Statistics Canada Reports II

[goodgrowth]

[q12]

Canada's population estimates: Strong population growth in 2023

Released: 2024-03-27

Quarterly population estimate — Canada
40,769,890

January 1, 2024

0.6% increase
(quarterly change)

Since the end of 2020, demographic trends in Canada have shifted significantly. The fertility rate reached a record low of 1.33 children per woman in 2022. Millennials now outnumber baby boomers in Canada and the labour market has changed, with some sectors experiencing shortages. Many permanent and temporary immigrants came to Canada, including many workers and international students.

On January 1, 2024, Canada's population reached 40,769,890 inhabitants, which corresponds to an increase of 1,271,872 people compared with January 1, 2023. This was the highest annual population growth rate (+3.2%) in Canada since 1957 (+3.3%).

Most of Canada's 3.2% population growth rate stemmed from temporary immigration in 2023. Without temporary immigration, that is, relying solely on permanent immigration and natural increase (births minus deaths), Canada's population growth would have been almost three times less (+1.2%).

In 2023, the vast majority (97.6%) of Canada's population growth came from international migration (both permanent and temporary immigration) and the remaining portion (2.4%) came from natural increase.

Trends in permanent and temporary immigration

In 2023, 471,771 permanent immigrants made Canada their home, which was within the target range of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC). Permanent immigration was up compared with one year earlier in every province and territory except Nova Scotia and Quebec.

A further 804,901 non-permanent residents (NPRs) were added to Canada's population in 2023. This was the second straight year that temporary immigration drove population growth and the third year in a row with a net increase of NPRs.

The majority of those NPRs were temporary workers responding to labour market needs in the different provinces and territories, followed by international students. Moreover, just over 1 in 10 NPRs were asylum claimants (with or without work or study permits).

Every province and territory except Newfoundland and Labrador saw a year-over-year increase in the net number of NPRs in 2023.

It is estimated that 2,661,784 NPRs were living in Canada on January 1, 2024. Among them, 2,332,886 were permit holders and their family members living with them, and 328,898 were asylum claimants (with or without work or study permits).

Difference between numbers of non-permanent residents from Statistics Canada and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada

Statistics Canada collaborates closely with Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and other federal departments to estimate the number of non-permanent residents (NPRs) living in Canada. The demographic estimates from Statistics Canada are updated on an ongoing basis, as new or revised data become available from its partners. Data related to NPRs from Statistics Canada's demographic estimates can differ from IRCC's data, given the different goals of the program.

For the third straight year, interprovincial migration at levels not seen in thirty years
Approximately 333,000 Canadians moved from one province or territory to another in 2023, the second-highest number recorded since the 1990s and the third straight year that interprovincial migration topped 300,000.

Alberta saw the largest net gain in interprovincial migration in 2023, adding 55,107 people. This was the largest gain in interprovincial migration nationally since comparable data became available in 1972. Alberta has been recording gains in population from interprovincial migration since 2022, a reverse of the trend seen from 2016 to 2021, when more people left the province than arrived from other parts of Canada.

Net interprovincial migration was also positive in Nova Scotia (+6,169 people), New Brunswick (+4,790) and Prince Edward Island (+818), although all three Maritime provinces gained fewer interprovincial migrants in 2023 than in the previous two years.

Nationally, Ontario (-36,197) lost the greatest number of people to other provinces and territories in 2023, following a loss of 38,816 people in 2022. The only other times (since comparable data became available) a province has lost more than 35,000 people due to migration to other parts of Canada occurred in Quebec in 1977 (-38,498 people) and 1978 (-36,955).

Unlike the neighbouring Alberta, British Columbia had more Canadians move out than in, meaning that, in 2023, net interprovincial migration (-8,624) was negative for the first time since 2012. In general, the largest migration flows for British Columbia and Alberta are with each other, and most of the net loss from British Columbia in 2023 was to Alberta.

