The News Rundown

B.C. private college shut down for misleading international students

This particular BC story is not one that I would be expecting to talk about on our last regular show of 2025, but because of the divisive media rhetoric surrounding Canada's latest population numbers, in a large part due to fewer foreign study permits, it's good to look at why exactly this is the case.
This past week the CBC released a story called "B.C. private college shut down for misleading international students", in which they say that Pacific Link College, based in Surrey and Burnaby, has been shut down, but as usual, the media glosses over the fact that this is actually 2 month old news.
We'll get back to Pacific Link College, and why the media waited so long to cover the story, but first, let's have some background. This week, it was reported that Canada's population fell by 76k in the third quarter of 2025, the largest population drop on record, which is being attributed mainly to a major decline in temporary foreign students and workers.
Statistics Canada said the number of non-permanent residents in Canada decreased by 176,479 over the same period, a nearly six-per cent drop — the largest since those records began in 1971. That decrease is mostly due to fewer international study permit-holders due to recent federal efforts to cap the number of permits issued per year.
In this most recent quarter, the agency said every province and territory except for Alberta and Nunavut saw population decreases, with Ontario and British Columbia seeing the biggest drops of 0.4 and 0.3 per cent, respectively.
Ontario and B.C. are also home to the country’s largest international student populations, Statistics Canada notes, and the decrease in study permit holders nationally was “concentrated” in those two provinces.
The crackdown on international students has exposed the post secondary education system within Canada, and how a lot of institutions were set up specifically to take money from people, generally from India, to come to Canada, and work towards permanent residency, rather than going to school and getting a good education.
This brings us back to Pacific Link College. On Oct. 8, the province revoked Pacific Link College's (PLC) certification to provide career-related course programs, effectively shutting down the college. In B.C., schools need the certification to provide full-time courses and charge tuition of at least $4,000.
In a Notice of Cancellation by B.C.’s private-college regulator, the Private Training Institutions Regulatory Unit (PTIRU), the college was stripped of its designation certificate last October and was ordered to immediately stop delivering its programs.
The hundreds of students that were enrolled in PLC at the time of the closure have been urged to apply for tuition refunds through the province. Students who previously graduated but feel like they were misled by the school can also qualify, according to the Ministry of Post-Secondary Education. Students have also been advised to seek enrolment in another school.
This didn't actually come out of nowhere. OMNI News reported back in May that Pacific Link was one of two private colleges ordered by the regulator to refund students, after a slew of problems with the college that PTIRU cited in its cancellation, including:
- False and deceptive claims on the college’s website
- Work placements that didn’t match program objectives
- Students admitted without meeting requirements
- Unapproved programs advertised and delivered
- Instructors without minimum qualifications
- Programs not delivered as approved
- An unreasonable attendance policy allowing up to 90 consecutive days absence
- Evidence of non-attendance and academic failure
Balraj Kahlon, co-founder of One Voice Canada, a nonprofit that advocates for international students, said that “We’ve been dealing with problems at Pacific Link College since 2019. After the OMNI story in May, even more students came forward.”
Kahlon said "There is still a lot of anger and frustration that [students] wasted a lot of time and money at Pacific Link. They were there, in some cases, for one to two years, [paying] $10,000 to $15,000 in tuition."
Kahlon acknowledged the regulator’s decision but said it came too late. “If they were paying attention earlier, a lot more students could have been protected.”
CBC on the other hand, is trying to claim credit for the closure, where the CBC's Jon Hernandez says "The closure comes after multiple students came forward to CBC News in September, alleging the school required them to participate in a political campaign for course credit."
In the CBC story, it says that in September, multiple students came forward to CBC News, alleging the school required them to attend Conservative candidate Tamara Jansen's campaign office for two weeks in the lead up to a byelection in December 2024.
Their participation, which included folding envelopes and door-knocking, was required for course credit and they were required to submit photos of their attendance to school administrators, the students alleged.
Jansen, who ended up winning the 2024 byelection, and again in the spring election of 2025, denied any knowledge that the school had directed students to their campaign headquarters, and said she had no ties to the school.
So the CBC clearly knew about the story surrounding Pacific Link College, and even tried to claim credit for helping to cause the closure by writing unproven allegations that slandered a Conservative MP. In reality, the problems with the college were reported on much earlier in the year, and even after the shuttering in October, we're only hearing about it now, this week, as the population numbers get released surrounding questions around the future for international students in Canada.
So why is it that rather than reporting on the news when it happens, the CBC knowingly waits for the most opportunistic moment to release a story? It's a question that needs to be asked, even if we won't get an answer.
Supplementals:

