Jamie Sarkonak: The federal judge determined to dismantle Canada’s immigration safeguards

Judicial appointments matter and have impact. Column would have been more balanced if it had more examples of rejections:

In 2013, Toronto lawyer Avvy Yao-Yao Go described herself as a “loudmouth activist for politicians to contend with.” She was an advocate of chain migration, a former member of the Ontario law society’s equity committee, a vocal critic of journalists and politicians, and once, she even tried to force the government to pay reparations to descendants of Chinese-Canadians impacted by the head tax (after losing one appeal in this process, her organization accused an appeal judge of racism; the complaint was tossed out).

Ideally, she wouldn’t be in charge of waving migrants into the country from a judicial seat. Nevertheless, Go was made a Federal Court judge in 2021 and much of her job is playing immigration gatekeeper. The results are what you’d expect, and they’re not favourable to Canadians….

Go doesn’t wave every single asylum seeker through; her record includes rejections, too. But her decisions in the last year alone show a pattern of leniency for rule-breakers, country-shoppers and, for lack of a better term, bulls–tters. Each instance takes state capacity away from cases that truly matter. It might be that Go feels the need to hold the door open for others, but it’s the rest of us who have to pay for the riff-raff who accept the invitation.

Source: Jamie Sarkonak: The federal judge determined to dismantle Canada’s immigration safeguards

Bouchard | Des vœux pour le Québec de 2026 [immigration]

A noter:

…Il y aurait beaucoup à faire sur le front de l’immigration. Il faudrait d’abord restaurer les programmes d’aide à l’intégration que le gouvernement vient d’abolir. Il faudrait gérer plus efficacement les effectifs à recevoir. Le Québec est ici victime, dit-on, de normes fédérales. Pourquoi ne pas les ignorer ? La crise qui s’ensuivrait sans doute serait bienvenue. Elle montrerait que le Québec peut se redresser et rejeter le rôle du quémandeur sans cesse éconduit.

Plus fondamentalement, le gouvernement Legault manifeste des attitudes et tient parfois un discours malveillant à l’égard des immigrants, dont il fait un bouc émissaire commode pour cacher ses fautes. Ici également, il y aurait un important travail à faire. Il n’est plus possible de légiférer comme si le Québec n’était composé que d’une majorité francophone….

Source: Idées | Des vœux pour le Québec de 2026

… There would be a lot to do on the immigration front. First, the integration support programs that the government has just abolished should be restored. The number of staff to be received should be managed more effectively. Quebec is here a victim, it is said, of federal standards. Why not ignore them? The crisis that would follow would probably be welcome. It would show that Quebec can recover and reject the role of the constantly rejected beggar.

More fundamentally, the Legault government shows attitudes and sometimes makes a malicious speech towards immigrants, of whom it makes a convenient scapegoat to hide its faults. Here too, there would be a lot of work to do. It is no longer possible to legislate as if Quebec were only composed of a Francophone majority….

Temporary foreign workers switch jobs and earn more after becoming permanent residents, study finds

Of note, not terribly surprising but good to see the data behind it:

…The research, which was conducted by economists at universities in Toronto and Chicago, found several benefits for workers who transitioned to permanent residency status.

Temporary foreign workers who were granted permanent residency in Canada between 2004 and 2014 – and thus were no longer on closed work permits which tied them to a single employer – saw an earnings increase of 5.7 per cent three years after they obtained PR status. 

The workers directly benefited from being able to switch positions, the researchers found. There was a “sharp” and “immediate” increase in the probability of a job-to-job transition of 21.7 percentage points over the three years, the paper estimates. And many of those workers switched into better-paying industries. 

“Our main question of interest when we began this research was: what is the effect of being on a closed permit relative to an open permit?” said Kory Kroft, a professor of economics at University of Toronto, and one of the paper’s authors. 

“The main takeaway is once you relax the restrictions, you see a big increase in job mobility. You find that immigrants who were clustered at low-wage jobs quickly sorted themselves into higher-wage jobs.” 

The TFW program is a key immigration stream in Canada that allows employers to hire mostly low-wage foreign workers on a temporary basis in sectors where the government determines there is a shortage of domestic labour, such as agriculture….

