Commentary, Opinion

Minority reports

April 16, 2026   ·   0 Comments

By Brock Weir

Like many Canadians on Monday night, I eagerly awaited the results of three Federal byelections – two in the GTA and one in the Montreal area.

Byelections, as a rule, don’t typically capture the public’s imagination, but it’s closer to the rule in Minority Governments, as Canada has been in since the October 19, 2019, Federal election when Justin Trudeau’s Liberals were reduced by some 20 seats in the House of Commons – 157 seats, down from the 177 they held prior to the writ dropping.

The incumbent government’s numbers improved slightly when Canadians next went to the polls, with the seat count “swelling” to 160 – still ten short to form a majority.

Going into last year’s Federal Election under the newly-minted leadership of Mark Carney, their fortunes rose again – still a few short of the new threshold of 172 seats for a majority established by a redistribution of the electoral map, but enough to apparently put fresh breeze into the party’s sails.

Each nation-wide election held since the Majority was lost in 2019 has been seen, as it so often is by pundits, as a litmus test on current leadership, whoever might be in a party’s top job at the time. Monday’s byelection results, as such, can certainly be seen as a win for Carney and the Liberals as they finally pieced together a Majority Government – despite how they got there.

The road to a Majority has had its fair share of supporters and detractors.

The green-carpeted road across the floor of the House of Commons is not without its potholes and those who have made the move from the Conservatives and the NDP towards the Liberal Government have faced their fair share of heat for doing so. They will face their constituents in the next nationwide election but, for now, they are confident they made the right move – if not for their constituents, but certainly for their careers. Their constituents, however, might have a different opinion.

Whether or not the floor-crossers did so to further their own ambitions, achieve the best results for their electorate, or to further the work of the incumbent government given the extraordinary geopolitical situation we find ourselves in as Canadians, is known only to them, but, at the very least, it’s brought this country a degree of stability it hasn’t had in more than half-a-decade.

Those most fervent against floor crossings – typically the more partisan among us, and generally only when the move across the floor goes against their preferred grain, and certainly not when the tides turn in their favour – might see it as an affront against democracy, despite it being something that has occurred relatively regularly in our Westminster-style democracy, but, without a shred of partisanship here, it’s nice to have some certainty amongst our leadership for the time being when so much uncertainty exists elsewhere.

Canadians continue to redefine not only our relationship with the United States in these extraordinary circumstances but our role in the wider world, which too is adjusting to the same uncertainties as we are. Despite how we got here, it is a positive that our partners know who they will be dealing with for the foreseeable future and we, in turn, know that the policies put forward by the party in charge will be done with more than just political longevity in mind.

As was my view when Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party of Canada finally formed a Majority Government in 2011 after losing a Confidence vote in the House of Commons, it will be a refreshing change of pace not to be in constant “election mode” and see what can be accomplished without so many pieces of legislation leaving the entirety of the machine of government teetering on a knife’s edge.

Carney’s Liberal Government has become a very different beast from the one formed under the leadership of Justin Trudeau. If Marilyn Gladu, a woman whose views largely aligned with the more socially conservative wing of the Conservative party can find a place within the party despite, to my eyes, having little in common with it, it will be interesting to see how the Liberals will continue to evolve as a party that takes all perspectives into consideration.

For better. For Worse. For everything in between. And, barring a reverse exodus away from Carney and back into the arms of the Poilievre Conservatives, it’s poised to be a situation with some staying power.

Stay tuned.

Democracy was at work at the Provincial level on Monday as well when Ontario Minister of Education Paul Calandra announced a significant restructuring of Ontario’s school boards.

Above and beyond the shift away from traditional Directors of Education towards a Chief Executive Officer with business experience, as if our publicly-funded schools are businesses, was the somewhat welcome news that the publicly-elected roles of school trustees will continue to exist as Ontario gets ready for the 2026 Municipal Elections this October.

Although the role of the trustees will be significantly diminished from what they were elected to do in the 2022 – no longer being able to make changes to the CEO-derived budget, for one – it was nice to see the Minister acknowledge the community-level role these positions hold and offer some certainty to those seeking to put themselves forward to advocate for the educational needs of their families, neighbours, and constituents.

Again, somewhat.

There is still no clarity what role trustees will have, if any, in school boards currently under Provincial Supervision, such as the York Catholic District School Board and Peel District School Board, ahead of the October election.

Should these “supervised” boards not satisfy the Ministry that the requisite changes have been made, trustees will continue to have no role, aside from matters of faith in the case of Catholic trustees, until Queen’s Park is satisfied with an impacted Board’s performance.

Yet, by the sounds of it, members of the public can continue to put themselves on this fall’s ballot – only to find themselves placed essentially into suspended animation until the Ministry decides otherwise.

That doesn’t sound like a particularly attractive prospect from where I sit, nor does it do anything, in my view, to strengthen our democratic process.

It sounds like the governmental equivalent of paying for the privilege of being placed on a list for the opportunity to get a chance to potentially buy a highly-coveted concert ticket, but no guarantee of getting to see the show, no matter how much money you’re prepared to throw at it. There’s no certainty in any election as voters cast their ballots for different reasons, but usually – USUALLY – there’s a position for someone to win and be the community voice they were elected to be.

Unless things change in the coming months, in jurisdictions where these Boards are suspended, it’s a race for a title and nothing more.

I’ve previously expressed by concerns in this space with some of the things I have seen unfold at the YCDSB, but given the choice between having community representation at the table versus none, I know where I stand – and so do incumbent, prospective, and in-limbo trustees.

In their case, however, there is no floor to cross for greener pastures, whatever colour you’re looking for. How about an ecclesial aisle?

Readers Comments (0)