Donald Trump’s latest anti-immigration policies may drive migrants to Canada. But are they welcome here?

Not with open arms given overall public opinion on immigration having risen too much before the recent reductions:

Since late last month, Toronto resident Hazat Wahriz has been approached by Afghan friends and acquaintances in the U.S. desperately asking about refuge in Canada.

With Washington pausing and reviewing the entire asylum system and immigration processing of applicants from certain countries including Afghanistan, he said his compatriots south of the border are fearful of losing their already precarious status and being deported to the embrace of the Taliban.

“Just imagine you belong to a community that is inadmissible there and is not welcome,” said Wahriz, a former university professor and diplomat in Afghanistan, who came to Canada for asylum in 2013 and is a citizen. “Now the U.S. is not a safe country for them. Deportation for most of these people is going to be a sentence to death.”…

Montreal immigration lawyer Marc-André Séguin said it’s too early to predict how Trump’s policies would affect the refugee flow to Canada, but Ottawa’s stronger border enforcement — and slashing of immigration levels — sends a strong message to would-be claimants abroad. 

“Canada is certainly trying to make it more challenging for asylum seekers to seek refuge on Canadian soil,” said Séguin, who practises American and Canadian immigration law, and has been retained by U.S. clients concerned about their status there.   

“Canada in the recent past has done a lot to to make itself less attractive. To what extent will that play a role in possible demand? It’s hard to say at the moment.”…

Source: Donald Trump’s latest anti-immigration policies may drive migrants to Canada. But are they welcome here?

More Canadians, including children, detained in U.S. for immigration violations, new data show

Not surprising, inevitable result of sweeping crackdowns:

A sweeping immigration crackdown in the United States is increasingly ensnaring Canadians who don’t have criminal records – including at least six children – new U.S. government data show. 

An estimated 207 Canadians have now been held in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody at some point since January, when President Donald Trump took office. The total number of Canadians held in 2024 was 130.

Earlier this year, an initial Globe and Mail analysis revealed that ICE had detained two Canadian toddlers in May at a remote facility in Texas. The analysis also showed that Canadians held by ICE were more likely to have criminal records than many other nationalities swept up in the White House’s mass deportation campaign, which has primarily targeted immigrants from Latin America. 

In the first half of 2025, almost 70 per cent of Canadians placed in immigration detention had criminal convictions or pending criminal charges. 

Now, a growing number of Canadian detainees are being held on immigration violations alone, updated enforcement data covering late July to mid-October show.

Of the Canadians detained during this period, some 44 per cent had no criminal records or pending charges against them, The Globe has found. The detainees include four children ranging in age from under two years old to about 16 years old.

Source: More Canadians, including children, detained in U.S. for immigration violations, new data show

The median entry wage of new immigrants decreased by 10.6% in 2023 but remained above its pre-COVID-19 pandemic level

Of note:

The median wage earned by new immigrants in Canada one year after admission can be a good predictor of their future economic outcomes. The real median entry wage (after adjusting for inflation) of newcomers decreased by 10.6% from 2022 to 2023, the largest decline since 1991.

This drop among immigrants from 2022 to 2023 occurred amid a 1.1% increase in the overall real median wage of Canadians over this period. While entry wages decreased across most immigrant categories, the overall decline is partly related to the fact that the proportion of immigrants admitted as principal applicants under the Canadian Experience Class (CEC), who typically have a higher entry wage, reached an all-time high in 2021, but fell below 2019 pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels in 2022.

This Daily release explores the economic outcomes of recent immigrants in the 2024 Longitudinal Immigration Database (IMDB). It outlines variations in the economic outcomes of newcomers by admission category, pre-admission experience and province. The IMDB is the result of a collaboration between Statistics Canada, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), and the provinces.

Infographic 1 
Median entry wage of immigrants and percentage change from previous year, tax year 1990 to 2023

Thumbnail for Infographic 1: Median entry wage of immigrants and percentage change from previous year, tax year 1990 to 2023

The median entry wage for new immigrants decreases more in 2023 than in 2020, but remains higher than every other year prior to 2021

The median entry wage of immigrants steadily increased from 2010 to 2022, except in 2020 when wages were impacted by the pandemic.

