November 5, 2025
Canada’s New Immigration Plan: A Needed Reset — But Not Enough to Renew an Aging Nation
Canada’s latest immigration levels plan for 2026–2028 marks a sharp shift from the growth-focused vision of just two years ago. The government’s new targets hold steady at 380,000 permanent residents per year, down from the earlier trajectory that peaked at 500,000 by 2025.
After a decade of rising targets, Ottawa has chosen to stabilize annual permanent resident admissions at 380,000 and reduce temporary residents by 43%. This is, in many ways, a needed reset—a moment to pause, consolidate, and reassess. But if the plan is only about managing numbers, it risks falling short of what an aging population and changing economy truly require.
1. From Growth to Balance
The government’s earlier 2024–2026 plan envisioned steady increases toward 500,000 new permanent residents by 2025. By contrast, the 2026–2028 plan holds flat at 380,000 per year, distributed across three familiar streams:
| Stream | 2026 | 2027–28 | Share of total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Economic | 239,800 | 244,700 | ~63% |
| Family | 84,000 | 81,000 | ~21% |
| Refugee & Humanitarian | 56,200 | 54,300 | ~15% |
The shift from acceleration to stability signals a government seeking breathing room to align immigration with housing, healthcare, and service pressures. Yet, as I told the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration (CIMM), Canada’s challenge “is not dedication, but architecture and delivery.” The system suffers from a growing gap between policy ambition and administrative capacity.
2. Linking Ambition to Capacity
The new levels plan may hint at capacity-based planning, but the government has not yet shown how targets connect to measurable indicators. Without transparency on housing availability, processing ability, or integration funding, the 380,000 figure risks becoming a round number rather than a reasoned strategy.
In testimony before CIMM, I emphasized that ambition and capacity must reinforce—not compete with—each other. That means:
- Synchronizing intake and delivery through a universal Expression of Interest / Invitation to Apply (EOI/ITA) system.
- Linking levels to real data in housing, healthcare, and labour.
- Legislating service standards under the Service Fees Act to reduce backlogs.
- Establishing an Immigration Ombudsperson for fairness and redress.
- Governing automation and AI in decision-making to ensure transparency and equity.
These reforms, as BLG PC has proposed, do not require major new spending—just smarter coordination, oversight, and accountability.
3. Beyond Capacity: Canada’s Aging Nation
Canada’s median age is now over 41, and its fertility rate sits at 1.3 births per woman, well below replacement levels. Immigration is the country’s primary driver of population and workforce renewal.
A reset focused solely on capacity could therefore miss the broader purpose: demographic sustainability. In an aging country, population renewal depends not just on how many people Canada admits, but on who arrives, where they settle, and how they are retained.
4. A System Built for Delivery and Renewal
BLG PC’s policy recommendations, as outlined before CIMM, call for a modern architecture that links administrative capacity to policy ambition and demographic renewal:
- Transparent capacity indicators in housing, healthcare, and settlement.
- Universal EOI/ITA intake across programs to manage flow dynamically.
- Legislated service standards to reduce uncertainty and delay.
- Purpose-driven sub-streams for elder care, regional vitality, and Francophone growth.
- AI oversight and a statutory right to counsel to uphold fairness in a digital era.
This would transform immigration levels from static targets into living indicators of national capacity and renewal.
5. A Reset Worth Defining
The question now is whether this reset will become that framework—or simply a pause before the next wave of strain. If Canada can bridge ambition and capacity through transparency, design, and fairness, the numbers show proposed levels for permanent resident admissions in Canada for 2026–2028:
- Overall projected admissions: 380,000 each year (2026/27/28) (range: 350,000–420,000)
- Economic immigration: 239,800 (2026); 244,700 (2027/28)
- Family reunification: 84,000 (2026); 81,000 (2027/28)
- Refugees, protected persons, humanitarian & compassionate, and other: 56,200 (2026); 54,300 (2027/28)
- French-speaking admissions outside Québec: 9% (2026); 9.5% (2027); 10.5% (2028)
Similarities
- The overall model of splitting admissions into economic, family, and humanitarian streams remains consistent.
- The emphasis on economic immigration as the largest component continues (over 60% in recent plans).
- The multi-year planning horizon remains standard (three-year cycles).
- Targets for French-speaking admissions outside Québec persist, reflecting ongoing Francophone priorities.
Differences / Key Changes
-
Lower overall numbers:
-
- The 2023–2025 plan projected up to 550,000 admissions by 2025.
