Canada to pause approval of temporary foreign workers for low-wage jobs in Montreal

2024/08/21 Leave a comment

Of note. Will be interesting to see the details of which groups most affected (e.g., fast food restaurants or personal support workers):

Canada will freeze the approval of new temporary foreign workers in low-wage jobs in the Montreal area starting in September, CBC News has learned.

A senior government source said the processing of Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA) applications will be suspended for six months, starting on Sept. 3, for job offers with wages below $27.47 per hour — currently Quebec’s median hourly wage.

The decision is expected to be made public on Tuesday.

Premier François Legault and Quebec Immigration Minister Christine Fréchette are scheduled to make an announcement about the temporary foreign worker program tomorrow at 10 a.m.

Low-wage temporary foreign workers in Quebec must both be approved by the province and have their employer’s LMIA application approved by the federal Immigration Ministry.

Ottawa says the move is an attempt to “ensure the integrity of the temporary foreign worker (TFW) program” which is designed to be used when workers already in Canada aren’t able to fill vacancies.

Quebec Premier François Legault has been asking Ottawa to curb temporary immigration in the province for months.

Canada will freeze for six months the approval of new temporary foreign workers in low-wage jobs in the Montreal area starting in September, CBC News has learned. The announcement is expected Tuesday morning.

Source: Canada to pause approval of temporary foreign workers for low-wage jobs in Montreal

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

After the riots, Keir Starmer should tell us the truth about our country. This is why he won’t | Nesrine Malik

2024/08/21 Leave a comment

Notable rant:

Far-right thuggery. Marauding mobs. The prime minister’s descriptions of those who brought one of the worst episodes of violence on to the country’s streets captured their actions, but not their motivations or origins. Where did the rioters come from? Why now? Why are they attacking those they are attacking? If many people in this country are now, in Keir Starmer’s words feeling “targeted because of the colour of your skin, or your faith”, how does such a colossal violation come about, and how will it be addressed? The only answers we have been given treat the problem as one of security, of a troublesome minority who “do not represent” the country, and which will be stamped out by a heavy security response and prison sentences. A freak event triggered by the Southport stabbings. And that’s that.

But it will not be that. Because that minority reflects, and draws on, decades of racism, Islamophobia and anti-immigration rhetoric and policy broadcast by parts of the rightwing media, the Conservative party and the Labour party itself. Those years will not be swept aside by a policing crackdown. And their legacy will not, more importantly, be dismantled without its narratives being taken on and confronted.

“What Keir Starmer should do now” has been a preoccupation since the violence erupted. And yes, this is a moment – clearly presented, desperately needed, ripe for the taking – in which Starmer could, on the back of a large majority and fresh in government, mount a campaign against the notions that precipitated this month’s events. The things he should say are obvious, but he will not say them.

What he should say is that immigration is not “out of control”. That we do, in fact, have control of our borders, and that the vast majority who come to the country are allowed in after meeting an extremely high visa threshold. That we do in fact, invite many of them in, to fill gaps in our health and care sectors, and that those who come as students, or to work in the private sector, pay hefty residence permit fees and pay twice for the NHS, in taxes and in NHS surcharge.

He will not say this, because the illusion that immigration is something that a government can fully “control”, that is not subject to economic dynamics and the needs of public infrastructure, is important to maintain. Shattering this illusion makes it difficult for a government to present itself as having a “solution” to the problem of a country that, as Starmer previously said, needs to be “weaned” off immigration.

What he should say is that those who are not allowed or invited in constitute a tiny fraction of overall immigration. That asylum seekers are not merely an administrative processing concern, but a human rights one. That the UK has obligations, and moreover, values and convictions, that necessitate looking fairly and humanely upon the resettlement needs of those fleeing war, persecution and the devastation of their countries. He will not, because, well, it feels like heresy just to have typed the above. The Tory party’s Rwanda scheme, its “stop the boats” sloganeering, Nigel Farage’s jaunts to Kent to witness the “invasion”, and an almost total failure by the media and politicians to humanise asylum seekers, makes pointing out their needs and real numbers forbidden.

