--- author: TVO Today date: '2026-09-18' guest: '' layout: post.njk source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvKCFRcABw4 speaker: TVO Today tags: - immigration-policy - labor-market - demographic-shift - housing-affordability - economic-integration title: 加拿大移民政策大转向：激增、失衡与重构之路 summary: 随着公众支持率跌至30年低点，加拿大联邦政府大幅削减永居与留学生配额。本期节目深度探讨了从过去的平稳高素质移民模式，到近期转向低薪临时工所引发的住房与承载力危机，剖析省提名项目、留学生生态及未来政策重回平衡的关键路径。 insight: '' draft: true series: '' category: politics-society area: society-thinking project: [] people: [] companies_orgs: [] products_models: [] media_books: [] status: evergreen --- ### 移民政策转向背景 **Jeyan Jeganathan**: 长期以来，大多数加拿大人都认为政府接纳的移民数量是恰到好处的。然而情况发生了改变。在2023年和2024年，公众对移民的支持率急剧下滑，跌至30年来的最低点。根据**《2026年加拿大多元化研究》**（Canadian Diversity Study 2026），当时大多数加拿大人表示移民水平过高。几十年来，**渥太华**（Ottawa）首次接收到了这一明确信号。从那时起，联邦政府对**加拿大移民系统**（Canada's immigration system）做出了重大改革，大幅减少入境人数。那么，当前局势究竟如何？我们是在找回正确的平衡，还是又制造了一套全新的问题？我是**Jeyan Jeganathan**，欢迎收看《The Rundown》。
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: For a long time, most Canadians thought the government was accepting the right number of immigrants. Then things changed. In 2023 and 2024. Support dropped dramatically, sinking to a 30 year low. And according to the Canadian Diversity Study 2026, a majority of Canadians then said immigration levels were too high. For the first time in decades, Ottawa got the message. And since then, the federal government has made some big changes to Canada's immigration system, sharply reducing the number of people coming into the country. So where do things stand now, and are we getting the balance right, or have we created a different set of problems? I'm Jeyan Jeganathan. Welcome to The Rundown.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 好的，让我们来看看实际发生了哪些改变，因为削减幅度确实相当大。以**国际留学生**（international students）为例：2024年，联邦政府开始限制入境加拿大的国际留学生数量。根据**加拿大移民及公民部**（Department of Immigration and Citizenship）的数据，国际留学生总数此后下降了三分之一，新入境人数下降得更快。从2026年1月到6月，新抵境的国际留学生人数与2024年同期相比减少了82%。 **永久居留权**（PR）申请指标也在缩减。2024年，加拿大迎来了创纪录的PR批准量，新增超过48万名永久居民。自那之后，渥太华将目标下调至2025年的39.5万和2026年的38万。根据今年上半年的数据，部分专家认为加拿大2026年实际接纳的申请人数可能会低于原定目标。 改革不仅发生在联邦层面。2026年6月，作为人们获取永居身份的重要途径之一，**安大略省省提名移民项目**（OINP / Ontario Immigrant Nominee Program）进行了全面改革。在第一阶段新制度下，申请人必须符合三类通道之一：自雇医生、高技能职业或附带额外要求的低技能职业。削减数字是一回事，更关键的问题在于这些削减究竟意味着什么。这些举措是在解决加拿大人所担忧的痛点，还是最终会引发新问题？**Sonia Sidhu**、**Parisa Mahboubi**，非常感谢两位来到我们的演播室。 Parisa，我先来请教你。在经历了多年公众对移民水平过高的反弹之后，加拿大大幅下调了永居目标。你在**C.D. Howe研究所**（C.D. Howe Institute）长期深入钻研这些数据，你认为这次削减是迈向了正确的方向，还是偏离了轨道？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Okay, so let's look at what's actually changed because there have been some pretty big cuts. Take international students: in 2024, the federal government started limiting how many international students could come to Canada. And according to the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, the international student population has since dropped one third. And new arrivals have fallen even faster. From January to June 2026, there were 82% fewer new international student arrivals compared to the same period in 2024. Permanent residency or PR applications are being scaled back, too. In 2024, Canada hit a milestone number of permanent residency approvals with over 480,000 new residents. Since then, Ottawa has lowered its targets to 395,000 in 2025 and 380,000 in 2026. And based on data from the first half of this year, some experts believe Canada is on track to admit fewer applications than planned for 2026. The changes aren't just happening at the federal level. In June 2026, the Ontario Immigrant Nominee Program was overhauled. One of the pathways people can use to become permanent residents. Under the first phase of the new system, applicants must now qualify for one of three pathways as a self-employed physician, a higher skilled occupation or a lower skilled occupation with additional requirements for each. Cutting numbers is one thing. The bigger question is what those cuts actually mean. Are these changes fixing the problems Canadians were worried about, or could we actually end up creating new ones? Sonia Sidhu, Parisa Mahboubi, thank you so much for joining us in our rundown studios. I'm going to come to you. After years of backlash over immigration levels being too high, Canada has significantly reduced permanent residency targets. You dig into this data all the time with the C.D. Howe Institute looking at the numbers. Is this cut a step in the right direction or are we off track?
