See attractions, get attracted: This is one way Canada is trying to help new immigrants decide to stay

More coverage for the latest “Leaky Bucket” report (catching up on the report issued last November, CBC only covered this week):

…Highly educated immigrants are leaving faster than those with lower education levels, while those with doctorates are more than twice as likely to leave as those with a secondary education or less, according to the report.

But ICC research shows the antidote to the skilled immigrant exodus is a sense of belonging and optimism about life in Canada, the factor most closely tied to whether newcomers stay long term.

While financial struggles and concerns push many to leave, the data found that the strongest driver of immigrant retention is optimism about the future, measured by immigrants’ confidence in their personal and family prospects, plans for long-term residence in Canada and belief that friends and family can succeed here. 

Even a one per cent increase in optimism boosts the likelihood of staying by 28 per cent, according to ICC data.

“Immigration is a long game. It isn’t just about inviting people to come to Canada as immigrants,” said Shamira Madhany, managing director for World Education Services Canada. “What really matters is how included people feel and how inclusive the system is.”

The Canoo app, which aims to support and promote an early sense of connection among newcomers, has had more than 420,000 members since it was created in 2010. …

Source: See attractions, get attracted: This is one way Canada is trying to help new immigrants decide to stay

Rétention des immigrants récents: Le Québec maintenant champion canadien

Strong short-term retention, weaker long-term retention:

Un an après leur admission, 91,5 % des immigrants permanents admis en 2022 qui prévoyaient s’établir au Québec y vivaient toujours. En Ontario, la proportion est de 91,3 %, selon des données publiées vendredi par Statistique Canada.

Ce résultat est d’autant plus surprenant qu’il s’inscrit dans un contexte de mobilité accrue.

En 2023, 13,5 % des immigrants admis un an plus tôt avaient déjà changé de province ou de territoire, en hausse marquée par rapport à 10,1 % en 2022. La pandémie a laissé des traces : la mobilité interprovinciale a bondi à ce moment, puis est restée élevée.

Autrement dit, les nouveaux arrivants bougent davantage. Dans ce contexte, réussir à en garder plus de neuf sur dix après un an n’a rien d’anodin.

Le Québec fait mieux que l’Ontario, mais aussi la Colombie-Britannique (88,5 %) et l’Alberta (87,3 %). Pour la cohorte admise en 2022, c’est le meilleur taux de rétention à un an au pays.

Une montée rapide

La montée du Québec est récente, mais rapide. Entre 2019 et 2022, le taux de rétention à un an est passé de 85,9 % à 91,5 %, après avoir atteint un sommet en 2021 (93,4 %). Malgré un léger recul en 2022, le niveau demeure élevé.

Pendant ce temps, l’Ontario faisait du surplace. Depuis 2019, son taux de rétention tourne autour de 93 %, sans progression marquée.

Résultat : le Québec a rattrapé, puis dépassé la province voisine.

À moyen terme, le tableau change. Cinq ans après leur arrivée, 79,6 % des immigrants permanents admis en 2018 résidaient toujours au Québec, contre 90,8 % en Ontario.

À l’échelle des grandes villes, Montréal est plus fragile. Son taux de rétention sur cinq ans a atteint 71,3 %, comparable à celui de Toronto, mais inférieur à ceux de Vancouver, Calgary et Edmonton.

Concrètement, Montréal perd encore des immigrants vers d’autres provinces. Sur cinq ans, la métropole enregistre une perte nette de 5725 immigrants permanents pour la cohorte admise en 2018, pendant que plusieurs villes de l’Ouest canadien continuent d’en gagner.

À court terme, le Québec dans son ensemble tire mieux son épingle du jeu. Pour la cohorte admise en 2022, la province affiche un solde migratoire interprovincial positif, avec un gain net de 2095 immigrants permanents.

Le Québec ne fait pas que retenir la majorité de ceux qui s’y installent : il attire aussi des immigrants initialement destinés à d’autres provinces, surtout l’Ontario.

