Todd: Canada’s giant immigration industry will have to get used to ‘intense’ public debate

Not sure whether I would use the word “intense” but yes, greater debate, discussion and questioning part of a needed new normal. As I have repeatedly emphasized, debate need not be xenophobic or racist as the concerns relate to issues that affect all, immigrant and non-immigrant alike: housing, healthcare and infrastructure:

When I was asked to address members of the immigration division of the Canadian Bar Association, I expected an audience of maybe 25 to 50 lawyers.

But last Saturday, 400 immigration lawyers showed up at the Victoria Convention Centre to hear what three Canadian journalists and a think-tank member had to say about the media’s impact on migration.

The panel was asked to address immigration lawyers’ fears that heightened media coverage is “sparking intense public debate” and influencing “how immigrants are perceived and how decisions are made.”

In addition to offering our thoughts, panel members learned there are actually more than 1,200 immigration lawyers in the Canadian Bar Association, with their numbers mushrooming in the past 15 years.

I noted there are another 13,000 licensed immigration consultants in Canada, a doubling in just seven years. The lawyers in Victoria let us know, justifiably, that the “consultants” are not as highly trained as lawyers, or as regulated.

On top of these private players employed in the migration sector, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada has doubled its staff in a decade to more than 13,000 employees.

Altogether, these professionals and workers add up to an army of more than 27,000 immigration specialists (about the same as the number of soldiers and staff employed by Canada’s Department of Defence).

All make their living helping migrants navigate the complexities of becoming a foreign student, temporary worker, reunified family member, investor immigrant or permanent resident of Canada.

In addition, the C.D. Howe Institute maintains another huge cohort that does somewhat the same thing. Unlicensed agents — from the fields of travel, education and labour — also take fees for advising clients on how to get into Canada and stay there.

The institute’s Tingting Zhang and Parisa Mahboubi, therefore, maintain there should be many more licensed consultants — and that the government should offer better aid to the roughly six million people whose applications are each year processed for entry into Canada.

In other words, the 400 lawyers who gathered last week at the Victoria Conference Centre represented just a fragment of the immigration business in Canada. No wonder it’s called one of the country’s biggest industries.

Understandably, the gathered immigration lawyers, the slight majority of whom were women, wanted to do everything they could to help the clients in Canada and around the world who come to them.

Their questions and comments all revolved around the hope that borders be more open and the often-labyrinthine migration process easier.

They also worried about declining support for immigration. A Leger poll this spring found 58 per cent of Canadians believe migration rates are “too high”. Even half of those who have been in the country less than a decade feel that way.

Given the lawyers’ desire to assist their clients, many were wary that in the past two years more journalists have been digging into migration policy and its impact.

That’s in large part because former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doubled immigration levels and increased the number of guest workers and foreign students by five times. Almost three million non-permanent residents now comprise 7.3 per cent of the population, up from 1.4 per cent in 2015.

The lawyers noted that, after decades in which journalists essentially avoided migration issues, many more articles were being written about such topics as the sudden jump in asylum seekers, tens of thousands of international students not attending school, businesses exploiting temporary workers and population pressures on housing and rents.

Two panelists, Toronto Star immigration reporter Nicholas Keung and Steve D’Souza of CBC’s Fifth Estate, emphasized the value of talking to migrants to develop poignant “human interest” stories. They have also investigated how bosses, fly-by-night colleges and some migrants have taken part in scams.

In response to CBA’s concerns that Canada’s media were producing “stories that have become a lightning rod for public sentiment, shaping how immigrants are perceived and how decisions are made,” the journalists on the panel explained it’s our duty to cover migration stories, and all stories, in a way that is “fair, balanced and accurate.”

Although panelist Daniel Bernhard, of the Institute for Canadian Citizenship, correctly said that some journalism about migration is superficial, I suggested it’s generally a good thing Canada’s long-standing national taboo against reporting on and debating migration policy has eased.

Although some politicians, migration lawyers, consultants and other agents may not always like it, I also said journalists’ goal is to responsibly probe to the truth of a matter and, beyond that, to “let the chips fall where they may.”