From 2020 to 2021, the real median entry wage of immigrants rose by over one-fifth (+21.2%), increasing from $34,400 to $41,700. It then rose a further 6.7% year over year to $44,500 in 2022. In 2023, the median entry wage of immigrants declined by 10.6% to $39,800 but remained higher than the median entry wage in 2020 ($34,400) and every other year prior to 2021.

This was a relatively large decline, given that the overall real median wage of Canadians increased by 1.1% to $47,650 in 2023.

The decrease in the number of Canadian Experience Class principal applicants admitted in 2022 may contribute to the overall decline of the median entry wage of new immigrants in 2023

In 2023, immigrants from each of the main admission categories saw their median entry wage decline compared with the previous year. Specifically, the median entry wage declined for spouse and dependent economic immigrants (-7.3% year over year to $34,400), for immigrants sponsored by family (-4.1% to $30,300) and for refugees (-1.9% to $25,900).

Economic principal applicants, who are selected for their ability to contribute to Canada’s economic development, had the highest median entry wage among the four main admission categories at $51,500 in 2023. While this was a 5.5% decline from the previous year, each of the specific programs within the economic principal applicant stream experienced smaller decreases or even increases in entry wage.

In 2023, CEC principal applicants, who are selected based on their Canadian work experience, remained the admission category with the highest median entry wage. Their median entry wage rose 3.4% to $60,600 in 2023, following a decline in 2022 from its peak in 2021 ($71,000).

In 2023, principal applicants from the skilled worker and skilled trades (-4.4% to $56,000) and provincial/territorial nominee (-3.8% to $47,700) programs saw their entry median wages decrease from a year earlier. Business (-2.4% to $24,900) and caregiver (+4.9% to $38,500) principal applicants had the lowest entry income among economic principal applicants.

The decreases in the median entry wages by admission categories in 2023 were mostly smaller than what was observed for the overall immigrant population (-10.6%). This discrepancy is likely related to changes in the makeup of the immigrant population and their admission categories.

In 2021, IRCC specifically invited express entry candidates, who were more likely to be physically located in Canada and therefore less impacted by pandemic-related border restrictions, to apply for permanent residency. This was done, in part, by increasing the number of immigrants admitted through the CEC program, the category with the highest median entry wage. Specifically, the share of immigrants aged 15 years and older admitted as CEC principal applicants increased from 12% in 2020 to 27% in 2021. This change contributed to the growth of the entry wage of all new immigrants in 2022. With the removal of border restrictions in 2022, CEC principal applicants were less targeted, and their share declined to 5% in that year. This, in addition to the other factors at play during the post-pandemic period, contributed to the overall reduction in the entry wages of new immigrants in 2023….

Source: The median entry wage of new immigrants decreased by 10.6% in 2023 but remained above its pre-COVID-19 pandemic level

HESA: New Statscan Data on Students and Academic Staff

Of interest. College sector and business programs were the main abusers:

The student data is the slightly more interesting of the two, because it (finally) shows the system essentially at the height of the international student boom in the late fall of 2023 (Statscan student data is based on an October/November snapshot and therefore does not quite capture the full craziness of what went on in Ontario colleges, where most all international students were on an 8-month schedule with starts happening every four months and so therefore did not necessarily show up on Statscan scans). 

Unsurprisingly, total enrolments in Canadian postsecondary went up. A lot. 140,000 or so, which in absolute terms is the biggest single-year increase in post-secondary enrolments in Canadian history. But as figure 1 shows, that increase was a) highly concentrated in the college sector and b) largely due to international students.

Figure 1: Increase in Post-Secondary Enrolments by Sector and Source, Canada, 2023-24

Figure 2 breaks down the college increase by field of study.  Again, not a huge surprise: the biggest source of increase was business programs (cheap to deliver, required level of English not all that high); if anything, though I am surprised that so many programs saw an increase in enrolments: this result is actually substantially less business-centric than I would have expected.

