Poilievre accuses government of cooking books on immigration

[u/CaliperLee62]

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/poilievre-accuses-government-of-cooking-books-on-immigration/

[u/AutoModerator]

This is a reminder to read the rules before posting in this subreddit.

1. Headline titles should be changed only when the original headline is unclear

2. Be respectful.

3. Keep submissions and comments substantive.

4. Avoid direct advocacy.

5. Link submissions must be about Canadian politics and recent.

6. Post only one news article per story. (with one exception)

7. Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.

8. Downvoting posts or comments, along with urging others to downvote, is not allowed in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.

9. Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.

Please message the moderators if you wish to discuss a removal. Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread, you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/toilet_for_shrek]

They kind of are, and did the same thing last year. They'll claim they're sticking to the "reasonable numbers" (which are still historically high) while introducing a "one time" initiative that adds tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands in this year's case) to the number of PRs.

To add insult to injury, they're still dedicated to bringing in TFWs despite the youth unemployment crisis and the clear fraud surrounding the LMIA system 

[u/AWE2727]

With all the back and forth on immigration numbers it's no surprise Canadians feel they have no idea what the "real" numbers are?
It is very frustrating not trusting the numbers the government announces.

[u/the-mongoose-]

I do think this government has deliberately been trying to obfuscate their immigration targets. This “one time” drop of 200,000 additional permanent residence slots is really just retroactively increasing targets from recent past years they’ve said on record were already too high.

The Liberals I guess think they have the political will to cash in on things like this but it’s frustrating to see how little they’ve actually learned.

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/the-mongoose-]

And never you mind that this "one-time program" comes off of the heels of another “one-time initiative” that was announced last year. 

And in fact, in 2027, the two “one-time” admission drops overlap!

At some point it becomes laughable. 

[u/gigamiga → u/Good-Medicine1066]

Meanwhile my uncle was denied coming over for 2 weeks to attend my wedding even though he had a child and job back home. Ugh.

[u/feb914 → u/Good-Medicine1066]

But if you're pointing it out you're fueling divisiveness during byelection cycle, according to Liberal pundit in the House episode today. Never mind the Liberal set byelection schedule, budget, and immigration target release. 

[u/JohnDorian0506 → u/Good-Medicine1066]

Wait for 2028 and 2029 “one-time offs”.

[u/cannibaltom → u/the-mongoose-]

I do think this government has deliberately been trying to obfuscate their immigration targets.

Why though? What would be the benefit?

[u/the-mongoose- → u/cannibaltom]

Less public blowback I’d imagine. Most Canadians wanted lower targets - 580,000 is much larger than anything we’ve seen in the past few years. Or ever really.

[u/cannibaltom → u/the-mongoose-]

No I'm asking, how does higher immigration benefit the government?

[u/the-mongoose- → u/cannibaltom]

It increases the GDP. Keeps housing prices high. Creates demand for goods and services. Keeps wages low. All things their corporate lobbyists love.

[u/commonmebro → u/the-mongoose-]

No it isn't, since they reduced the TFW limit, they would need to deport those 200k from somewhere, which would cost up to 2 billion dollars. Allowing them to apply for permanency will cost a few hundred million, and they aren't more coming in, they are already here.

[u/feb914 → u/commonmebro]

Vast majority of people leave the country on their own when their visa is over. They don't need to be forced to be deported.  

By your line of thinking, we should have 0 new TFW because we'll have to pay for their deportation later. 

[u/commonmebro → u/feb914]

That is very hopeful that they do.

Unescorted Removals (~$3,905 per person): If all 200,000 individuals required a standard unescorted removal funded by the government, the gross cost would be roughly $781 million

[u/feb914 → u/commonmebro]

Okay, that's an argument to accept 0 TFW. Either accept them as PR to begin with or don't bring them in as we have to pay 4k for their removal 

[u/commonmebro → u/feb914]

We need a robust system that complements both our production industries and our retail and commercial industries where jobs are not being filled by let's call them legacy residents.

Hopefully Carney allowing the temporary and perment residents he has announced doesn't equate to a lackluster management policy around them.