Source: Temporary foreign workers switch jobs and earn more after becoming permanent residents, study finds

Regg Cohn | Anti-Israel protests expose the lack of leadership at city hall and Queen’s Park

Indeed, sad example of passing the buck back and forth:

…The minister who oversees law enforcement says more needs to be done. The mayor says she’d like to see more arrests and has spoken to the chief about it.

The chief would like to clarify. Speaking the next day on Moore’s radio show, Demkiw said it wasn’t so simple.

“Listen, I do not know where she’s getting that narrative,” he countered. “The Crown attorneys guide us on the prospect of conviction.”

If these three community leaders are still talking past each other, it’s hardly surprising that protesters are still shouting and chanting at other residents of Toronto who have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

The Toronto Police Association issued its own statement after Kerzner’s missives appealing for “clear and consistent direction to our members and the public about what is lawful and unlawful when it comes to protest activity.”

Clarity amid ambiguity isn’t easy. But that doesn’t mean the crown prosecutors who are paid and educated to make these decisions shouldn’t be rising to the occasion — and pursuing test cases as needed.

For two years, protesters have been showing up outside the homes of Canadian Jews to loiter and litigate a conflict a world away — and a country away. That transgresses the universal value that a person’s private home is a private sanctuary — akin to a castle, not a consulate (the Israeli consulate is fully 15 kilometres away from that neighbourhood).

For two years, protesters have been free to hold their own demonstrations on the streets and squares of Toronto, where the right to assembly and peaceful protest is protected by the Charter of Rights. But the right to free speech is hardly unlimited, and freedom of assembly does not confer a right to trespass on private property — let alone empower people to wade in with megaphones to disrupt, drown out or trample on other people’s holiday celebrations in shopping malls (just as unionized workers, even in a lawful strike, cannot picket in a shopping centre).

To be sure, the policing of protests is always a balancing act. But trespass isn’t especially ambiguous on private property; and there’s a difference between peaceful protest (protected under the Charter) versus disruptions that escalate to harassment and hatefulness.

Interestingly, Jason Kenney, a former federal minister of multiculturalism (and ex-premier of Alberta) waded into the debate after the Boxing Day disruptions at Eaton Centre, asking why the authorities (notably his fellow Tories) couldn’t get their act together. Good question.

Kenney suggested they could invoke Ontario laws against trespass. Or apply criminal code laws on mischief; mischief “motivated by bias, prejudice or hate;” causing a disturbance; and unlawful assembly.

A better question is why, if the solicitor general is so vexed by the lack of action, he doesn’t send a letter to his cabinet colleague, Attorney General Doug Downey, suggesting that his ministry provide clearer guidance to Crown attorneys about how to proceed.

The only certainty is that we have a solicitor general who is publicly wagging his finger, a chief who says his hands are tied, a mayor who is washing her hands of the situation, a police union that is throwing up its hands, and an attorney general who may be sitting on his hands.

And no one pointing the way forward.

Source: Opinion | Anti-Israel protests expose the lack of leadership at city hall and Queen’s Park

Idées | L’interculturalisme québécois est-il mort?

Good assessment:

L’un des faits marquants de l’année qui vient de se terminer, quasiment passé sous le radar, est la rupture opérée par le gouvernement caquiste à l’endroit de ce qu’il était convenu d’appeler le « modèle interculturel ». Si on se fie aux actions et aux paroles du gouvernement depuis son arrivée au pouvoir, on peut se demander si c’est la fin de l’interculturalisme, un modèle made in Québec qui visait à reconnaître le caractère pluraliste de la société québécoise, à valoriser la contribution de toutes ses composantes tout en insistant sur les relations entre elles et faisant du français la langue de la culture publique commune.

L’adoption, le 28 mai 2025, de la Loi sur l’intégration à la nation québécoise (loi 84) s’inscrit dans une trajectoire opposée qui jette aux orties une compréhension nuancée et respectueuse de la complexité des identités et des modalités d’appartenance à la société québécoise. Ce virage fut renforcé par le dépôt du projet de loi 9 (Loi sur le renforcement de la laïcité au Québec), puis totalement confirmé dans le projet de loi 1 qui cherche à cadenasser l’idée de l’intégration nationale en l’enchâssant dans la constitution québécoise.

