Jesse Kline: Liberal immigration plan exposes the folly of big government

2023/11/13 Leave a comment

Bit of a stretch to link the flawed immigration plan to the “folly of big government” as bad immigration policy can also be the “folly of small government.” And of course, the vast majority of immigrants have the ” potential to contribute to the tax base for the next three or four decades” as any cursory analysis of the data shows:

It is becoming clear to an increasing number of Canadians that the rapid influx of new immigrants brought in by the federal Liberals is exposing cracks in a country with an overburdened health system, a massive social safety net and a bureaucracy that stifles the economy and prevents housing and infrastructure from keeping up with population growth.

A series of recent polls found that 44 per cent of the country thinks immigration levels are too high, with even higher levels of dissatisfaction in Liberal strongholds such as Vancouver (49 per cent) and the Greater Toronto Area (57 per cent).

…

Source: Jesse Kline: Liberal immigration plan exposes the folly of big government

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Canada is curbing immigration — but this lawyer says newcomers still drive our economy – Toronto Star

2023/11/13 Leave a comment

I rely more on labour economists like Mikal Skuterud than immigration lawyers for assessing impact of immigration on the economy, particularly productivity and GDP per capita growth:

The engine driving Canada’s economic growth isn’t cars, crude or softwood lumber — it’s immigration. In spite of lagging productivity compared with other economic superpowers, like the United States or China, Canada has propped up its aging labour force with newcomers.

Last year, Canada’s population grew by nearly one million people, according to Statistics Canada. Almost all of them were newcomers: refugees fleeing persecution, post-secondary students in pursuit of a Canadian diploma and job experience, farm workers with the country’s agricultural temporary foreign worker program.

Just last summer, months after U.S. tech giants like Meta and Amazon were laying off thousands of qualified tech professionals, then-immigration minister Sean Fraser launched a program to give U.S. H1-B visa holders a shot at Canadian work permits. Within 48 hours, 10,000 applications had been submitted.

But Ottawa appears to be tapping the brakes on its ambitious immigration targets. Earlier this month, the federal government announced it would “stabilize” immigration levels at 500,000 per year starting in 2026, despite years of continually raising its target. Meanwhile, Northern College, an Ontario post-secondary institution, has revoked around 700 acceptance letters from international students over the past year due to what it described as a lack of local jobs and housing.

These decisions come in the face of stubbornly high housing and food costs affecting everyone living on Canadian soil: permanent residents, citizens and undocumented alike. Stephen Green, managing partner at immigration law firm Green and Spiegel, spoke to the Star about the current economic — and educational — landscape for immigrants from his Toronto office earlier this week:

There is an argument that amid competition for housing and jobs in Canada, immigration at our current level is unsustainable. Do you buy this argument?

I don’t buy that at all. First, unlike some countries like the U.S., where they have a lottery system based on country of origin, we have a really rigorous and thought-out selection system based on “human capital.” They look at a newcomer’s age, their education, whether they’ve worked or studied in Canada, whether they have family in Canada, whether they can speak English and French — that sort of stuff. We’re selecting immigrants based on a model that economists and various policy experts have said are considered very important factors.

I think the only major issue is that a lot of people in their forties have a very difficult time immigrating to Canada because of the point system. An applicant’s age is about 30 per cent of it. So if you are 45 years old, you run a really successful business outside of Canada and you want to come here, you’re going to have a tough time. But I don’t buy the notion about jobs. Even at my firm, we’ve been trying to find some skilled workers for over two years. We can’t find people. And I’m hearing from the construction industry that there are no workers. We have a really serious problem finding carpenters and plumbers — and these are the people who are supposedly going to help us with our housing crisis.

So how do those folks fare in Canada’s immigration system?

It’s very difficult for them under the point system. A lot of those skilled workers don’t speak great English and don’t have a great education. The trades have a very difficult time immigrating, and the government has always known that, and they’ve struggled to try to make the system better. But the real problem is that the provinces are responsible for licensing, and the feds are responsible for bringing people in. There are situations where you may have a carpenter that will make it through the immigration system, but then they can’t get their licence as a carpenter.

Look at doctors. Look at nurses. We make it so difficult for these people to get the proper licence. You can’t tell me that a doctor that’s graduated from Harvard and wants to practise in Canada — or a pharmacist from Europe — has to go through a horrendous licensing process. It’s wrong, and that was really holding up the ability of individuals that immigrate to our country to really perform their professions.

During the first years of the pandemic, there was some talk about getting more doctors from abroad into Canada’s health-care system. It sounds like the issues haven’t improved.

It’s a little better. They’re moving way too slow. It’s interesting, on the medical side — it costs the province more money to license more doctors. And the doctors want to protect their turf a bit. But I think Canadians have had it. You have people that can’t find family doctors, that can’t find specialists, and they’re saying there’s no reason why doctors should go through such craziness to get licensed.

International students have gotten a lot of attention from the federal government recently. First there was last summer’s acceptance letter scam, then Northern College’s recent revocation of 700 international student acceptances. Can you explain what’s going on?

