Close Reading

As a Canada who speaks both French and English and who follows politics quite closely, I have to say that the headline and some of the reporting here is quite misleading. A reduction in immigration has broad support across Canada. I wouldn't say that notion is dividing the country in any significant way. You do have certain industry groups that disagree, but among the population these reductions have broad support. This is a historic change in public opinion in Canada, but it has been driven by the unprecedented increase in immigration under the last term of the Trudeau government. To put this in context, non-permanent residents in Canada numbered around 1.5 million on Q3 2023, but by Q3 2025, that number sat a just over 3 million. The previous government increased immigration targets by 3 or 4 times over what they had been for years, which caused a number of economic issues. Essentially, the volume was simply too high for the economy and society to support. This was unfair to both Canadians and new comers, many of which could not find employment or afford a decent place to live. The changes being suggested are largely bringing Canada back to what the targets were for over a decade before, though a bit lower to account for the sudden surge. Canada remains one of the most pro-immigration countries in the world. However, and this is where I think DW's reporting is misleading, there is a distinction to be made between policies at the federal level and policies at the provincial level. Immigration, per our constitution, is a federal matter, however, Quebec in particular is distinct from other provinces. I don't mean only culturally and linguistically, but also in the powers that have been devolved to it by the federal government. On the question of immigration, Quebec has more powers and more ability to set its immigration targets and programs than any of the other 9 provinces. The particular program discussed here, the Quebec Experience Program (PEQ), is a particular immigration stream that only existed in Quebec. So what is happening with that program cannot be labeled as a whole-of-Canada thing. Where the changes to the PEQ are controversial, unlike the general changes at the federal level, is that people who immigrated under that specific program were promised certain things. There was a multi-year time line to Permanent Residency and then Citizenship. Many of those people have been in Quebec for 5-8 years already. However, the changes made to the program were done in such a way where people who many years into the program, had gotten an education, started a career, had children, ect. are now being told they can't continue and must leave Canada. There are even stories of people who married Canadians, now have children, and the one parent who was under this program now faces the possibility of having to leave Canada and be separated from their family. All through no fault of their own. That is what many people see as unfair, and I agree, however limiting future applications under the program, to bring in less people, that is not controversial. Canada has no responsibility to bring in people who are not already in Canada, but Canada does have some responsibility towards people who uprooted their lives to move to Canada and built new lives here based on promises and representations made to them by the Canadian and Quebecois governments. We should no simply kick those people out of the country.

BASED QUEBEC 🎉

So Quebec is reducing it's intake numbers and based on what as it's called good governance so was letting in folks with hopes bad governance lol ??

Before Trudeau's liberal government, Canada's permanent resident program was based on factors such as being fluent in English or French (in Quebec), passing standard exams in one's own country, being educated (Bachelor's or higher), work experience, family, age, and knowledge of Canada's general culture. If you had all the points, you would be selected. It took about three years, and while waiting, you could not apply for any visa to enter Canada. The security check was part of the process, and the Canadian government asked applicants to enter the country by bringing money (Like one year's salary). This system was a perfect plan, and many Western countries wanted to copy that (As I heard on many French and American radios before), but the liberals broke the system! And I still don't know why!

There is a clear lie in that video. Nobody is in Limbo. Mind you there is normal Federal Express entry program still happening. Meaning, that if you get selected through that program, you can immigrate to any province of your choice - including Quebec. You can also still get bonus points for Canadian education (Quebec education does count) and Canadian work experience (if it qualifies). So the only thing that happened was, that one provincial nomination program was ended, that is all that happened. The practical problem is, that provincial nomination does give so many points, that it is a guarantee of normal express entry pull as long as you just meet criteria to enter Express entry. So provincial nominations are suitable for people that might be otherwise struggling with points (older age, less language perfection, les bonus points from education or work experience). For a disclaimer, provincial programs are based on a specific province needs and just because one was opened when you planned to go and study or work in Canada, it does not mean it will be like that forever. If an agent made you such promise, then he was misleading you. Again for those people demonstrating, nothing has changed for them other than one future option was gone. They still have their student or work permit until it expires. They also can apply into Express entry program as normal. On a side note for Canadian trying to cheer about this, be aware, such change can also mean that economy projection for next few years is not the best. so take it a warning sign. Or if we are lucky, it was found that this program was not bringing intended type of skilled worker or was heavily abused.