Since my Vancouver Sun editors about a dozen years ago asked me to produce more analyses about migration, I have learned covering the beat essentially amounts to writing about the “winners and losers” of migration policy, which in Canada is put together behind closed doors.

Some examples. Applied ethicists point to how it’s one thing for Canadians to worry about a “brain drain” — about losing talented citizens to places like the U.S. and Singapore. The more worrisome flip side, for countries in Africa and East Asia, is that Canada is actively draining away their brainy people, be they physicians or entrepreneurs.

Then there are the 2.8 million temporary workers in Canada, many of them international students paying exorbitant school fees. Some have been winners, getting solid educations and decent jobs in their homelands or permanent residency in Canada. Others have been exploited for their willingness to work for low wages — which has, in turn, been a losing proposition for other low-skill workers in Canada.

The job of tracking migration policies’ winners and losers is endless, including covering the squeeze that rapid population growth and the trans-national migration of foreign capital is putting on those trying to pay Canadian housing costs and rents.

Suffice it to say, journalists’ job is to shine as much light as possible on this vast system, which impacts millions. The ultimate goal is to encourage the creation of policies that best serve the most people, which is one way to advance the common good.

Source: Canada’s giant immigration industry will have to get used to ‘intense’ public debate

Hiebert: Canada’s Future Depends on Where Immigrants Settle, Not Just How Many Are Welcomed

 Good analysis by my friend Dan Hiebert noting the needed linkages between immigration and other policies:

Immigration alone cannot solve Canada’s regional and demographic challenges, according to a new report from the C.D. Howe Institute. Immigration must be paired with regional development; otherwise, Canada risks exacerbating the divide between fast- and slow-growth regions while placing even greater strain on already pressured large urban centres.

In “Fast vs. Slow: How Different Immigration Rates Can Impact Canada’s Economic Challenges and Regional Disparities,” Daniel Hiebert finds that regardless of the number of immigrants Canada welcomes, settlement patterns result in only modest population growth in slower-growth regions.

“Regionalization policies like Provincial Nominee Programs have helped newcomers to settle beyond the big three cities,” said Hiebert. “But the real test is whether they stay – secondary migration is pulling people right back into fast-growing areas.”

Hiebert argues that a multi-stage immigration process – such as beginning with temporary status – can help slower-growth regions retain newcomers by giving them time to build social and economic ties before settling permanently.

“If we’re judging the system by how well it supports all parts of the country, it’s coming up short,” Hiebert added. “Immigration can certainly help address Canada’s demographic challenges, but it’s not the only tool – we need broader regional development to make it work.”

The report emphasizes the need for Canada to pair immigration initiatives with broader efforts to strengthen local economic opportunities, access to services, and overall community attractiveness. It also outlines several policy recommendations to help slow-growth regions thrive, including investing in infrastructure, fast-tracking credentials, and supporting the growth of promising mid-sized cities that can absorb growth and ease pressure on major urban centres.

“With housing costs, productivity issues, and an ageing population dominating the national conversation, building growth and resilience across all regions has to be a top priority,” said Hiebert. “It’s not just about the number of newcomers we bring in – it’s about making sure they have the support and opportunities to thrive wherever they settle.”

Read the Full Report

Canada Wasting the Talents of Skilled Immigrants

Of note:

Canada’s ambitious efforts to attract highly skilled immigrants are undermined by a widespread mismatch between immigrants’ qualifications and job opportunities, according to a new study from the C.D. Howe Institute. The report highlights key factors, such as language proficiency and education quality, as well as systemic barriers like the lack of recognition for foreign credentials and complex credential assessment processes, which hinder immigrants from fully contributing to Canada’s economy.

In “Harnessing Immigrant Talent: Reducing Overqualification and Strengthening the Immigration System,” Parisa Mahboubi and Tingting Zhang reveal that 26.7 percent of recent immigrants – those who arrived in Canada within the last five years – with a Bachelor’s degree or higher are employed in positions requiring only a high school diploma or less. This is three times higher than the rate for Canadian-born workers with similar education levels.

