Research publications

Temporary foreign workers have been an important feature of Canada’s labour market landscape for decades. In essence, temporary foreign workers are foreign nationals engaged in work activities who are authorized to enter and to remain in Canada for a limited period with the appropriate documentation. In Canada, they are grouped in two overarching temporary labour migration programs. The first one is the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP), which assists employers in filling specific labour market gaps when Canadians and permanent residents are not available. The TFWP consists of several major streams, which have diverse requirements and operating procedures. These are: the high-wage stream (which refers to positions with wages at or above the provincial or territorial median hourly wage); the low-wage stream (which refers to positions with wages below the provincial or territorial median hourly wage); the primary agriculture stream (which refers to temporary foreign workers engaged in on-farm primary agricultural work, and includes the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program); the Global Talent Stream (which offers a shorter processing time to help employers obtain highly skilled or specialized temporary foreign workers more quickly); and the Caregiver Program (which refers to positions involving the care of children or family members with high medical needs). These TFWP streams require employers to obtain a Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA). Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) will issue a positive LMIA if an assessment indicates that hiring a temporary foreign worker will have a positive or neutral impact on the Canadian labour market. Where an LMIA is required, a positive LMIA must be obtained before the temporary foreign worker can apply to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada for a work permit.

Plastics have become ubiquitous throughout the global economy and in our daily lives as a result of their useful properties and low cost. At the same time, the durability of plastics combined with poor waste management has resulted in an estimated 60% of all plastics ever produced accumulating in landfills and the environment, where they can last for hundreds of years. As plastics break down, they form microplastics – tiny plastic pieces. Microplastics can accumulate persistent pollutants while they circulate in the marine environment and can enter the human food chain through seafood, sea salt and drinking water. Because ocean currents distribute lightweight plastic debris far from its source, the environmental quality of one nation can be negatively impacted by plastic litter originating from other nations. Strategies being deployed around the world to curb plastic waste and marine plastic pollution include: restricting the use of harmful or problematic plastics; requiring producers to be responsible for their products through end-of-life; implementing consumer information campaigns, including encouraging reduction and reuse; incentivizing recycling through deposit return schemes or by requiring minimum recycled content in plastic products; promoting innovation, such as in designing products for reuse and recycling; and supporting improved waste management infrastructure in developing countries with high plastic leakage into the environment. As is the case in many countries, Canada’s largest single category of plastic waste is packaging. The increasing volume of single-use plastics, including plastic packaging, is problematic as these products are only used briefly, rarely recycled and prone to becoming litter. The majority of Canada’s plastic waste ends up in landfills, with only 9% being recycled.

This paper examines the governance framework for radioactive waste management in Canada and describes the various disposal projects proposed to date and the decision-making process that supports them. Disposal projects vary according to the different categories of radioactive waste, which require a type of containment and isolation specific to their level of risk in order to protect human health and the environment. For example, low-level radioactive waste, such as contaminated soil and equipment used in nuclear power plants, can be stored long term in near surface facilities. In comparison, high-level waste, such as spent nuclear fuel, and some intermediate-level waste, such as former nuclear reactor parts, may have to be contained and isolated in deep geological repositories for hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of years. In Canada, four long-term, low- and intermediate-level waste management projects are expected to be completed in the coming years. Three of these projects involve the disposal of low-level waste owned by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories in near-surface facilities. Two of these projects are already under construction (Port Hope and Port Granby) and the other is in the approval phase (Chalk River). A proposed deep geological repository for the disposal of low- and intermediate-level waste owned by Ontario Power Generation that was in the process of being approved was rejected in its current form following a ratification vote by the Saugeen Ojibway Nation. An alternative solution will have to be considered. With respect to high-level waste, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization was established in 2002 as a not-for-profit organization to develop and implement a national long-term management plan for all of Canada’s spent nuclear fuel. This plan, known as Adaptive Phased Management, is expected to lead to the selection of a suitable site for a deep geological repository.

Sanctions are measures implemented by governments to restrict or prohibit certain types of interactions with a foreign state, individual or entity. Governments impose sanctions in pursuit of foreign policy objectives, most often in response to breaches of international peace and security, but also in cases of gross violations of human rights and significant acts of corruption. Over the last 30 years, the use of sanctions by the United Nations (UN), Canada and allies such as the United States (U.S.) and the European Union (EU) has increased significantly. Canada imposes UN-mandated sanctions through the United Nations Act, and autonomous sanctions through the Special Economic Measures Act and the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law). Regulations made under these Acts create a series of restrictions, prohibitions and obligations applicable to firms and people in Canada and to Canadians overseas in relation to foreign states, individuals and entities. The Acts include criminal penalties for contravening the regulations and provisions for parliamentary reporting and review. Canada currently has 20 sanctions regimes targeting specific countries and two transnational regimes related to counter-terrorism, as well as human rights and corruption sanctions targeting 70 individuals from five countries. Canada often imposes sanctions in coordination with its allies, most notably the U.S. and the EU. That said, Canadian sanctions practice differs from that of the U.S. in a number of important respects. Unlike Canada, the U.S. imposes so-called “secondary sanctions,” which seek to impose restrictions on firms in third-party countries. The U.S. also regularly imposes large fines in response to the violation of sanctions, totalling more than US$1 billion in 2019.