- The 2024–2026 plan targeted 485,000 (2024), 500,000 (2025), and 500,000 (2026).
- The 2026–2028 plan at 380,000 per year marks a major downward adjustment.
-
Stabilization vs. growth: A plateau replaces previous upward trajectories.
-
Distribution: Economic share (~63%) stays dominant, but total figures decline.
-
Rising Francophone target: Up to 10.5% by 2028, indicating greater emphasis.
-
Wider ranges: The 350,000–420,000 spread allows flexibility but adds uncertainty.
Analysis / Implications
- The drop to ~380,000 reflects a pivot toward managing infrastructure, housing, and service pressures.
- Economic immigration remains the core driver, but tighter quotas may increase competition or selectivity.
- Lower overall intake may ease short-term pressures but slow population and labour growth.
- Higher Francophone targets reinforce minority-language policy goals but require more settlement resources.
- Wide target ranges signal flexibility but risk planning uncertainty for provinces and employers.
- Even at 380,000, Canada remains among the world’s highest per-capita immigrant recipients.
- Stakeholders must recalibrate expectations and strategies to align with lower intakes.
Are the Numbers “Arbitrary”?
Mostly, yes—as presented. Our brief before the House argues that levels should be explicitly tied to absorptive capacity (housing, healthcare, integration resources) and reported through public dashboards.
A flat 380,000 with wide ranges but no capacity metrics risks appearing political rather than evidence-based. Our model calls for legislated service standards and a unified EOI/ITA intake so that volumes track real processing and settlement capacity—reducing backlogs and stop-start policymaking.
A System Still Built for Yesterday
The plan keeps the classic three-part division—economic, family, and humanitarian—even as realities outgrow that model. As noted, our reform brief recommends:
- A universal EOI/ITA system across all streams to pace intake dynamically.
- Purpose-built sub-streams (e.g., elder care, short-term business mobility, regional retention) to align immigration with real needs.
- Legislated service standards and quarterly public dashboards linking targets to delivery.
- Stronger oversight of AI and automation to safeguard fairness and transparency.
The 2026–2028 plan doesn’t move in that direction. It freezes the existing structure rather than modernizing it. BLG PC’s proposed architecture introduces a system built for delivery and renewal.
In my testimony before Parliament, I called for “binding service standards through the Service Fees Act and a universal EOI model to transparently align application intake with delivery.” These steps—paired with stronger oversight and communication—would end the cycle of runaway inventories, duplicated applications, and declining public confidence.
Should the Divisions Be Different?
Yes. Clearer, purpose-built streams and a common intake framework would make volumes adjustable within defined sub-purposes, improving predictability for applicants, employers, and provinces.
While keeping broad statutory categories may aid reporting, Canada should operationalize sub-streams on a universal EOI/ITA backbone tied to published capacity metrics.
That model better supports demographic renewal (younger workers, care capacity, regional balance, Francophone vitality) with fewer backlogs and less volatility—turning levels from a headline number into a managed system.
The 43% Drop in Temporary Residents: A Turning Point
The government’s plan to cut temporary residents—international students, foreign workers, and other short-stay migrants—by 43% is one of the most consequential policy shifts in recent memory. While this may ease housing and education pressures, it could also:
- Shrink labour pools in healthcare, hospitality, and construction.
- Reduce transition pathways to permanent residency.
- Undermine Canada’s reputation as a global talent destination if not paired with transparent pathways.
Without complementary reforms, this cut risks trading one imbalance (housing pressure) for another (labour scarcity and demographic decline).
The Way Forward: Capacity Over Quotas
The choice is not between “more” or “less” immigration—it is between random caps and responsive planning. Canada needs an evidence-driven system that:
- Publishes real-time capacity indicators.
- Uses a universal EOI/ITA model to meter applications.
- Embeds service standards in legislation.
- Tracks Francophone and regional retention outcomes, not just admissions.
With these reforms, the 380,000 cap could become a living number—adjustable, defensible, and tied to measurable national goals rather than politics.
Conclusion: A Defining Choice at a Demographic Crossroads
Canada’s immigration reset signals the end of unbounded expansion. The challenge now is to ensure the next phase—whatever its size—is governed by capacity, transparency, and purpose. If Ottawa follows through on a 43% cut to temporary residents without redesigning the systems that process, integrate, and retain newcomers, we risk aging faster, shrinking sooner, and competing weaker. Immigration has always been Canada’s great advantage. With the right framework, it can also be its path to renewal.