### 配额缩减与透明度 **Parisa Mahboubi**: 削减永久移民目标数量是完全正确的做法。其原因在于，连续数年间，加拿大都在大幅提高移民接纳水平。这还不仅限于永久移民，我们同时还接纳并迎来了海量的**临时居民**（temporary immigrants）。这导致了总人口在极短时间内出现暴增——例如2023年加拿大的人口增长率突破了3%。 这种由移民驱动的人口突增给我们的整个体系带来了巨大压力，导致社会无力消化如此庞大的人群，给**住房市场**（housing market）、劳动力市场以及各项公共基础设施带来了沉重负担，难以同时支撑新移民和现有居民。因此，政府回归可持续的移民增长率、将配额调整到加拿大能够承受并能保障现有居民与新移民福祉的水平，是至关重要的一步。 不过，我们必须做到的一点是保持透明。例如，当政府公布永久移民目标时，他们必须把所有通道、所有专项计划都纳入进去。那些为了调节总人口而实施的一次性专项接纳计划，都应当如实计入对外公布的总体指标中。
Original English **Parisa Mahboubi**: That was the right way to do to reduce the number of permanent immigration targets. And the reason is that for several years, Canada continued to increase its immigration levels significantly. And it's not just permanent immigration. So we also admitted and welcome a large number of temporary immigrants. So that contributed to a large increase in population growth over a very short period of time. For example, Canada's population growth reached more than 3% in 2023. What happened is that sudden increase in population growth through immigration put pressure on our system in terms of not being able to absorb that large number of immigrants and putting pressure on housing market, labour market, and on other aspects of the system to support those newcomers and also existing population. So this is important. It was important step for the government to return to sustainable rate of immigration and a level and rate that Canada can absorb and support the existing population. In addition to newcomers. However, one thing we need to do is to be transparent. For example, when the government announced targets for permanent immigration, they have to include all streams, all initiatives. One time initiative that they are considered to make adjustments to total population. They all should be included in the target that they are announcing.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 你能给我举一个你提到的这些通道的例子吗？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Can you give me an example of some of those streams that you're talking about?
**Parisa Mahboubi**: 举个例子，去年政府公布的2026年和2027年永久移民官方头条指标是38万。但与此同时，政府又宣布了一项一次性专项计划，额外接纳超过10万名永久移民。这些人其实此前已经获得了批准，符合成为永久居民的资格，一直在排队等待正式获批。但是这部分庞大的数字却没有被包含在对外公布的官方指标当中。这就具有误导性。为了提高透明度，政府必须对我们到底要接纳多少人做到公开坦诚，这是社会做规划所必不可少的依据。
Original English **Parisa Mahboubi**: For example, last year this headline numbers was 380,000 for permanent immigration in 2026 and 2027. At the same time, government announced a one time initiatives to admit more than 100,000 permanent immigrants. These individuals, they were already approved. They are eligible to become permanent immigrants. They were waiting for their time to become permanent immigrants. But these numbers weren't included in the target, the headline targets. So that's misleading. And the one thing that the government needs to do to increase transparency, they have to be transparent about how many numbers we are going to admit. That's something we need for planning.
### 人口老龄化与再校准 **Jeyan Jeganathan**: 好的。Sonia，我看到你在点头。你是一名**移民律师**（immigration lawyer），请帮我们解读一下：你怎么看待永居目标的下调？我们是一个**生育率极低**（ultra low fertility rate）的国家，放眼未来，我们将面临严重的**人口老龄化**（ageing population）。配额削减会对我们造成什么影响？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: All right, Sonia, I see you're nodding your head there. You're an immigration lawyer. Help me understand here. What do you make of the reduction in PR targets here? Where a country that, you know, we have an ultra low fertility rate here. So when we look into the future, we have an ageing population. What does this do for us?
**Sonia Sidhu**: 我认为我们首先确实需要回顾历史。2015年至2019年间，我们经历的是渐进式的增长，平稳且可持续。随后疫情爆发，数字骤降；紧接着又出现了前所未有的暴增，也就是2024年的历史纪录。我们现在听到的全都是数字上蹿下跳。 我真正将当前阶段视为一个**再校准时代**（recalibration era）。我们正在重新校准指标应该定在多少，我们绝不能简单套用2015至2019年的趋势来推导2026年该怎么做，因为世界已经变了。我们的劳动力需求变了，疫情极大地改变了各个行业的运作模式，我们必须把这些因素考虑在内。要想让政策钟摆停在最精准的位置是非常困难的，这是动态变化的现实，绝不是非黑即白一句话就能定下来的。 但我认为更重要的问题在于：好的，我们可以定一个数字，但这个数字背后到底包含了什么？我们是否吸引到了合适的人才？我们不能只死盯总量数字。我们有实际的**劳动力市场需求**（labour market needs），我们的**医疗系统**（healthcare system）急需工作人员。如果我们定了一个指标，但其中只有2%是医疗工作者，那我们的问题依然没有解决，因为这个总量并没有对准痛点。 因此我认为更大的问题是：这个数字是否解决了实际需求？其次，当我们锁定了所需人才并把医护人员引进之后，他们能否真正进入劳动力市场？这里存在两重甚至三重的脱节。如果联邦移民审批要耗费三年，随后各省专业**资格认证**（licensing boards）又要耗费一年，前后四五年过去了，这真的满足了我们当下的迫切需求吗？政府必须与行业认证机构紧密联动。
Original English **Sonia Sidhu**: I think we really need to look at it historically first, right. Like we had 2015 to 2019. We had a gradual increase. Right. Sustainable, gradual. Then the pandemic happened. And then we had a major decrease. And then we had an unprecedented increase. The 2024 records. Right. And all we're hearing is that we're hearing numbers up, down, up, down. I really see this as a recalibration era. We're recalibrating what the numbers should be, and we can't follow the trends that we did in 2015 to 2019 to say what 2026 should be, because the world has changed. You know, we have different labour needs. Pandemic changed a lot of how industries operate. So we have to take that into consideration. And getting the pendulum right is really hard. Right? This is live stuff. This isn't something you can just say. It's going to be this black and white, but I think the more important question is, okay, can we get a number? But what does that number entail? Are we getting the right talent? We can't just concentrate on a number. We have labour market needs. We have a health care system that needs workers. If we say a number and out of that number, only 2% are health care workers. We're still in problem. The numbers didn't address the needs. So I think the bigger question is, are we addressing the needs with this number? And then when we address the talent, we get the health care workers in. Are they able to actually enter the market? Right? Are we also addressing there is twofold threefold. Right. So it's like the government has to get in with the licensing boards and say, if immigration is going to take three years to get and then another year for licensing, we're 4 or 5 years down the road, did that really meet our needs?
