Todd: This should be the first Canadian election that focuses on migration

2025/03/28 Leave a comment

I suspect, however, that it will not given that immigration, like so many other issues, is drowned out by the existential crisis of the Trump administration. But yes, appointments by PM Carney provide a hook to raise the issue and cite the excessive influence of the Century Initiative in past government policy before former immigration minister reversed course. As I have argued before, his changes provide space for immigration policy discussions without being labelled as xenophobic or racist.

Skuterud’s comments on rotating immigration ministers is valid and unfortunately former minister Miller was shuffled out by PM Carney:

A controversial appointment put migration in the headlines on the same weekend that Prime Minister Mark Carney announced a snap election.

The investment fund manager and former head of the Bank of Canada, who won the Liberal leadership contest two weeks ago, became the subject of news stories focusing on how he has chosen Mark Wiseman, an advocate for open borders, as a key adviser.

Wiseman is co-founder of the Century Initiative, a lobby group that aggressively advocates for Canada’s population to catapult to 100 million by 2100. Wiseman maintains Canada’s traditional method of “screening” people before allowing them into the country is “frankly, just a waste of time.” The immigration department’s checks, he says, are “just a bureaucracy.”

Wiseman believes migration policy should be left in the hands of business.

The appointment of Wiseman is an indication that Carney, a long-time champion of free trade in capital and labour, is gathering people around him who value exceptional migration levels and more foreign investment, including in housing.

Carney denied a charge by Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre that bringing in Wiseman “shows that Mark Carney supports the Liberal Century Initiative to nearly triple our population to 100 million people. … That is the radical Liberal agenda on immigration.”

Carney tried this week to distance himself from the Century Initiative, telling reporters Wiseman will not be advising him on migration.

For years, migration issues have been taboo in Canada, says SFU political scientist Sanjay Jeram.

But the Canadian “‘immigration consensus’ that more is always better” is weakening, Jeram says. Most people believe “public opinion toward immigration has soured due to concerns that rapid population growth contributed to the housing and inflation crises.” But Jeram also thinks Canadian attitudes reflect expanding global skepticism.

Whatever the motivations, Poilievre says he would reduce immigration by roughly half, to 250,000 new citizens each year, the level before the Liberals were elected in 2015. The Conservative leader maintains the record volume of newcomers during Trudeau’s 10 years in power has fuelled the country’s housing and rental crisis.

Carney has said he would scale back the volume of immigration and temporary residents to pre-pandemic levels, which would leave them still much higher than when the Conservatives were in office.

What are the actual trends? After the Liberal came to power, immigration levels doubled and guest workers and foreign students increased by five times. Almost three million non-permanent residents now make up 7.3 per cent of the population, up from 1.4 per cent in 2015.

Meanwhile, a Leger poll this month confirmed resistance is rising. Now 58 per cent of Canadians believe migration levels are “too high.” And even half of those who have been in the country for less than a decade feel the same way.

Vancouver real-estate analyst Steve Saretsky says Carney’s embracing of a key player in the Century Initiative is a startling signal, given that migration numbers have been instrumental in pricing young people out of housing.

Saretsky worries the tariff wars started by U.S. President Donald Trump are an emotional “distraction,” making Canadian voters temporarily forget the centrality of housing. He says he is concerned Canadians may get “fooled again” by Liberal promises to slow migration, however moderately.

Bank of Canada economists James Cabral and Walter Steingress recently showed that a one per cent increase in population raises median housing prices by an average of 2.2 per cent — and in some cases by as much as six to eight per cent.

In addition to Carney’s appointment of Wiseman, what are the other signs he leans to lofty migration levels?

One is Carney’s choice of chief of staff: former immigration minister Marco Mendicino, who often boasted of how he was “making it easier” for newcomers to come to the country. Many labour economists said Mendicino’s policies, which brought in more low-skilled workers, did not make sense.

By 2023, the Liberals had a new immigration minister in Marc Miller, who began talking about reducing migration. But Carney dumped Miller out of his cabinet entirely, replacing him with backbench Montreal MP Rachel Bendayan. Prominent Waterloo University labour economist Mikal Skuterud finds it discouraging that Bendayan will be the sixth Liberal immigration minister in a decade.

