Read the following opinion column from a website.
I believe the federal government is right to ask whether its immigration targets match the number of homes actually being built. I also believe it is about to answer that question with the wrong tool. A single national ceiling tied to housing starts would slow arrivals in towns that badly need workers just as much as in cities that badly need apartments, and that would be a mistake.
Xenia Fekete, a labour economist, argues that permanent immigration should stay high because retirements are emptying jobs in the trades and in care work faster than young Canadians can fill them. She points to vacancy surveys showing that openings for licensed electricians and personal support workers have stayed high for three straight years. Fekete would adjust temporary programs one sector at a time, and she wants foreign credentials recognized in months rather than years. Bjorn Vezina, a housing advocate, says every annual target should be published beside a count of homes actually completed, not homes merely announced. “Bringing in workers without roofs is a plan for crowded basements,” he said in a speech to city councillors. He is not against high immigration, but he wants the two numbers to move together over several years.
Zinnia Pelland, who manages her province’s nominee program, stresses that the country is not one housing market. Some mid-sized cities still need newcomers to staff hospitals and meat plants, she says, while the hottest cities need slower arrivals until new zoning rules produce more homes. She would reward towns able to show rentals ready to build and licensed tradespeople willing to mentor with a bigger share of nominee places. Taavi Goulet, a spokesperson for care-home and food-processing employers, says any abrupt reduction in those streams would force employers to cancel shifts within a few months. Goulet backs Vezina’s published housing numbers but insists that labour shortages be tracked on a separate scoreboard rather than buried inside a housing rule.
Two years ago I spent six weekends in a row bidding against strangers for a one-bedroom apartment, so Vezina’s warning does not sound abstract to me. In my view, though, Pelland has the better answer. A rule written for Toronto should not empty a hospital ward in Brandon. I would have Ottawa publish Vezina’s housing count and Goulet’s labour scoreboard together, then let the provinces steer newcomers toward places with both jobs and homes waiting. Sanjeev Laporte writes on national affairs every Saturday.
Using the drop-down menu (▾), choose the best option according to the information given on the website.
Who most clearly argues that one rule should not fit every part of the country? 2..
Bjorn Vezina’s position would most likely be supported by 3..
What outcome does Taavi Goulet’s condition call for? 4..
The columnist’s view of a single national ceiling is best described as 5..
The following is a comment by a visitor to the website page. Complete the comment by choosing the best option to fill in each blank.