Former immigration minister Jason Kenney once said foreign students were the best future immigrants to Canada. Why? They pay for their own education. It’s a funny word — but they become Canadianized much easier than other immigrants. Our foreign students fund my kids. They pay $40,000 to $50,000 a year to go to the University of Toronto, when Canadian-born students pay $7,000 to $8,000. But the federal government only let foreign students go to schools that have been designated “learning institutions” — by provinces. And the provinces have failed Canadians by designating far too many that don’t deserve it.

As for the fraudulent letters — the issue is that post-secondary institutions have asked for help finding students in foreign countries, and there is no compliance on them. I was in Chandigarh in India recently. It would blow your mind. Massive billboards by immigration consultants promising to get students into schools. The problem is that the Canadian government knows about it, but they can’t enforce anything because it’s happening in a foreign country. The foreign country can’t do anything.

What’s made it worse is that the Canadian government lifted a requirement that immigration consultants be permanent residents or citizens. Now, if I’m living in India, I can take an online course to become an immigration consultant and the college regulating immigration consultants can’t go after me.

Do you think more institutions will start reneging on international student acceptances, as Northern College has done?

I don’t know. But I hope the provinces will look at those institutions and make them understand what they did to these students. You have to understand that in places like Chandigarh, the parents of these students are selling everything possible to make their child’s life better than theirs. If you get accepted to this college that you mentioned and you’ve got your plane ticket, you’ve booked everything — and they say sorry, you can’t come? I mean, that’s bad.

Have you noticed an increasing reluctance by international students to come to Canada?

Our government has made some statements against certain countries in the Parliament of Canada, and I think it has tremendously affected the way they look at Canada now. So we’ll have to see how the government is going to manage that. I think, regardless of whatever India may or may not have done, I think there were different ways to handle that.

We depend on immigration for economic growth. If Canada decided to flatten or even lower immigration targets, what kind of effect do you think that would have on our economy?

It would be disastrous. Here’s something that most Canadians don’t have a clue about. Do you know what a fellow in a hospital is?

No, I don’t.

That’s someone who is an expert in their area of medicine from abroad, or even in Canada. Our medical system relies so heavily on these doctors from abroad, but we pay them 70 per cent less than what a doctor in Canada makes. Five years ago, the Saudi government pulled 800 fellows home after a dispute with us, and the Canadian government worried the medical system would crash.

Immigration is so important to Canada. It is a very emotional area of the law because, a lot of the time, people don’t understand the effects. They make decisions based on what they think is happening — that an immigrant is taking their job, or that temporary agriculture workers get paid less than Canadians. They aren’t.

Temporary foreign workers are tied to specific employers, and it can be very difficult for them to report labour violations. Is the federal government trying to change that?

On the one hand, the government has a compliance regime that puts a lot of stress on workers — on the other hand, they have to ensure there is an employer-employee relationship, and ensure there are parameters on what workers will do. It’s a difficult balance, and the government is aware of that. They’ve heard those concerns. Like all of us, they want to make the system better. But some people take advantage of it, and we have to look at how to prevent abuses. Maybe, for now, a restricted work permit is the best way to prevent the abuses in our system.

Source: Canada is curbing immigration — but this lawyer says newcomers still drive our economy – Toronto Star

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Michael Taube: Leave it to Trudeau to destroy his party’s reputation on immigration

2023/11/08 Leave a comment

Overly partisan but not without some valid criticisms. And Taube leaves out the bigger issue of the larger number of temporary residents:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s immigration plan is broken. His Liberal government may not have admitted it in so many words, but their recent actions speak quite clearly.

After steadily increasing the number of newcomers over the years, Ottawa has announced it will cap the number of permanent residents it accepts at 500,000 in both 2025 and 2026. It’s finally dawned on the Trudeau Liberals that there needs to be an economic reset. Canada’s housing market is too expensive and our health care system is overloaded — and the impact of costly temporary resident programs is too often overlooked.

From a historical perspective, the decision to put a forthcoming freeze on immigration is certainly interesting. For the first time in a long time, the Liberals will likely be viewed in a more negative light when it comes to Canada and its immigration policies.

The Liberals were consistently put on a high pedestal by many generations of newcomers due to their seemingly positive approach to immigration. The fact that former prime minister William Lyon Mackenzie King, a Liberal, committed one of the worst immigration-related atrocities in Canadian history, turning away 900 Jewish refugees who fled Nazi Germany aboard the MS St. Louis in 1939, and oversaw the disgraceful internment of Japanese Canadians during the Second World War, was largely (and conveniently) forgotten.

As for Conservative prime ministers like Brian Mulroney and Stephen Harper, who both supported immigration from a personal standpoint and as a means to enhance the country’s economic engine, they never received nearly the same amount of praise and adulation for their efforts.

In particular, Pierre Trudeau’s tenure as prime minister was consistently viewed in the most positive light by most Canadian newcomers. He could do no wrong when it came to immigration. Yet, here’s the historical irony. This Liberal leader actually oversaw a significant decline in total immigration numbers.

According to Bob Plamondon in his book, The Truth about Trudeau, Canada had 183,974 immigrants when he was first elected in 1968, or roughly one per cent of the population. When Trudeau left politics in 1984, the immigration rate dwindled to 0.3 per cent.

“These reductions did not reflect an anti-immigrant policy per se, but flowed out of a choice made by the Trudeau government in response to a weaker economic climate and higher unemployment,” Plamondon wrote.

