Carney government’s new immigration plan: Who wins, and who is losing out

2025/11/07 Leave a comment

Good overview in the Star.

One slight of hand manoeuvre in the plan that some have noted is that the overall number of 380,000 permanent resident admissions does not include the one-time initiatives (115,000 for asylum seekers, 33,000 for Temporary Foreign Worker transition) over 2026 and 2027, which would bring the number for those two years to around 450,000.

Legitimate way to handle transition but we will need to see how it works out in practice:

Here are the big winners in the new levels plan:

Provincial immigration programs 

Although the overall permanent resident spots for the economic class have only gone up slightly from 232,150 this year to 244,700 in 2028, the provinces and territories will see their share of that pie growing from 55,000 to 92,500 via the provincial nomination programs (PNP).

The program allows provincial governments to screen and select prospective permanent residents who best meet their regional economic and labour market needs. 

“We don’t know how the provinces are going to allocate those PNPs, nor do we know the categories and occupations of the draws,” said Ottawa-based immigration lawyer Cedric Marin, who speaks on behalf of the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association. “But clearly, it’s a win.”

French-speaking immigration applicants outside Quebec

The new plan will continue to boost the levels of French-speaking permanent residents settling outside of Quebec from 29,325 in 2025 to 35,175 in 2028. The increase may seem small but will ultimately bring up the percentage of newcomers proficient in French from 8.5 per cent to 10.5 per cent of the annual permanent resident intakes.

This move is not without controversy as French-speaking immigrants face challenges in accessing services and finding jobs settling in English-dominant provinces and territories. Under the skilled immigration selection system, proficiency in French itself has given francophone candidates an advantage over other skilled candidates.

“What we see is that French speakers outside Quebec are able to immigrate and have a much higher chance of success than those in health care, in STEM, those in other occupations,” said Marin, a francophone from Ottawa.

Protected persons who’ve been granted asylum

The Immigration Department plans to launch a one-time initiative to grant permanent residence over two years to 115,000 people who have been given asylum but are caught in processing backlogs in Canada. Officials said this number is in addition to the permanent resident targets in 2026 and 2027.

“The government was right to provide a response to the thousands of people to whom Canada has offered protection but no permanent status,” said Diana Gallego, president of the Canadian Council for Refugees. “It is not only life-changing for them, but also good for Canadian society as a whole.”

But there are people who lose out in the plan:

Temporary residents already in Canada

The Immigration Department plans to implement a one-time measure to “accelerate” the transition of 33,000 work permit holders to permanent residency in 2026 and 2027. However, as of the end of the third quarter of 2025, slightly more than three million non-permanent residents were in Canada.

Many of these temporary residents have worked, studied and invested in their lives here; they have been crushed by the reduced permanent resident levels and could run out of legal status any time.

“The concern I’m expressing has to do with the large number of people already here and the fact that we haven’t actually made a plan for them,” said Queen’s University immigration law professor Sharry Aiken. 

Refugees abroad awaiting resettlement to Canada

The federal government and community groups sponsor refugees abroad under Canada’s resettlement program. The new immigration plan will see the annual quotas for privately sponsored refugees drop by 30 per cent from 23,000 this year to 16,000 in 2026, while government-assisted refugees are reduced from 15,250 to 13,250.

The Canadian Council for Refugees said more than 90,000 refugees are currently in the private sponsorship backlog alone, and the lower quotas mean a wait time of nearly six years.

Permanent residence applicants on humanitarian grounds

Ottawa has offered temporary refuge to Ukrainians fleeing the Russian invasion, Afghans escaping the Taliban, Hong Kongers seeking freedom from Beijing and Sudanese affected by their two-year-old civil war. Many are only eligible to stay permanent on humanitarian grounds.

The new plan slashes the number of spots from 10,000 to 6,900 in 2026, and 5,000 for 2027 and 2028. “As you can imagine, in this context, they are losers,” said Marin.

Source: Carney government’s new immigration plan: Who wins, and who is losing out

Filed under Immigration Tagged with

More commentary on reduced immigration levels

2024/11/02 Leave a comment

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]


















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

Selected commentary on Government’s reversal of immigration policies

2024/10/26 Leave a comment

The plan, apart from the numbers and the addition of targets for temporary residents, also had high level discussion of impacts on housing, healthcare and education, as I argued for in my December 2022 article Has immigration become a third rail in Canadian politics?

Major and overdue reversal, one that allows for a more serious discussion regarding immigration policies and priorities without accusations of xenophobia or racism (although see that some activists have already gone there).

Some selected commentary, mix of serious and agenda driven, no doubt more will follow.

Advocates:

A Dark Day for Canada: CILA Condemns Immigration Levels Plan 2025-2027: As an example of this, the federal government’s decision to aggressively increase permanent resident levels in 2021 during a challenging pandemic operating environment created a cascading effect on permanent and temporary resident programs which are still placing immense pressure on the immigration system today and will continue to do so over the foreseeable future. Another example was to allow international students to work full-time while class was in session. This change added to the growing number of foreign students coming to Canada, primarily to seek employment opportunities rather than academic pursuits. Consulting widely with stakeholders would give IRCC the information it needs to plan for the long-term and make policy decisions that are sustainable.  

