Die unbeabsichtigten Folgen der Kürzungen für internationale Studierende in BC

Sounds a lot like the corporatized education system seriously failed to ‚embrace innovation‘ or whatever the current managerial slogan is. They counted on an infinite gravy train of international student tuition to float their institutions and are paying the price for lack of foresight. You can tell that the educators are looking for any reaches possible for a continuation of a system that was fundamentally unsustainable.

Over the past few years, the CBC has shown a consistent and obvious bias regarding where it sits on the immigration debate. I’ve lost track of the number of overly-sympathetic pieces on the plights of international students facing expiring visas, or the post-secondary institutions who grew their administrative costs in lock-step with revenue growth from international student tuitions and now find themselves short.

The debate is never around *why* these changes were done, but rather the injustice they’ve imposed on the people benefitting from the policies that no longer are supported.

Perhaps most obviously, the CBC doesn’t even attempt at making the case as to why these changes were necessary to begin with. In fact, they ignore the rationale entirely and act as a mouthpiece for consumers of cheap labour, high tuition and rent to grow their investment portfolios.

CBC should be ashamed of themselves with these completely unbalanced pieces.

>According to the [auditor general’s report](https://www.canada.ca/en/auditor-general/our-work/audit-reports/auditor-general-report-2026-international-student-program-reforms.html) released Monday, B.C. expected to see an 18 per cent drop in study permit approvals in 2024 — but it actually saw a reduction of 66 per cent.

Have people considered that the changes to immigration rules undercut the *primary incentive* that drew students to Canada to begin with?

>“It’s very clear how few people in Ottawa are actually thinking about this from the lens of what serves international students, what serves Canadian communities, what serves, you know, universities or colleges,“ he said.

Our policies are meant to serve *Canadian interests* – not foreigners seeking to use our education system as a path-of-least-resistence itno Canada. Who is to say these changes don’t actually help Canadian communities? Lower rents, less chaotic transit (I absolutely love how quiet the GO Train is now in the morning) and an increasing number of seats filled by actual Canadians – these are all good things, unless you are a landlord or a college who benefitted from this.

>The academic said the drastic drop in international admissions will mean, in a few years, there could be a generation of post-secondary students who have very few international colleagues — **which McCartney argued will lead to a lack of global perspectives.**

This is such a hilarious take. A lack of foreign students will lead to a „lack of global perspectives“? Canada still has relatively high immigration and we’re a country that is highly connected to both disaspora communities domestic and abroad.

>**“The reality of Canada is that we are totally dependent on temporary residents. They run our businesses … they are a huge part of the energy of this country,“ he said**

Have they considered that relying on „temporary residents“ may not be a good thing for the well-being of Canada in some aspects? Just because something is true today, does not mean it’s something that has to be the case in the future.

>Rural areas across B.C. have said for months that they’re dealing [with labour shortages](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/temporary-foreign-workers-prince-rupert-9.7022263), and that the reduction [in international students](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/canada-immigration-international-students-workforce-northern-bc-1.7374915) means rural towns will be disproportionately affected.

Now we’re getting to the crux of the issue – it’s about a stream of cheap labour and not wanting to increase wages to attract Canadians. Let’s just get to brass tacks here, shall we?

> Rural areas across B.C. have said for months that they’re dealing with labour shortages, and that the reduction in international students means rural towns will be disproportionately affected.

This was not an “unintended consequence”. It was an intended consequence and policymakers and think tankers simply didn’t care.

If voters want those programs they will vote for more funding. If they don’t, they won’t. Same with every other province.

„“It’s very clear how few people in Ottawa are actually thinking about this from the lens of what serves international students…what serves, you know, universities or colleges,“ he said.“

– Why would we, Canadians, care how our internal policies „serve“ the world? 

Why would we worry about serving post-secondary institutions? They aren’t „the people“.

This reeks of regulatory capture being undone, and those who were benefiting from that capture complaining.