 81 percent, Liberals 85 percent, CPC 64 percent, NDP 89 percent

The other question that is interesting to look at the breakdown between Canadian and foreign-born pertains to those immigrants considered to be high priority. Not surprisingly, immigrants place higher priority on family immigration and international students but a lower priority on refugees. Both give priority to higher skilled compared to lower skilled:

People with good education and skills who move to Canada permanently: High priority: Canadian-born: 66 percent, Foreign-born: 67 percent

Family members of current residents of Canada, including immigrants: Canadian-born: 38 percent, Foreign-born: 43 percent

Refugees who are fleeing conflict or persecution in their own countries: Canadian-born: 58 percent, Foreign-born: 47 percent

Workers with specialized skills that are in high demand in Canada: Canadian-born: 76 percent, Foreign-born: 80 percent

Students who come to study in Canadian colleges and universities: Canadian-born: 29 percent, Foreign-born: 45 percent

Lower skilled workers who are hired to come to Canada for a short time to take on hard-to-fill jobs: Canadian-born: 34 percent, Foreign-born: 33 percent

Yakabuski: The Liberals’ immigration blueprint is unsound, and will hinder the economy it seeks to help

Good, long and informative read on the fallacies of the government’s immigration policies and programs. Good quotes by Mikal Skuterud, Pierre Fortin and yours truly:

On the afternoon of June 16, Canada’s population surpassed the 40-million mark.

In a country long lamented by some of its leading thinkers as a low-density also-ran stunted by a lack of bodies to fill its vast expanses and dynamize its sleepy cities, it was to be expected that hitting this milestone would be considered a big deal by some.

…

Source: Opinion: The Liberals’ immigration blueprint is unsound, and will … – The Globe and Mail

Globe editorial: How Ottawa ignored its own warning and made Canada’s refugee crisis even worse

Good policy advice, not listened to.

And it appears from a variety of public opinion research that this ill-advised policy change is likely one of the changes contributing to declining public support for immigration:

There is a thicket of bureaucratic language in the eight-page briefing document from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada on the upside and downside of waiving temporary visitor visa requirements to get rid of a massive backlog of applications.

…

Source: How Ottawa ignored its own warning and made Canada’s refugee crisis even worse

Miller to provinces: If you can’t fix international student rackets then feds will

Some stronger messaging from the feds:

The federal government is prepared to crack down on dubious post-secondary institutions that recruit international students if provinces aren’t up to the task, Immigration Minister Marc Miller warned Friday.

Miller made the comments as he announced new rules to curb fraud and “bad actors” in the international student program, following an investigation this summer into more than 100 cases involving fake admission letters.

Provinces are responsible for accrediting schools that can accept international students, which include both public universities and colleges as well as private institutions.

In his final months in the role former immigration minister Sean Fraser raised concerns about the number of private colleges in strip malls and other venues that rely on international student tuition, but in some cases offer a meagre education in return.

Several advocacy groups, including the Migrant Workers Alliance for Change have highlighted cases of student exploitation by some of those intuitions.

Miller said Friday the international school program has created an ecosystem that is “rife with perverse incentives,” and that is very lucrative for the institutions and for provinces that have underfunded their post-secondary schools,

“The federal government is coming forward and opening its arms to our provincial partners, territorial partners, to make sure we all do our jobs properly,” Miller said at a press conference at Sheraton College in Brampton, Ont. Friday.

“If that job can’t be done, the federal government is prepared to do it.”

The immigration department counted 800,000 active study permits at the end of 2022, a 170 per cent increase over the last decade.

“What we are seeing in the ecosystem is one that has been chasing after short term gain, without looking at the long term pain. And we need to reverse that trend. But it will take time,” he said.

Ontario in particular has “challenges” when it comes to the accreditation of post-secondary intuitions, but it is not the only one. Miller did not elaborate on what those specific challenges are.

The Ontario Ministry of Colleges and Universities did not answer specific questions, but said in a statement the provincial government will “again ask for a meeting with the new federal minister to discuss the planned changes once they’ve been communicated with ministry.”

Sarom Rho, an organizer with the Migrant Workers Alliance for Change, said the “fly-by-night colleges” are sometimes partnered with public institutions. But even those can be exploitative, she said.

She said she is working with a group of students who paid tuition up front to one of those intuitions, but were asked for more money just weeks before class enrolment began.

