Canada Immigration Plan 2017 released !

[mf4361]

Thats the same graph, just using a different starting y point.

and that is my point. put it in a different axis makes the actual increase in number smaller than advertised. Did anyone remember some high school statistics and graphing?

The previous graph is using graph to distort data to make an anecdotal point. @Que Em will be good at being a politician

 

[betty44]

Im sorry but thoses just numbers not facts. numbers can change, everything relies on EE cutoff and score for people who deserve additional points. there is a big different in knowing that x amount of people will land in 2017 And knowing with facts that beacuse i will have a good score in 2017, i will be able to compete in EE for next year. Im not saying info given is not important but it does not have any impact if they dont complement it with changes to EE. People who deserve additional points need hope that those points will be given and starting date for it, it could be only 10 points or just 5 but since nov. 2015 they ve been playing this game. Knowing this numbers does not help a international graduate with a work permit expriring or a french speaker in the same position. It only creates more anxiety¡.

 

[Alexios07]

and that is my point. put it in a different axis makes the actual increase in number smaller than advertised. Did anyone remember some high school statistics and graphing?

The previous graph is using graph to distort data to make an anecdotal point. @Que Em will be good at being a politician

Don't blame Que Em, he just quoted the graph from IRCC's report:

http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?mthd=tp&crtr.page=1&nid=1145319&crtr.tp1D=930

Im sorry but thoses just numbers not facts. numbers can change, everything relies on EE cutoff and score for people who deserve additional points. there is a big different in knowing that x amount of people will land in 2017 And knowing with facts that beacuse i will have a good score in 2017, i will be able to compete in EE for next year. Im not saying info given is not important but it does not have any impact if they dont complement it with changes to EE. People who deserve additional points need hope that those points will be given and starting date for it, it could be only 10 points or just 5 but since nov. 2015 they ve been playing this game. Knowing this numbers does not help a international graduate with a work permit expriring or a french speaker in the same position. It only creates more anxiety¡.

At least we have something to discuss and know the future plan of the government.

 

[fatani]

Well last yr govt said 50% of the applicants will be coming from EE. Now the govt mentions MOST OF THEM will come from EE. With Quotas also increased for economic immigration from last yr and most of them will come through EE then there is definate chance that Number of ITAs will increase. With 50% target for EE they were sending 1500 ITAs consistently so now with most of them coming through EE and with the slight increase in immigration target the ITAs will definately going to increase by atleast 1000 more per round so if they send out 2000-2500 ITAs per draw consistently the score will fell below 450 quiet easily. Because if they are saying MOST OF THEM WILL COME FROM EE. It means that they cant stick to 1500 because 1500 ITAs were sent before when they said 50% will come through EE. So my logic suggests that the draw size will increase.

 

[Que Em]

and that is my point. put it in a different axis makes the actual increase in number smaller than advertised. Did anyone remember some high school statistics and graphing?

The previous graph is using graph to distort data to make an anecdotal point. @Que Em will be good at being a politician

No data has been distorted in that graph, check the scaling.

Forget about graphs, come back to the actual numbers.

Permanent Resident Admissions 2011-15:

2011: 248,732
2012: 257,809
2013: 259,039
2014: 260,282
2015: 271,847
2016: 300,000 (projected)
2017: 300,000 (projected)

For 2011 to 2015, the average was 259,542. And now, the admission targets are at 300,000.

Comparing to the average admissions in the last 5 years (2011-15), the targets for 2016 and 2017 have additional space for over 40,000 admissions.

 

[betty44]

Im just saying the could simply reach the new immigration target leaving EE just the way it is. Most of us in this forum are below 450 points and i know i dont speak for myself when i say that we are tired of waiting and deserve a ray of hope for 2017

 

[fatani]

McCullum said that from 2011-15 their targets were 260,000 on avg and then they have to increase the number in 2016 suddenly because of the refugees. So now 300,000 is a benchmark number from which they will grow further in coming years.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.3829496&ved=0ahUKEwic1O-KmIbQAhVsLcAKHcUdAIwQFggkMAM&usg=AFQjCNGSzFfpZdKVC-nQNOqwL7MGt1I8tA&sig2=_oU5DO0HPpTzM6iGeELk7w

 

[mf4361]

No data has been distorted in that graph, check the scaling.

Forget about graphs, come back to the actual numbers.

Permanent Resident Admissions 2011-15:

2011: 248,732
2012: 257,809
2013: 259,039
2014: 260,282
2015: 271,847
2016: 300,000 (projected)
2017: 300,000 (projected)

For 2011 to 2015, the average was 259,542. And now, the admission targets are at 300,000.

Comparing to the average admissions in the last 5 years (2011-15), the targets for 2016 and 2017 have additional space for over 40,000 admissions.

I apologize for not realizing the graph isn't made by you.

The numbers are right but the scale of graph is definitely distorted and no indication of "Not to scale". If you want to show [Increase in target] they should graph the data as such. Basically a first derivative.

i guess the graph is indeed made by politicians

 

[Que Em]

What is the pilot scheme btw?