Le préambule de la loi 84 énonce que les Québécois forment une nation au sein de laquelle ne se déploie qu’une seule culture, présentée ici comme une seule et unique « culture commune ». Il soutient que ce modèle s’inscrit dans la continuité de la Politique québécoise du développement culturel élaborée à la fin des années 1970 par Fernand Dumont, Guy Rocher et Camille Laurin. Il s’agit, selon nous, d’un véritable et tragique détournement de sens.

La politique de 1978 évitait délibérément l’utilisation de l’expression « culture commune » pour lui préférer celle de « culture principale de tradition française ». Les auteurs ne déclinaient pas la culture québécoise au singulier ni ne faisaient référence à « une » culture québécoise indifférenciée. Au contraire, ils citaient une « culture principale » et ses nombreux attributs, porteuse d’une identité, dont la langue représentait l’un des axes centraux et le signe premier de son identité. Loin de proposer une homogénéisation culturelle au nom d’une identité unique à laquelle les nouveaux arrivants devaient s’assimiler, l’énoncé reconnaissait « la pluralité des mondes culturels et la pluralité des voies d’accès à la reconnaissance que les hommes poursuivent de leur existence commune ».

En somme, la politique de 1978 prenait acte de l’hétérogénéité de la culture québécoise, reconnaissant la diversité au Québec non pas comme une menace, mais comme quelque chose lui étant intrinsèque.

Depuis cette époque, l’idée de l’interculturalisme s’est inspirée de cette volonté de favoriser les rapprochements culturels à travers les interactions positives, la réciprocité et le respect mutuel. Ces principes ont historiquement positionné le Québec à mi-chemin entre les approches assimilationnistes et multiculturalistes. Il importe de rappeler qu’ils renvoyaient aux dimensions civiques de la communauté politique dans un cadre bien précis, celui du Québec où le français est la langue officielle et la langue commune, surtout dans les dynamiques de la sphère publique.

Ainsi, plutôt que d’aborder l’interculturalisme à travers le prisme d’une « culture commune », ce modèle proposait un cadre civique dont les paramètres avaient déjà été bien établis dans l’énoncé Au Québec, pour bâtir ensemble de 1990 et qui ont été réitérés à maintes reprises, notamment dans les recommandations du rapport de la commission Bouchard-Taylor, en 2008.

Le gouvernement actuel a abandonné cette conception du vivre-ensemble, qui, rappelons-le, interpelle toutes les composantes de la société québécoise pour le remplacer par un modèle d’intégration qui ne concerne que les personnes issues de l’immigration. Cette approche s’inscrit dans une démarche assimilationniste qui repose sur une vision purement ethnique de la nation québécoise, qui nie les fondements de la culture civique au Québec et qui stigmatise un grand nombre de personnes qui ont décidé de s’installer au Québec et de s’y enraciner.

Loin de reconnaître la diversité de la culture québécoise, la loi 84 soumet les personnes issues de l’immigration à l’injonction à adhérer à une culture dite « commune », dont certains de ses éléments aux contours indéfinis, notamment les « valeurs sociales distinctes » et les « valeurs québécoises ». Le projet de loi 9 fait de la laïcité de l’État l’un des fondements de l’intégration nationale. Il en va de même du projet de loi 1, qui figerait dans la constitution québécoise ce modèle assimilationniste d’intégration.

Avec cette déformation du pluralisme, le Québec, à l’instar d’autres sociétés occidentales, devient frileux et se replie sur lui-même. Ce faisant, il tourne le dos à un demi-siècle d’efforts de reconnaissance de la diversité, qui en fait pourtant sa richesse, et de lutte contre la discrimination.

François Rocher et Bob W. White, Le premier est professeur émérite à l’École d’études politiques de l’Université d’Ottawa; le second est professeur titulaire au département d’anthropologie de l’Université de Montréal.

Source: Idées | L’interculturalisme québécois est-il mort?

One of the highlights of the year that has just ended, almost gone under the radar, is the rupture made by the Caquist government in the face of what was agreed to call the “intercultural model”. If we rely on the actions and words of the government since it came to power, we can wonder if this is the end of interculturalism, a model made in Quebec that aimed to recognize the pluralistic character of Quebec society, to enhance the contribution of all its components while insisting on the relations between them and making French the language of common public culture.