What he should say is that people have been fed lies. That he is going to finally tell us the truth. That immigration is not responsible for the housing crisis, or for the one in the NHS. That asylum seekers being housed in a hotel is not the reason your high street is empty, your industries mothballed, your public spaces scorched, your councils bankrupt, and your community spaces shuttered. That we have laid at the door of immigrants the consequences of an entire economic model that has defunded the state and privileged big businesses and private capital, and concentrated asset accumulation in the south of the country with no foresight or plan. That immigration is not the biggest problem we face; that would be the disgrace of inequality and rising child poverty in the sixth wealthiest economy in the world. He will not say any of this, because Labour cannot be seen to threaten higher taxes or higher spending. Better to blame a lack of growth, and then be muzzled by the implicit cosigning of austerity when immigration is blamed for its consequences.

And what he should say is that this is a country that for too long has allowed the most small-minded, parochial, cynical and mendacious parties to dictate who we are allowed to be. That there is another country, exemplified by those who turned up against far-right violence spontaneously, that has been forbidden from expressing its truth and texture in our politics, policies and discourse. That immigration is in fact a quotidian reality, a question already settled through the peaceful merging, blending and cross-pollination of millions of people over not just the past century, but throughout Britain’s history as a territory. That “concerns” about immigration are not to be pandered to, that promises to reduce it, and even actually reducing it, will never be enough. That even Brexit and the end of free movement did not mollify those in search of perpetual grievance. And yes, that racism is behind many of those concerns, an undeniable fact now that they have been manifested in attacks on Muslims and people of colour. That Islamophobia is a real, powerful threat to social cohesion, one that has passed without condemnation or consequence in the highest offices of the land, and which now must finally be confronted.

He will not say it, because Starmer’s weakest feature is his inability to paint a rousing vision of our modern country. One that isn’t just about safe streets and working hard and paying the bills and getting on, but that appeals to a fundamental need for belonging and belief in a higher quality that binds us in nationhood.

We don’t live in Gotham City, waiting for a mayor to clean the streets of villains. We are not just atomised individuals running our own public limited companies, but part of something bigger, part of a nation that has miraculously expanded, absorbed and assimilated people from all over the world, one that has manifested the best and most natural of human impulses – to get along and make a common home.

This truth must be said not just by Starmer, but the entire senior ranks of our government, consistently and unflinchingly, without fear of what that will unleash. Because what is the cost of saying it? Will it, maybe, bring angry thugs on to our streets? Will it provoke people so much that they will, perhaps, attack the police, mosques, businesses and individuals? Will it trigger even more invective from the rightwing media and claims of treachery and “two-tier policing” on the part of the Labour government? No – that is the cost of silence. We are already there. And we will remain there, because of all the things our leaders are afraid to say.

Nesrine Malik is a Guardian columnist

Source: After the riots, Keir Starmer should tell us the truth about our country. This is why he won’t | Nesrine Malik

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

These international students are still waiting for study permits from Canada with just two weeks before classes begin

2024/08/20 Leave a comment

Not great:

…Following changes announced by the federal government in January to rein in the number of international students, there has been an overall increase in student visa backlogs and processing times due to the confusion over how study permit quotas would be allocated and the lack of infrastructure for provinces to issue the newly required attestation letter for applicants. 

The wait times to get a decision for international applicants shot up from nine weeks in January to a peak of 15 weeks in May; processing times for those applying from inside Canada went from four weeks to 14 weeks in June and now 11 weeks, according to data from ApplyBoard, an online marketplace for learning institutions and international students.

The Immigration Department has stopped publishing the overall outside Canada wait times in favour of providing the information based on the country where an application is processed. Currently, the estimated processing time for China is eight weeks….