Strong population growth in the fourth quarter of 2023

From October 1 to December 31, 2023, Canada's population increased by 241,494 people (+0.6%). This was the highest rate of growth in a fourth quarter since 1956 (+0.7%).

Canada welcomed 100,472 permanent immigrants in the fourth quarter of 2023, with nine provinces reporting higher year-over-year immigration levels.

In Quebec, the number of new immigrants decreased by about half, from 16,188 in the fourth quarter of 2022 to 8,627 in the fourth quarter of 2023.

From October 1, 2023, to January 1, 2024, the number of NPRs increased by 150,347, up for the eighth quarter in a row.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/dail...098-1&indgeo=0

[q12]

On January 1, 2024, Canada's population reached 40,769,890 inhabitants, which corresponds to an increase of 1,271,872 people compared with January 1, 2023.

We gained a Saskatchewan and a Nunavut in 2023.

And we just passed 41 Million, next month 42 Million???

[MonctonRad]

Before we get rid of JT, we'll probably be at 42.5M

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Before we get rid of JT, we'll probably be at 42.5M

It might slow down a tad, but even if Pierre Poilievre becomes Prime Minister, our population will still continue to increase at a rapid pace.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by lio45

The last time I allowed him to drag me down to his level and try to beat me with his experience, I actually made sure I phrased my statement in a bulletproof way: "wages in Canada have been going down lately compared to the cost of keeping a roof over one's head and food on one's table."

Most Canadians are struggling with the higher cost of virtually everything in the 2020s.

"Canada is doing great. By golly have you seen the rapid rise in wages!?"

[Architype]

Originally Posted by Wigs

Most Canadians are struggling with the higher cost of virtually everything in the 2020s.

"Canada is doing great. By golly have you seen the rapid rise in wages!?"

So much winning! It is, winning, right?

[MolsonExport]

For most of my years (more than 20) at SSP, and for those that shared an opinion on the matter, the desire has been for a bigger (population) Canada. Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

Clearly, the intake is completely unsustainable, for a multitude of reasons. And if there is one thing that the current liberal government owns, it is the completely unrealistic intake.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

For most of my years (more than 20) at SSP, and for those that shared an opinion on the matter, the desire has been for a bigger (population) Canada. Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

Clearly, the intake is completely unsustainable, for a multitude of reasons. And if there is one thing that the current liberal government owns, it is the completely unrealistic intake.

Agreed. There is such a thing as too much of a good thing. This is it.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Agreed. There is such a thing as too much of a good thing. This is it.

Most of those of us who aren't racists basically assumed Immigration=good until 2022 or so. I noticed it here first and then in real life conversations a few months after that. It took the political-media elite a little longer but they are also waking up to the fact we need a massive decrease in immigration and especially TFW fake students that now form the bulk of the intake.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It might slow down a tad, but even if Pierre Poilievre becomes Prime Minister, our population will still continue to increase at a rapid pace.

The Liberals recently announced that they want to cut the proportion of NPRs down to 5% of the population. The talk on social media is that only works if population growth slows down to 350k a year, which is basically the historical pre-JT growth rate (i.e. 500k PRs enter and 150k NPRs leave a year). We could be seeing a slow down, but cutting down growth by 1 million people a year is a long bridge to cross and will be disruptive. Knowing the Liberals, they'll likely take the easy way out and get to that 5% by converting a bunch of NPRs to PRs.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

So, somewhat lower than the ~1.5 million that many of us were predicting based on Q3 growth. Either growth fell off significantly in the last few months of 2023, or the increasing pace of emigration is taking a toll.

It's neither. Canadian population growth is much higher in the summer than winter so taking Q3 growth and extrapolating it for the whole year will always result in a number that's well off.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by theman23

The Liberals recently announced that they want to cut the proportion of NPRs down to 5% of the population. The talk on social media is that only works if population growth slows down to 350k a year, which is basically the historical pre-JT growth rate (i.e. 500k PRs enter and 150k NPRs leave a year). We could be seeing a slow down, but cutting down growth by 1 million people a year is a long bridge to cross and will be disruptive. Knowing the Liberals, they'll likely take the easy way out and get to that 5% by converting a bunch of NPRs to PRs.