Is the Atlantic Immigration Pilot Program going to be a new thing? Wonder how different it's going to be from the current PNPs.

http://www2.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/news/news_release.2016.07.0616.html

ATLANTIC IMMIGRATION PILOT

Purpose/Objective

The three-year pilot project is intended to be an employer-driven immigration program to help address labour market needs in the four Atlantic provinces (New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland & Labrador). The goal is to develop approaches for immigration that will enhance retention of immigrant workers in the Atlantic provinces in support of the Atlantic Growth Strategy.

Through this project the Government of Canada ‎will admit up to 2,000 immigrants and accompanying families in 2017, with rising numbers in the following years depending on performance. This is a substantial increase, amounting to almost half the current number of provincial nominees in Atlantic Canada.

More here:
http://www.acoa-apeca.gc.ca/eng/Agency/MediaRoom/NewsReleases/Pages/4824.aspx

 

[Que Em]

I apologize for not realizing the graph isn't made by you.

The numbers are right but the scale of graph is definitely distorted and no indication of "Not to scale". If you want to show [Increase in target] they should graph the data as such. Basically a first derivative.

i guess the graph is indeed made by politicians

Come on, buddy. The scale is not distorted, the Y-axis grid lines are placed exactly at a consistent gap of 20,000. And the graph represents the figures correctly. However, you can say that the graph has been designed in a way to focus on the 'actual change' (which is the main point of the discussion here).

Changing the starting point of the Y-axis doesn't change the facts (i.e., the actual numbers). So, let's just focus on the actual numbers, instead.

 

[mf4361]

Come on, buddy. The scale is not distorted, the Y-axis grid lines are placed exactly at a consistent gap of 20,000. And the graph represents the figures correctly. However, you can say that the graph has been designed in a way to focus on the 'actual change' (which is the main point of the discussion here).

Changing the starting point of the Y-axis doesn't change the facts (i.e., the actual numbers). So, let's just focus on the actual numbers, instead.

Look, whatever you want to call that, it's a wrong one. It exaggerated relative change of numbers to its base

If you want to show only the part of interest and start y axis not from 0, use axis break symbol

 

[Que Em]

Look, whatever you want to call that, it's a wrong one. It exaggerated relative change of numbers to its base

If you want to show only the part of interest and start y axis not from 0, use axis break symbol

Base is clearly mentioned at 240,000. As, 0 is not mentioned/shown on the graph, there is no need to add any axis break symbol.

Also, I am clearly not the one who made this graph and I have already agreed to the fact that the graph has been designed in a way to 'highlight' the change. But it's factually/technically correct and no data has been distorted in the making of this graph.

 

[ravdawg]

and that is my point. put it in a different axis makes the actual increase in number smaller than advertised. Did anyone remember some high school statistics and graphing?

The previous graph is using graph to distort data to make an anecdotal point. @Que Em will be good at being a politician

Exactly. Basic research methodologies - you don't use garbage data visualizations. Failed litmus test.

 

[Pawshi]

Folks,

My opinion - Overall the FSW numbers have increased. I do believe that there would be larger draw to accommodate the increase. Also, PNP quota has been increased to some. Thoughts???

FSW is increased by 26.19% from 58400 to 73700
PNP increased by 6.69% from 47800 to 51000

Considering the good increase in FSE, if we divide the increase evenly (15300/12) then we get 1275 more ITAs. Considering 1 ITA to 1.5 family, the net increase in the ITA comes out to 850.
Considering the old ITA level of 1500 for each draw, and then two draw every month, the new ITA should be 1500+425=1925

So as per my calculation, the next draws in Nov 2016 to Sept 2017 should be around 1800 to 2100.

 

[Pawshi]

Please check the figures from 2015, 2016 and 2017. I think, it is a great news for all of us.

2015 - http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/publications/rpp/2015-2016/

2016 - http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/notices/2016-03-08.asp

2017 - http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/notices/2016-10-31.asp

in 2015, they didnt specify any target. They kept high and low. If we compare high of 2015 to high of 2017, there is net increase of 3300

in 2016, they specified the target. Considering that in mind, there is a increase of 15300. Good gain in economic immigrants.

The next encouraging statement for 2017 is that "Levels targets and ranges have not been established for each individual program as a majority of admissions in 2017 are expected to come from Express Entry. This approach reflects the current way that federal economic immigrants are selected under the Express Entry system. The Express Entry system determines which programs foreign nationals qualify for based on the information they provide and awards them points under the Comprehensive Ranking System for their ability to successfully enter the Canadian work force (e.g., age, education, official language proficiency and work experience)."

while 2016 says - "Levels targets and ranges have not been established for each individual program as almost half of admissions in 2016 are expected to come from Express Entry. This approach reflects the new ways federal economic immigrants are selected under the Express Entry system. The Express Entry system determines which programs foreign nationals qualify for based on the information they provide and awards them points under the Comprehensive Ranking System for their ability to successfully enter the Canadian work force (e.g. age, education, official language proficiency and work experience)."

so the net net stuff is....that there is around 500+ ITA to be added in each draw as per the base of 1500 from last two years. Then, increase of 600 to 1000 ITAs also to be factored as majority of admission is from express entry. So considering, it to 80% of what it was stated in 2016 (half of admissions in 2016), I consider around 600 to 1000 ITAs. So again the final net should be around 2500+ to 3000 ITAs in each draw for next one year.

Let's see how it goes.