“The location of study is a key factor driving overqualification,” says Zhang. “For instance, immigrants educated in Southeast and Southern Asia are 2.7 times more likely to experience overqualification than those educated in Canada. These findings show how the perceived quality of foreign education impacts labour market outcomes, along with differences in language fluency and other contributing factors.”

The report also finds that systemic challenges, such as inefficient credential recognition and regulatory hurdles, further contribute to the issue. The complex mix of licensing and certification requirements for regulated professions creates significant barriers, particularly in healthcare, where many immigrants face difficulties despite the high demand for labour in this sector.

“The economic costs of immigrant overqualification is staggering,” says Mahboubi. “Overqualified immigrants experience the largest earnings gap, earning on average 46 percent less than non-immigrants with matching education and skills, even after controlling for other factors.”

The report outlines key recommendations to address these barriers:

  • Revise the Express Entry system to align educational and language requirements with labour market demands.
  • Expand access to workplace-focused language training programs.
  • Streamline foreign credential recognition and establish mutual recognition agreements with source countries.
  • Enhance employer awareness of immigrant credentials and provide hiring incentives.

“Highly educated immigrants in Canada are not being given opportunities to fully utilize their skills and qualifications,” says Mahboubi. “By tackling challenges and removing integration barriers, Canada can ensure that these talented individuals contribute more effectively to the economy while also enjoying fulfilling careers.”

Read the Full Report

Source: Canada Wasting the Talents of Skilled Immigrants

More commentary on reduced immigration levels

More of the commentary that I found interesting and relevant:

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

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

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

Wow! By whom? Tell us more, minister!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


















Mahboubi: The other immigration problem: Too much talent is leaving Canada

More commentary on emigration and the apparent churn we have between arrivals and departures:

The Statistics Canada paper also draws attention to the challenges immigrants encounter, extending beyond economic integration to encompass factors such as family dynamics and considerations, cultural adaptation, and the political, economic, or cultural conditions of their country of origin. Furthermore, the study highlights the phenomenon of transnationalism, where immigrants maintain ties in multiple countries. Some immigrants may plan to emigrate from Canada as part of a strategic migration approach. Not all these circumstances are easy for Canadian policy makers to address.

Other circumstances, however, are well within Canadian policy makers’ scope. Canadian living standards are stagnating. Weak capital investment is hurting productivity and incomes. Canadian businesses tend to stay small. Canadian governments rely relatively heavily on personal income taxes, with high rates that apply at relatively low income levels – not an approach that signals to talented people that Canada is the place for them. Tax reform and other changes that mitigated these problems would make Canada more attractive to everyone – immigrants and Canadian-born alike.

Paying attention to which immigrants are likeliest to leave, and why, can help Canada improve its ability to attract and retain talent. We may be able to refine our selection criteria to raise the proportion of talented, entrepreneurial immigrants who stay in Canada. We can make it easier for immigrants with specialized skills, in health care for example, to work in their professions. Moreover, addressing factors such as high taxes and regulations that stifle entrepreneurship can help Canada retain more immigrants and retain more Canadian-born talent – a win for everyone.

Parisa Mahboubi is a senior policy analyst at the C.D. Howe Institute, where William Robson serves as CEO.

Source: The other immigration problem: Too much talent is leaving Canada

CD Howe Institute: Higher immigration without business investment lowers Canadian living standards

Yet another voice questioning the government’s immigration strategy and policies given lack of business investment:

Immigration is driving a historic surge in Canada’s population. At the same time, Canadian wages and living standards are stagnant. That is a bad combination – and, worse, it is not a coincidence. And here’s the link: Business investment is so weak that the stock of productive capital per worker in Canada – the buildings, tools and software they use – is falling. More workers and less capital are putting Canada on a path to a low-productivity, low-wage economy.

William Robson is chief executive of the C.D. Howe Institute. He recently co-authored a report on business investment in Canada.

Source: Opinion: Higher immigration without business investment lowers … – The Globe and Mail

Mahboubi: Canada’s underemployed economic immigrants: How to stop wasting talent

Usual list of factors and issues. Regulated profession credential recognition is under provincial jurisdiction and that is where some of the movement is. Was always amused when at IRCC foreign credential recognition that appeared to me as all process with little substance.