### 留学生体系的利与弊 **Jeyan Jeganathan**: 明白了。多年来频繁占据新闻头条的另一个议题是国际留学生。自2024年以来，加拿大的留学生人口减少了三分之一。请带我们梳理一下其中的利、弊与丑陋面。当我们看到留学生配额削减了整整三分之一时，我们应该对此抱有怎样的预期？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Got it. All right. One of the things that also took headlines for a number of years was international students. Since 2024, Canada's international student population has dropped by one third. Take us through it. The good, the bad, the ugly. When we look at sort of the cuts there in terms of the reduction by one third. What can we expect here?
**Parisa Mahboubi**: 关于国际留学生：显然，有些群体会从中受益，而另一些群体则会因大幅削减而受到冲击。从根本上说，整顿留学生项目是一个正确的决定，因为过去几年我们目睹了留学生注册人数的恶性暴增。当然，并非所有省份和所有院校都要为此负责，不幸的是，市场上出现了一些**不良投机机构**（bad players），推高了这一异常峰值；各省政府也难辞其咎。 例如**安大略省**（Ontario），在留学生人数激增方面就比其他省份承担更大的责任。尽管激增最严重的主要是各类大专学院（colleges）而非综合性大学（universities），但我们看到的结果却是所有院校都因管理不善和投机者的恶劣行径而遭受了一刀切的惩罚——政府没有精准惩治害群之马、没有思考如何提升体系的可持续性并做精细调整，而是采取了全面压缩。 但这一紧缩决定本身是必要的。留学生的无序暴增给**住房供给**（housing）和各项公共服务带来了巨大压力。与此同时，生源锐减的教育机构已经且将继续承受严峻冲击。各省必须在学费政策等层面给予支持，因为安省当年的学费冻结政策正是导致高校过度依赖国际生源的重要根源。 我认为，与其设立生硬的配额上限，不如全面评估各院校的实际教学质量与表现，允许办学优良的院校保持合理规模。我们确实能从优秀的国际学生中受益，他们是**永久居民的优质潜在候选人**。留学生通过学费、日常消费和各项经济活动为我们的经济做出贡献。我们可以从留学生中获益，但我们必须把事情做得更好，必须更精准地筛选出我们真正需要的留学生类型。
Original English **Parisa Mahboubi**: So in regards to international students. There are some groups are going to benefit from that. Some others are going to be affected by significant reductions. And the obvious one that in terms of that was the right decision to do to manage international student programs, is that over time, we saw significant increase in enrolments of international students, and not all provinces and not all institutions are responsible for that. Unfortunately, there were some bad players that contributed to that spike, and also provinces. Ontario, for example, is the one that actually more responsible than other provinces for the spike in international students. And despite actually it was highest for colleges, not necessarily universities, but one thing we saw is that all institutions got punished by mismanagement and by the act of bad players instead of punishing bad players and also thinking how we can make the system more sustainable and also make adjustments to make it work better. But it was the right decision. We needed to do that. Increase in international students put pressure on housing and also other services, and we need to provide to them. But at the same time, institutions that they saw reduction in international students are going to be affected and have been affected. And provinces need to support them in regards, for example, tuition policy, what happened in Ontario was the reason behind that. And also, instead of putting a cap, I think it's better to look at institutions, their performance and allow them for those that they are doing well. Because we benefit from international students, they are potential candidates for permanent residence. And they can contribute to our economy through their tuition, through their consumption and their activities. We can benefit from international students, but we need to do it better. We need to select better what type of international students we need.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 好的，Sonia，我想请你谈谈。留学生归根结底属于**临时移民**（temporary immigration）的大范畴，此前该项目的推行方式招致了大量批评。请谈谈这里面的不良中介与投机者。刚才Parisa也提到了住房承载力等压力，请帮我们梳理一下这组数据背后的利、弊与深层问题。
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: All right, Sonia, I'm going to get you in here. When it comes to international students, just to be clear, they do follow sort of under the umbrella of temporary immigration, received a lot of flak in terms of how the programs were rolled out. Talk about sort of the bad actors here. But Parisa had mentioned also housing, like, you know, the pressures there. Help me understand a little bit some of the good, the bad, the ugly when it comes to these numbers.
**Sonia Sidhu**: 我认为Parisa一针见血：整个项目此前完全失去了**可持续性**（sustainability）。我们正在严重冲击基础设施，冲击公共服务。对我而言，最关键的是维护我们**教育行业的声誉与公信力**（integrity of our education sector）。我们必须在国际舞台上竞争，绝不能任由我们的教育品牌被抹黑损毁。 所以这甚至不仅关乎数量的对与错、是多还是少，而在于我们是否招收到了合格的人才。正如她所言，我们需要这些学生入读正规学业，进而填补我们急需的劳动力缺口。如果现在的实际情况是有些高校正在关停专业——我还是要回到医疗领域——医疗专业明明有大量空缺席位，却因为招不满生源而被迫停办。我们必须思考：如何精准吸引合适的人才来填补这些空缺席位，进而对接长期的劳动力市场需求？这才是政策的核心重心所在。
Original English **Sonia Sidhu**: I think like she hit the nail there, the sustainability of the program wasn't there. Right? We're affecting infrastructure. We're affecting public services. And to me, like the most important thing is the integrity of our education sector. We have to play on a global level, right? We cannot have our education sector being tarnished like that. So it's not even about the numbers. Is it right? Is it wrong? Is it too much? Is it too less? Are we getting the right students here? We need these students, like she said, to go to school, enter the labour market that we need. So if we have schools that are shutting down programs, I'm going to go back to health care. There's open seats for healthcare professionals and they're shutting down programs because they don't have enough enrolment. Well, that's where we have to say, how do we attract the right students to fit this empty seat, to then roll out to our long term labour needs? And I think that's what the concentration should be on.
