Immigration | Drop your anchor

Even with the best intentions, it is difficult to objectively analyze the reduction in federal immigration targets.

On Thursday, the Trudeau government made an about-face that was as surprising as it was spectacular. Next year, the number of permanent immigrants will decrease by 20%. It will thus go from 500,000 to 395,000, then to 380,000 in 2026 and to 365,000 in 2027.

Is this figure too low, as employers claim? Or even too high, as François Legault maintains?

There is no definitive answer to these questions.

Capacity fluctuates depending on the socio-economic (job market, housing shortage, French language courses) and political context (deadlines for processing applications). It also varies depending on the types of candidates selected. These factors are not static – the government can influence them.

To quantify the reception capacity, we must also give value to intangible things such as social diversity and the protection of French. On these subjects, no expert can decide in a neutral and scientific manner.

And that’s not all. To assess reception capacity, there remains another obstacle, more subtle and insidious. It is that of the chosen reference point.

This phenomenon is called “anchoring bias.” A classic example: at the store, a coat is on sale. On the label, we cross out the current price, which serves to make the other appear smaller.

Likewise, Mr. Trudeau’s 20% drop seems major. But we can also compare it to the level of 2015. When he came to power, Canada welcomed 270,000 permanent immigrants.

So here’s another way to present the numbers. From 2015 to 2025, this immigration jumped by 46%.

Still, the turnaround is major.

For Mr. Trudeau, immigration is not only an economic or humanitarian issue. It is identity. Canada’s greatest wealth, he has already said, is its diversity.

The Prime Minister therefore had to act violently by decreeing this reduction. Even more surprising, he announced it himself – this kind of press conference would usually have been done alone by the Minister of Immigration, Marc Miller.

For what ? Mr. Trudeau’s values ​​have not changed. Rather, he responded to popular pressure. Support for immigration is declining, even more so in the English-speaking provinces, in particular because of its effect on the housing crisis.

In the next election, Mr. Trudeau will not be compared to the old version of himself. We will put him more in opposition to his rival Pierre Poilievre.

The Conservative leader must be satisfied with the announcement. Besides, he does not promise to cancel it.

During his race for leadership in 2022, Mr. Poilievre did not dare criticize the record increase in immigration. He did not want to be accused of intolerance or, worse, Trumpism.

Mr. Trudeau has just resolved this thorny issue for himself.

The anchoring effect will also be felt in Quebec. Not so long ago, the mere mention of a reduction in immigration thresholds was suspect. This is no longer the case.

The Parti Québécois will unveil its immigration plan on Monday. By comparison, it will appear a little less aggressive.

To analyze the federal announcement, the most important anchor should be elsewhere.

Next year, Quebec and Canada will respectively welcome nearly 60,000 and 390,000 permanent immigrants.

Let’s compare this figure with temporary immigrants. According to the latest census, Quebec has 600,000 and Canada, 3 million. Those who reside in the territory temporarily are therefore eight to ten times more numerous than those who obtain citizenship.

The focus on the permanent immigration threshold thus seems exaggerated. While Quebec is torn over whether permanent immigration should increase or decrease by 10,000 candidates, no target exists for temporary candidates.

At the federal level, a modest reduction has just been promised for the first time – these residents will go from 6.5% to 5% of the population, it is said. It remains to be seen whether the target will be reached.

Three other anchor points influence the perception of the federal reduction in immigration thresholds.

The first anchor is the country used as a reference point.

Canada remains a state very open to immigration. He is the most welcoming of the G7. As a percentage of its population, it receives around 50% more immigrants than the United Kingdom and three times as many as the United States^⁠1.

The second is demand. If we compare the number of immigrants welcomed to that of people who wish to come to us, the current threshold remains low. And this imbalance will continue, due to humanitarian conflicts which accelerate global migrations.

The third anchor, more anecdotal, is historical comparison. Canada is currently breaking records. The proportion of immigrants in the population has just exceeded the record level of 1921, which was 22.3%.

So, what to think of the reception capacity? It’s up to you to drop your anchor.

1. Check out OECD immigration figures