His assessment was that “holding the line on immigration is exactly the opposite of what Trudeau is known for,” and it’s entirely accurate. That’s not what most Canadians know or want to remember about him, however.

They would rather focus on the elder Trudeau’s decision to introduce the Canadian multiculturalism policy in 1971 that touted personal and cultural freedom for ethnic minorities.

“A policy of multiculturalism within a bilingual framework commends itself to the government as the most suitable means of assuring the cultural freedom of Canadians,” he told the House of Commons on Oct. 8, 1971. “Such a policy should help to break down discriminatory attitudes and cultural jealousies … It can form the base of a society which is based on fair play for all.”

They also remember when he brought in a new Immigration Act in 1976 with fondness. The act supported economic and cultural policies for newcomers, the need for diversity and promoting non-discrimination against newcomers. Government and the volunteer sector would work together to help new immigrants adapt to our country, and refugees became a distinct group of immigrants protected under Canadian law.

Many immigrants therefore viewed the elder Trudeau as a political saviour and their champion. Criticism of his leadership and policies was often ignored or disregarded. When it came time to vote, most would enthusiastically select the candidate with the word “Liberal” next to his or her name.

But what the elder Trudeau giveth, the younger Trudeau taketh away.

The younger Trudeau’s government has hiked Canada’s immigration numbers far more than most western democratic governments — and his own father’s. When he was first elected in 2015, Canada’s target for permanent residents was below 300,000. We’ll be at 485,000 in 2024 and at 500,000 in 2025.

“Make no mistake. This is a massive increase in economic migration to Canada,” then-immigration minister Sean Fraser told the Canadian Press in 2022. “We have not seen such a focus on economic migration as we’ve seen in this immigration levels plan.”

It was a massive increase, but to what end?

The younger Trudeau’s poor reputation on the international stage has tarnished Canada’s reputation as a welcoming country to newcomers; this is a result of, for instance, icy relations with G20 leaders, problems with India (costumes and otherwise), older instances of blackface and more. Trudeau also paid plenty of lip service to Syrian and Afghan refugees in past years — in practice, however, refugee resettlement has dropped overall from 76,000 in 2023 to below 73,000 in 2025.

Furthermore, the Trudeau government’s decision to ignore the affordability crisis until just recently has made Canada a tough environment for newcomers, who now have trouble finding work, paying rent and feeding their families.

Whereas the elder Trudeau and other Liberal prime ministers regularly built voter confidence with new immigrants, the younger Trudeau has developed into a leader who tries to desperately grab immigrant votes at all costs. Based on his economic mismanagement and forthcoming freeze on newcomer numbers, that political farce won’t be happening for much longer.

Source: Michael Taube: Leave it to Trudeau to destroy his party’s reputation on immigration

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Le plafonnement annoncé en immigration n’est qu’illusion

2023/11/07 Leave a comment

Certainement:

En se targuant d’enfin tenir compte de la capacité d’accueil du Canada et des provinces, déjà mise à rude épreuve, le gouvernement de Justin Trudeau prévoit maintenant de « stabiliser » ses cibles d’immigration… dans trois ans. Mais, d’ici là, la crise du logement, facteur principal de ce semblant d’ajustement libéral, ne se résorbera pas miraculeusement. La flexibilité exhibée traduit plutôt un entêtement persistant.

Les avertissements brandis par le Québec, voulant que l’éducation, la santé ainsi que l’offre de logement peinent à répondre à l’immigration pléthorique fédérale, sont maintenant partagés par d’autres provinces canadiennes. La population aussi s’en inquiète désormais. Un récent sondage révélait qu’un nombre record de citoyens croient que le Canada accueille trop d’immigrants (44 % des Canadiens, 37 % des Québécois).

Nonobstant, le fédéral maintient la hausse prévue encore deux ans : la cible passera à 485 000 immigrants en 2024 et à 500 000 en 2025. C’est l’année suivante que ce chiffre restera figé. Or, d’ici ce gel annoncé, ce sont 55 000 personnes arrivantes de plus que si le gouvernement avait stabilisé son accueil dès aujourd’hui aux 465 000 immigrants attendus cette année. Un ralentissement plus rapide aurait cependant renié les valeurs libérales, s’inquiétait-on dans ses rangs.

Les signaux étaient pourtant encourageants. Le plan stratégique pour l’immigration dévoilé cette semaine s’engageait à « chercher à intégrer la planification du logement et de la santé, et d’autres services importants, à la planification des niveaux d’immigration du Canada ». Le tout, « en collaboration étroite avec les provinces ». Le gouvernement Trudeau a même appuyé une motion bloquiste, non contraignante, l’appelant à revoir ses cibles d’accueil après consultation du Québec et des provinces « en fonction de leur capacité d’accueil ».

Mais ce nouvel arrimage, promis par Ottawa, ne se fera qu’a posteriori. Le fédéral persiste à ignorer les volontés d’accueil du Québec. La « consultation » fédérale ne servira qu’à répartir ce nombre de nouveaux arrivants fixé unilatéralement.

