Thank you for the question, Mr. Ste-Marie.
If you don't mind, I'll answer in English.
I was making a very rough statement. Let me dig into it a little more.
Labour force growth will be at roughly the same rate as immigration because Canada's aging workforce is no longer generating growth itself. It's going to stop generating growth in the next two or three years. All of our net labour force growth will therefore come only from immigration, unless of course we're able to boost participation from under-represented sectors, such as women, indigenous Canadians, etc. These are important considerations around the edges.
That 1% growth is roughly the immigration target. The government has actually targeted a little higher than that 1% growth. We can assume about 1% economic growth from that. Doing it that way suggests there is no increase in per capita growth. That's implicitly what I'm saying. I'm not saying that's what will occur; I'm saying that's just a simplifying assumption. In fact, we would expect that it would add to productivity for two reasons. One is something you alluded to, which is that there are, in many sectors, shortages of workers. That impedes the productivity of firms that can't find the workers. These would be in various skill sets. The other is that, on average, the immigration populations are more entrepreneurial than the average domestic population is—that is, they start more small businesses—and those new businesses add to productivity at the margin. These are not large effects that I'm talking about, but that's what you need to boost per capita income—some extra effects like that.