ICYMI: Canadian telecom firms blame immigration policies for mobile subscriber slowdown

An example of the how the corporate world became somewhat dependent of large numbers of permanent and temporary immigration:

…For years, Canada’s top telecom providers rode a wave of high immigration, collectively adding hundreds of thousands of new mobile phone subscribers most quarters. Those days are over. 

Canada’s three biggest wireless firms — BCE Inc., Rogers Communications Inc. and Telus Corp. — all cited tighter immigration rules when explaining to investors over the past two quarters why subscriber growth has slowed. The trio recorded fewer than 54,000 net new mobile subscribers in the first quarter, the lowest number in four years. 

Two years ago, the country’s population grew 3.1%, a rate not seen since the 1950s, largely due to an influx of foreign students and temporary workers. But last year, as it became clear the housing supply and the health care system were straining from this growth, the federal government enacted measures meant to stem the tide. 

As a result, Canada plans to admit nearly 20% fewer permanent residents this year than its target in 2024, as well as fewer foreign students.

BCE saw a small decline in net mobile phone subscribers in the first quarter, which it said was partly due to “slowing population growth attributable to government immigration policies.” The company’s revenue is falling, which was a consideration in its decision to slash its dividend by over half — the first cut in 17 years.

Telus also said reduced immigration hampered its mobile subscriber growth when it reported earnings on Friday. And Rogers, which has the largest number of wireless customers, reported a weak quarter of growth on that metric and also cited “slowing population growth as a result of changes to government immigration policies.” 

Source: Canadian telecom firms blame immigration policies for mobile subscriber slowdown

ICYMI: Foreign student asylum claims hit record high in 2024, set to grow in 2025

Of note. About 4 percent of all students is 2024:

International students filed a record 20,245 asylum claims last year, with 2025 on track to surpass that number, according to federal immigration data obtained by Global News.

The claims are rising, even as Ottawa cuts the number of study permits it issues, with Prime Minister Mark Carney pledging like his predecessor Justin Trudeau to return Canadian immigration to “sustainable levels.”

The newly released figures also suggest that 2025 could see an even greater number of claims by foreign students. In the first three months of the year, international students filed 5,500 asylum claims, a 22 per cent increase from the same period last year.

The data from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada show the number of international students seeking asylum last year was nearly double the 2023 figures and six times higher than in 2019.

Immigration lawyers say the numbers will keep trending upwards, as the federal government restricts previously available pathways to permanent residence, and as the backlog for adjudicating cases continues to balloon.

“The government has closed a lot of doors for international students to apply for permanent residence through regular streams,” said Toronto-based immigration and refugee lawyer Chantal Desloges.

“As a result, it’s funneling people to look for other solutions.”

Pressure grows to ‘dial back’ levels

During his first news conference as prime minister, Carney repeated his pledge to cap the total number of temporary workers and international students to less than five per cent of the Canadian population by the end of 2027, down from seven per cent.

“This will help ease strains on housing, on public infrastructure and social services,” said Carney on May 2.

Source: Foreign student asylum claims hit record high in 2024, set to grow in 2025

Party Platform Immigration and Citizenship Comparison: Quick Look

Here is my quick comparative table on the specific immigration and citizenship commitments of the four major parties. Striking no specific mention of either immigration or citizenship in NDP platform:

Urback: Trump’s policies will send asylum seekers to Canada’s border. What’s our plan?

Ongoing issue. One encouraging aspect is that virtually all are entering through official border crossings, number of RCMP interceptions appear stable according to February data:

…Yet even if Mr. Trump leaves the STCA intact, Canada should be ready for a crisis anew at our border with the U.S. (which will only compound the crisis we already have with international student no-shows, and the thousands of international students who have claimed asylum amid policy changes in order to stay in the country). Before he left office, Justin Trudeau committed $1.3-billion to tackle a contrived fentanyl crisis at the U.S.-Canada border. Now that Mr. Trump has revealed that his claimed rationale for his tariffs were an utter fabrication, Canada needs to allocate those funds – and then some – toward the real crisis.