Unprecedented global warming has been observed in recent decades. Around the world, mean air and water temperatures have increased, amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea levels have risen. Canada is no exception: our mean temperature has increased by more than twice the global average temperature. A warming climate will likely have short- and long-term effects on people’s lives. Many aspects of our society are governed to some extent by climate. Here in Canada, climate change is likely to have an impact on human health, human rights, migration, food security, the economy, employment, national security and transportation. Political, social and economic institutions will have no choice but to adapt to the societal disruption brought about by climate change, but they can also find ways to take advantage of new opportunities. That means taking climate change into account in public policy planning.

Under section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867, the federal government has exclusive legislative authority for "Indians, and Lands reserved for the Indians." This responsibility, however, often overlaps with that of the provinces, whose authority extends to areas such as child welfare, education and policing. While "Indians" means all Indigenous peoples for the purpose of section 91(24), the federal government has historically tried to limit its responsibilities to the status First Nations population living on reserves, notably through the Indian Act, leaving other Indigenous peoples in a "jurisdictional wasteland." These nuances have influenced the relationships First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples have with the provincial and federal governments. The emphasis placed on federal and provincial responsibility has also historically overshadowed Indigenous peoples' inherent rights, including their right to govern themselves. Developments over the past decades in the areas of child and family services, education and policing illustrate how jurisdictional complexities may affect First Nations peoples and their communities, and how gaps have been filled by First Nations themselves as they assert their right to self-government and self-determination. To date, however, these developments have been more limited in scope and have mostly resulted from the federal government's intention to incrementally devolve programming and service delivery.

In Canada, defence procurement is a complex process involving several federal departments and agencies, notably the Department of National Defence; Public Services and Procurement Canada; Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada; and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. This decentralized, multi departmental approach to defence procurement is unique to Canada. Other industrialized countries have used different defence procurement models, with procurement undertaken by individual armed services, defence departments, centralized defence organizations, separate government organizations or independent civilian corporations. Notwithstanding the existence of these various defence procurement models and reforms in a number of countries in recent years, most processes – regardless of the model – continue to face similar challenges and criticisms. Many processes are characterized by bureaucratic hurdles, political influence, cost overruns and delays in delivering major projects. No existing defence procurement model seems to be able to address adequately all of the challenges associated with defence procurement in the 21st century. These challenges include the growing complexity and rising cost of major weapon systems and of global supply chains, as well as the increased speed of technological changes in certain fields. The mandate letters that the Prime Minister of Canada provided to several ministers in December 2019 refer to “analyses and options for the creation of Defence Procurement Canada.” In that context, an examination of the full range of defence procurement models used by Canada’s allies and other countries may occur in an effort to identify some of the advantages and disadvantages of each model, and their respective lessons learned.

The Canada Health Act (CHA) sets out criteria and conditions that provincial and territorial health insurance plans have to meet in order to receive the full cash contribution for which they are eligible under the Canada Health Transfer. The CHA requires that “medically necessary” or “medically required” hospital, physician or surgical-dental services be insured by the provincial or territorial plan. As a result, some health services that many Canadians view as essential to maintaining good health – such as prescription drugs and many mental health services – are not required by the CHA to be insured by the provinces and territories. Provinces and territories are free to insure other health care services in addition to the ones prescribed by the CHA. This means that the basket of publicly insured health services varies among Canada's provinces and territories. Over the years, improvements to the CHA have been proposed by health care stakeholders, academics and parliamentarians. This Background Paper describes the CHA, summarizes provincial and territorial compliance issues, and reviews parliamentary action related to the CHA.

Refugees are people who flee their country because it is unsafe. Most refugees seek protection in a country neighbouring their own. Others make their way to countries like Canada and seek protection once they have arrived. This paper describes the steps to obtain protection when a person is already in Canada. International law and Canadian legislation provide a framework for identifying whether a person needs protection. Refugee claimants must first approach Canadian officials, who will determine whether they meet certain criteria for referral to the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB).

In Canada, defence procurement currently involves several federal departments and agencies, including the Department of National Defence; Public Services and Procurement Canada; Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada; and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. Each department or agency is responsible for different stages of the defence procurement process. That said, over time, Canada has had various defence procurement processes, each with its own challenges and successes. To date, these processes have included procurement by individual armed services (army, navy and air force), by centralized federal departments or agencies and by Crown corporations. During the 20th century, the general trend in Canada in times of war or national emergency was to centralize defence procurement in a single federal department with its own Cabinet minister in order to improve control and coordination when acquiring defence products. For example, this approach was used during the Second World War with the Department of Munitions and Supply (1940–1945) and the early stages of the Cold War with the Department of Defence Production (1951–1969). For about the last 50 years, Canada has had a decentralized, multi-departmental approach to defence procurement. Since 1969, the process has involved several federal departments and agencies with specific roles and responsibilities. Introduced at a time of significant organizational change within the federal government, this process was originally established with the goals of maximizing the use of resources, achieving better administrative efficiency and realizing significant cost savings.