If there's a hard cap of 500k on PRs, though (which there will be) they can't just move NPRs over to PRs, since that will count against the 500k. So if they actually manage to make this work, it really will mean a very sharp reduction in population growth (until the rebalancing at 5% is achieved in 2027, at which point NPR intake will resume, at a somewhat lower level).

There's really no way to wiggle around this goal if they really want to achieve it in the timeframe outlined. And as excessive as NPR intake has been, it really will be very disruptive to reduce it so much, so fast, so it'll be interesting to see how that plays out.

[goodgrowth]

Originally Posted by theman23

The Liberals recently announced that they want to cut the proportion of NPRs down to 5% of the population. The talk on social media is that only works if population growth slows down to 350k a year, which is basically the historical pre-JT growth rate (i.e. 500k PRs enter and 150k NPRs leave a year). We could be seeing a slow down, but cutting down growth by 1 million people a year is a long bridge to cross and will be disruptive. Knowing the Liberals, they'll likely take the easy way out and get to that 5% by converting a bunch of NPRs to PRs.

What do they mean by this? 5% of the population is about ~2M. Are they talking about the collective NPR in the country at any given moment or something?

[theman23]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

If there's a hard cap of 500k on PRs, though (which there will be) they can't just move NPRs over to PRs, since that will count against the 500k. So if they actually manage to make this work, it really will mean a very sharp reduction in population growth (until the rebalancing at 5% is achieved in 2027, at which point NPR intake will resume, at a somewhat lower level).

There's really no way to wiggle around this goal if they really want to achieve it in the timeframe outlined. And as excessive as NPR intake has been, it really will be very disruptive to reduce it so much, so fast, so it'll be interesting to see how that plays out.

I don’t think we can take for granted the PR target stays the same. A lot of Liberal announcement recently are half baked ideas being rushed out to stem the drop in the polls. I suspect we’ll see an upward revision of PR targets if the Liberals stay in power long enough to keep this promise (or equally likely is that they’ll just renege on it once the heat is off).

Originally Posted by goodgrowth

What do they mean by this? 5% of the population is about ~2M. Are they talking about the collective NPR in the country at any given moment or something?

Yes, that’s what they mean.

[harls]

I think we are caught in the 'population trap' now. Can't turn off the valve completely.

[goodgrowth]

I'm starting to think one of the big issues of our population growth problem is that much of it has been obfuscated through so many different avenues, categories, terms and counted in different ways.

Our government needs to just publish a TOTAL NUMBER that includes everyone coming to the country on an annual basis.

Like you have economic migrants, students, refugees, tfws, then skilled pathways? Then you have non-citizens which are broken into PR's and NPR's?

Like seriously no average person is ever able to grasp the whole picture because it is so convoluted and overlapping at the same time. I'm not sure our government has either.

[Acajack]

It's important not to lose sight of the fact that there is and will continue to be tremendous backroom pressure from powerful interests to NOT reduce the intake of newcomers (aka Fresh New Suckers) too much.

So if people are pining for a very noticeable reduction, I wouldn't get my hopes up.

It would take a huge paradigm shift or hard break in order for that to happen.

I'm just not seeing it yet.

(There are lots of political tricks that allow you to not listen to the people but still remain in power.)

[MolsonExport]

Many (most? all?) of us are direct and indirect descendants of 'Fresh New Suckers' from 400, 300, 200, 100, 50, 25, etc. years ago.

Those Irish getting off the boat for quarantine at Grosse Ile din't have a pot to piss in, or a window to throw it out of.

Weren't a modest number of European colonists those with...criminal records...back in the early days?

[harls]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Weren't a substantial number of European colonists those with...criminal records...back in the early days?

None of them settled in Sherbrooke area, for sure.