Figure 2: Increase in College Enrolments by Field of Study, 2023-24

Source: New Statscan Data on Students and Academic Staff

Young Canadians increasingly tie immigration to home affordability problems, survey finds

Link to report below to this insightful report. Really good analysis across different aspects:

Canadians’ attitudes toward immigration are the most negative they have been since the early 1990s, driven particularly by young people linking high migrant inflows to the affordability crisis and a housing shortage.

A new report from the Institute for Research on Public Policy, written by University of Toronto researchers, shows just how suddenly and dramatically sentiment toward immigration has changed in recent years. The report is based on 26 surveys produced by the Environics Institute between 1981 and 2024. 

Environics surveys the Canadian public annually on a variety of topics. Recent survey results have particularly stood out because of a pointed negative shift in attitudes toward immigration, after more than two decades of mostly pro-immigration sentiment across the country. This prompted the researchers to conduct a historical analysis of immigration attitudes in Canada to gauge when, previously, Canadians held such negative views. 

“Such drastic changes in public opinion are not common,” wrote Randy Besco and Natasha Goel, political science academics at the University of Toronto. “Public attitudes are usually subject to short-term shifts, only when there are major events or sustained media coverage, and such swings usually reverse quickly,” they said. …

Source: Young Canadians increasingly tie immigration to home affordability problems, survey finds

Report: Who Changed Their Minds? Two Shifts in Canadian Public Opinion on Immigration: 1995-2005 and 2023-24

Canada takes longest to settle refugees from this region, report reveals, calling it ‘systemic racism’

Of note. Lower staffing in African countries appears to be the cause according to the CCR report:

Refugees from Africa continue to face longer wait times for resettlement to Canada than applicants from other regions, two years after a government audit identified inequities in immigration processing, says a new report. 

“The persistence of disproportionately long processing times in Africa and chronic under-resourcing of visa offices in the region reflect systemic racism in Canada’s immigration program,” said the study by the Canadian Council for Refugees, released on Friday. “Whatever the intentions of the decision-makers, the result is that Africans are treated inequitably.”

Based on data provided by the Immigration Department, the report showed African applicants sponsored by the Canadian government had an average 42-month wait time for all cases finalized between Feb. 1 and July 31, followed by those from the Middle East (26 months), Europe and Maghreb (15 months), Americas and the Caribbean (15 months), Indo-Pacific (13 months), and two months if they are processed by the resettlement operations centre in Ottawa.

The wait time for African sponsorships by private community groups is even longer, at 47 months, compared to 42 months for those processed in Europe and Maghreb, 40 months in Indo-Pacific, 39 months in the Middle East, and 30 months in Ottawa.

African visa offices lack staff

“One of the major findings from the report is that the structural inequity comes through largely in terms of the under-resourcing of the visa offices in the African continent,” Asma Faizi, president of the refugee council, said in an interview. 

“Yes, there might be a larger number of people seeking refugee protection and resettlement. Historically, that has been the situation. In our opinion, where you have regions where there’s a large need, there should be a large amount of resources dedicated to that region to ensure that the processing is not delayed.”

She said slow processing of African refugees has been a long-standing concern for the council, and the study aimed to examine if there has been progress following a 2023 Auditor General report that identified serious inequities in how refugee applications are processed. 

The audit, for example, found the visa office in Nairobi, Kenya, had about half the staff but almost double the workload as Ankara, Turkey, while the office in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, had similar staff levels to Rome but five times the workload. Due to staff shortages, some offices in Africa could not even meet the targets assigned to them for family and refugee programs….

Source: Canada takes longest to settle refugees from this region, report reveals, calling it ‘systemic racism’

‘You are a very bad minister,’ Conservative immigration critic says at tense committee meeting

Watched this brutal exchange. Her name comes up periodically as someone who may be shuffled and her appearance yesterday may increase speculation. That being said, MP Rempel Garner is somewhat of a bulldog in her questioning.

As to DM Kochhar’s letter asking MPs to be more respectful of public servants in their questioning, and to be mindful of the risks of posting edited clips that target them, I recall former DM Fadden having the same concerns some 15 years ago or so, albeit in a safer social media environment:

Immigration Minister Lena Diab sparred with her Conservative critic at a tense House of Commons committee meeting Thursday as the two disagreed on everything from immigration levels and deporting non-citizen criminals to what kind of salad they prefer.

Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner put Diab in the hot seat throughout her two-hour committee appearance, grilling Diab about her file and accusing her of being “a very bad minister” when she struggled to give a clear answer on whether she will use powers under the government’s pending C-12 legislation to mass extend temporary visas.

A section in that bill gives the government the ability to stop accepting applications or cancel, suspend or change documents for an entire immigration class — something critics on both sides of the issue say could be abused either to turbocharge the number of newcomers or cancel visas en masse.

Asked if she plans to use that power to keep more people in Canada rather than expelling them when their visas expire, Diab said “that’s not the purpose” of the legislation but wouldn’t say how it would be used.

A frustrated Rempel Garner interrupted Diab.

“When you ask a question I think you should be able to have decency to let someone respond,” Diab said.

“I don’t like your word salad, it’s true. You are a very bad minister,” Rempel Garner said.

“You know what, I prefer fattoush and tabouleh to your salad, at any time,” Diab said.

“That is the oddest thing any immigration minister has said at this committee. It’s very weak and will likely be added to your performance reviews,” Rempel Garner said.

“It’s my culture,” said Diab, who is Lebanese Canadian.

At one point, another Liberal MP, Peter Fragiskatos, stepped in as the two exchanged words.

Rempel Garner said she wasn’t speaking to him about these issues.

“He’s going to have your job,” she said to Diab of Fragiskatos, suggesting the minister was about to be shuffled out of cabinet. “I’ll likely be having this conversation with him in a couple of months.”

Rempel Garner also asked Diab about some recent non-citizen criminals getting more lenient sentences so they can avoid deportation.

Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, a permanent resident or foreign national can be deemed inadmissible if they engage in “serious criminality,” which includes any crime that results in being sentenced to prison for more than six months.

In one recent case an Indian national paid for sex with what he thought was a teenager at a Mississauga, Ont., hotel. That teenage girl was actually an undercover cop.

The man was ultimately sentenced to a conditional discharge for committing an indecent act and was sentenced to 12 months of probation, including three months of house arrest. Rempel Garner said the man should have been dealt with more harshly by the courts and ultimately deported.

Asked if she will send a message to judges that are letting non-citizen criminals off easy to avoid being forced out of Canada, Diab said that’s not her role.

“Sentencing decisions are made independently by the courts,” she said, while assuring the Conservative critic the government will remove foreign criminals when appropriate.

“So, you’re pro-raper,” Rempel Garner asked provocatively.

“The courts have already indicated that serious offences will be dealt with seriously,” Diab said, while adding she wasn’t familiar with the case Rempel Garner raised.

“Can’t you just say it’s wrong and we’ll look into it?” Rempel Garner asked in return. “You just defended a guy who sexually assaulted somebody. It’s rampant in our justice system.”

“A wise person once told me you debate the issues and the policy and you don’t debase the individual,” he said, urging his colleagues to follow that mantra.

Deputy minister cites cases of bullying

The meeting started with the committee chair, Julie Dzerowicz, reading a letter from Diab’s deputy minister — the top bureaucrat in the department — saying some public servants have been subjected to bullying and intimidation after appearing before the committee.

That letter, written by Harpreet Kochhar, relayed that some unnamed politicians have posted videos of the public servants testifying at the committee, and they have been targeted online and in person as a result.

Dzerowicz said Kochhar was concerned about the “well-being” of these government workers who he said have endured “significant harassment and abuse” and “hostile emails.”

The letter, shared with CBC News, relays Kochhar’s fear that MPs posting “short, decontextualized clips of committee appearances” by bureaucrats could lead to violence.

“One of our colleagues was recently confronted in a public space by an angry individual referencing material shared online,” Kochhar wrote.