Qu’importe que des experts, comme ceux de la Banque TD, aient averti qu’un « choc de la demande » guette le filet social du Canada. Qu’importe aussi que la vérificatrice générale ait dénoncé l’embourbement du traitement des demandes d’immigration, qui s’éternise à 22 mois pour les immigrants économiques et à quatre ans pour les réfugiés. L’arrivée d’un demi-million de nouveaux arrivants par année n’aidera pas ce goulet d’étranglement.

Le gouvernement du Québec, de son côté, maintient ses cibles à 50 000 nouveaux arrivants pour les deux prochaines années. En comptabilisant les diplômés accueillis par le Programme de l’expérience québécoise (PEQ), le chiffre annuel avoisinera les 60 000 immigrants.

S’y ajoutent cependant les centaines de milliers d’immigrants temporaires que Québec et Ottawa persistent à exclure de cette équation d’accueil. Ils sont, depuis deux ans, trois fois plus nombreux que les immigrants permanents.

Faute de gérer leur arrivée, Québec s’en remet à exiger pour certains la maîtrise du français, après avoir fait de même pour les immigrants économiques et ceux du PEQ. Quelque 35 000 travailleurs étrangers temporaires autres qu’agricoles devront dorénavant en faire la démonstration eux aussi pour renouveler leur permis au-delà de trois ans — comme tant de ces travailleurs venus pour pallier le manque de main-d’oeuvre le font.

François Legault voit dans la protection du français, et, de ce fait, de l’identité québécoise, sa « responsabilité historique ». L’immigration n’y est plus une menace, à ses yeux, mais elle est devenue un outil.

L’exigence de ce test de français semble toutefois embryonnaire. Ces travailleurs temporaires, déjà surmenés, auront-ils le temps et l’énergie de s’y consacrer ? Leurs employeurs seront-ils forcés de le leur permettre, ou simplement encouragés ? Les ressources de francisation seront-elles au rendez-vous ?

Les prochaines années diront si ces plafonnements de l’immigration suffiront à stabiliser aussi la pression sur le filet social appréhendée par les gouvernements. Avant d’en redébattre en campagnes électorales, puisqu’ils ont préféré présenter des plans pluriannuels écourtés.

Source: Le plafonnement annoncé en immigration n’est qu’illusion

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Yakabuski: Ottawa’s latest immigration plans fail to move the needle, on housing and in Quebec

2023/11/06 Leave a comment

Another good analysis, bringing in the Quebec dimension:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government this week took a baby step toward recognizing its immigration policy needs some fixing by halting future increases in the number of permanent newcomers the country intends to accept.

…

Source: Ottawa’s latest immigration plans fail to move the needle, on housing and in Quebec

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

Sun editorial: High immigration fuels Canada’s housing crisis

2023/11/04 Leave a comment

Unfortunately true:

While Canadians continue to worry about the availability of affordable housing, the Trudeau government announced Wednesday it will continue its current policy of boosting immigration levels to record highs through 2026.

Its existing plan, announced a year ago, of admitting 465,000 new permanent residents to Canada this year, 485,000 in 2024 and 500,000 in 2025, will now be extended to another 500,000 admissions in 2026.

Next year’s target of 485,000 new permanent residents will consist of 281,135 economic immigrants, 114,000 in family class, 76,115 refugees and 13,750 humanitarian admissions.

For 2025 and 2026, 500,000 new permanent residents will be admitted annually — 301,250 economic immigrants, 118,000 in family class, 72,750 refugees and 8,000 humanitarian admissions.

While Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government has long argued higher immigration levels are needed to boost economic growth because of Canada’s low birth rate, its pursuit of high immigration policies flies in the face of growing public concerns about the lack of affordable housing.

A Nanos poll in September showed most Canadians surveyed — 53% — believe Canada’s current immigration levels are too high, compared to 34% who approve of them and 8% who think they should be higher. The remaining 6% were unsure.

An Environics poll released this week found stronger support for immigration — with 51% of those surveyed disagreeing with the statement “there’s too much immigration to Canada” compared to 44% who agreed.

But opposition to current immigration levels rose dramatically by 17 percentage points in one year, while support dropped by 18 percentage points — both huge reversals.

In recent months the TD Bank, BMO and National Bank of Canada, among others, have all warned the federal government that its policy of high immigration is exacerbating Canada’s housing shortage.

As the National Bank put it:

“The federal government’s decision to open the immigration floodgates during the most aggressive monetary tightening cycle in a generation has created a record imbalance between housing and demand … As housing affordability pressures continue to mount across the country, we believe Ottawa should consider revising its immigration targets to allow supply to catch up with demand.”

While Canadians have always welcomed immigration, there are clearly growing public concerns about federal immigration policy.

But on this issue, as on so many others, the Trudeau Liberals just aren’t listening.

Source: EDITORIAL: High immigration fuels Canada’s housing crisis

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Clark: Time to address the immigration number that matters now

2023/11/03 Leave a comment

One of the better assessments, particularly on the lack of action on temporary residents, whose numbers have ballooned over the last 10 years:

Don’t look too closely at the immigration targets the federal government set Wednesday. They’re not the numbers that matter right now.

Immigration Minister Marc Miller kept the already-planned target of 500,000 in 2025, but said there’d be no increase in 2026. But that isn’t Canada’simmigration number.