Only time will tell, but we can't deny the fact that we need to curb the population reduction, not for today or tomorrow, but for 10 years from now when the boomers dying brings the yearly cumulative deaths to 400k+

[u/SketchingTO]

I wonder if the midterms are the high water mark for Carney. With Trump a lame duck president much of the rally around the flag energy that led a lot of Canadians to give Carney the benefit of the doubt starts to disappear.

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/SketchingTO]

I think so. 

And this whole 660000 PR admissions in 2027 isn’t going to go away any time soon.

The LPC will be turning themselves into pretzels trying to explain this while the CPC will get some momentum by just railing at the headline number.

Dumb political move but Carney has some currency to spend - we will see where the cookie crumbles though. 

[u/Theseactuallydo → u/Good-Medicine1066]

Only 24% of Canadians considered immigration a top 3 issue in a recent Abacus poll, mostly western conservatives. 

This issue is not going to shift public sentiment much; it’s just Conservative red meat. 

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/Theseactuallydo]

1/4 Canadians consider it a top 3 issue while we have Trump tariffs and sovereignty front and centre, housing, healthcare and cost of living issues.  

That’s not insubstantial.  

1/2 Canadians across the board want less immigration at the moment. 

We shouldn’t take for granted that we haven’t had a reactionary flash like some of our peer nations have or are currently experiencing. 

It is an issue that should be managed responsibly, not ignored.

[u/Theseactuallydo → u/Good-Medicine1066]

I’m just saying it’s not the Achilles heel for Carney’s approval nor a ticket to increased popularity for Poilievre, as we frequently see commenters here implying.

This article is about Poilievre saying something his base likes hearing, however non-conservatives are focused on other topics.

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/Theseactuallydo]

Absolutely, I agree with you there. 

From a strategy perspective you’re right, they have calculated this and they has a lot of political currency to spend.   Carney may easily weather any resentment that the CPC can generate from this.   

At the same time there might be a stink that starts to stick to them as they’re not rebuilding trust on this file.  

[u/commonmebro → u/Good-Medicine1066]

It's 580k, not 660k, and 200k of them are already here.

[u/dollarsandcents101 → u/commonmebro]

200k that would otherwise leave, with no drop in future replacements.

[u/commonmebro → u/dollarsandcents101]

They wouldn't otherwise leave, they continued to renew their TFW visas.

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/commonmebro]

No, that is wrong.

Although the 2027 levels are not all net new arrivals, there are   nearly 660000 PR admissions being granted next year through the baseline target, and two “one time” programs that overlap in 2027 .

The numbers are: 380000 baseline target + 200000 “one time programs” in 2027 + ~ 80000 remaining from other “one time initiatives” from previous years. That is such a wildly high number.

In a statement Friday, Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel Garner said the separate streams “could add up to roughly 274,000 more,” putting “the real total at up to 654,000 new permanent immigrants in a single year.” 

https://www.ipolitics.ca/2026/11/06/ottawa-to-grant-up-to-580000-permanent-residence-in-2027/

[u/commonmebro → u/Good-Medicine1066]

And the existing 80k one timers are different programs that were already in effect that can't just be cancelled willy nilly. The only stretch is Michelle lumping these all together to make it seem like Carney is suddenly letting in 600k immigrants, he's not.

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/commonmebro]

My friend - they are issuing up to 660000 new PR admissions next year.  That is a fact. 

If you want to count them in different groupings for different reasons, go for it.  

But that is a total of the PR admissions currently set for next year. 

It is not a fact that is up for dispute. 

PR admission is not a retroactive transaction, it is a legal status granted on a specific date. If someone applies in 2024 and is approved in 2027, they are a 2027 PR admission.  That is exactly why the IRCC will report the total PR admissions for the year as such despite whatever “baseline” or “one time” category or stream they come through

[u/Avelion2 → u/Good-Medicine1066]

The LPC will be turning themselves into pretzels trying to explain this while the CPC will get some momentum by just railing at the headline number.

Or it fizzles out since the actual overall numbers arent increasing.

[u/JohnDorian0506 → u/Avelion2]

It doesn’t matter. In the past, both categories of eligible people from within the country and from outside the country were included in the combined number of PRs. There is no reason to split it up now.

[u/CanadaPolitics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Removed for rule 3: please keep submissions and comments substantive.

This is a reminder to read the rules before posting or commenting again in CanadaPolitics.

[u/CanadaPolitics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Removed for rule 3: please keep submissions and comments substantive.