And if economic principal immigrants are largely not using settlement services, the government needs to understand why and make necessary program adjustments (or just accept that for most economic immigrants, these services may be less necessary).

Would be nice if IRCC would publish settlement services on open data!

Canada consistently fails to fully utilize immigrants’ skills, limiting its efforts to address labour-market needs and imposing a loss on the economy.

Economic immigration is Canada’s largest and most popular admission category. To make such immigration more responsive to labour-market needs, Canada recently launched category-based selection that prioritizes in-demand occupations facing shortages, such as those in health care and science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields.

However, once they get to Canada, foreign-educated immigrants, particularly recent immigrants, often encounter difficulties finding employment that aligns with their qualifications, and experience persistent skills underutilization. This phenomenon exists even among immigrants in targeted occupations in category-based selection, limiting the benefit of immigrants’ influx in those occupations.

According to Statistics Canada, more than 25 per cent of all immigrants (aged 25-64) with a foreign bachelor’s degree or higher worked in occupations requiring only a high-school diploma or less in 2021.

Earlier evidence from 2016 also shows that only two in five economic immigrants with a health-related degree worked in health-related occupations. The mismatch rate is also high among immigrants with a degree in the STEMfields (more than 50 per cent).

While admitting more immigrants in targeted occupations can help combat some chronic labour shortages, addressing underutilization issues is far more critical.

Obstacles that prevent economic immigrants from fully utilizing their skills include regulatory, language and cultural barriers, nonrecognition of foreign credentials and work experience, lack of Canadian experience, and discrimination.

To better integrate economic immigrants, provincial governments need to work with regulatory bodies to streamline foreign-credential and work-experience recognition. Some provinces are already moving in the right direction. For example, eight provinces offer practice-ready assessment programs for internationally trained family physicians.

But although this program can help speed up the credential recognition process, it is not open to all physicians and the number of assessments seems to be low, failing to keep pace with demand: Only 50 applicants will be accepted this year in Ontario. Provinces should expand this program based on the outcome evaluation and consider a similar program for other regulatory professions.

Provinces can also learn best practices from abroad. For example, Australia offers four assessment pathways for international medical graduates to register to practice. It has also taken several actions to reduce red tape and to streamline and expedite the assessment and registration process. The changesinclude increasing senior staff and cutting the processing time for initial risk assessments, fast-tracking admission of practitioners from trusted countries, and reviewing standards and requirements.

Professional Engineers Ontario recently removed the requirement of Canadian work experience for qualified foreign engineers. This change is a welcome strategy for other regulatory professions and other provinces to follow.

In addition, investing more in bridging programs such as Canada Work Experience that connects immigrants with experienced professionals in their respective fields through experiential learning, internship, or unlicensed opportunities helps immigrants understand the local job market. It also allows them to learn the workplace culture and gain Canadian experiences and new skills.

Governments need to support programs focusing on employability skills and develop targeted job-matching programs to facilitate connections between employers seeking skilled workers and immigrants looking for opportunities. They also need to educate employers on the benefits of hiring immigrants and encourage employers to hire recent immigrants.

A McKinsey report found that organizations with more ethnic and cultural diversity are 36 per cent more likely to outperform their competitors in profitability. According to a Toronto Region Immigrant Employment Council’s survey, 80 per cent of GTA employers who intentionally hire immigrants noticed a positive impact on their organization.

Raising awareness of, enhancing access to, and encouraging participation in employment services, language learning resources and bridging programs helpprovide better and faster labour-market integration of newcomers. Between 2016 and 2020, only 8.5 per cent of economic principle applicants accessed federally funded employment and community connection programs, far less than other immigrant groups.

According to a survey in 2021, only 8 to 9 per cent of skilled newcomers who used employment services learned firsthand about the available services from government offices (e.g., upon arrival at the border). The federal government needs to actively reach out to newcomers, educate them about employment assistance services and improve the usage of prearrival employment services.

As Canada plans to attract more skilled immigrants to fill gaps in the labour force and support the economy, better use of their skills and integration of this talent are becoming more crucial. Their prosperity means generations of benefits to come.