Source: These international students are still waiting for study permits from Canada with just two weeks before classes begin

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Canada to grant a select group of international students permanent residence upon graduation with pilot program

2024/08/20 Leave a comment

Another pilot that will create further expectations:

Ottawa is launching a new pilot program to attract and retain Francophone international students, providing them with a direct pathway for permanent residency in Canada after graduation.

The initiative is touted as a flagship measure of the new Francophone immigration strategy meant to boost the French-speaking population outside of Quebec, which has declined since 1971 from 6.1 per cent of the Canadian population outside the province to just 3.5 per cent today, threatening the country’s bilingual national identity.

Source: Canada to grant a select group of international students permanent residence upon graduation with pilot program


Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Sergent: Who benefits from surging immigration? Hint: it’s not Canadian workers 

2024/08/20 Leave a comment

More on immigration and productivity. Less clarity than other commentaries:

…Key takeaways: do the negative impacts on productivity mean that immigration is negative for the Canadian economy?

It does seem likely then that the surge in immigration over the last few years, particularly amongst NPRs, has contributed to the recent decline in Canada’s productivity. Because the capital stock moves slowly, faster population growth reduces the available stock of machinery, buildings, and natural resources per worker, making them less productive. And because new immigrants and NPRs are less productive than immigrants who have been in the country for a long period of time, a surge in immigration lowers the average quality of the workforce. The other key driver of growth, innovation, is unlikely to respond significantly to immigration, given that ideas tend to flow easily over national borders.

None of this means that no one in the economy benefits from immigration. Owners of capital certainly benefit when labour is cheaper and more abundant. However, the principal beneficiaries of immigration are immigrants themselves. Given the huge wage disparities between Canada and the developing countries from which the vast majority of immigrants come from, the potential economic gain to immigrants is very large. The costs of relocating and adapting to a new country are small in comparison.

Furthermore, there are things governments can do to improve the economy’s adjustment to the higher immigration. Policies to improvethe investment climate would help increase the capital stock, and better credential recognition would reduce the wage gap for new immigrants.

However, policy action on these fronts can only go so far. Ultimately, it is always going to take some time for the capital stock to catch up with a bigger workforce, and new immigrants are likely to be less productive for a significant period (unless Canada is willing to become much more selective in its immigration policy, cutting back on family class immigrants, and making selection criteria much more stringent). This means that if immigration remains at its current level, it is likely to remain a drag on productivity and therefore our standard of living for some time to come. Whether that proves politically sustainable remains to be seen.

Tim Sargent is Director of the Domestic Policy Program at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and a Distinguished Fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation.

Source: DeepDive: Who benefits from surging immigration? Hint: it’s not Canadian workers

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

ICYMI: Quebec demands federal quota system to relocate asylum seekers to other provinces

2024/08/20 Leave a comment

Of note:

Quebec is calling on Ottawa to introduce a nationwide quota system to evenly distribute asylum seekers across Canada.

In a letter sent to federal Immigration Minister Marc Miller on July 22, Quebec Immigration Minister Christine Fréchette recommended that Ottawa set quotas for provinces to receive asylum seekers based on their demographic weight, their capacity to house newcomers as well as their “historic effort” to welcome them.    

The story was first reported by the Journal de Québec.

Fréchette met Thursday with Miller as part of a regular committee meeting to discuss redistribution options, confirmed Miller’s director of communications Aissa Diop.

The immigration ministers of Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and British Columbia also attended, she said.

In July, at the Council of the Federation in Halifax, the provinces called for a “fair distribution” of asylum seekers and demanded that Ottawa consider each province and territories’ resources to support them.

Quebec Premier François Legault has often referred to the influx of asylum seekers in the province as a “national emergency,” saying Quebec no longer has the means to integrate more non-permanent residents.

The day Ottawa pledged $750 million to assist Quebec in supporting newcomers, Legault attributed “100 per cent of the housing problem” in the province to the increase in non-permanent residents.

