Published in The Hamilton Spectator, 25 March 2026
This isn’t a case of whataboutism; it’s about consistency in opinions.
By Bruce Forsyth
Bruce Forsyth lives in Barrie.
Re: A rising disdain for democracy, March 18
While he makes some good points, Robert Sorrell needs to balance his obvious hatred of Premier Doug Ford with a level of objectivity.
Sorrell’s lament of the premier’s “disdain” for the democratic process, which included a “governance by decree …” fails to recognize that it has more to do with politics as usual, both legitimate parliamentary processes and the cynical political games we frequently see, not a growing emulation of U.S. President Donald Trump.
I could make the same Trumpian arguments against Prime Minister Mark Carney, who emulated Trump’s preference for signing executive orders by performatively doing his own “signing of an executive order” to reduce the carbon tax to zero, in front of a crowd of reporters in March 2025, shortly after being sworn in.
Prime ministers don’t have the power to sign executive orders, so Carney’s actions were nothing more than performance art.
Sorrell also goes on to complain about “majority governments’ dictatorial powers.” Does Sorrell have a problem when Liberal governments have majority status? Does Sorrell have a problem with Carney achieving a majority government through back-room deals to entice floor crossers? Isn’t that going against the fundamental wishes of the electorate, who saw fit to limit Carney with a minority government?
Yes, I know that floor-crossing is allowable under our parliamentary system, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that it still looks very slimy that Carney is trying to get a majority this way.
Yes, Conservatives have welcomed floor-crossers into their ranks, too, but never to achieve a majority government denied to them by the electorate. Regardless of your political leanings, there is a very valid argument that floor-crossers should face an immediate byelection.
The same goes for Ford’s changes to the Freedom of Information changes. I do agree that a lack of information available to the public is troubling, but could we lay off the “dictatorial powers” talking point?
This isn’t a case of whataboutism; it’s about consistency in opinions. I find it annoyingly hypocritical for a columnist to criticize an opponent for doing something that if your side did something similar, you would applaud it. It’s either right or wrong. Period.
I agree that there is a rising distain for the type of democracy a large number of politicians from all political parties practice, because frequently the interests of the country and its citizens seem to be irrelevant to political ideology and ambitions, not because a right-wing politician “seizes power” and acts “like a dictator.”
*******************************************************************************************************************
A reader responds:
If it walks like a duck …
Re: Critics need some consistency in their opinions, March 25
Bruce Forsyth has requested that we “lay off the dictatorial” labels being used to describe Premier Doug Ford. To this I simply say, “if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.”
*******************************************************************************************************************
The unedited version:
Politics can be a dirty game at times
Re: “A rising distain for democracy” (Robert Sorrell, The Hamilton Spectator, 18 March): I know that the columnist doesn’t write the headline, but the headline of this column is quite appropriate, but not exactly for the reasons that Mr. Sorrell intended.
While he makes some good points, Mr. Sorrell needs to balance his obvious hatred of Premier Doug Ford with a level of objectivity. Mr. Sorrell’s lament of the Premier’s “disdain” for the democratic process, which included a “governance by decree…” fails to recognize that it has more to do with politics as usual, both legitimate parliamentary processes and the cynical political games we frequently see, not a growing emulation of President Donald Trump.
I could make the same Trumpian arguments against Prime Minister Mark Carney, who in an instance many people may have missed or forgotten about, emulated Trump’s preference for signing Executive Orders by performatively doing his own “signing of an executive order” to reduce the carbon tax to zero, in front of a crowd of reporters in March 2025, shortly after being sworn in. Prime Ministers don’t have the power to sign executive orders, so Carney’s actions were nothing more than performance art. It’s ironic that Ford and Pierre Poilievre are the ones that get called “wannabe Trumpers,” or “Maple Maga.”
Sorrell also goes on to complain that “…our parliamentary has long granted majority governments dictatorial powers…” Does Sorrell have a problem when Liberal governments have majority status in Parliament and our provincial legislatures? Does Sorrell have a problem with Carney achieving a majority government through back-room deals to entice floor crossers? Isn’t that going against the fundamental wishes of the electorate, who saw fit to limit Carney with a minority government? Yes, I know that floor-crossing is allowable under our parliamentary system, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that it still looks very slimy that Carney is trying to get a majority this way. Yes, Conservatives have welcomed floor-crossers into their ranks too, but never to achieve a majority government denied to them by the electorate. Regardless of your political leanings, there is a very valid argument that floor-crossers should face an immediate by-election to affirm their choice to change parties. The vast majority of people vote for the party itself, not necessarily the individual running under that party’s banner.