### 省提名项目与区域劳动力 **Jeyan Jeganathan**: 好的。我想把话题转向**安大略省省提名移民项目**（OINP），这是众多移民通道之一。该项目由省政府主导，但最终审批权在联邦政府。归根结底，无论新移民在加拿大的第一站落在哪里，几乎所有道路最终都通向安大略。安省是绝大多数人的首选目的地。我很纳闷：如果大家本来就排着队想搬来安省，那搞这个省提名项目的实际意义到底是什么？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: All right. I want to pivot a little bit over to the Ontario Immigrant Nominee program, one of the many streams here. This is run by the province, but ultimately is approved by the federal government. At the end of the day, regardless of where you start sort of your journey in this country, all roads tend to lead to Ontario. It is a popular destination for a lot of people, and so I am curious, what is the actual point of the program if people are already lining up to move to this province?
**Parisa Mahboubi**: 问得非常到位。如果省提名的目标仅仅是为了吸引更多移民、去缓解其他省份面临的人口萎缩挑战，那么安省根本不需要这样一个项目。安省没有吸纳不到人口的困扰；相反，安省面临的是完全相反的问题：作为核心目的地，一旦全国移民配额增加，安省就会吸纳绝大部分人口，从而给自身的基础设施造成巨大承载压力。 因此省提名的初衷绝不应该是单纯冲量。安省自行挑选移民的真正目标，应该是对所吸纳的人才类型拥有更强的自主把控权。
Original English **Parisa Mahboubi**: Absolutely. So Ontario basically doesn't need a program if the goal is to attract more immigrants and support, for example, demographic challenges other provinces are facing. So Ontario doesn't have that problem. Actually, it's Ontario has a different problem because now being a major destination. So it means that when we increasing immigration numbers, Ontario get the most of those numbers. So it means that it's going to put more pressure on its system. So it shouldn't be about that. And the objective, if Ontario wants to select, it's basically it's about having more control over the type of immigrants Ontario wants to select.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 精准筛选。
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Precision.
**Parisa Mahboubi**: 究竟具体选拔什么样的人？然而，回顾以往的经验、既有的项目甚至最新改版后的项目，核心问题依然在于：省政府的决策是否正确？是否选拔了合适的人选？ 当我们从宏观层面观察所有省份的省提名项目时会发现：与联邦项目筛选出的移民相比，由各省提名的移民在抵境后的**薪资收入表现**（earnings outcome post immigration）普遍处于劣势。这表明各省在选拔标准和项目设计上做得并不理想。 例如，安省目前将重点放在解决劳动力短缺上。我理解我们需要填补劳动力缺口，移民确实可以提供支持。然而我认为，首先，我们绝不应该把重点放在**低薪和低技能岗位**（low pay and low skilled jobs）的短缺上。因为这样做会抑制工资上涨，会恶化工作条件，实际上是在阻碍劳动力市场通过自我机制去解决这些挑战，妨碍了市场的自我调节。 正常的劳动力市场若出现短缺，理应伴随工资的上涨、工作条件的改善、对资本设备以及对现有员工技能的投资。但我们近期看到的却是雇主试图通过引进廉价移民来解决所有的用工需求，从而放弃了其他层面的自身努力。这就是症结所在。如果安省要挑选移民，就必须着眼于移民带来的长期效益。我们当前的**经济生产力**（productivity）面临巨大瓶颈，我们必须看清楚移民究竟该如何真正支持本省的生产力提升和长期经济增长。
Original English **Parisa Mahboubi**: What exactly? However, is it based on past experiences, based on the programs that we saw and even the overhaul of the program? The question is that whether the province is making the right decision and selecting the right immigrants. So when we look at an aggregate level in general, all provinces, they have programs that they select their own immigrants. When we look at the performance of immigrants selected by provinces relative to immigrants that are selected under federal programs in terms of their earnings post immigration, immigrants selected by provinces, they do poorly when it comes to earnings outcome post immigration. That shows that actually provinces are not doing a good job in terms of the selection and even in terms of the program. For example, Ontario now focuses on addressing labour shortages. I understand that we need to address labour needs, and immigration can support that. However, I can argue that, first of all, in terms of the shortages, we shouldn't focus on shortages in low pay and low skilled jobs. And the reason is that it can affect wage increases. It can affect working conditions. We are not encouraging workers to address some of those challenges. And we don't allow the labour market to adjust. We have to wait and see. For example, we should see if there are labour shortages, we should see some wage increases. We should see some improvements in working conditions. We should see some investment in regards to capital and also existing workforce. But what we saw recently is that employers are trying to address all labour needs through immigration. And so they are not taking other types of efforts. So that's the issue. So Ontario needs to, if they want to select immigrants, they have to focus on long term benefits of immigration and how our economy and productivity is a big issue. We need to see how immigration can support productivity and economic growth in the province.