Source: Rétention des immigrants récents Le Québec maintenant champion canadien

StatsCan study: In 2023, 13.5% of immigrants admitted 1 year earlier settled in another province or territory, up from 10.1% in 2022


Highly skilled immigrants are twice as likely to leave Canada, report shows

Makes sense, given the more educated have more mobility possibilities. But nevertheless highlights the retention issue:

The more educated an immigrant is, the more likely they are to leave Canada, a new report on immigration data and patterns suggests.

It comes as the federal immigration and health ministers testified on barriers to attracting immigrants to work in the health care sector on Tuesday.

New immigrants are leaving Canada “at near-record rates, with highly educated and highly skilled immigrants leaving Canada at twice the rate of those with less education and lower skills,” a new report by the Institute of Canadian Citizenship and the Conference Board of Canada found.

The ICC releases an annual report which studies the causes of onward migration — or migration of people first into, then out of Canada using data from Statistics Canada.

The likelihood of leaving Canada goes up as the level of education increases, the report found….

Source: Highly skilled immigrants are twice as likely to leave Canada, report shows

Report link: https://forcitizenship.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/The-Leaky-Bucket-2025-Nov.-17.pdf

StatsCan: Recent trends in immigration from Canada to the United States

Important study highlighting retention issues for high skilled immigrants to Canada:

….In recent decades, a significant decline in permanent migration from Canada to the United States has been observed. The average number of Canadian-born individuals granted U.S. permanent residency fell by 30% from the late 2000s to the late 2010s. In contrast, the number of U.S.-born immigrants to Canada has increased. Overall, Canada experienced a net loss in the exchange of permanent residents from the early 1990s to the mid-2010s. However, since 2018, the difference in permanent resident flows between the two countries has become relatively small.

Data from U.S. labour certification applications reveal that Canadian temporary workers seeking permanent employment in the United States were highly educated and concentrated in computer, mathematical, architecture and engineering occupations, though the overall educational attainment of these applicants has declined over time. By 2024, foreign-born Canadian citizens made up 60% of all Canadian citizen applicants for U.S. labour certification, and the median wage offers for these positions remained high, though slightly lower than a decade earlier.

The continued movement of highly skilled Canadians—both Canadian-born and foreign-born—into the U.S. labour market has important implications for both countries. For Canada, these findings highlight retention issues for skilled immigrants. In the United States, the influx of highly skilled Canadian workers continues to bolster key sectors, but the overall decline in Canadian immigration suggests tightening competition for global talent.

Source: StatsCan: Recent trends in immigration from Canada to the United States

Ipsos and Bernhard: Immigration intake numbers only tell half the story

More on retention issues and impact of housing pressures as part of decision to stay or leave:

…This week, the ICC and Ipsos are releasing a selection of data from “The Newcomer Perspective,” a massive new survey of 15,383 verified adult immigrants. Among many compelling insights, it delivers immense detail about which newcomers are looking to leave Canada and why. For example, we found that the desire to leave is unevenly distributed; economic immigrants – those who were selected for their ability to contribute to Canada’s shared prosperity – are by far most eager to hit the road.

Over 30 per cent of federally selected economic immigrants – those with the very highest scores under the points system – say they are likely to move to another country within two years, compared to 22 per cent of immigrants admitted under family-reunification programs. Economic immigrants selected by provinces (who tend to have lower scores under the points system) are less likely to consider leaving (21 per cent), but that is still one in five who are planning their exit.

Though immigrants are routinely blamed for driving up housing costs, unaffordable housing is driving skilled immigrants away, with over 80 per cent citing it as their main reason for wanting out. The current line is that there are too many immigrants for our housing supply. Perhaps it’s better to ask whether there are too few houses for the immigrants we need…

Source: Immigration intake numbers only tell half the story

Survey: Reducing Number of Newcomers to Canada Misses the Real Issue of Current Immigrants Looking to Leave


Canadian provinces in open competition for economic immigrants

Summary of interesting research:

At a time of widespread labor shortages, the competition to attract and retain skilled immigrants isn’t just between countries; Canada’s provinces are also competing against each other. Catherine Xhardez, a professor in the Department of Political Science at Université de Montréal who studies immigration policy, discussed the trend in a talk on June 6 at the Forum sur l’intégration 2024 in Montreal.