The figure that matters more is the 2.2 million in temporary residents who are in Canada. That number has surged for reasons that have nothing to do with immigration planning. And the Liberal government should be screwing up their courage to do something about that, right away….

Source: Time to address the immigration number that matters now

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

Ottawa et Québec plafonnent leurs seuils d’immigration

2023/11/03 Leave a comment

Parallel approach but Quebec maintaining the current ceiling while the federal government does so in 2025.

Bloc leader Blanchet argues that levels are not fixed given that Parliament passed the Bloc motion that « de revoir ses cibles d’immigration dès 2024 après consultation du Québec, des provinces et des territoires en fonction de leur capacité d’accueil, notamment en matière de logement, de soins de santé, d’éducation, de francisation et d’infrastructures de transport, le tout dans l’objectif d’une immigration réussie ».

Translation: “To review its immigration targets as early as 2024 after consulting Quebec, the provinces and territories according to their reception capacity, particularly in terms of housing, health care, education, francization and transport infrastructure, all with the objective of successful immigration.”

La hausse constante du nombre d’immigrants temporaires force Ottawa et Québec à plafonner leurs seuils d’immigration pour les prochaines années. C’est ce qu’ont annoncé les deux ordres de gouvernement mercredi.

En plus du nombre record d’immigrants temporaires, la situation « volatile » du français contraint le gouvernement du Québec à limiter sa planification de l’immigration aux deux prochaines années. D’ici 2025, il choisit de maintenir ses seuils « réguliers » à 50 000 nouveaux arrivants par année, mais exclut les « diplômés » du Programme de l’expérience québécoise de son calcul.

Le premier ministre québécois, François Legault, et sa ministre de l’Immigration, Christine Fréchette, ont présenté en conférence de presse le plan gouvernemental en matière d’immigration pour la période 2024-2025. Contrairement à ce qui était prévu, le document, qui est le fruit de consultations menées en septembre à l’Assemblée nationale, ne contient pas de cibles pour 2026 et 2027.

« On va, pendant deux ans, regarder l’impact [de nos mesures]. En fonction de ces résultats-là, on prendra des décisions pour les années suivantes », a expliqué M. Legault. « La situation est volatile, a ajouté Mme Fréchette. On voit le nombre de résidents non permanents monter encore et encore. »

Même approche du côté d’Ottawa, qui a aussi annoncé un plafonnement de ses cibles d’immigration pour 2026. Le ministre de l’Immigration, des Réfugiés et de la Citoyenneté, Marc Miller, a confirmé que le Canada accueillerait 500 000 nouveaux résidents permanents en 2026, soit la même cible que l’année précédente.

Il s’agit d’une première pause dans la tendance à la hausse des objectifs d’immigration des dernières années. Les cibles du gouvernement canadien annoncées l’an dernier prévoyaient l’accueil de 465 000 résidents permanents cette année, 485 000 en 2024 et 500 000 en 2025.

« En stabilisant le nombre de nouveaux arrivants, nous reconnaissons que le logement, la planification des infrastructures et la croissance durable de la population doivent être correctement pris en compte », a déclaré le ministre Miller lors de son annonce.

Le gouvernement canadien vise également une immigration francophone hors Québec de 6 % en 2024, 7 % en 2025 et 8 % en 2026 — des cibles beaucoup plus modestes que ce que plusieurs organisations réclament.

Le statu quo semblait se dessiner depuis quelques jours à Ottawa. Mardi, le ministre Miller affirmait déjà qu’il ne « voyait pas un scénario où on diminuerait les niveaux [d’immigration] » et que « le mot d’ordre, c’est une certaine stabilisation ».

Le français sous la loupe

Pour deux ans, et pour agir dans le dossier « déterminant » de la protection du français, le gouvernement Legault maintiendra pour sa part ses cibles « régulières » d’immigration permanente aux niveaux actuels. « C’est important, pour nous, pour arrêter, pour inverser le déclin du français, de se limiter à 50 000 », a dit le premier ministre mercredi.

À ce seuil de base s’ajoutera toutefois une dizaine de milliers d’immigrants non comptabilisés dans les seuils de Québec. En mai, la ministre de l’Immigration avait proposé que les immigrants issus du volet « diplômés du Québec » du Programme de l’expérience québécoise soient exclus du calcul des cibles. Elle ira de l’avant avec cette mesure. Selon les estimations du ministère, ces nouveaux arrivants seront environ 6500 en 2024. Un arriéré de 6600 personnes du milieu des affaires doit également être « écoulé » l’an prochain, ce qui porterait le nombre d’immigrants permanents à quelque 63 000 en 2024.

M. Legault assure que la montée en force dans les sondages du Parti québécois — qui propose une baisse des seuils — n’explique pas sa décision de maintenir la cible migratoire de base à 50 000 nouveaux arrivants. Le gouvernement a aussi dû prendre en compte la capacité d’accueil du Québec, a précisé Mme Fréchette.

Comme il l’avait laissé entendre au printemps, Québec soumettra les immigrants issus du Programme des travailleurs étrangers temporaires, à l’exception des travailleurs agricoles, à des exigences en français. Au renouvellement de leur permis de travail, ils devront démontrer une maîtrise du français de niveau quatre, c’est-à-dire être capables de « discuter avec leur entourage » de « sujets familiers », a précisé la ministre Fréchette.