While we are unable to change the past, it is incumbent on IRCC to learn from its recent shortcomings and ensure it hosts genuine stakeholder consultations moving forward so that immigration levels planning and other major policy decisions consider various viewpoints and we can proactively and effectively manage a healthier immigration system. 

OCASI: Immigration Levels Plan leaves behind refugees, families and people without status: We are deeply concerned that the government continues to incorrectly tie immigration numbers to housing pressures. Scapegoating immigrants for the lack of affordable housing is disgraceful, and will only increase anti-immigrant sentiment from politicians and the public. We expect better from the government and leaders of all political parties. 

These cuts also contradict the government’s acknowledgement that immigration is essential to Canada’s economic success and growth, and that 100% of Canada’s labour market growth comes from immigration. We call on the government to provide greater clarity on how the new levels plan is expected to resolve the public concerns it claims to address.

Canada betrays refugees – CCR Statement on 2025 Levels Announcement: In a shameful abdication of responsibility, the Canadian government has massively reduced its commitment to offer protection to those fleeing persecution and danger in the world, and all but ensured that refugees in Canada will remain separated from their spouses and children for years to come. The CCR condemns today’s announcement and calls on the government to reverse this dangerous course.

Media commentary

Clark: The day Justin Trudeau (sort of) admitted a mistake on immigration: The U-turn is unusual for governments, and out of character for this one. But it had become a political necessity to tell Canadians the Liberals are changing course. Mr. Trudeau even admitted he made a mistake. Or sort of.

Keller: The Trudeau government wants to restore the immigration consensus that it broke: Good news: Canada’s immigration consensus is back. Better news: It’s being restored by the people who broke it.

That means immigration is not going to become a divisive, polarizing and potentially explosive issue in the next federal election. Unlike our peers in Europe and the United States, we’re not going to have a radical left versus radical right brawl over the issue.

Why not? Because Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government has come to its senses on this issue. It’s been moving in that direction for the last year and a half, and as of this week, it’s close to fully there.

Phillips | Don’t be fooled into thinking Canadians have soured on immigration — the truth is remarkable
Canadians, by a significant majority, still believe in the value of immigration and they aren’t scapegoating immigrants for their problems, which compared to what’s happening in other countries is quite remarkable. Apparently, not even massive screw-ups in the immigration system can change that. Be grateful.

John Ivison: Red flags all over Trudeau’s flawed plan to curb runaway immigration: The new immigration plan says that 62 per cent of permanent resident admissions will come from the economic class next year, up from 58 per cent in 2024.

But that might simply reflect the adoption of a proposal circulating in the Immigration Department that would create a new economic class of permanent residents for people with high-school education or less, who would otherwise not pass the Comprehensive Ranking point-system that has served Canada so well when it comes to selecting the best and brightest.

The fear among some economists is that this might apply the brakes to a situation that is out of control but risk derailing the whole locomotive by undermining the skills-based system and lowering the standard of permanent resident that Canada accepts.

SUN EDITORIAL: Reducing immigration necessary, not racist: We aren’t going to fault Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for admitting his high immigration policies were a mistake that contributed to today’s affordability crisis, including high housing costs.

We do fault him for his government’s false depiction of Canadians who were raising these concerns long before he did, as racists.

Jesse Kline: Toronto Star paints a skewed picture of Trudeau’s immigration cuts: The bigger problem is that Keung’s story ran in the news section, where reporters have traditionally been expected to provide unbiased accounts of the day’s events. Although Keung is a veteran of the Star’s newsroom, the issue of reporters blurring the line between news and opinion is becoming increasingly common — particularly among young journalists fresh out of university, where many professors now see it as their duty to train activists, rather than extol the virtues of objective journalism.

This influx of woke young journalists has fundamentally changed the culture of many newsrooms, even ones as storied as the New York Times, as its former opinion editor, James Bennet, lamented in a lengthy feature published in The Economist last December. Bennet noted that when he began working at the paper as a reporter in 1991, he started from the bottom and was taught to aspire to “journalistic neutrality and open-mindedness.” In 2006, he left to become editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, where he started to “see some effects of the new campus politics.” [Ironically, the NP increasingly resorts to anti-woke younger columnists.]

Academic

Worswick: As Canada cuts immigration numbers, we must also better select immigrants
The reduction in the immigration and temporary-resident targets can be seen as sound economic policy so long as we as a country maintain our historical focus on selecting economic immigrants who are likely to have high earnings in the Canadian labour market. This focus has played no small part in maintaining our pro-immigration consensus, which can continue under a properly designed set of immigration policies.

Various (Star selection)

Canada’s major changes to immigration targets met with widespread criticism: Diana Palmerin-Velasco, a director of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said the business community understands the need for a sustainable immigration system but is concerned about the plan’s implications on the labour market.

“It seems that the government might be overreacting,” she said. “It’s not just 100,000 fewer permanent residents. We are also expecting to see 400,000 fewer temporary residents. We are talking about 500,000 people.”

Scotiabank economist Rebekah Young said the drastic cuts to both permanent and temporary immigration are going to have a near-term macro impact on the economy, and there will be trade-offs.