As of June 19, Quebec reported 597,140 non-permanent residents living in the province. Of that sum, 189,962 were asylum seekers — an amount that represents a little more than half of the total number of asylum seekers in Canada (363,312), according to Quebec’s Immigration Ministry.

However, Ottawa contests those numbers.

Diop would not comment directly on Quebec’s requests in the letter but said a redistribution model for asylum seekers would have incentives for those who support it and disincentives for those who don’t. She would not provide details on Ottawa’s intentions.

“We’re not going to send a message to provinces and territories through the media,” she said. “We need to figure out how to best amalgamate all of their asks and come to a general proposal that would suit everyone.”

She noted the federal government recognizes Quebec and Ontario are bearing the brunt of the increase in asylum seekers.

Limiting work permits provincially

In an effort to ensure asylum seekers go to their assigned location, Fréchette is urging the federal government to restrict their work permits by province.

The restriction would apply until the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada renders a decision on the refugee claim.

The letter also asks Ottawa to relocate asylum seekers to provinces and territories based on factors including their language skills and whether they have relatives living in a given province.

“This system would make it possible to welcome asylum seekers with dignity and ensure that they can contribute to the economic vitality of all regions of Canada,” the letter said.

Creating a countrywide network would alleviate the pressure experienced by Quebec and Ontario — provinces that received a large number of asylum seekers — and prevent non-permanent residents from “systematically heading toward the metropolitan regions of Montreal and Toronto,” the minister argues.

If an asylum seeker were to settle in a different area than the one the federal government assigned, the person would have to assume all accommodation costs upon their arrival, the letter says.

To incentivize provinces to follow the system, Quebec suggests that Ottawa create a new federal transfer tied to an information-sharing system that would help offset some of the costs of services for asylum seekers.

The letter also emphasizes Quebec’s repeated demand for Ottawa to tighten visa requirements.

It says 17,490 asylum claims were filed in the province between Jan. 1 and March 31. Nearly half of them (8,070) were filed by claimants who entered Canada with a visitor visa

Most people seeking asylum in Quebec are from India and Bangladesh, according to the province.

Source: Quebec demands federal quota system to relocate asylum seekers to other provinces

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Are there “third rail” issues in Canadian politics?

2024/08/19 Leave a comment

Interesting oversight in not including immigration as a “third rail.” Personally, don’t believe it is as long as discussion focuses on the impact of current levels on housing, healthcare and infrastructure, all issues that face immigrants and non-immigrants alike. Perhaps the lack of its inclusion is in itself a good sign:

In Canadian politics, certain policy issues act as “third rails”—topics so charged that even touching them can have severe political consequences. To better understand these dynamics, we recently conducted a national survey asking Canadians how a range of policy ideas would influence their voting decisions. The goal was to identify which policies are likely to attract or repel voters, regardless of their stance on other issues.

We tested a wide array of ideas, including raising taxes on the richest 1% of Canadians, making public transit free in every city, offering free university and college education, eliminating the federal carbon tax, forcing religious organizations to pay taxes, and abolishing the monarchy to establish a republic. 

Other tested ideas included eliminating all government funding to the CBC, expanding the use of nuclear energy, bringing back the death penalty, allowing people to pay for most healthcare procedures, adding new taxes on sugary beverages, abolishing official bilingualism, taxing profits from the sale of primary residences, criminalizing abortion, introducing mandatory military service for those aged 18 to 20, raising the eligibility age for retirement benefits like CPP and OAS, and legalizing all drugs, including hard drugs like heroin and cocaine.

Source: Are there “third rail” issues in Canadian politics?