New ministers, Skuterud said, are vulnerable to special interests, particularly from business.

“It’s a complicated portfolio,” Skuterud said this week. “You get captured by the private interests when you don’t really understand the system or the objectives. You’re just trying to play whack-a-mole, just trying to meet everybody’s needs.”

Skuterud is among the many economists who regret how record high levels of temporary workers have contributed to Canada being saddled with the weakest growth in GDP per capita among advanced economies.

Last week, high-profile Vancouver condo marketer Bob Rennie told an audience that he pitched Carney on a proposal to stimulate rental housing by offering a preferred rate from the Canada Mortgage Housing Corp to offshore investors.

We also learned this week that Carney invited former Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson to run as a Liberal candidate. Robertson was mayor during the time that offshore capital, mostly from China, flooded into Vancouver’s housing market. When SFU researcher Andy Yan brought evidence of it to the public’s attention, Robertson said his study had “racist tones.” Two years later, however, Robertson admitted foreign capital had hit “like a ton of bricks.”

It’s notable that Carney, as head of the Bank of England until 2020, was one of the highest-profile campaigners against Brexit, the movement to leave the European Union.

Regardless of its long-lasting implications, Brexit was significantly fuelled by Britons who wanted to protect housing prices by better controlling migration levels, which were being elevated by the EU’s Schengen system, which allows the free movement of people within 29 participating countries.

For perhaps the first time, migration will be a bubbling issue this Canadian election.

While the link to housing prices gets much of the notice, SFU’s Jeram also believes “the negative framing of immigration in the U.S. and Europe likely activated latent concerns among Canadians. It made parties aware that immigration politics may no longer be received by the public as taboo.”

Source: This should be the first Canadian election that focuses on migration

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

Nicolas | Victoire antiwoke

2025/03/28 Leave a comment

A reminder but yes, there have been excesses:

…En toute transparence, un sentiment de colère m’habite alors que je parcours et reproduis ici ces mots. Une colère saine, que je travaille à exprimer sainement. C’était écrit dans le ciel que l’obsession pour les wokes et le wokisme manufacturés de toutes pièces par Fox News et les autres grands médias de la droite républicaine visait le rétrécissement des libertés d’expression, d’association et universitaire. Les campus ont été des lieux cruciaux dans les luttes pour les droits de la personne dans l’histoire américaine : s’attaquer à l’université, c’était autoriser un recul des droits, et vice versa.

Je trouve lourd qu’il soit même nécessaire de rappeler que le wokisme est la clé d’une guerre culturelle inventée par la droite républicaine pour servir ses intérêts, et que c’est à partir du combat contre le danger woke — renommé parfois EDI de manière à peu près interchangeable — qu’on assoie présentement cette attaque contre la raison, la science, le langage et des pans entiers de la population.

Certains auront de la difficulté à admettre qu’en alimentant ces chasses aux wokes, ils sont tombés dans un piège extrêmement grossier dont on voit maintenant le résultat. Je crois que, derrière cette colère, il y a surtout une tristesse, une forme de deuil. Une déception aussi.

Marginalisé. Marijuana. Minorités. Multiculturel. Noir. Non binaire. Obésité. Opioïdes. Oppression. Orientation. Polarisation. Politique. Pollution. Personne enceinte. Populations clés. Préférences sexuelles. Préjugés. Privilège. Promouvoir. Pronoms. Prostituées. Qualité environnementale.

Si j’établis l’obsession pour les wokes comme le début de la fin des haricots, c’est parce que je citais Hannah Arendt la semaine dernière, et je vais me répéter : « La mort de l’empathie humaine est l’un des premiers signes et des plus révélateurs d’une culture sur le point de sombrer dans la barbarie. »

Et que le mot « woke », à la base, ne signifie qu’une sensibilité pour la justice sociale et un engagement actif dans la lutte contre la discrimination et les inégalités.

