Quebec schools want exemption from foreign student cap, but Immigration Minister unmoved

2024/11/07 Leave a comment

More on international students in Quebec:

Public post-secondary institutions in Quebec say they should be exempt from the government’s plan to cut international students, claiming it could hurt their ability to attract top talent, but the immigration minister shows no sign of backing down.

Jean-Francois Roberge said Tuesday it’s “not reasonable” to think the government could reduce the number of foreign students in Quebec without including universities and public colleges, known as CEGEPs. Last month, Roberge tabled legislation that would give the government broad discretion to cap foreign student enrolment at Quebec schools based on region, institution and program of study.

Universities and CEGEPs say the Quebec government has encouraged them to recruit more international students in recent years, especially from French-speaking countries, only to do an about-face as part of its effort to stem the flow of non-permanent residents.

They say the government should leave them alone and instead target institutions that might be abusing the system. When Roberge announced the bill, he said some private colleges were using education as “a business model to sell Quebec and Canadian citizenship.”

But on Tuesday, Roberge made clear the bill isn’t just about tackling abuse. “We know we want to reduce the number of students and do it well,” he told reporters in Quebec City. “To think we could do all that without the CEGEPs and universities being part of the equation, I think that’s not reasonable.”…

Source: Quebec schools want exemption from foreign student cap, but Immigration Minister unmoved


Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Ministry ignored immigration impacts: Report

2024/11/06 Leave a comment

Sigh…. Once again, the value of evaluation reports is demonstrated and should enjoy broader coverage for their findings:

The Canadian Immigration Department has admitted to ignoring whether foreign workers took Canadian jobs or kept wages low, Blacklock’s Reporter has reported.

Impacts are not monitored, said an internal report.

“The program is built on the assumption that benefits to Canada from the facilitation of select foreign workers exceed any potential harm to the domestic labour market,” said the Evaluation Of The International Mobility Program. “However document review and key informants pointed out that labour market impacts are not monitored.”

Auditors scrutinized a program that allowed more than 3,970,000 foreign workers into Canada from 2014 to 2022.

Most were men under the age of 34 and came from India and China.

Almost half applied to stay in Canada as permanent residents, wrote the Department of Immigration.

The Evaluation report said there were no attempts to make sure Canadian workers and wages were protected.

“The program is less aligned with commitments to consider Canadian workers first especially given the program’s continued growth,” it said….

Source: Ministry ignored immigration impacts: Report

Link: Evaluation of the International Mobility Program

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

Le Devoir Éditorial | L’urgence d’agir, dans un an [immigration]

2024/11/06 Leave a comment

Assez critique:

L’urgence d’agir pour resserrer l’accueil en immigration n’est donc finalement que l’affaire du gouvernement fédéral, aux yeux de François Legault. Le premier ministre du Québec et ses troupes caquistes ont beau marteler depuis des mois que les services publics et le parc immobilier sont sous trop haute pression, son gouvernement n’a pas pour autant cru bon de profiter du dévoilement annuel de ses propres seuils en immigration pour les réduire à son tour. Pire, il explique les rehausser momentanément pour agir… dans encore un an.

Au fil des ans, le discours de François Legault s’est avéré aussi inconstant que l’accueil des immigrants permanents par son gouvernement. Il n’est tenu qu’à une seule reprise à sa cible de 40 000 admissions par année, en 2019 (l’année pandémique suivante, lors de laquelle les frontières ont été fermées, étant exclue de toute planification coordonnée). Et jamais, depuis que cette cible a été revue à la hausse, à 50 000 immigrants permanents, n’a-t-elle été respectée. Un quasi-record est maintenant prévu pour l’an prochain (après celui atteint en 2022, pour justement rattraper les années pandémiques), avec l’arrivée attendue en 2025 de jusqu’à 66 500 nouveaux arrivants, dont 13 500 à 15 000 immigrants nouvellement diplômés accueillis en vertu du Programme de l’expérience québécoise (PEQ).

Aux prises avec la popularité de ce volet du PEQ, que sa prédécesseure avait choisi de déplafonner l’an dernier, le ministre de l’Immigration, Jean-François Roberge, explique avoir décidé d’ainsi élaguer l’accumulation de ces demandes de résidence permanente tout en imposant un moratoire sur les subséquentes en vue d’avoir les « coudées franches » pour chiffrer ses seuils d’immigration des prochaines années.

Car, pour l’instant, le gouvernement caquiste s’est abstenu de tout geste décisif visant à faire fléchir les tendances migratoires qu’il déplore haut et fort. Il s’en remet plutôt à une planification pluriannuelle immuable, prétextant que celle de l’an dernier, pour 2024-2025, lui lie les mains pour l’année qui s’en vient.