“They are a source of labour supply and they provide economic activity through the workforce, but they also consume,” said Young. “We’re likely left with lower GDP, but not necessarily a stronger trajectory for the growth outlook.”

Dan Kelly, president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, said the cuts are troubling to employers and small businesses.

“A restaurant owner who can’t find a cook ready and willing to work in their community will not have work for the Canadians who may work in the front of the house,” he said. “We need to rethink many of these recent changes and be ready to turn the dial back up.” 

The cuts mean migrants will be forced to remain temporary or become undocumented, and pushed further into exploitative jobs and conditions, said Syed Hussan of the Migrant Rights Network.

The Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association called the pullback a “dark day” for Canada, warning of economic, fiscal and social damage.

“We still have an aging population, low birth rate, and pressing economic and fiscal pressures,” said Barbara Jo Caruso, its co-president. “Canada’s fundamental need for immigration has not changed.”

Diana Gallego, president of the Canadian Council for Refugees, said behind the numbers slashed from the humanitarian component of the levels are 14,000 real people struggling under persecution or in conflict zones around the world.

Business

Statement by Century Initiative in Response to Federal Government’s 2025-2027 Immigration Levels Plan: “Cutting immigration targets is the ultimate hammer solution to a problem far more complex than a few loose nails. This decision projects panic and instability at a time when the country needs clarity and foresight. Canada’s reputation as a stable, welcoming environment for business and talent is now at risk.” — Lisa Lalande, CEO, Century Initiative 

CFIB statement on the latest immigration cuts: These decisions hold huge implications for small business owners, Canadian workers as well as permanent immigrants and temporary workers. A restaurant owner who can’t find a cook ready and willing to work in their community will not have work for the Canadians who may work in the front of the house. We need to rethink many of these recent changes and be ready to turn the dial back up whenever and wherever needed.

Size of Ottawa’s cuts to immigration targets takes business by surprise: Since the reduction is likely to take place when the economy is becoming less inflationary and interest rates decline, this could inspire “existing Canadians to ramp up their spending,” said James Orlando, director of economics at Toronto-Dominion Bank, instead of depending upon newcomers.

Bank of Montreal economist Robert Kavcic in a note on Thursday said that while the government’s decision will reduce demand, the narrative that slower population growth is bad for the economy needs to be dispelled.

He said gross domestic product per capita, which measures the total production of goods and services during a certain period divided by the total population, has fallen in seven of the eight quarters since the second quarter of 2022.

Canada’s immigration pullback may impact economic growth, BoC governor says: “If population growth comes down faster than we have assumed, headline GDP growth will be lower,” Macklem said in response to a question on how the immigration curbs would impact the bank’s forecasts.

If household spending recovers more quickly due to continued cut in interest rates, economic growth could also be higher, he said, while addressing reporters virtually from Washington.

Other

Peter Csillag: Bigger numbers, fewer safeguards, and no accountability—How to fix Canada’s foreign worker program woes: The government’s signal this week that it is willing to not only entertain but actually implement restrictions on its broader immigration agenda is welcome, but far too little, too late. While the high-profile announcement of cuts to the number of permanent residents allowed into Canada is much needed, broader problems persist, particularly with the TFW program. It will be up to the next government to solve them.

Liberals to reduce immigration levels by 135K over two-year period: Sergio Karas, a specialist in immigration law agrees, he told True North that while this reduction is necessary given the housing crisis and the current state of the economy, he still believes that number should be further reduced. 

“As usual, the Trudeau government is doing it wrong,” said Karas. 

“The total number should be reduced to the 2015 levels of approximately 300,000 because the federal government inflated the number exponentially in the last nine years, but more important are the categories where the reduction should be applied. Not all applicants have the same ability to adapt, job security, language skills, and expertise required to ensure economic growth.”

Government announcement

The 2025–2027 Immigration Levels Plan is expected to result in a marginal population decline of 0.2% in both 2025 and 2026 before returning to a population growth of 0.8% in 2027. These forecasts account for today’s announcement of reduced targets across multiple immigration streams over the next two years, as well as expected temporary resident outflows resulting from the 5% target, natural population loss and other factors.

With this year’s levels plan, we have listened to Canadians. We are reducing our permanent resident targets. Compared to last year’s plan, we are:

  • reducing from 500,000 permanent residents to 395,000 in 2025
  • reducing from 500,000 permanent residents to 380,000 in 2026
  • setting a target of 365,000 permanent residents in 2027

The Levels Plan also supports efforts to reduce temporary resident volumes to 5% of Canada’s population by the end of 2026. Given temporary resident reduction measures announced in September and this past year, Canada’s temporary population will decrease over the next few years as significantly more temporary residents will transition to being permanent residents or leave Canada compared to new ones arriving.

Specifically, compared to each previous year, we will see Canada’s temporary population decline by

  • 445,901 in 2025
  • 445,662 in 2026
  • a modest increase of 17,439 in 2027

These reductions are the result of a series of changes over the past year, including a cap on international students and tightened eligibility requirements for temporary foreign workers, implemented to decrease volumes and strengthen the integrity and quality of our temporary resident programs. The changes are designed with long-term economic goals in mind to make sure that we continue to attract the best and the brightest.