En écrivant semaine après semaine de manière négative à partir de ce concept, des chroniqueurs ont contribué à associer le souci des personnes vulnérables au ridicule, voire au danger ou au mal. On a stigmatisé l’empathie — sans prévoir que ça allait finir par revenir au nez d’à peu près tout le monde. Parce qu’on a tous des éléments de vulnérabilité en nous, d’une manière ou d’une autre.

C’était ça, le piège.

Des personnalités médiatiques américaines, européennes, canadiennes et québécoises ont passé une partie de la dernière décennie à cibler des personnes, principalement des jeunes, qui exprimaient des préoccupations pour le bien commun à partir de profondes réserves d’empathie, déclenchant souvent à leur égard une pluie de messages haineux qui a contribué à les faire taire. Il y avait bien sûr parfois des maladresses dans la manière de s’exprimer, maladresses qui ont servi de justificatif à cette dureté. Mais le traitement médiatique a tellement été dur envers les jeunes empathiques qui s’exprimaient de manière parfois maladroite dans l’espace public qu’il n’y a pratiquement plus de jeunes empathiques qui osent s’exprimer dans l’espace public. Problème réglé, je suppose ?

Race. Racisme. Rougeole. Santé mentale. Science climatique. Ségrégation. Sexe. Sexualité. Socioculturel. Socio-économique. Sous-représentés. Sous-représentation. Sous-estimés. Stéréotypes. Sujets à enquête fédérale. Sujets qui ont récemment reçu l’attention du Congrès. Sujets qui ont reçu une grande attention médiatique.

Il y a quelque chose d’obscène dans le silence des gens qui ont fait leur pain et leur beurre avec la « liberté d’expression » et l’antiwokisme à Fox News ces dernières années, face à cette censure — cette vraie censure —, c’est-à-dire ce bannissement de mots par legouvernement de manière à limiter la distribution des ressources. Mais une fois la colère, la tristesse et la déception exprimées, je retrouve accès à mes instincts plus généreux, voire optimistes, sinon sereins, dans l’interprétation de ce silence. Je me dis — j’espère — que certains ont entamé une réflexion sur la machine infernale dans laquelle ils ont mis le doigt.

Systémique. Trans. Transgenre. Traumatisme. Traumatique. Vaccins. Victimes. Violence fondée sur le genre. Vulnérable.

Au fond, la seule question qui importe vraiment, c’est : qu’est-ce qu’on est en train d’apprendre de tout cela ?

Source: Chronique | Victoire antiwoke

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Politicians’ attacks on immigrants lack solid evidence: New data set the record straight

2025/03/28 Leave a comment

Interesting international comparative study:

…Complaints about inclusion

In the United States, President Donald Trump has voiced concerns about immigrants’ welfare access repeatedly, both during his first term and since taking office again this year. 

In last year’s British election, a staple of Rishi Sunak’s campaign was the insistence that immigrants threaten the sustainability of the welfare state. 

On the other side of the North Sea, the political party that won the Dutch elections made the argument that immigrants are “pampered” a central feature of its election platform. 

Ironically, all three of these countries are among the most exclusionary, according to the most recent IESPI data, as the graph below illustrates. (Note that the IESPI is organized such that a value of 0 is maximally inclusionary and 100 is maximally exclusionary.)

A graph shows immigrant exclusion from social programs by country
Immigrant exclusion from social programs by country. (Author provided)

Inclusionary trends have ended

A second observation is that the era of social welfare systems becoming more inclusive for immigrants has ended.

From 1990 until the 2010s, most western welfare systems were removing barriers for immigrant access to social programs. But since then, levels of immigrant welfare exclusion have not changed dramatically over time. 

Closer inspection shows that this picture of stability since the 2010s hides negative trends in different social programs.

On the one hand, health-care programs and active labour market policies have gradually become more inclusionary. More and more countries have been making health-care services accessible for vulnerable immigrant populations, and rolling out targeted programs to improve newcomers’ chances on the labour market. 

On the other hand, social assistance policies have generally become more exclusionary over time. Many countries have intensified restrictions for recent arrivals, migrants without permanent residence status and migrants who cannot demonstrate successful integration.