Source: Trump’s policies will send asylum seekers to Canada’s border. What’s our plan?

Tremblay | Et si la question des réfugiés devenait l’enjeu principal des élections?

Likely not going to happen, as is the case with so many non-Trump tariff etc issues:

…Rappelons qu’en plus des Haïtiens, un très grand nombre de Vénézuéliens et de migrants latino-américains seraient également dans la mire des États-Unis. Le président américain estime le nombre total des « illégaux » à 8 millions. Combien le Canada peut-il en accueillir ? Bien malin celui qui peut répondre à cette question.

Pierre Poilievre a répondu que le Canada devait accueillir les « vrais demandeurs d’asile ». Le Bloc exige, lui, une meilleure répartition de ces réfugiés à travers le pays. Mark Carney affirme impérativement qu’il les renverrait d’où ils arrivent, c’est-à-dire aux États-Unis. Rappelons que l’Entente sur les tiers pays sûrs permet de refouler les demandeurs d’asile qui proviennent des États-Unis. Mais nos voisins sont-ils encore un pays sûr ?

Voici une belle occasion pour les conservateurs et pour le Bloc québécois. Une bonne réponse à la crise migratoire pourrait déterminer l’issue des élections, autant sinon plus que la réponse aux menaces tarifaires. Pierre Poilievre pourrait ici regagner tous les précieux points perdus depuis l’arrivée de Mark Carney en se montrant ferme dans cette crise humanitaire et en rappelant que la crise migratoire est véritablement une crise de la vision libérale de ce pays que Justin Trudeau qualifiait, il n’y a pas si longtemps, de « premier État postnational de la planète ». Le chef conservateur pourrait même s’imposer comme l’homme fort capable à la fois de protéger le Canada et de résister à Trump.

Le Bloc a de son côté l’occasion de revenir dans la mêlée pour défendre les intérêts du Québec qui ont été particulièrement malmenés par la gestion migratoire du gouvernement Trudeau. Quant à Mark Carney, il faut se poser cette question à plusieurs dizaines, voire à plusieurs centaines, de milliards de dollars : pourra-t-il continuer à cacher le bilan libéral, surtout en matière d’immigration et de logement, alors qu’une nouvelle crise migratoire s’annonce ? Quelle crédibilité auront les libéraux pour nous convaincre qu’ils seront les meilleurs pour freiner l’afflux de réfugiés après des années de déni et de laxisme éhontés en la matière ?

Qui a dit que la campagne électorale était déjà terminée ?

Source: Idées | Et si la question des réfugiés devenait l’enjeu principal des élections?

… Recall that in addition to Haitians, a very large number of Venezuelans and Latin American migrants would also be in the sights of the United States. The American president estimates the total number of “illegals” at 8 million. How many can Canada accommodate? Very smart who can answer this question.

Pierre Poilievre replied that Canada should welcome the “real asylum seekers”. The Bloc demands a better distribution of these refugees across the country. Mark Carney imperatively states that he would send them back to where they arrive, that is, to the United States. Recall that the Agreement on Safe Third Countries makes it possible to push back asylum seekers who come from the United States. But are our neighbors still a safe country?

This is a great opportunity for the Conservatives and for the Bloc Québécois. A good response to the migration crisis could determine the outcome of the elections, as much if not more than the response to tariff threats. Pierre Poilievre could here regain all the precious points lost since the arrival of Mark Carney by being firm in this humanitarian crisis and recalling that the migration crisis is truly a crisis of the liberal vision of this country that Justin Trudeau described, not so long ago, as “the first post-national state on the planet”. The conservative leader could even establish himself as the strong man capable of both protecting Canada and resisting Trump.

