Immigration in Canada
Diversity.
Multiculturalism.
Equal opportunity for all.
These are just some of the words and phrases that have become synonymous with Canada in the global community, and are standards that Canada prides itself on establishing and upholding. According to a 2010 Focus Canada survey, more than 80 percent of all respondents believed that multiculturalism is an important Canadian national symbol. Therefore, it is unsurprising that Canadians strongly support immigration, despite many criticisms of Canada’s immigration policies over the years. Over time, Canada has become an attractive destination for immigrants worldwide who are looking for a host country with abundant opportunities and cultural acceptance.
Opposing Views
Conversely, certain individuals such as environmentalist David Suzuki believe that immigration is actually detrimental to Canada. In an interview with L’Express, Suzuki claimed that “Canada is full”, believing that immigration will exacerbate its shortage of space. He further criticized the country’s immigration policies, declaring that “we pillage the countries of the south by depriving them of their future professionals and we want to increase our population to help our economy grow. It’s crazy!”
Unsurprisingly, his controversial comments were met with disagreement. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney was one of the more vocal opponents, asserting that Suzuki’s comments were “toxic and irresponsible”. Close examination of Suzuki’s main arguments further reveal their inaccuracies and shortsightedness.
Examining Suzuki’s Arguments
Point #1: Reducing immigration will solve the space shortage crisis
Suzuki’s suggestion of reducing immigration to preserve space is surprisingly short-sighted. Space shortage isn’t just a Canadian issue, but a global concern. Therefore, controlling Canada’s population through reduced immigration will not prevent the worldwide population from multiplying. Canada may temporarily avoid the excessive pollution and resource shortage associated with overpopulation, but environmental issues caused by the rest of the world will eventually impact Canada, making any reductions in immigration ultimately pointless.
Furthermore, reducing immigration could also impede an opportunity to slow down worldwide population growth. Studies have shown that people who immigrate are likely to adopt the fertility rates of their host country within a few generations. Since the fertility rates of Canada’s top immigrant-source countries are much higher than that of Canada, families from developing countries could actually contribute less to global population growth if they immigrate.
Point #2: Immigration harms developing nations by diverting their best talent
Every year, highly-intelligent people leave their own country to look for better opportunities elsewhere in a phenomenon named the “brain drain”. Suzuki claims that Canada’s attractive immigration policies encourage skilled workers from developing countries to emigrate, thus depriving those nations of much-needed intellectuals. However, many sources such as Malaysian newspaper The Star claim that there are more than enough trained workers in developing countries to compensate for immigration, making the actual disadvantage of “brain drain” difficult to quantify. Immigration for Federal Skilled Workers, likely the group that Suzuki is referring to, has an annual limit of 25,000 applications as of May 1, 2014. Since the combined population of Canada’s top three immigrant-source countries (China, India, and the Philippines) is well over two billion, it is highly unlikely that 25,000 skilled workers leaving for Canada would deprive those countries of future workers.
Furthermore, Suzuki is heavily underestimating the benefits that these immigrant workers actually return to their original countries. Many skilled immigrants actually send the majority of their earnings back home. For example, remittances from immigrant Filipino workers accounted for 9.8% of the Philippines’ entire GDP in 2012 according to The World Bank. The country’s economy would suffer immensely if Canada decided to establish more rigid immigration policies.
Additionally, Suzuki failed to consider that many of these skilled immigrants are headed to Canada in search of better lives. There may be no opportunities for these individuals to develop and become leaders in their home countries due to their social situations. Why should they be denied the opportunity to forge their own destinies elsewhere?
Point #3: Canada attracts immigrants for the sole purpose of increasing economic growth
Attracting immigrants to enhance economic growth is one of the reasons why immigration is important, but Suzuki is mistaken about why immigration is so critical for the future prosperity of Canada.
The sobering fact is that the current Canadian fertility rate makes social services such as Medicare unsustainable. These social services were established in a time when the national fertility rate was very high. They relied on the prediction that there would be a large number of taxpayers to fund Medicare and other services for a comparatively small aging population. However, after the widespread acceptance of contraception and the legalization of abortion, Canada’s fertility rate declined dramatically to 1.61 children per woman in the most recent census of 2011. This rate is much lower than the replacement fertility rate of 2.1, meaning that the tax-paying population of Canada would actually be decreasing without the influx of immigrants.
Therefore, immigrants play an essential role in Canadian society by helping to increase the total number of taxpayers that fund social services. Contrastingly, Suzuki’s immigration-reduction policies would further decrease the number of tax payers and increase the comparative size of the aging population, making services such as Medicare even more unsustainable. As the national birthrate declines and the aging population rises, Canada will continue to depend on immigration to maintain the tax-paying population and economic growth required to provide social services.
Conclusion
Over the years, immigration and multiculturalism have become pillars of Canada’s global identity. Despite David Suzuki’s condemnation of Canada’s supportive immigration policies, the fact remains that Canada needs foreign workers to help sustain its most-valued social services and its economic growth. Furthermore, reducing immigration will not resolve the global space shortage as Suzuki claims, and will actually hurt countries that depend on remittances. Overall, Canada needs immigration just as much as immigrants need an accepting destination full of opportunities such as Canada. This mutualistic relationship reveals that immigration is key to Canada’s current and future prosperity.
Visit www.myvisasource.com for information about a leading law firm dedicated to helping people all over the world obtain visas in Canada and the United States.