“I want to implore all committee members from all parties to be very cognizant of how we use the information from this committee, whether it’s online or offline,” Dzerowicz said, adding she doesn’t want appearing before a committee to be a “security risk.”

Rempel Garner said Kochhar was trying to “censor” Conservatives and stop them from questioning the department about what she described as a failed immigration policy.

“I will not be silenced,” she said, saying she will fight to get the government to “do the right thing” on this file.

“Giddy up,” she said.

Diab was ostensibly before the committee to talk about the government’s immigration targets for the coming years — figures that were included in the recent federal budget, an unusual move given they are generally delivered publicly by the minister….

Source: ‘You are a very bad minister,’ Conservative immigration critic says at tense committee meeting

Immigration Minister warns foreign nationals to not abuse asylum system as U.S., U.K. tighten rules

Right message but unlikely to have much impact, just as the impact of former PM Trudeau’s 2017 infamous ‘To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada,’ was overstated:

…Asked about the implications for Canada, Ms. Metlege Diab warned asylum seekers against trying to take advantage of the Canadian system.

“If you’re coming just because you think it’s a way to side-step our system, don’t do that,” she said in her first major interview since taking on the role.

“We are telling people, no matter who you are, where you are, the asylum system in Canada is here to protect those that desperately are [in need], not for everyone,” she said. 

She said the borders bill, also known as Bill C-12, which is now going through Parliament, would “tighten up” the asylum system and “ensure that those that are not eligible to apply are weeded out earlier.” 

The bill, which would ban those who have been in the country for more than a year from claiming asylum, will “signal to the global community that Canada is not here for people to take advantage of,” she said.

Canada is known for its humanitarian efforts, and should “protect those that really need protection,” she said. But the country is also dealing with “capacity issues,” such as the availability of housing and health care. 

In this year’s immigration targets, Ottawa dramatically cut the number of international students it plans to admit and effectively froze the numbers of permanent residents over the next three years. The cuts followed waning support among Canadians for increasing immigration in recent years. 

Ms. Metlege Diab said “the mood of the country, going door to door,” has changed….

 Source: Immigration Minister warns foreign nationals to not abuse asylum system as U.S., U.K. tighten rules

Trump’s halting of asylum claims prompts fresh calls to suspend Safe Third Country Agreement

No surprise. Reactions below:

…But some experts have warned that suspending the agreement could open the door to an unknown number of asylum claimants who are currently ineligible for protection in Canada, at a time when the federal government is striving to reduce immigration because of pressure on housing.

Fen Hampson, president of the World Refugee & Migration Council and a professor of international affairs at Carleton University, said Mr. Trump’s decision “puts our government on the horns of a real dilemma.”

“The U.S is no longer providing equivalent protection and Canada faces a significant moral and potentially legal obligation to offer asylum to those who cannot get protection in the U.S.,” he said.

“The Canadian government must now decide whether it wishes to exercise its authority to suspend the agreement, create a broader exemption or stick with the status quo,” he said in an e-mail. “With tens of thousands of asylum claims still pending in Canada and fears that suspending the [agreement] could lead to increased irregular border crossing, the government may prefer to do nothing.” …

The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and the South Asian Legal Clinic of Ontario have launched a judicial review of the Safe Third Country Agreement, seeking to declare it invalid. Maureen Silcoff, a lawyer who is representing plaintiffs in that case with lawyer Sujit Choudhry, said the agreement requires countries to follow the UN Refugee Convention, but the U.S. has chosen to stop adjudicating asylum claims. 

“The agreement itself anticipated that a situation may arise that requires a suspension,” Ms. Silcoff said.

“That day has arrived. The basis for the agreement has evaporated. It was predicated on the U.S. having a functional asylum system. The U.S. suspension of asylum determination means that the very foundation of the agreement has disappeared.”…

Lawyer James Yousif, who was policy director to former immigration minister Jason Kenney, said the U.S. government’s decision to halt all refugee claims would likely lead the Federal Court to strike down the Safe Third Country Agreement, which requires what he describes as a “functioning” asylum system.

