Joel Kotkin: Immigration alone won’t solve Canada’s population decline

This year, Canada’s population decreased, the first time since Confederation 160 years ago.

The reasons vary, but include a reduction in mass immigration, a very low birthrate and a stagnant economy sending ambitious Canadian to — horror of horrors! — the brutal nation just to the south.

Demographic decline has spread across much of Europe, East Asia and increasingly even developing countries, a demographic implosion that will shape our political and economic life for decades to come. Roughly two-thirds of countries experience fertility rates below 2.1, the level needed to replace the current population.

In the next quarter century, estimates the IMF, China’s population will drop by 155.8 million, Japan 18 million, Russia 7.9 million, Ukraine 7 million, South Korea 6.5 million and Italy 7.3 million.

Canada, as of now, is projected to experience some marginal growth. But with a fertility rate almost half that needed to replace the population, Canada, notes The Catholic Register, is now “fertile ground for population collapse.”

Canada’s birth decline is precipitous even by western standards, with a fertility rate lower than the U.S., France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. The current trajectory puts on track with Japan, the poster child for population decline.

Population has long been a challenge for Canada, as the country has struggled to populate its vast, bountiful territory. Even during the early days of New France, relatively few came to the country and once the British took over, growth came from high fertility rates.

Immigrants from Ireland and the other British isles boosted Canada’s population followed by migration from central and eastern Europe in the late 19th and early 20th Century. But the U.S. — except during the Civil War or after immigration restrictions placed in 1924 — has tended to get the lion’s share of immigrants, largely due to more fertile land, a stronger economy and better weather, at least in places.

In the past decade, the mainstream Canadian establishment has had an answer to this dilemma: immigration. But this has not helped staunch a low birthrate or made the country any more cohesive. It also did not prevent the country from suffering the slowest economic growth rates among advanced countries.

Europe may be Prime Minister Mark Carney’s beloved role model, but it shows the futility of mass immigration, particularly from developing countries. Throughout the continent, newcomers are far more dependent on welfare transfers than natives. In Spain, the rate of poverty for immigrants from outside the continent, mostly Latin America and Africa, is roughly three times that of native population.

Similarly, in Canada, one in five recent immigrants now suffers “deep poverty” — an income below 75 per cent of the poverty line — compared to only five percent of the whole population. Many emigrants seem increasingly reluctant to adopt Canadian social and civic norms. A welcoming and tolerant country, for example, has turned into one of the world’s hotbeds of antisemitism.

Not surprisingly, the tide is turning against mass migration, not only in the United States, but also the U.K., Netherlands, France, and Germany, whose welfare state is creaking under the burden. This opposition is rising even in developing countries such as South Africa, Turkey, Pakistan, Uganda, Egypt, Kenya and Ethiopia.

In Canada, too, opposition to unrestrained mass immigration has grown so fierce that cuts are being imposed by the current Liberal government, run by the ultimate globalist.

Clearly, immigration is not the solution to the demographic dilemma. The real long-term issue deals with an extraordinarily low birthrate, made worse by poor prospects faced by many native-born Canadians.

The pain is felt most, as in other Western societies, by the domestic working class. Since many of the recent newcomers are poor and ill-educated, a recent King’s Trust report suggests young native-born Canadians are competing against recent immigrants at the low end of the job market. In the U.S., a recent congressional study shows mass immigrant tends to slow wage growth at the lower ranks. As millions have left the country, working class wages have begun to grow faster than for the already affluent.

Rather than looking abroad for salvation, Canada might prioritize getting their disengaged workforce back towards employment. In Canada, up to one quarter to one-third of the population under 30 is neither in school nor a job. More than 800,000 young Canadians aged 15 to 29 are neither employed nor engaged in education or training, and a detachment for the labour force that has grown markedly since 2022, one of the peak years of Canadian immigration.

This mismatch of native workers and jobs drives fertility rates down. Many young people are failing to launch, notes the recent King’s Trust report, have seen the elimination of full-time work. A 2026  study  by the Fraser Institute found that 437,000 people aged 15 to 24 looked for a job but could not find one last year, up 57 per cent from 2022. Fourteen per cent of Canada’s workforce is under 25 but they account for twice as large a percentage of the unemployed.

Then even if they get jobs, few young Canadians can afford the country’s housing market, which has soared in part due to immigration, particularly in Vancouver and Toronto. Real Estate Magazine estimates that the number of homeowners aged 18 to 34 plunged by 21 per cent over the past three years — from 47 per cent in 2021 to just 26 per cent today.

Housing costs, particularly for single-family homes, have long been a factor influencing fertility rates. The current decline in housing starts won’t make things any easier.

Not surprisingly, young, and ambitious Canadians are heading south of the border — even under the odious Trump — in growing numbers. Last year saw the largest exodus to the US in decades. To be sure America also has ultra-expensive areas like California and New York City, but the economic growth is now largely concentrated in booming cities in the American sunbelt, where prices tend to be lower.

Ultimately, Canada cannot seriously address its demographic problem through immigration alone. Instead, steps need to be taken to reduce the cost of housing, promote more vigorous economic growth, including raising the retirement age, and shifting immigration policy to favour those who can contribute materially to the nation. Rather than looking abroad for solutions, priority should be placed on helping young people to ensure a Canadian future worth having.

National Post