“The school said, ‘Well, if you don’t have the money, you can go back home, earn some and come back,'” Rho said Friday.

She said the federal government must take up the accreditation of colleges and universities that accept international students.

“They are aware of the substandard nature of these institutions, these fly-by-night private colleges,” she said.

Also on Friday Miller announced new rules in the federal government’s jurisdiction to address fraud and “bad actors” in the international student program.

Miller’s department plans to set up a system to recognize post-secondary schools that have higher standards for services, supports and outcomes for international students in time for the next fall semester.

The standards could include adequate access to housing, mental health services, and a lower ratio of international to Canadian students, Miller said, though the criteria hasn’t been finalized.

Details about how exactly recognized schools and institutions would benefit under the new system will be released later, the minister said. As an example, he said applicants for those schools would be prioritized when it comes to processing their study permits.

“Our goal here is to punish the bad actors to make sure that they are held accountable, and reward the good actors who provide adequate outcomes for the success of international students,” the minister said.

The details of that system will be important, Rho said, especially since students often fear speaking out because of their precarious status in Canada.

“Migrant student workers should not be caught in this … carrot and stick system,” she said.

“What will happen to those who do go to the schools that are ‘bad actors?’ They will also be punished. So instead, what they need is protections and equal rights.”

The department is also looking to combat fraud by verifying international students’ acceptance letters from Colleges and Universities.

The extra verification is a reaction to a scheme that dates back to 2017, which saw immigration agents issue fake acceptance letters to get international students into Canada.

The department launched a task force in June to investigate cases associated with the racket. Of the 103 cases reviewed so far, roughly 40 per cent of students appeared to be in on the scheme, while the rest were victims of it.

The task force is still investigating another 182 cases.

“The use of fraudulent admissions letters has been a major concern for my department this year and continues to pose a serious threat to the integrity of our student program,” Miller said, adding that international students are not to blame.

The new rules come as a welcome development to the National Association of Career Colleges, the group’s CEO said in a statement Friday.

“We welcome the opportunity to work with the federal government to improve our international student system by building greater trust and security, supporting Canadian communities, and ensuring that Canada’s immigration programs are student-centred,” the CEO, Michael Sangster said in a statement.

Source: Miller to provinces: If you can’t fix international student rackets then feds will

Le Bloc compte forcer un débat sur les cibles d’immigration à Ottawa

Long overdue, but Parliament likely not the best place for a meaningful discussion and debate:

Le Bloc québécois va utiliser sa journée d’opposition de mardi prochain pour forcer la tenue d’un débat, en Chambre, sur la nécessité ou non d’Ottawa de consulter le Québec et les autres provinces avant de fixer ses cibles d’immigration.

La formation politique entend mettre de l’avant une motion afin que les Communes « demande[nt] au gouvernement de revoir ses cibles d’immigration dès 2024 après consultation du Québec, des provinces et des territoires en fonction de leur capacité d’accueil, notamment en matière de logement, de soins de santé, d’éducation, de francisation et d’infrastructures de transports, le tout dans l’objectif d’une immigration réussie », selon le libellé qu’a lu aux journalistes le chef bloquiste, Yves-François Blanchet, jeudi.

Il a affirmé en mêlée de presse qu’il estime que la motion, « sur le principe », « devrait pouvoir rallier un peu tout le monde ».

« On n’a pas voulu être trop contraignants », a-t-il déclaré, disant vouloir « forcer une réflexion de bonne foi ».

Geler les cibles d’immigration ?

Le Canada a pour cible d’accueillir 500 000 nouveaux résidents permanents par an partout au pays d’ici 2025. Selon un reportage publié par Radio-Canada, le Conseil des ministres du gouvernement Trudeau a des discussions sur la possibilité de stabiliser, voire de revoir à la baisse cet objectif.

Si l’option du plafonnement en venait à être préconisée, cela signifierait qu’une pause surviendrait quant à la hausse des cibles d’immigration qui s’est maintenue au courant des dernières années.

La Presse canadienne n’a pas été en mesure de corroborer les informations rapportées par le diffuseur public, qui a précisé s’être entretenu avec une demi-douzaine d’élus libéraux.

Appelé à commenter ce reportage, M. Blanchet a dit vouloir se garder une certaine réserve considérant qu’aucune décision n’a été prise par le Conseil des ministres.

Il a néanmoins soutenu que l’idée de stabiliser ou réduire, si elle se concrétise, n’équivaudrait « pas [à] un recul au sens politique ».