Or, rien n’oblige le ministre Roberge à s’y tenir au chiffre près. La Loi sur l’immigration au Québec indique au contraire qu’il doit simplement établir ses cibles annuelles en « en tenant compte ». M. Roberge devrait le savoir, lui qui vient justement de plus que doubler sans préavis l’accueil prévu de diplômés du PEQ.

Qui plus est, le ministre a poussé l’illogisme de son gouvernement jusqu’à refuser de confirmer qu’il se préparait donc à abaisser les seuils dans deux ans. Tout au plus cela fera-t-il « partie des scénarios » étudiés, s’est-il contenté d’avancer.

Les récriminations caquistes contre une volte-face jugée insuffisante du gouvernement fédéral de Justin Trudeau, qui vient pour sa part d’annoncer une réduction de 20 % de l’immigration permanente qu’il contrôle, et ce, dès l’an prochain, tombent à plat. Le refrain de l’inaction fédérale, répété par un gouvernement québécois qui en fait encore moins dans son propre champ de compétence, sonne de plus en plus faux.

Heureusement, le ministre Roberge a vu juste en annonçant que l’équation d’accueil du Québec l’an prochain inclurait enfin — comme celle du fédéral — la réalité des résidents temporaires, trois fois plus nombreux que les immigrants permanents. L’Institut du Québec est venu adresser un éloquent rappel à l’ordre : près de la moitié des résidents non permanents en territoire québécois relèvent de la responsabilité du Québec. Et la forte hausse de l’immigration temporaire depuis trois ans s’explique d’abord par celle de l’octroi de permis de travail (161 400 personnes, soit 49 % de la croissance), et non par l’arrivée massive de demandeurs d’asile (102 000 migrants, ou 31 % de l’augmentation).

Que le gouvernement caquiste s’en tienne encore à des mesures circonscrites pour resserrer l’immigration temporaire, avec un moratoire des travailleurs à bas salaire à Montréal ou un plafond d’étudiants étrangers toujours non chiffré, devient difficilement défendable.

Recadrer le système d’immigration québécois pour en définir et en respecter la capacité d’accueil nécessite justesse et prévoyance. La CAQ tente aujourd’hui de compenser les effets de ses propres politiques visiblement mal attachées, en ayant ouvert la porte en continu aux diplômés du PEQ ou exigé une meilleure maîtrise du français sans appréhender l’explosion prévisible de la demande en francisation. Le ministre Roberge a bien raison de se réjouir du fait que 80 % des immigrants économiques accueillis l’an prochain maîtriseront le français. Cela devrait d’autant plus l’encourager à financer à une juste hauteur l’apprentissage de ceux qui ne rêvent que de pouvoir s’en féliciter à leur tour.

L’accueil migratoire, dans un monde de plus en plus imprévisible, requiert une flexibilité. Encore faut-il toutefois qu’elle ne se fasse pas en improvisant. Et encore moins en lorgnant une prochaine campagne électorale, à retardement.

Source: Éditorial | L’urgence d’agir, dans un an

The urgency of acting to tighten the reception in immigration is therefore ultimately only the business of the federal government, in the eyes of François Legault. The Quebec Prime Minister and his Caquist troops have been hammering for months that public services and the real estate stock are under too high pressure, but his government did not think it was good to take advantage of the annual unveiling of its own immigration thresholds to reduce them in turn. Worse, he explains to raise them momentarily to act… in another year.

Over the years, François Legault’s speech has proven to be as fickle as his government’s reception of permanent immigrants. It is only bound once to its target of 40,000 admissions per year, in 2019 (the following pandemic year, during which borders were closed, being excluded from any coordinated planning). And never, since this target was revised upwards, to 50,000 permanent immigrants, has it been respected. A near-record is now planned for next year (after the one reached in 2022, precisely to make up for the pandemic years), with the expected arrival in 2025 of up to 66,500 newcomers, including 13,500 to 15,000 newly graduated immigrants welcomed under the Quebec Experience Program (QEP).

Struggling with the popularity of this component of the PEQ, which its predecessor had chosen to remove last year, the Minister of Immigration, Jean-François Roberge, explains that he decided to prune the accumulation of these applications for permanent residence while imposing a moratorium on the subsequent ones in order to have the “free elbows” to quantify his immigration thresholds for the coming years.

Because, for the moment, the Caquiste government has refrained from any decisive gesture aimed at reducing the migratory tendencies that it deplores loud and clear. Instead, he relies on an immutable multi-year planning, on the pretext that last year’s, for 2024-2025, binds his hands for the year to come.

However, nothing obliges Minister Roberge to stick to it to the nearest number. The Quebec Immigration Act, on the contrary, indicates that it must simply establish its annual targets by “taking them into account”. Mr. Roberge should know this, he who has just more than doubled without notice the planned reception of PEQ graduates.

