Kevin Paquette: The Parti Québécois forced a necessary immigration debate - National Post
Leader of the Parti Quebecois (PQ) Paul St-Pierre Plamondon speaks to the media following the third and final televised Quebec election debate in Montreal, Quebec, Canada on September 23, 2026. Quebec voters will cast their vote on October 5. Photo by GRAHAM HUGHES /POOL/AFP via Getty ImagesArticle contentFrom the very start of the Quebec election campaign, Parti Québécois Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon made it clear that immigration would once again be one of the defining issues. By proposing to cut the number of temporary immigrants in the province by half and reduce permanent immigration to roughly 35,000 people a year, the PQ leader has reignited a debate that, predictably, quickly became polarized.
It took only a few days for the discussion to move away from the proposed levels and from Quebec’s actual capacity to welcome and integrate newcomers. Québec solidaire co-spokesperson Ruba Ghazal was quick to ask the PQ leader to define “what is a Quebecer?” Liberal leader Charles Milliard, for his part, accused PSPP of operating in a “gray zone” when discussing immigration.
Columnist Jesse Kline keeps you up to date with what’s happening in Israel and the effects of antisemitism on life here in Canada. Friday mornings.
A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.
The next issue of Channel Israel will soon be in your inbox.
We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again
Welcome to Quebec’s immigration debate. A debate in which, all too often, questions about motives take precedence over questions of policy. And this tendency is nothing new.
Back in 2016, then-Liberal premier Philippe Couillard accused François Legault, at the time leader of the second opposition group in the National Assembly, of “fanning the flames of intolerance” after Legault questioned Quebec’s capacity to increase annual immigration from 50,000 to 60,000 newcomers.
Ten years later, the language has changed, but the reflex remains essentially the same. As soon as someone questions an immigration target or a politician raises the issue of integration capacity, they quickly become suspect.
Yet, if we do not want to surrender the immigration debate to the extremes, we need to be able to ask a simple question openly: how many people are we actually capable of welcoming and integrating successfully?