The Bloc, for its part, has the opportunity to return to the fray to defend Quebec’s interests, which have been particularly mistreated by the Trudeau government’s migration management. As for Mark Carney, we must ask himself this question at several tens, even several hundred, of billions of dollars: will he be able to continue to hide the liberal balance sheet, especially in terms of immigration and housing, while a new migration crisis is announced? What credibility will the Liberals have to convince us that they will be the best at curbing the influx of refugees after years of shameless denial and laxity in this area?

Who said the election campaign was already over?

Venezuelans facing deportation in the U.S. seeking routes to Canada, including by illegal crossings 

Something going on with IRCC and CBSA as monthly stats on asylum claimants from IRCC date from December 2014 and irregular arrivals from RCMP/CBSA date from January (former generally issued in about 5 weeks, latter generally a week or two). Impact of cuts on important data given articles like this:

Venezuelans facing deportation from the United States under President Donald Trump’s immigration clampdown are seeking routes to Canada, including illegal crossings, according to Canadian immigration consultants.

They say some Venezuelans have already crossed into Canada – both at regular border posts and by slipping across – with others preparing to come here to escape being detained and deported from the U.S.

Hundreds of Venezuelans are facing deportation after Mr. Trump announced plans to end Venezuelans’ special protected status, introduced by the Biden administration, shielding them from deportation. Some with alleged links to gangs have already been detained and deported.

Immigration experts working with the Venezuelan community said Canada is viewed as a top destination for those who do not want to be returned.

The Canadian government does not deport Venezuelans to their home country, which is beset by violent crime.

Annie Beaudoin, a Canadian immigration consultant based in California, said “the end of the U.S. Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for thousands of Venezuelans, Haitians, and other foreign nationals, has translated into an increase in illegal crossings into Canada.”

She said some Venezuelans, including health and construction workers, attempting to come through illegal crossings might qualify for visas to come to Canada….

Source: Venezuelans facing deportation in the U.S. seeking routes to Canada, including by illegal crossings

Experts urge parties to rethink immigration priorities

Perspectives from economist Mikal Skuterud, focussing on need to focus on high skilled immigrants, Gauri Sreenivasan, CCR, on refugee concerns and myself on the opportunities for rethinking immigration policies and priorities. pdf link not password protected.

Source: Experts urge parties to rethink immigration priorities, pdf

Provincial immigration applicants in Canada see soaring processing times. They say the system is unfair

More fall-out from the needed policy reversals:

…Sangha is among many economic immigrants selected and nominated by individual provinces for permanent residence, who are caught up in processing delays; that’s largely because the federal government cut the number of new permanent residents for 2025 by 25 per cent to 395,000 and reduced it further in the next two years.

The provincial immigration nomination program was one of the biggest casualties, with its allocated spaces halved to 55,000 in 2025, 2026 and 2027. 

Apart from putting newcomers’ lives in limbo, it was a big blow for a program whose aim is to settle economic immigrants outside of Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver to places where their skills are needed.

The federal cuts are “one of the factors that’s suppressing the issuance of the actual PR (permanent residence) and the increase of the processing times,” said Calgary immigration lawyer Mark Holthe, on behalf of the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association.

Beginning in the late 1990s, the provinces reached deals with Ottawa and started their respective nomination programs to recruit immigrants for local workforce needs. (Quebec has had its own special agreement to select its own immigrants.)

Applicants are screened and then referred to the federal Immigration Department for permanent residence processing. Newcomers are to remain in the province that nominate them.

The current delay in processing provincial immigration applications is only affecting nominees who apply under the “non-express entry” streams, which are not prioritized by federal officials.

Sangha, who came here in 2022 and works in IT for a petroleum company, said it’s unfair that he has to wait 21 months for processing when it takes just seven months for those in the express entry streams….

Source: Provincial immigration applicants in Canada see soaring processing times. They say the system is unfair

Is Canada’s immigration system actually broken? Here’s how it changed under Justin Trudeau

Good overview and series of informative charts:

Canada’s rapid population growth recently has been driven by immigration, which accounted for 97.3 per cent of the 724,586 net growth in the country in 2024.