Cette « avancée historique » n’est qu’une première étape, a assuré l’élue de la Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ). « Autour de 35 000 » résidents non permanents seront soumis à cette mesure, soit moins de 8 % des 470 000 temporaires recensés au Québec en juillet.

Le gouvernement Legault souhaite donc convaincre Ottawa d’exiger les mêmes connaissances aux immigrants de son Programme de mobilité internationale — ils sont 119 000 au Québec.

Dialogue vague avec Québec

La ministre Fréchette s’attendait à une réduction des cibles fédérales d’immigration. En conférence de presse, mercredi, elle a reproché à Ottawa de ne pas avoir considéré « la situation qui prévaut au Québec » en fixant ses propres seuils.

« Au niveau politique, il n’y a pas eu de consultation. Et, normalement, le gouvernement fédéral doit tenir compte des cibles d’immigration du Québec avant de s’avancer sur ses propres cibles », a-t-elle relevé.

Questionné à ce sujet, le ministre Miller a affirmé avoir parlé à deux reprises avec Mme Fréchette à propos de l’accueil des réfugiés, des travailleurs étrangers temporaires et des étudiants étrangers. « Oui, j’ai aussi parlé de nos attentes pour l’accueil des familles. […] Est-ce que je dis [la cible de] 500 000 à tout le monde ? Non, ce serait violer le privilège du Parlement », s’est-il défendu.

« Est-ce que c’était à la hauteur [des] attentes [de Québec] ? Je ne peux pas y répondre. On s’était parlé sachant la position publique de la CAQ sur les cibles du Canada », a-t-il ajouté.

En vertu de l’accord Canada-Québec, le Québec fixe ses propres niveaux d’immigration. Le printemps dernier, Christine Fréchette avait annoncé qu’elle mettrait deux scénarios à l’étude. L’un d’eux, qui augmenterait la cible en 2027 à 60 000 immigrants, rompt avec l’affirmation faite par François Legault durant la campagne électorale selon laquelle rehausser les seuils serait « un peu suicidaire » pour le statut du français au Québec. Le second scénario vise un maintien du statu quo à 50 000 immigrants permanents par année.

Toutefois, pour le chef du Bloc québécois, Yves-François Blanchet, les cibles annoncées mercredi ne peuvent pas être finales.

Mardi, M. Blanchet a notamment mis en avant une motion demandant au gouvernement « de revoir ses cibles d’immigration dès 2024 après consultation du Québec, des provinces et des territoires en fonction de leur capacité d’accueil, notamment en matière de logement, de soins de santé, d’éducation, de francisation et d’infrastructures de transport, le tout dans l’objectif d’une immigration réussie ».

La motion a été adoptée à l’unanimité à la Chambre mercredi, juste avant l’annonce du ministre Miller.

« [Le gouvernement] a voté pour [la motion], donc il est d’accord avec moi. […] Ses cibles actuelles ne peuvent pas être finales et permanentes, c’est lui qui l’a dit ! » s’est exclamé M. Blanchet.

Source: Ottawa et Québec plafonnent leurs seuils d’immigration

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Keller: The Liberals broke the immigration system. But better is always possible

2023/11/01 Leave a comment

Particularly scathing commentary in the Globe, calling for lowering of permanent resident levels but silent on temporary residents:

This week, when it releases its new immigration targets, the Trudeau government has an opportunity to begin rethinking immigration policy.

For the past eight years, the Liberal plan has been about sharply and steadily increasing permanent immigration, while enabling even sharper increases in temporary immigration – with the two interconnected streams powered by huge jumps in the number of foreign students.

Why? The government’s reasons are a combination of faith and politics.

Faith that accelerating the country’s population growth will somehow spark higher per-capita economic growth and higher living standards – a faith belied by economic theory and evidence.

The Liberals also wanted to politically anchor themselves to the left of the Conservatives on the issue, and perhaps plant the seeds of a nascent wedge. This even though the Conservatives, who never miss an opportunity to attack the Liberals over so much as a misplaced comma, have always studiously avoided criticizing Liberal immigration plans.

The Liberal approach to immigration is having major economic consequences, many of them negative. Yet for years, there has been no national conversation critical of the Liberal approach. The topic is taboo. That’s what happens with issues of faith.

So let’s talk about what a rational immigration system would look like: It would start with acknowledging that the long-standing principles, goals and methods of the Canadian immigration system, created long before the Trudeau government came into office, are sound.

The key principle is that immigration should be designed to benefit Canada economically. The main goal should be choosing immigrants who offer the greatest benefit to Canada, by being mostly more educated and more skilled than the average Canadian, and thus likely to be more productive and earn higher wages. The right method for selecting these economic immigrants is the points system.

A government that wanted maximum benefits for Canada would have taken the above and doubled down. Instead, the Liberals have spent the past eight years watering it down.

In so doing, the Liberals have undermined the country’s long-standing pro-immigration consensus. Recent polls suggest that somewhere between a plurality and a majority of Canadians want lower levels of immigration.