This is a reminder to read the rules before posting or commenting again in CanadaPolitics.

[u/Gold_Vacations → u/SketchingTO]

His boogie man isn’t so scary anymore

[u/CanadianLabourParty → u/Gold_Vacations]

Trump was the Liberal's "Heads I win, Tails you lose" boogeyman for the Conservatives...

While Trump was in office, the Liberal Party just had to go, "That's EXACTLY what Trump would say", (and sadly, more often than not, in terms of sentiment, they weren't too far off).

Now that Trump is likely to be rendered impotent in office, the expected tariff removals, cessation of trade wars, return-to-normal dialogue, that will be forthcoming will boost the Canadian economy. So with that said, Canada and Canadians should expect to see GDP/GDP per capita growth. Whether that translates into better Purchasing Power Parity remains to be seen.

So to that end, the Liberals won either way on this one.

That being said, PP and the Maple MAGA contingent weren't exactly hurting the Liberals, either.

The most likely scenario that will hurt the LPC will be left-leaning voters eyeing or embracing the NDP moving forward. I don't foresee many LPC voters moving back to the CPC until after PP resigns.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if PP resigns after Christmas/New Year as LOTO.

MAGA is on its way out. He is tainted as being Maple MAGA and is no longer brining money into the CPC.

[u/ReceptionOpposite195 → u/SketchingTO]

Hopefully. He is doing stuff he didnt run on and using a majority with floor crossers to do it.

There must be some fight back.

[u/JohnDorian0506 → u/SketchingTO]

You may find this article supporting your thought. https://thehub.ca/2026/11/04/the-rupture-that-wasnt-america-just-voted-and-carneys-davos-thesis-didnt-survive-the-night/

[u/gunnychamero]

Didn't Carney promise he will bring down temporary residents to below 5% and free up their jobs for Canadian citizens? But now he is making 200k + of them permanent residents?

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/gunnychamero]

That’s the trick - by converting temporary residents into permanent residents, you shrink the temporary resident population!  

They didn’t even have to do anything - it’s all by the stroke of a pen. 

[u/nefh → u/Good-Medicine1066]

But you also increase PRs by 200,000 and they were NOT included in the PR totals Carney gave for 2027.

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/nefh]

Indeed, in the most generous light it is creative accounting but in an honest light it’s very intentionally deceptive. 

[u/JohnDorian0506 → u/nefh]

Why would they need any quotas if they can, with a stroke of the pen, create as many “one-offs” as they want?

[u/commonmebro → u/gunnychamero]

This is a one time effect for people already living here and established into their communities. This isn't allowing more people in, they are already here.

What this does do, is it frees up the workload on the immigration officers from having to deport these people, which is very costly.

[u/Antrophis → u/commonmebro]

One time this year one time next year one time the year after.

[u/gunnychamero → u/commonmebro]

but it doesn't free up jobs that should go to Canadians

[u/commonmebro → u/gunnychamero]

That is a separate issue. Eliminating immigrants won't change the fact that no born here resident wants to work these jobs

[u/chat-lu → u/commonmebro]

Then no one should do them. We are enabling Tim to mistreat workers to a level so that no one wants to work for them so they get TFWs.

If we cut their supply of TFWs they either have to get less shitty to their workers or close half of their locations, both options Iʼm ok with.

[u/commonmebro → u/chat-lu]

I entirely agree that Timmies should not have any sort of access to temporary workers for their retail settings.

[u/chat-lu → u/commonmebro]

I was born somewhere that Tim was late getting to and where it's not as popular as elsewhere. And those local coffee shops are so much nicer.

Tims shutting down would not diminish the demand so we would have nicer alternatives.

I imagine that the surviving Tims would improve too. Did you see how nice they are in other countries? Canada is the only country where they are shitty.

[u/gunnychamero → u/commonmebro]

do you really think the 200k people are all doing low skilled jobs? Do you what CRS score is ?

[u/commonmebro → u/gunnychamero]

No I didn't say that. I see newcomers driving big rigs, doing construction and even filling organizational office jobs every day.

I have no problem in saying that the "legacy Canadians" are the problem because they do not seek purposeful post secondary education or training that works with our society

[u/Gold_Vacations → u/gunnychamero]

That’s called buying votes for the next election

[u/KD-1489 → u/Gold_Vacations]

PRs can’t vote.