A graph shows trajectory of change in social programs for immigrants
The trajectory of change in social programs for immigrants. (Author provided)

Large differences in historical trajectories

When we look beyond aggregate trends, we also note very different trajectories in different countries. 

In some countries (Austria, Germany, Finland, Iceland, Malta, New Zealand, Portugal and Spain), social programs have become consistently more inclusionary. 

Other countries (Canada, Luxembourg and Sweden) have also undergone an inclusionary development, although at a more modest pace of change. 

In a third set of countries (Australia, Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Norway and Switzerland), policies initially became more inclusionary but this trend was halted or reversed around 2010. The social programs of three other countries (the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States), finally, have consistently become more exclusionary over time. 

A graph shows four trajectories of change in social programs for immigrants in various countries.
Four trajectories of change in social programs for immigrants in various countries. (Author provided)

These comparisons within the IESPI data set hopefully enable us to make sense of the frequently charged nature of discussions about immigrants’ access to social programs.

Most obviously, they show we should be cautious when listening to some of the politicians who are most critical of immigrant welfare access, like Donald Trump, Rishi Sunak and Geert Wilders. 

If their arguments that exclusionary reforms in their countries are nothing but reasonable adjustments to overly generous approaches ever had any merit, that merit is quickly evaporating.

Source: Politicians’ attacks on immigrants lack solid evidence: New data set the record straight

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Poilievre tentatively courts Canada’s rising dissatisfaction with immigration

2025/03/27 Leave a comment

Not too much new in terms of the general points. More use of Century Initiative as punching ball, particularly given Mark Wiseman, one of the main persons behind CI2100, being appointed an advisor to PM Carney.

My earlier assessment of what to expect under a Conservative government largely still holds with the exception that the changes by former immigration minister Miller have paved the way for further restrictions:

After years of avoiding any clear position on the subject of immigration levels, the Conservatives have opened the 2025 campaign with a hard pledge to “slow immigration down” to sustainable levels.

“I want people to come here (in) numbers that can actually be housed, employed, and cared for,” Poilievre told a reporter on Monday, adding that he would directly tie immigration levels to homebuilding.

“So we’re always going to be adding homes faster than we add people,” he said.

Poilievre also lashed out again at the Century Initiative, a pro-immigration non-profit which advocates for Canada to have a population of 100 million by 2100.

The Conservative leader framed the group as advocating a “radical, crazy idea” to “bring in people from poor countries in large numbers, to take away Canadian jobs, drive wages down and profits up.”

It’s not the first time that Poilievre has criticized Liberal handling of immigration. A common refrain of Poilievre in the House of Commons was that the Liberals had “lost control of immigration.”

Last summer, he told a press conference that “we have to have a smaller population growth.” In a podcast interview with psychologist Jordan Peterson, Poilievre said “we’re not interested in the world’s ethno-cultural conflicts.”

At a Holocaust commemoration ceremony in January, Poilievre said Canada needs to start deporting immigrants involved in hate crimes.

“We must deport from our country any temporary resident that is here on a permit or a visa that is carrying out violence or hate crimes on our soil,” he said.

But this usually stopped short of any specific promises on immigration levels, visa quotas or screening procedures.

In fact, Poilievre’s ambiguity on immigration issues has been slammed by both the Liberals and by his critics on the conservative fringes.

At a media roundtable in Brampton, Ont., earlier this year, then immigration minister Marc Miller defended his government’s sudden turn towards reduced immigration levels, including non-renewal for the visas of more than two million temporary migrants in the country who might have expected permanent residency.

Source: FIRST READING: Poilievre tentatively courts Canada’s rising dissatisfaction with immigration

Filed under Immigration Tagged with

Open letter to the next prime minister: We need a royal commission on Canada’s future

2025/03/27 2 Comments

Yet another call:

There is no longer any room for doubt. Donald Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency is a seismic shift for the entire world. 

However, the liberal international order that Trump threatens and that benefited Canada so greatly for so long has been unraveling for more than two decades. As a result, Canadian policies and mindsets rooted in the late 20th century are hopelessly outdated.

The time for complacency is over. Canada must wake up, adapt and steel itself for the harsh realities of today. In short, we need a royal commission on securing Canada’s future. 