These changes will help provinces, territories and stakeholders align their capacities and allow the population to grow at a sustainable pace as we encourage institutions to do their part in better welcoming newcomers.

Other measures from the 2025-2027 Immigration Levels Plan include the following:

  • Transitioning more temporary residents who are already in Canada as students and workers to permanent residents
    Representing more than 40% of overall permanent resident admissions in 2025, these residents are skilled, educated and integrated into Canadian society. They will continue to support the workforce and economy without placing additional demands on our social services because they are already established, with housing and employment.
  • Focusing on long-term economic growth and key labour market sectors, such as health and trades
    Permanent resident admissions in the economic class will reach 61.7% of total admissions by 2027.
  • Strengthening Francophone communities outside Quebec and supporting their economic prosperity
    Of the overall permanent resident admission targets, Francophone immigration will represent
    • 8.5% in 2025
    • 9.5% in 2026
    • 10% in 2027

Through this plan, we are using our existing programs so that everyone—including newcomers—has access to the well-paying jobs, affordable homes and social services they need to thrive in our beautiful country.

Source: Government of Canada reduces immigration


















Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , , ,

Keller: The Liberals are lowering carbon taxes and raising immigration. They should do the opposite

2023/11/04 Leave a comment

Another good column by Keller. Money quote:

If the decision matrix had been good economic policy, the government would have U-turned on immigration, while holding firm on carbon pricing.

Source: The Liberals are lowering carbon taxes and raising immigration. They should do the opposite

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

Personal reflections on the immigration levels plan

2023/11/03 Leave a comment

Reviewing the plan and the coverage to date, my initial reflections are as follows:

The approach of stabilizing levels at 500,000 in 2025 resulted in the headlines the government likely wanted, with words like “plafonnent,” “hold back,” “capping,” “level out” and”stabilize.”

However, given that means an increase from 2023 levels of 465,000 to 500,000 in 2025, this “stabilizing” is more virtue signalling that they are listening to public concerns than actually taking action. The fact that any further adjustment would happen after the 2025 election makes is likely meaningless for the current government.

Moreover, given timelines to increase housing and healthcare capacity, continued increases in immigration levels will simply exacerbate the gap between levels and absorptive capacity. Hard to see this as a winning strategy…

However, should, as appears likely, the Conservatives form the next government, they would be faced with a high baseline level that may or may not be politically difficult to undo. And of course, the Liberals may have thoughts of this being a potential wedge issue for immigrant origin voters, a dubious strategy given that immigrant voters are more concerned about high immigration levels than Canadian-born (Environics Focus Canada 2023).

The plan, as is common in government documents, fails to acknowledge the negative impacts of some policy changes:

On the positive side, the government belatedly notes the impact of high levels of immigration on housing, healthcare and infrastructure and notes the need for a “whole of government” approach to improve the absorptive capacity:

While immigration contributes to the supply of labour, alleviates demographic pressures, and provides social and cultural benefits, it also creates demand for infrastructure and services. With significant and sustained growth in planned notional immigration levels, success for newcomers and all Canadians means working collaboratively with other federal departments, provinces and territories, communities and municipalities, Indigenous communities, the private sector, and stakeholders.

While there is more discussion on the role and importance of temporary foreign workers but no details on possible actions resulting from his media comment that “Canada has become “addicted” to temporary foreign workers, which has created what he called “perverse incentives” and, in some cases, led to abuse of the workers.” Minister Miller has started to address the abuse of the international student program but still too early to tell how effective these changes will be given implementation issues.

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Canada looking to stabilize immigration levels at 500,000 per year in 2026

2023/11/03 Leave a comment

One of the general articles covering the plan with Phil Triadafilopoulos stating the obvious that housing pressures will continue with these high levels give the time it takes for housing to be built:

After increasing its immigration targets several times in recent years, the federal government announced Wednesday it’s aiming to maintain its target of welcoming 500,000 new permanent residents in 2026.

Immigration Minister Marc Miller said the target is meant to support the labour supply while easing pressures on housing and health care.

“What Canadians are telling us, what economists are telling us, is that we have to dive into the micro-economic impacts of immigration,” Miller told a press conference.

The government has steadily increased its immigration targets in recent years to boost the workforce and support an aging population.

Last year, the government released a plan to grant permanent residency to 465,000 people in 2023, a figure that’s set to rise to 500,000 by 2025. The immigration target for 2015 was under 300,000.

Miller said Wednesday the government is now levelling off its planned immigration intake to see what sorts of adjustments can be made to Canada’s immigration programs.

“Those numbers were needed but now we have to take a look at them, where we feel they’re reasonable and plateauing in a space where we think it makes sense,” he said.

“We have a lot of complex calculations that we need to make and measures we need to adjust. I think it’s sometimes politically convenient to come out with a hammer-type approach… It’s more on the level of finer surgery that we need to adjust.”

Canada’s population grew by a record 1 million people in 2022. The population also surpassed the 40 million mark earlier this year.