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Explaining immigration casework in federal Members of Parliament’s district offices in Canada

2024/08/19 Leave a comment

Interesting and encouraging study, indicating that casework reflects riding demographics, not political affiliation:

In Canada, a majority of federal constituency offices deal primarily with immigration files. The few qualitative studies on the subject show that the resources dedicated to these files and the type of work carried out on the immigration files handled vary between offices, thus contributing to disparities in service between federal electoral districts. How can such variation be explained? Based on the quantitative analysis of unpublished administrative data, this article first highlights the diversity of files handled by constituency offices, as well as the types of intervention carried out by constituency assistants. It then aims to explain the variations in case processing according to the type of case and the volume of requests handled. Studies of constituentsʼ files received and processed at constituency office level have argued that the political ideology, gender and ethnicity of the deputy as well as the demographics of the constituency are explanatory factors. This analysis shows that in the case of immigration files, constituency demography is the most important factor, while the MP’s political affiliation plays a very limited role. These results shed new light on the factors involved in the processing of immigration cases at constituency level, and add nuance to previous, mainly qualitative analyses. Our results also contribute to understanding the work of constituency offices for constituents, which appears to be far less partisan than in other countries where similar offices exist.

Source: Explaining immigration casework in federal Members of Parliament’s district offices in Canada




Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s call to ‘cherish’ multiculturalism as Gaza refugee fight drags on

2024/08/19 Leave a comment

Some interesting numbers from Australia, highlighting greater intake than Canada (as of July 24, 434 approved, 189 in Canada:). But there has been little political debate in Canada over those coming from Gaza unlike in Australia:

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has continued to back ASIO and Australia’s security measures as a political bunfight over refugees fleeing to Australia from ravaged Gaza continues.

Opposition leader Peter Dutton this week called for a ban on refugees from Gaza, claiming adequate vetting was not taking place.

“Peter Dutton plays politics at every opportunity,” Albanese said, during a visit to the Ferragosto festival of Italian culture in Sydney’s inner west today.

“It’s important that we value our multiculturalism, we celebrate it, and we cherish it.”

Australia has granted more than 2600 visas to Palestinians, and rejected a further 4600, since Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel, according to Senate Estimates from May.

Of those, only about 1300 have arrived and remain in Australia.

And with the Gaza borders closed, it’s unlikely many more will turn up in the near future.

The opposition is calling for checks on those refugees already here, along with compulsory face to face interviews with future applicants.

“We’re prepared to show that compassion but we want to make sure when they come here they can continue to enjoy that lifestyle we have,” Nationals leader David Littleproud said.

No specific offences or crimes committed by Gaza refugees have been mentioned.

But ASIO Director-General Mike Burgess’s declaration that “rhetorical” support for Hamas would not be an automatic bar to entry to Australia has been seized upon as a political talking point.

Source: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s call to ‘cherish’ multiculturalism as Gaza refugee fight drags on

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Où sont passées les clés de notre système d’immigration ?

2024/08/19 Leave a comment

Good article in La Presse (translation below):

Aujourd’hui, le Canada perd la face sur la scène internationale.

La mécanique qui permet aux employeurs canadiens de faire venir des travailleurs étrangers à bas salaire crée un « terreau fertile » pour l’esclavage contemporain, déplorait le rapporteur spécial l’ONU, Tomoya Obokata, cette semaine1.

Le constat est dur. Mais il ne révèle qu’une partie du problème. En fait, le Canada a perdu le contrôle de l’immigration temporaire.

Au fil des ans, Ottawa comme Québec ont laissé émerger un système d’immigration à deux vitesses, dans la plus grande hypocrisie.

Devant les projecteurs, Québec impose des plafonds chiffrés et des critères précis pour l’immigration permanente. « En prendre moins, mais en prendre soin », clamait la Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) quand elle a été élue pour la première fois. 

Mais en coulisses, le gouvernement laisse entrer sans compter les résidents non permanents qui ont été trois fois plus nombreux à arriver au Québec (174 000) que les permanents (52 800), en 2023.

