Search

A key component of the Conservative Party of Canada's (CPC) electoral strategy in 2011, 2015 and 2019 was to court the country's "ethnic vote". Under the leadership of Stephen Harper and Andrew Scheer, the CPC launched an aggressive outreach strategy aimed at attracting conservative ethnic populations while at the same time, continuing to appeal to the party's "old stock" base – referred to as the "populist paradox". This approach was particularly prominent in the Party's immigration and citizenship policy platform. While the CPC continuously rolled out reforms further restricting access to incoming immigrants and refugees, they framed these initiatives as a way to keep disingenuous immigrants out in order to protect the integrity of the Canadian immigration system, a system used appropriately by those immigrants from whom they were seeking support. Using Sara Ahmed's work on affect and happiness, this paper examines the CPC's construction of "good" and "bad" immigrants, specifically how these constructions are taken up in broader narratives of Canadian citizenship and belonging. In doing so, I address how the CPC uses this rhetoric to appeal to voters, both immigrant and non-immigrant alike. Un élément clé de la stratégie électorale du Parti conservateur du Canada (PCC) en 2011, 2015 et 2019 était de convoiter le ''vote ethnique'' dans le pays. Sous la direction de Stephen Harper et Andrew Scheer, le PCC a lancé une stratégie de sensibilisation agressive visant à attirer des populations ethniques conservatrices tout en continuant de faire appel à la base du ''vieux stock'' du parti – appelée ''paradoxe populiste''. Cette approche était particulièrement importante dans la plate-forme de la politique d'immigration et de citoyenneté du Parti. Bien que le PCC ait continuellement déployé des réformes restreignant davantage l'entrée aux immigrants et aux réfugiés, il a présenté ces initiatives comme un moyen de garder les immigrants de moralité douteuse à l'écart afin de protéger l'intégrité du système d'immigration canadien, un système utilisé de manière appropriée par ces mêmes immigrants auprès de qui ils cherchaient du soutien. Utilisant les travaux de Sara Ahmed sur l'insouciance et le bonheur, cet article examine la construction par le PCC des notions de ''bons'' et ''mauvais'' immigrants, en particulier comment ces constructions sont reprises de façon plus large dans des récits de la citoyenneté et de l'appartenance canadiennes. En somme, j'explique comment le PCC utilise cette rhétorique pour séduire les électeurs, immigrants et non-immigrants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In contrast to recent policies in the United States, immigration reform in Canada, during the past decade, has resulted in one of the most transformative periods in Canada’s immigration history. This article examines these changes, against the comparative backdrop of American inaction. These include changes affecting the three classes of legal permanent residents—economic, family, and refugee—as well as temporary foreign workers and foreign students. Canadian citizenship rules have also been refocused from citizenship as a “right” to citizenship as a “responsibility.” The article illustrates the advantages of the Canadian system, but cautions against overmanagement, centralization of decision-making power, and the loss of Canada’s welcoming reputation. The Canadian system, while not perfect, is efficient and should be able to successfully adjust to future problems that arise, provided that the Canadian public has sufficient input in policy decisions. Given a more complex and cumbersome US immigration policy system, comprehensive immigration reform is not likely to occur if partisanship prevails. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]