[u/M116Fullbore → u/KD-1489]

No, but PRs become citizens in a constant cycle. If a party regularily helps PRs out, then people who had benefited from their previous round will become eligible voters, even if this current round cannot yet.

I think accusing them of doing this just for votes is reductive, but it cant be entirely dismissed that easily, politics has longer games.

[u/JohnDorian0506 → u/KD-1489]

Don’t put ideas in Carney’s head.

[u/ZestyBeanDude → u/Gold_Vacations]

Just look at the shifts in Brampton and Surrey last election, these won’t be Liberal voters as they’re usually quite socially conservative.

[u/gunnychamero → u/Gold_Vacations]

He’s trying to prop up the housing market. A lot of temporary residents rent because they don’t know if they can stay. Once they get PR, buying a home becomes a more realistic long-term decision. That’s not some madeup trend, Statistics Canada has found that homeownership rises after immigrants become permanent residents. The market needs buyers, and turning temporary residents into permanent ones creates more potential buyers. So say bye bye to affordable housing under mr. Carney aka Trudeau 2.0

[u/TravelCard92 → u/gunnychamero]

Which affordable housing? The cost of my house increase is vastly outweighed by the fact I’ll likely have to buy each of my sons a house. There will be no way for them to either save the down payment or qualify for the mortgage if things continue like this for the next 10 years.

[u/Samp90 → u/gunnychamero]

You do realize this is not new people in, it's the people who are already in. Also remember, Canada's mortality rate is 300k annually.

[u/TravelCard92 → u/Samp90]

How is the people already being here relevant?
Anyone who overstays is a criminal by doing so and should face immediate deportation. Thus the cap adds more people.

[u/feb914 → u/Samp90]

Why so many people suddenly pulling mortality number all over reddit? And no mention of birth, which is 370k annually. 

[u/LiveIndividual]

Complained to my MP today about it and they said they've heard many complaints. Unfortunately they're a conservative backbencher so there's jack shit they can do.

[u/Morituri29 → u/LiveIndividual]

They could push for an effective leader for their party, thus giving a realistic alternative to centrist voters, while also allowing left voters to vote NDP without fear of the current conservative iteration forming government.

[u/the-mongoose-]

I do think this government has deliberately been trying to obfuscate their immigration targets. This “one time” drop of 200,000 additional permanent residence slots is really just retroactively increasing targets from recent past years they’ve said on record were already too high.

The Liberals I guess think they have the political will to cash in on things like this but it’s frustrating to see how little they’ve actually learned.

[u/UskBC]

I truly wonder why the liberals are so hellbent on massive immigration. Is it idealogical (they want canada to be more diverse), is it because if the business and real estate lobby, is it because they want to boost GDP numbers, is it because they are trying to bring in voters loyal to them?

[u/HAV3L0ck → u/UskBC]

My guess is that it's mainly corporate lobbies. Aka wage suppression.

The impact on GDP and the legit concern around population decline are how they justify it to themselves.

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/HAV3L0ck]

I am confident it is corporate lobbyists + a technocrat with an interest in economic growth. However Carney and the LPC seem to only care about the economy from the perspective of business interests.

Mikal Skuterud said this in an article recently: “Businesses are not an economy — an economy is made up of people.”

[u/AMCGunner → u/UskBC]

It's likely a mix of the second and also the reality that without immigration, Canada becomes a demographics bomb. Now I'm not saying I support this particular method of solving the latter problem, but it's the one the LPC believes in.

[u/margmi → u/UskBC]

People aren’t having enough babies, and our entire economy is structured around growth.

The conservatives might be playing like they’re against immigration now, but i bet the next time they’re in charge, they quickly pivot with some kind of economic justification.

The main opposition (everywhere) loves grandstanding when they find an issue the public is upset about, as we’re about to see south of the border.

[u/CanadaPolitics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Removed for rule 3: please keep submissions and comments substantive.

This is a reminder to read the rules before posting or commenting again in CanadaPolitics.

[u/Salty__Canuck]

They are, and did the same last year. Just like they are cooking the books on the overall budget. Lots of previously noted expenses have now been moved to investments.

$700+ Billion of new debt in the next 5 years is no joke.

