Like it or not everybody, BurlOak is correct about this, at least in regards to how a lot of the immigrant community perceives these policies. My dad came to Canada as a refugee, and this could have been uttered word for word by him.
We are seeing dog whistle politics being employed because some unfortunate elements of our political spectrum are being opportunistic about actual underlying concerns many people have with our immigration policy under Trudeau. Would we see those tactics being effective today or increasingly mainstream had we stayed the course with our +/- 350,000 a year intake as under Harper? I'm not sure. We might be discussing the economy and fiscal deficits instead.
Immigration in the legal sense has only been increased comparatively modestly. The actual numbers from last year aren't much above that (350,000)
I'm not sure they that would be attracting any attention.
I think there has been negative attention with the proverbial 'irregular border crossers' who are percieved to be queue-jumping.
Its worth saying here that I while I think that issue can and could have been handled better; its not as if Trudeau created it; nor are people being granted citizenship upon arrival, they are being afforded a hearing for their refugee claim, which is per international law.
That should not be read as a fulsome defense of the government's handling of the issue.
I am on record that the particularly leaky back road into Quebec ought to be patched up. (yes, I do mean a fence, at least in the interim) I think more idealistically, we'd compensate the few Americans with homes at the end of that dead-end road, and agree to pay to remove the road and reforest it. That would be a preferred alternative in the medium term.
Beyond that, there is room to decide how to address those who would normally be required to have applied for status in the US first, to be a convention refugee. However, legislative and treaty changes would need to be made, and that takes time.
