How the Liberals came up short in Ontario — and lost their majority bid
Winning a fourth mandate and returning to power was certainly a victory for the federal Liberals, but it was marred by a disappointing showing in Ontario which played a significant role in costing them a majority.
"Obviously, if you compare to where the Liberals were three months ago, it was an unbelievably amazing result in Ontario. But I think it would be fair to say that to get to a majority government, they needed to hold their own in Ontario," said Dan Arnold, chief strategy officer for the research firm Pollara and former research strategist for Justin Trudeau's Liberals.
"I think you could at least say that their inability to, or the fact that they lost seats in Ontario, is probably the reason it's a minority as opposed to majority government."
The Liberal Party did end up winning 69 seats, the most in the province, with 49.6 per cent of the popular vote.
But the Conservatives weren't far behind, winning 53 seats and 44 per cent popular vote. It was a net gain for the Conservatives of 16 seats, and loss of nine for the Liberals. The NDP's five seats in the province were wiped out.
The results seemed to defy some projections. Éric Grenier, a polls and elections analyst who writes The Writ newsletter and runs CBC's Poll Tracker, had projected the Liberals to win 82 seats and the Conservatives 38.
"This was where the surprise came in, primarily in York Region of the Greater Toronto Area and in southwestern Ontario. The Conservatives beat their polls in Ontario by a small amount, but their vote proved more efficient than expected," Grenier wrote.
WATCH | Why the Conservatives' message resonated with voters in many GTA ridings
The results in Ontario looked very different than they did during the Trudeau years, Arnold said. The Liberals this election did do better in the Ottawa area, most notably picking up Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre's seat in Carleton. And in some Toronto ridings, their win margins were much larger than before, he said.
Liberals lost seats in GTA
The Liberals scored victories in places like Peterborough and the Bay of Quinte, parts of the province where they did better than they had in past couple elections.
But there were other parts on the province where they recorded some big losses, including in the 905 region and ridings like Brampton West, Cambridge, Markham-Unionville, Newmarket-Aurora, and Vaughan-Woodbridge, all won by Conservatives.
For example, Liberal candidate Francesco Sorbara won three times under Trudeau in Vaughan-Woodbridge but lost Monday by 20 percentage points, Arnold noted. As well, Brampton West Liberal candidate Kamal Khera, a cabinet minister in both Trudeau and Carney governments, lost in her riding, despite winning in 2021 by over 20 points.
"So there's some very dramatic swings there," he said.
As to why the political shift, voters in that particular area may have been more sensitive to issues like affordability and housing pressures over the last couple years, issues that Poilievre had zeroed in on during the campaign and before, Arnold said.
"For a lot of voters there, that probably trumped the Trump factor when they were kind of ranking their priorities" Arnold said.
David Coletto, founder and CEO of Abacus Data, echoed that millennial and Gen X voters in the Greater Toronto Area whose mortgage payments went up substantially over the last years of the Trudeau government may have turned to the Conservatives.
WATCH | Polls predicted election well, except some weird Ontario results, says pollster
Those issues may have been muted when Trump was the main factor but in the final two weeks of the campaign, based on Abacus tracking, the concerns about Trump faded and gave the Conservatives an opening to make the case for change, Coletto said.
Affordability and crime were two issues that mattered to a lot of voters in that 905 region that worked against the Liberals, he said.
He said in many parts of the 905 area, there was the perception that crime, particularly auto thefts, had gotten out of hand, and that was linked to the Trudeau years.
"And I think the Conservatives in the final week-and-a-half of the campaign really tried to put a focus on that," Coletto said.
Boots vs. suits
But there was also the opening up of the "boots versus suits" dynamic in Ontario that has become a political advantage for Conservatives, he said.
That the Conservatives won both Windsor ridings may be an in indication of the slight realignment of the party — to get those working-class, private-sector, unionized voters in the trades, manufacturing and natural resource sectors into their camp, Coletto said.
"The absolute devastation of the NDP really opened that up," he said. The GTA was was a roadblock for the Liberals in a way but Conservatives made some important gains in other parts of the province."
Arnold added that the Liberals ate the NDP vote in many parts of the province, but there wasn't as much NDP vote to begin with in the 905, which hurt the Liberals in terms of growth.
"The biggest dynamic of this campaign was the fall of the NDP. And in places where the fall of the NDP helped the Liberals, like in Peterborough, that's a great night for them. But in places where either there wasn't as much NDP to fall or it went more to the Conservatives or split evenly, those are the places where I think they struggled more in Ontario."
Vote-splitting on the left
Laura Stephenson, professor of political science at Western University, said in some ridings like London Fanshawe and Windsor West, in which the NDP incumbent lost to a Conservative, there was likely vote-splitting on the left.
