Keller: Canada is about to lose more than 100,000 farming jobs. That’s great economic news

More on innovation, productivity and immigration:

….Back in 1891, it would have called for a large (and mostly poorly paid) work force. Progress since then has been remarkable, spurred by massive investments in labour-saving farming equipment and technology. The Conference Board study predicts more of the same.

All of which should be a reminder that labour shortages and rising wages have economic benefits. Yes, benefits. They are the mother of business innovation and investment, because they force businesses to chase ever greater labour productivity. Particularly when it comes to low-wage jobs, a tight labour market and upward pressure on pay should be the goal of government policy.

However, Canadian businesses in recent years persuaded Ottawa that, no matter the state of the economy or the level of unemployment, they can’t fill hundreds of thousands of low-wage jobs. But these alleged labour shortages are mostly just businesses facing the pressure to compete for workers by raising wages.

Those pressures have been alleviated by allowing businesses to recruit an effectively unlimited number of temporary foreign workers, at the lowest legal wage, or less. Absent that low-wage release valve, businesses would have to innovate and invest more in new technologies to use less labour, and get more out of each hour of (increasingly expensive) labour.

That’s how we raise productivity. That’s how we grow the economy….

Source: Canada is about to lose more than 100,000 farming jobs. That’s great economic news

Keller: What Liberals and Conservatives can learn from the French and British elections

Keller continues his legitimate critique:

…Housing unaffordability is partly the result of an unprecedented and unplanned jump in non-permanent immigration, far above anything Canada has ever seen, and far above Liberal immigration plans. It was a case of severe government incompetence, and it’s still unclear to what extent the Trudeau administration is actually addressing the mess, as opposed to crafting a comms strategy to fuzzy it. Statistics Canada’s latest estimate of the non-permanent population is 2.8 million, up from less than two million a year ago.

Closing the gap between housing supply and housing demand, by greatly increasing housing supply, will take a long time. It calls for hundreds of thousands more construction workers and hundreds of billions more dollars. It risks bringing other economic distortions. In contrast, closing the gap by reducing population growth can be done quickly.

The Liberals may or may not need a new leader. They won’t win on fear. They can’t win by pitching more of the same. They definitely need a better record to run on.

Source: What Liberals and Conservatives can learn from the French and British elections

Keller: The latest unintended consequence of Liberal immigration policy

The latest from Keller, raising legitimate fears on the possible impact on public support for immigration. No win for the government as any measures they take will be opposed by activists on the left and conservatives on the right:

….The Liberals are under pressure from left-wing groups to offer many of them citizenship. But doing so would set a precedent, and open a Pandora’s Box of consequences.

It would encourage aspiring immigrants who do not qualify for the limited number of permanent residency spots to simply ignore the expiry of their work or student visas and remain in the country, pending amnesty. Ditto failed refugee claimants. Ditto people who overstay a tourist visa.

It would reinforce the growing impression, which student and worker recruiters around the world are selling, that crossing the Canadian border, by whatever means, is a smooth road to Canadian citizenship.

But for the Trudeau government, the most compelling reason to tread carefully in this area may be political. Canadian citizenship as a reward for flouting immigration law is going to tick off a lot of Canadians. I suspect the most hardboiled and unapologetic will be those people who queued up, followed the rules and entered during daylight hours: immigrants.

Source: The latest unintended consequence of Liberal immigration policy

Keller: The campus occupations aren’t protected by free speech, because they aren’t speech

Of note:

…Imagine if a Christian campus group took over King’s College Circle, and said it would remain until the university stopped funding anything to do with abortion. Should they be removed? Why? If your answer is they have to go because their opinions are wrong, you’re standing free speech on its head. This is Canada, not the People’s Republic of China.

The legal problem with an occupation, left or right, pro-Palestinian or anti-vaccine, isn’t what its participants are saying. It’s what they’re doing – taking over a space and holding it hostage.

What does that have to do with free speech? Nothing.

Source: The campus occupations aren’t protected by free speech, because they aren’t speech

Keller: The Trudeau government’s promise of 3.87 million new homes is next to impossible

I and others have been noting that time needed to increase housing means further revisions to the number of immigrants, temporary and permanent, is needed:

…An extraordinarily high share of our national wealth is already invested in housing rather than in productive business assets. In 2022, 37.9 per cent of Canada’s gross fixed capital formation – investment in assets – was tied up in dwellings. That’s the highest level in the OECD.