What’s more, the minister pushed the illogicality of his government to the point of refusing to confirm that it was therefore preparing to lower the thresholds in two years. At most, this will be “part of the scenarios” studied, he simply said.

The caquist recriminations against a reversal considered insufficient by the federal government of Justin Trudeau, which has just announced a 20% reduction in the permanent immigration it controls, starting next year, are falling flat. The refrain of federal inaction, repeated by a Quebec government that does even less in its own field of competence, sounds more and more wrong.

Fortunately, Minister Roberge was right in announcing that the Quebec reception equation next year would finally include — like that of the federal — the reality of temporary residents, three times more numerous than permanent immigrants. The Institut du Québec came to address an eloquent call to order: almost half of non-permanent residents in Quebec territory are the responsibility of Quebec. And the sharp increase in temporary immigration over the past three years is first explained by that of the granting of work permits (161,400 people, or 49% of growth), and not by the massive arrival of asylum seekers (102,000 migrants, or 31% of the increase).

The fact that the Caquist government still sticks to circumscribed measures to tighten temporary immigration, with a moratorium on low-wage workers in Montreal or a ceiling of foreign students still not quantified, becomes difficult to defend.

Reframing the Quebec immigration system to define and respect its reception capacity requires correctness and foresight. The CAQ is now trying to compensate for the effects of its own visibly poorly attached policies, having continuously opened the door to PEQ graduates or demanding a better command of French without apprehending the foreseeable explosion of the demand for francization. Minister Roberge is right to welcome the fact that 80% of economic immigrants welcomed next year will master French. This should all the more encourage him to finance at a fair height the learning of those who only dream of being able to congratulate themselves in turn.

Migrant reception, in an increasingly unpredictable world, requires flexibility. However, it must not be done by improvising. And even less by eyeing an upcoming election campaign, with delay.

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Le gel de l’immigration permanente, une «catastrophe», selon les experts

2024/11/06 Leave a comment

Meanwhile, in Quebec:

Catastrophe », « choc », « urgence » : au-delà de la confusion semée par l’annonce du quasi-gel de l’immigration permanente au Québec la semaine dernière, des experts invitent à voir le sentiment de panique qui se répand chez les immigrants.

La CAQ s’est « prise à son propre jeu » en politisant l’immigration, disent aussi deux chercheuses. Difficile maintenant d’agir en toute « cohérence » avec le discours politique, alors que les pressions économiques et humanitaires s’exercent de tous côtés, souligne par exemple Danièle Bélanger.

« C’est une catastrophe pour ces personnes qui ne peuvent plus changer de statut », remarque cette professeure à l’Université Laval et titulaire de la chaire de recherche du Canada sur les dynamiques migratoires mondiales. « Il n’y a aucune allusion aux effets de tout ça sur les personnes, comme si ça n’existait pas. On corrige un peu le fichier Excel et on met ça dans le broyeur », poursuit-elle.

« On parle de personnes qui arrivent ici et jouent le jeu des règles de l’immigration. Ça implique très souvent de grands changements de vie. Puis, du jour au lendemain, ces règles changent. J’ai pu observer un fort sentiment de trahison », remarque quant à elle Capucine Coustere.

Aujourd’hui chercheuse postdoctorale à l’Institut de recherche sur les migrations et la société de l’Université Concordia, Mme Coustere a consacré sa thèse à étudier les transitions entre un statut temporaire et la résidence permanente. « Les mesures concernent largement des personnes qui sont déjà ici et vont augmenter les délais pour des personnes qui sont temporaires, avec tout ce que ça implique », dit-elle, du point de vue tant de la restriction des droits que de la précarité.

Exode canadien et « urgence »

Des observateurs ainsi que le gouvernement fédéral ont déjà souligné que les resserrements récents de l’immigration temporaire et permanente pourraient augmenter le nombre de personnes qui se retrouvent dans un cul-de-sac : certaines se tourneront vers une demande d’asile, et d’autres pourraient rester sans statut sur le territoire.

D’autres immigrants encore, qui viennent de perdre la possibilité de s’installer définitivement — du moins durant le gel —, pourraient aussi décider de partir vers les autres provinces canadiennes. Le ministre fédéral de l’Immigration, Marc Miller, a d’ailleurs rehaussé la cible d’immigration francophone dans le reste du pays.

C’est d’ailleurs déjà parmi les options que les avocats en immigration soumettent à leurs clients, dit sans détour l’avocat en immigration Patrice Brunet. « Évidemment, moi, je préfère que les bons candidats restent au Québec, mais c’est au client de choisir ce qui est dans son intérêt », note-t-il en entrevue. Les changements dans le reste du Canada « sont moins intempestifs », et l’accès à la résidence « beaucoup plus rapide et sûr ».

« En ce moment, on traite beaucoup le sujet comme des chiffres, comme des inventaires de marchandise, mais ce sont des humains », ajoute-t-il aussi.