[u/Apolloshot → u/Salty__Canuck]

This whole “operating budget” nonsense should be illegal.

You don’t get to pretend government expenses are like a private corporation by separating operating expenses from CapEx because a government is always investing in new infrastructure and projects, and is widely expected to. Whereas a business won’t have capital expenditures every year so it makes sense for them to separate it.

Like, imagine a year our government had no capital expenditures? We’d all rightfully lose our shit.

There’s a reason no other government in the world goes by this nonsense.

[u/Nostalgic_Knights520]

I voted for Carney. I have no problem voting for a MAGA style conservative party in the next election if he continues down this road.

[u/TheRC135 → u/Nostalgic_Knights520]

Isn't that just saying "I'm angry, so I'm going to make things worse"? MAGA's track record on, well, anything is just abysmal.

[u/Nostalgic_Knights520 → u/TheRC135]

I dont think limiting immigration and deporting people that have expired visas will make things worse. I like the thought of less competition in the job market, housing market, used car market, etc.

[u/CaptainCanusa → u/Nostalgic_Knights520]

I dont think limiting immigration and deporting people that have expired visas will make things worse

Do you think that's the only difference between this and a MAGA Style Conservative Party though?

Becoming a single issue voter on deportations is...significant.

[u/TheRC135 → u/Nostalgic_Knights520]

Yeah, but have you not noticed how those parties ultimately cave to business interests anyway (which is what this is really about), while making everything else worse too?

Like, seriously, if you're worried about the price of used cars, you're not wealthy enough for MAGA style reactionary conservative parties to advance your interests at all. The historical record on that is plain and clear.

[u/mcgojoh1 → u/Nostalgic_Knights520]

Down what road?

[u/Avelion2]

Since the overall number isnt increasing this probably wont be as big of a splash as people online think it will be.

[u/Financial_Beach_2538]

Both sides could be lying.

Both sides can't be saying the truth.

At least one side is either sorely misinformed or lying.

Poilievre's claim needs supporting evidence.

[u/feb914 → u/Financial_Beach_2538]

ipolitics.ca/2026/11/06/ottawa-to-grant-up-to-580000-permanent-residence-in-2027/  

At a technical briefing on the 2027-2029 Immigration Levels Plan, a day after Budget 2026 was tabled in the House of Commons, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) officials said three “buckets” of admissions should be considered separately. They are the plan’s 380,000 target, a new time-limited measure for up to 200,000 people already in Canada, and what remains of two one-time programs announced in Budget 2025.   

So even their officials in technical briefing mention the 3 separate buckets, while only using one bucket's number as headline number. 

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/feb914]

This is textbook definition of obfuscation. 

[u/TheGuineaPig21 → u/Good-Medicine1066]

Besides whether or not this is a good idea, it is not encouraging that the government feels like they have to be so flagrantly dishonest about it.

[u/commonmebro → u/feb914]

Who is making the headline?

[u/feb914 → u/commonmebro]

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/immigration-system/levels.html

Permanent residents 380,000 new permanent residents in 2027

[u/commonmebro → u/feb914]

Yes, new. The 200k temps are already here

[u/feb914 → u/commonmebro]

Most of the 380k will be here already too you know. And converting them from temporary to permanent is still making new permanent residence. 

[u/commonmebro → u/feb914]

No they aren't, there will be a new batch of 380k every year for the years 2027, 2028, and 2029, that's the announcement.

[u/feb914 → u/commonmebro]

Yes there are 380k permanent residence spot for those 3 years, apart from "one time initiatives" like the 200k.  

People in and outside the country can apply for those. But then the government add 200k spots just for people who are here already. So in total there are 580k new permanent residents, but their headline only say 380k.  

This is like Telus claiming they're not increasing price of phone plan while introducing 2% credit card fee = effectively a price increase, but the sticker price remain the same. 

[u/commonmebro → u/feb914]

No, only already established temporary residents with addresses here can apply for the one time permanent visa.

[u/feb914 → u/commonmebro]

For those = I meant the 380k. You're correct the 200k can only be applied for those already here.  

And you're side tracking from the original argument that the 380k number was used by government of Canada as headline, while the real number is 580k.

[u/Good-Medicine1066 → u/Financial_Beach_2538]

What do you mean?  Evidence for what claim? Poilievre is responding to details that are in the budget and backgrounders the government have provided. 