Parisa Mahboubi is a senior policy analyst at the C. D. Howe Institute, where Tingting Zhang is a junior policy analyst.

Source: Canada’s underemployed economic immigrants: How to stop wasting talent

Long way home: Blamed for affordability crisis, Liberals look to pivot on housing

But a real pivot has to include both immigration and housing….

Chris Burke and his fiancée have been less than a year away from buying their first home for the past three years.

Saving for a down payment was the first challenge. Now, rising interest rates have kicked home ownership down the road again, stalling the couple’s plans to get married and have children.

“Any gains we make towards purchasing a house, we’re watching the goalposts move further and further away,” the 31-year-old Ottawa resident said.

Feeling “stuck,” as Burke put it, is a sentiment shared by many young Canadians who are increasingly pessimistic about their home ownership prospects.

For the federal Liberals, the growing discontent with the state of the housing market is becoming a political threat.

“I’m a former Liberal voter,” Burke said. “I certainly wouldn’t be voting for them this time around.”

Experts say the housing crisis poses a great risk to the incumbent government in the next election if it doesn’t take drastic action soon.

“This has become probably the most important both economic and political problem facing the country right now,” said Tyler Meredith, a former head of economic strategy and planning for Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland.

“And especially given the significant emphasis the government has put on immigration and the relationship between immigration and the housing market, there is a need to do more.”

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has taken direct aim at the Liberals for the state of the housing market, highlighting the dramatic increases in home prices, rents and even interest rates.

According to the Canadian Real Estate Association, the national average price of a home sold was $709,000 in June 2023, up from $455,000 in Oct. 2015, when the Liberals first came to power.

And the cost of getting a mortgage has soared, following a series of aggressive interest rate increases by the Bank of Canada in response to rising inflation following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rent prices have also skyrocketed, with some cities seeing double-digit increases over the last year.

Trudeau has tried to deflect for the housing crisis, recently saying there are limits to what the federal government can do.

“I’ll be blunt as well: housing isn’t a primary federal responsibility,” Trudeau said during a housing announcement in Hamilton on July 31.

“It’s not something we have direct carriage of. But it is something that we can and must help with.”

His remarks were quickly blasted by Poilievre, who reminded people of earlier promises Trudeau had made on housing.

“(Trudeau) held a news conference … to tell you all he’s not responsible for housing. That’s funny, because eight years ago, he promised he was gonna lower housing costs,” Poilievre said in a news conference the next day.

Most experts agree that Ottawa isn’t solely responsible for the problem. But many say the federal government could still be doing more to alleviate the shortage of housing at the root of the affordability crunch.

The Canada Mortgage Housing Corp., the national housing agency, warned last year that the country needs to build 5.8 million homes by 2030 to restore affordability.

If the current pace of building continues, then only 2.3 million homes will have been added to the housing stock by then.

There are several things experts say the federal government could be doing, such as better calibrating its immigration policy with housing and reforming tax laws to incentivize rental developments. It could also push local governments to get housing built faster.

The federal government has been hearing from stakeholders and housing experts on these potential solutions, as rumblings grow about a focus on housing in the coming fall economic statement and next year’s budget.

A senior government official who spoke on the condition of anonymity so they could discuss matters not yet made public, says the Liberals plan to take steps over the next year to get other levels of government, the private sector and the not-for-profit sector to build more homes.

Trudeau’s recent cabinet shuffle might be an early sign that the federal government plans to prioritize housing. The prime minister appointed one of the stronger communicators and a rising star on the Liberal bench, Sean Fraser, to take on housing and infrastructure as one, amalgamated file.

“The prime minister said something to the effect of, ‘I’ve got a big job for you to do,'” Fraser said in an interview.

Fraser said he hopes to help restore a housing market closer to the one he grew up with in small-town Nova Scotia: one where having a job was enough to buy a home.

“It might take a bit of time for us to solve the housing challenges that are before us,” he said. “But man, is it a challenge we’re solving.”

That challenge includes overcoming jurisdictional issues. Many of the policy levers that could help spur more housing development are at the provincial and municipal levels of government.

Urban planning, zoning laws and red tape are the purview of local governments, which have decision-making powers that can help or hinder housing development.

