While I was away: Immigration articles of interest

NYT: Our Interview With Mark Carney [Immigration]

Commentary by the Conservatives and right leaning media has overdramatized the possible shift. Proof will of course be in the forthcoming levels plan:

…What we’ve basically been doing is first getting the system under control. So if we want to let in 500,000 people through formal immigration and some temporary workers and students, we cap things and we let in 500,000 people. There were years where the expectation would have been for example, 700,000 and it ended up 2 million. The overshoots were, and you know it’s a country of 40 million people.

These are big, big overshoots, and it’s not that easy to get to Canada, right? It is from the U.S. but otherwise you’re flying in or taking boats. So we’ve taken measures to get that under control and we have it under control. So students down by 60 percent, temporary foreign workers down by 50 percent. It happens to be the case. Part of this is tightening, but asylum seekers are down by one-third on a flow basis, and now the question starts to become: When do we resume some controlled increase in the population, which is the nature of Canada. So that will happen, and we just want to make sure that we’ve got it under control….

Rob Breakenridge: The Carney honeymoon would end if he opens up immigration again

Depends on what the forthcoming levels plan contains for both permanent and particularly temporary resident numbers:

…Carney’s musings on immigration have also been noticed on the campaign trail in Quebec, where the Parti Québécois (PQ) pushed for limits on immigration in what became a successful campaign.

And even though the PQ has promised to shelve an independence referendum until after Donald Trump leaves office, new premier Paul St-Pierre Plamondon has threatened to hold a referendum on immigration, not dissimilar to what’s on the ballot in Alberta.

It’s hard to imagine that voters in either province won’t or wouldn’t side heavily with their respective premiers on this issue. As such, it’s easy to envision a backlash against Carney’s planned increases.

It may well be that the government is tempted by the GDP boost that high immigration helps to generate, even if it papers over other weaknesses in the economy. Again, Carney himself has noted this phenomenon, calling it a “basic fact,” and that “you can do the math” in terms of how declining population can affect economic growth.

Carney’s political honeymoon is not a political blank cheque and nor should he be so overconfident as to feel as though he’s immune from a similar backlash to his predecessor. This issue has become divisive enough already and it’s playing with fire to thrust this issue back on a fatigued and frustrated Canadian public.

We’ll eventually need a return to responsible immigration growth, but the government has more work to do before that’s feasible and saleable.

Keller: The Canadian population decline that never happened, and what it means for immigration policy

Keller’s latest two part series on immigration following the Carney NYT intv:

… On the same day as Statscan dropped that news, Prime Minister Mark Carney was in New York, sitting for an interview with The New York Times. Among other things, he was asked about Canada’s “population decline,” and when he would begin “reversing” it through higher immigration.

The PM didn’t challenge the mistaken premise that Canada’s population is declining; he was presumably unaware of the new figures. But he gave a long and detailed answer about the immigration system’s recent history, which shows that he has a grasp on how things went off the rails under his predecessor.

I wrote a book last year on what Canada used to get right about immigration, and how after 2015 it got things so badly wrong. Most of what Mr. Carney had to say was on point.

He concluded with this: “Now the question starts to become: When do we resume some controlled increase in the population?”…

Keller: Mark Carney has started fixing immigration. He needs to keep at it 

His concrete recommendations:

…Continue reducing temporary immigration: The temporary-immigration streams used to be small, but they exploded under the Trudeau government. They came to be seen as backdoors to permanent immigration, for those who would not otherwise have scored high enough to secure permission to permanently immigrate.

These pathways need to be wound back, and some need to be wound down. The Carney government has promised to bring temporary-resident numbers down to 5 per cent of the national population by next year, but it’s well behind schedule. In any case, the target is too high.

The C.D. Howe Institute’s expert group on immigration suggests aiming for 3 per cent. I agree. What’s more, the vast majority of future temporary residents should be high-quality visa students or former students on postgraduate work permits.

End the low-wage temporary foreign worker program: It makes sense to give Canadian businesses the flexibility to temporarily hire an aeronautical engineer from overseas. It makes no sense to hand out temporary visas for low-wage work. Canada has a shortage of educated and skilled people in some high-paying fields, but there is no generalized shortage of workers, nor is there a lack of unskilled workers.

Temporary work visas should no longer be available for jobs paying less than $100,000 a year, with the singular exception of the long-standing seasonal agricultural worker program. A reduction in the pool of people available for entry-level jobs should cause wages at the bottom of the income scale to feel some upward pressure. That would be a good thing.

Focus student visas on the best: The limited number of student visas should go to the highest-quality institutions and programs, admitting the most-qualified students, and charging the highest international tuition.