Prior to Carney becoming the leader, there may have been strong support going to the NDP incumbent. In this case, it's likely that some stayed with the NDP incumbent but others went to the Liberal candidates, she sad.
"So it was almost like a failure of co-ordination on the progressive side," she said.
Stephenson also suggested the Doug Ford factor should also not be ruled out for Liberal challenges in the province.
"There's a lot of people in Ontario who do feel more conservative right now," she said. "Obviously there are differences at the federal level, but you know, we have to account for the fact that there will be this baseline level of more right-ish support."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Government struggles to cut foreign aid spent on asylum hotels
The government is struggling to cut the amount of foreign aid it spends on hotel bills for asylum seekers in the UK, the BBC has learnt. New figures released quietly by ministers in recent days show the Home Office plans to spend £2.2bn of overseas development assistance (ODA) this financial year - that is only marginally less than the £2.3bn it spent in 2024/25. The money is largely used to cover the accommodation costs of thousands of asylum seekers who have recently arrived in the UK. The Home Office said it was committed to ending asylum hotels and was speeding up asylum decisions to save taxpayers' money. The figures were published on the Home Office website with no accompanying notification to media. Foreign aid is supposed to be spent alleviating poverty by providing humanitarian and development assistance overseas. But under international rules, governments can spend some of their foreign aid budgets at home to support asylum seekers during the first year after their arrival. According to the most recent Home Office figures, there are about 32,000 asylum seekers in hotels in the UK. Labour promised in its manifesto to "end asylum hotels, saving the taxpayer billions of pounds". Contracts signed by the Conservative government in 2019 were expected to see £4.5bn of public cash paid to three companies to accommodate asylum seekers over a 10-year period. But a report by spending watchdog the National Audit Office (NAO) in May said that number was expected to be £15.3bn. Asylum accommodation costs set to triple, says watchdog Asylum hotel companies vow to hand back some profits On June 3, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper told the Home Affairs Committee she was "concerned about the level of money" being spent on asylum seekers' accommodation and added: "We need to end asylum hotels altogether." The Home Office said it was trying to bear down on the numbers by reducing the time asylum seekers can appeal against decisions. It is also planning to introduce tighter financial eligibility checks to ensure only those without means are housed. But Whitehall officials and international charities have said the Home Office has no incentive to reduce ODA spending because the money does not come out of its budgets. The scale of government aid spending on asylum hotels has meant huge cuts in UK support for humanitarian and development priorities across the world. Those cuts have been exacerbated by the government's reductions to the overall ODA budget. In February, Sir Keir Starmer said he would cut aid spending from 0.5% of gross national income to 0.3% by 2027 - a fall in absolute terms of about £14bn to some £9bn. Such was the scale of aid spending on asylum hotels in recent years that the previous Conservative government gave the Foreign Office an extra £2bn to shore up its humanitarian commitments overseas. But Labour has refused to match that commitment. Gideon Rabinowitz, director of policy at the Bond network of development organisations, said: "Cutting the UK aid budget while using it to prop up Home Office costs is a reckless repeat of decisions taken by the previous Conservative government. "Diverting £2.2bn of UK aid to cover asylum accommodation in the UK is unsustainable, poor value for money, and comes at the expense of vital development and humanitarian programmes tackling the root causes of poverty, conflict and displacement. "It is essential that we support refugees and asylum seekers in the UK, but the government should not be robbing Peter to pay Paul." Sarah Champion, chair of the International Development Committee, said the government was introducing "savage cuts" to its ODA spending, risking the UK's development priorities and international reputation, while "Home Office raids on the aid budget" had barely reduced. "Aid is meant to help the poorest and most vulnerable across the world: to alleviate poverty, improve life chances and reduce the risk of conflict," she said. "Allowing the Home Office to spend it in the UK makes this task even harder." "The government must get a grip on spending aid in the UK," she said. "The Spending Review needs to finally draw a line under this perverse use of taxpayer money designed to keep everyone safe and prosperous in their own homes, not funding inappropriate, expensive accommodation here." Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: "Labour promised in their manifesto to end the use of asylum hotels for illegal immigrants. But the truth is there are now thousands more illegal migrants being housed in hotels under Labour. "Now these documents reveal that Labour are using foreign aid to pay for asylum hotel accommodation – yet another promise broken." A Home Office spokesperson said: "We inherited an asylum system under exceptional pressure, and continue to take action, restoring order, and reduce costs. This will ultimately reduce the amount of Official Development Assistance spent to support asylum seekers and refugees in the UK. "We are immediately speeding up decisions and increasing returns so that we can end the use of hotels and save the taxpayer £4bn by 2026." Is the government meeting its pledges on illegal immigration and asylum?