The adoption, on May 28, 2025, of the Quebec Nation Integration Act (Law 84) is part of an opposite trajectory that gives nettles a nuanced and respectful understanding of the complexity of identities and the modalities of belonging to Quebec society. This turn was reinforced by the filing of Bill 9 (Law on the Strengthening of Secularism in Quebec), then fully confirmed in Bill 1, which seeks to lock up the idea of national integration by embedding it in the Quebec constitution.

The preamble to Law 84 states that Quebecers form a nation within which only one culture unfolds, presented here as a single “common culture”. He argues that this model is part of the continuity of the Quebec Policy of Cultural Development developed in the late 1970s by Fernand Dumont, Guy Rocher and Camille Laurin. In our opinion, this is a real and tragic diversion of meaning.

The 1978 policy deliberately avoided the use of the expression “common culture” to prefer that of “main culture of French tradition”. The authors did not decline Quebec culture in the singular nor did they refer to “an” undifferentiated Quebec culture. On the contrary, they cited a “main culture” and its many attributes, carrying an identity, whose language represented one of the central axes and the first sign of its identity. Far from proposing cultural homogenization in the name of a unique identity to which newcomers had to assimilate themselves, the statement recognized “the plurality of cultural worlds and the plurality of access routes to the recognition that men pursue of their common existence”.

In short, the 1978 policy took note of the heterogeneity of Quebec culture, recognizing diversity in Quebec not as a threat, but as something intrinsic to it.

Since that time, the idea of interculturalism has been inspired by this desire to promote cultural rapprochement through positive interactions, reciprocity and mutual respect. These principles have historically positioned Quebec halfway between assimilationist and multiculturalist approaches. It is important to remember that they referred to the civic dimensions of the political community in a very specific framework, that of Quebec where French is the official language and the common language, especially in the dynamics of the public sphere.

Thus, rather than approaching interculturalism through the prism of a “common culture”, this model proposed a civic framework whose parameters had already been well established in the statement In Quebec, to build together of 1990 and which were repeatedly reiterated, in particular in the recommendations of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission’s report in 2008.

The current government has abandoned this conception of living together, which, let us remember, challenges all components of Quebec society to replace it with an integration model that only concerns people from immigration. This approach is part of an assimilationist approach that is based on a purely ethnic vision of the Quebec nation, which denies the foundations of civic culture in Quebec and which stigmatizes a large number of people who have decided to settle in Quebec and take root there.

Far from recognizing the diversity of Quebec culture, Law 84 subjects people from immigration to the injunction to adhere to a so-called “common” culture, some of which some of its elements have undefined contours, including “different social values” and “Quebec values”. Bill 9 makes the secularism of the State one of the foundations of national integration. The same goes for Bill 1, which would freeze this assimilationist model of integration in the Quebec constitution.

With this distortion of pluralism, Quebec, like other Western societies, becomes cold and withdraws into itself. In doing so, he turns his back on half a century of efforts to recognize diversity, which nevertheless makes it its wealth, and to fight against discrimination.

François Rocher and Bob W. White, The former is a professor emeritus at the School of Political Studies of the University of Ottawa; the second is a full professor in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Montreal.

Want to immigrate to Canada? Learn French

Political objectives over economic, with little evidence shared:

At a time when Canada is clamping down on immigration, there is now a clear strategy for settling permanently in the country: Learn some French.

In 2025, the federal government invited 48,000 people to apply for permanent residency through the Express Entry program for skilled workers because of their French-language abilities. This was substantially higher than invites sent to people with recent work experience in Canada (35,850) or those in health care (14,500) or the trades (1,250).

Over all, the government sent just shy of 114,000 invitations through the Express Entry system for skilled immigration, which ranks candidates by a score. A candidate’s points are based on such factors as age, education, work experience – and crucially, English or French.

…Labour economists have generally taken a dim view of those changes, because it means that stronger candidates can be passed over in favour of those with lower scores.

For example, on Dec. 16, the government invited 5,000 people with recent Canadian work experience to apply for permanent resident status. The cut-off score to get an invite was 515 points.

A day later, 6,000 people were invited to apply in the French category, and the cut-off score was 399 points.

Someone with a lower score may be older, have less education or work experience, weaker language skills – or some combination thereof.