The report into the findings of the Alberta Next Panel was quietly dropped on the Friday afternoon before the Christmas break.
Note about Friday news, especially before a holiday.
The report says that, “Replacing the CPP with an (Alberta plan) is the most financially meaningful initiative Albertans have the right to pursue on our own to enhance our sovereignty and financial independence within a united Canada.”
The report is clear that a referendum should be held on this but only after more information on the pros and cons are shared.
The report also suggests creating an Alberta police force when the contract with the RCMP ends in 2032.
The report calls for a referendum on abolishing the senate.
But most controversially the report calls for a referendum on more control over immigration similar to how Quebec manages their immigration.
These votes minus the one on the pension plan would likely happen in October 2026.
They manage immigration based on language requirements, cultural values, and economic need.
In speaking with the Calgary Sun’s Rick Bell Danielle Smith shared her views on immigration and they are controversial but part of an opening negotiation.
On controlling the number of immigrants coming to the province Smith points out the federal government during and after COVID increasing numbers drastically.
On ensuring immigrants contribute to the economy she wants a made-in-Alberta system with a sustainable level of immigration.
She also wants that system to select people who have an ability to find a job.
She’s specifically speaking of economic migrants because when they arrive they’ll already be a taxpayer.
The ante was upped again when she highlights those who came as temporary foreign workers and ended up bringing family members.
She said, “if they want to stay they can bring their wife and their kids over and now they are able to take part in all of the same programs everybody else is. But you have to make money. You have to be a taxpayer. You have to produce before you start drawing on social programs.”
Smith sees this as a potential avenue for immigration reform citing that the UK with a “socialist prime minister” is looking at withholding access to social programs until someone has worked for 10 years.
She said, “those are the kinds of conversations we need to have here.”
It could include withholding access to all types of programs including health care, childcare, or any entitlements and people here would otherwise be treated like tourists.
“As a tourist you don’t go to somebody else’s country and expect to get child care and education and health care and other benefits,” Smith said.
She also says what most Albertans will have noticed, there is a language barrier.
The immigration system in Canada awards points for knowing either English or French. There has been a huge surge of English learners in schools.
Smith said what most Albertans will have noticed, “[there’s] a very large number of people coming into our province who don’t have the rudimentary basics of the language.”
Newcomer advocates, specifically out of the Canadian Immigrant Women’s Association called this an anti-immigrant sentiment, divisive, and that there is no need for such an immigration policy.
These advocates feel there’s no need because the immigration system in Canada makes it very difficult to gain legal entry and that the numbers have been lowered and that instead we should be welcoming these people because those who are welcomed are more likely to contribute.
Naheed Nenshi, the NDP leader, did not comment specifically on immigration but did deride the Next panel as being a distraction from government failures on healthcare and education.
Why is this an opening negotiation? A lot of what Smith has said and what the panels discussed has been inherently polarized.
By the time it reaches the policy state it will be somewhere between the status quo and what was suggested.
By suggesting an outcome that makes people uncomfortable it creates an opening for discussion on those subjects whether people like it or not.
The interview with Rick Bell was limited in scope but it’s an effective trial balloon to see how much push back such policies would achieve.
From here the conversation opens on the issues deemed most controversial.
It’s very interesting to see the media’s response to these issues but there is a clear playbook that very few in the media are versed on that is about to unfold over the next 18 months.
Supplementals:

How did Canada’s young people become its unhappiest generation?

