BY HERBERT HILDEBRANDT
We could all be forgiven for questioning our ability to do basic math as we see provincial election signs popping up on roadsides across Ontario. Did we not just have an election less than three years ago? Yes, in fact we did, in June 2022, to be exact. If you thought Ontario had a fixed election date law, you would also be correct. So, why are candidates having to drill through ice to put in their signs in the middle of winter, you might ask? This is where it gets interesting, or nefarious, depending on who gives you an answer.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford insists that calling an early election just over 2.5 years into his second term is necessary for stability and a strong mandate. How does cutting a term nearly in half translate to stability? The hypocrisy here is staggering. If his government was looking for stability, he got that in June 2022 with a massive majority that doesn’t actually run out until June 2027, by law. Instead, he’s throwing Ontario into an unnecessary, $200 million election—money that could have been put to far better use in these financially challenging times.
Take, for instance, Ford’s claim that he needs a renewed mandate to fight Trump’s tariffs. That’s a curious excuse. If the threatened tariffs are such an existential threat to Ontario’s economy, why not invest that $200 million in border security, infrastructure, or even in directly addressing the issues Trump has raised? Ford made no attempt to visit Trump in Mar-a-Lago, or Washington, D.C., to sit down and actually figure out a solution from November to February. Instead, he is burning through taxpayer dollars on an election literally nobody asked for but himself.
Ford also claims he needs a new mandate to justify new spending at pandemic-levels and borrowing massive amounts of money to support that spending. We’ve seen a similar play before. Liberal Premier David Peterson tried this trick in 1990, calling an early election when he had years left in his mandate. Voters punished him for it, and what did we get? Five years of the worst government spending in living memory under Bob Rae’s NDP. It doesn’t always repeat itself, but history often rhymes, and Ontarians would do well to remember that election.
“Ontario Premier Doug Ford insists that calling an early election just over 2.5 years into his second term is necessary for stability and a strong mandate.”
Then there’s the $3 billion question—literally. Just before calling the election, Ford’s government borrowed over three billion to send nearly every Ontarian a $200 check in the mail. Convenient timing, isn’t it? Voters get a physical reminder of Ford’s generosity just as they’re being asked to head to the polls. In my mailbox I found two checks (for my wife and I) and, conveniently, a brochure from my local Progressive Conservative Party candidate with a picture of himself and Premier Ford, asking for my vote. That’s not fiscal policy—it is old-school vote buying. I’ve seen this before, actually. In Mexico, politicians would show up at local ranchos with bags of rice, beans, and even microwaves, all in a blatant attempt to buy goodwill before an election. Ford might not be handing out kitchen appliances, but the principle is the same: use taxpayer money to bribe the electorate. This blatant incentive to vote for the current government is an intellectual insult to every citizen of Ontario, notwithstanding the negative financial impact it will have as future generations come to grips with repaying the debt and interest of this scheme.
This kind of maneuvering reeks of desperation and cynicism. Ford isn’t calling this election for Ontarians—he’s calling it for himself. He appears to be betting that with a fresh mandate, he can secure his political future before real accountability catches up with him. He’s doing it on our dime.
Voters should see through this charade. A government that truly prioritizes stability would focus on governing, not on engineering an election to suit its own timeline. The only mandate Ford should be getting from Ontarians is a demand for: transparency, accountability, and an end to these wasteful political games