What happened during the Trudeau era was the opposite, as provinces – led by Ontario – took advantage of the unlimited number of student visas to encourage the weakest and lowest-tuition institutions, mostly public and private colleges, to go on a cash grab. What was being sold was entry into Canada, not education.

Our leading public universities, which charge international undergraduate tuition of $50,000 and up, and even more for some master’s programs, should get nearly all of the visas. Private colleges should get none. Public colleges should get few.

Stable permanent immigration: From the early 1990s until the Trudeau government, Canada’s immigration rate was relatively stable, through Liberal and Conservative administrations. It helped to make immigration as boring and unnoticed as functioning plumbing.

Let’s set our immigration rate at 0.7 per cent of the population – that’s about 300,000 new immigrants. Keep the rate there year after year, indefinitely.

An immigration rate of 0.7 per cent would be on par with where things were for the quarter century before the Trudeau government. It would be well below the level Canada hit from 2022 to 2024, and somewhat lower than the figure the Carney government has targeted. But by international standards, it would still be above average.

As I detail in my book on immigration, the U.S. legal-immigration level in the decades before the first election of President Donald Trump was around 0.3 per cent.

As on other key files, the Carney government has started to turn the ship on immigration. As with those other issues, more turning is still needed.

Olive: How Justin Trudeau’s immigration ambitions unravelled

Meanwhile in the Star, Olive seems oblivious to the failings of the philosophy and approach, not just miscalculation:

…Trudeau brought a record number of newcomers to Canada, and that proved to be a test of his governing philosophy. The labour shortages of the post-pandemic gave him the chance to better align economic need with more newcomers. It was a test he failed through miscalculation, but the philosophy was sound.

The weakest links in Carney’s cabinet are still there

The latest in the case for a change in immigration minister with speculation why still in place:

Most Canadians don’t know much about the Singh decision. But if you’re the country’s Immigration Minister, you must.

So it was alarming that Lena Metlege Diab seemed confused when she was asked about the seminal 1985 Supreme Court decision in an interview for a Radio-Canada podcast.

It was the ruling that set the foundations of Canada’s asylum system, and is central to immigration policy. It established that asylum-seekers have Charter rights and a right to an oral hearing, led to the creation of the Immigration and Refugee Board, and is still an issue in reform efforts today.

But it didn’t ring bells for the minister.

Kevin Paquette: The Parti Québécois forced a necessary immigration debate

The more positive approach to integration. Will see what the incoming government changes its electoral approach to a more inclusive governing approach: 

But integration is a concept that goes beyond language. It is also about sharing some basic values, understanding the institutions of the society you are joining and, over time, developing a sense that you belong to something larger than yourself. A society needs that sense of common civic and civilizational belonging if it is to remain cohesive over time.

All of these elements show why the debate over integration capacity deserves better than the familiar accusations and assumptions we have now become accustomed.

Raising questions about our capacity to welcome newcomers does not mean shifting the burden of our collective choices onto immigrants who choose Quebec. On the contrary, it means taking seriously the responsibility we have toward them.

When someone chooses Quebec, we should want them to be able to find their place here, learn French, build a life, and develop a genuine sense of belonging. When our capacity to integrate newcomers is overwhelmed, they pay a price as well.

That is ultimately what the immigration debate should be about: not searching for someone to blame, but making sure that those who choose Quebec have a real chance to succeed here and, over time, to feel fully at home.

Kevin Paquette is a consultant at Crestview Strategy. He was a political advisor to Quebec’s Minister of Public Security and president of the Coalition Avenir Québec’s youth wing. 

Express Entry and Labour Market Outcomes of Economic Immigrants

Unclear whether this will still apply and the CRS gets undermined by increased specialty streams as preliminary evidence suggests it is not:

Four recent studies examine the labour market outcomes of immigrants selected through Express Entry (EE) and assess how well the system’s Comprehensive Ranking System (CRS) identifies applicants with strong economic potential. Using data from the Longitudinal Immigration Database and the linked IMDB–2021 Census, the research examines employment, earnings, wages and occupational mobility among EE immigrants, comparing their outcomes with those of other economic immigrants.

Overall, EE immigrants demonstrate stronger labour market outcomes than non-EE economic immigrants. They are more likely to be employed, earn higher employment income and weekly wages, and remain in their intended occupations. These differences are observed across a range of admission cohorts and demographic and labour market characteristics.

The research also finds that several core CRS selection factors are consistently associated with stronger outcomes. In particular, higher official language proficiency, educational attainment, Canadian work experience and higher pre-admission employment earnings are associated with better post-admission employment and earnings outcomes. Pre-admission employment earnings are among the strongest predictors, suggesting that the quality of applicants’ previous labour market experience may be more informative than simply having Canadian work experience.