Devant les micros, Québec fait grand cas de l’augmentation des demandeurs d’asile. Il est vrai que la province fait plus que sa part et on se réjouit de voir Ottawa réfléchir à un plan pour mieux répartir l’effort à travers le pays. Mais Québec se garde bien de dire que la croissance dans les autres catégories de résidents non permanents (étudiants, travailleurs temporaires) a été encore plus forte (+44 %) que celle des demandeurs d’asile (+37 %) depuis un an.

Cela fait l’affaire des cégeps et universités sous-financés par l’État, qui ont trouvé là un filon pour regarnir leurs coffres et maintenir en vie des programmes en manque d’étudiants locaux. Cela fait aussi le bonheur des employeurs, qui veulent des bras pour accomplir des tâches ingrates au salaire minimum.

Mais pour l’ensemble de la société, c’est contre-productif.

Qu’à cela ne tienne, Québec et Ottawa ont accordé une série d’assouplissements, sans considérer leur effet cumulatif, qui a fait exploser l’immigration temporaire depuis 2015.

Ils ont en quelque sorte donné les clés de notre système d’immigration aux établissements d’enseignement et aux employeurs qui déterminent le nombre et le profil des étrangers qui arrivent chez nous, selon leurs besoins à eux.

Cela a fait dévier le système d’immigration de son objectif d’attirer des travailleurs qualifiés. Et c’est ainsi qu’on se retrouve avec un niveau de vie à la baisse, comme en témoigne le PIB par habitant, qui descend depuis plusieurs trimestres.

Le ministre fédéral de l’Immigration essaie maintenant de remettre le dentifrice dans le tube. En mars, Marc Miller a annoncé son intention de réduire d’environ 20 %, d’ici trois ans, le nombre d’immigrants temporaires qui atteint 2,8 millions au Canada.

Ce ne sera pas simple.

Va-t-on leur montrer la porte ? Il y a un risque que les non-résidents qui perdent leur permis restent au Canada quand même, sans papiers, un statut qui peut mener à des abus encore pires. Et cela ne réduirait pas le nombre d’étrangers sur le sol canadien… à moins de mettre en place un système de déportation à l’américaine. Franchement, ça ne serait pas chic.

Va-t-on leur accorder la résidence permanente en vrac ? Cela ferait en sorte que des immigrants temporaires qui n’ont pas le meilleur profil passeraient devant les candidats plus qualifiés. Pas fort. 

Remarquez, on pourrait aussi relever les plafonds d’immigration permanente pour leur faire de la place. Mais dans ce cas, on ne réduirait pas réellement la croissance de la population.

On le voit, il n’y a pas de solution magique pour diminuer rapidement le nombre de non-résidants déjà au Canada.

Voilà pourquoi il est crucial d’agir en amont, en resserrant les critères d’immigration temporaire.

Auparavant, les demandes d’immigration permanente étaient acheminées de l’étranger. Quand les immigrants étaient acceptés au Canada, ils entraient par la grande porte, avec des services structurés. 

Désormais, les étudiants et les travailleurs arrivent avec un statut temporaire, dans l’espoir de rester à long terme. On ne peut plus continuer avec ce système à deux étapes qui crée des frustrations et des goulots d’étranglement.

Il est crucial de mieux arrimer les immigrations temporaire et permanente, qui sont des vases communicants.

Il est aussi nécessaire de sevrer graduellement les employeurs de la main-d’œuvre étrangère à bas coût, une solution de dernier recours. C’est une chose de recruter des travailleurs saisonniers dans le secteur agricole. C’en est une autre quand le secteur manufacturier, la restauration ou le commerce de détail pourvoient avec des immigrants temporaires… des postes permanents.

Le recours trop facile à la main-d’œuvre bon marché peut avoir l’effet pervers de freiner les investissements en technologie et en machinerie qui permettraient d’améliorer la productivité du Québec, souligne un rapport de l’Institut du Québec2.

Il est temps de donner un bon tour de vis à l’immigration temporaire.