Son équipe et lui-même en ce moment transmettent « un sentiment d’urgence » à leurs clients qui sont « extrêmement stressés », tant les particuliers que les entreprises : « Déposez aussitôt que vous êtes admissibles. On ne sait pas si à minuit le programme pourrait être suspendu pour une période indéterminée. »

Des modèles qui s’entrechoquent

L’avocat n’est pourtant pas du tout contre un modèle d’immigration souvent appelé « à deux étapes », au contraire. Obtenir la résidence permanente depuis l’étranger est un système « d’un autre temps » à ses yeux.

Il y a en effet une part croissante des résidents permanents sélectionnés à même le « bassin » de temporaires. Et Jean-François Roberge, ministre de l’Immigration du Québec, a avancé, dans toutes les annonces, vouloir raffermir cette tendance. Le fait « d’essayer » un emploi et un milieu de vie au Québec permet de mieux « aligner » les demandes des employeurs et les attentes des employés, avance M. Brunet.

«Être temporaire, c’est se fréquenter avant de se marier. Il y a moins de pression et, si ça ne marche pas, j’ai toujours l’option de repartir », dit-il.

La professeure Danièle Bélanger se dit quant à elle « très partagée » sur cette idée. Les indicateurs économiques montrent bel et bien que ceux qui font cette transition en ayant déjà vécu ici coûtent moins cher à l’État et ont un meilleur taux d’emploi ainsi que des salaires supérieurs.

« Mais, d’un point de vue humain, c’est un régime migratoire qui comporte un coût humain élevé », décrit-elle. Les immigrants temporaires, peu importe leur programme, vont endurer beaucoup de choses pour arriver à cette « carotte » de la résidence permanente : « Et ce qu’on voit maintenant est que cette carotte est extrêmement volatile », dit Mme Bélanger….

Source: Le gel de l’immigration permanente, une «catastrophe», selon les experts

Disaster”, “shock”, “emergency”: beyond the confusion sown by the announcement of the quasi-freeze of permanent immigration in Quebec last week, experts invite you to see the feeling of panic that is spreading among immigrants.

The CAQ has “taken on its own game” by politicizing immigration, two researchers also say. It is now difficult to act in complete “coherence” with political discourse, while economic and humanitarian pressures are exerted from all sides, underlines Danièle Bélanger, for example.

“It’s a disaster for those people who can no longer change their status,” says this professor at Laval University and holder of the Canada Research Chair on Global Migration Dynamics. “There is no allusion to the effects of all this on people, as if it did not exist. We correct the Excel file a little and put it in the grinder, “she continues.

“We are talking about people who come here and play the game of immigration rules. It very often involves big changes in life. Then, overnight, these rules change. I was able to observe a strong feeling of betrayal, “remarks Capucine Coustere.

Now a postdoctoral researcher at the Institute for Research on Migration and Society at Concordia University, Ms. Coustere devoted her thesis to studying the transitions between a temporary status and permanent residence. “The measures largely concern people who are already here and will increase the deadlines for people who are temporary, with all that it implies,” she says, from the point of view of both the restriction of rights and precariousness.

Canadian exodus and “emergency”

Observers and the federal government have already pointed out that the recent tightening of temporary and permanent immigration could increase the number of people who find themselves in a cul-de-sac: some will turn to an asylum application, and others could remain without status on the territory.

Still other immigrants, who have just lost the opportunity to settle permanently — at least during the freeze — may also decide to leave for other Canadian provinces. The Federal Minister of Immigration, Marc Miller, has also raised the target of Francophone immigration in the rest of the country.

It is already among the options that immigration lawyers submit to their clients, says immigration lawyer Patrice Brunet. “Obviously, I prefer that the good candidates stay in Quebec, but it’s up to the client to choose what is in his interest,” he notes in an interview. Changes in the rest of Canada “are less untimely”, and access to the residence “much faster and safer”.

“At the moment, we treat the subject a lot as numbers, as merchandise inventories, but they are human,” he also adds.

His team and himself are currently transmitting “a sense of urgency” to their customers who are “extremely stressed”, both individuals and companies: “Depose as soon as you are eligible. It is not known if at midnight the program could be suspended for an indefinite period. ”

Models that clash

However, the lawyer is not at all against an immigration model often called “two-step”, on the contrary. Obtaining permanent residence from abroad is a system “from another time” in his eyes.

There is indeed a growing share of permanent residents selected from the temporary “basin”. And Jean-François Roberge, Quebec’s Minister of Immigration, put forward, in all the announcements, that he wanted to strengthen this trend. “Trying” a job and a living environment in Quebec makes it possible to better “align” employers’ demands and employee expectations, says Mr. Brunette.

“To be temporary is to hang out before getting married. There is less pressure and, if it doesn’t work, I always have the option to leave,” he says.

Professor Danièle Bélanger says she is “very divided” on this idea. Economic indicators do show that those who make this transition having already lived here cost the state less and have a better employment rate as well as higher wages.

“But, from a human point of view, it is a migratory regime that has a high human cost,” she describes. Temporary immigrants, regardless of their program, will endure a lot to get to this “carrot” of permanent residence: “And what we see now is that this carrot is extremely volatile,” says Ms. Bélanger….

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

Ottawa under pressure to give more Lebanese a safe haven in Canada

2024/11/05 Leave a comment

Not surprising. And as always, precedents of other programs such as the one for Ukrainians set benchmarks for other groups to cite:

Ottawa is facing calls to expand a temporary immigration program that gives people who have managed to escape Lebanon a safe haven in Canada, with MPs and immigration experts saying the measures are too limited and leave relatives of Canadians in peril.

Earlier this week, the federal government announced a program that will allow Lebanese nationals and their immediate families to extend their stay in Canada so they can avoid the fighting between Israel and Iranian-backed militant group Hezbollah that has escalated over the past five weeks.

Lebanese nationals who are already in Canada, and their spouses and children, can apply without charge for a work or study permit so they do not need to return home. Those who have temporary-resident status can apply to extend it, and people who came here from Lebanon as visitors can also ask to extend their visitor visas in Canada for free.

But critics say the measures, which will be in place until July 31, are far more limited than other programs the government has established to help people fleeing war zones, including Ukrainians and Palestinians in Gaza.Source: Ottawa under pressure to give more Lebanese a safe haven in Canada…

Source: Ottawa under pressure to give more Lebanese a safe haven in Canada

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

David | L’obligation de cohérence

2024/11/05 Leave a comment

Coherance always difficult to achieve, both within policy areas and between them:

…Jean-François Roberge s’est récrié quand on lui a demandé si son annonce était une réaction au plan de réduction présenté lundi dernier par le PQ, mais il est difficile de croire qu’il lui a fallu des semaines pour préparer le sien, qui consiste essentiellement à décréter un moratoire et à reporter les décisions difficiles au printemps.

Qu’il s’agisse d’immigration ou de laïcité, la Coalition avenir Québec est en voie d’être supplantée par le PQ sur le terrain de l’identité de la même façon qu’elle avait réussi à supplanter le Parti libéral du Québec sur celui de l’économie. La protection de cette identité ne se limite pas à la seule chicane avec Ottawa.

Le gouvernement Legault a aussi une obligation de cohérence. Il ne peut pas continuer à tenir les nouveaux arrivants pour responsables de tous les maux, de la crise du logement à celle de la DPJ, en passant par l’engorgement des hôpitaux, des écoles et des garderies, sans faire quoi que ce soit pour en limiter l’afflux.

Pour un gouvernement qui avait justifié la hausse des seuils d’immigration par un recrutement accru de francophones et la francisation des autres, il est également difficile d’expliquer pourquoi les centres de services scolaires sont forcés de fermer des classes de francisation un peu partout au Québec, faute de s’être vu attribuer des budgets suffisants.

Selon le commissaire à la langue française, Benoît Dubreuil, ce sont précisément les nouvelles exigences relatives à la connaissance du français imposées aux immigrants qui ont fait exploser la demande en francisation. « La demande est trop élevée parce qu’il y a trop de résidents temporaires non francophones », convient M. Roberge.

Malheureusement, la cohérence et les intérêts politiques ne font pas toujours bon ménage. Quand les porte-parole des entreprises, particulièrement en région, vont faire le siège des députés caquistes et leur expliquer qu’elles risquent de fermer si on les prive de leur main-d’oeuvre immigrante, M. Legault en arrivera peut-être à la conclusion qu’une baisse analogue à celle qu’a décrétée Ottawa est finalement bien assez grosse.

Source: David | L’obligation de cohérence

.. Jean-François Roberge cried out when asked if his announcement was a reaction to the reduction plan presented last Monday by the PQ, but it is difficult to believe that it took him weeks to prepare his, which essentially consists of decreeing a moratorium and postponing difficult decisions to the spring.

Whether it is immigration or secularism, the Coalition avenir Québec is in the process of being supplanted by the PQ in the field of identity in the same way that it had succeeded in supplanting the Quebec Liberal Party on the economy. The protection of this identity is not limited to the chicane with Ottawa alone.

The Legault government also has an obligation of consistency. He cannot continue to hold newcomers responsible for all ills, from the housing crisis to that of the DPJ, through the congestion of hospitals, schools and daycare centers, without doing anything to limit the influx.

For a government that had justified the increase in immigration thresholds by increased recruitment of Francophones and the francization of others, it is also difficult to explain why school service centers are forced to close francization classes throughout Quebec, for lack of sufficient budgets.