Based on her recent study titled “‘Stand by me’: competitive subnational regimes and the politics of retaining immigrants,” Xhardez examined the strategies used by the provinces to attract, select and above all retain economic immigrants.

The work is published in the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies.

More immigration powers

While Quebec was the first province to gain increased powers over immigration, the other provinces quickly followed suit. Under bilateral agreements with the federal government, they now have significant powers, particularly over economic immigration.

“Of all the federated entities in the world, Canada’s provinces have the greatest say in immigration matters,” Xhardez said. “They have used their autonomy to develop policies for attracting, recruiting, selecting and receiving immigrants, as well as distribution strategies to spread newcomers across their territory.”

The instrument most frequently used by provinces to attract economic immigrants is the Provincial Nominee Program (PNP), which lets them directly select a significant portion of their skilled immigrants. In some cases, up to 90% of a province’s economic immigrants have been selected through the PNP.

After these targeted selection efforts, however, provinces face a major challenge in retaining the immigrants they have selected.

“Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, immigrants enjoy the same freedom of movement as Canadian citizens, with some qualifications, and can therefore change province at will,” Xhardez noted.

Varying retention rates

The data Xhardez gathered by reviewing provincial documents published between 2005 and 2022 and 63 economic immigration programs show significant interprovincial differences in retention five years after arrival.

British Columbia, Quebec and Alberta lead the way with retention rates of 86%, 85% and 83% respectively (5-year rates), all immigrant categories). At the other end of the scale, some Atlantic provinces struggle to hold onto immigrants: New Brunswick retains 50%, Newfoundland and Labrador 46%, and Prince Edward Island 31%.

Taking local ties into account

To maximize their chances of retaining economic immigrants, the provinces apply specific selection criteria, using PNPs not only as tools for attraction and selection but also as levers for retention.

Xhardez divides the provinces’ actions on this front into four categories:

  • Adaptability factors: Applicants are favored if they already have family, professional or educational ties to the province.
  • Demonstrated intent and ability to settle permanently: Some provinces, such as Manitoba, require proof of ties to the local community.
  • Detailed settlement plan: Applicants may be required to provide a concrete integration plan, including points such as place of residence and education for their children.
  • Exclusion criteria: Candidates may be rejected if, for example, they reside in another province or own property in another province.

These practices give rise to a new selection criterion: According to Xhardez, the “ideal migrant” is no longer just someone who has the required professional skills but also someone who shows a strong commitment to the host province.

“It remains to be seen whether these policies work in the long term and we need a better understanding of immigrants’ trajectories,” she said. There are, she noted, other factors that can influence the decision to stay in a province or leave.

Major financial and societal challenges

The importance that Canadian provinces attach to retaining economic immigrants “is due to the provinces’ investments and efforts in both attracting and integrating newcomers,” Xhardez observed. “The departure of an immigrant to another province is therefore a net loss for the original host province.”

Beyond the financial considerations, these retention strategies raise questions about the balance between the provinces’ economic needs and immigrants’ right to mobility. They also highlight the challenges of long-term integration of newcomers and building a sense of belonging.

“As the competition for talent intensifies, Canadian provinces continue to refine their approaches,” said Xhardez. “The effectiveness of these policies and their impact on the country’s demographic and economic distribution will remain subjects of study and debate in the years to come.”

Source: Canadian provinces in open competition for economic immigrants

Canada’s ‘leaky bucket’ of immigration? More newcomers are choosing to leave Canada for greener pastures

Flip side of immigration levels, the number of immigrants leaving. Important new analysis:

More recent immigrants are leaving Canada for greener pastures, a new study says.

The findings suggest the phenomenon is especially prevalent between four and seven years after newcomers have received their permanent residence.

Although the number and ratio of people leaving each year varied, over the course of 25 years, accumulatively about 20 per cent of immigrants in each cohort ultimately left Canada, said the report, “The Leaky Bucket: A Study of Immigrant Retention Trends in Canada.”

However, the so-called onward migration rate spiked to 31 per cent in 2019 when 67,000 departures were reported.

