J.J. McCullough: How you’re supposed to talk about immigration in Canada—and how Poilievre is poised to capitalize 

Another late to the party commentary.

I agree, however, that the Conservatives have greater licence to engage in immigration policy, not only because of the various commentary noting the need for a more measured approach but also because the Liberal government has largely accepted (or ceded) the arguments and is walking back some of its more ill-advised policies.

And even the Century Initiative appears to be flailing around, trying to remain relevant, when their fundamental premises are largely discredited:

…All this puts the Conservatives under Pierre Poilievre in an interesting position. The Canadian press, and thinky class more generally, has created a permission structure for him to run for prime minister on a platform of reducing immigration without fear of being characterized as a racist fearmonger. Polls suggest over 60 percent of Canadians both want and expect him to do this. Yet Poilievree himself has so far avoided articulating the extent to which he agrees; at his tightly scripted rallies he has no standard immigration-related applause line.

It’s possible his party is still captive to the legends of the Harper years—that they believe immigrant voters are “their” constituency to lose, and Conservatives must therefore tread lightly on rhetoric that could be seen as anti-immigrant. Despite a clearly changing tone in media coverage, the party might also simply not trust the press to accurately characterize a restrictionist Conservative immigration plan, and thus feel there’s no PR incentive to spend much time talking about the issue when they’re already enjoying such a solid lead in the polls.

Or, and perhaps most likely, Poilievre simply wants a restrictionist immigration agenda to be something he can roll out at a more politically opportune time—closer to the official fall 2025 election campaign when Canadians will be paying the most attention, and will be most aware of his promises.

Yesterday’s political taboo could be tomorrow’s ace in the hole.

Source: J.J. McCullough: How you’re supposed to talk about immigration in Canada—and how Poilievre is poised to capitalize