« C’est un recul au sens mathématique […] et juste arrêter de monter est probablement une politique intéressante. Geler, ce serait une amélioration. Réduire serait probablement une amélioration en attendant que le Québec soit capable d’avoir mis en place des mesures et des choix en termes de nombres et de manières qui soient propres au Québec », a dit le chef du Bloc québécois.

« Pro-immigration » et Québécois

Habituellement, le débat sur la motion d’opposition commence le jour même de son dépôt, prévu mardi prochain. Le vote, toutefois, a en temps normal lieu à une date ultérieure.

Le Bloc québécois n’a pas attendu pour questionner le gouvernement sur sa réceptivité quant à l’idée de sa motion à être déposée. Dès jeudi, il a utilisé plusieurs de ses interventions à la période des questions pour interpeller les libéraux.

Le ministre de l’Immigration, Marc Miller, a soutenu qu’il est « pro-immigration » en plus d’être Québécois. « On a besoin d’immigrants au pays, on a besoin de construire des maisons. Ça nous prend 100 000 emplois dans la construction. Ça ne va pas nécessairement venir d’ici. Ça va prendre de l’immigration », a-t-il répondu.

Il a, du même souffle, invité le Bloc québécois, « s’ils sont contre l’immigration », à le dire « high and clear » (haut et fort).

Source: Le Bloc compte forcer un débat sur les cibles d’immigration à Ottawa

Immigration Minister set to combat international student fraud 

Overdue baby steps:

Immigration Minister Marc Miller is set to unveil on Friday a package of reforms designed to combat fraud in international student admissions and stop bad actors from preying on those students for financial gain, and to fast-track study-permit applications at colleges and universities that meet high standards.

Among the new measures will be a multilayered authentication system for ensuring letters of acceptance from universities and colleges are genuine. A foreign student needs such a letter to apply for a study permit, an immigration document that allows them to enter the country. Fake letters have been used to obtain permits fraudulently.

…

Source: Immigration Minister set to combat international student fraud

USCIS Changes H-1B Visa Lottery, Extends Cap-Gap For Students

Interesting proposed shift from multiple registrations per applicant to unique identifiers, among other proposed changes:

Employers, international students and H-1B professionals will like some elements of a proposed H-1B visa rule, although other measures will generate opposition and invite litigation. The most significant change for many individuals will be how U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services conducts the H-1B lottery. USCIS published the notice of proposed rulemaking on October 23, 2023, and it is subject to a 60-day comment period that could result in revisions. A proposed narrowing of the degrees that would allow a position to qualify as an H-1B specialty occupation might be the rule’s most controversial measure. (See article here.)

Changing The H-1B Lottery

USCIS uses a lottery when companies file more H-1B applications (or registrations) than the annual limit of 85,000 (65,000 plus a 20,000 exemption for advanced degree holders from U.S. universities). According to USCIS, registrations for FY 2024 increased largely due to multiple registrations submitted for the same individuals. Still, due to the low annual H-1B limit, USCIS would have rejected over 75% of H-1B registrations for FY 2024, even if beneficiaries with multiple registrations were excluded from the lottery.

USCIS proposes a solution—selecting H-1B registrations by unique beneficiaries—recommended in a May 1, 2023, Forbesarticle. Many employers will likely approve of the change.

“Under the proposed update to the random selection process, registrants would continue to submit registrations on behalf of beneficiaries and beneficiaries would continue to be able to have more than one registration submitted on their behalf,” according to USCIS. “Selection would be based on each unique beneficiary identified in the registration pool, rather than each registration. Each unique beneficiary would be entered in the selection process once, regardless of how many registrations were submitted on their behalf. If a beneficiary were selected, each registrant that submitted a registration on that beneficiary’s behalf would be notified of selection and would be eligible to file a petition on that beneficiary’s behalf.”

USCIS will use “valid passport information” to identify unique beneficiaries, and individuals would select among the employers that submitted H-1B registrations on their behalf. “DHS [Department of Homeland Security] proposes to require the submission of valid passport information, including the passport number, country of issuance, and expiration date, in addition to the currently required information. Registrants would no longer be allowed to select an option indicating that the beneficiary does not have a passport.”