According to the Commissioner for the French Language, Benoît Dubreuil, it was precisely the new requirements for the knowledge of French imposed on immigrants that caused the demand for francization to explode. “Demand is too high because there are too many non-French-speaking temporary residents,” agrees Mr. Roberge.

Unfortunately, consistency and political interests do not always go well together. When the spokespersons of companies, especially in the regions, go to besiege the Caquist deputies and explain to them that they risk closing if they are deprived of their immigrant workforce, Mr. Legault may come to the conclusion that a decline similar to the one decreed by Ottawa is ultimately quite large.

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Ramos | Here’s what we get wrong when we talk about international students and immigration

2024/11/04 Leave a comment

Good commentary by my friend Howard Ramos on the important distinctions between immigration and migration, how Canada has shifted towards the latter and the need for separate but related analysis and discussion on each:

…The failure to deliver on the value-proposition of migration and immigration to Canada has led to a reputational hit. Many newcomers have given up on the country and are returning home or looking elsewhere to fulfill their dreams.

Canada needs to recognize it is not the only game in town for attracting scarce high skill talent in a world. Trudeau failed in his ambition to offer “deliverology” to Canada and to the newcomers seeking to start a new life here.

Recognizing that Canada has become a migrant country does not mean that it should turn away from international students and temporary workers. As provinces have cut funds to colleges and universities, international students play a vital role in making up the shortfall. They also create a vibrant academic atmosphere and learn the skills needed in Canada and their home countries. Temporary workers also fill acute labour shortages and make up for an aging workforce. And both are needed in Canada’s two-step immigration system that relies on “Canadian experience” as an important factor in obtaining permanent residence.

Canada needs some temporary migrants but also needs to seriously consider the economic, infrastructure, social and cultural repercussions of moving to a migration system from being only a permanent immigration system. To fully do that demands two conversations about immigration and not just one.

Source: Opinion | Here’s what we get wrong when we talk about international students and immigration

Filed under Immigration, migration Tagged with

Trump’s Immigration Policies Made America Less Safe. Here’s the Data.

2024/11/04 Leave a comment

Yet another example:

Listen to just about any of former president Donald Trump’s rallies, and you’ll hear claims that President Joe Biden’s border policies have made the country less safe. At a recent town hall, Trump said Biden is releasing murderers, “drug dealers, drug addicts, everybody” into the country.

But new data reveal that Trump was the one whose immigration policies damaged the country’s security. In fact, he released more convicted criminals into the United States than his successor.

This is not to lend credence to Trump’s efforts to demonize immigrants as dangerous or violent. Data from the Census Bureau shows that immigrants — both legal and illegal — are at least half as likely as citizens to be incarcerated for crimes committed in the United States. (This is why deporting everyone living here illegally would increase crime rates.)

But when it comes to the small percentage of noncitizens who do commit crimes, Trump did not prioritize removing them during his term in office. In fact, he explicitly deprioritized them.

Trump released more criminals into the United States than Biden.

In his first week in office, Trump signed an executive order rescinding Obama-era orders that directed the Department of Homeland Security to focus its resources on detaining and removing noncitizens who committed serious crimes. Trump said he would not “exempt classes or categories of removable aliens.” His goal, he said, was enforcement “against all removable aliens.”

What did that mean in practice? Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were no longer required to focus on felons. They could arrest anyone caught here illegally, and they did — from pizza delivery drivers to domestic-violence victimsto spouses of U.S. citizens with no criminal records.

New government data obtained by the Cato Institute highlight what happened next: Immigrants with serious criminal records were frequently released into the country instead of being detained for deportation. This included individuals who were transferred to the custody of ICE after serving their sentences and those who were previously deported and encountered ICE after crossing into the country again.

From January 2017 to February 2020, the Trump administration released more than 58,000 convicted criminals into the United States, including more than 8,600 violent criminals and 306 murderers. Contrast that with the Biden administration, which reinstated enforcement priorities: Overall, the average month under Trump saw twice as many releases as under Biden.

Bier WaPo1

Source: Trump’s Immigration Policies Made America Less Safe. Here’s the Data.

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

More commentary on reduced immigration levels

2024/11/02 Leave a comment

More of the commentary that I found interesting and relevant:

The Line: Dispatch from The Front Lines: Have a great trip, Jen! And where are they moving? Right now, public opinion is probably fairly reasonably grounded in reality. We think it would be broadly true today to say that Canadians still see value in immigration in the abstract, and remain good at welcoming newcomers into their own communities. We suspect that most of us have direct relationships with immigrants, and have better lives for those relationships. But we are very worried. Many of the problems that our recently unchecked immigration rates have caused or (more fairly) contributed to — including overwhelmed social services and the housing crisis — are going to continue getting worse for a number of years, since so much is already baked in. This is scary, and could mean that we see anti-immigration sentiment evolve explicitly into anti-immigrant sentiment. That would take what we have today, an embarrassing public-policy failure, and turn it into a genuine social nightmare, one from which it could take many years to recover, as newcomers pay the price for our policy failures and report back home that Canada is a place to avoid at all costs.