Ben Dachis, associate vice-president of public affairs at the C.D. Howe Institute, says the predicament the Liberals find themselves in speaks to the “insidious nature of consistent federal overreach.”

“The cautionary tale is that the federal government needs to stick with jurisdiction,” Dachis said.

But housing expert Carolyn Whitzman has a different take. The University of Ottawa adjunct professor says the federal government can’t turn its back on Canadians in the middle a crisis.

“The federal government: it’s where the buck stops,” Whitzman said.

“If housing and climate change are the crises that they’re certainly treated (as), the federal government is going to have to put on its big kid pants and actually deal with it.”

Source: Long way home: Blamed for affordability crisis, Liberals look to pivot on housing

Related article: Canada ‘absolutely’ can’t build more houses without more immigrants, minister says

Canada’s housing crisis “absolutely cannot” be solved without the aid of new immigrants who bring their skills here, Immigration Minister Marc Miller told reporters on Friday

“The federal government is making housing more affordable and bringing in the skilled workers required to build more homes,” Miller said in Montreal.

“Without those skilled workers coming from outside Canada, we absolutely cannot build the homes and meet the demand that exists currently today.”

Miller was asked by reporters if he was considering slashing Canada’s immigration targets, which are currently at historic highs, in response to a recent Bank of Canada report that new immigrants are adding to housing demand.

The minister said he was not.

“People coming to this country are resourceful. When they bring capital, they are able to acquire houses,” he said.

“If people are asking us to slash, what does that mean? Does that mean slashing the skilled workers that we need to actually build those houses? Slash family reunification, which can be devastating for the mental health and well-being of the families that are already here?”

Canada aims to welcome 451,000 new immigrants in 2024.

By 2025, the number is expected to go up to 500,000 new immigrants in one year.

Miller said around 60 per cent of new immigrants to Canada are economic migrants, many of whom are the kind of skilled workers needed to build more housing. Family reunification visas account for around 20 per cent of those migrating. The rest, he said, are refugees and asylum seekers.

“We have a humanitarian duty towards people that are fleeing war and persecution,” Miller said.

Last week, a spokesperson from Miller’s office told Global News that fulfilling Canada’s labour shortages is one of his key priorities, and a key goal of the government’s immigration targets.

“Strategies like Express Entry, and the historic Immigration Levels Plan, which is largely made up of economic migrants, are a great asset to our nation as they will directly help combat the ongoing labour shortage. This is especially true when it comes to the housing sector,” Bahoz Dara Aziz, press secretary to the immigration minister, told Global News.

“With provinces like Ontario needing 100,000 workers to meet their housing demands, it is clear that immigration will play a strong role in creating more homes for Canadians.”

The federal government increased its immigration targets in November 2022, and Miller has suggested those targets may need to keep rising.

The construction industry is short tens of thousands of workers, and experts say a coming wave of retirements could make the problem worse.

Meanwhile, Canada is millions of homes behind what’s needed to reach housing affordability this decade.

The job vacancy rate in construction is at a record high with around 80,000 vacancies in the industry,  CIBC deputy chief economist Benjamin Tal said in a recent note.

Those vacancies, which push up building costs and impede productivity, come at a time when the residential construction industry is under pressure to meet the demands of a growing population.

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. forecasts a need for 3.5 million more homes by 2030 than the country is currently on track to build.

The number of new homes built, however, has been in decline, from just over 271,000 in 2021 to 260,000 in 2022. And in May this year, the annual pace of housing starts dropped 23 per cent month over month, leading the CMHC’s chief economist to predict that just 210,000 to 220,000 new homes will be built by the end of the year.

Last week, the federal government launched a separate stream of entry for newcomers with work experience in skilled trades.

“It’s absolutely critical to address the shortage of skilled trades workers in our country, and part of the solution is helping the construction sector find and maintain the workers it needs,” Miller said in a statement, making his first major announcement as Canada’s new immigration minister.

“This round of category-based selection recognizes these skilled trades workers as essential, and I look forward to welcoming more of these talented individuals to Canada.”