USCIS anticipates a beneficiary could have more than one potential employer. “If multiple unrelated companies submitted registrations for a beneficiary and the beneficiary were selected, then the beneficiary could have greater bargaining power or flexibility to determine which company or companies could submit an H-1B petition for the beneficiary, because all of the companies that submitted a registration for that unique beneficiary would be notified that their registration was selected and they are eligible to file a petition on behalf of that beneficiary.”

USCIS will “extend the existing prohibition on related entities filing multiple petitions by also prohibiting related entities from submitting multiple registrations for the same individual.”

USCIS states, “The proposed change may also potentially benefit companies that submit legitimate registrations for unique beneficiaries by increasing their chances to employ a specific beneficiary in H-1B status.”

The controversy over multiple registrations obscures a stark reality for employers: H-1B registrations with only one employer increased by 66% between FY 2022 and FY 2024, illustrating the increasing demand for talent in the U.S. economy.

Extended Cap-Gap Protection For International Students

F-1 students, often working on Optional Practical Training, now receive “cap-gap” protection when changing to H-1B status. In a move students, employers and universities will welcome, the proposed rule provides automatic “cap-gap” protection until April 1 rather than the current October 1 (i.e., an additional six months). USCIS states this “would avoid disruptions in employment authorization that some F-1 nonimmigrants seeking cap-gap extensions have experienced over the past several years.”

Nonprofit Research Institutions

The proposed rule would allow more organizations to qualify as nonprofit research institutions. That would make them eligible to file H-1B petitions exempt from the H-1B annual limit. USCIS would change the definition of a nonprofit research organization from one “primarily engaged in basic research and/or applied research” to an organization with “a fundamental activity of” basic research and/or applied research. “This would likely increase the population of petitioners who are now eligible for the cap exemption and, by extension, would likely increase the number of petitions that may be cap-exempt,” according to USCIS.

H-1B Petitions For Entrepreneurs 

Due to the regulatory definition of an employee-employer relationship, USCIS rules make it difficult for entrepreneurs to qualify for H-1B petitions. USCIS recognizes this causes many high-skilled foreign nationals to not found a company or wait until they acquire permanent residence. “Nearly two-thirds (64%) of U.S. billion-dollar companies (unicorns) were founded or cofounded by immigrants or the children of immigrants,” according to research by the National Foundation for American Policy, indicating what the U.S. economy loses when restricting foreign-born entrepreneurship.

“DHS is proposing to add provisions to specifically address situations where a potential H-1B beneficiary owns a controlling interest in the petitioning entity,” according to the proposed rule. “One of the proposed conditions is that the beneficiary may perform duties that are directly related to owning and directing the petitioner’s business as long as the beneficiary will perform specialty occupation duties authorized under the petition a majority of the time.”

Initial approvals for H-1B petitions when the H-1B beneficiary “possesses a controlling ownership interest in the petitioning” business “will be limited to a validity period of up to 18 months.”

Codifying H-1B Petition Amendments

Beginning July 2015, USCIS required amended H-1B petitions when employers received a new labor condition application (LCA) from the Department of Labor. This followed the agency labeling the Simeio Solutions case an Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) precedent decision binding on adjudicators. The decision raised costs for many employers.

“Any change in the place of employment to a geographical area that requires a corresponding labor condition application to be certified to USCIS is considered a material change and requires an amended or new petition to be filed with USCIS before the H-1B worker may begin work at the new place of employment,” under the proposed regulatory language. An employer does not need to file an amended petition if the H-1B visa holder moves “to a new job location within the same area of intended employment as listed on the labor condition application.”

Requiring Compliance With Site Visit Requests

For many years, USCIS has conducted site visits at the employers of H-1B visa holders. However, attorneys argue the authority to conduct such site visits is suspect. USCIS seeks to change that with the proposed rule by mandating compliance with the agency’s visits.

“The proposals must be viewed in the context of how much the government will charge for access to H-1B visas,” said Lynden Melmed, a partner with Berry Appleman & Leiden (BAL) and a former chief counsel of USCIS. “The fee rule, which is expected to be released at any time, could be more impactful than any of the changes proposed this past week.”

Source: USCIS Changes H-1B Visa Lottery, Extends Cap-Gap For Students

Le recrutement du Québec à l’étranger est vu d’un œil critique par des pays sources

No better nor worse than others, but with real implications for source countries:

Le Québec pige dans les forces vives des pays étrangers, y compris dans des secteurs névralgiques comme la santé, et le plus souvent sans invitation officielle. Les ambassadeurs du Maroc et du Bénin ainsi qu’un recruteur à l’étranger souhaitent envoyer un signal au gouvernement québécois.