That population growth is coming at a time when the country is also facing a housing shortage. Almost 5.8 million new units will have to be built by the end of the decade in order to fix the housing supply, said a report from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation released in September.

Miller admitted the housing shortage was a factor in the decision to level off immigration targets. He said it was not the main factor.

“If that were the sole reason, it would totally be misunderstanding the challenges I think we’re facing as a country,” he said.

Many experts have said that the root causes of this housing shortage are not related to immigration. Red tape and anti-development sentiment at the municipal level, for example, can lead to major delays in housing projects.

The federal government is pushing municipalities to adjust their zoning bylaws through its housing accelerator program.

Miller maintained that Canada will need to maintain immigration levels in order to provide the workers who can build houses.

Earlier this year, the government announced changes to the express entry system that would prioritize tradespeople for permanent residency. Miller said those changes have attracted roughly 1,500 tradespeople from abroad.

But Phil Triadafilopoulos, a political science professor who specializes in immigration at the University of Toronto, said high levels of immigration will still put pressure on the housing market.

“I don’t know whether pausing at a historically high level of immigration is really going to do much to ease affordability issues around housing,” he told CBC News. “Those pressures are going to persist, I think.”

The government’s target for economic immigrants is holding steady at 60 per cent of total immigration, according to the new plan

Goldy Hyder, president and CEO of the Business Council of Canada, said the government should boost that portion to 65 per cent.

“Unfilled job openings for highly skilled and educated professionals remain stubbornly high. If not addressed with urgency and ambition, this shortage of leading talent will have a large and lasting impact on Canadian technological innovation, labour productivity and capital investment,” he said in a media statement.

Jenny Kwan, the NDP’s immigration critic, said the Liberals’ plan lacks transparency.

‘While the government’s immigration levels plan document talks about ensuring newcomers can successfully resettle in Canada, there are no plans attached to make that happen. Once again, it’s all talk and not action,” she said in a media statement.

Source: Canada looking to stabilize immigration levels at 500,000 per year in 2026

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

Miller shares strategy for Canada’s immigration system, ahead of new levels plan

2023/11/02 Leave a comment

The messaging before the levels plan, along with a glossy communications piece:

The federal government’s priorities for improving Canada’s immigration system include better aligning the number of people welcomed to the country with what the labour market needs, as well as services and infrastructure, says a report released Tuesday.

“With an aging population, people living longer, families having fewer children, Canada imperatively needs immigration to rebalance our demographics and support the growing need for workers,” federal Immigration Minister Marc Miller said Tuesday.

“Today, we’re laying out our plans to build an immigration system that can meet the future demands of our country,” Miller added as he released a report outlining key actions intended to strengthen the immigration system, based on consultations with stakeholders.

The report comes ahead of the federal government’s annual immigration levels plan, which Miller is expected to table in the House of Commons on Wednesday.

Among the changes outlined in the report is the need to develop a “whole-of-government” approach to immigration growth. Such an approach would take housing, health care, infrastructure and other services into account when planning immigration levels.

Canada’s immigration system has faced scrutiny recently as high levels of newcomers drive population growth and put pressure on the housing market. Last year’s immigration plan, released in November, said Canada would welcome 500,000 immigrants per year by 2025.

Miller suggested Tuesday the constraints in the housing market are the result of a failure to take action by both Conservative and Liberal federal governments, as well as the provinces.

However, he pointed recent steps by the federal government to address the housing shortage, including the rollout of the housing accelerator fund, which gives cities additional money to boost housing development.

The report also offers a guidefor other action the federal government has either begun or is in the processing of developing to improve the immigration system.

That includes developing a new francophone immigration policy that will “enhance the vitality of francophone minority communities, while maintaining and increasing the demographic weight of French linguistic minority communities in Canada,” according to a news release.

The report proposes creating a chief international talent officer position to better align immigration programs and pathways with the labour market.

It says the federal government is also looking at creating a “recognized institutions framework” to fast-track study permits for educational institutions with high standards.

Source: Miller shares strategy for Canada’s immigration system, ahead of new levels plan

Government explainer: An Immigration System for Canada’s Future: A plan to get us there

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Près de dix ans d’attente pour qu’un réfugié obtienne sa résidence permanente au Québec

2023/09/02 Leave a comment

Of note:

Les seuils d’immigration proposés par le gouvernement Legault menacent de faire exploser les délais des futurs résidents permanents dans la catégorie humanitaire. Tandis que s’amorceront dans moins de deux semaines les consultations publiques en immigration, Le Devoir a appris que le nombre de dossiers est tel qu’au rythme où vont les admissions au Québec, il faudra près de dix ans à un réfugié reconnu et à ses personnes à charge pour obtenir la résidence permanente.

Selon les données d’Immigration Canada, quelque 30 000 réfugiés reconnus vivant au Québec — soit des demandeurs d’asile à qui le gouvernement fédéral a donné le statut de « personnes à protéger », ce nombre comprenant leurs personnes à charge se trouvant à l’étranger — attendaient ce précieux sésame en date du 8 août. Or, la planification pluriannuelle soumise par la ministre de l’Immigration, Christine Fréchette, propose d’accueillir, pour chacune des quatre prochaines années, environ 3550 personnes dans la catégorie « réfugiés reconnus sur place ». Cette catégorie comprend les demandeurs d’asile arrivés au Québec notamment par voie terrestre, maritime et aérienne.