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) said that by welcoming people in skilled trades such as carpentry, plumbing and welding, Canada can help its construction sector attract skilled workers.

But there remain questions about how the government can ensure those bringing the skill set to work in construction actually end up working in the sector and are able to navigate the certifications processes across the country.

Source: Canada ‘absolutely’ can’t build more houses without more immigrants, minister says

Immigration Surges Past One Million — Canada Needs a Real Count and Real Plans

Annual levels plan needs to include temporary workers and international students rather than these being solely demand-driven. And better and more disaggregated data would be welcome although we have enough to understand the general trends:

Canada revved up its immigration machine last year to make up for the pandemic slowdown and recorded a new high of 437,500 new permanent resident arrivals. And the federal government plans to keep going, increasing permanent immigration targets to half a million by 2025 – 75 percent higher than the 2017 target level.

While public opinion remains broadly supportive of greater immigration, the impact on housing, health care, and broader community capacity has entered the debate. And to fully assess the effects, especially on housing, we need to look beyond headline immigration numbers. International arrivals for permanent and temporary visa holders not already in Canada need to be added to the equation. Precisely counting these groups is not an easy task due to data gaps and inconsistencies, but for 2022, we estimate the real total of arrivals last year was more than one million people.

The expansion of two-step immigration selection that prioritizes applicants with Canadian work experience and post-secondary education, allowed many applicants, such as temporary foreign workers and students, to receive approvals from within Canada. However, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) does not publish the data on their country of residence, making it difficult to understand the role of approvals for those already residing in Canada. According to IRCC data, this trend of applications from within Canada spiked during COVID. They made up fully 75 percent of 406,045 permanent residency approvals in 2021, but only 45 percent last year. This means the number of permanent residency approvals for people outside Canada – who create incremental housing demand – more than doubled between 2021 and 2022 to about 241,500.

Among those new arrivals are non-permanent residents. This category is growing rapidly, faster than new permanent residents, and is the most volatile element in population estimates. Non-permanent residents need to hold a valid permit to live in Canada and include temporary foreign workers, international students, refugee claimants and now a surging number of Ukrainians under a new authorization for emergency travel program.

In total, there were 1.3 million new temporary visas issued (excluding extensions and tourists) in 2022, a 45-percent increase from 2021. According to country of residence data, the number of new permit holders (e.g. temporary foreign workers and international students) whose place of residence was outside Canada grew by 83 percent from 2021 to more than 855,000 in 2022.

Combining permanent and temporary entry from outside Canada in 2022, the estimated total arrivals was more than one million (see Figure).

A new element of the temporary resident increase was the policy response to the invasion of Ukraine. Eligible Ukrainians can come to Canada for up to three years under the emergency authorization, and Ukrainians already in Canada can extend their visas. There is also a surge in Ukrainians arriving through other programs.  In 2022, only 29 percent (140,094 individuals) of the 478,357 approved applications arrived (another 66,000 have landed so far in 2023 through April 2). The continuing flow will substantially increase international arrival and non-permanent resident numbers in 2023 as Canada keeps receiving and processing applications.

Although some residents may leave Canada and some new arrivals are absorbed into existing extended family households, the available data points to an overall net increase in the number of arrivals as well as in demand for housing: the latest CMHC Rental Market Survey shows the national vacancy rate fell from 3.1 percent to 1.9 percent from October 2021 to October 2022.

Current trends indicate a larger influx of international arrivals (far outpacing temporary visa departures) in 2023 and further increases in housing demand. This would push the rental vacancy rate to near zero and worsen housing supply shortages.

Even if the Ukraine War ends swiftly and the labour market starts to cool down, requiring fewer temporary foreign workers, Canada still needs to address its housing crunch in both the short- and long-term.

In the short-term, prefabrication and modular construction, like those that non-profits have constructed for veterans may be needed.

Meanwhile, another concern is Canada’s data quality. Complex, confusing and even conflicting published data due to over- and under-estimates of temporary immigration figures hampers accurate and timely population and housing forecasts. First, one individual can have more than one visa in a calendar year, and leave prior to the visa expiry. As well, in another COVID response, the immigration department has allowed non-permanent residents with expired visas to remain in Canada while their application for visa renewal or permanent residency is under review. To obtain population estimates, however, Statistics Canada still assumes non-permanent resident visa holders left the country the month following visa expiry. Accurate data is needed for accurate analysis of resources and capacity planning to serve new arrivals. And evidence shows that there have been long term data gaps in tracking temporary residents.