Since the early 1990s, successive federal governments had maintained a steady immigration level yearly that averaged 0.75 per cent of Canada’s overall population, regardless of the boom-and-bust economic cycle. Skilled immigrants were viewed as an economic stimulant during a recession and as a source of labour supply in time of prosperity.

The number of temporary residents was relatively small. Most international students came primarily to study while foreign workers ebbed and flowed supposedly based on labour needs; those whose time was up had to go home. In the mix were asylum seekers who would become permanent residents if granted protected status. 

Riding the popularity of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s “sunny ways,” the Liberal government welcomed tens of thousands of displaced Syrians and slowly raised the annual immigrant intake to 0.9 per cent of Canada’s overall population in 2019.

After a nosedive in immigration in 2020 — to 0.49 per cent of the population — due to pandemic border closures, Trudeau not only extended the stay of most temporary residents, but opened the door to more in response to skyrocketing job shortages, which reached about a million vacancies….

It didn’t help that Canada’s immigration system over recent years has prioritized the transition of temporary residents in the country, many toiling in lower-skilled jobs, to permanent residents. Instead of picking skilled economic immigrants with high scores in the point selection system, so-called targeted draws were introduced in 2023 to favour candidates with lower scores but who work in an in-demand occupation or are proficient in French.

“We are not selecting the best of the best,” said Planincic. “The intent is to meet labour market needs, but it really muddies the waters, especially when the categories can change at political whims.” 

A better indicator of an immigration candidate’s value to the community and the country, she suggested, is their current earnings, which should be part of the point system….

Immigration lawyer Mario Bellissimo attributes much of the system’s chaos to the myriad “ministerial instructions,” temporary directives issued by the minister to address intake, processing, selection, or to create pilot programs.

The extraordinary authority endowed with the minister — introduced in 2008 by Stephen Harper’s Conservatives — has contributed to a patchwork of ad-hoc immigration policies with little transparency.

The ballooning temporary resident population is further fuelled by Canada’s evolving “two-step” permanent residence selection system that favours those already in the country, with Canadian education credentials and work experience. In 2022, 36 per cent of all new permanent residents had previously been in Canada on work permits, up from 19 per cent in 2010 and 33 per cent in 2019.

The population of temporary residents got out of control “because they wanted this mass pool to draw from,” said Bellissimo, adding that immigration officials have been stretched thin handling these student, work and visitor applications, compromising services….

Most people used to look past the struggles of immigrants and focus on the success of their children, but now they expect newcomers themselves to hit the ground running. Paquet said it’s time for Canadians to have a debate about the objectives of immigration.

Immigration had generally been a non-issue in modern Canadian politics because of a consensus that it’s good for the country. Might this federal election be different?

Although Donald Trump and tariffs have dominated the early part of the campaign, immigration has become a major political issue in the last few years of Trudeau’s government.

“How much will the parties talk about it and how much of a central theme will it be?” asked Paquet, research chair in politics of immigration at Concordia. “When a party decides to do that, then that tells us a lot about how the political system is changing.”

Source: Is Canada’s immigration system actually broken? Here’s how it changed under Justin Trudeau

Todd: In Canada, ‘housing nationalism’ shouldn’t be an epithet

Important reminder and lesson:

…The story of this type of Canadian nationalism, which aims to make it possible for young, working Canadians to have a chance at affordable housing, is spelled out in a new study by B.C. housing experts Joshua Gordon, David Ley and Andy Yan. 

Gordon is with the digital society lab at McMaster University, Ley is author of Housing Booms in Gateway Cities and Yan is director of Simon Fraser University’s City Program.

They rebut big players in the Canadian development industry and their allies, whom they dub the “growth machine.”

These powerful forces are often guilty of “playing the race card” as an “ideological tactic” to stop the public from realizing how offshore capital and wealthy immigrants have contributed to astronomical house prices in Canada, say the authors.

The trio’s paper, Crafting the Narrative: Wealth migration, growth machines and the politics of housing affordability in Vancouver, is published in The Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. It is a direct response to a 2023 article by two prominent B.C. researchers that was published in the same journal.