Occupation characteristics also matter. Applicants in higher-skilled occupations generally have stronger employment, earnings and occupational retention outcomes, while remaining in an intended occupation is associated with substantially higher earnings. Job offers are associated with somewhat higher post-admission earnings, although their predictive value varies across outcomes and occupational categories.

By contrast, several CRS bonus factors – including Canadian education, French-language bonuses, siblings in Canada and spouse-related characteristics – show limited associations with short- and medium-term labour market outcomes after accounting for other applicant characteristics.

Together, the findings provide evidence on the factors associated with labour market success among EE immigrants and can inform ongoing consideration of the design and selection criteria of economic immigration programs. Because Express Entry was introduced in 2015, additional follow-up will be needed to assess whether these relationships persist over time.

Read the research: Express Entry and Labour Market Outcomes of Economic Immigrants

Canada’s refugee shelters are getting ready for the next surge. Here’s how cities are building a system that works

The key factor is, of course, the reduced number of refugees…:

… The tide, however, has begun to turn. Federal policy shifts aimed at curbing irregular migrants and restricting access to asylum have led to a significant decline in new asylum claimants in the past year — and governments have used the opportunity to build a more sustainable refugee shelter system that would be ready for the next surge. 

Municipalities reporting fewer refugees in shelters 

New refugee claimants dropped from 105,940 in the first seven months of 2024 to 69,410 in the same period in 2025 — and to just 33,415 this year.

Officials attributed the decline to the new visa requirement for Mexican travellers, tightened border enforcement and heightened scrutiny of visa applications. Ontario currently receives about 45 per cent of all claims, followed by Quebec at 38 per cent.

The federal Immigration Department said it closed all the refugee hotels that it directly funded and ran as of October 2025.

In Toronto, the number of claimants in regular shelters fell from 6,490 people in August 2024 to 1,691 this September. As demand declines, the city is closing two of its refugee shelter hotels this fall and the remaining one in 2027.

Calls specific to refugee claimants have dropped from more than 100 a day at times in 2023 to 10 to 20 a week now. During the first six months of 2026, fewer than 500 claimants were admitted into Toronto’s shelter system, while on average 165 have left each month since January. 

“We are generally able to meet demand from refugee claimants,” said Vera Dodic, the city’s director of refugee response. “We are no longer regularly seeing refugee claimants call Central Intake to report no available space.”…

Immigration Department looking into termination of refugee sponsor policy: Diab

Hopefully, with public reporting:

The Immigration Department will monitor for any negative effects from a recent decision not to extend a policy that gave permanent residency sponsorship exemptions to some refugees, Immigration Minister Lena Diab said Wednesday.

The policy was introduced in 2019 to allow some refugees to sponsor some undeclared family members for permanent residency but it expired earlier this month and was not renewed.

Kazemzadeh: Canada’s settlement services are going digital. AI should support workers, not replace them

Overall, balanced but one should expect some staff efficiencies and reductions but hopefully with better outcome reporting (even outputs are updated on opendata and have to be requested):

… Canada should not reject AI in settlement services. The technology has real potential. But governments and settlement agencies should avoid building a digital-only system.

The better model is hybrid: AI for routine information, translation support, navigation and basic triage; humans for complex cases, legal referrals, trauma-informed care, accessibility needs and emotional support.

The future of settlement services will likely be more digital. But success should not be measured by how many workers are replaced. It should be measured by whether newcomers receive faster, safer and more inclusive support.

AI can open the door. Human expertise must remain inside.

Globe editorial: Thoughts and prayers, Canadian style

Valid critique. Time to stop using “thoughts and prayers” language with any such incident, no matter the issue or group:

…So how to turn back this growing tide of hatred? As we have argued before, that effort has to begin with understanding, and speaking, the truth: Antizionism is fuelling the rise in antisemitism. The rejection of Israel, of its very right to exist, has become the growth medium for the contagion of antisemitism. The test of courage for any political leader is whether they are willing to speak this truth. Prime Minister Mark Carney failed that test in June, even as he tried to provide comfort to the Jewish-Canadian community.

Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow has failed even more spectacularly. In fairness, Ms. Chow has spoken out against anti-Israel protests being staged in the heart of the Jewish-Canadian neighbourhood near Bathurst and Sheppard in north Toronto. And, of course, she has offered her thoughts and prayers, Canadian style, in condemnation of incidents such as the attack on Kiva’s.

But Ms. Chow has, through her actions, shown where her sympathies lie. The mayor refused to attend a flag-raising ceremony for Israel’s national day in May, 2024, saying such an event was “divisive.” She also declined to take part in the annual Walk for Israel in June of this year.