Une règle de trois montre qu’il faudra huit ans et demi pour écouler ces dossiers, sans compter que des milliers de nouveaux réfugiés reconnus vont venir ajouter le leur sur la pile. Rien qu’en 2022, 60 000 demandes d’asile de personnes vivant au Québec ont été déposées. Ces demandes ne seront toutefois pas toutes acceptées.

« Je suis abasourdie, même si les chiffres ne me surprennent pas tant que ça parce qu’il y a eu une hausse des demandes d’asile », a déclaré Stéphanie Valois, présidente de l’Association québécoise des avocats et avocates en droit de l’immigration. « Mais ce qui me surprend c’est quand on met [ce nombre] en parallèle avec les objectifs d’admission dans la planification du Québec. Il y a un décalage complet avec la réalité. »

« Le Québec se met la tête dans le sable », a déploré pour sa part Stephan Reichhold, directeur de la Table de concertation des organismes au service des personnes réfugiées et immigrantes. « Ces délais sont rattachés à des souffrances majeures pour les familles qui sont séparées et reconnues comme réfugiées. Qu’elles se fassent traiter comme ça, c’est absolument inacceptable. » Selon lui, le message qu’on leur envoie est clair : « Mieux vaut pour ces personnes déménager en Ontario ! »

Sans la résidence permanente, les réfugiés reconnus ne peuvent pas étudier, avoir accès aux garderies et occuper certains emplois, explique Me Valois. « Et pour la réunification familiale, c’est une catastrophe », dit-elle, en rappelant que, si les réfugiés reconnus sur place sont en sécurité au Québec, ce n’est pas toujours le cas de leurs proches. « J’ai beaucoup de clients du Soudan, et c’est la guerre là-bas. Même si le réfugié soudanais qu’on reconnaît comme personne à protéger se trouve ici, les membres de sa famille, eux, peuvent être bloqués à l’étranger dans une situation de danger. Ils ne peuvent pas attendre tout ce temps. »

Les partis d’opposition, choqués

Ces données sur le nombre de dossiers font réagir les partis d’opposition. Le député de Québec solidaire et porte-parole en matière d’immigration, Guillaume Cliche-Rivard, se dit « atterré » et « choqué » de constater que le plan de la ministre Fréchette maintiendra dans la précarité « sans raison apparente et pour des délais excessifs » les personnes parmi les plus vulnérables qui travaillent et sont déjà intégrées.

« Cela confirme l’incompétence du ministère, qui présente, année après année, des plans incomplets et sans crédibilité. La ministre Fréchette vient malheureusement de nous confirmer que son arrivée n’a rien changé à ce niveau. »

Pour le député libéral de Nelligan, Monsef Derraji, l’immigration dite « humanitaire » est aussi économique. « Ce n’est pas de la charité. C’est une catégorie qu’on s’est donnée, car on est très accueillant comme peuple au Québec », soutient-il. « Le nombre de demandes a augmenté depuis l’arrivée de la CAQ au pouvoir et, pour moi, on ne peut pas faire fi de ça. »

Il estime d’ailleurs que la consultation publique qui s’amorce passe à côté de débats importants. « C’est l’occasion en or de parler de la capacité d’accueil, on a l’occasion de parler des travailleurs étrangers et on ne le fait pas. C’est la même chose pour les personnes de la catégorie humanitaire, on n’en parle pas. »

Le co-porte-parole du Parti québécois en immigration, Stéphane Handfield, rejette pour sa part la faute sur Ottawa. « Il faut aborder la question en fonction de notre capacité d’accueil [langue, logement, école, médecin, etc.], ce que le gouvernement fédéral n’a certainement pas fait dans les dernières années. Il s’agit ici de personnes vulnérables, qui, dans bien des cas, sont séparées des membres de leur famille depuis de nombreuses années en raison de la lenteur du système d’immigration fédéral. »

Des cibles souvent dépassées

Rappelons que, dans le plan d’immigration, les cibles proposées par le gouvernement sont souvent dépassées, car ce sont des indicateurs. En 2021 et en 2022, par exemple, il était prévu d’accueillir entre 2500 et 2800 réfugiés reconnus sur place, y compris leurs personnes à charge, mais en réalité, plus de 5600 personnes ont été admises dans cette catégorie en 2021 et quelque 4000 en 2022. Environ deux fois plus.

En plus du nombre croissant de demandes d’asile, cela peut aussi s’expliquer par un rééquilibrage dans la foulée de la pandémie. En 2019, soit tout juste avant la pandémie, le nombre de personnes admises dans la catégorie « réfugiés reconnus sur place » avait été fidèle à la prévision. En 2018, la prévision a été légèrement dépassée.

Mentionnons que, dans la catégorie de l’immigration humanitaire, les « réfugiés sélectionnés à l’étranger », dont font partie les réfugiés parrainés au privé par des petits groupes d’individus ou des organismes, ne sont pas aussi nombreux à attendre. Selon les chiffres d’Immigration, Réfugiés et Citoyenneté Canada, le nombre est d’environ 2000 personnes.