In their article, University of B.C. professor Nathanael Lauster and Vancouver statistician Jens von Bergmann defended investment of offshore capital in Canadian housing, arguing that opposition to the phenomenon is a baseless “moral panic” in the guise of “housing nationalism,” a movement they deem to be a “hammer in search of nails.”

Lauster and von Bergmann argued in their 2023 paper, which echoed the views of many in the development industry, that such economic nationalism “blames and penalizes the foreign” and, specifically, is “anti-Chinese.”

In addition to their high profiles as commentators in the media, Lauster and von Bergmann were key players in the legal attempt to force the repeal of B.C.’s foreign-buyers tax, which failed. B.C. Appeal Court judges concluded in 2019 the tax didn’t promote racism or reinforce “racial stereotypes” about people from Asia.

The new paper by Gordon, Ley and Yan compiles data showing foreign capital has indeed been a dramatic factor in raising B.C. housing values, a fact they say is often “celebrated behind closed doors by the real estate industry.”

Their paper frequently quotes business speeches by Vancouver condo marketer Bob Rennie, including when he told an audience of developers that buyers from Mainland China were at one point responsible for 90 per cent of the homes sold for more than $2 million on the west side of Vancouver.

The tremendous volume of high-end housing purchases by non-Canadians was confirmed in a 2015 study by Yan. This new paper provides further context. It notes how what was happening to Metro Vancouver was also occurring at the same time in the U.S., which, unlike Canada, keeps track of foreign investment in property.

The U.S., between 2015 and 2018, experienced a six-times surge in the volume of housing purchases made by buyers from China. The multi-billions of dollars were much more geographically spread around than in Canada, however, where the money was concentrated in Vancouver and Toronto.

While acknowledging that some people can indeed be xenophobic, Gordon, Ley and Yan say there is no evidence of that in regard to opposition to excessive foreign capital in Canadian housing. Polls, they say, show popular resistance to these global flows of capital came from across ethnic groups, including people of Chinese ancestry.

The scholars also provide evidence that B.C. residents’ grassroots opposition to “foreign ownership” — a term in which they include “satellite families” who earn most of their money outside of the country, where it’s not subject to Canadian taxation — has come largely from centrist and left-wing people.

They explain how B.C.’s foreign-buyers tax, and the speculation and vacancy tax, have been moderately successful in curbing house-price inflation.

Before the two taxes were introduced in 2016 and 2018 the west side of Vancouver had seen detached house prices jump by 67 per cent between 2014 and 2016. Prices in the same two-year period spiked by a “remarkable” 84 per cent in Richmond.

After the two taxes came into effect, the price of houses in the same parts of the city, which had drawn the most interest from foreign buyers and rich investor immigrants, fell by about one-fifth.

Reflecting on political philosophy, the authors take exception to Lauster and von Bergmann’s claim that opposition to such price jumps came from “reactionaries,” a term normally used to describe right-wing people who oppose progress or reform.

Their article says protective policies like the foreign buyers and speculation taxes have instead had “egalitarian effects, generating tax revenue from landowners, property developers and wealthy buyers that helped support government spending on lower-income individuals, including affordable housing.”

The authors, including Ley, a UBC geography professor emeritus who this week publicly endorsed the candidacy of TEAM’s Colleen Hardwick in Vancouver’s April 5 byelection, recommend a novel idea for governments to go further in limiting foreign wealth in B.C. housing.

“More aggressive action is possible,” they say, “such as property surtaxes that can be offset by income tax paid, with exemptions for seniors, which would more comprehensively tax foreign-capital-based home ownership.”

The authors readily acknowledge the “growth machine” opposes such policy ideas: It would rather continue to “instrumentalize charges of racism to support neo-liberal agendas” and maximize profits.

The trouble, suggest the authors, is that such name-calling taints legitimate debate about housing and the nature of healthy nationalism.

Source: In Canada, ‘housing nationalism’ shouldn’t be an epithet