Yet, the mayor had no problem with blurting out “Free Palestine” – the rallying slogan of those antizionist rallies – during the Pride Parade in late June. 

The mayor’s office did not respond when asked last week why the flag-raising event was divisive, but reciting the Free Palestine slogan is not a problem. Ms. Chow owes Torontonians, particularly Jewish Torontonians, an explanation.

Does she, for instance, support the right of Israel to exist? Or is she in line with the hate-infused catechism (recited most weeks near Bathurst and Sheppard) that deems Israel a pariah state?

Until she does clarify, her thoughts and prayers will ring hollow.

Source: Thoughts and prayers, Canadian style

Hamed Esmaeilion: We will never forget what Iran did to Canadians

Understandable reaction and feeling neglected but perhaps unrealistic expectations regarding PM time and that governments have broader interests than specific community ones, “the world as it is.” Not unique to Iranian Canadians or other totalitarian regimes:

…Over the past 18 months, the prime minister has not attended a single event dedicated to the victims of the Islamic Republic’s crimes. Other members of his government attended the sixth anniversary commemoration of the downing of Flight PS752, but he chose not to be there. During the events of Jan. 8 and 9, the Iranian-Canadian community did not receive the solidarity it needed from him.

Now, while the blood of many victims stains the streets of cities across Iran and thousands of families around the world face endless grief, he speaks of the need to engage with this regime and restore diplomatic relations in order to protect Canadians’ rights.

The families of Flight PS752 victims continue to be targeted by the regime. Even now, they face intimidation and persecution, including arrest and the confiscation of their passports.

Had the government used the legal tools at its disposal and sought provisional measures in the two active proceedings before the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Islamic Republic would never have dared to go this far.

We have called neither for war nor for negotiation. Our demand is simple: a fair and impartial trial that establishes the truth and delivers justice.

Rather than advocating an impossible proposition that we, the victims’ families, will oppose with all our strength, the prime minister should attend memorial ceremonies for the victims of this regime. There, standing among grieving Canadian families, he may better understand what is at stake and find the resolve to press for accountability before international courts.

Anything else will mean trampling truth and justice under a naïve notion of diplomacy, one that has failed for half a century because it refuses to confront the Islamic Republic’s murderous ideology and inhumanity.

Source: Hamed Esmaeilion: We will never forget what Iran did to Canadians

While I was away: Antisemitism

Wide range of commentary on antisemitism and conflation of antisemitism and anti-Zionism, and the mixed reaction to PM Carney’s address to Jewish leaders. Making an address outside of the House of Commons never works, former PM Mulroney learned that with Italian Canadians, former PM Harper learned that with Sikh Canadians and PM Carney repeats those mistakes with Jewish Canadians.

And Carney should have been clearer on the extreme forms of anti-Zionism on display in Canadian cities and institutions that go far beyond legitimate criticism of the Israeli government policies and actions, particularly under the current Netanyahu government with extremist Jewish ministers in Cabinet and government:

Canada is being tested by a crisis of antisemitism, Carney says

… Mr. Carney’s speech, his first to focus on the topic of antisemitism, was met with polite praise from those in the audience, which included MPs, local and provincial politicians and religious leaders. He had faced pressure to speak in person directly about the issue.

But Jewish leaders criticized him for not addressing his government’s foreign policy toward Israel, which has included condemning the country’s conduct in Gaza and recognizing a Palestinian state – moves that some in the Jewish community have said further inflamed domestic tensions.

“When Canadian elected leaders publicly condemn Israel, the world’s only Jewish state, Jewish Canadians pay the price,” Holy Blossom’s Rabbi Yael Splansky said in recorded remarks played before Mr. Carney began speaking.

Globe editorial: The missing words in Mark Carney’s antisemitism speech

…What should he have said? That the problem is antizionism, a complete, anything-goes rejection of, and demonizing of, Israel’s existence. And that antizionism is manifesting itself on Canada’s streets and university campuses, in a complete, anything-goes rejection, and demonizing of, Jews.

This is where the Prime Minister’s courage failed him. Taking on the antizionists – the core of the problem – was not something this Liberal prime minister was prepared to do. He went into a synagogue before an invitation-only audience of 170 Jewish leaders and did not meet the moment. He didn’t mention Israel, despite his prepared remarks doing so – once. He was unable or unwilling to articulate what is behind the “scourge of antisemitism” that he rightly condemned….