But that does not make Canadians “anti-immigration.” It just means they’re questioning the Liberal government’s immigration policy. Canadians are no more anti-immigration than someone who declines dessert after a hot-dog-eating contest should be accused of suddenly having become anti-food.

Last week in Toronto, a shared bed for rent was advertised for $900 a month. Not a room in a shared apartment. A shared bed in a shared room. Half of a 60-inch-wide mattress. Yours for just $10,800 a year.

This is happening in one of the world’s most bonkers housing markets, where a record shortage of places to live is meeting an immigration policy that celebrated a record of more than a million people coming to the country last year. This year’s numbers are likely to be higher; in the first six months of 2023, the temporary-resident stream alone brought in nearly 700,000 people.

This is happening even as the Bank of Canada’s high-interest-rate policy is trying to slow inflation by reducing economic activity, with one of the main transmission mechanisms being discouraging borrowing for new housing construction.

An immigration policy based on faith says there’s no connection between a sudden population surge and the price of rent. Basic arithmetic has other ideas.

Ottawa should lower its immigration targets, at least for the next few years. The current target for 2025, half a million new permanent immigrants, is nearly double the level of 2015.

Canada was not anti-immigration in 2015. Canada was not anti-immigration under the Liberal governments of Jean Chrétien, Paul Martin and Pierre Trudeau, when immigration was even lower. And Canada will not be anti-immigration next year if, in response to facts not faith, immigration is a bit less than this year.

Next step: Ottawa has to get back to properly using the points system to select the most highly skilled, highly educated and highly remunerated economic immigrants.

What has instead happened under eight years of Liberal government is that the temporary-immigration stream has exploded. Most of the people in that stream are coming to flip burgers, stock shelves and deliver food. Big business loves this endless supply of minimum-wage workers. The rest of us should be less enthused.

One of Canada’s biggest problems, and a growing drag on our living standards, is low productivity growth. Canadian businesses don’t invest enough in new technology and innovation – the things that spell more goods and services produced for each hour of work. A bottomless barrel of low-wage labour further discourages Canadian business from making those capital investments.

And a lot of low-wage labour is arriving through the booming student visa stream – which has been quietly converted from a selective program for luring the best and brightest to a no-limits scheme allowing universities and especially colleges to, in effect, sell Canadian citizenship. This, too, has to be scaled back and smartened up.

Better is always possible, as someone once said. Hint, hint.

Source: The Liberals broke the immigration system. But better is always possible

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Canadians’ support for immigration is slipping, polls show. Some say misinformation is partly to blame, Spectaculaire bond de la résistance à l’immigration au Canada

2023/11/01 Leave a comment

More coverage of declining public support for current high levels of immigration. Starting with the Toronto Star (arguably, there has been greater misinformation by the advocates of high levels of immigration than from those advocating caution):

A pair of new polls point to a continuing decline in Canadians’ support for immigration — findings one pollster describes as a “clarion call” for the federal government.

The two surveys were released Monday, ahead of the expected unveiling this week by Immigration Minister Marc Miller of the government’s latest immigration plan, which will set the number and composition of the various classes of permanent residents welcomed to Canada over the next three years.

The federal government’s current immigration plan, unveiled in 2022, aimed to bring in 465,000 new permanent residents this year, 485,000 in 2024 and 500,000 in 2025. The Immigration Department is on track to meet the 2023 target.

Over the past year, amid surging interest rates and the increasing cost of living, Canada’s high immigrant intake has been tied to the housing crisis as well as a strained health-care system and per-capita productivity.

The poll by the Environics Institute for Survey Research and Century Initiative found the number of respondents who agreed “immigration has a positive impact on the economy of Canada” has dropped 11 per cent from last year and reached its lowest level since 1998.

Lisa Lalande, CEO of Century Initiative, said the data is a “clarion call” for proactive economic planning, improved integration policies and investments in infrastructure such as housing in order to preserve the confidence of Canadians.

“Immigration makes us a more prosperous, diverse, resilient and influential country — but only if we do the work to grow well,” said Lalande, whose group advocates for responsible population growth.

The separate poll of 1,500 people by the Association for Canadian Studies and Metropolis Canada revealed similar trends. It found 57 per cent of respondents in Greater Toronto felt there are too many immigrants, compared to 41 per cent in Montreal and 49 per cent in Vancouver.

Respondents in Greater Toronto were also most likely to feel there were too many refugees admitted to Canada, with 55 per cent of them agreement with the statement, followed by 40 per cent among those from Montreal and 39 per cent of those from Vancouver.

“These surveys were indicative of a shift in sentiment around the numbers of immigrants coming to the country, a lot of which, I think, is connected to issues around housing,” said Jack Jedwab, president of the ACS and Metropolis.

Those sentiments are fuelled in part by the lack of knowledge among Canadians of the country’s immigration landscape, he said.

Thirty-seven per cent of participants in the survey thought Canada received more than 250,000 refugees a year, when only about 76,000 were accepted. They also overestimated the number of permanent residents admitted to the country, with 27 per cent of people believing that Canada had already been taking in 500,000 newcomers a year.

The misinformation speaks to the need to better educate and inform the public about Canada immigration, Jedwab said.

“Policymakers have to pay more serious attention to how we manage immigration and manage opinion around immigration,” he said. “They need to explain to people why immigration continues to be so vital to the future of our country.”