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Carney defends inviting Modi to G7 after RCMP linked India to murders and extortion
Prime Minister Mark Carney defended his decision to invite Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the G7 summit in Alberta just months after the RCMP accused his government of acts of murder, extortion and coercion. As this year's chair of the G7, Carney said it's important to have India at the table in Kananaskis while world leaders discuss issues including energy security and critical minerals, given the country's size and key role in the global supply chain. He said he consulted with the other G7 leaders on the decision. Carney also suggested India is now more willing to co-operate with ongoing Canadian investigations. "We have now agreed importantly to continued law enforcement dialogue. So there's been some progress on that," Carney said during a Friday news conference. "I extended the invitation to Prime Minister Modi in that context and he has accepted." The invitation, announced earlier Friday morning, garnered swift condemnation given Canada's public accusation that members of the Indian government are involved in plots to stoke fear and cause harm on Canadian soil. Last fall, the RCMP laid out allegations accusing agents of the Indian government of playing a role in "widespread violence" in Canada, including homicides, and warned that it poses "a serious threat to our public safety." That came after Canada accused Indian government agents of being involved in the murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian activist for Sikh separatism. WATCH | Carney defends decision: The World Sikh Organization of Canada said the decision caused "outrage and pain" within the Sikh community across Canada. "For Sikhs in Canada, this is a betrayal, not just of our community, but of core Canadian values," said president Danish Singh in a statement. Liberal MP criticizes PM's move The Sikh Federation of Canada called the trip "a grave insult." The group said Nijjar's 2023 shooting death outside a gurdwara in Surrey, B.C., was "part of a co-ordinated effort to silence dissent and terrorize our community." A member of Carney's own caucus also voiced criticism. Liberal MP Sukh Dhaliwal, who represents the Surrey riding where Nijjar was shot, said neither he nor many of his constituents support Modi. "They are concerned about justice," he told CBC's Power & Politics. "We cannot tolerate any interference from any foreign agents irrespective whether they're from India, China, Russia, Iran or any other country." RCMP Commissioner Mike Duheme has said the Mounties have strong evidence showing the "highest levels" of the Indian government were involved in orchestrating a campaign of violence on Canadian soil, including homicides, coercion and extortion. Duheme said police evidence shows Indian diplomats and consular staff collected information and brought that information to the Indian government, at which point instructions would be fed to criminal organizations to carry out acts of violence. There's been no suggestion from officials that the alleged campaign of violence has ended. The RCMP's comments came nearly a year after then prime minister Justin Trudeau announced Canada had evidence linking Indian agents to the killing Nijjar. Rising in the House of Commons in September 2023, Trudeau said Canadian security agencies were pursuing credible allegations of a potential link between agents of the government of India and Nijjar's death A Canadian citizen, Nijjar was a prominent local leader in the Khalistan movement pushing for the creation of an independent Sikh state in India. Four Indian nationals are accused in the alleged assassination plot and their cases are before a B.C. court. New Delhi has denied the allegations and has accused Canada of supporting "Khalistani terrorists." Leaders from the G7 countries — Canada, France, United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States — along with the president of the European Commission are heading to Alberta for high-level meetings June 16 and 17. Conservatives say invitation is necessary Modi has been invited to every G7 leaders' summit since 2019, but Carney had been under pressure from Sikh organizations to break with that tradition. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre called the invitation "necessary," saying Canada needs to work with India on trade and security files. "India has been at the last six G7 conferences. It's one of the biggest and fastest-growing economies in the world. We need to sell our natural gas, our civilian nuclear power technology and other resource projects to India," he said Friday. "We want to see the government work on addressing security issues at the same time when the prime minister has those conversations."The NDP called on Carney to rescind the invitation. "It is unconscionable that the government would roll out the red carpet" for Modi, said the party's critic for public safety and national security Jenny Kwan "This move undermines efforts to hold foreign powers accountable for interference and violence in our country." Trudeau met with Modi on the sidelines of the Italy G7 last June, but relations between the two countries remained terse. When the RCMP went public with its investigation, Ottawa expelled six Indian diplomats and consular officials "in relation to a targeted campaign against Canadian citizens by agents linked to the government of India." Global Affairs Canada said that it had asked India to waive diplomatic and consular immunities "and to co-operate in the investigation," but India declined. India responded by expelling six diplomats, including Canada's high Liberal government under Carney has shown a willingness to thaw relations with India. Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand said she had a "productive discussion" with her Indian counterpart last month on "deepening our economic co-operation and advancing shared priorities." During the recent federal election campaign, Carney called the Canadian-Indian relationship "incredibly important." "There are strains on that relationship that we didn't cause, to be clear," he said. "But there is a path forward to address those with mutual respect." In a social media post Friday, Modi wrote that he looks forward to meeting at the summit. "As vibrant democracies bound by deep people-to-people ties, India and Canada will work together with renewed vigour, guided by mutual respect and shared interests," he wrote.
