This article was originally published on The Conversation, an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts. Disclosure information is available on the original site.
___
Author: Mark Winfield, Professor, Environmental and Urban Change, York University, Canada
Ontario Premier Doug Ford has justified his early election call on the need to respond to United States President Donald Trump’s threat to impose 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian imports.
While the threat of tariffs on all Canadian imports has been paused — although Trump has since slapped levies on all steel and aluminum imports into the U.S. — Ontario voters need to reflect more than ever on the province’s circumstances and the performance of its government as they prepare to head to the polls next week.
The Ford government’s approach to the environment and climate change, as well as its policies on a range of other issues like housing, health care and education, is best understood in the context of its overall “market populist” approach to governance.
Several defining features of this model have emerged over the past six and a half years under Ford’s rule.
Unaffordable proposals
First, issues that require long-term perspectives on environmental, social and economic costs — like climate change — have tended to be disregarded. To the extent that the government has provided any sort of long-term vision, it has been focused on grandiose infrastructure projects.
That includes a proposal to bury the Highway 401 highway in Toronto — an undertaking with a potential cost of anywhere between $60 and over $200 billion. But even that expense would pale in comparison to a recent proposal for a 10,000-megawatt nuclear power plant near Wesleyville, between Toronto and Kingston.
The costs for the project based on recent experiences in the U.S., could easily top the $200 billion mark as well.
The Ford government’s drive to “get it done” has also, at times, invoked a near-Trumpian disdain for democratic norms and limits on executive authority. This has been illustrated by, among other things, the first invocation of the notwithstanding clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Ontario history.
Power has been increasingly concentrated in the premier’s office. Provisions for public participation, transparency and accountability under the guise of eliminating red tape in decision-making processes have been systemically eliminated.
Processes for the meaningful environmental and economic review of major projects have suffered the same fate.
Another defining issue is the Ford government’s approach to managing the province’s finances, with even the consistently pro-business Fraser Institute raising concerns.
The disregard of financial responsibility has perhaps been most powerfully demonstrated by issuing of $200 rebates to Ontario residents. These are expected to cost to the provincial treasury more than $3 billion.
Fewer revenue streams
The Ford government has also displayed a willingness to eliminate billions a year in stable, long-term revenue streams, like vehicle licencing fees and fuel taxes. Major long-term costs and liabilities have been embedded at the same time, especially in relation to questionable infrastructure projects.
All of this has taken place amid ongoing crises, attributed to provincial underfunding in areas like schools and post-secondary institutions, affordable (especially rental) housing and health care.
In the longer term, liabilities are accumulating from the government’s failure to deal with the impacts of a changing climate.
A final feature of the government’s market populist governance model has been an approach to decision-making based on connections, access and political whim rather than evidence or analysis.
This pattern was perhaps most evident during the $8.3 billion Greenbelt land removal scandal involving well-connected developers. But the same pattern extends to the energy, for-profit health and resource extraction sectors as well.
The province’s major opposition parties ran unsuccessfully in the 2022 election on the basis of platforms emphasizing adherence to what had been thought to be core principles in Ontario politics — moderation, managerial competence, and basic democratic values.
Opposition parties
This time, all three have turned to more populist themes.
Liberal Leader Bonnie Crombie promises even more tax cuts than Ford. The NDP proposes to remove tolls from the 407 highway at an unknown cost to the provincial treasury and other programs.
Even the Green Party, which has previously drawn praise for the content and imagination of its platforms, has picked up on populist themes, with an emphasis on affordability and a Ford-topping promise — and likely an even more ambitious — to build two million new homes.
Vulnerabilities for the Ford government abound. Recent polling suggests that despite the apparently strong Conservative lead, Ford himself is deeply unpopular, particularly among women voters. Sixty per cent of Ontario residents think the province is on the “wrong track.”
The early election call itself is widely seen as costly, unjustified and opportunistic. The distraction of the election may well have weakened the province’s immediate capacity to deal with the Trump administration.
Questions and investigations around the Greenbelt land removal scandal and the government’s relationship with the land-development industry continue to close in on the premier’s office amid an ongoing RCMP investigation.
Crises around housing, education, health care and electricity continue to deepen.
Still disengaged?
In calling an early election, the Ford government has provided Ontario voters with an unexpected opportunity to reflect on its record, and the potential paths forward for the province.
Hopefully Ontario voters will engage more deeply with these questions than they did in the 2022 election, which had the lowest voter turnout in the province’s history.
Three years ago, the government emerged with an overwhelming majority in the legislature on the basis of the ballots of less than 18 per cent of the province’s eligible voters. The stakes are far too high in 2025 for a repeat of that level of disengagement.
___
Mark Winfield receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. This chapter summarizes the contents of the author's contribution to three new volumes on Ontario politics (The Politics of Ontario, 2nd ed,( UTP 2024); Ontario Since Confederation: A Reader (UTP 2025); and Against the People (Fernwood 2025)
___
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Disclosure information is available on the original site. Read the original article: https://theconversation.com/the-biggest-threat-in-the-ontario-election-isnt-donald-trump-its-voter-disengagement-249528
Mark Winfield, Professor, Environmental and Urban Change, York University, Canada, The Conversation