So, great. It’s nice to have something to look forward to. Right?

But there was one other issue that jumped out at us after the announcement this week. Both Prime Minister Trudeau and Immigration Minister Marc Miller made all-too political acknowledgments of responsibility. The prime minister went so far as to concede that his government “didn’t get the balance quite right.” Not to be outdone in the race for the most fearless and blunt mea culpa, Miller said, “Did we take too long to adjust? I think there is some responsibility there to assume.”

Wow! By whom? Tell us more, minister!

Look, let’s be blunt about this. Both your Line editors support immigration. And we both know that there is plenty of blame to go around. Many business interests and provincial leaders were desperate for more people. The federal government didn’t come up with the idea of ramping up growth to unsustainable levels all on its own. They had a lot of friends and a lot of help. The buck does stop with them. And we’re not going to let them get away with their attempts to deflect the blame. But it is fair to note that a lot of people were demanding this, and that our failure to roll out enough housing and social services to keep up with the demand rests on us, not on the people we invited to start new lives in this country. They are victims here. We sold them a bill of goods we had no ability or willingness to deliver upon. And we should be ashamed of ourselves for that. We have essentially defrauded people who just wanted to build a better lives for themselves and their families so that we could keep reaping the economic benefits of their arrival, and we kept doing that until the moment that it stopped being a good deal for us. Some future descendent of Justin Trudeau is probably going to have to offer up a tearful apology for this in a century or so. 

And it’ll take that long, clearly. This was the feds’ responsibility, and they screwed it up. It would not kill them to admit as much, openly and clearly, with a bit less of a masterclass in the passive voice than what Miller just offered the voters.

Globe editorial: Canada’s past and present were built on immigration. Our future will be too. Ottawa responded too slowly to rectify its mistakes but last week moved past tinkering. Count it as a turning point. The changes will help start to restore broad confidence in an immigration system that was long embraced by Canadians, respected around the world – and helped to build this country over many decades.

Immigration changes a ‘black eye’ for businesses, families, students, warns B.C. lawyer
“Businesses are going to suffer. The people on the ground right now — the workers here, the people on temporary status — are suffering. The students (are) totally gutted,” said Victoria immigration lawyer David Aujla. “We had a really pro-refugee, pro-humanitarian outlook, accepting people who were in crises. I think that’s going to take a big hit. I think Canada’s now got a black eye.”

The new changes will be very difficult for some newcomers waiting to bring relatives to Canada, said Jonathan Oldman, CEO of the Immigrant Services Society of B.C.

The reductions, though, will make the new levels of permanent residents similar to what happened before COVID-19, said Oldman, whose agency helps settle more than 25,000 people each year who come to B.C. for humanitarian, economic or family reunification reasons.

Will Tao, an immigration lawyer with the Burnaby law firm Heron, worries these changes are designed to “nudge” people to leave Canada if they’re facing long waiting times to become permanent residents.

“They’re obviously scared and concerned,” he said of his clients.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said his government didn’t get the “balance quite right” when it increased immigration targets over recent years. But Tao said achieving that balance isn’t as simple as slashing targets, which affect people from countries ranging from war-stricken Ukraine to Afghanistan where women and girls are at risk.

The impact includes post-secondary schools losing a “cash cow” of funding by losing international students, who pay far higher tuition than Canadian youth.

Tao also said some employers in the last week have pulled their support for a Labour Market Impact Assessment, a document that’s necessary to hire foreign workers, because they can’t afford the new federally mandated increase in wages for temporary foreign workers.

And while fewer immigrants may lead to less competition for affordable housing, will Canada also lose the temporary residents who are construction workers building the much-need housing?

“Immigration is a driver of economic growth and is the primary source of population growth in the near term,” Fiona Famulak, the chamber’s president, said in a statement last week. “Decreasing the labour pool will therefore add to (businesses’s) burden, not improve it, in the coming years.”

High-profile Vancouver immigration lawyer Richard Kurland said his email inbox has been clogged with messages from clients, lawyers and immigration consultants looking for solutions to this “fiasco” created by the federal government.

Those wanting to increase their chances of permanent residency should “look at your options seriously and immediately.”

C.D. Howe Institute Advisory Group on Immigration Targets: In conclusion, the Advisory Group agreed that Canada’s immigration system requires reform to better balance population growth with the country’s economic capacity. With some members supporting an annual intake of under one percent of the population for permanent immigration, the group broadly supported a gradual reduction in both permanent and temporary immigration over the coming years, with a focus on maintaining sustainable, long-term levels. Members stressed the need for a stable, transparent immigration policy that prioritizes high-skilled immigrants, addresses housing and healthcare challenges, and restores public confidence. They called for a more rigorous assessment of immigration programs and improved enforcement capacity, urging the government to set realistic, evidence-based immigration targets.

