‘We lost the plot’: John Ibbitson and Darrell Bricker on why Canada has reached a crisis point

Darrell Bricker, pollster and CEO of Ipsos Public Affairs, and veteran journalist John Ibbitson explain why Canada, from its struggling immigration system, to its suppressed patriotism, to its unhopeful younger generation, to its straining federation, is in such poor shape. They also discuss what’s wrong with the Canadian Right and Left, and what they must do to fix things, based on their new book Breaking Point: The New Shifts Putting Canada at Risk. You can listen to this episode on Amazon, Apple, and Spotify. Program Summary This is an automated summary. Please check against delivery. A stark assessment of Canada’s current state suggests that decades of postponed decisions and policy failures have converged into a moment of reckoning that threatens national unity and prosperity. This perspective, detailed in a recent book examining Canada’s challenges, presents both a sobering diagnosis of the nation’s problems and a controversial set of prescriptions for addressing them. While Canada has weathered serious crises before, the current situation is often viewed as unique in its complexity. The moment has been colorfully described as one where “Canada has kicked so many cans down the road for so long, the chickens are finally coming home to roost.” From this viewpoint, long-standing problems have accelerated dramatically in recent years. Deteriorating defense capabilities, a broken immigration system, strained Indigenous relationships, and federal-provincial relations are cited as having reached unprecedented levels of tension. Furthermore, the arrival of former President Donald Trump’s rhetoric about annexation and threats of tariffs is seen as having forced Canada to confront these accumulated challenges simultaneously. Immigration is identified as perhaps the most damaging policy failure of recent years. The assessment notes that Canada once possessed “the best competitive advantage in the world” by being virtually alone among developed nations in enthusiastically welcoming hundreds of thousands of immigrants annually. For years, Canada brought in approximately 250,000 carefully selected, well-educated immigrants who contributed economically and culturally, with majority public support. However, the system is described as having collapsed when the government lost control of multiple immigration streams. While increasing the permanent resident cap was not necessarily opposed, the temporary foreign worker program is seen as having spiraled out of control. Even more critically, the international student program became characterized as “the actual core of our immigration system,” leading to massive abuse. Combined with asylum seekers crossing the border and millions of people Statistics Canada suddenly discovered had not been previously accounted for, the result was a dramatic shift in public opinion. For the first time, polls showed a majority of Canadians believed too many immigrants were entering the country. A key distinction is made between diversity as strength and diversity as weakness. The argument is made that when immigrants from around the world come to Canada seeking opportunity while embracing fundamental Canadian values of compassion, rule of law, and a “strict intolerance for intolerance,” diversity strengthens the nation. However, when competing ideologies emerge, regional alienation intensifies, and Canada becomes something to apologize for rather than celebrate, that same diversity becomes a weakness. On economic and housing issues, a heretical argument is presented: Canada needs to embrace suburban sprawl. This viewpoint contends that Canada is fundamentally a suburban nation, with more than two-thirds of the population living in three-bedroom houses with backyards. The COVID-19 pandemic is cited as proof that people want single-family homes with outdoor space. While supporting density and infill development, the position is held that younger generations must have access to affordable housing, even if located far from city centers. This suburban reality connects to an analysis of Canadian politics, where elections are seen as won or lost in suburban communities. These areas, noted for having high immigrant populations and significant non-white majorities, are considered critical. Any political movement that ignores these demographic realities or adopts divisive rhetoric is expected to fail, given that approximately 40 percent of Canada’s population is non-white and 25 percent of Canadian citizens were born outside the country. Several bold prescriptions for national renewal are proposed. These include diversifying trade relationships beyond the United States, building infrastructure to access new markets for natural resources and agriculture, and finally developing serious defense capabilities to protect Canada’s Arctic borders and fulfill NATO commitments. One proposal involves relocating federal departments dealing with shared or provincial jurisdictions to cities across Canada, with ministers and deputy ministers living in those communities rather than Ottawa. For example, the Canada Council could move to Saskatoon. This is suggested as a way to help the federal government understand regional concerns while making it more visible and relevant to Canadians outside the capital.