Source: Want to immigrate to Canada? Learn French

55 ans d’attente pour une résidence permanente

Not tenable:

Les immigrants qui ont demandé la résidence permanente via certains programmes humanitaires pourraient ne jamais l’obtenir de leur vivant. Devant la baisse des cibles d’admission d’Ottawa, les délais d’attente ont explosé, allant jusqu’à dépasser les 50 ans dans certains cas, a constaté Le Devoir.

De tous les programmes, c’est celui visant les Ukrainiens qui présente la pire attente : en juillet dernier, le délai de traitement des dossiers était de plus de 55 ans. Pour les ressortissants de Hong Kong, pour lesquels le Canada a mis en place une mesure humanitaire extraordinaire visant à faciliter l’obtention de la résidence permanente, il est de 50 ans. Et dans d’autres programmes humanitaires, l’attente varie entre quelques mois et… plusieurs décennies….

Demandes nombreuses, cibles faibles

L’avocat en immigration Steven Meurrens, à l’origine de multiples analyses de données d’Immigration, Réfugiés et Citoyenneté Canada (IRCC), n’est pas étonné de voir les délais exploser. « Je ne suis pas tellement surpris par les délais de traitement élevés », a-t-il souligné au Devoir.

En plus des données qu’il a récoltées au moyen de ses demandes d’accès à l’information, Me Meurrens pointe les données du cahier de transition de la ministre canadienne de l’Immigration, Lena Metlege Diab, publiées sur le site d’IRCC en mai dernier. Le temps d’attente pour les nouveaux demandeurs de la catégorie « motifs humanitaires et politiques d’intérêt public » varie de 12 à 600 mois (de 1 à 50 ans). « Les délais de traitement de nombreuses politiques d’intérêt public et demandes fondées sur des motifs d’ordre humanitaire au Canada augmentent en raison de la forte demande, des contrôles d’admission limités et des objectifs d’admission peu élevés », lit-on sur le site….

Source: 55 ans d’attente pour une résidence permanente

A Supreme Court ruling could bring historic drop in Black representation in Congress

Of note:

The United States could be headed toward the largest-ever decline in representation by Black members of Congress, depending on how the Supreme Court rules in a closely watched redistricting case about the Voting Rights Act.

For decades, the landmark law that came out of the Civil Rights Movement has protected the collective voting power of racial minorities when political maps are redrawn. Its provisions have also boosted the number of seats in the House of Representatives filled by Black lawmakers.

That’s largely because in many Southern states — where voting is often polarized between a Republican-supporting white majority and a Democratic-supporting Black minority — political mapmakers have drawn a certain kind of district to get in line with the Voting Rights Act’s Section 2 provisions. In these districts, racial-minority voters make up a population large enough to have a realistic opportunity of electing their preferred candidates.

But at an October hearing last year for the redistricting case about Louisiana’s congressional map, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared inclined to issue this year another in a series of decisions that have weakened the Voting Rights Act — this time its Section 2 protections in redistricting.

That kind of ruling could put at risk at least 15 House districts currently represented by a Black member of Congress, an NPR analysis has found. Each of those districts has a sizable racial-minority population, is in a state where Republican lawmakers control redistricting and, for now at least, is likely protected by Section 2. Factoring in newly redrawn districts in Missouri and Texas, which were not included in NPR’s analysis, could raise the tally of at-risk districts higher….

Source: A Supreme Court ruling could bring historic drop in Black representation in Congress

How productive is the public service? We’ll never know | Denley

Some things easier to measure than others but productivity in service delivery, HR, finance and property management should be doable and are needed:

…One need be only moderately cynical to identify the reason for rejecting productivity measurement. There’s a big clue in the task force’s report. The advisory group states, “Without reliable data, it is difficult to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of government services or identify areas for improvement.”

That might seem like a problem to concerned taxpayers, but for those in government, it’s an ideal situation.

The problem with assessing performance is a political downside. If you set a goal and don’t meet it, that’s a visible failure. Better to keep it vague and talk only about the volume of money spent. Easier, too. It saves all the thinking about how to actually accomplish things, as opposed to just promising them.

What little reporting the federal government does on its own effectiveness illustrates the pitfalls of telling people how you are doing. A recent report by the Treasury Board showed that government departments that deliver high-volume services fell woefully short of expectations in 2024-25.