“While the fairy tale of Canada as a land of opportunity still holds for many newcomers, this study points to burgeoning disillusionment,” said the report released Tuesday by the Institute for Canadian Citizenship (ICC) and the Conference Board of Canada.

“After giving Canada a try, growing numbers of immigrants are saying ‘no thanks,’ and moving on.”

As Canadians turn their attention to the number of immigrants welcomed to Canada amid worries over housing costs, access to health care and other government services, the report sheds light on what researchers call “onward migration,” where people leave their home country, settle in a second and then move again.

Based on the 2021 longitudinal immigration database, which links immigration data with tax data, the study tracks immigrants’ departures by using their lack of fiscal activity, such as income, as a proxy for an individual’s presence or absence in Canada.

Those included in the study were granted permanent residence between 1982 and 2018, and must have been at least 18 years of age when they came to Canada and filed income taxes here at least once since their arrival.

Averaging across each of the 1982-2018 cohorts, it found that onward migration in the first year sits just below the average annual rate of 0.9 per cent. However, the rate rises quickly and peaks around year five, with an average of 1.33 per cent of the arrival cohort leaving that year. It then declines steadily, falling back below 0.9 per cent by year 11.

However, the annual first-year onward migration rate spiked from 0.8 per cent in 2016 to 1.18 per cent in 2019, representing a significant surge compared to the average 0.9 per cent.

“The trend has been toward an increased onward migration rate,” said 18-page report. “More recent cohorts have sustained elevated onward migration rates for a greater number of years. This has led to higher cumulative onward migration for recently arrived cohorts.”

The extent of onward migration does ebb and flow. Over a 15-year period, those who arrived in the late 1980s and early 1990s, as well as the ones who came in 2004 — the last cohort where the 15-year post-arrival data was available — all had a higher rate of departures.

The average cumulative onward migration rate, for example, was 18 per cent for cohorts who arrived in the 1980s, compared to the 21 per cent among those who were granted permanent residence in the first half of the 1990s.

The report findings are in line with a conservative estimate by Statistics Canada that found 15 to 20 per cent of immigrants leave the country within 10 years after arrival and a recent Star story that found more recent immigrants are contemplating leaving.

Generally speaking, said the ICC and Conference Board report, the benefits of immigration can only be realized over time, when newcomers stay, thrive and contribute to the country.

“Retention should be a key performance indicator for Canada’s immigration strategy, given the central role that immigration is meant to play in supporting population and economic growth,” it said.

Researchers agreed the longitudinal immigration database is not perfect, because it wasn’t designed to measure onward migration and may not capture those who don’t file income taxes for whatever reason and who are not linked properly with the tax data.

There could be many reasons why newcomers choose to leave Canada, whether it’s due to challenges they face in their economic integration, their lack of sense of belonging, opportunities arising in other countries or even individual or family preferences.

“Many of these are beyond the control of Canadian policymakers,” the report said. “But policymakers can influence immigrants’ experiences in Canada.”

It recommends the federal government closely monitor onward migration among newcomers, invest in settlement services and programs to support immigrant integration, help employers hire and retain immigrant workers, and put money in infrastructure to meet population growth.

Source: Canada’s ‘leaky bucket’ of immigration? More newcomers are choosing to leave Canada for greener pastures

Scofield: Believe it or not, Canada’s population will hit 40 million in June. It’s time we learned how to retain newcomers [IMO, also question levels and impacts]

Disappointing in that Scofield doesn’t question some of the assumptions behind the immigration levels and their support by the business community, education institutions and others. So much easier to turn up the immigration dial, so much harder to address housing, healthcare and infrastructure needs:

Canada’s population is about to break the 40 million mark this June.

Chief Statistician Anil Arora took to the stage last week to illustrate Canada’s surging society, and that number was his starting point for a very good reason.

Canada’s population is growing quite quickly by historical standards and compared to the rest of the world, and almost all of that growth is thanks to immigration. At the same time, it’s important to note that in any given year, there are thousands of Canadians who leave the country — either permanently or temporarily. You can actually see it happening in real time, thanks to a “population clock” built by Statistics Canada, which shows a couple thousand people per day coming into Canada mainly as immigrants or non-permanent residents.

And what’s true for the country is even more so for the GTA, the centre of the country’s vibrant and dynamic diversity.

The implications are far-reaching and profound, as Arora pointed out in the prestigious, annual Manion lecture to public servants — especially for the economy.

To make the obvious point, it’s essential that policymakers and employers alike anticipate the change coming at us, and make the most of it. That’s not lost on any employer desperately trying to fill job postings these days, nor is it lost on our political leaders.

Immigration Minister Sean Fraser and his entourage are travelling the country, looking for bold ideas for the long term, practical ideas for the short term, and tight timelines to deliver a new vision to his colleagues in cabinet.

At stake is our standard of living, our ability to compete with other countries, our regional development and, importantly, our ability to get along with one another.

Here are a few more numbers to add to Arora’s headline.

Last year, permanent residents coming into Canada reached a historic high, and the same goes for temporary workers. In other words, Canada has a healthy flow of people moving here for the long term, along with a more haphazard intake of stopgap workers whose future is uncertain.

Employers are scrambling to fill more than 731,000 positions right now, but this is down from the one million job vacancies that dominated the news last fall. The vacancies reflect an underlying labour shortage in Canada as the population ages and retirements pile up. But layered on top of that is an expected shorter-term slowdown in hiring as the country’s employers grapple with rising interest rates and stagflation.

House prices in the GTA were up four per cent in April but down 7.8 per cent from a year ago. Similarly, the volume of sales was up nine per cent on the month, but down 5.2 per cent compared to a year ago. In other words, Toronto homes are really expensive and the market is very much in flux. It’s a confusing array of short-term mismatches and long-term demographic trends that require a nuanced approach, if the country’s economy is to set itself on a growth trajectory.

There’s no doubt that we need a growing labour force over the long term, and that immigration is the source of that growth. There’s also no doubt that business leaders routinely list labour supply as their top challenge, and they’re constantly reassessing the mix of skills that they need. There’s no doubt that the challenge of expensive housing repeatedly throws a wrench in the best-laid plans. And there’s also no doubt that Canada’s reputation as a magnet for the world’s best and brightest is under pressure because other countries are mirroring our approach and taking us on.

Canada has fallen behind on key issues that impact our reputation, including administrative backlogs, inadequate housing, and poor recognition of foreign credentials. In the 2022 Global Talent Competitiveness Index, Canada fell to 15th place — down from 9th place in 2015, with its lowest scores for immigrant retention. 

Helpfully, the federal government separates out the “acute” short-term dynamics from the “chronic” longer-term pressures and is actively talking to business about how to collaborate and make sure the mix of newcomers adds to our ability to build homes, fill job vacancies and set the stage for longer-term productivity.

There’s talk of fast-tracking the flow of newcomers attached to trusted employers and trusted institutions such as universities. There’s creative thinking around how large-scale employers can work together to recruit pools of workers overseas. The discussion with professional organizations to streamline credential recognition is vigorous. And there’s some promising use of technology to speed up approvals in a way that also helps with matching people with jobs and smooths out integration.

And of course, on top of the push for speed and the right mix of workers, Canada’s immigration policy is also about a humanitarian approach to refugees and family reunification, as always.

We’re in the midst of a promising collective brainstorming around how — a brainstorming that will become more complicated in the next months as government drives towards decisions and as the economy slows down.

Luckily, most of the public, the government and business are on the same wavelength in making immigration work well for the economy, and the country as a whole.

Let’s keep that consensus in mind as policymakers and employers figure out how.

Source: Believe it or not, Canada’s population will hit 40 million in June. It’s time we learned how to retain newcomers

Amos: Let’s fix this Citizenship Act obstacle to Canadians overseas: Liberal MP

Liberal MP Will Amos (Pontiac) picks up on the arguments of Lloyd Axworthy and Allan Rock regarding the first generation limit.

As usual, the arguments focus on the relatively few Canadian expatriates who make a major economic, social or political contribution, compared to the many who are just pursuing personal or professional objectives. Many of these maintain minimal connections to Canada, judging by consular, passport and income tax data that I analyzed with respect to expatriate voting (see my earlier piece What should expatriates’ voting rights be? – Policy Options).

Amos repeats the old canard regarding the exemption for Crown servants serving abroad, all of whom pay taxes, are in daily in not hourly contact with Canada and Canadians, and who are sent abroad to further government objectives. Quite different from expatriates living in such places as Hong Kong, LA or Dubai who are pursing their personal and professional interests.

Amos is unclear on what alternative he proposes. Does he really want Canadian citizenship to be able to be passed on indefinitely, without any meaningful restriction or is he proposing some other limit (e.g., second generation)?

I am militating against this little-known 2006 amendment to the Citizenship Act that limits Canadian citizenship to only the first-generation of children born to (or adopted by) Canadians who live outside Canada. This means that children of Canadian parents who are travelling, studying or working abroad become citizens of Canada at birth or at the time of adoption. Their children, however, are not entitled to Canadian citizenship if they are born outside Canada. Given that two to three million Canadians are living or working overseas at any time, this issue affects potentially thousands of Canadian children each year.

Lloyd Axworthy and Allan Rock, respectively Canada’s former foreign affairs minister and UN ambassador, have written persuasively that the 2006 amendment treats Canadians differently based on where they live, which fails to account for the benefits of Canadians’ engagement abroad and may deter Canadians from going overseas. Furthermore, they note that the amendment is not applied uniformly, as federal employees and military personnel who serve outside Canada are not subject to the same rules. The potential deterrent for Canadians to serve abroad with international agencies or NGOs is obvious.

There can be no justifying this legislative disparity on vague grounds of “simplicity and transparency.” Whatever the administrative benefits – if any – of this legislation, they are outweighed by our need to ensure that all Canadians have equal rights, including the right to pass along citizenship equally. A Canadian is a Canadian.

With the passage of Bill C-6, the government has already fulfilled a major election promise to remove two-tiered citizenship and reverse the detrimental and artificial barriers to citizenship that were put in place by the Harper Conservatives. Now it’s time to move even further.

I urge Minister of Immigration and Citizenship Ahmed Hussen to take action and table a bill in the House of Commons that will address this inequity. Let us implement the fixes quickly and support, not needlessly hinder, Canadians trying to make a positive global impact.

via Amos: Let’s fix this Citizenship Act obstacle to Canadians overseas | Ottawa Citizen

More immigrants coming to Atlantic Canada, but retention rates low: report

Ongoing retention rate problem – only about half remain:

More people are immigrating to Atlantic Canada than ever before, but many do not stay, a new report says.

The Atlantic Provinces Economic Council report released Thursday said a record 8,300 immigrants arrived in 2015, and yet more the following year.

The Halifax-based council said 11,600 immigrants came to Atlantic Canada in the first nine months of 2016, due in part to an influx of Syrian refugees.

“The total numbers have tripled since 2002,” David Chaundy, author of the report, said in a phone interview Thursday.

Chaundy, the council’s research director, attributes the increase to expanded use of provincial nominee programs, which allow provinces to nominate people who wish to immigrate to their region, up to a cap.

“That’s what has really driven the growth,” said Chaundy, adding that this year the region could see closer to 19,000 immigrants, due in part to a new three-year Atlantic immigration pilot project announced by Ottawa and the four provinces last year.

But Chaundy said retention rates for Atlantic Canada are low, and lengthy processing times are a barrier for greater use of immigration in the business community.

“The challenge is on the retention of these immigrants,” said Chaundy. “Although our immigration numbers are rising, we’re still losing close to half of them over a five-year period.”

Although express entry applications are being processed within six months, provincial nominee applications are taking 16 months to be processed by the federal government, he said.

“These can be a challenge for employers looking to bring in a worker fairly quickly,” said Chaundy. “We really need to make sure we have resources to process these applications in a timely manner.”

About 80 per cent of immigrants settle in the region’s major urban centres.

The report is based on information from Statistics Canada and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.

Source: More immigrants coming to Atlantic Canada, but retention rates low: report – Macleans.ca