Québec, qui a favorisé abondamment le recours aux immigrants à bas salaire, a le devoir de présenter une vision d’ensemble, claire et logique. Il ne suffit pas d’attendre les mesures d’Ottawa pour ensuite crier à la victime en réclamant les pleins pouvoirs.

Source: Où sont passées les clés de notre système d’immigration ?

Today, Canada is losing face on the international scene.

The mechanism that allows Canadian employers to bring in low-wage foreign workers creates a “fertile breeding ground” for contemporary slavery, lamented the UN Special Rapporteur, Tomoya Obokata, this week1.

The observation is hard. But it only reveals part of the problem. In fact, Canada has lost control of temporary immigration.

Over the years, both Ottawa and Quebec City have allowed a two-speed immigration system to emerge, in the greatest hypocrisy.

In the spotlight, Quebec City imposes numerical ceilings and precise criteria for permanent immigration. “Take less, but take care of it,” said the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) when it was first elected.

But behind the scenes, the government lets in without counting non-permanent residents who were three times more likely to arrive in Quebec (174,000) than permanent residents (52,800), in 2023.

In front of the microphones, Quebec City makes a big case for the increase in asylum seekers. It is true that the province is doing more than its part and we are delighted to see Ottawa thinking about a plan to better distribute the effort across the country. But Quebec is careful not to say that growth in other categories of non-permanent residents (students, temporary workers) has been even stronger (+44%) than that of asylum seekers (+37%) over the past year.

This is the case of CEgeps and universities underfunded by the state, who have found there a vein to replenish their chests and keep programs alive in need of local students. It also makes employers happy, who want arms to perform ungrateful tasks at the minimum wage.

But for society as a whole, it is counterproductive.

Never mind, Quebec and Ottawa have granted a series of relaxations, without considering their cumulative effect, which has exploded temporary immigration since 2015.

They have somehow given the keys to our immigration system to educational institutions and employers who determine the number and profile of foreigners who arrive with us, according to their needs.

This has diverted the immigration system from its objective of attracting skilled workers. And this is how we find ourselves with a declining standard of living, as evidenced by GDP per capita, which has been falling for several quarters.

The Federal Minister of Immigration is now trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube. In March, Marc Miller announced his intention to reduce by about 20%, within three years, the number of temporary immigrants to reach 2.8 million in Canada.

It won’t be easy.

Will we show them the door? There is a risk that non-residents who lose their license will still remain in Canada, without papers, a status that can lead to even worse abuses. And this would not reduce the number of foreigners on Canadian soil… unless an American-style deportation system is set up. Frankly, it wouldn’t be chic.

Will they be granted permanent residence in bulk? This would ensure that temporary immigrants who do not have the best profile would pass in front of more qualified candidates. Not strong.

Note, we could also raise the permanent immigration ceilings to make room for them. But in this case, population growth would not really be reduced.

As we can see, there is no magic solution to quickly reduce the number of non-residents already in Canada.

This is why it is crucial to act upstream, tightening the criteria for temporary immigration.

Previously, permanent immigration applications were sent from abroad. When immigrants were accepted into Canada, they entered through the big door, with structured services.

From now on, students and workers arrive with a temporary status, in the hope of staying in the long term. We can no longer continue with this two-step system that creates frustrations and bottlenecks.

It is crucial to better stick up temporary and permanent immigration, which are communicating vessels.

It is also necessary to gradually wean employers of low-cost foreign labor, a solution of last resort. It is one thing to recruit seasonal workers in the agricultural sector. It is another when the manufacturing sector, catering or retail supply temporary immigrants… permanent positions.

The too easy use of cheap labor can have the perverse effect of slowing down investments in technology and machinery that would improve Quebec’s productivity, says a report from the Institut du Québec2.

It’s time to give a good turn of the screw to temporary immigration.

Quebec, which has widely favored the use of low-wage immigrants, has a duty to present an overall, clear and logical vision. It is not enough to wait for Ottawa’s measures and then shout to the victim by demanding full powers.

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →