Briefing: The Public Mood Before Budget Day (Abacus, immigration)

More from Abacus on immigration where concerns are more about capacity than culture or values:,

4. Immigration: Skepticism steady, focus on capacity

Views on immigration (new Abacus poll) have barely shifted since last year: 49% negative, 26% positive, 26% neutral. The concerns aren’t cultural, they’re about capacity.

Majorities still say immigration worsens housing (69%) and strains healthcare (around 60%), but opposition has softened slightly as the government lowers targets (67% now say “too high,” down from 72%).

Younger Canadians and Liberal supporters are more likely to see the upside — addressing labour gaps, supporting growth — while skepticism remains strongest in the Prairies and among Conservative voters.

The message: Canadians don’t want the gates closed, they want the system to work.

Source: Briefing: The Public Mood Before Budget Day

Gessen: How to Be a Good Citizen of a Bad Country

Good read on the dilemmas some Israelis are facing:

…Dekel was trying to shift some of the responsibility for his own actions — his own resistance, which he felt was insufficient — onto unnamed others, and in doing so he was telling an important truth about resistance in general. Seeing other people act makes it less frightening to join in protest. Even more important is an unspoken principle my conversations with these Israelis reminded me of: To be a good citizen of a bad state, one has to do scary things. It may be writing an op-ed calling for your own country’s isolation, as Sfard did, knowing that it would cost him friendships and get him branded a traitor. It may be using your body to shield someone more vulnerable, as Greenberg does. It may be withdrawing your economic cooperation. It is weighing leaving against staying, moral obligation against fear, flying under the radar against taking a risk — and opting for the risk.

Source: How to Be a Good Citizen of a Bad Country

Majority of Canadians say immigration level still too high, but confidence growing in Carney fixing ‘broken’ system: Poll

Of note:

The Liberal party has restored some Canadians’ confidence in its ability to manage immigration, though a majority still believe the Conservatives are better equipped to fix the beleaguered system, according to a new poll.

A year after implementing some seismic policy changes to reduce immigration intakes, the Liberals are closing the gap with the opposition Conservatives in public perception of their ability to handle a system what many view as “broken,” said the Abacus Data survey, published on the eve of the release of Ottawa’s 2026-28 immigration levels plan on Tuesday.

Overall, 38 per cent of Canadians favoured the Conservatives to stickhandle this issue, compared to 29 per cent for the Liberals. However, the Liberals’ score has risen 13 percentage points on that question in the past year while those expressing confidence in the Conservatives only grew by four percentage points, said the poll for the Toronto Star.

“It does show how much (former prime minister Justin) Trudeau affected people’s perceptions,” said David Coletto, Abacus chair and CEO. “Now that he’s gone and the government has continued to follow through on that more restrictive immigration policy, they’ve kind of returned to more of a normal place.” Liberal Mark Carney became prime minister in March.

Rapid population growth as a result of high immigration dominated political debates over the last two years, and public concerns about lagging housing, health care and other social services have prompted the Liberal government to make drastic cuts in the admissions of both permanent and temporary residents, including foreign students and workers. Immigration applicants are also faced with backlogs and long processing times.

While 49 per cent of Canadians — virtually unchanged from 50 per cent last November — continue to view immigration through a negative lens, attitudes have largely stabilized, said Coletto, with 26 per cent of people expressing positive feelings toward immigration in Canada. 

Sentiment remains most negative among older Canadians and Conservative voters, while younger Canadians and Liberal supporters are more positive about immigration. Despite the lower permanent resident intake from 500,000 in 2024 to 385,000 this year, 67 per cent of people still said the target is too high; that percentage was down modestly from 72 per cent a year ago.

“Heading into a budget that will set a new immigration plan, the government is navigating a delicate balance,” said Coletto. “Canadians continue to see immigration through the lens of scarcity — too few homes, too much strain on public services, and a labour market that feels stretched. The public pressure is clearly on restraint, not expansion.”…

Source: Majority of Canadians say immigration level still too high, but confidence growing in Carney fixing ‘broken’ system: Poll

Former immigration minister [Miller] rejected officials’ advice to shelve Sudan humanitarian program

Of note, classic case of balancing general objectives with the specific:

Immigration officials advised shelving a special humanitarian program, designed to help Sudanese Canadians bring family members here to escape civil war in the African country, over concerns that plans to reduce immigration could be undermined, sources say.

The officials argued that bringing in Sudanese could affect the government’s immigration levels plan: annual targets that the government sets for the number of permanent and temporary residents it plans to admit.

But former immigration minister Marc Miller, two sources say, last year rejected that argument as he thought Canada should help family members of Canadians caught up in what has been described as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. He pressed ahead with establishing a pathway to permanent residence for those with direct family ties to Sudanese Canadians, although processing delays have left thousands who applied stranded. Mr. Miller declined to comment. …

Source: Former immigration minister rejected officials’ advice to shelve Sudan humanitarian program

A New Era of Immigration Enforcement Unfolds in the U.S. Interior and at the Border under Trump 2.0

Another good analysis by MPI:

Unauthorized migration at the U.S.-Mexico border plunged dramatically during the just-ended fiscal year, as the Trump administration leveraged new border controls, further asylum restrictions, and the promise of mass deportations, reaching about 444,000 migrant encounters recorded in fiscal year (FY) 2025. This sharp drop from 2.1 million encounters the prior year was also marked by reversion to a pattern last experienced more than a decade ago: Flows primarily composed of Mexican single adults and Central American unaccompanied children.

The steep decrease in unauthorized arrivals at the border and return to nationalities that are easier to turn back because of existing repatriation agreements has permitted the administration to direct its focus to immigration enforcement in the U.S. interior—in fact deploying significant U.S. Border Patrol assets to cities such as Los Angeles and Chicago. To achieve its goal of mass deportations, the administration has increased coordination among federal agencies, elevated cooperation with state and local law enforcement agencies, rapidly accelerated the build-up of detention capacity, expanded the use of fast-track removal powers, tapped the U.S. military, and established new agreements to repatriate returnees to third countries. As a result, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) recorded more deportations from within U.S. communities during FY 2025 than the Border Patrol apprehended people crossing the Southwest border illegally—the first time since at least FY 2014, according to available data.

While detailed FY 2025 data about ICE arrests and removals have not been released since January, there is no doubt that interior enforcement has risen. But it has become increasingly complicated to track results because only selective statistics have been made public. Returning to regular reporting of detailed data on immigration enforcement across the various Department of Homeland Security (DHS) immigration agencies could not only improve the public’s understanding of current immigration enforcement activities but also inform state and local stakeholders who want to collaborate or who are affected by enforcement.

Ramped-Up Interior Enforcement and Mass Deportations

While U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) continues to post border encounter statistics every month, DHS has inconsistently released immigration enforcement data  and its last detailed tables of ICE and CBP actions ended with November 2024 activity. Based on the latest publicly available figures, however, the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) estimates that ICE conducted about 340,000 deportations in FY 2025, including noncitizens with a formal order of removal and immigration detainees who chose to end their detention with a voluntary departure. This would mark a level of activity 25 percent higher than the 271,000 deportations recorded by ICE in FY 2024. These fiscal year figures do not include deportations conducted by CBP, which DHS has yet to release.

The  administration says it conducted more than 400,000 deportations overall between ICE and CBP in its first 250 days, and was on pace to reach nearly 600,000 by the end of its first year. This projection falls short of the 685,000 deportations recorded by the Biden administration in FY 2024—and is well off the Trump administration’s pledge of carrying out 1 million deportations per year.

Location Matters

Where the deportations are happening is significantly different under the Trump administration, with more occurring within the U.S. interior rather than at the border. This has significant operational impacts, given deportations in the interior are likely to be far more resource intensive and carry higher individual and societal costs with enforcement happening in U.S. cities and against people who, unlike many recent border crossers, often have significant years of U.S. residence and deep community ties.

Of the 400,000 deportations conducted by the Trump administration through its first 250 days, MPI estimates approximately 234,000 were conducted by ICE from the U.S. interior, with another 166,000 by CBP.

ICE daily deportations, in fact, doubled from 600 in January to 1,200 since June. ICE deportations have increased as the number of immigrants being placed in detention centers has surged. Since the start of the Trump administration, the average number of noncitizens in ICE detention centers has grown gradually, reaching about 60,000 by the end of FY 2025 (see Figure 1). And by March, most detainees had been arrested by ICE in the interior, not by CBP at the border or through CBP transfer to ICE, as was usually the case under the Biden administration….

Source: A New Era of Immigration Enforcement Unfolds in the U.S. Interior and at the Border under Trump 2.0

Canada’s education sector has a new idea to lure international students back. Here’s what it is

Doesn’t appear to be a new idea:

…Niagara College president Sean Kennedy said Canada has remained a safe and welcoming country known for its progressive values, cultural diversity and quality education. 

“The messaging to the world through this campaign will be, ‘Come and grow your future as a global citizen,’” said Kennedy, whose school saw international applications drop by half and lost 40 per cent of international enrolment in the past year.

For graduates, that could mean returning home after an amazing education and international experience or staying and working for those who fall in love with Canada, he said.

“Both paths are really laudable, commendable and worth considering,” Kennedy noted. “It’s a bit more of a balanced approach. What we’re offering here is a chance to grow your skills and knowledge and expertise, but also to grow as a person.”

Source: Canada’s education sector has a new idea to lure international students back. Here’s what it is

Jamie Sarkonak: Liberal diversity mandates must end if we’re to solve the judge shortage

Not sure if there is real evidence for the assertion “focus on diversity necessarily comes at the expense of excellence” and citing one example rather than a broader sample does not cut it. The shortages assertion may or may not be true, as the government has a record in many areas of not meeting targets and levels:

…This tends to involve standard-bending because the pool of bench-eligible senior lawyers is going to be more white and more male than the country as a whole. The senior tiers of any profession reflect the demographics of students in professional schools 40 years ago, not today. While excellent candidates can be found from all walks of life, the Liberal focus on diversity necessarily comes at the expense of excellence. And because the Liberals are obsessed with maintaining an acceptable ratio of white male to “diverse” appointees, we can infer that they’d rather leave some seats empty until a correct number of diverse judges can be put forward at the same time. Shortages ensue….

Source: Jamie Sarkonak: Liberal diversity mandates must end if we’re to solve the judge shortage

Under Trump, Becoming a U.S. Citizen Gets Harder

Details of note:

A harder civics test. Stricter social media vetting. Neighborhood investigations into people’s “moral character.”

The Trump administration is erecting new hurdles for lawful permanent residents applying for U.S. citizenship, part of a broader effort to tighten an immigration system that federal officials say has become too lax. Officials are reviving old vetting standards and adding new requirements that emphasize cultural assimilation and more aggressively screen applicants for “anti-American” views.

Joseph Edlow, the director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, recently said he was “declaring war” on anyone who wants to naturalize but “doesn’t want the responsibility of what it means to actually be a U.S. citizen.”

Some immigrant advocacy groups contend the moves are meant to discourage people from applying for citizenship and to raise the bar in a way that would reduce the number of naturalized citizens, or immigrants who were approved for citizenship as opposed to people who gained it via birthright. They worry that the anti-American label could be applied to those who disagree with the administration on matters such as the war in Gaza. The changes are stoking fear among immigrants who want to apply but are hesitant to reopen their cases and invite greater scrutiny from immigration authorities, according to legal advocates and groups that teach citizenship classes.

They say the process to obtain citizenship was already fair. To become a citizen, people generally have to have a green card for several years, submit an application, pay a fee, complete an interview with a Citizenship and Immigration Services officer, pass a background check as well as English and civics tests, and take an oath. Those who marry U.S. citizens can apply sooner after obtaining a green card.

Nicole Melaku, the executive director at National Partnership for New Americans, a coalition of immigrant rights groups, said she was concerned that the changes would have a chilling effect on applications. Although green card holders already have the right to live and work in the United States permanently, naturalized citizens have greater protections against deportation, the right to vote and the ability to sponsor more family members, among other things.

“This is an intimidation and fear-producing tactic from this administration to possibly dissuade individuals from accessing the process,” Ms. Melaku said.

In mid-August, Citizenship and Immigration Services issued a memo that increased the standard to show “good moral character.” This is a longstanding requirement that previously involved checking for criminal convictions and other acts of wrongdoing, such as failure to pay child support. Now, officers must also check for “positive attributes,” such as family caregiving, educational attainment, stable employment and community involvement.

The agency also said in a policy memo that it would begin considering “any involvement in anti-American or terrorist organizations” in requests for immigration benefits, including citizenship applications. Officials said they would screen people for support of “antisemitic terrorist organizations” and expand social media vetting to include checks for anti-American activity.

The agency also said it would resume neighborhood investigationsof immigrants who apply for citizenship, meaning that officers could interview neighbors and co-workers of applicants as part of the vetting process. Immigration authorities had essentially stopped doing this by 1991.

People who apply on or after Oct. 20 will also have to take a harder civics test, which will require them to answer 12 out of 20 questions correctly, up from six of 10. The list of potential questions has been expanded to 128 from 100. It also eliminates several simple geography questions and adds some that are more nuanced.

Matthew Tragesser, a spokesman for the immigration agency, said that citizenship was the “most meaningful status the U.S. government can bestow” and that people seeking to defraud the system would not receive the benefit. He added that it “should not be a cakewalk to obtain, and we are certainly not going to give it away.”…

Source: Under Trump, Becoming a U.S. Citizen Gets Harder

May: The Day of [Budget] Sacrifice

Good piece:

….The budget, he [Daniel Quan-Watson] says, also marks a sharp philosophical turn. For a decade, the public service operated on a “do everything” instinct – fix every injustice, chase every big ambition, launch every initiative.
 
That era is over.
 
“It’s not that yesterday’s priorities don’t matter,” he says. “It’s that some things matter even more today. You ask, ‘Where are the injustices?’ You get one – maybe six, but it isn’t 22.”
 
“We’re not going for stars now – we’re going for low-orbit satellites. And if you catch one, you’ll be lucky.”
 
This is the moment to lead. As Anil Arora, Canada’s former chief statistician puts it, the public service needs doers, not more talkers.
 
“For too long, leadership has been about coming up with ideas, putting them out there and walking away. That won’t cut it anymore. The country doesn’t just need policy – it needs people who can implement and deliver. This is real. This is our moment. Step up when the country needs you.”

The warning signs of decline. All this comes against a backdrop of a public service – while still among the world’s best – is showing cracks. Jocelyne Bourgon is a former clerk. She is one of the architects of the 1995 program review and has advised governments around the world. She’s taken a hard look at how Canada’s public service stacks up globally. Her conclusion: it’s slipping.

The warning signs are there. Morale is down. Fewer public servants feel valued. Citizens report declining satisfaction with government services – from health care and passports to Phoenix pay, digital procurement, and CRA call centres. Canada’s e-government ranking tells the same story: we were third in the world in 2010. Now we’re 47th.
 
Bourgon (above) calls this an inflection point – a moment to act before the decline deepens. And with the Carney government signalling major downsizing and operational shifts in the budget, the public service is about to face that challenge head-on.

Source: The Day of Sacrifice

This CSPS is a very good reference document. Have highlighted the lessons learned but a must read for those interested in governance and program reviews. Found the tech observation particularly of interest:

Lessons from Past Spending Reviews

  • Lesson 1: Review impacts are not well tracked or understood.
  • Lesson 2: Spending reviews have not presented detailed analysis of the service-level impacts to Canadians.
  • Lesson 3: It is generally difficult to determine the impact of spending reviews on services to different populations in Canada.
  • Lesson 4: Program reductions tend to be undone over time.
  • Lesson 5: Spending reviews affect the federal workforce through job losses, expected productivity gains, uncertainty around change, and other morale-related considerations.
  • Lesson 6: Several second-order observations from this review have implications for how future spending restraint may be carried out.