Geist: Why Mark Carney’s Antisemitism Speech Did Not Meet the Moment

…Naming the crisis is only step one however, and on the parts that matter most, the speech missed the mark. Begin with where he chose to deliver it. Carney told his audience he was speaking in a synagogue but the address was for all Canadians. But a speech for all Canadians that frames antisemitism as a national problem belongs on the floor of the House of Commons, where Canadians are represented and where all MPs – whether or not they are Jewish or represent ridings with large Jewish populations – would have had to sit together and hear the need for the country to take responsibility for antisemitism. I’m happy to see Evan Solomon, Leslie Church, Anthony Housefather, Rachel Bendayan, and Ben Carr in attendance. But we need all MPs, particularly those who have said little about antisemitism since October 7th, to see this as their issue too. MPs from all perspectives sitting side-by-side only happens in the House of Commons, and it did not happen yesterday (as one rabbi noted, a speech in a synagogue was needed months ago in the immediate aftermath of the shootings).

Chris Selley: At a synagogue, Carney tells the wrong people to abandon their ethnic rivalries

…We’re lucky, and we have done a lot of things right, but we’re not special: You can’t ask people to bring their faith, culture, language and world view with them to Canada but leave any rivalries or grievances behind. That’s just not human nature. This insistence on combating dire situations with myth-making will eventually be a large part of the Liberals’ undoing. In the meantime, on the issue of antisemitism specifically, Carney’s government seems to have almost nothing to offer. And he offered it at a synagogue.

John Ivison: The crucial words Carney wouldn’t speak in his antisemitism speech

For my part, I felt that it was an unusually eloquent and heartfelt speech but that it fell short for a different reason: it failed to be honest about the cause of the corruption in the body politic.

“We welcome the peoples of the world, in all their diversity and splendour. We don’t welcome the world’s hatreds,” Carney said. “When you come to Canada, you bring your faith, your traditions, your language, your story but you leave behind your animosities.”

But that is not happening. Islamists arrive and are given permission to give vent to their ancient loathing by anarcho-socialists, and their naive campus enablers, who love Palestine but hate Canada, and despise Jews most of all.

The Montreal4Palestine group continues to defend the mock hanging of a man wearing a kippah last month, saying it was directed at a specific political figure (Israeli politician Itamar Ben-Gvir), not at Jews. Will it take a real lynching to convince the waverers that this is not legitimate freedom of expression?

Given the demographics, it is clear why the prime minister was ambiguous in laying the blame.

But, as Elie Wiesel learned in the death camps, neutrality helps the oppressor and silence encourages the tormentor.

The malignancy will continue to metastasize if we keep obscuring its source.

Tasha Kheiriddin: Mark Carney in denial over what’s behind antisemitism

…Citizenship is a two-way street. Newcomers have a responsibility to respect the laws and customs of the place they choose to call home. When they not only fail to embrace Canada’s basic values, but repudiate them, there must be consequences: fines, arrests, deprivation of liberty, and in the case of non-citizens, removal from the country. Let me be clear.

That’s what Carney should have said. Instead, he listed his government’s actions to date, including Bill C-9, the Combating Hate Law. He announced the creation of a Ministerial Advisory Council on Rights, Equality, and Inclusion, one of whose jobs will be to study antisemitism. It includes one lone Jewish member, former senator Marc Gold, and features Omar Alghabra, an MP who has been photographed numerous times in the company of Islamic extremists.

This is BS. Canada doesn’t need another council to study a problem that Carney described quite fully in his remarks. Canadian Jews need to feel safe in their homes and communities. And all of us need an end to denial, inaction and the toleration of hate.

Lederman: The Prime Minister addressed Canada’s antisemitism problem. Almost nobody was satisfied

… Canada’s Jewish community, like any community, is not homogenous. There are always going to be differences of opinion. Some of the criticism is fair, but the knee-jerk sneering at the Prime Minister’s acknowledgment of Jewish Canadian pain – and his call for the rest of the country to step up – is disappointing and unproductive. The speech was not a hollow gesture, but a meaningful promise to act.

The speech, in fact, was the action. Or an action, at least.

“No Jewish Canadian should ever have to wonder whether the government sees this clearly,” said AI Minister Evan Solomon, who is Jewish. “We do. We see it, we acknowledge it, we are acting on it.”

Canada’s leader is asking the country to come together to oppose antisemitism. This should be commended, not condemned. The response to that plea tells the story of a country divided.

Stephens: Hatred of Israel and the Degradation of the West

…How is it that hatred of one country can wind up doing more damage to the haters than the hated?

All prejudice, mindless or deliberate, is mind-warping; obsessive prejudice, of the kind Israel disproportionately attracts, is even more so. There are today millions of people around the world who, with considerable media and academic assistance, have convinced themselves that the major, if not sole, cause of injustice in the Middle East and even the world is Israel’s occupation of parts of the West Bank and Gaza.

