Paul Forseth is a commentator from BC and served as a member of Parliament from 1993 until 2006.Ottawa plans to hold immigration levels mostly steady over the next three years, according to Budget 2026. The Liberals claim the updated immigration plan aims to strike “a balance” that favours the needs of the economy, housing, healthcare, and social services. Such claims have not been true in the past and are unlikely to be true going forward.The mythmakers say the “Levels Plan” will continue to balance the needs of Canada’s employers, industries, and communities with Canada’s ability to meet the needs of newcomers, while avoiding undue pressure on housing, healthcare, and social services. Evidence shows past claims have been unreliable, and the new “Liberal speak” will be just as ephemeral.The new federal immigration targets were revealed on November 5. They will maintain temporary resident arrivals at 370,000 per year in each of 2027, 2028, and 2029, while the target for permanent resident admissions will stay at the current level of 380,000 in each of those years. The announcement is socially irresponsible and even hurtful.What is the Liberal immigration policy all about? Are the Liberals playing a long game to bake into society a biased pro-Liberal voting bloc among immigrants? It is hard to measure, but Liberals keep doing it despite considerable political pushback. So, they clearly see it as worth the political risk and believe it will pay off. Liberals also have a historical advantage among more recent immigrant-origin voters.A 2019 Canadian Election Study analysis published in the Canadian Journal of Political Science found that the Liberals had an advantage among immigrant-origin electors. Potential citizens who were permanent residents were particularly favourable toward the Liberals.Many factors influence their voting preferences, including country of origin, length of time in Canada, income and occupation, religion and social values, age and education, views on taxation, housing, and public services, and their assessment of individual political parties. Permanent residents cannot vote in federal elections, but some cheat and do anyway. They must first become Canadian citizens and meet the applicable voting requirements..Immigration clearly changes the electoral landscape; that is a demographic reality. Every person who eventually becomes a Canadian citizen and registers to vote becomes part of the electorate. Over time, immigration changes the composition of Canada’s social fabric. If certain immigrant-origin communities have historically favoured one party, their growing representation would affect electoral outcomes. Parties choose candidates to reflect local ethnic and social character.System defenders respond that there is a difference between a policy having an electoral benefit from immigration and a policy being deliberately designed for that benefit. Liberals deny ulterior motives.Voters can scrutinize political incentives, campaign strategies, constituency demographics, and government decisions as a test of motives. However, without better documentary evidence, internal communications or credible testimony establishing intent, it is only a likely possibility to say the government is deliberately importing voters.However, immigrants are not necessarily lifelong Liberal supporters. Their political preferences can change with their economic circumstances, experiences, and integration into Canadian society.Canadians need to demand measurable accountability rather than simply arguing about whether immigration numbers are too high. Key problem areas are housing, healthcare, labour markets, infrastructure, immigration transparency, and democratic accountability.Immigration targets should be assessed against actual housing completions, rental vacancies, and household formation, and not just bold Liberal bragging.Publish provincial and regional assessments of the additional doctors, nurses, hospital beds, and healthcare funding required. These statistics don’t look good for the Liberals.Demonstrate that temporary foreign worker programs are addressing genuine shortages rather than allowing employers to avoid improving wages and working conditions. Tim Hortons, the subject of media controversy over foreign worker abuse, is one example. Although based in Canada, its parent company, Restaurant Brands International, has 3G Capital, a Brazilian-linked investment firm, as its largest shareholder.Ensure municipalities receive adequate funding for population growth, including transit, water, sewage, and schools. Federal practice can unreasonably download responsibilities onto local governance..Publish the actual number of new arrivals, departures, extensions, overstays, and transitions from temporary to permanent status. The federal bureaucracy either hides the data or deliberately does not record it.Publish transparent assessments of immigration policy, including its economic, social, and demographic effects, without treating criticism of immigration levels as hostility towards immigrants. This is a public-service shortcoming.The bottom line — are the announced levels socially acceptable and financially doable? They are financially manageable in theory, as Canada will suffer but muddle through regardless. However, the targets alone do not establish social and infrastructure sustainability.Has the immigration system been brought under control, as Prime Minister Mark Carney claims? Some reductions have occurred, but the additional transition initiative and continuing intake warrant skepticism. The implications of the budget announcement are very worrisome.Is mass immigration returning from the era of former prime minister Justin Trudeau? Not in the same temporary-arrival pattern, although permanent admissions remain substantial, and 2027 numbers seem high.What about Western Canada? Housing, services, and some labour markets could face continued pressure, depending on regional capacity and the composition of arrivals.So, given the political trouble the immigration file has given, why are Liberals persistent?Is this a Liberal voter-building strategy? Evidence shows historical Liberal advantages among some immigrant-origin voters.If the population grows faster than housing, infrastructure, productivity, and public service capacity, the country can grow, and the Liberals can boast about growth, even when existing residents don’t feel better off. They may also calculate they are making Canada more politically Liberal.Canada should be asking not simply how many people it can attract, but how many it can successfully accommodate while maintaining affordability, opportunity, and public services for everyone. How successful is assimilation? The government should have to demonstrate that its targets meet that test. Is the government nation-building for the common good, or for the Liberal Party?Paul Forseth is a commentator from BC and served as a member of Parliament from 1993 until 2006.