Tous reconnaissent que l’exode des cerveaux, un phénomène aussi connu sous le terme de brain drain en anglais, existe depuis longtemps. À une différence près : ce sont aujourd’hui des gouvernements qui font directement du recrutement, comme celui du Québec, sans toujours en demander l’autorisation ou offrir une contrepartie.

« Du côté des gouvernements qui recherchent cette main-d’oeuvre, ces compétences, il devrait y avoir une certaine retenue et une réflexion », affirme l’ambassadrice du Maroc au Canada, Souriya Otmani.

Après le terrible tremblement de terre qui a frappé le Maroc en septembre dernier, les médias locaux ont rapporté que les hôpitaux manquaient de personnel, une pénurie déjà aiguë et aggravée par une saignée des professionnels encouragée par des pays recruteurs.

Trois jours plus tard, une page officielle du gouvernement du Québec annonçait sans gêne une séance d’information pour ceux souhaitant immigrer dans la province, avec à la clé des emplois dans le secteur de la santé.

Le peu de ressources humaines « dont nous avons un besoin impérieux » est « pompé de manière un peu cynique par des partenaires qui sont déjà beaucoup plus développés », indique quant à lui l’ambassadeur de la République du Bénin au Canada et aux États-Unis, Jean-Claude do Rego.

La santé et l’éducation sont des domaines de préoccupation pour les deux officiels, alors que d’autres professions techniques les inquiètent moins. « Oui, il y a certaines catégories professionnelles où il y a un surplus, et le Maroc cherche à assurer des débouchés, y compris à l’étranger », explique la diplomate marocaine.

Il existe pour ces domaines des canaux officiels de recrutement « tout à fait légaux », comme l’Agence nationale de promotion de l’emploi et des compétences (ANAPEC) au Maroc. Cette agence nationale prend cependant garde de ne pas promouvoir l’exode dans « des secteurs très sensibles », comme la santé, avance Mme Otmani. Elle tient à préciser qu’elle ne donne que son point de vue, tout en admettant que le sujet est régulièrement abordé dans plusieurs arènes politiques et économiques au pays.

L’exode des infirmières, des aides-soignantes, des médecins ou des préposés est une « perte sèche pour un pays en plein développement comme le nôtre, qui a besoin de toutes ses ressources humaines qualifiées », ajoute-t-elle.

Des pays en situation critique

L’Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS) publie depuis 2020 une liste rouge des pays dont les systèmes de santé sont les plus vulnérables, afin d’alerter les pays recruteurs.

Québec recrute directement des personnes au Bénin, au Cameroun, en Côte d’Ivoire, au Togo et au Sénégal, des pays qui figurent sur la Liste de soutien et de sauvegarde du personnel de la santé. À défaut de pouvoir l’interdire, l’OMS demande aux gouvernements recruteurs d’adhérer à un certain code de conduite et de passer des ententes avec les bassins de travailleurs.

L’ambassadeur do Rego ne vise pas expressément les efforts du Québec dans son pays d’origine, mais il croit que la province est bien positionnée pour « trouver de meilleures modalités » afin que ce type d’échange « puisse rester compatible avec les besoins de développement de la société qui laisse partir ses talents », expose-t-il.

Ce pays d’Afrique de l’Ouest finance l’éducation publique, y compris des formations postsecondaires. Or, comme l’indignation autour des médecins québécois qui vont pratiquer ailleurs, cette « équation économique nationale est négative », indique quant à lui Yves Legault, vice-président exécutif ISA Immigration et Recrutement.

« Le discours politique est : “Pas de problème, on va aller chercher des infirmières à l’étranger.” Mais on n’a pas payé pour leur éducation et il n’y a aucun mécanisme de retour. Il y a une iniquité flagrante dans ce modèle migratoire », martèle M. Legault, qui est également consul honoraire du Bénin à Toronto.

Solutions

Bien sûr, pas question d’empêcher la mobilité internationale, disent-ils tous. « Mais comment peut-on rendre moins pénibles les tensions » sur un système déjà fragilisé ? demande M. do Rego.