As a result, this obsession has contributed to the relative neglect of the region’s other fundamental problems, above all the abiding grip of authoritarian politics in places like Cairo and Ankara and totalitarian religious fundamentalism in Gaza and Tehran. When was the last time you heard of an American campus protest against the treatment of Kurds by Turkey (a NATO ally and longtime beneficiary of U.S. security guarantees), or the genocide in Sudan?

Why is this year’s arts biennale in Venice being roiled by the inclusion of Israel, but not of China? Why has the recent report detailing the extensive documentation of systematic use of rape and sexual torture by Hamas and its collaborators received little attention?

These aren’t just questions of hypocrisy or double standards. They are evidence of minds that have lost the capacity to think dispassionately and critically. What we should really be worried about isn’t the future of Israel; it’s the fate of the West.

Moral judgments should be made about Israel according to the same standards by which we judge other countries faced with similar circumstances. It’s when Israel is demanded to be a saint — and then, as it invariably falls short, is damned as the worst sinner — that we lose our sense of perspective and proportion.

Jack Mintz: Australia’s response to antisemitism puts Canada to shame

…Dave Rich, a leading British academic on antisemitism, concluded that labelling Zionism as a form of western colonialism is used to demonize, exclude and attack Jewish people and supporters of Israel. He also argued that claiming that Israelis are just like the Nazis in practising genocide undermines the importance of the Holocaust in defining antisemitism.

This all-encompassing approach in Australia should be carefully reviewed by the Carney government. It is not just a matter of a government’s responsibility towards security. It is also an issue of social cohesion.

Like Australia, intimidating demonstrations that dehumanize Jews has led to an increase in antisemitic attacks in Canada. Reported and unreported antisemitic acts are frequent, totalling 567 per month in 2025 alone, according to B’nai Brith Canada’s annual audit of antisemitic incidents.

The Carney government should not wait for a Bondi-like terror incident before acting to curb antisemitism. So far, its effort is deficient.

Lederman: The San Diego mosque shooting is a profoundly 2026 tragedy

….What drives a 17- and 18-year-old to this kind of hatred? To end people’s lives, and then their own? Mr. Clark was about to graduate from high school. 

Consider everything we’re learning about the manosphere – misogynistic, hateful, homophobic, antisemitic, and somehow very attractive to many young men. 

A spark – caused by a bad day, a fateful encounter, who knows what – sends these kids to dark corners of the internet. Their hateful curiosity is reinforced by algorithms that continue to serve up vile ideas. These algorithms are designed to maximize engagement – and, for the social-media companies, profits. It’s all happening in the combustible environment of the divisive politics of the day, where hateful rhetoric has become the norm, not just from blabbermouth commentators, but politicians, all the way up to the U.S. President. 

In the aftermath of this tragedy, far-right Trump ally Laura Loomer posted: “The shooting in California took place at a jihadi mosque known for its hate preachers.” She wrote that it was “likely planned by Muslims” and the U.S. Islamic lobby. There are too many people who will believe her own hate-filled misinformation, uncritically.

Beyond the grief of this incident, there is an urgent need to address this emergency. We are in a confirmation-biased, hate-fuelled misinformation crisis. Wherever these two young men – boys, really – have been taught to hate like this, others are there too, lurking, reading, learning at the knees of influencers, extremist pundits, hateful politicians. The consequences, as we have seen too many times, can be deadly.

Polansky: Despair is not an option

…The perceptive reader will have noted that none of these measures requires special privileges or carve-outs for Jews or any other minority group. Moreover, all of these recommendations apply widely to problems of governance across the country. This is precisely the point. The observable social decline described here afflicts Jews acutely but not exclusively.

Similarly, the older dispensation of Canadian liberalism, now in need of restoration, allowed Jews to flourish along with other Canadians. Another way to put it is that improving the worsening situation of Canadian Jews will entail making much-needed corrections to the country as such. This is not incidental.

Against this proactive view is a growing (and largely online) sentiment, bolstered by a combination of unfavourable demographic trends and ugly news stories, that Canada is finished for Jews, and they should begin looking elsewhere. This, in fact, echoes much of the pessimism one increasingly finds among non-Jewish Canadians of all stripes about the trajectory of their country.

The French novelist Michel Houellebecq famously wrote “there is no Israel for me.” That there is an Israel (or, potentially, a Florida) for Canadian Jews should not change their calculus. By any historical measure, Canada has done quite well by them (and vice versa). They owe something to their country, and if nothing else, they owe it to their ancestors, who braved far worse to get here, to stay and fight. Canadians in general should do likewise. In this, as in other matters, they may find common cause in repairing their country’s weakening institutions.