Question 13 is wrong based on the book, Quebec is not a bilingual city, and I can't find that answer on page 47, and the right answer is New Brunswick.

There are now quite a few news stories in Canada of immigrants leaving the country - some back home and others to the USA and other places. Many just get a Canadian passport and then leave. There are public health care and pensions, so it can be an asset and also a convenient travel document to have. A lot of Canadian university graduates have a very hard time finding work in their fields and a lot of them look to the US for a better future. Both immigration and unemployment in Canada are much higher that in the US - so more people are chasing fewer jobs that often pay less and are taxed more than in the USA. Opportunities are generally a lot fewer in Canada than the US, and the business environment is not as favourable, and taxes significantly higher. You would be getting some of the entrepreneurs from Canada moving to the US for more favourable conditions as well to launch a business and also now a lot more rich investor types, so-called high net worth individuals wanting to relocate, because they just raised the capital gains tax in Canada. Capital gains is also triggered on inheritance in Canada with a deemed sale of property and assets, so rich people would prefer the American system and want to be residents there for tax purposes and have their assets grow in value in the US compared to Canada. There are very large numbers of foreign students and other categories of immigrants which may have as their goal going to the US after getting a temporary visa to Canada which is easy to get - maybe something like half a million to a million people in those categories depending on the year, plus around another half million regular immigrants and refugees now. The Trudeau administration has increased immigration to record numbers. It has been steadily going up over the years for several decades since 1990. Because of family re-unification it can have a snowball effect and could significantly exceed 1 million per year. A lot of the sending countries have much larger populations than Canada, so there are a lot more that can be potentially sent to Canada in the future. About 1/4 of the population of Canada has been added in the past few decades. Add to that visitors and temporary visas - that is a lot of people potentially moving to the US. Before the 1990s Canadians visiting the US were not required to have a passport and a drivers' license or birth certificate was adequate. Now a passport is required. It is impossible to effectively control the long Canada-US border, so there could be some unified policies in that area agreed on between Canada and the USA on immigration and refugees. Canada currently has a very open immigration policy with the government actively seeking out more immigration beyond its current processing capacity and trying to take rejected immigrants from other countries. The Canadian government, especially in recent years under Trudeau is immigration hungry. It might be the only country in the world doing that. What some news reports are now saying is that some immigrants are actually leaving, since they find it so difficult in Canada and some are worse off than they were in the countries they came from, which were considered to be less developed than Canada. \nWashington currently has more immigration controls and administrative competencies than Ottawa, so US pressure and influence is a faster way to get reforms into the system than waiting for local politicians to do anything, which is unlikely. Canada is seen by some as a backdoor into the US. Biden's immigration policies could be seen as very conservative in Canada compared to Trudeau's. It used to be in the news about how refugees were trying to get to Canada and walking across the border in Quebec and out west from the US earlier, but now there are more news stories of immigrants leaving Canada trying to go the other way, probably due to high costs and unemployment because the government took in more people than it could absorb into the economy. They have the idea that immigration drives GDP growth so that they can borrow and spend more, expand the civil service, etc. without making any cutbacks or efficiencies, supposedly without the Debt to GDP ratio getting worse, just by bringing in more people as if that would drive the economy. A lot depends on who you bring in as well. Are they going to go on welfare, are they going to increase crime, will they somehow contribute to society, are they a net tax benefit or cost in terms of government services, will they invest money, will they start a business and create jobs for others ? Those issues do not factor into government decision making in Canada for the most part. Ontario Premier Doug Ford did say there were too many foreign students. It is bad planning not to consider those factors since there are other costs that grow with those policies as well, and infrastructure has to be expanded. I think that the real immigration numbers to Canada are not transparent or made public, nor are the costs involved, if anyone even knows what they are. Nor is the impact on crime. You can guess from what the reports are in other countries. The Fraser Institute has made some estimates on the net costs of immigration to the government budget a few years ago, which were very high and which by now have increased - the cost equivalent of several new aircraft carriers each year. They are big numbers which are not publicized, but it amounts to the fact that immigration is subsidized by the taxpayers in Canada and it is not paying for our pensions as an ageing society as has been claimed. There is less money for education, health care and pensions per person, and those social benefits will probably have to be reduced over time. Social programs can only be delivered to the extent that the government has money. The bigger social system a county has, the more such immigration policies are going to cost. Trudeau has been expanding various social programs as well, so higher taxes and debt are likely with that approach. Then more productive people and companies will want to leave Canada and go to the US. Probably the government does not know what the actual numbers and costs are and doesn't actively keep track of that information beyond what is required. Probably nobody knows what the true immigration figures and their associated costs are in Canada, and hardly anyone has even studied those issues. If they can just walk across the US border and get papers so easily making an asylum claim, it is not surprising, since it would take them longer to get a regular visa and work permit if they did it legally. You could call that a loophole in the US immigration system which is being exploited. The US is better governed in general and has a better system in many ways, but I am not sure if it is the same on that. People have arrived on boats and have not been sent back. At least in the US you have more open information about those issues. In Canada it is hard to find out anything about it. Deportations from Canada are very few. \nOn other issues in Canada when voting in federal elections you have to show a government issued photo ID like a drivers' license or passport to vote and bring a card that was mailed out to eligible voters that gets updated addresses when a person files their taxes. I have never heard of mail-in ballots in Canada, but there are remote areas of the country in the far north who may have special system for voting. It is easier to get a Canadian citizenship than US and many more citizenships are handed out in Canada each year in proportion to the population than in the US. Canadian might be one of the easiest citizenships to get in the world. The official line now is that it is a country of immigrants. Based on current trends, will very little opposition to it in the parliament and most MPs supporting it, future immigration to Canada could increase to several million per year because of the rapid growth of population in the world, and the momentum already growing of immigration to Canada, so it may change significantly in the future. Historically around the world you can see many examples that country names, borders, flags and languages change over time with population changes, so it might not be called Canada anymore in 50-100 years. For example, Bulgaria used to be called Thrace which had been a powerful kingdom in antiquity and had a different language which is barely known about anymore. Over the past 2,000 years it has gone through a number of changes and had various regimes governing it, has been independent and also part of several different empires. Canada has only been a country for a short time in comparison and has been been going through significant changes. Trudeau has said that Canada is a post-national country. Canada is also going through a period of critical self-examination and deconstruction-revisionism. A lot of what had been viewed as positive from its history now is seen more critically, with re-naming and removing historical figures now seen as negative.\nDiscussing immigration policy critically is considered by many to be taboo in Canada, unless a person is saying good things about it in general. You can hear people say that the government isn't processing enough people, for example, but not often that there are too many or that it costs a lot of money. The trend of migration from Canada to the US would only increase much more in the future as it is going currently, and its role as a stepping stone to migration to the US could increase. The way this would be seen by many in Canada is that they are losing valuable people to the USA whom they consider assets, since a lot of officials have been trying to bring in more people into the country, but not everyone wants to stay in Canada nowadays because of a lack of jobs and opportunities. Canada is quite laissez-faire about migration, with Toronto being a sanctuary city as well.

I noticed one glaring error in your video. Shaw sold off it's mobile phone division (Freedom) to Videotron, which is a Quebec based company. The merger would not have been permitted if this did not happen over issues of the largest mobile cell phone company owning the 4th largest. The competition bureau actually sued rogers and shaw to prevent their merger, but a court sided with the companies citing the sale of Freedom as one of the reasons why.

I honestly think he and his ilk have deliberately set out to destroy Canada, after all the liberal party is a Quebec based party so, if you can’t win a sovereignty vote just destroy the country your part of?! They are doing a bangup fantastic job of it!

damn scrolled a lot and everyone is so depressed Oo glad to have chose a small city in northish Quebec guess its less bad around here. I really feel a lot of the issue is spread around the world densily urban population and service based économy. idk much but hey life is good in the countryside.

Quebec #1? You've got to be kidding! Great maybe if you are fluent, and I do mean fluent, in French. Otherwise you're treated like a second class citizen. As a tourist destination it is fabulous. The best food ever throughout the province. Old Quebec City by far the most beautiful in Canada and Montreal for the marvellous shopping experience. All fine for a fumbling in French tourist, but moving there and trying to get on in fractured high school French is a whole new and not so pleasant experience. I lived in the province for just under 2 years so my comments are based on that experience. After travelling the country extensively I settled in Northern Ontario to raise my family. Now retired I live in Canada's largest city Toronto and love it.

Yeah mate! Canada is a shit hole! And it always was! Except maybe Quebec. I left Canada 30 years ago and never looked back. \nIt's a Cultural desert, no Spirit, no Soul. Based on greed. Greed for money, money, money........ Now Corporate owned spiritual shit hole!

Ratings of the Provinces/Territories I've been to (based on awesomeness): 1. BC, 2. Alberta, 3. Yukon, 4. NWT, 5. Quebec, 6. Ontario, 7. Manitoba, 8. Saskatchewan.

Hey there, you fine American... Just to let you understand, our system is FAR from perfect, but it's still easy access and quick service IF you don't need a rare specialist or a not so rare one). The thing is, it's ALL priority based, so if you wait, it's because someone needs your resources even MORE than you do. Sometimes, it ends up in a tragedy, but MOST times, it allows for the neediest to get it first. \nAs far as having children here, we have a NEGATIVE birthrate, so our government PAYS us to have children. My son grew up in Quebec, and they have a double everything. Double taxes (not that bad after the tax deductions and credits), but they also Double the safety net and services, compared to the rest of Canada. Not only was childbirth free, so were the pre-natal courses and everything else, AND we got around 1000$/mo in childcare benefits, until he turned 18, with full of tax credits per kid. Plus, daycare was 5$/day back then, it's 7$/day almost 20 years later.. Pretty citizen friendly. \nThings MIGHT be changing though. Our conservatives are taking their talking points from the US GOP since COVID, and they are all-in to please their Oil lobby overlords and donators out in our prairies region. The Alberta Premier is a far-right conspiracy nutcase and her new pet-project is Capitalist healthcare (among her trolley of lunacies). SAME place the far-right rednecks always come at us from. It's like they binge-watch FUX nonnews and get their ideas from the dumbest idiots there. Disgraceful Canadian MAGAt wannabes are the result of Trump polluting everything since 2016. He made shameless individuals get some traction in this new, crazy world we live in. And it infected the whole Western world. Canada is not immune to idiocies, Q , conspiracy nuggets, and belly-button Anarchists everywhere.\nSorry a bout this little rant, but things are getting steadily worst as the year goes on. \nAnyways, YOU give me a sense that what we SEE about Americans isn't all there is to see. Some of you are decent, so keep it up and don't let the ranting morons give your whole country a bad rep.

Our son (22 yo) was in a traffic accident 3 years ago. Heavy multi-trauma that necessitated 18 surgeries, the latest was 2 months ago. He still has complications that forces him into long hospital stays. If we were living in the US, not only the whole family would have been bankrupt, but he most certainly would have died from lack of fund to pay for his care. Being Canadians living in Quebec, we didn't pay a dime, and his medical care wasn't even entirely paid for by the universal national healthcare. Most of it was paid by the Société d'Assurance Automobile du Québec (provincially funded, single payer automotive insurance).\n\nEverything, including renovations to the house to make it suitable for a wheelchair user and so much other things he now needs has been paid for. All in all the cost of all the medical care, prothesis, equipments, surgeons (6 of them, diffrent specialies), multiple MRIs, scans, stress-tests, ect. is most certainly in the 7-figure by now. The single payer automotive insurance granted him a pension for life, calculated on the base of the salary he would have made in his future job, had the accident not cut short his university education.\n\nJust typing this to show a very valid reason why it makes absolutely no sense for a Canadian to move to the US, makes me tear up for families down south going through a similar situation, knowing that unless they are millionaires, they're probably going through hell. Each time we hear about the health care system in the US, we have feelings I can't even describe.\n\nEdited to add: Our son is covered by his father's complementary health insurance he has at his job. We didn't have to claim anything there yet.

Hey Tyler, I just wanted to point out that our most favourite curse words in Quebec are almost all religious based (catholic). Weird I know but there you have it.??

Just so you know... Quebec swear words are mostly Catholic church words in French. \nLike Tabarnac(tabernacle), Ostie (the communion waffer), Kaliss (the chalice), Criss (christ), Viarge (Virgin mary), etc... It's a form of protests because that church got pretty corrupted and politicized here before we decided to mostly all become agnostic or atheist , and to give women and kids more rights. \nIt's based on the Duplessis era and the abuse of the church... Those abusive schools that the first nation kids went through, we had the same, except they were called orphanages and reform schools and all run by that clergy. It put a big damper on our religion.

I see this done a lot but there's a big difference between correlation and causation. Your Rbc example shows the top people all white, including women I may add. It's very ingenuous to claim racism based purely on who has risen to the top. Would you call the NBA racist because blacks overwhelmingly are represented or did they get there because they were the best? It's really exhausting having to correct leftist talking points based on nothing.\nThis is the problem today, racism is used so much that it's become little more than name calling because people, usually on the left, call anyone they disagree with racist.\nYou dislike illegal immigration? Racist. You can be pro lawful immigration but have the wrong opinion and your a racist.\nHate crimes? These are incredibly rare and are often skewed politically, largely for reasons I just explained but if an indigenous man assaults an Asian lady, it's less likely to be labeled a hate crime as, say a white male doing the exact same.\nNot so common here but in the US, there are numerous examples of blacks assaulting Asians and orthodox jews and the media will cleverly imply it's whites by saying white supremacy is on the rise, then give the stats on hate crimes, most of which were not committed by whites. It's this kind of media manipulation that creates an inaccurate impression.\nNow, for the indigenous, yes, there is systemic racism. We have an entire governmental system treating natives differently with reserves, different taxes, hunting rights etc by definition it's systemically racist although many are a benefit.\nI also agree with your comment on Quebec with it's strong almost nationalist attitudes towards maintaining it's French heritage at the expense of individual rights.\n, please don't label someone or an organization as racist just because a bunch of white people occupy top positions without evidence that racism was the cause when it could just be they were the best candidates. Is it not best to not always assume the absolute worst before coming to a conclusion? It's like our legal system based on a biblical tale of choosing to let a 100 guilty go free than condemn a single innocent man. A founding principle to modern western countries that should apply here.\nBeing racist is a serious and nasty accusation that should be thrown only when it's established. I don't call someone a child killer just because I disagree with their politics and to do so is an a front to genuine victims. \nI'd argue Canada is one of the least racist nations on Earth. Name a country, you think is LESS racist, I'm curious, what would you suggest? I would counter that racism or xenophobia is far more common in non western countries.\nI would suggest countries in Asia, Africa and others with less multicultural populations harbor more racist sentiment towards other races. Visit Japan, very xenophobic but no one dares call them racist because it doesn't promote the leftist stereotype of white man racism.\nThere's a reason you never saw racism but had to be lectured by holier than thou self flagulating liberals about the scourge of racism, it's mostly a fabrication. These same people can never give a factual example beyond what you provide with the Rbc example. If it's that bad you would think they can provide real evidence.\nHave you actually met or seen racism in Canada? You probably have a better chance being struck by lightning.

I have families in Quebec and Montréal and been there a few times never experience racism. I’m sure there’s racism and ethnic prejudice where ever you go doesn’t matter which countries you go. Hopefully there’ll be a day where everyone’s can be seen as equal, we will not be judge based on race, skin color, religion, ethnic origins, caste system etc…we all will be able to see each other as PEOPLE

As a resident of Quebec, I had invest massively in 2003 in robotic, automation and numerisation of our manufacturing facility with almost no employees.\nI can produce any kind of component and turn arround less than 1/2 hours of set up.......\n\nOur data base is so huge, I can reapeat order from last 20 years..in less than 1 minute.....\n\nI will say......we are 100% R&D each day...we design...produce...and ship....material dosen't exist......only in imaginary....we bring it to life

The socioeconomic flaws are much difficult to compare considering the very foundations that birthed America as well as its intricate and dense population. There are variety of implications that comes to accommodating a diverse population of 380 million which is 10 times the population of Canada (these can also be structural). The rent in Montreal is not as high relative to major urban cities in America simply because of the demand. People simply do not want to live in Montreal at the same rate that they do for places like San Francisco and New York. Moreover, places like New York and San Francisco, (this can also include Toronto/Vancouver), have rigorous rent controls as well as zone restriction laws that limits the capacity for home builders to produce affordable housing, (especially when compared to Quebec). I live in Canada, but I even I must admit that economic success and freedom is much higher in the U.S. Name me another Western country with more african Billionaires/Millionaires than America? Canada is immensely reliant on Government to regulate trade and commerce and due to our lack of entrepreneurial spirit, I expect that we will remain a commodity-based economy for decades. This is especially a sad reality if interest rates continue to rise, as it will negatively impact the purchasing power of our dollar which is indexed to commodities . \n \nCheers,

I lived everywhere in Canada except the Territories, Manitoba, and N.B., and I always come back to Quebec. It's NOT that it's better in everything. It's just that it's better in everything that counts for ME!!!\n- It's the CHEAPEST place to rent or own but has great wages and a high minimum. \n- Most of our cities are in the St-Lawrence valley. That means we have a LOT of local produce in-season. \n- We have a diversified economy. Less manufacturing and heavy stuff than Ontario, but LOTS of high-tech and knowledge-based jobs. With a HUGE service industry, bloated by the constant influx of tourists.\n- It's got the BEST quality of social life in the country. It's an all-year party and club season. \n- It's got FOUR real and distinct seasons.\n- It's almost as beautiful outside as BC. Until autumn and the colors, then it's better for a few weeks.\n- It's got the BEST social net in the country. \n- It's got the most beautiful women too. No question whatsoever about that one.\nAnd it's the SAFEST... That and being cheap to live in are the two main points. I'm bilingual, so I don't care about the French-only oddities, they are few and far between. It's 2021, not 1980. The Internet and Cable tv from the US changed EVERYTHING. ALL of the kids and young adults will answer you in English if you aren't acting like a jerk. So will almost anyone under 60.

Ranking the best provinces to live in bases on statistics only misses the mark on what actual Canadians think.\nFor example if you were to poll people from across the nation, I’m very certain, Quebec wouldn’t be anywhere near the top of the list as best province to live in, especially considering their politics!!

ISLAMISATION OF EUROPE, ENGLAND AND AMERICA. Actually, we see in Sueden, Denmark, Germany, England, Australia, New Zeland and other countries, the fiascos, promoted by MERCKEL for immigration. In all those countries, by millions, the Muslims are making pressure to introduce the Shariah Law and, for one, MERCKEL let them to. Pretty soon, we will see those countries, introduce representations in their government and, it will be the end of them. As drastic a measure, by all means, those Muslims must be reduced by numbers. Statistics don't lie. While the average children birth, represent 1.5 per couple, we see rates of 4 to 16children per man in Muslims communities. On top of being in tandem with islamism, they are supported by social programs, where they can benefit of all the ressources of SOCIAL SECURITY, PUTTING UNDER THE NATIONALS. In Canada, their population is 1,053,945 or 3.2% . In USA, their population is 3,450,000 or 1.1%. \nWe observe in Canada, a government representation of Muslims in strategic positions. The same is observe in USA. As a matter of facts, the usual patterns of infiltration is in progress and, we even see COURTS referring to the Shariah Law as weight on our regular administration of JUSTICE. THERE COULD NOT BE TWO (2) SYSTEM OF JUSTICE for our citizens. IMMIGRANTS HAVE TO CONFORMED TO THE LAW OF THE LAND, not to the SHARIAH. The operating system among democratic countries cannot be base on the Quran (Coran) and, the prescriptions of their Prophet MOHAMED. Those archaic systems were designed to control human activities in the Arab World, not in the WEST. It is at work since the 7th century. At the speed they go, Canada will be a Muslim State in 30 years. I said it before, Canada must joined the United States as fast as possible, to reduce the muslim influence or, drastic measures be introduce to reduce their number. In Quebec, for exemple, the LAW is in process to reduce their influence and, many muslims already think to move West of Quebec. That's a society very flexible to change of perceptions. Our LAW must not show any flexibility to the application of the Sharia Law and our understanding of liberty of religion, must stay private if need to. Moskes liberty must be stop at all costs and, no permit delivered. Those moskes are serving the only purpose of endoctrination and, make undue pressures on american values. Gerry

Immigrant wishful thinking. Canada does love immigrants and most of it's populace are immigrants, but that is only for well documented immigrants with high human capital. Canada uses a point based system to see whether new immigrants can contribute to society. Trudeau is making things worse. Look at the influx of Haitians coming to Quebec. Too much rhetoric not enough learning.

I think the discrimination in Montreal (and all of Quebec, for that matter) wouldn't be based on skin color, it would be based on who is and who isn't a Francophone.