The world in which Canada operates has fundamentally changed in the last 20 years. It began with the 9/11 terrorist attacks.  Afterward, security trumped trade in the U.S. New and enhanced security measures led to a “thicker” border. More rules, regulations, paperwork and scrutiny caused delays and increased costs. Canada-U.S. trade suffered as a result. 

This shift further illustrated the risks of Canada’s deep economic dependence on its southern neighbour, but our reaction was to work even more closely with the U.S. to keep the border open to trade. Since then, the escalating climate crisis, the rapid digital transformation, the global financial crisis, China’s economic and political rise, Russia’s authoritarian resurgence and U.S. fears of hegemonic decline have only intensified America’s focus on national security as a defining feature of its economic relations, pushing other countries to do he same.

The policies and governance mechanisms that underpin Canada’s society, economy and security were not designed for the current illiberal international landscape.   …

Source: Open letter to the next prime minister: We need a royal commission on Canada’s future

Filed under Government Tagged with , , , ,

USA: A new study quantifies how a #citizenship question would likely hurt census accuracy

2025/03/27 Leave a comment

Contrast with Canada where citizenship has been part of the census for many years. But in current US political context, understandable how this would affect response rates:

Adding a citizenship question to U.S. census forms — a change that many Republicans in Congress and President Trump have wanted — would likely undermine the accuracy of the country’s population counts, a new peer-reviewed study shows.

The findings, published last week in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, build on earlier research by the Census Bureau and quantify longstanding concerns among opponents of the question, who fear it could derail the once-a-decade tally of U.S. residents that’s used to redistribute political representation and federal funding to communities.

Census participation levels have long varied among different demographic groups. For example, in the 2020 census, those differences helped drive the overcounting of people who identify as white and not Hispanic and the undercounting of Latinos.

Source: A new study quantifies how a citizenship question would likely hurt census accuracy

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Trump overhauls US elections in new executive order, including proof of citizenship

2025/03/27 Leave a comment

Expect court challenges:

President Donald Trump on Tuesday signed a sweeping executive action to overhaul U.S. elections, including requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and demanding that all ballots be received by Election Day. The order calls on states to work with federal agencies to share voter lists and prosecute election crimes. It threatens to pull federal funding from states where election officials don’t comply.

The Republican National Committee launched a massive effort to probe voter registration lists nationwide.

Trump often claims elections are being rigged, even before the results are known, and has waged battles against certain voting methods since he lost the 2020 election to Democrat Joe Biden and falsely blamed it on widespread fraud.

Source: Trump overhauls US elections in new executive order, including proof of citizenship

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Lawyers advise Canadians working in U.S. to avoid travel amid border crackdown

2025/03/27 Leave a comment

Of note (one of our children is working in the USA and hearing from others whose travel plans being affected):

U.S. immigration lawyers are warning foreigners working and studying in America – including Canadians – to refrain from international travel, saying that crossing the U.S. border has become significantly more unpredictable since U.S. President Donald Trump took office and that they run the risk of being detained or refused entry.

The Trump administration has issued a series of broad executive orders over the past two months that aim to “secure” the American border by expediting the removal of undocumented migrants. But immigration lawyers say the overall hostile tone from the White House toward non-U.S. citizens is emboldening border agents to become more heavy-handed with travellers leaving and entering the country, even those who hold valid work and study visas.

In some cases lawyers are advising clients to prepare for increased scrutiny of their personal histories, including possible searches of their cellphones for evidence of their political leanings.

Earlier this month, New York-based immigration law firm Dyer Harris LLP, which helps foreigners secure work visas in the U.S., sent an e-mail to their clients residing and working in the country recommending that they hold off on international travel altogether, unless in an emergency.

“The hostile chaos emanating from the White House should make everyone cautious on international travel for the time being,” the e-mail read. “Make arrangements with family and friends to be in touch on a daily basis [if crossing the border]. It is crucial someone knows where you are, and that action is taken if you are taken into custody.”

Recently, there have been multiple incidents of business travellers and tourists arbitrarily being stopped at U.S. border crossings and sometimes held for weeks at U.S. immigration detention centres….

