It’s no secret that Doug Ford has been planning to call an early election for some months. That would explain, among other things, the $200 per person handout to Ontario taxpayers due to arrive this month. But he has decided to use President Trump’s tariff threat to justify the election. In effect, he is trying to get re-elected by wearing his recently acquired “Canada is not for sale” hat.

There are serious questions about the constitutional legitimacy of this political strategy. Furthermore, it is not clear that Ford’s actions to date on this file justify his re-election.

The Caretaker Convention

Premier Ford has stated that he will still be premier “every single day during this election” and, because the tariff threat is urgent, “I’ll be working 20 hours a day as we go through this transition with these tariffs.” And, as Chair of the Council of the Federation, he has announced his intention to lead a delegation of premiers to Washington during the election. The Ontario Liberals have pointed out that it is standard practice in Canadian parliamentary democracy that, when the legislature has been dissolved, government should conduct only routine, non-controversial and urgent business, and that ministers should avoid any perception that they are using their ministerial offices, resources, or portfolios for political purposes.

There is good reason to believe that responding to the tariff threat is urgent but, because Ford has defined the tariff threat as the justification for calling the election, everything he does on that file, especially a high-profile trip to Washington, will rightly be perceived as something he is doing for political purposes.

There are two ways Ford could respect the caretaker convention. The first would have been not to call the election because his Government’s mandate would not normally expire until June 2026 and dealing with the urgent threat of tariffs will take place long before then. Ford’s response to that threat would constitute a key component of his record when running for re-election, just as the Trudeau Government’s renegotiation of NAFTA was a key component of its record in the 2019 election. The second would be to refrain from working on the tariff file during the election campaign, for example not being part of the premiers’ delegation to Washington, or at the very least, saying nothing about his work on the tariff file during the campaign. Everything we know about the man suggests he is extremely unlikely to exercise such self-restraint.

The Best Person for the Job

Ford’s opening salvo on what he wants to be the central issue of the campaign was “Just imagine this, folks. Imagine Bonnie Crombie or Marit Stiles sitting across from President Trump negotiating a deal. It would be an absolute disaster.” This salvo ignores two facts: first that Ford has asked for, but not received a meeting with Trump and second, and perhaps more important, it will be the federal government, whoever is prime minister, that will be negotiating with the Trump Administration. Ontario will be there as a voice advising the federal government but will not be a party to the negotiation.

So far, Ford’s positions on possible tariffs have been all over the map. He has advocated a Fortress Am-Can approach that would exclude Mexico and break up USMCA, which experts on negotiation say would enable the US to driver harder separate bargains with both countries. Indeed, the federal government has been pursuing multi-lateral approaches to US tariffs in discussions with Mexico, the UK, and the EU. He has discussed cutting off exports of electricity from Ontario, which would lead US-based utilities to make alternative plans and consider Ontario an unreliable supplier. He has argued that “Canada is not for sale” and that Canada will never become the 51^st state but has never made a compelling argument for Canada’s unique and separate identity. Indeed, the Fortress Am-Can mentality invites the question Trump keeps asking, “If you want the benefits of tariff-free access to the US market, why not become the 51^st state?”

Ford hasn’t proven that either Bonnie Crombie or Marit Stiles would be an “absolute disaster” in advocating for Ontario in the tariff negotiations. Perhaps he is insinuating that a female leader can’t stand up to Trump, something that Chrystia Freeland several years ago disproved, and that Claudia Sheinbaum and Mette Frederiksen now seem to be demonstrating. Bonnie Crombie and Marit Stiles may take the position that how to advocate for Ontario in the tariff war is not the issue in the election. Nonetheless, it will be interesting to see if the campaign, and for example the leaders’ debate, evolves in such a way that voters get to contrast how the three major party leaders say they would deal with the tariff threat.