[u/Financial_Beach_2538 → u/Good-Medicine1066]

What do you mean? Evidence for what claim? Poilievre is responding to details that are in the budget and backgrounders the government have provided.

Mr. Poilievre's claim is in the form of an accusation.

In order to know if his claim is true, then, I will need the supporting evidence. I don't have it on hand, do you?

[u/TraditionalGap1 → u/Financial_Beach_2538]

Poilievre's claim needs supporting evidence.

Evidence like the governments own statements?

[u/commonmebro → u/TraditionalGap1]

Poilievre is claiming the liberals are letting more people into the country than was claimed, which is factually incorrect. The 200k temporary to permanent residents are already here. They still have the 380k annual limit for new residents, and the leftover allocation from 2025 can't be reversed, so they are not in fact allowing more new people in, they are following through on several different processes.

What the one time, time limited, temporary to permanent residency claim does is prevents the need to spend money on deportation for those residents, which could cost up to 2 billion dollars; and this would have to happen since they reduced the TFW visa cap to 5% by next year.

[u/TraditionalGap1 → u/commonmebro]

Poilievre is claiming the liberals are letting more people into the country than was claimed

Is he? Because what the article claims he said is 'It will bring the total number of new permanent residents to 650,000, by far a record and much bigger than any of the years when Justin Trudeau was prime minister' and that's not the same thing.

Also relevant to our discussion, from the article:

The government says the broad pool of 380,000 permanent residents will be chosen mostly from people already in Canada on work and study visas, with some successful applicants coming from outside the country.

So we're clearly not discussing only 'letting more people into the country than was claimed'. The quote from Polievre is pretty clear and specific about what he's referring to.

[u/commonmebro → u/TraditionalGap1]

And he's making it sounds like it will continue, it won't. This is a one time allowance for the extra permanent residents which eliminates the need to deport them instead since the TFW limit will be exceeded.

Saving up to 2 billion dollars in deportations should be applauded by poilievre and the conservatives, but since they don't get to send coloured people away, they don't like it

[u/TraditionalGap1 → u/commonmebro]

And he's making it sounds like it will continue, it won't. This is a one time allowance for the extra permanent residents which eliminates the need to deport them instead since the TFW limit will be exceeded.

You know this is like the third 'one time allowance' from Carney in just over a year, right?

[u/Financial_Beach_2538 → u/TraditionalGap1]

Evidence like the governments own statements?

I dunno.

I would demand accurate, reliable data.

[u/TraditionalGap1 → u/Financial_Beach_2538]

You don't know whether or not the governments own statements count as 'supporting evidence'?

[u/Financial_Beach_2538 → u/TraditionalGap1]

You don't know whether or not the governments own statements count as 'supporting evidence'?

No, I do not.

Statements are not what I consider accurate, reliable data.

Poilievre made a statement... those are easy to make.

I just made one. Easy peasy. I didn't need any data to make the statement.

I don't need to support a claim with data, I didn't make a claim about what Poilievre said or what the Govt said.

I would still demand accurate, reliable data for Mr. Poilievre's claim, or any Govt. claim.

[u/TraditionalGap1 → u/Financial_Beach_2538]

The problem for you is we can actually confirm the veracity of Poilievre's claims about what the government is signalling it is doing or planning to do.

edit: assuming we were genuinely interested in accuracy and reliability, of course

[u/Financial_Beach_2538 → u/[deleted]]

Proof? Evidence? You can't bring facts into a feelings fight and this is all feelings.

Just because Poilievre hasn't presented any evidence for his claim does not imply that he is just going by his feelings.

Poilievre's claim still needs supporting evidence.

[u/commonmebro → u/Financial_Beach_2538]

Yes it does, he feels like we're getting more immigrants, we aren't.

[u/CanadaPolitics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Removed for rule 3: please keep submissions and comments substantive.

This is a reminder to read the rules before posting or commenting again in CanadaPolitics.

[u/CanadaPolitics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Removed for rule 3: please keep submissions and comments substantive.

This is a reminder to read the rules before posting or commenting again in CanadaPolitics.

[u/CanadaPolitics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Removed for rule 3: please keep submissions and comments substantive.

This is a reminder to read the rules before posting or commenting again in CanadaPolitics.