Canada’s Immigration Consensus Fractures as Federal Election Looms

As Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s tenure nears its end, one of his most consequential late-term policy decisions was the sharp reduction in immigration targets. This decision, ostensibly aimed at addressing housing shortages and economic challenges, signals a broader shift in Canadian politics towards more restrictive immigration policies, reflecting rising public hostility toward immigration. With the upcoming federal election fast approaching, a growing number of Canadians view immigration as a determining factor in the failures of housing affordability and access to public services, further fueling anti-immigration sentiment.

Canada has long positioned itself as a country that welcomes immigrants from around the world, and for much of recent history, public sentiment reflected this. Between the early 2000s and 2022, the percentage of Canadians who believed there was “too much immigration” declined from 45 per cent to just 27 per cent. However, in just two years, that trend has reversed dramatically. In 2024, nearly 58 per cent of Canadians believed the country was admitting “too many immigrants.” Thus, in response to changing public sentiment, the federal government has introduced a series of reversals on immigration policy, including a 21 percent reduction in permanent resident admissions in 2025—from a previous target of 500,000 to 395,000—with further cuts planned through 2027. For a government that had previously positioned immigration as a pillar of economic growth, this policy shift marks a stark departure, aligning more closely with more conservative approaches to immigration.

The political calculus behind these restrictions is clear. Politicians across the political spectrum have increasingly associated immigration with the housing crisis, reinforcing anti-immigrant rhetoric as a tool to gain voter support. Furthermore, the backlash against the perceived failures of neoliberalism has also driven many voters toward conservative rhetoric, amplifying skepticism toward immigration. Conservative party leader Pierre Poilievre has been at the forefront of this shift, consistently framing high immigration levels as a direct contributor to unaffordable housing and strained public services. While this messaging has proven politically effective, it has also reinforced a growing perception that immigrants are an economic burden rather than an asset.

The consequences of this shifting rhetoric extend beyond electoral strategy. Canada’s increasingly restrictive immigration policies have profound effects on immigrants and BIPOC communities, fueling xenophobia and exclusion. Additionally, there are significant economic impacts for Canada. For example, Canada’s reduction in the number of international student visas not only limits educational access but also undermines the financial stability of higher education institutions. Colleges and universities, which depend on the higher tuition fees paid by international students, are already struggling financially due to visa caps. The reduction of revenue from international tuition is most likely to result in higher tuition for Canadians, cuts to programs, decreased faculty positions, and a slowdown in research and innovation, impacting Canada’s position in global academic rankings. 

Beyond international student visas, reducing immigration targets risks exacerbating labour shortages in key sectors such as healthcare, construction, and technology. With an aging population and declining birth rates, Canada has long relied on immigration to sustain its workforce. While reducing intake levels may alleviate short-term political pressures, it risks undermining the country’s long-term economic competitiveness and growth.

Meanwhile, in the US, Donald Trump’s administration has begun implementing large-scale deportations, intensifying concerns over immigrants’ wellbeing and reinforcing a broader shift toward restrictive immigration policies across North America. Traditionally, Canada has positioned itself as an alternative to the US’s hardline stance, often attracting immigrants and refugees fleeing restrictive policies. However, as a “Not Everyone is Welcome” mentality grows in Canada and the Liberals adopt a more stringent stance to immigration, Canada’s reputation as a welcoming country may be eroding. 

This realignment on immigration highlights a broader transformation in Canadian politics. Where immigration was once a near-consensus issue—with all major parties mainly in agreement on its economic benefits—it has now become a defining fault line in the upcoming election. The Liberals’ shift away from their traditionally pro-immigration stance may be an attempt to neutralize Poilievre’s attacks. Still, it also risks alienating voters who previously saw the party as immigration’s most vigorous defender.

As Canada navigates the tensions between economic necessity and political expediency, the future of its immigration model remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that the once-stable consensus on immigration is fracturing, setting the stage for one of the most contentious policy battles of the upcoming federal election. 

Edited by Christy Khairallah

Featured image: “Toronto: Dundas St, Chinatown” by The City of Toronto is licensed under CC BY 2.0.