In this blog I summarize several observations about immigration in Quebec made by Jacques Houle, author of the book Disparaître ? (To Disappear?).
Français Une version française de ce blogue est disponible sous le titre L’immigration, cette question intouchable.
We all know (or should know) how regressive pseudoleftists gleefully use insults, vilification and outright slander to silence speech which they refuse to tolerate. This applies, in particular, to anyone who dares to address the subject of immigration. Anyone with such temerity can expect to be targeted in short order.
Well Jacques Houle, author of Disparaître ? Afflux migratoires et avenir du Québec (To Disappear? Waves of Migrants and the Future of Quebec), dares. In a recent article by columnist Mathieu Bock-Coté, entitled « La pénurie de main d’oeuvre est une fable » : entretien avec Jacques Houle (The labour shortage is a myth; Interview with Jacques Houle), he summarizes the situation. Here are his essential points:
- There is no shortage of labour for quality jobs with good salaries. According to the Quebec Institute of Statistics, nearly a third of Quebec workers are overqualified for the jobs they hold. For college and university graduates, the overqualification rate reaches 40%.
- The myth of a labour shortage is used to hide the reality that there is a problem recruiting persons to fill poor quality jobs, with low salaries or which are part-time or have non-standard hours. Furthermore, more than 60% of the labour shortage corresponds to wages of less than $15 per hour. The positions with the greatest shortage are: waiters, salespersons and cashiers, as well as various unskilled jobs. These are low-paid, insecure jobs which are of little interest to non-immigrants and former immigrants.
- There is no real labour shortage in Quebec but rather many low-paid jobs with non-competitive working conditions which remain unfilled. The solution is not immigration, but rather increases in salary and better working conditions.
- It is no surprise that the biggest proponents of mass immigration are (1) business owners who seek immigrant labourers who have no choice but to accept miserable salaires and (2) politicians with a broad propensity for electoral clientelism.
- Administrators of higher educational institutions love foreign students for the simple reason that they pay much higher tuition.
- Mass immigration benefits powerful lobbies who keep quiet about the enormous advantages they can expect from it.
In conclusion, J. Houle reminds us that the issue of immigration, which, like any important societal concern, should be part of normal democratic debate, is subject to what could be called “soft censorship” (« censure blanche ») and he concludes that some subjects of discussion are taboo.
And here are the conclusion which I draw: The identitarian and régressive pseudo-left, which is overwhelmingly obsessed with the question of race, which sees racism everywhere—whether it exists or not—and which imposes its opinions as if they were sacred religious dogma, poisons political discourse and prevents us from addressing subjects which we the public, electors and citizens, should be able to discuss openly and without censorship. The taboo against open debate about immigration mainly serves neoliberal financial interests, with whom pseudo-leftists are objectively allied.
Finally, we must not forget one aspect of this issue which was not mentioned in the interview: the use by the government of Canada of sizable immigration, especially in the Montreal region, with the purpose of overwhelming the francophone majority of Quebecers, in the medium and long term, in order to stifle the specificity of that majority. In particular, this use of immigration is an indirect and insidious way of fighting against Quebecers’ desire for State secularism.