8 Comments

Good column.

As an immigrant myself, clearly I favor immigration. But the rate of immigration has to be adjusted to the realities of the receiving country. Infrastructure (housing, schools, health care) is an important aspect. But I would argue that integration to the rest of society is also important. That is not the same as assimilation. But being able to communicate in a common language and feeling a sense of community, and eventually solidarity, with one's neighbors and other fellows, is a goal to strive for. Massive immigration tends to make that much harder.

Expand full comment

Nothing wrong with tying immigration levels to increased housing, health care, school, etc. support. That's obviously not been done - and *especially* problematic with international students in Ontario. Successive governments since the Harris era have starved the system for resources, and international students are used to keep the system afloat. In program I teach in, of 40 students, two are domestic. They're mostly great people, but that's a lot, and some clearly have only a passing interest in what they're studying, quickly disappearing to the job market (and in cases failing out because of it.)

I'm thankful my college takes their obligations to those students somewhat seriously (https://www.sheridancollege.ca/about/administration-governance/institutional-plans/brampton-charter-international-student-experience) but there's not nearly the resources to quickly meet their needs. Private diploma mill colleges are far less responsible.

Expand full comment

Have never seen the Term - Immigration invoked without Growing The Economy and/or GDP

this much as The Crusades always included The Infidels & thus was a Holy War

My perspective for many years has been - Can We Not Stabilize The Economy ? Not ‘doable’ ?

& by the way.. Which Economy ? Or might I ask Who’s Economy ?

We cannot ‘house the imported house builders’ seems problematic

Who else can we not ‘house’ or at least not ‘affordably’

Another question is where & why such ‘housing’ must be built - primarily ?

Why Toronto, among other large urban centre’s ?

And speaking of ‘Growing who’s Economy’ ?

We must Export Our Resources to Grow Other Countries Economies ?

One way or another.. Canada is & will be the Destination of Choice - long term

Canada has everything that fits The Criteria To Survive and/or Thrive

Freedom Water Space Arable Soil Natural Resources Opportunity

If we recognize DeSantis as the Malignant Narcissist that he is..

Pierre Poilievre cannot even find his shoelaces.. much less do them up

He’s ’accomplished’ sweet fuck all as an Adult Canadian

aside from enriching himself on the Taxpayer’s Dime

& likely via furtive Insider Trading

He DEFINES & Exemplifies Partisan Political Parasitism

&

Expand full comment
Jan 22Edited

I don’t think the analogy with Brexit and immigration from the newish EU members is correct. The cities and areas around major cities were against Brexit. Despite housing prices going up and up in these areas, despite strains on healthcare in the big cities, people saw more benefit in staying inside the EU. The pro-brexit areas were mostly rural or semi-rural. Areas where house prices had not exploded and life was pretty similar to the early 2000s. However, the people in these areas were upset that the cashiers in the supermarket would speak polish amongst each other or that their plumber spoke with a non British accent. The motivations of the pro Brexit camp were not driven by anxieties of the consequences of immigration, they were driven by emotional considerations of Britain not being British enough (or more precise, England not being English enough). I will leave it others to determine if this is racist or not.

In Canada, I fortunately do not see this sentiment. I think the recent announcement of capping the student visa per province is a good idea. Universities and colleges have been able to supplement shortfalls in funding by attracting foreign student en masse. If provinces want to fund higher education through foreign students, then they need to provide housing that goes with it. The alternative would be to fund educational institutions properly of course.

Now, I think the government should take it a step further and make also other types of immigration dependent on housing. Perhaps that will finally get voters to tell their provincial governments to be part of the housing solution.

Expand full comment

Good post. We have a massive post-Covid housing deficit: high demand (from both remote work and international student numbers) colliding with painfully slow municipal approvals. We need to both increase supply, and reduce population growth to a level where supply can keep up.

Alex Usher states pretty clearly that Doug Ford's government has been exploiting international students in huge numbers, at Ontario colleges especially. With the new federal cap, and the new rule that public-private partnerships are no longer eligible for post-graduate work permits, Ontario faces some hard choices. https://morehousing.ca/student-caps

With public-private partnerships, students attend a private college in the GTA which licenses its name and curriculum from the public college. It's a major source of revenue for public colleges. Kathleen Wynne had already decided to wind them down, but after the 2018 election, Doug Ford expanded them instead.

An interesting comment from Reddit, noting that international students paying high tuition fees to public-private partnerships are a way for the Ford government to subsidize the local economy in more remote areas. "Ford has general disdain for universities, but the colleges are the largest employer in a bunch of Conservative seats. There will be a lot of suffering in towns like Timmins, Sarnia, Belleville, and North Bay if their colleges have to shrink or close. What replaces international students in the Timmins economy if that multi-million revenue stream dries up?" https://old.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/19ffkn0/total_chaos_ontario_colleges_say_cap_on/kjkvddy/

Expand full comment

Your base assumption that a Poilievre government would de facto be racist and anti-immigration is frankly ridiculous. There is nothing tangible indicating this would be the case, if you have evidence to support this, please present it.

Expand full comment

I think it’s impressive how the CPC has managed to frame this as a completely Liberal policy while avoiding taking a firm position of their own.

The current TFW and immigration framework was created when Jason Kenney was Immigration Minister and Poilievre was in cabinet. Poilievre later even succeeded Kenney as Employment Minister.

As opposition leader, Poilievre certainly hasn’t committed to cutting immigration. The most recent statement I could find was Bloomberg on the 12th

“Poilievre did not say whether he would roll back Canada’s permanent resident target or curb the number of temporary newcomers, such as foreign students. In the past, he has declined to say that he would scale back immigration.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-12/trudeau-rival-pierre-poilievre-pledges-to-tie-immigration-levels-to-homebuilding

It mostly goes to show how poor the Liberal messaging and leadership on this issue has been. It would have taken very little effort to not only have been out in front on this, but to have positioned themselves as the party representing Canadian’s desire for visible action

Expand full comment

Poilievre cannot take a firm stance on this issue, because the moment he says "reduce", the Liberal spin machine starts up and he is loudly labelled racist (as per the author's assumptions in this article)

Expand full comment