St-Arnaud : Ottawa’s cut to immigration flow may lead to economic challenges: The recent years are an example of how Canada’s immigration policies can dramatically affect the economy. The government went from one extreme, the population growing too fast, to another, growing too little. This volatility shows that both extremes can lead to economic challenges.

Orsini: Canada has lost its reputation for bringing in the best and brightest students: So what can the federal government do to rebuild Canada’s global reputation? First, when in a deep hole, stop digging. The blunt policy changes have created confusion and uncertainty, which is discouraging students from coming to Canada. We need the world’s top scientists, researchers and innovators to help grow our economy and to make up for our slowing labour-force growth rate.

Second, the federal government needs to accelerate its targeted approach to international student enrolment through a simplified and streamlined “Recognized Institutional Framework” that incentivizes good performance and focuses on quality programming and students applying to Canada. Unfortunately, including master’s and PhD students under the international student cap will further discourage highly skilled students from coming to Canada, and add further delays to an already lengthy process.

Third, the federal government needs to work with the provinces, industry and the postsecondary sector to rebuild our brand so that Canada once again becomes a destination for top talent from around the world. Our country has lost our global reputation as a top destination for talent because of changes like the latest student-permit cuts.

Alicia Planincic: What will the cut in immigration mean for Canada’s economy?  The result, however, is that at least 40 percent of the now more limited spots available for permanent residency (395,000 in 2025) will be granted based on whether a candidate is already in Canada rather than who brings the most value to the Canadian economy, longer-term. Though it’s difficult without more information to determine the extent of the impact, many current temporary residents work in lower-skill positions, meaning that higher-skill candidates—the engineers, scientists, entrepreneurs, and skilled tradespeople—who don’t yet live here could be passed over as a result.

Blit: Ottawa’s immigration cut is a chance to boost productivity: Ottawa’s policy shift sends the right signal. But further changes to immigration policy are needed. It’s time to end the recently introduced category-based immigrant selection process, which encourages companies to invest in lobbying rather than in technology. We need a full return to the “points system,” one that’s data-driven and targets the most highly skilled talent to fuel innovation and growth. The best and brightest knowledge workers are not only productive themselves, they can make others around them more productive as well.

Last week’s announcement, then, is more than just a return to sensible immigration levels. It’s a rallying cry to Canadian businesses: no more shortcuts. If Canada’s economyis going to thrive in the 21st century, it will be through ingenuity, investment and the right kind of talent – not an endless supply of cheap labour.

Century Initiative | Slashing immigration is a political shortcut, not a real solution: When a country faces large-scale social or economic change, as Canada does, we need leadership from government, and a vision based on where we are today and where we can aspire to go. Instead, we’re seeing our policymakers swing from month to month based on the opinion environment, chasing after the low-hanging fruit to reduce demand for housing over the nation-building need to plan for supply.

It doesn’t have to be this way. We can replace these fragmented, whack-a-mole efforts with a long-term, national smart growth framework — one that builds inroads between immigration targets and housing, workforce, and infrastructure.

It’s not enough to change the tires; we need to rebuild a more resilient economic engine for Canada’s future. [I almost have pity for the CI given how rapidly the debate has turned]


















Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , , , , , , , ,

Ipsos and Bernhard: Immigration intake numbers only tell half the story

2024/11/01 Leave a comment

More on retention issues and impact of housing pressures as part of decision to stay or leave:

…This week, the ICC and Ipsos are releasing a selection of data from “The Newcomer Perspective,” a massive new survey of 15,383 verified adult immigrants. Among many compelling insights, it delivers immense detail about which newcomers are looking to leave Canada and why. For example, we found that the desire to leave is unevenly distributed; economic immigrants – those who were selected for their ability to contribute to Canada’s shared prosperity – are by far most eager to hit the road.

Over 30 per cent of federally selected economic immigrants – those with the very highest scores under the points system – say they are likely to move to another country within two years, compared to 22 per cent of immigrants admitted under family-reunification programs. Economic immigrants selected by provinces (who tend to have lower scores under the points system) are less likely to consider leaving (21 per cent), but that is still one in five who are planning their exit.

Though immigrants are routinely blamed for driving up housing costs, unaffordable housing is driving skilled immigrants away, with over 80 per cent citing it as their main reason for wanting out. The current line is that there are too many immigrants for our housing supply. Perhaps it’s better to ask whether there are too few houses for the immigrants we need…

Source: Immigration intake numbers only tell half the story

Survey: Reducing Number of Newcomers to Canada Misses the Real Issue of Current Immigrants Looking to Leave


Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →