Century Initiative: Strategic Immigration Levels Planning for Canada’s Short and Long-Term Future

Summary of lessons and recomendations from the Century Initiative consultations on immigration planning. I was part of those consulted. Further reflection of CI’s efforts to distance itself from its earlier overly simplistic approach to immigration. My quick comments in italics.

As for the IRPA recommended changes, unclear whether the government is planning to make any amendments to IRPA given other priorities although the CIMM immigration study may suggest otherwise:

Key Lessons for Immigration Levels Planning

1. Misinformation and disinformation pose growing risks to the integrity of immigration levels planning. True, but arguably also applied to a number of pro-immigration advocates.
2. Significant investments are needed in Canada’s data ecosystem to provide the evidence needed for effective immigration levels planning. While IRCC and StatsCan generate a wealth of data, there still remain significant gaps, particularly with respect to integrating different data sets.
3. Immigration levels planning requires deeper analysis at the local and regional level. Challenge is balancing local and regional with national levels, recognizing mobility rights mean that immigrants may relocate to pursue opportunities.
4. Immigration levels planning requires longer time horizons to avoid sudden system shocks. In principle yes, but the famous line, “in the long run, you’re dead.”
5. Immigration levels planning must combine quantitative and qualitative analysis to determine what types of immigrants are needed to meet Canada’s economic, demographic, and social objectives and how to improve outcomes for recent arrivals. Challenge is in the doing.
6. Immigration levels planning must reflect Canada’s short and long-term absorptive capacity and social and economic objectives, rather than responding reactively to changing national and global dynamics. Good reference to absorptive capacity but there will always be political pressures to be reactive.

Recommendations

1. Amend s. 94(2)(b) of IRPA to require the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship to include the total number of annual arrivals in the immigration levels plan (permanent and temporary). Long overdue.
2. Amend s. 3 of IRPA to explicitly recognize permanent residence and citizenship pathways as core objectives of Canada’s immigration system and require that immigration levels planning account for expected transitions from temporary to permanent status. Also overdue. Always struck me as odd no reference to citizenship in the plan.
3. Amend s. 94(2) of IRPA to require the Government of Canada to consider Canada’s absorptive capacity in the immigration levels planning process. Also overdue.
4. Amend IRPA to introduce accountability and reporting mechanisms to the immigration levels planning process. Would be nice! Particularly with respect to outcomes, not just outputs.
5. Develop a core set of indicators to inform immigration levels planning across short-, medium-, and long-term horizons, and provide transparent public information on how these indicators are used in future immigration levels plans. To a certain extent, the core CRS human capital criteria provides the basis for the indicators and the CRS and any indicators should be coherent and mutually reinforcing.
6. Strengthen collaboration with other orders of government by more transparently reflecting regional priorities and realities within the national immigration levels planning process. Arguably, regular fed-prov consultation provide for this.
7. Establish a formal long-term immigration planning framework that defines Canada’s demographic, economic, and nation-building objectives and explicitly guides future immigration levels plans. Again, in the long run we’re dead.
8. Clarify and harmonize the Government of Canada’s language regarding immigration levels and targets. Always an area for improvement.
9. Strengthen research and data infrastructure on two-step migration to better inform immigration levels planning. Agree.
10. Increase the time horizon of immigration levels plans beyond 3 years, recognizing that longer-term projections are a forecast and subject to adjustment over time. In theory, yes, in practice not sure how meaningful given electoral cycles and events.
11. Make strategic investments in the data ecosystem on immigration-related issues to better inform policy and planning. Always in favour of better data and analysis.
12. Increase the depth, rather than breadth, of the Government of Canada’s immigration levels planning consultation process. Makes sense.

Source: Strategic Immigration Levels Planning for Canada’s Short and Long-Term Future