“The extent of a President’s ability to halt asylum without legislation is unclear. But if asylum is halted and deportations begin, the consequences for Canada will be immediate,” he wrote in an e-mail.

If the pact is struck down, Mr. Yousif said, that would allow millions of people currently in the U.S. who are covered by the Safe Third Country Agreement to apply for asylum here.

“That would represent an existential threat to Canada’s immigration system,” he said.

Sharry Aiken, a professor at Queen’s University specializing in immigration and refugee law, said Mr. Trump’s latest edict on halting asylum claims is “the nail in the coffin” of the Safe Third Country Agreement.

She said other anti-migrant policies he has enacted should have already prompted the Canadian government to revisit whether it is still valid.

“If we had any doubts before, we shouldn’t now,” she said. “The agreement is predicated on responsibility sharing and that people have access to asylum in the U.S.”

Prof. Aiken predicted suspending the agreement is not going to lead to Mr. Trump being “upset with Canada” or a big influx of asylum seekers coming from the U.S.

“If necessary, we need to ensure that the IRB [Immigration and Refugee Board] is adequately resourced to deal with a potential increase in the number of claims,” she said.

Source: Trump’s halting of asylum claims prompts fresh calls to suspend Safe Third Country Agreement

Chris Selley: Upset about the state of Canada? Why not pretend it’s better? [non-deportation of immigrants accused of sexual abuse]

Agree, risk of losing immigration status should not be a “get out of jail” card except in extremely rare circumstances:

Again in theory, that should include a 47-year-old non-citizen, living in Bradford, Ont., who recently pleaded guilty to various charges with respect to sexually abusing a young girl — including once when he was on bail for charges of sexually abusing the same girl, whom he reportedly impregnated twice when she was no older than 13. News outlet BarrieToday reports the accused was at one point during his trial “permitted an adjournment to explore the effect his eventual guilty pleas would have on his immigration status.”

Which is, obviously, insane.

Because this is Canada, however, and we can’t ever let anything be simple, the 47-year-old’s immigration status has become something of a controversy in Ottawa.

I don’t have empirical data before me, but I suspect deportation would not strike most Canadians as an intemperate or unjust punishment for Mr. 47-year-old Child-Impregnator from Bradford. It’s neither lenient nor draconian; it’s just common sense. It’s pretty hard to get a six-month sentence in this country, after all. The absolutely vast majority of Canadians, regardless of where they’re born, manage to avoid imprisonment for their entire lives, and they hardly even have to break a sweat avoiding it. I think that’s a reasonable expectation of immigrants as well.

Alas, some of us don’t like this rule, or at least we feel honour-bound not to like it. It’s just so terribly unfancy, if not downright American-style. Judges and Liberals seem to suffer from this disproportionately. So what judges have been doing, in certain cases, is discounting the sentences non-permanent residents are handed, rather than bringing those immigration consequences down upon an offender’s and his family’s heads.

This has been widely reported. It’s not some kind of conspiracy theory. But some of us seem to have great trouble admitting it (perhaps because it’s so obviously inappropriate). In August, Radio-Canada ran an article headlined “Conservatives say the justice system favours non-citizens. Experts disagree.” Only Radio-Canada’s experts didn’t actually disagree; they mostly just seemed to object to the notion that one sentence might be compared to another to begin with, as opposed to each being considered a standalone, perfectly honed diamond of wisdom.

When (a judge) is considering a sentence, they can’t be blind to the fact that this person is not a naturalized Canadian, is still an immigrant and therefore will have additional consequences as a result of the sentence,” a Toronto immigration lawyer told Radio-Canada — which was, of course, the whole question, and it’s not a rhetorical one. Can judges be blind to that? Should they?

The Conservatives, led by immigration critic Michelle Rempel Garner, want to make a law that says no: Judges wouldn’t be allowed to consider immigration consequences in handing down sentences, such as against that creep from Bradford, Ont. In the unlikely event I were advising the Liberals, I would suggest agreeing to support that law as quickly and enthusiastically as possible….

Source: Chris Selley: Upset about the state of Canada? Why not pretend it’s better?