Suscitant un engouement certain, les consultations publiques sur la planification de l’immigration au Québec pour la période 2024-2027 s’amorceront le 12 septembre prochain. Un nombre record de plus de 70 intervenants et organismes seront entendus.

Source: Près de dix ans d’attente pour qu’un réfugié obtienne sa résidence permanente au Québec

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with , ,

Barutciski: Canada’s overly inclusive definition of ‘immigrant’ threatens to upset the apple cart 

2023/08/29 Leave a comment

Fully agree with need to include temporary residents in the annual levels plan but no need for the government to await an amendment to IRPA: in the interim, the government could decide to do so on its own volition if inclined to do so and be more transparent about actual levels of immigration.

Likely inertia will prevail, nothing will be done by the government and no amendment to IRPA will come before Parliament. Happy to be proven wrong…:

That Canadians have been debating aspects of immigration policy this summer is, on its own, unusual. After years of record-setting admission numbers, systemic problems such as the generalized housing shortage and the surge of homeless asylum seekers have prompted debates about whether the number of admissions is too high – though admirably, Canada’s traditional widespread openness and commitment to immigration remains unquestioned. But what’s also unusual is the way we are talking about immigrants, because official and media sources have presented the yearly number of immigrants to the country in a way that hasn’t been as clear and upfront as possible about recent changes in immigration policy.

In the past, the term “immigrant” was generally used to designate permanent residents who had been admitted to the country. As a consequence, Canadians had grown accustomed over the past few decades to hearing that their country was admitting roughly 200,000 to 400,000 immigrants a year. In March, however, then-immigration minister Sean Fraser announced that Canada had brought in a million new immigrants in the previous year. While the sudden huge increase was largely unexplained, careful observers figured it out: the new statistics included temporary residents, such as international students, along with the usual permanent resident numbers.

This has stemmed from an explosion in the granting of temporary resident permits since the Liberals came to power in 2015. The Liberals were also still able to issue a large number of permanent-resident permits during the COVID-19 pandemic, when the borders were closed, by relying on the selection of temporary residents who were already in Canada. This approach is becoming the new way of selecting many of the country’s permanent residents.

In other words, temporary migrants already have become a significant part of the country’s immigration policy; the data has just caught up with that reality. The problem is that nobody has actually explained this major change to the host population. The implications need to be discussed openly and honestly, and it is impossible to do so if the relevant information is not made public.

According to s. 94 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the immigration minister is supposed to provide Parliament with a report that explains many details focusing on the permanent residents who are admitted every year. This provision is now incomplete given this shift in reporting basic statistics. Parliamentarians should amend the legislation so that Canadians can be properly informed not only about permanent residents, but also temporary residents.

All opposition parties should push for this amendment. The Liberals have somewhat downplayed their role in the evolving language, maintaining that temporary permits depend on demand from employers and postsecondary institutions. Yet the federal government ultimately controls the authorization and issuance of visas. If employers looking for cheap labour and cash-strapped educational institutions really are able to guide the country’s immigration policy based on their own narrow interests, that would disregard the implications for the rest of the country.

There seems to be an ideological dimension to the shift, and it has been implemented in a way that goes beyond the traditional consensus amongst Canadians. When she was foreign affairs minister, Chrystia Freeland illustrated this vision when she rushed to Toronto’s Pearson Airport in 2019 to greet the newly arrived asylum seeker Rahaf Mohammed. Her characterization of the Saudi teenager that day as a “brave new Canadian” was technically premature if we go by the country’s Citizenship Act. Some have similarly started to refer to asylum seekers as “newcomers,” even though in most cases, their ultimate status and right to remain in Canada is unknown. This generous use of inclusive terminology regarding community membership is not understood by average Canadians, and threatens to upset the informal agreement that positively informs our politics: that immigration enriches Canada.

All these changes to Canada’s immigration policy may represent potentially interesting new ideas, but they need to be clearly presented and debated to keep the public on board. Marc Miller, who took over for Mr. Fraser as Immigration Minister in July, would be wise to proceed cautiously and reassure Canadians that their country is not being transformed too quickly by the improvised and ad hoc application of new concepts. The place of temporary permits in the overall immigration scheme provides one important example where recent developments need to be properly scrutinized. An amendment to Canada’s immigration legislation is needed to make sure this happens.

Michael Barutciski is a faculty member of York University’s Glendon College. He teaches law and policy with a focus on migration issues.

Source: Canada’s overly inclusive definition of ‘immigrant’ threatens to upset the apple cart

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Les immigrants temporaires ne feront pas partie des discussions de Québec

2023/05/06 Leave a comment

Seems similar blind spot to the federal government consultations on the annual plan that doesn’t include temporary residents even if the numbers and arguably impact greater than Permanent Residents:

Reconnaissant que près de 300 000 immigrants non permanents se trouvaient en sol québécois à la fin de 2022, la ministre de l’Immigration, Christine Fréchette, refuse toutefois d’inclure la question des immigrants temporaires dans sa consultation sur les cibles cet automne.