Carney to continue using Trudeau-era advisory board to suggest Senate appointments

Will be interesting to see whether there is any impact on the diversity and political leanings of Carney appointments. Trudeau appointments: 55.2 percent women, 19.8 percent visible minorities, and 12.5 percent Indigenous:

Prime Minister Mark Carney said Wednesday he will continue to rely on the independent advisory board created by Justin Trudeau to suggest Senate appointments, but gave no timeline for filling a growing number of vacancies. 

After more than a year in office Mr. Carney has yet to make a single Senate appointment. Vacancies are mounting not just among senators but also on the board tasked with selecting new members of the Senate. 

There are currently nine vacancies in the 105-member Senate and another six senators are planning to retire by the end of 2026. The Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments, consisting of federal, provincial and territorial representatives, currently has just five members. It has 24 vacancies, leaving most provinces without representation on the board. 

At a Montreal-area press conference, Mr. Carney gave no indication of when he would begin addressing the vacancies in the Senate. “We will be appointing senators in due course, and I will take into account the advice of the independent advisory committee that was established by my predecessor,” he said. 

Source: Carney to continue using Trudeau-era advisory board to suggest Senate appointments, Carney not planning to allow senators in Liberal caucus, senior government official says


An impatient Mark Carney would rather bypass the public service than reform it

Public service reform is a thankless task politically and takes an inordinate amount of time, effort and political support. Needed but rarely executed given previous failures like UCS.

Former deputies need to share some of their concrete experiences with efforts in public service reform and lessons learned, rather than more general diagnostiques and recommendations. More on the how and less on the why:

…Unlike his predecessors, Mr. Sabia took over as Clerk of the Privy Council with decades of business experience under his belt. That makes him an oddity in Ottawa, where most senior bureaucrats have never worked outside the capital, much less outside government.

Therein lies the problem that Mr. Carney and Mr. Sabia face as they try to inject new dynamism into a public service that has long operated according to the principles of risk minimization and strict adherence to procedure. The senior bureaucracy is almost exclusively composed of individuals who climbed the ranks during an era of increasing centralization of power and policymaking in the Prime Minister’s Office. Their skill set revolves around keeping the dust down, rather than disrupting the status quo. 

As in any organization, however, disruption is a necessary component of innovation. And the federal public service is desperately in need of it. 

“[N]otwithstanding the massive increase in hiring over the last decade, too few public servants have been hired for the leading-edge skills required for modern government,” write former PCO clerk Kevin Lynch and ex-PCO official James Mitchell in their newly published book, A New Blueprint for Government. “When Amazon can deliver a package to almost anyone in Canada the next day, public expectations for government service standards increase accordingly. Yet those expectations are too often not being met.”

Source: An impatient Mark Carney would rather bypass the public service than reform it

Keller: Mark Carney is already struggling with Justin Trudeau’s immigration legacy

Captures the challenge and the resulting disruption well:

…The challenge is that for three years the Trudeau government opened the door to what was effectively an unlimited number of notionally temporary immigrants. They came “temporarily” with the aim of staying permanently. (And who can blame them?) They paid tuition to a fly-by-night college and accepted minimum wage jobs in the hope of parlaying that into citizenship.

In the year 2000, there were 67,000 people holding a temporary work permit. By the end of 2024, there were 1,499,000. 

In 2000, there were 123,000 student visa holders. By the end of 2023, there were more than one million.

Between 2011 and 2015, the number of refugee claims made in Canada averaged about 17,000 a year. Last year, there were 190,000. This year, claims are on pace to hit 110,000.

In 2015, there were 10,000 people in Canada who had applied for refugee status and were awaiting a decision. The figure is now 296,000….

Source: Mark Carney is already struggling with Justin Trudeau’s immigration legacy

Carney says temporary foreign worker program needs a ‘focused approach’

Not much new in terms of messaging:

Prime Minister Mark Carney said Wednesday the temporary foreign worker program needs a “focused approach” that targets the needs of specific sectors and regions.

Carney’s comments came as he outlined the government’s plans for the fall during an address to the Liberal caucus at their annual retreat in Edmonton.

The prime minister said the government’s plan to return immigration rates to “sustainable levels” includes reducing the number of non-permanent residents to “less than five per cent” of the total population.

Temporary workers and international students made up 7.1 per cent of Canada’s population as of April 1, according to Statistics Canada.

“Now, it’s clear that we have to work to continue to improve our overall immigration policies, and the temporary foreign worker program must have a focused approach that targets specific strategic sectors and needs in specific regions,” Carney said in his speech to caucus.

