Could Migration Issue In Canadian General Election 2025 Determine The Government? – OpEd

The Canadian Federal Election is going to take place on April 28, 2025. In this election, migration is emerging as one of the major critical issues that is being influenced by the political dynamics and public sentiments. Canada has been consistently pursuing positive immigration policy.

However, in the recent past, Canadian population (41.5 million people as of January 2025), has been accusing the migrated people for their several socio-economic challenges such as housing shortages, overburdened healthcare systems, and socio-economic challenges. On account of high public awareness of the Canadian Citizens, major issues and challenges on account of migration, how laws and policies can deal with the same is emerging as major electoral agenda of the major political parties. How the sentiments of the voter can decide the electoral mood of the country? 

Political Dynamics and Party Platforms

In the federal election 2025, the migration has emerged as one of the major electoral issues for the major political parties of Canada. Mixed kind of responses and concerns isare visible on part of the voters. Thus, each major political party has been putting forward unique strategies to address this public concern. As far as Liberal Party under the leadership its leader Prime Minister Mark Carney, called the 2025 election as the pivotal moment for immigration policy. Thus, Liberal Party’s stand for migration has been remained very positive. However, this traditional pro-immigration policy stance under the leadership of Carney, the Liberal Party had changed it to more cautious and capacity-focused. The party placed a strong emphasis on preserving Canada’s standing as a migration welcoming country, whereas on the other hand, the same wanted to strike a balance between housing and healthcare capacity and economic needs. 

On the contrary, the Conservative Party under the leadership of Poilievre, the party has exploited the people sentiments and annoyance against the immigration. Poilievre’s populist rhetoric attributed housing shortages and inflation to Liberal policies, alleging immigration as a major contributing factor for the same. The Conservatives supporting the stricter immigration policy and laws and place a higher priority to provide the solution to challenges created out of immigration. Even economic stability of the country has been remained on top priority. However, the conservative leadership is not coming forward openly to stand against the same. Rather, the party has been clearly steering away of overtly anti-immigrant rhetoric in order to retain the support of moderate voters. Also, it is worthy to mention here that some X posts have been criticizing Carney and Poilievre for failing to address the 70% of Canadians concerns. The critics opposing the party against the mass immigration stance because they have been silent on specific immigration caps. Notwithstanding, the people who are struggling with non-availability of house, inflations and lack of job opportunities, especially those in the Prairies and among Millennials and Gen X, voters from these sections are finding resonance in the Conservatives’ emphasis on cost-of-living issues. 

Jagmeet Singh is an established leader of the New Democratic Party (NDP). This party is supporting the progressive immigration laws along with more assistance for integration and affordable housing for the people. The NDP also focuses on addressing the systemic inequalities including the universal pharmacare and a wealth tax which are currently made worse by rapid population growth.  However, some electoral surveys highlighting that the left-leaning voters turning to the Liberals given the belief of the same that Carney is a more formidable opponent to Trump. Since the NDP’s confidence-and-supply deal with the Liberals ended in September 2024, the same has harmed the chances of electoral gains of the NDP. 

Public Sentiments on Migration

Historically, Canadians have been supportive of immigration. However, in the recent past, public sentiments toward migration in Canada has been undergone a paradigmatic shift given the concerns of rapid population growth, driven by immigration. This sentiment is echoed broadly and substantiated   by the fact that about 70% of Canadians have been expressing concerns and opposition to mass immigration, citing pressures on housing, healthcare, and public services. Even in a January 2025 poll survey revealed that 82% of recent immigrants and foreign students are expressing concerns that the Canadian government has permitted too many newcomers without adequate planning for housing, infrastructure, or jobs.

The external factor  such as the  US President Donald Trump’s Canadian policies (threats of mass deportations and tariffs) have further complicated the public sentiments. The threat of mass deportation has raised concerns of a potential influx of migrants crossing the Canada-U.S. border, being reminiscent of past Roxham Road issue. Historically, Canada has not faced any large-scale unauthorized migration. This probable concern of migration has heightened public anxiety out of the immigration’s impact on national security and economic stability. This is being labelled as “Trump effect” which has also sparked a wave of patriotism. This patriotism is influencing voters to prioritize leaders perceived as capable of defending Canada’s interests.

Ultimately, the young Canadians particularly those who are under 30, are disproportionately being affected by these dynamics. Given the major concerns such as job scarcity, lack of pensions, and barriers to homeownership, these young people are expressing frustration with immigration’s perceived threat and role in exacerbating these challenges. 

Electoral Implications and Voter Polarization

It is reported that the Canadian 2025 election is highly polarized, with migration intersecting with economic and geopolitical concerns. The poll surveys reported that there is a neck-to-neck competition between the Liberals and Conservatives. However, the Liberal Party is holding a slight edge at 41% among likely voters compared to 39% for the Conservatives. Taking over the leadership by Carney of the Liberal Party has revitalized the electoral gains, as the same were polling at 16% under Justin Trudeau in late 2024. However, the Conservative Party is retaining strong support in the Prairies, where economic struggles and anti-Liberal sentiment are pronounced.

At the same time, it is found that the migration’s role in voter decision-making is emerging as complex issue. For some voters, particularly those who are prioritizing cost-of-living issues, the conservative party’s focus on affordability and reduced immigration is resonating. On the contrary, the voters who are being concerned on part of Trump’s threats, are tilting toward Liberal Party. PM Carney is being viewed by voters as  a strong leader, who is better equipped to navigate international pressures and maintain Canada’s immigration system. This dichotomy of the domestic economic concerns versus external geopolitical challenges has divided and polarized the voters. The marginality of the smaller parties like the NDP and Greens have suggested that Canada has been moving towards a two-party system which is being substantiated with 80% of votes likely to split between the Liberals and Conservatives. This split is further intensifying the focus on migration emerging as one of the key issues between the two parties.

Potential Outcomes and Future Implications

It is being argued that the election’s outcome is going to shape significantly the Canada’s immigration policy. A Liberal victory under leadership of Carney would solidify the current approach with moderated immigration targets along with a focus on infrastructure investment to alleviate public concerns.  Carney is being considered as a strong leader whose diplomatic acumen to negotiate with Trump may also stabilize the cross-border migration pressures. Whereas on the other hand, a Conservative Party’s win might lead to stricter immigration policies. The party is likely to prioritize economic recovery and affordability. However, Poilievre’s vague commitments are being conceived to leave space for inconsistency and uncertainty. Also, it seems that whichever party forms the government, that is likely to be a minority government given the tight competition. Against this background, the role of smaller parties would become significant. In this scenario, it can be said that all parties are facing pressure to address migration’s impact on housing and services swiftly.

At last, the public sentiments continuously evolving based on parties’ stances towards migration. However, in case there is a failure to address these challenges, that would further escalate the anti-immigration sentiments.  The influence of U.S. policies, particularly Trump’s deportation plans along with other geopolitical and geo-economic challenges would remain a wildcard, putting Canada’s ability test to balance the humanitarian commitments with domestic pressures.

Conclusion

Migration has remained a critical issue for the Canadian federal election 2025. The same has  underscored the migration’s role as one of the critical issues, reflecting the deep public concerns about housing, affordability, and national security. Politically, the Liberals and Conservatives have been dominating the migration discourses. Carney’s pragmatic approach is giving tough competition to Poilievre’s populist approach towards migration.  However, it is certain that the election’s outcome would determine either Canada maintains its welcoming stance or adopts a more restrictive policy, with lasting implications for its demographic and economic future. 

On the other hand, the public sentiments are continuously being shaped by the socio-economic challenges, struggles and external threats, has shifted from broad support for immigration to widespread scepticism. The majority of the population of Canada have been opposing mass immigration. As voters head to the polls, migration remains a lens through which Canadians are evaluating leadership, governance, and the nation’s path forward.

About the authors:

• Prof. Bawa Singh, Department of South and Central Asian Studies, Central University of Punjab, Bathinda, India.
• Koche Jay M., Research Scholar, Department of South and Central Asian Studies, Central University of Punjab, Bathinda, India.