The same goes for Ford’s changes to the FOI rules. I do agree that a lack of information available to the public is troubling, but could we lay off the “dictatorial powers” talking point? Same with the “seized all levels of power” bit against Trump. Both were elected to their positions in free elections and the powers given to them are in accordance with the political structure. Every four years, we get a chance to re-elect these “dictators,” as Sorrell implies, or elect a new government. There’s also the issue of the federal Liberals, who under former PM Justin Trudeau, promised the government would be “open by default,” yet failed spectacularly in that regard, so there’s that too.
This isn’t a case of whataboutism; it’s about consistency in opinions. I know the role of opinion columnists is to take strong opinions on issues, but I find it annoyingly hypocritical for a columnist to criticize an opponent for doing something that if your side did something similar, you would applaud it. It’s either right or wrong. Period.
I agree that there is a rising distain for the type of democracy a large number of politicians from all political parties practice, because frequently the interests of the country and its citizens seem to be irrelevant to political ideology and ambitions, not because a right-wing politician “seizes power” and acts “like a dictator.”
*******************************************************************************************************************
The original column that inspired my column:
Opinion | Doug Ford’s increasing disdain for democracy in Ontario
The similarities to his own style and those of the American president seem to draw closer every day.
March 18, 2026
By Robert Sorrell
Like a dark mole that suddenly appears on one’s skin and then continues to grow relentlessly until its true nature becomes unquestionable, so does the reality of Doug Ford’s plans for Ontario become inescapable.
From one of the first acts upon his ascension to the premiership, which was to gut and reduce Toronto city council using the “not withstanding” clause of the Constitution, to his subsequent and most recent overrides of multiple other councils and education boards, Ford has shown an ever-increasing capriciousness in his manner of governing and a clear and growing disdain for democratic processes.
Governance by decree announced outside of the provincial legislature seems to be becoming the norm. The similarities to his own style and those of the American president seem to draw closer every day.
Going into the last election Ford seemed to be running a rearguard action as the RCMP had launched an investigation into what had become known as the Greenbelt Scandal. In it, he and his government were accused of removing and dismantling major portions of the protected Greenbelt lands for development and the benefit of his wealthy political donors. However, as the investigation is even now dragging on, Ford went on to win yet another majority and returned to continue his efforts to redefine how he saw Ontario, at all levels, should be managed.
And now, as newer accusations have arisen, Ford appears to have decided that the best way to silence any future encumbrances to his plans is to simply remove the mechanism that allows the media and public to monitor his efforts.
Last week Ford announced his government was going to “modernize” the Freedom of Information Act, through which politicians’ records can be viewed by the public. This will involve making both himself and his cabinet members exempt from the FOI rules. And not just exempt going forward but retroactively as well.
So now information that could have been viewed yesterday, or years ago, will no longer be available to find in the public record. These are not the actions of a man or government that has nothing to hide. These are the actions of someone desperate to cover their tracks.
We have seen how in the United States, as the president has seized all levers of power, accountability has become almost a thing of the past. Here in Ontario and Canada as a whole, our parliamentary system has long granted majority governments essentially dictatorial powers, with trust being placed in the integrity of those in charge and with accountability being wielded through regular public elections.
But without access to the evidence of our leaders’ dealings, decisions made in those elections cannot be based on complete or accurate information. And as our next provincial election is not until 2030, there is going to be ample time for Ford to reshape Ontario into the very muddied world he seems to be bent on establishing.
While the Americans can console themselves with the possibility of changing their government’s direction through their mid-term elections, or even removing their president in 2028, Ontario is now locked into Ford’s government for the next four years. And as with the American president, a single year in power is all it took to show just how much an unfettered leader can do to change a country — or a province.
Sources: Doug Ford’s increasing disdain for democracy in Ontario, Trudeau promises more transparent government and changes to the Senate – The Globe and Mail, Colby Cosh: Dear Carney, please cut the republican crap | National Post.