The news is starting to wake up to the fact that not everything is all peachy in Canada, and that in fact, things have been sliding for the last few decades, especially for younger generations. The Canadian ideal of what a dream life entails could be in a state of “flux,” researchers say, forcing them to reconsider what it means, and what it takes, to be happy.
This is of course not new, with reporting over the past 7 years, even pre-pandemic that happiness levels in Canada, and especially in its bigger cities like Toronto and Vancouver have been steadily dropping. From families to finances, benchmarks are happening later for Canada’s young — and their happiness levels have been plummeting as a result.
The World Happiness Report says Canadians under 30 were the happiest age group in the country as recently as 2011. Now, they’re the unhappiest.
The 2024 edition of the decades-long study of global happiness, published by the Wellbeing Research Centre at the University of Oxford, asked participants to picture their life as a ladder, with the best possible life at 10 and the worst at zero.
While many countries among the 134 covered by the research have also seen happiness levels fall among those under 30 since 2006, the slide of young Canadians down the ladder is exceptional.
Only four countries have seen a worse decline — Jordan, Venezuela, Lebanon and Afghanistan, not an auspicious list of countries to be grouped with.
So why does happiness matter? Happiness is generally listed as a metric comprising of all the things that make life good, with opportunity for upward mobility. And unless you've been living under a rock, a lot of those opportunities have eroded for those millennial aged or younger in Canada.
Young people across Canada interviewed by The Canadian Press described the challenge of building lives they once imagined, bogged down by an unaffordable housing market, struggles to save for the future, online gloom and a growing youth mental health crisis.
Before 2014, well-being in Canada could be broadly described as a U-shaped trajectory. Satisfaction was high among youth, declined to a low point in mid-life, then rose again as people got older.
John Helliwell, an emeritus professor of economics at the University of British Columbia and a founding editor of the World Happiness Report, said that U-shape is no more.
“The happiness of the young has dropped sufficiently far ... below that of the middle-aged that used to be the least happy. It’s now the young and then the middle-aged, and then the uprising at the end is still there.”
Helliwell said social and economic conditions are not seen by today’s young as promising, unlike previous generations.
“The chances of getting a job and the chances of getting a job with a future — that’s one dimension. And the other is the price of housing. Where you live is a very important part of how you feel about your life. Feelings of economics and residential security clearly (are) important to happiness, so uncertainty about either of those aspects of life is going to play in a negative way.”
In 2023, the Bank of Canada’s housing affordability index hit its worst level in 41 years. While it has eased, it remains at levels akin to the early 1990s, when interest rates were more than nine per cent. The situation has been particularly acute for Canada’s young.
Non-profit Generation Squeeze says that in 1986, it took five years for a typical 25-to-34-year-old to save for a 20 per cent down payment on a representative home in Canada. By 2021, it took 17 years. And in the greater Vancouver and Toronto areas, it was 27.
Other life benchmarks have been shifting, too. Statistics Canada says the average age of marriage has steadily increased, from 25 in 1968 to 35 in 2019. Over the same period, the agency says the average age of first-time mothers rose from 22 to 29, while the average age of all mothers rose to nearly 32 in 2024, up from almost 27 in 1976.
This makes sense, if you don't have housing or financial security, you can't work towards starting a family.
It’s not a difficult question to answer, and it's surprising that the media has taken this long to try. First, younger Canadians have fewer close social ties. Research shows social ties are a major predictor of happiness. As the city becomes more unaffordable people leave and social ties break. Building new relationships takes time. But fewer ties = less happiness, in general.
Second, it’s harder to make ends meet. When you’re struggling to make ends meet, it’s harder to enjoy life. You spend more time working, have less income for the necessities (housing, food), less disposable income for discretionary purchases, less leisure time, less social time, and more worries.
Third, relative income matters. Research shows you’ll be happier if you earn 100k when everybody else earns 50k vs if you earn 200k when everybody else earns 250k. Vancouver, for example, has stratified along the lines of homeowners vs renters. If you’re a renter, you have less wealth than homeowners in your community. Because we’re social animals, we compare ourselves to our wealthier friends consciously and/or subconsciously. And the results of that comparison makes us less happy.
As the saying goes, comparison is the thief of joy, but when the standards of living have fallen so far in Canada, it's hard not to be unhappy about the major things. Sure, it's possible to be happy and take pleasure in the little things in life, but if you don't own a home, you can't pay your bills, and the money you work hard for doesn't buy near as much as it used to, it's hard to feel secure.
In that sense, without major structural and governmental changes, the unhappiness will continue.