Source: Lawyers advise Canadians working in U.S. to avoid travel amid border crackdown

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , , ,

As Trump cuts university research, American scholars look north

2025/03/26 Leave a comment

Encouraging that Canadian universities are actively engaged in such recruitment:

In the early days of the second Trump administration, Frédéric Bouchard, dean of arts and sciences at University of Montreal, told his faculty’s two dozen department chairs to keep an eye out for talented researchers in the United States who might be looking for a change of scenery.

If they knew of anyone unsettled by funding cuts and political moves in the U.S., particularly if that person had a connection to Canada, Prof. Bouchard wanted to be notified immediately.

He has already had calls from colleagues, he said.

“Any time the market for talent is rattled it makes our jobs easier recruiting the best that are out there,” Prof. Bouchard said. “It’s still early. Right now we are just discussing with various potential people, seeing whether they’re interested or not.”

Prof. Bouchard said private donors have even expressed an interest in supporting recruitment.

“Without me asking them they told me that if we found somebody, and we needed additional resources to bring them to Canada, that I should give them a call,” Prof. Bouchard said.

At the University of Toronto, department of immunology chair Jen Gommerman said she has already had researchers in the U.S. contact her about opportunities in Canada. Many are feeling demoralized, she said.

“It’s a fearful time for everyone in academia,” Prof. Gommerman said. “There’s uncertainty. There’s this feeling of loss.”

In the first weeks of the Trump administration, a series of executive orders and policy decisions has destabilized research agencies and universities. The National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have all been targeted for cuts, which the White House has said are aimed at saving money and improving efficiency…

Source: As Trump cuts university research, American scholars look north

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

HESA: EDI and the Measurement of Merit

2025/03/26 Leave a comment

Good primer on EDI/DEI considerations:

…Now it is not obvious (to me at least) that the overall results of such a system are any worse than the overall results of the current system. You gain a little bit of equity in one direction and (perhaps) lose it in another. But there are winners and losers when switching from one system to another and the losers tend to scream louder than the winners.

In an ideal world, of course, one would be able to measure everyone individually by distance travelled, without the use of proxies. That way, “elites” from disadvantaged groups would not be unduly rewarded, and financially disadvantaged whites’ underprivileged position would be recognized. There would still be screaming, of course—people who were in danger of losing their position of privilege would still claim that a context-free, single-point-in-time definition of merit is “better” and “more objective” than a context-dependent one (this is more or less the position taken by the Students for Fair Admissions in the Harvard admissions case decided by the US Supreme Court in 2023). But it would have fewer drawbacks than other schemes which measure disadvantage via proxies.

Why don’t we do that? Well, I would argue it is for two reasons. The first is simply that using proxies to measure disadvantage is a whole heck of a lot cheaper than measuring it at an individual level. With proxies, you can reduce disadvantage to a set of categories that can be indicated by a tick in a box, something that reduces complexity and obviates the need to treat each case individually.

But the second and probably more important reason is that distance travelled is not an entirely straightforward and measurable proposition. It is by no means impossible to create methodologies to look for it: the Loran Scholarships and McGill’s McCall-MacBain scholarships both train assessors to look for precisely this (which is a very good reason why the former is so good at picking future Rhodes Scholars). But the problem is that there is no hard-and-fast algorithm here. You have to put selectors in a position where they can exercise judgment. And frankly, in an increasingly low-trust society, that’s hard to do (Phillip K. Howard’s Everyday Freedom: Designing the Framework for a Flourishing Society is very good on the unfree consequences of depriving administrators of the ability to exercise judgement).

And so here’s the thing: if you don’t want to measure disadvantage individually because you are too cheap to do so, and/or you can’t allow people freedom of judgement in assessing disadvantage for the purpose of measuring distance travelled, then what you’re left with as options are measurement by proxy, or settling for a definition of merit that unabashedly favours the members of the lucky sperm club. There is not really a fourth option.

Source: EDI and the Measurement of Merit

Filed under DEI, Multiculturalism Tagged with

← Older posts

Newer posts →