Les gens formulent eux-mêmes le désir d’aller vivre à l’étranger, reconnaît Yves Legault, dans la « recherche d’une vie meilleure pour eux, mais surtout pour leurs enfants ». Si toutefois les conditions étaient réunies dans leur pays d’origine, « ils n’auraient pas à s’expatrier ». Le défi est donc d’aider à « construire des opportunités » dans leur pays d’origine, à l’heure où les pays occidentaux montrent un certain désintérêt pour la coopération internationale.

« Je ne suis pas manichéen. Je comprends les raisons fondamentales pour lesquelles certains pays trouvent cette solution à leurs problèmes », affirme l’ambassadeur du Bénin, qui invite à « trouver une solution de compromis ».

Il évoque notamment la volonté de son gouvernement depuis plusieurs années d’obtenir un plus grand nombre de places à coût réduit dans le système éducatif au Québec. Les étrangers paient en effet des droits de scolarité beaucoup plus élevés que les citoyens ou les résidents permanents, mais des bourses pour en être exonérés existent. « Nous ne bénéficions que d’un quota de dix bourses, alors que nous avons 50 fois plus de demandes », illustre-t-il.

La réflexion est aussi déjà lancée au Maroc et au Bénin pour trouver des incitatifs à rester là-bas, en améliorant les conditions salariales.

Elle donne l’exemple d’une entente avec l’Allemagne, qui prévoit une formation pour les travailleurs marocains et un retour éventuel dans leur pays d’origine. « Personne ne va les obliger [à rentrer dans leur pays], mais on insiste dès le recrutement sur le fait que c’est une condition de départ, de manière que le Maroc bénéficie de cette formation aussi. »

Source: Le recrutement du Québec à l’étranger est vu d’un œil critique par des pays sources

Amid growing dissent, will Canada change its immigration plans?

Good overview, largely from the more pro-current approach side, as we await the levels plan release:

Canada is set to unveil the latest targets for how many new residents it hopes to welcome in the coming years.

The annual announcement of permanent resident levels, something Immigration Minister Marc Miller must do in Parliament on or before Nov. 1, is the kind of dry fare that has traditionally drawn little attention, serving largely as a governmental formality amid high levels of public support for immigration.

But this year’s numbers are expected to face more scrutiny given a surging discussion of whether Canada has the capacity and the infrastructure it needs to accommodate the hundreds of thousands of newcomers it is bringing in.

{{tncms-inline displaytitle=”Immigration drives Canada’s population to 40M” embedid=”ba479a79-f163-4cc5-97a2-74273de44cbb” linktodownloadthumbnail=”https://oovvuu-thumbnails-prod.imgix.net/48/80128685-73f5-4883-bd94-3b3795f23f29.jpg?h=200&w=300″ playerscripturl=”https://playback.oovvuu.media/player/v2/index.js” type=”oovvuu”}}

And, as the government seeks to maintain public support for immigration, some say how Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberals approach immigration — and the messaging around it — will be key.

The government’s current immigration plan, unveiled in 2022, aimed to bring in 465,000 new permanent residents this year, 485,000 in 2024 and 500,000 in 2025. The immigration ministry is on track to meet the 2023 target.

The upcoming plan, however, will look at the numbers for the next three years.

Recent polls suggest that Canadians’ appetite for more immigration may be waning. A Nanos report in September showed 53 per cent of Canadians wanted Ottawa to accept fewer immigrants, up from 34 per cent in a similar poll in March. Then, an online survey by Research Co. in October found 38 per cent of Canadians said they believe immigration is having a mostly negative effect, up 12 percentage points from research conducted a year ago.

“Some people are feeling there’s too much immigration, when it comes to the fact that it’s driving up the housing cost, exacerbating the housing shortage, making the connection between immigration and health care and education,” says Toronto Metropolitan University professor Rupa Banerjee, whose research focuses on immigrant employment integration.

“Immigration is on people’s radar more and the plan will be scrutinized a lot more closely.”

So far, the government has seemed inclined to stay the course.

“I don’t see a world in which we lower it, the need is too great,” Miller told Bloomberg in August. “Whether we revise them upwards or not is something that I have to look at.”

Magdalene Cooman of the Conference Board of Canada said Canadians need to understand the immigration plan’s long-term objectives are to address the country’s aging population and boost economic growth.

While immigrants do need housing, health care and other government services, she said, people shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that newcomers are also part of the solutions to those challenges, and contribute to the workforce, whether it’s by building new homes or caring for those in hospitals.

“There is a reason why the federal government has moved in this direction,” said Cooman, the board’s interim associate director in charge of immigration research.