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Reform UK struggles to find friends to share council power
Reform UK's success in the recent local elections has propelled many councillors with limited or no political experience into council chambers across England. While Reform UK's rise was the big story of those elections, almost half of the councils up for grabs were not won outright by any single party. That means many of those newbie councillors are now navigating so-called hung councils, where parties with little in common often work together to get the business of local government done. But so far, it hasn't panned out that way for Reform UK, which isn't involved in any formal coalitions, pacts or deals in areas where there were local elections this year. This was despite rampant speculation about Reform-Conservative coalitions ahead of the polls, with party leaders Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage not ruling out council deals. So, what's going on? In some places - Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Leicestershire - Reform UK has enough councillors to form minority administrations and is attempting to govern alone. In other areas where coalitions were possible, Reform UK has either shunned co-operation or vice versa. Where Reform UK has explored potential partnerships locally, its policies have been viewed with suspicion by the established parties. In Cornwall, the Liberal Democrats, Labour and the Conservatives refused to work with Reform UK, even though it was the biggest party and had won the most seats. Instead, the Lib Dems teamed up with independent councillors to run Cornwall Council as a minority administration. That infuriated Reform UK's group leader in Cornwall, Rob Parsonage, who branded the coalition deal "undemocratic" and "a total stitch-up". Did other parties contrive to exclude Reform UK? The newly minted Lib Dem council leader, Leigh Frost, does not think so. "The reality is our core values at heart of it just stand for two very different things and it makes working together incompatible," Frost told the BBC. "And then Reform was given two weeks to try to form an administration and chose not to." Frost said Reform UK's Cornwall candidates mainly campaigned on immigration. This was echoed in conversations with other local party leaders across the country. The BBC was told Reform's candidates had little local policy to offer and mostly focused on national issues, such as stopping small boats crossing the English Channel. Slashing "wasteful spending" by councils, like Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) in the US, was also a common campaign theme. In Worcestershire, where Reform won the most seats but fell short of a majority, the party's supposed lack of local policy was a major sticking point for the Conservatives. "They haven't got a local prospectus and that was part of the problem," said Adam Kent, Tory group leader on Worcestershire County Council. "They didn't stand on any local issues. It was on national politics. How can you go into coalition with somebody if you don't even know what they stand for?" Joanne Monk, the Reform UK council leader in the county, said she only had "a brief couple of chats" with other party leaders but was uncompromising on coalitions. "I'm damned sure we're not on the same wavelength," she said. She followed the lead of Farage, who ruled out formal coalitions at council level but said "in the interests of local people we'll do deals", in comments ahead of the local elections. In Worcestershire, Reform UK's minority administration may need to do deals to pass key decisions and avoid other parties banding together to veto their plans. Recognising this, she acknowledged other parties were "going to have to work with us at some point". In Northumberland, the Conservatives retained their position as the largest party and gave the impression they were willing to entertain coalition talks with Reform UK, which gained 23 seats. "I said I would work with anyone and my door is open," said Conservative council leader Glen Sanderson. "But Reform the next day put out a press release saying the price for working with the Conservatives would be extremely high. So on that basis, I assumed that was the door closed on me." No talks were held and the Conservatives formed a minority administration. Weeks had passed after the local elections before Mark Peart was voted in as Reform UK's local group leader in the county. As a result, he wasn't in a position to talk to anybody. "Everything had already been agreed," Peart said. "It was too late." Reform UK sources admitted the party was caught a bit flat-footed here and elsewhere as many of its new councillors got the grips with their new jobs in the weeks following the local elections. A support network for those councillors, in the form of training sessions and a local branch system, is being developed by the party. But this week Zia Yusuf, one of the key architects behind that professionalisation drive and the Doge cost-cutting initiative, resigned as party chairman, leaving a gap in the party's leadership. Reform UK's deputy leader, Richard Tice, said the party's success at the local elections "was partly because of the significant efforts and improvements to the infrastructure of the party" spearheaded by Yusuf. Though Yusuf is gone, the party has considerably strengthened its foundations at local level, after gaining 677 new councillors and two mayors. A Reform UK source said party bosses will be keeping an eye out for stand-out councillors who could go on to become parliamentary candidates before the general election. They said in areas where Reform UK runs councils as a minority administration, it's going to take some compromise with other parties and independents to pass budgets and key policies. In the messy world of town halls and council chambers, that could be a tough apprenticeship. Reform UK prepares for real power on a council it now dominates Sir John Curtice: The map that shows Reform's triumph was much more than a protest vote Reform UK makes big gains in English local elections