**Sonia Sidhu**: 抱歉，我必须插一句，在这个问题上我持完全不同的观点。 大家总觉得移民都涌向安省，但实际上绝大部分都扎堆在**大多伦多地区**（GTA / Greater Toronto Area）。然而安省远不止GTA。GTA以外的地区正在形成新的发展枢纽，许多在GTA以外运营的实体产业极度缺乏人手，我们迫切需要省提名项目来拉动这些边远和新兴区域。 因此安省真正应该专注的——他们在去年和今年初也确实这样做了——是基于地理位置的定向邀请，也就是“**职业加地理位置**（occupation plus location）”的双重定向。 即便在GTA内部——这是我从实际办案经验中得出的体会——也有许多雇佣外籍员工的企业确实招不到本地人。这些外籍员工的签证即将到期，如果他们在联邦的**快速通道**（Express Entry）中缺乏打分竞争力，他们就将失去工作和岗位，而雇主依然招不到人来填补空缺。因此GTA内的特定行业和岗位依然面临用工荒。各省的省提名项目是必不可少的，因为一个省绝不仅是一个单一的核心城市群。
Original English **Sonia Sidhu**: Sorry, I'm just going to jump in there. I have a completely different opinion on that. Yeah. Just because we have a draw to our province, it's really within the GTA. Okay. Ontario is much more than the GTA, and we have hubs that are developing outside of the GTA. We have industries that don't operate in the GTA, but outside they are in need and we need this provincial nomination program to drive those areas. So what Ontario really should be concentrating on, and they did it last year, and they did it at the beginning of this year, is location based invites, not only occupation based, but occupation plus location. But even within the GTA, and I say this from practice, we have companies that have foreign national employees, they can't fill a labour shortage. These employees are expiring. And if they're not competitive for the express entry, the federal program, these individuals are going to lose their jobs and positions. But the employer still doesn't have someone to fill it. So it's still an issue in the GTA as well, right? Particular employees, particular industries. But the PNP programs are needed because the province isn't just one hub.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 当我们谈论市政区域劳动力市场时，具体是指哪些地方？比如哪些区域？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: When we talk about municipal labour markets, what are we talking? We're talking like...
**Sonia Sidhu**: 比如**雷湾**（Thunder Bay）、安大略湖北部、安省西南部，还有安省中部和东部。安省中部有定向邀请，但对于GTA而言，多伦多以外仍有大量人口聚集。因此这些项目是不可或缺的，省政府确实需要加大力度明确：在大多伦多和多伦多市区之外，各地的具体需求是什么？哪些实体产业亟待精准扶持？
Original English **Sonia Sidhu**: Thunder Bay, northern Lake Ontario, southwestern Ontario. There's central Ontario, eastern Ontario. There's invites for central Ontario, but for the GTA, right, we still have a good population outside of the Toronto area. Right? So these programs are needed, and the province really does have to ramp it up and say, hey, outside of the GTA and outside of Toronto, even, what are the needs? What are the industries that need to be addressed?
### 给政策制定者的建议 **Jeyan Jeganathan**: 好的，借此机会，让我们向政策制定者提出一些切实建议。无论是给联邦移民部长**莉娜·迪亚布**（Lena Diab），还是给安省新任劳工、移民、培训与技能发展厅长**特雷弗·琼斯**（Trevor Jones），请两位各自提出一条核心建议。
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Well, with that, let's get some recommendations on the table, whether it's for the Federal Minister of Immigration, Lena Diab, or Ontario's new Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development, Trevor Jones. We have one recommendation from each.
**Parisa Mahboubi**: 对联邦政府，我的建议是让整个系统保持**透明与可预测**（transparent and predictable），并始终紧盯对加拿大真正核心的目标——例如移民的长期发展成效、对经济的实质贡献，以及能否提升全体加拿大人的生活水平。这意味着必须优化选拔机制，摆脱单纯基于类别的划分，从而筛选出最顶尖的优质候选人。 对安省政府，我的建议是全面审视移民通道与国际留学生衔接机制，基于实际成效评估整个系统的选拔效率。在制定政策时，运用真实数据并关注移民抵境后的实际表现至关重要。就留学生而言，要严格评估各院校的办学表现，重新审查招收留学生的院校资格名单。 在**区域移民**（regional immigration）方面，我建议重点关注**留存率**（retention rate）。我认为单纯的区域移民政策无法从根本上解决偏远地区留人难的问题，因为移民拥有自由迁徙权，我们无法强迫他们永远留在某地。我们真正需要做的是提升这些地区本身的吸引力，让它对所有新移民和加拿大人都具备吸引力。
Original English **Parisa Mahboubi**: So for the federal government, my recommendation is to make the system transparent, predictable and also look at the objectives that matters for Canada. You know, for example, long term outcomes of immigrants and their contribution to our economy and raising standards of living for all Canadians. So it means improving selection system and moving away from category based selection. So we can select top candidates. And for Ontario, my recommendation is that look at both immigration and also international student stream and pathways, looking at how the system is doing in terms of selecting of immigrants, looking at the outcomes, it's really important to use the data and to look at the outcome of immigrants when we are designing the system. So when it comes to international students looking at institutions, you know, their performance. So we need to revisit the list of institutions admitting international students. And in regards to regional immigration, I recommend looking at retention rate. That's something that I believe regional immigration policy is not able to address. Immigrants in those regions, because immigrants can move. We can force them to stay in one region. We need to make those region attractive to all immigrants and Canadians.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 好的。Sonia，你的建议呢？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: All right. Sonia.
**Sonia Sidhu**: 对于省政府，我认为在**企业家移民通道**（entrepreneur stream）上，我们需要一个真正运转有效的企业家通道。安省是一个驱动国家经济的经济大省，这里聚集了海量的人才，但我们却没有充分利用。这是我给省政府最大的建议。 对于联邦政府，我用一个最直观的例子来说明：像我这样的人，除了出生在加拿大这一条之外，其他条件保持不变，在联邦移民评分系统里居然完全没有竞争优势。这就是系统的问题所在。我们必须深入研究那些被我们遗漏和错失的高素质群体，并把他们真正吸纳进来。
Original English **Sonia Sidhu**: I mean, with the provincial government entrepreneur stream, we need an entrepreneurial stream where a big province that drives a lot and we have a lot of talent here that we're not capitalizing on. Right. So that is my biggest recommendation to the province. To the federal government: the best way I put it, like someone like me say, you know, but for being born in Canada, everything is the same for me. I'm not competitive for immigration on a federal level. That's a problem, right? So look into that, right? We need to look into the group of people we're missing and drive that in.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 好的，这部分讨论我们不得不告一段落了。非常感谢两位带来的深刻见解，Sonia、Parisa，非常感谢。
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: All right. Well, we are going to have to leave it there. I really appreciate your insights, Sonia. Thank you so much.