And the Trudeau government’s unreachable building target may aim too low. To achieve affordability solely through more housing, CMHC last year said the number of homes needed could be almost six million. CIBC economist Benjamin Tal pegs the shortfall at closer to seven million.

The logical conclusion is that we can’t build our way to affordability, at least not any time soon. Ottawa has to lean harder on the demand side of the equation. That means significantly reversing the unprecedented spike in the number of temporary residents. Population growth has to come down – way down.

Source: The Trudeau government’s promise of 3.87 million new homes is next to impossible

Keller: Is the Trudeau government overselling how much housing it can build? Yes

Indeed, particularly in the next few years if not more. Likely will not help their electoral prospects given time required to build new housing:

…When CIBC economist Benjamin Tal updated the CMHC estimate earlier this year, to account for recent unprecedented population growth because of immigration, he pegged the shortfall at closer to seven million homes.

If that’s true, then getting to housing affordability doesn’t just mean a doubling of the pace of home building. It would take a quadrupling.

The Trudeau government’s sudden burst of furious housing announcements – plus the suggestion that the resistance of some provinces is all that stands between Canada and sweet affordability – may deliver political dividends in the run-up to a 2025 election.

However, the overnight erection of a glittering skyline of new housing policies comes after the government spent years ignoring the growing stresses caused by its immigration choices. That’s partly what got us here.

The Liberals are now saying a lot of the right things on both housing and immigration. It’s a start. But to quote a handwritten note from the PM’s chief of staff, Katie Telford, which was entered into evidence last week at the foreign interference inquiry: “Bragging is not doing.”

Source: Is the Trudeau government overselling how much housing it can build? Yes

Urback: According to Justin Trudeau, Justin Trudeau is fear-mongering on immigration,

Keller: The Trudeau government’s housing promises can’t fix a crisis of its own making

Good use of pointed satire to highlight the hypocrisy or wilful (?) blindness:

Someone, somewhere, appears to have taken a blowtorch to Canada’s immigration system. It’s a mess. We have too many people, and not enough homes, not enough transit, not enough health care infrastructure. International students are lining up at food banks and homeless shelters. Canadians’ attitudes on immigration are becoming more negative.

Who set fire to our once-enviable immigration system? Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is on a mission to find out. Just as soon as he gets all of this soot out of his hair.

Speaking at a press conference Tuesday, Mr. Trudeau laid out the facts. “Over the past few years we’ve seen a massive spike in temporary immigration … that has grown at a rate far beyond what Canada has been able to absorb,” he said. He gave an example: in 2017, two per cent of Canada’s population was made up of temporary immigrants; today, it’s 7.5 per cent. “That’s something we need to get back under control,” he said, adding that temporary immigration has “caused so much pressure in our communities.”

A few years ago, someone named Justin Trudeau would have accused Mr. Trudeau of fear-mongering for making these sorts of remarks about immigration. In fact, he saidexactly that when, for example, Conservative MP Steven Blaney asked about the massive backlog in immigration applications amid a wave of asylum seekers in 2018. “It is completely irresponsible of the Conservatives to arouse fears and concerns about our immigration system and refugees,” Mr. Trudeau said at the time.

“The reason for the delays is that the Harper Conservatives spent 10 years cutting our immigration services and getting rid of the employees who process applications,” he continued. “They did not manage our immigration system responsibly.”…

Source: Opinion: According to Justin Trudeau, Justin Trudeau is fear-mongering on immigration

Less clever, but equally pointed:

 

The only way to bring housing supply and demand back into a more equitable balance, at least in the next few years, is to lower demand. And the only way to do that is for the Trudeau government to retrace its hasty steps on temporary foreign residents. That is what the government has promised. That is what it has to do.

Source: The Trudeau government’s housing promises can’t fix a crisis of its own making

My reflections on this change of direction by the PM, and the related push on housing, is that it feels like fin de régime flailing around and desperation.

The change brings to mind, one of my favourite scenes from one of my favourite movies, Casablanca:

  • Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds? [Vote me out?]
  • Captain Renault: I’m shocked! Shocked to find that gambling is going on in here. [immigration has grown too fast]
  • [a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]
  • Croupier: Your winnings, sir. [poll numbers]
  • Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much. [someone, somewhere else, broke immigration]
  • [aloud]
  • Captain Renault: Everybody out at once….

 

 

Keller: The Liberals broke the immigration system at high speed. They’re repairing it by baby steps

Hard not to agree:

…In all of this, the Trudeau government is caught in a bind of its own making. It found, to its evident delight, that sharply ramping up the number of people arriving on notionally temporary permits was easy. To govern is to choose, but the government discovered that the less choosing it did – and the more rubber-stamping of visas it encouraged – the easier governing appeared to be.

It is now discovering that unwinding things, even a little, is more difficult. It will be lobbied heavily to eviscerate its modest promises, and to quietly reverse this course reversal.

That is also where Liberal predilections reside. They didn’t just break the immigration system. They broke it with great enthusiasm. And their repair job is still mostly blueprints, drawn up haltingly and under the duress of public opinion.

Compared with Europe and the United States, Canada has long had a wider immigration door, but also far more control – an aspect of the “order” in peace, order and good government – over who enters. That is what underpinned public support for immigration.

And controlling the door was important because once somebody gets into Canada, whether as a temporary worker, student or even tourist, it isn’t easy to get them to leave. Not if they don’t want to. Ottawa decides who gets in but has much less control over, or information about, how many people whose visas have expired, and who are no longer legally allowed to reside in Canada, nevertheless remain.

In the months and years to come, that is likely to be the final aftershock of Liberal immigration policy.

Restoring sense and sanity to the system won’t be easy. Breaking is easier than repairing.

Source: The Liberals broke the immigration system at high speed. They’re repairing it by baby steps

Keller: Economically speaking, we’re all living in Brian Mulroney’s Canada [immigration]

Fair observation. Harper conservatives also maintained levels during 2008 financial crisis. Unclear whether Poilievre will maintain current plan of 500,000 new Permanent Residents by 2015 or not, not to mention curbing the steep rise in temporary workers and international students:

…There’s one more legacy of the Mulroney era that never gets talked about: immigration.

Until the early 1960s, immigration to this country was largely restricted to Europeans and Americans. Then, under John Diefenbaker’s Progressive Conservatives, Canada for the first time opened itself to the world, adopting a race-neutral immigration policy.

A quarter-century later, Mr. Mulroney’s PCs made a second big change to immigration, by moving to permanently increase annual immigration levels, regardless of economic conditions. Until then, Canada’s quotas had fluctuated year-to-year. In the boom times of 1967, for example, a Liberal government admitted 223,000 new Canadians. But numbers were sharply reduced under Pierre Trudeau, reaching a low point of just 84,000 arrivals in 1985.

The Mulroney government decided to not only steeply raise the annual targets, but to keep them there. In 1993, Canada accepted just shy of 257,000 immigrants.

The Chrétien Liberals would scale back those numbers, but only slightly. For most of the Chrétien era, the number of immigrants remained north of 200,000 a year, and at around 0.7 per cent of the population. That continued through the Harper era.

The Mulroney decision, paired with the Diefenbaker decision, slowly changed this place. The Canada of a couple of generations ago often talked about itself as the product of two founding peoples, British and French. Such phrasing now sounds anachronistic, and it is. But in the early 1980s, the visible minority population was less than 5 per cent of the national population.

Today, that figure is closer to 30 per cent. The mayors of Toronto, Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary are all visible minorities, three of them are immigrants – and nobody cares. That too is part of the Mulroney legacy.

source: Economically speaking, we’re all living in Brian Mulroney’s Canada

Keller: The Trudeau government needs more than words to restore the immigration consensus

Keller continues his well founded critique of immigration policies and highlights, as others have done, the mismatch between immigration and housing (I would add healthcare and infrastructure) timelines and the need to downsize temporary migration and other measures:

… Ending the severe mismatch between housing demand and supply, in this decade rather than the next (or the one after that), means addressing the cause of the spike in demand. It means significantly downsizing the temporary foreign worker program, downsizing and smartening up the student visa program, and things like reintroducing visa requirements for Mexican tourists, which the Trudeau government removed in 2015, and which has led to tens of thousands of refugee claimants arriving at Canadian airports.

Canada had an immigration consensus from the 1960s to 2015. The Trudeau government broke it. Mr. Miller can restore it. But des belles paroles won’t be enough.

Source: The Trudeau government needs more than words to restore the immigration consensus