“So we’re working on that. Setting those goals, adjusting and working to ease the strain on housing, public infrastructure and our social services while we build that strong economy.”

At a press conference in Brampton, Ont., on Tuesday, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre once again called on the government to scrap the temporary foreign worker program due to high youth unemployment, which hit 14.6 per cent in July.

Poilievre said immigrants are not responsible for housing and employment challenges and instead blamed the government. 

“They’ve allowed massive abuses of the international student, temporary foreign worker and asylum claims system, with rampant fraud that happened right under their nose. And as a result, our youth can’t find jobs or homes,” Poilievre said.

”(Carney’s) allowing corporations to bring in a record number of temporary foreign workers this year at a time when youth employment numbers are their worst in three decades.”

Government data show the number of temporary foreign workers coming to Canada decreased significantly in the first six months of the year. About 119,000 temporary workers arrived in the first half of 2025, down from more than 245,000 in the first half of 2024.

The government’s current target for temporary workers is to admit about 368,000 this year and 210,000 next year.

Before Carney’s speech, former immigration minister Marc Miller said “you can’t just scrap” the temporary foreign worker program and accused Poilievre of trying to whip up “anti-immigrant sentiments.”

“We need immigration whether we like it or not in this country,” Miller said….

Source: Carney says temporary foreign worker program needs a ‘focused approach’

Keller: Yes, Canada should (mostly) end our temporary foreign worker programs 

Nice reminder of previous comments (Trudeau did the same in 2014):

…Prime Minister Mark Carney used to get this. Back in 2013, when he was governor of the Bank of Canada, he told a parliamentary committee that “one doesn’t want an overreliance on temporary foreign workers for lower-skill jobs, which prevent the wage adjustment mechanism from making sure that Canadians are paid higher wages but also that firms improve their productivity.”

He added that temporary foreign workers should be for “those higher-skilled gaps that do exist.” 

In plain English, he said that bringing in highly skilled people to fill high-wage jobs was good for Canada, but allowing business easy access to lots of temporary foreign workers for entry-level jobs was a recipe for suppressing the wages of low-wage Canadians, and discouraging companies from raising productivity through labour-saving technologies. 

That was the right answer. It was also a good foundation for future immigration policy.

But last week, Mr. Carney said the opposite. Pushing back against Conservative criticism, he said that “when I talk to businesses around the country … their number one issue is tariffs, and their number two issue is access to temporary foreign workers.”

Mr. Carney, please rediscover your 2013 answer. Aside from being economically sound, it is immeasurably more politically saleable. Just ask British Columbia Premier David Eby.…

Source: Yes, Canada should (mostly) end our temporary foreign worker programs

The Functionary: New clerk expectations

More notes of caution but I wish them well:

…But are they too alike? That’s the worry. Both bring a Goldman Sachs-style mindset with big ambition that prizes speed and outcomes, which could drive them to barrel ahead — not listening, not slowing down, ignoring red flags.

Would deputies raising alarms about a Phoenix-style pay disaster get heard? Or would they be dismissed as risk-averse and stuck in public-service inertia?

As one long-time deputy minister said:

“Neither Carney nor Sabia has worked in the parts of government that actually deliver services. Finance manages crises — it doesn’t build systems. Fixing immigration or modernizing service delivery isn’t about reacting fast. It’s about designing complex programs, managing risk, and building IT that actually works. That’s not their wheelhouse.”

Goldman pace, Ottawa reality. The kind of style that works at Goldman Sachs — where there’s a deep bench of talent ready to step in — doesn’t translate easily to the public service, where replacements aren’t so easy to find or groom. Burnout here carries real risks, and losing top talent isn’t as simple as hiring the next in line.

Tellier and Sabia also came up in a different era. Barking orders and command-and-control leadership were the norm in the 1990s. But that style is now widely seen as outdated.

These days clerks prioritize wellness and mental health. And many public servants are tired. They haven’t a breather since the pandemic. There’s been Trump’s trade war, the federal election, two government transitions, and new crises keep coming – wars, fires.

Can the public service handle a hard-driving, two-year push for massive changes – with the chaos of layoffs? And can Carney stay focused to get his big things done?

The new guard is, well, older. Carney and his lieutenants — Sabia, chief-of-staff Marc-André Blanchard, and principal secretary David Lametti — are all white, male Boomers or Gen Xers leading a millennial-dominated public service that’s 58-per-cent women. 

Many public servants have only ever worked under the Trudeau government, where wellness, DEI, values and ethics, and work-life balance were top priorities. Money flowed and the public service grew. Gears are now shifting to high performance, speed, outcomes, spending and job cuts. That’s a culture shift.

The real leadership test may be less about what gets done — and more about how.

Source: New clerk expectations