It’s pretty obvious that effective digital service delivery is critical to productivity and expanding output per worker, but in 2024-25, only 52 per cent of those high-volume departments met digital service standards, down from 55 per cent the year before. The target is 80 per cent, in itself a pretty modest number.

The Treasury Board report says the 80 per cent target “reflects Canadians’ expectations of simple, secure and efficient delivery of services and benefits.” If so, those expectations would be dramatically less than the ones we have of Amazon.

The underlying problem can be seen in the percentage of government business applications “assessed as healthy.” That number was only 38 per cent in 2024-25 and the target is a mere 40 per cent. Not exactly a recipe for efficient and effective service delivery.

Let’s put all of this in a broader context. In Canada, the federal, provincial and municipal governments combined employ more than 20 per cent of the population, and their spending equals 40 per cent of gross domestic product.

If those governments don’t use money productively, they are a drag on the whole economy, wasting people and money that could be more effectively deployed in the private sector.

Instead of spending so much time on the issue of where public servants work, the Carney government should focus on the far more important problem of what they do and whether it’s done effectively. The public service is too big, expensive and important to be run by guesswork.

Source: How productive is the public service? We’ll never know | Opinion

Geoff Russ: Immigration made affordability worse. Liberals gaslighted us all

I lean more to incompetence and overly political objectives. But the debate is here, largely focussed on the practicalities of housing, healthcare and infrastructure, which are shared between immigrants and Canadian-born but with some increase of concern over values, with some of the excesses of pro-palestinian demonstrations and activities, likely contributing to those concerns:

…So what happened to Miller and Trudeau’s demands that Canadians ignore the changes wrought by millions of newcomers who arrived under their government?

There are two unflattering possibilities.

First, they may have been dishonest. Swelling the number of people living in Canada superficially boosts GDP and allows the Liberals to brag about growth while ignoring worsening GDP per capita. Many skeptics correctly termed this trick “human quantitative easing.”

The second possibility is simple incompetence. Perhaps they believed that demand for housing and supply would magically align if enough potential construction workers entered the country, and municipalities would build at a scale unseen since the Second World War.

In either case, the people who noticed that both were nonsense received scolding and spin in return.

In 2023, Maclean’s published a piece defiantly declaring that “limiting immigration isn’t the solution,” and suggested that blaming the surge of newcomers was to shoot at an “easy target,” while also noting that the population had grown by over a million people in 2022 due to temporary and permanent immigration.

On the hard left, arguments that there was too much immigration were slandered as a moral panic, with critics instead blaming the evils of capitalism, and castigating those asking questions for apparently scapegoating foreigners.

Trying to ignore the relationship between the numbers of immigrants, government policy, and negative economic pressure is akin to ignoring the connection between peanuts, people with allergies, and anaphylactic shock.

Do you notice the sleight of hand? It is perfectly acceptable to believe that bad housing policies are to blame, and that zoning, fees, and the lack of purpose-built rentals all matter.

But if you so much as imply that historically outsized immigration levels worsened the lot of everyday Canadians, you are suspect, and those suspicions were endorsed by the Liberals.

This is why the pivot matters. The Liberals were eventually forced to half-admit their mistakes, or malpractice, with Trudeau confessing his government “didn’t get the balance right” on immigration after the pandemic, as if it were a mediocre martini with too much vermouth. They spent years denying that population growth was a central pressure on rising housing prices, and now want to congratulate themselves for changing course when most young Canadians are deeply pessimistic about their future.

Advocates for mass immigration have lost the economic argument, and most Canadians want a reduction in the annual numbers. After years of Ottawa and its ideological allies minimizing the material effects of immigration, Canadians should insist on an honest second conversation about the social and cultural consequences of rapid change.

Surveys show Canadians want sterner expectations regarding assimilation and mainstream national norms, and they deserve that debate without being smeared for noticing the changes around them.

The supposed Canadian exceptionalism when it comes to the pitfalls of immigration and multiculturalism is winding down. For those who want a truly responsible approach to both subjects, now is the time to keep pushing the boundaries of debate and discourse.

Source: Geoff Russ: Immigration made affordability worse. Liberals gaslighted us all