Gloomier future seen for Canadian immigration
‘National conversation’ urged in view of challenges identified in internal review
With 35 per cent of male newcomers returning home and a growing middle class in developing countries less inclined to migrate, an internal government review is calling the future of Canadian immigration into question.
The report by Immigration Refugees and Citizenship Canada also points to the challenge of reconfiguring an immigrant-selection system in a rapidly changing labour market where a growing number of jobs are temporary and there’s “increasing mismatch” of available skills and the skills in demand.
“What changes, if any, does Canada want to make to its current ‘managed migration,’ ” asked the 23-page study, titled “Medium-Term Policy: Balanced Immigration” and stamped “for internal discussion only.” “To what extent is the current overall immigration level appropriate and/or necessary?”
With major changes made in the last decade under the former Conservative government, legal and immigration experts are calling on Immigration Minister John McCallum to have a “national conversation” on the future of Canadian immigration.
“Ottawa must take a step back to do a review of the whole immigration program and reach a national consensus in moving our country for- ward as a nation-building exercise rather than as an economic imperative,” said Debbie Douglas of the Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants.
The new government has already announced reviews of certain immigration programs involving temporary foreign workers and the Express Entry processing system, but critics say such reviews must be done in a holistic manner rather than a piecemeal fashion.
“This is the most thoughtful brief (on Canada immigration) I’ve seen in 10 years,” said Queen’s University immigration law professor Sharry Aiken. “It’s asking all the right questions.”
The report points to the greater emphasis the former Tory government put on selecting economic immigrants based on in-demand occupations despite the rise of a so-called “project economy” marked by shorter term contract- or project-driven employment.
“This environment makes it a significant challenge to target occupations and industries that are priorities for addressing through immigration,” it said.
While the report forecast does mean potentially lower immigration to Canada in the longer term, University of Toronto professor Jeffrey Reitz said global migration is still driven by “inequality” from poor to rich countries.
Although Ottawa introduced the Express Entry system in 2015 to let employers pick prospective immigrants to ensure newcomers are quickly employed, Reitz said the uptake of candidates outside the country has been small. He also agrees with the report’s questioning of the current strict differentiation between “economic” and “social” immigrants.
Family-class immigration can keep potentially productive relatives here, said Reitz, the director of ethnic, immigration and pluralism studies at U of T. “When you lose your job and you have no family, you move. A support group gives people a reason to stay.”
The report suggests that given “the somewhat artificial distinction between social and economic immigration, there may be grounds for giving greater weight to ‘non-economic’ criteria and on criteria related to the success of subsequent generations.”
Ryerson University professor John Shields, whose research focuses on labour markets and immigrants, said all immigrants “including the refugee class contribute to the society economically. They pay dividends economically in five, ten years as integration is a long-term process that can take a lifetime.”
McCallum’s office declined to comment on the study but said he is committed to improving family reunification, humanitarian efforts, citizenship reforms and creating economic opportunities through immigration.