Talonnant Mme Fréchette sur le sujet lors de l’étude des crédits de son ministère, le député solidaire de Saint-Henri–Saint-Anne, Guillaume Cliche-Rivard, a sommé le gouvernement d’aborder le sujet lors de ses consultations sur les cibles d’immigration 2024-2027. « On a aucune consultation sur les temporaires, je vous demande un engagement pour qu’on puisse faire une planification ordonnée réglée ensemble et qu’on sache où on s’en va. De faire uniquement l’exercice sur les permanents, c’est de passer à côté du débat », a-t-il souligné.

Le député libéral de Nelligan, Monsef Derraji, a renchéri en faisant valoir que la majorité des travailleurs temporaires s’installaient dans la région de Montréal. « On ne peut pas dire qu’on peut juste tenir compte des permanents dans la planification pluriannuelle », a-t-il lancé.

Selon des documents rendus publics dans le cadre de l’étude des crédits, il y avait environ 290 000 immigrants temporaires en territoire québécois au 31 décembre 2022, surtout des étudiants étrangers et des travailleurs temporaires.

La ministre Fréchette a pour sa part rétorqué que ce type d’immigration reflète le besoin ponctuel des entreprises et estime important que ces dernières gardent cette « agilité » pour aller « chercher les talents dont elles ont besoin ». « L’immigration temporaire, c’est [aussi] l’effet du succès de nos établissements d’enseignement », a-t-elle ajouté. « Pour nous, d’office, ça fait partie des éléments, car on y fait référence, mais pour ce qui est des orientations comme telles, la planification pluriannuelle porte sur l’immigration permanente. »

Déplorant que des travailleurs étrangers temporaires soient pris en otage en raison de permis « fermés » qui les lient à un donneur d’emploi en particulier, le député Monsef Derraji a tenté d’obtenir de la ministre qu’elle s’engage à éliminer ces documents qui conduisent parfois à des abus de la part des employeurs. Christine Fréchette a répondu qu’il s’agissait d’une question dont elle discute déjà avec son homologue fédéral, Sean Fraser. Elle a par ailleurs rappelé que son gouvernement souhaite rapatrier les pouvoirs des programmes concernant les travailleurs temporaires gérés par Ottawa.

Davantage d’immigrants francisés

Malgré des taux de décrochage parfois élevés dans certaines régions, la ministre de l’Immigration s’est également félicitée du progrès de la persévérance des immigrants en francisation dans l’ensemble du Québec.

Préférant voir les choses du côté positif, Christine Fréchette dit observer des taux de persévérance de 78,8 % pour les étudiants à temps complet et 84,6 % pour les étudiants à temps partiel. « C’est franchement un beau succès. […] On a augmenté considérablement le nombre de personnes qui prennent des cours de francisation ».

Lors de l’étude des crédits, le député Derraji lui a fait valoir que près de la moitié des immigrants en francisation décrochent dans certaines régions administratives, notamment en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, où ce taux atteint 43 %. À Montréal, il est près de 25 %. « Ce n’est pas du tout un échec, on partait de zéro. On a tellement rebâti en 2018 », a répondu la ministre Fréchette. Selon les documents du ministère, le décrochage est moins élevé chez élèves à temps partiel, soit environ 15 % pour l’ensemble du Québec.

Pressée d’expliquer pourquoi certains immigrants décrochent de la francisation, elle a noté que, dans un contexte de plein-emploi, beaucoup peuvent être tentés par le marché du travail. « Quand on prend des cours de francisation, on peut être rapidement sollicité pour intégrer des entreprises ou travailler davantage d’heures si on a déjà un emploi », a-t-elle affirmé.

Quant aux immigrants temporaires, la ministre a précisé que la majorité d’entre eux (60 %) parle français et, qu’au cours de la dernière année, il y a eu une augmentation de plus de 30 % des travailleurs étrangers temporaires qui ont suivi des cours de français. « C’est colossal », a-t-elle déclaré.

Or, bien que les allocations s’étendent désormais aux milliers de travailleurs temporaires agricoles, à peine 431 d’entre eux se sont inscrits à la francisation. La ministre Fréchette a dit vouloir augmenter ce score. « La francisation est un travail constant, il y aura toujours des efforts à faire pour que l’apprentissage du français soit facilité et accessible. » Elle entend miser sur de nouveaux outils, dont Francisation Québec, un guichet unique qui sera lancé dès le 1er juin et qui regroupera toute l’offre de services en francisation.

Pas fermée à la régularisation

Par ailleurs, questionnée à savoir si son ministère allait emboîter le pas au fédéral, qui planche sur un programme de régularisation des personnes sans statut, Christine Fréchette a dit ne pas fermer pas la porte. « Mais il faut voir davantage les intentions pour décider si on s’y engage ou pas », a-t-elle souligné.

La ministre a d’ailleurs affirmé qu’il était « encore trop tôt pour se prononcer » sur cette question. « C’est important pour nous de connaître la nature des orientations [du fédéral]. On souhaite être consultés sur cette politique publique. »

Source: Les immigrants temporaires ne feront pas partie des discussions de Québec

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

← Older posts