**Sonia Sidhu / Parisa Mahboubi**: 感谢邀请。
Original English **Sonia Sidhu / Parisa Mahboubi**: Thank you for having us.
### 加拿大移民历史经验 **Jeyan Jeganathan**: 归根结底，这里存在一个更宏大的议题：加拿大究竟是如何一步步陷入当前这种局面的？**《环球邮报》**（The Globe and Mail）专栏作家**Tony Keller**多年来一直在持续追踪加拿大的移民体系。他指出，系统的问题远比单纯讨论“加拿大放进来了多少人”要深刻得多。Tony，非常高兴你能来到我们的演播室，最近可好？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Look, there is a bigger question here about how Canada ended up in this position in the first place. Globe and Mail columnist Tony Keller has been tracking Canada's immigration system for years. And he argues some of its problems go much deeper than simply how many people Canada lets in. Tony, great to have you in our studios. How are you doing?
**Tony Keller**: 很高兴来到这里，谢谢。
Original English **Tony Keller**: Very good to be here with you. Thanks.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 我想先从积极的方面聊起。这需要我们上一堂简短的历史课：你曾谈到，加拿大在相当长的时间里把移民政策做得非常成功。你为什么会这么认为？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: I want to start on a positive note. Will require a bit of a brief history lesson here, but you say Canada got immigration right for a very long time. Why do you think that?
**Tony Keller**: 加拿大曾经是一个非常令人瞩目的国家：我们维持着相当高的移民配额，而且**移民受到普遍欢迎**（immigration was popular），没有任何争议。我在我的书中形容，它就像**运转良好的城市下水道管道系统**（functioning plumbing）一样——没有人会整天惦记它，没有人为它焦虑，它默默运转且成效卓著。 这是一件非常了不起的成就，因为在发达世界的绝大多数其他国家，移民过去和现在都是极具争议性的话题，会引发各种政治反弹和严重的政治对立，但这些在加拿大曾经统统没有发生。 如果要解释其中的原因，你必须归功于两点：**好运气与好政策**。好运气在于，我们三面环海，南面与美国接壤，而美国本身一直在强力吸引全球人口而非输出难民；好政策在于，我们主动挑选优质移民，而不是坐等人们不请自来、突然出现在边境。我们过去在选拔和聚焦**经济类技术移民**（economic immigrants）方面做得极为出色。这一切带来的结果就是：加拿大拥有较高的移民率，却没有人为此过度担忧，也没有人强烈反对移民。
Original English **Tony Keller**: So Canada was a very impressive country in that we had a fairly high rate of immigration, and immigration was popular. It was uncontroversial. I say in my book that it was kind of like functioning plumbing, right? Nobody thought about it. Nobody worried about it. It just happened and it worked. And so that is a remarkable thing because most of the rest of the developed world, immigration was and is quite controversial, creates all kinds of political backlash, creates all kinds of political tensions that wasn't happening in Canada. And I think to explain why, you have to look at how both luck and good policy. We have good luck: we have three oceans surrounding us, and we border the United States, which has tended to attract people as opposed to exporting them. And good policy: we tended to pick immigrants. We tended to select immigrants as opposed to having people just show up unannounced. And we tended to do a pretty good job of selecting and focusing on economic immigrants. The consequence of all that was Canada had a fairly high immigration rate. Nobody worried that much about immigration. Nobody was deeply opposed to it.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 当我们说我们把这套体系做得很成功时，具体是指哪个历史时期？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: What are we talking about in terms of a time period here when we did it?
**Tony Keller**: 没错，是从20世纪60年代一直延续到2015年，特别是从90年代初到2015年这段黄金期。在90年代初，历经**克雷蒂安政府**（Chrétien government）和**哈珀政府**（Harper government），移民配额始终保持高度稳定。移民体系依照清晰一致的逻辑运行，一切变得稳定、平淡、毫无争议，但却高效运转。它之所以没有争议，正是因为整个系统在现实中运行得非常好。
Original English **Tony Keller**: Right, 1960s, all the way up to 2015, and in particular the early 1990s, up to 2015. So in the early 90s, through the Chrétien government and the Harper government, immigration rates are stable. The immigration system is run along similar lines, and things just become stable, boring, uncontroversial. But they work. It's uncontroversial because it's actually working pretty well.
### 政策剧变与模式颠覆 **Jeyan Jeganathan**: 好的，快进到2026年。如你所说，现在的移民议题再也不平淡了，反而充满了激烈争议。到底发生了什么变化？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Okay, fast forward 2026. You say immigration, it's not boring, it's quite contentious. What changed?
**Tony Keller**: **特鲁多政府**（Trudeau government）对这个系统进行了大幅颠覆。 首先，**数量被极其盲目地推高**。加拿大从克雷蒂安时代到哈珀时代一直保持着稳定的配额基数，但在特鲁多任内这一数字暴增。 其次，也是最根本的改变——**人们入境加拿大的方式被彻底颠覆了**。我们从一个绝大多数聚焦于永久居留、以**积分制选拔高技能与高学历经济类移民**（point system, high skilled, high education people）为绝对核心的体系，彻底蜕变成了一个高度依赖**临时移民**（temporary immigration）的系统，尤其是通过**留学生签证通道**（student stream）。 更为致命的是，这些被大量引入的临时移民，实际上是因为符合**低薪和低门槛岗位**（low wage jobs, low entry positions）的用工需求而被招募进来的；在留学生群体中，他们普遍入读的不是高质量的顶尖学府，而是大量低质院校。 我们把整个系统的底层逻辑彻底颠倒了过来。我们急剧膨胀了入境人数，对原有的成熟体系动了根本性的大手术。我认为这正是加拿大公众对移民态度发生剧烈逆转的核心根源。
Original English **Tony Keller**: So the Trudeau government changed a lot of things about the system. And first of all, numbers went way up. Canada had had these stable numbers from the Chrétien era through the Harper era. Numbers went way up. The second thing is the manner in which people were coming completely changed. So we moved from a system that is overwhelmed, was overwhelmingly focused on permanent immigration, with the core of the system being economic immigrants chosen through the point system, high skilled, high education people, mostly to a system very focused on temporary immigration, especially through the student stream. And that and those temporary immigrants tended to be chosen, in fact, because they were qualified for low wage jobs, low entry positions, and they were not, in the case of students generally going to high quality institutions, but especially to low quality institutions. So we kind of turned the system upside down. And we dramatically increased the number of people coming really, really big change to the system that existed. And I think that's a big part of the reason that Canadian attitudes towards immigration changed.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 这种公众态度的转变，是否也受到了我们南部边境美国局势的影响？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Any reason, attitude changing with what was happening south of the border?
**Tony Keller**: 这是一个非常耐人寻味的问题。因为在同一时期，美国的移民形势在**拜登政府**（Biden administration）任内也发生了剧烈变化，入境人数大幅激增。但美国主要是大量人群直接穿越美墨边境寻求政治庇护，其规模在美国历史上是史无前例的。 但按人口比例计算，加拿大的涌入规模实际上远比美国高得多。二者唯一的区别在于：在加拿大，每一个入境的人在形式上都是被政府主动发函“邀请”来的。 每一个来到加拿大的人都是合法入境的，每个人手里都持有签证。从法理形式上看，这确实与美国偷渡潮不同，也更具可控表象。但问题的关键在于，总人数实在是过于庞大，最终对全体加拿大人产生了剧烈冲击。 于是大量加拿大人开始质疑：“这到底是怎么回事？这么做对国家有什么好处？对我们普通人有什么好处？我们为什么要这么搞？”
Original English **Tony Keller**: So this is an interesting question because at the same time, in the US, immigration was also really changing during the Biden administration, immigration numbers went way up. It was primarily about people crossing the border from Mexico and asking for political asylum. Huge numbers unprecedented in American history. The Canadian numbers were quite a bit higher. The difference is, in Canada, everyone who came to Canada was invited. Everyone who came to Canada came legally. Everyone had a visa. So I think that was different and beneficial. But at the same time, the numbers are so big that ultimately had an effect on Canadians. And I think a lot of Canadians started to say, what's going on here? What's the benefit of this? What's in it for me? Why are we doing this?
### 生育率迷思与劳动力流动 **Jeyan Jeganathan**: 好的，太快、太多了。现在，每当讨论这个话题时，我们总能一次又一次听到一种论调：由于加拿大**出生率下降**（falling birth rates），我们必须大力支持引进更多移民。这种论点到底有多大的站得住脚的说服力？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Okay, too much, too fast. Now, one of the arguments we hear over and over again when this conversation comes up is that we're in favour for more immigrants here in Canada because of falling birth rates. How much weight does that argument hold?
**Tony Keller**: 我个人认为这个论点根本站不住脚。 这种论调的核心逻辑是：如果不引进海量移民，我们整个宏观经济就会面临全面的**劳动力短缺**（generalized labour shortages across the economy）。事实上，正是这种论调推动了2015年之后的移民大跃进——各类企业和特定商业游说团体不断鼓吹“加拿大即将面临人口短缺，必须大幅增加移民，加拿大目前劳动力严重不足”。 在整个经济体系中存在“普遍性劳动力不足”的说法是毫无逻辑的，因为我们的失业率从来都不是零。你可以说在某些特定领域存在结构性短缺，尤其是**高技能专业人才**（highly skilled people），这确实是我们应该高度重视的，我们也应该利用移民系统来精准解决这类短缺。但是，那种宣称“加拿大只是单纯的人不够，所以我们必须盲目维持超高移民率”的论点，完全缺乏事实依据。
Original English **Tony Keller**: I don't put a lot of weight on that because ultimately... So the argument for that is that we will have labour shortages generalized across the economy, labour shortages. And that, in fact, is what drove the big run up in immigration after 2015 was businesses and certain lobby groups saying Canada is going to have a population shortage. You've got to boost immigration. Canada currently has not enough workers. The idea of not enough workers generalized across the economy doesn't make a lot of sense, because we can see unemployment rate isn't zero. You can have specific shortages, especially for highly skilled people, and we should worry about that. And we should use the immigration system to target that. But the idea that there just aren't enough people in Canada, therefore, we need higher immigration rates, not a lot of basis to believe.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 听众中可能会有人反驳，比如安省北部社区的人会说：“Tony，我们当地确实缺人，我们那里的确非常需要劳动力。”对此你怎么回应？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: That there might be some people who are listening. Communities in northern Ontario who might say, well, actually, Tony, we do have a shortage. We do need people up there. What do you say to that?
**Tony Keller**: 这个论点面临的一个根本性挑战是：在加拿大，我们拥有**劳动力自由迁徙权**（labour mobility）。 你可以对某个人说：“如果你移民去某个偏远小镇或特定区域，我们会给你提供优待或专项政策支持。”但问题是，人是会长脚走动的。当地人口之所以流失，恰恰是因为其他大城市有更好的经济发展机会，人们被更好的经济机遇所吸引，这是完全正常的市场规律。 因此，试图通过移民系统去人为硬性充实那些正在持续流失人口的偏远社区，是极难奏效的。那些地方之所以流失人口是有其深层经济原因的。你无法通过移民政策强行逆转这一趋势，因为宪法赋予了每个人迁徙的自由，你无法强迫任何人永远留在特定地区。
Original English **Tony Keller**: So one of the challenges with that argument is, in Canada, we have labour mobility. So you can say to someone, hey, we're going to help you or give you a special benefit if you immigrate to a certain small town or a certain area, but you can move. People have been leaving those areas precisely because there are economic opportunities elsewhere. They are drawn to those economic opportunities. That's a good thing. So it is challenging to use the immigration system specifically to try to bulk up local communities in areas that are losing people. They're losing people for a reason. But so it's hard to use immigration because you can't compel anybody to stay anywhere.
### 成功移民体系的底层逻辑 **Jeyan Jeganathan**: 好的。回顾我们谈到的60年代和90年代的早期成功经验，请帮我们总结一下：加拿大建立一个成功的移民体系，其**核心秘诀与底层逻辑**究竟是什么？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Okay. Talk about the early days. We talk about the 60s. We talk about the 90s here. Help me understand what is the recipe here for a successful immigration system here in Canada.
**Tony Keller**: 我认为加拿大成功的移民体系秘诀在于：保持**相对较高但不过高的移民规模**（relatively high immigration, but not too high）——关于具体数字大家可以理性讨论；并且，**坚决聚焦于高技能与高学历人才**（focuses on skilled people and educated people），而不是把注意力放在引进从事最底层、最缺乏吸引力岗位的非技术劳工上。这才是最核心的钥匙。 同时，必须保持强有力的**边境管控力**（border control），这也是加拿大历史上一贯具备的优势，以确保入境者不是随意闯入，而是受邀而来。 我相信，只要我们回归到以往行之有效的经典体系，并在此基础上不断完善与优化，你就会看到加拿大人重新对移民感到安心与接纳，移民政策将重新受到广泛拥护。最重要的是，移民将重新变回一个**毫无政治争议的平常议题**：各个政党之间不会再拿移民互相攻击，加拿大人之间不会因移民产生撕裂与对立，它将重新变回默默高效运转的城市给排水系统。
Original English **Tony Keller**: So I think a successful immigration system for Canada has relatively high immigration, but not too high. And people, reasonable people can debate what that level is, focuses on skilled people and educated people, as opposed to focusing on unskilled people for the lowest, least attractive jobs. I think that's really the key. Have a decent level of border control, which Canada has always had to make sure that people don't just arrive, that they're invited. I think if you get back to the system the way it was and continue to refine and improve it, you're going to see Canadians be quite comfortable with immigration. You're going to see immigration be popular. Above all, you're going to see immigration be uncontroversial. Political parties won't fight over immigration. Canadians won't fight over immigration. It will just go back to working like functioning plumbing.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 你说的这个愿景非常耐人寻味。你刚才谈到让一切回归后台平稳运行、让指标实现稳定。我很想知道，你对联邦移民部长莉娜·迪亚布有什么具体的政策建议？他们目前是否走在正确的轨道上？
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Well, you talk about that. It's interesting. I am curious about what advice you would have or do have for the federal immigration Minister, Lena Diab, as you talk about something quiet, just kind of doing things behind the scenes and getting the numbers stabilized. Any advice there? Are they on the right track?
**Tony Keller**: 我认为他们确实朝着正确的方向迈出了一些步伐，但他们需要做的事情还有很多。 首先，他们必须**把配额总量进一步降下来**。我认为应该进一步回调到历史常态水平。在90年代、2000年代初直至2015年，我们的移民吸纳比例大约维持在**总人口的0.7%到0.8%**（0.7 to 0.8 percent of the total population）。以当前的人口基数换算，也就是每年大约30万人左右。因此，要把总量指标再压降一些。 其次，必须**大幅提高准入技能门槛**。不要把精力放在引进低薪劳工上，要把重心放在高学历、从长远来看能为加拿大做出实质贡献的高素质人才上。 第三，我主张**彻底废除临时外国劳工项目**（Temporary Foreign Worker program / TFWP）。因为该项目近年来彻底沦为了引进大量低薪工人的工具。同时，我们应当将**留学生签证**严格聚焦在正规顶尖大学的高质量学术项目上。我们要吸引的是那些我们真正渴望留在加拿大、甚至需要与全球竞争才能留下的人才；而不是那些仅仅为了获取加拿大身份、把学费当作买门票而入境的生源。对于那些入读顶尖大学顶尖项目的优秀学生，他们完全有能力随时回国或前往其他国家，这才是我们必须在全球全力争夺的核心人才。
Original English **Tony Keller**: I think they have taken some steps in the right direction. I think there's more they've got to do. They've got to bring the numbers down. I would say a little bit more back to where the levels were. So the levels that we were at in the 90s, the early 2000, up to 2015, were about 0.7 to 0.8 of the percent of the total population. So we're looking at talking around for current population, around 300,000 a year. So bring the numbers down a bit more. Bring the skill level up higher. Don't focus on low wage work, focus on high education people who in the long run will contribute to Canada. And I would get rid of entirely the temporary foreign worker program, because the temporary foreign worker program has focused recently on a lot of low wage work, and I would focus our student visas on universities, high end universities, good quality programs, the kind of people we want to attract to Canada, the kind of people we'd actually have to compete to get them to stay in Canada, as opposed to the kind of people who are paying tuition for the purpose of remaining in Canada. The tuition is simply to get in the door. In the case of people going to a high end university, doing a high end program, they could leave and go back to their country. We're trying to attract them. That's who we want: people we're competing for.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: Tony，我们今天的讨论就到这里。非常感谢你抽出时间接受我们的采访。
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Tony, we're going to leave it there. I really appreciate you taking the time.
**Tony Keller**: 谢谢你，非常感谢。
Original English **Tony Keller**: Thank you. Thank you very, very much.
**Jeyan Jeganathan**: 您认为政府在移民政策上找到了正确的平衡点，还是说目前的削减走得太远了？欢迎在评论区留言告诉我们，或者发送邮件至 Rundown@TVO.org。
Original English **Jeyan Jeganathan**: Do you think the government has found the right balance on immigration, or have the cuts gone too far? Let us know in the comments, or send us an email at Rundown@TVO.org.