Firing Line

U.S. lists demands Canada must meet to extend CUSMA

The story of Canada getting a new trade deal with the United States was something that was promised during the spring election campaign by Mark Carney.
The first deadline was the G7. Then it was the middle of July. Then it was Labour Day. Then the goal posts shifted again.
Negotiations were derailed by Doug Ford’s ad invoking Former US President Ronald Reagan for which Carney apologized thereby admitting that this played a direct role.
The question at the tail end of the year was would there be a deal? Now it looks like that will have to wait for 2026’s CUSMA renegotiation.
The story of how we got here though is interesting.
This week a story crept its way into Canadian media about the US seeking trade concessions on CUSMA.
The story first casually mentions things like access for alcohol and other spirits. But later about halfway through the stories dairy is mentioned.
Specifically that the US is asking Canada to expand access to its dairy market and address concern about the exports of certain products.
The US negotiations feel that Canadian policies “unfairly restrict market access.”
Also cited were the Online Streaming Act and Online News Act which seek to have news production and streaming services follow Canadian cultural and broadcasting rules which impact American companies.
Also cited was the AESO or Alberta Electricity Systems Operator claiming that Montana based producers can’t fairly access the Alberta market.
These shifts by the Americans caused Mark Carney to say that we should not expect a new deal with the Americans in the near future.
Carney said, “My judgment is that that is now going to roll into the broader CUSMA negotiations, so we’re less likely, we’re unlikely, given the time horizons coming together, to have a sectoral agreement.”
Carney provided more clarity on the state of the negotiations before the Ontario tariff ad aired saying that “we were close to an agreement. We didn’t get that agreement. The terms of that agreement, from our perspective, are still on the table.”
The initial slate of reports on this story framed the issue as one of the Americans simply wanting more access to the dairy market.
Almost none of the outlets specifically said what this meant: the Canadian supply management system was a hinderance to trade talks.
Supply management is a system that is mostly prevalent in eastern Canada that protects the dairy industry by setting a quota system. Meaning that farmers can only sell a portion of their product and if they hit a threshold they must stop selling.
This is done to keep dairy prices higher and ensure Canadian dairy remains dominant in Canada and dairy farmers are protected.
The media did not cover this either because they did not make the connection or did not want to have the story out there that something integral to many in Canada was hindering a deal.
As a result of this media discussion Mark Carney actually came out and said that supply management would not be on the table in any negotiations.
First it was a series of unreasonable asks by the Americans that we got through by dropping counter tariffs as an olive branch.
After this it was Doug Ford’s ad that held up negotiations.
Now it appears as though the supply management system may be holding up a direct Canada/US trade deal before we get to the CUSMA renegotiation.
In the recent months the line from the government has changed from needing to do anything and everything to retaliate against the Americans to that we should look positively upon the fact that we have some of the largest free market access to the US under CUSMA.
Presently the import quotas negotiated under CUSMA during Trump's first term are designed to give US producers tariff-free access worth roughly 3.5 per cent of Canada's domestic demand for dairy products.
The Americans want more and to do give them more would mean compromising Canada’s supply management system.
This is something that all political parties elected to the house in the last election agreed would be off the table.
The media’s lack of coverage on this ask is striking and raises the question if any concession on supply management is possible.
Put in another frame, first Doug Ford derailed trade talks, secondly a dairy system benefitting mostly eastern Canada is derailing trade talks.
We’re left to believe that it’s all Trump’s fault all the time but if a western based industry was a trade irritant would the media and government be so silent?
Supplementals:

Quote of the Week

“[there’s] a very large number of people coming into our province who don’t have the rudimentary basics of the language.” - Alberta Premier Danielle Smith on what many Albertans feel regarding immigration.

Word of the Week

unhappiness - a state of emotional distress that can contribute to feelings of fatigue or disappointment

How to Find Us

Westerncontext.ca

westerncontext.ca/subscribe

westerncontext.ca/support

x.com/westerncontext

facebook.com/westerncontext

Show Data

Episode Title: Back to Basics
Teaser: A BC college loses its credentials, Danielle Smith speaks candidly about immigration, and the happiness of Canada’s youth plummets. Also, a US trade deal is not on the horizon.
Production Code: WC-449-2025-12-20
Recorded Date: December 20, 2025
Release Date: December 21, 2025
Duration: 1:03:54
Edit Notes: Patrick mute first story and wotw

Podcast Summary Notes

Duration: XX:XX