These observations are not directly related to the mechanics of reviews, but could constrain fiscal or other policy in a way that changes the shape or importance of spending reviews. The following observations fall into this category.

  • Lesson 7: Canada is unlikely to further increase free trade in the same dramatic manner as with the 1991 launch of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
  • Lesson 8: Raising consumption taxes (i.e. HST) remains a broad-based option for increasing revenue.
  • Lesson 9: Canada’s public service uses roughly the same labour mix to run its programs as it has since 1946.

Technological developments during the past 80 years, if not the past 30 years, should have reduced the labour requirement. Computers, digital automation, and internet communications have made direct services easier to provide to Canadians. Forms and databases automate many tasks with higher accuracy, e.g. security checks, benefit applications, tax returns. Yet, the same number of Canadians is served by each public servant after decades of efficiency measures in spending restraint. Why is this? An un-nuanced early result appears to be that programs are more complex, as is the work to deliver them, even while the inflation-adjusted value delivered to each Canadian has not changed much in the last fifty years. However, some of this complexity may be unnecessary.

  • Lesson 10: Federal operations have legislative or policy barriers that reduce the full benefit of technological advances and maintain or increase complexity.

Source: CSPS: Canada’s Federal Spending Reviews – Lessons

Ottawa’s immigration cuts have eased pressure on housing and labour markets: TD Economic report

Supply and demand in action:

Ottawa hitting the brakes on population growth by drastically cutting incoming immigration has eased the pressure on social and economic infrastructure, according to a newly released report from TD Economics.

Last year, notes TD, government policymakers acknowledged that the influx of immigration was too high relative the ability of Canada’s social and economic infrastructure to cope. Unemployment rose more than a full percentage point between 2022-2024, while businesses struggled to keep up with a rapidly expanding supply of workers. Meanwhile, housing affordability was being stretched to its limits.

“In response, the government introduced an immigration plan to right-size non-permanent residents (NPRs) and permanent resident (PR) targets to allow for some ‘catch up’ in the needed infrastructure,” writes Beata Caranci, senior vice president and chief economist, and Marc Ercolao, economist.

“That policy shift is evident by a massive tapering in Canada’s population growth from a multi-decade high of 3.2% in Q2-2024 to just 0.9%.”

Now, the TD economists says, the question is whether the policy shift will achieve the intended outcomes for housing and the labour markets.

“The short answer is yes.”

How has Ottawa’s policy change affected the housing market?

Reducing the number of immigrants can relieve housing market pressures a few ways, they write.

In the rental market, drastically slower immigration bears out TD’s softer rent growth forecast of 3-3.5 per cent in 2026, which is roughly half the growth rate of 2024.

Lowering the cap on newcomers has also lowered condo demand for both homeownership and the secondary rental market. It has also caused downward pressure in asking rents across major cities, write Caranci and Ercolao.

The largest shifts were observed in B.C. and Ontario due to a higher proportion of temporary foreign workers and students. Those markets also have the highest supply of condo units where the secondary market was previously attractive to investors.

“Calculating the impact of immigration flows on home prices is a more nuanced exercise. For one, NPRs have limited participation in the ownership market. And when they do, NPRs usually opt for condominium units. So a reduction in NPR inflows carries the greatest weight on this segment of the market.”

Aside from NPRs, write the TD economists, the data shows that recent immigrants are slightly more active in homeownership during their initial years in Canada, with a preference for detached homes. By their fifth and sixth year, they note, immigrant ownership rates tend to converge toward 50/50 toward renting….

Source: Ottawa’s immigration cuts have eased pressure on housing and labour markets: TD Economic report