“Immigration is really the only way to increase population, to support population growth and to support the future of Canada.”

A recent report by Desjardins said the country’s working-age population (those 15 to 64) would need to grow by just over two per cent annually in order to offset the impacts of aging. That growth relies largely on immigration.

“What’s the optimal level of immigration to Canada? This can be a tough question to answer, as ‘optimal’ is in the eye of the beholder,” said the report. “It depends on the policy objective that immigration is meant to achieve.”

While the short-term strains of the population growth are already showing, the report suggested the federal government could restrict the admission of non-permanent residents such as international students and temporary foreign workers.

Despite the lagging infrastructure, the conference board’s Cooman warned that any pause to the long-term immigration strategy could create other unintended problems.

“I’m not opposed to increasing the levels because I understand the long-term growth strategy,” said Cooman. “But I am opposed to increasing the levels without a strategy to show us how all the infrastructure can be built to accommodate more people in the country. You can’t have one without the other.”

Whom Canada brings in matters, observers say.

Permanent residents come to Canada under the economic, family or humanitarian classes. In 2023, about 58 per cent of them will have been selected based on their education backgrounds and skills; 23 per cent through sponsorships by spouses or children and grandchildren; and the rest as resettled refugees and protected persons.

Using real wages as a proxy for relative productivity of different groups, the Desjardins report said economic immigrants in particular are outperforming the typical Canadian.

Several observers credit the immigration ministry with fine-tuning the way it selects economic immigrants by better matching the skills of candidates with the labour market needs, and targeting those with backgrounds in health care, transportation, trades, agriculture and STEM occupations. Officials, for instance, have relaxed some rules for immigrant physicians and created a special immigrant class to attract workers in construction-related trades.

To immigration lawyer Betsy Kane, the bigger challenge for Miller is to overcome the public backlash and explain his immigration strategy.

“Between the home construction effort and the easing of the doctor efforts, you’re potentially reducing the lag in public opinion,” said Kane, vice-president of the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association.

Banerjee of TMU said the government has to be more specific in explaining the immigration plan than just floating the big numbers around.

“We are bringing in trades and transport workers and there’s a number of pilots now that are working to try and bring people into underserviced smaller and rural communities. Many of them are very small (scaled), but there’s been efforts,” said Banerjee.

“A lot of that is lost, because all we see in the headlines is ‘500,000 newcomers being admitted.’”

In August, a CIBC study found there were about one million more people living in Canada than official government estimates, including international students, foreign workers, asylum seekers and undocumented migrants. (Unlike permanent residents, temporary residents are uncapped and not included in the immigration plan.)

“We need to make sure these immigration targets also include temporary migration numbers. We cannot have uncapped temporary migration and then pretend that is all of the immigration,” said Banerjee.

In a letter to Miller this month, the Business Council of Canada urged the government to prioritize highly skilled economic-class immigrants to fill high-paying jobs, and raise the ratio of the economic immigrants in the mix from 60 per cent to 65 per cent by 2025.

While the number of job vacancies requiring lower levels of skill and education has declined significantly, the council said unfilled job openings for highly trained and educated professionals remain stubbornly high.

“Enhanced economic immigration is essential,” wrote Goldy Hyder, president and CEO of the council, whose member companies support more than six million jobs across Canada. “If we do not seek this skilled labour, our economic rivals will.”

But employers aren’t the only group that would like to get a bigger piece of the permanent-resident pie.

Advocates for refugees are urging Ottawa to raise the levels of resettled refugees up from about 10 per cent to 15 per cent to accommodate the growing number of displaced migrants around the world, which now stands at 108 million.

“If we are able to increase Canada’s resettlement targets, it would support the reduction of the backlog,” said Gauri Sreenivasan of the Canadian Council for Refugees, adding that a recent government audit showed 99,000 refugees were waiting in the queue by December 2022.

NDP immigration critic Jenny Kwan said she’s concerned about the backlash against the immigrant community.

“No good will come out of that because we have already lived through racism and discrimination in Canada’s history,” she said. “The government has to have a housing plan and an infrastructure plan for our community.”

Tom Kmiec, the Conservative immigration critic, did not respond to the Star’s requests for comment. This summer, his party leader, Pierre Poilievre, did say the immigration system is broken, but sidestepped reporters’ questions about whether he would change the current targets.

Source: Amid growing dissent, will Canada change its immigration plans?