Those who want to stifle the debate around immigration thresholds at all costs have found a new argumentative trick. They explain to us that no study would come to specify our reception capacity in terms of immigration.
This is absurd. The capacity for reception and integration is a serious concept. Let's see from which criteria to define it.
First criterion: the future of French. The experience of the past 25 years is telling: mass immigration, as all serious demographers agree, is responsible for the anglicization of Montreal and Laval. It exceeds our capacity for francization.
Second criterion: cultural integration. Do those who join us first identify with their community of origin or do they quickly come to identify with the historic French-speaking majority and the people of Quebec? Or do they prefer to identify as Canadians or Montrealers first? Unfortunately, we know that the Quebec identity is often overlooked.
Third criterion: electoral behavior. Do immigrants and their descendants come to vote like the rest of the population by dividing themselves into several options or do they form a more or less compact electoral bloc rallying massively to a party and an ideology? We know that the second scenario prevails: the newcomers are overwhelmingly federalists. We understand the PLQ to always want more.
Fourth criterion: the material reception capacity. We know that there is a real housing crisis. It is directly linked to the demographic pressure generated by massive immigration (not to mention the illegal immigration that comes to us from Roxham Road). The same is true for the overflow of Montreal schools.
Let us now look at the factors structuring our reception capacity.
First, there is the number. We can transform any individual into a Quebecer, regardless of their origin, and that's good. But it's harder to do that when they come in at over 50,000 a year. You have to have a purely technocratic and disembodied vision of integration to believe it effective in the face of a human mass of this magnitude.
There is our continental reality. Immigrants who come to us mentally present themselves first in North America, then in Canada, also in Montreal, and incidentally, in Quebec. The force of attraction of the Quebec people is very weak compared to American cultural codes.
There is our belonging to Canada, which is first and foremost an English country, with a multiculturalist model, which challenges our claim to have our own model of integration, in addition to assimilating it to withdrawal.  ;
Finally, let's talk about the context of globalization, which weakens the ability of all nations to integrate, by favoring communalism more than collective identity.
At the end of all this, we evaluate. And we see that we receive far too many immigrants. How to fix a number then? Politics is not an exact science, of course. But insofar as we want an active immigration policy, we understand, in the light of history, that it is around 20,000.
Katrine Johns has been a reporter on the news desk since 2013. Before that she wrote about young adolescence and family dynamics for Styles and was the legal affairs correspondent for the Metro desk. Before joining The Gal Post, Katrine Johns worked as a staff writer at the Village Voice and a freelancer for Newsday, The Wall Street Journal, GQ and Mirabella. To get in touch, contact me through my firstname.lastname@example.org 1-800-268-7128