At an event on Friday, the immigration minister said discussions about the upcoming immigration plan were ongoing but hinted that reducing immigrant intake was not an option, even though he said he understood the public concerns.

“This is one of the most significant economic vehicles to our country, but we need to do it in a responsible way,” Miller told reporters. “The net entrance into the workforce is 90-plus per cent driven by immigration, so any conversation about reducing needs to entertain the reality that would be a hit to our economy.”

The Environics and Century Initiative report showed 44 per cent of Canadians said they were strongly or somewhat in agreement with the statement, “there is too much immigration to Canada,” up 17 percentage points from a year ago, the largest one-year change recorded on this question since the annual survey started in 1977.

It said those who agreed with this statement were most likely to cite concerns that newcomers may be contributing to the current housing crisis (38 per cent of this group give this reason) compared to only 15 per cent in 2022.

Respondents continued to identify inflation, cost of living, the economy and interest rates as the most important issue facing the country. Overall, just 34 per cent of people said they were happy with the way things are going in Canada, down 13 percentage points from last year.

The silver lining is that the negative public sentiments toward immigration do not appear to have translated into Canadians’ feeling about immigrants themselves, the survey said.

Forty-two per cent of respondents said immigrants make their community a better place, compared to just nine per cent who believed newcomers make it worse, with the rest saying it makes no difference. Those with a positive view cited local diversity, multiculturalism as well as the role immigrants play in economic and population growth.

Of the various admitted classes of permanent residents, the respondents also want the federal government to prioritize those with specialized skills and high education, followed by refugees fleeing persecution and overseas families of Canadians.

Temporary foreign workers in lower-skilled jobs and international students were ranked the lowest, with only about one-third of people saying those two groups should be a high priority, the report found.

The 2024-26 immigration plan is expected to be tabled in Parliament on Wednesday.

Source: Canadians’ support for immigration is slipping, polls show. Some say misinformation is partly to blame

In Le Devoir:

L’appui aux cibles d’immigration actuelles est en chute libre. Entre 2022 et 2023, la proportion de Canadiens susceptibles de dire qu’il y a trop d’immigrants dans le pays a bondi de 17 points de pourcentage, ce qui vient renverser radicalement une tendance qui remonte à des décennies.

Quelque 27 % des Canadiens considéraient l’an dernier que « le Canada accueille trop d’immigrants ». Cette année, ils sont 44 % à affirmer une telle chose, une croissance record de 17 points.

Ces données sont tirées d’un sondage probabiliste en partie réalisé et financé par l’organisme Initiative du siècle, qui promeut l’idée d’une population de 100 millions d’habitants d’ici 2100.

« On a déjà vu des périodes où l’opinion restait en mouvement, mais là, c’est un saut. On peut dire que c’est du jamais vu », explique Andrew Parkin, l’un des chercheurs de cette étude. Il faut remonter au début des années 2000 pour observer une telle frilosité à l’égard des seuils d’immigration.

Ce changement d’opinion touche autant les Canadiens les plus fortunés (+20 %) que les immigrants de première génération (+20 %). Il touche aussi les partisans libéraux (+11 %), néodémocrates (+9 %) ou encore conservateurs (+21 %).

Économie et crise du logement

Ce n’est pas le malaise culturel que peuvent susciter les néo-Canadiens qui cause cette volte-face dans l’opinion publique, souligne le rapport. C’est plutôt le contexte économique difficile et la pénurie de logements qui fondent cette nouvelle réticence.

« Ça ne veut pas dire que les immigrants sont la cause de la crise du logement ou du manque de logements abordables, soutient Andrew Parkin. C’est plus : “Est-ce que c’est le bon moment pour avoir plus d’immigration étant donné qu’il y a une crise du logement ?” C’est une nuance. […] Le contexte économique touche tout le monde également. Ça touche aussi les immigrants, qui cherchent aussi à acheter une maison. »

Malgré tout, une majorité (51 %) de Canadiens rejettent encore l’idée que les niveaux d’immigration seraient trop élevés. Et ils sont très peu nombreux à voir l’immigrant comme un problème en soi.

« Certains disent qu’on utilise la crise du logement comme excuse pour se tourner contre les immigrants. Ce n’est pas ça. Le nombre de Canadiens qui disent que l’immigration empire leur communauté, c’est juste 9 %. Au Québec, c’est 4 %. »

Le Québec plus ouvert

Le Québec suit la tendance canadienne, mais demeure le territoire où le sentiment général reste le plus ouvert aux nouveaux arrivants. Environ un tiers (37 %) des Québécois considèrent que les immigrants sont trop nombreux, contre 50 % en Ontario et 46 % dans le reste du Canada.

La vision du Québec sur cette question a grandement évolué depuis les années 1990. Pas moins de 57 % des Québécois considéraient en 1993 que les immigrants « menaçaient la culture du Québec » ; ils ne sont plus que 38 % à avoir cette opinion aujourd’hui.

Le Canada a franchi cette année le cap des 40 millions d’habitants, en raison notamment d’un flux migratoire toujours plus important.

Source: Spectaculaire bond de la résistance à l’immigration au Canada

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →