A report released by the federal government provides some details about the different classifications of immigrants allowed into Canada, and the distributions of each grouping. The most interesting change is in the limits placed on the two largest groups: the so-called "economic class" (individuals with specific skill sets that are needed in the Canadian labour force) and the "family class" (individuals with a relative, such as a spouse, parent, or child, who has already immigrated). Despite the increasing demand for skilled workers caused by an aging population (due in no small part to the baby boomer generation), next year Canada will actually decrease its limit for the economic class, and increase its limit for the family class.
Of the nearly 252,000 immigrants admitted in 2006, 55% were from the economic class, 28% were from the family class, and the remainder (17%) were refugees, asylum seekers, or compassionate/humanitarian decisions. The future plans include limits of 71,000 for family class (up 2,000 from this year) and 154,000 for economic class (down from 158,000 this year). Specific percentages of distribution cannot be determined until after the fact, as the overall limits are banded (240,000 to 265,000).
Some opposition party members are claiming that the shifts are a political move, and with good reason: if a government allows part of a family to immigrate, it can arguably expect support from those newcomers in the next election, if only on the implied promise that keeping the same party in power will increase the number of family members allowed into the country.
Regardless of the motivation, the decision to allow more families to reunite inside Canada's borders is a positive one. If nothing else, any decision that creates the opportunity for a family to live and grow together is a good decision. Also, assuming that the majority of the circumstances are that an economic class immigrant is allowed entry, and his or her family comes as family class immigrants in a subsequent year (which is likely the case, given the distributions), there are economic benefits as well. With fewer out of country relatives, one could reasonably argue that a smaller proportion the salary will leave the country as well. A man or woman who is supporting a family in Canada as opposed to one in their native country is going spend more money in Canada, which means an increase in the consumer base for Canadian retailers. It not only makes moral sense, but business sense as well.
However, while overall immigration levels are remaining relatively unchanged from year to year, Canada is facing a future with a severe labour shortage. So, cutting the number of skilled workers allowed into the country is an ill-advised plan. With so much work available, Canada needs to increase the number of immigrants to compensate for the rapid reduction of our work force as the boomers age and retire. MP Olivia Chow suggests an increase in the overall number of immigrants to 1% of Canada's population (or 330,000 individuals) to help improve the situation. That sounds like a good start to me.
Well said.
Posted by: metro mama | November 09, 2007 at 09:24 PM