COVID shutdowns and the Ukraine war illustrate how dramatic changes in the number of new arrivals can occur with lasting economic and demographic consequence. Using the correct metric in a timely manner is, therefore, critical. We need disaggregated data on permit issuances and arrivals by country of residence as well as data on the total unique count of temporary residents to make sure we know how many people are here.

Henry Lotin is an economist and principal of Integrative Trade and Economics and a retired Canadian diplomat, and Parisa Mahboubi is a Senior Policy Analyst at the C.D. Howe Institute.

Source: Immigration Surges Past One Million — Canada Needs a Real Count and Real Plans

Immigration alone can’t keep Canada young

Reminder that the demographic argument for large increases in immigration to address an aging population will not by itself reverse the demographic trends:

Canada is getting older. Not just us Canadians as individuals, but our population as a whole.

Our fertility rate dropped below the replacement rate of 2.1 required for population stability way back in 1971. Life expectancy at birth has increased by more than nine years since then.

One consequence of low fertility and increased longevity is that the number of people past what we traditionally consider working age is rising relative to the people of working age. The ratio of Canadians age 65 and older to Canadians age 18-64 rose by more than 10 percentage points over the past 40 years, and will rise by more than 10 percentage points again over the next 40.

An aging population puts pressure on living standards, dampens growth of government revenue and presents fiscal challenges – notably to public pensions and health care. Since immigration has become a major contributor to population growth, and immigrants are, on average, younger than already-resident Canadians, immigration can look like an antidote to aging – a kind of national elixir of youth.

This hope does not survive an encounter with real numbers, as we show in a recent publication.

Running the federal government’s recent targets, and the recommendation for an increase to 450,000 immigrants annually from the government’s Advisory Council on Economic Growth, through a demographic model reveals that higher immigration, by itself, does little to alleviate the pressure of aging.

Raising immigration, whether to an unchanging level of 450,000 a year, or to a permanently higher rate of 1.2 per cent of the already-resident population, does not stop the ratio of retirees to workers rising further, and has negligible impacts on living standards.

An immigration policy designed to stabilize the ratio of retirees to workers would require massive inflows – 1.5 million annually over the next decade alone – that are outside the realm of economic or political reality.

By contrast, projections involving later retirement – an increase in the age at which we typically consider people too old to work – present a markedly brighter picture. A projection in which the average age of retirement rises from 65 to 70 over 20 years produces a stable ratio of retirees to workers over the next decade and a half, and a decline after that. More workers per retiree means faster growth in living standards.

Encouragingly, combining later retirement with a permanently higher rate of immigration produces a bonus.

Not only does that mix lower the ratio of retirees to workers and boost living standards throughout the projection, but it demonstrates some happy timing.

In the next decade or so, when the pressure of aging on living standards will be most intense, later retirement improves the outlook – and as that boost begins to fade, the slower-acting impact of higher immigration gives us a second wind.

The later-retirement example highlights a more general point. Canada needs policies to complement higher immigration targets.

Slower growth and higher taxes will make us less attractive to potential immigrants than faster growth and lower taxes.

If living standards are growing relatively quickly in countries that are potential sources of immigrants, and in countries that compete with us as destinations for immigrants, we will have a tougher time attracting the quantity and quality of people envisioned by advocates for higher immigration – a vicious circle.

If longer work life and other responses to aging makes us more prosperous, however, we will more easily attract immigrants and retain workers who can contribute to our prosperity – a virtuous circle.

Higher immigration may be good for many reasons, but it cannot keep Canada young. Other policies to ease the demographic transition, notably encouraging people to work longer, hold out at least as much promise for boosting living standards.

And those changes would complement higher immigration targets, by improving Canada’s attractiveness to people willing and able to contribute to the Canadian economy.

via Immigration alone can’t keep Canada young – The Globe and Mail