1 day Ago By Joel Kotkin
For decades, Canada won a deserved reputation as a country with a sensible immigration policy that brought in large numbers of workers, entrepreneurs and innovators. Yet Canada’s current immigration policies do not align with the country’s economic reality or popular opinion. Almost three-quarters of Canadians, according to a Leger survey, think Canada’s system is “too generous.
” It’s not just Conservatives who feel that way: a majority of Liberals, and even roughly half of NDP voters, also are opposed to the current system. Three-quarters of Canadians also think immigrants are putting pressure on housing prices and having a negative impact on health care and schools. What went wrong? Like many other western countries, Canada has shifted away from an emphasis on people with useful skills to what boils down to something of an open border.
I was first made aware of this a decade ago by a former Montreal refugee board judge who was alarmed at the growing lack of scrutiny given to newcomers by gullible, politically motivated officials. Last year, Canada took in over a million migrants, including those in the country on temporary work and student visas, which is an enormous number for a country of around 40 million. It’s no surprise, then, that nearly two-thirds of Canadians lack confidence in the screening process.
Similar pushback is increasingly common throughout the West. In the United States, a serious debate over immigration has been stymied by Donald Trump’s repeated exaggerations. Yet overall, American attitudes about immigration have hardened .
According to Gallup , the percentage of Americans who wish to reduce immigration has soared to 55 per cent, from 35 per cent in 2012. Roughly 60 per cent of Americans and a majority of Latinos support mass deportations. Even diehard progressives like the ever malleable Kamala Harris, long an advocate of ultra-liberal immigration policies, has started talking about finishing Donald Trump’s border wall, something she previously denounced ferociously.
The shift on immigration is even clearer in Europe. In Germany , Chancellor Olaf Scholz is now embracing the idea of expelling some migrants , while concern over immigration is spurring the growth of right-wing populist parties, even in liberal countries like the Netherlands and France. Faced with mounting opposition, even the Trudeau government announced new restrictions on part-time low-wage workers.
This is proof that even the dullest political minds have some notion of what the public is thinking. Despite this, it would be foolhardy to block a steady, regulated flow of newcomers. A shortage of both workers and babies in many advanced countries will put enormous strain on pensions, social security and medical care for their aging populations.
Across the whole OECD , the dependence ratio of older people (i.e., those aged 65 and over as a proportion of those aged 20-64) will rise to 46 per cent in 2050, from the current 22 per cent.
At the same time, western economies need workers and the entrepreneurial ethic displayed by many immigrants. In the U.S.
, immigrants tend to start more businesses than other Americans. Much the same is true in Canada, where one in three business owners with paid staff are immigrants , which is well above their share of the population. Newcomers from India have been particularly notable for injecting much-needed stimulus in rural areas like northern Ontario.
In Canada and elsewhere, immigration policies often are embraced as a way to attract tech workers. Canada’s tech sector is more limited in scope and lower-paying than its American counterpart, which is highly dependent on imported labour. Foreign-born workers, overwhelmingly from Asia, make up a remarkable three-quarters of Silicon Valley’s tech workforce.
Canada last year recruited 30,000 foreign tech workers , who now constitute 37 per cent of the country’s scientific research and development workforce, well above their share in the population. Yet we may want to consider whether demand for foreign geeks and skilled professionals will remain infinitely buoyant. Artificial intelligence has already undercut the market for freelance work , while tech firms like Salesforce , Meta, Amazon, IBM , Google and Lyft are cutting back their workforces.
Similarly, at the lower end of the labour force, such things as robotic nannies and robots that can clean bathrooms and make hotel beds could undercut future demand. It is also critical to recognize that the unregulated flow of lower-skilled immigrants tends to lower the wages and job prospects of working-class people. To be sure, hope that the recent wave of immigrants would spark economic growth in Canada is increasingly specious.
Newcomers account for around 98 per cent of Canada’s population growth, but the new supply of immigrants has occurred while the country has suffered among the slowest economic growth rates in the developed world. Canada’s standard of living continues to fall while the country’s labour productivity continues to decline. The current approach to immigration also has consequences for society as a whole.
In France, newcomers and their offspring have created a permanent underclass , including a minority who embrace lawless nihilism and Islamist ideology. Even Sweden , the Valhalla of progressive fantasies, has been forced to call in the army to tamp down on both gang and Islamist violence in immigrant-dominated areas . Similar patterns can be seen in the U.
S. In big cities — such as Denver , New York and Chicago — the influx of largely undocumented border-crossers has led to higher costs for hotels, an increase in municipal spending and sparked resentment, particularly among working-class residents, over competition for social services, parks and hospital care. Roughly half of all Latinos, notes Pew , associate the current wave of immigration with increased crime in their communities.
If Canada and other countries want to accommodate immigrants, they have to do so in a way that address legitimate voter concerns and national interests. Simply put, when it comes to immigration, more is not always better. Countries in East Asia with low immigration have found ways to tap workers from developing countries on short-term visas .
Immigration policy should not be based on progressive virtue signalling or simply providing businesses with cheap labour. The focus has to be on a careful accounting of both national economic interests and political stability. Control of the border, and immigration policy, is the foundation for this.
Canada needs to return to the efficient, skills-oriented immigration approach that existed in decades past. Uncontrolled immigration is neither a salve for the economy nor necessarily good for social stability. Rather than being driven by a mindless embrace of diversity for diversity’s sake, Canadians, and others in the West, need to focus instead on what really works and attracting those immigrants who can help build a more prosperous future.
National Post Joel Kotkin is the RC Hobbs presidential fellow in urban futures at Chapman University and author, most recently, of “The Coming of Neo-Feudalism: A Warning to the Middle Class.”.
