Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives need a wake-up call

For now, that fragility seems to be hidden behind the unique circumstances at Queens Park. The Ontario Liberals remain without a permanent leader, and for several years, the PCs benefited from a deeply unpopular federal Liberal brand in the later years of Justin Trudeau’s leadership. All the while, the provincial NDP was being dragged down by an incredibly weak federal NDP that was seemingly only interested in identity politics. Those conditions made provincial politics safer to navigate for Ford’s team. But they are changing quickly. Notably, the federal Liberals under Mark Carney are no longer a drag on their provincial cousins, and the Ontario Liberal Party is now ramping up for a leadership race that could inject new energy into the third party that continues to be the natural opponent to Ford. The imminent danger is not that the PCs are about to lose power. For that to happen, a major transformation would be needed by the Liberals in a rather short time frame. That said, the real danger is that the PCs continue governing as if the competitive landscape hasn’t fundamentally changed. Critics, especially those within the conservative movement, are dismissed as irrelevant so long as the electoral math still works. Over the past several years, the party’s approach to governing has become increasingly transactional. Choices are driven by what minimizes political friction in the moment and what plays to Ford’s populist strengths, not by what reinforces a coherent set of conservative beliefs over time. The party doesn’t behave like a steward of a conservative political tradition, but rather like an incumbent convinced that it is entitled to power. In that respect, history has a way of teaching important lessons. For much of the 20th century, Ontario’s PCs saw themselves as the province’s natural governing party. Because they were. In fact, they governed for 43 years straight from 1943 to 1985. Over time, though, that confidence hardened into entitlement, and entitlement became complacency. After the 1990 election, the party found itself in a very unfamiliar place: in third place, facing questions of its continued existence. The party’s recovery in the mid ‘90s did not begin with better tactics, but with a rethinking of purpose. Enter Mike Harris. Upon winning the leadership of the weakened PC Party, Harris realized that he needed to challenge the party’s most deeply held assumption. The purpose of the Progressive Conservative Party, he argued, was not simply to win elections, but to provide good government rooted in clear values and principles. Winning mattered, but it could not be the party’s reason for being. That fundamental reframing imposed humility, discipline, and coherence on the party as Harris and those around him sought to rebuild. Electoral success eventually followed, because voters understood what the party believed. And the result was an era of ambitious conservative reform that served Ontario well. This is a deeply relevant lesson to today’s PC Party. Political movements that define their purpose around merely winning eventually hollow themselves out. They stop listening. They mistake temporary weakness in their opponents as permanent structural realignments. But when conditions change, as they inevitably do, these types of parties discover that they don’t have enduring trust or clarity of principles to draw from. Ontario remembers what comes next. The long years that the PCs spent in opposition didn’t begin with a strong Liberal government. They began before that, with a party that had lost its compass and compromised public trust. By the time they faced the voters, the internal decay of the party was already advanced. This convention should be a moment to ask hard questions in order to avoid such an outcome. What does it mean to be a conservative in Ontario today? What compromises will the party refuse to make, even if they are electorally convenient? What does the party exist to conserve, and what is it willing to reform? What ideas are worth risking political capital to advance? Those questions are more difficult than debating election tactics or managing media narratives. Ontario doesn’t need a Progressive Conservative Party that’s only effective at winning. It needs one that remembers why it sought power in the first place. If the party continues to treat victory as its north star, rather than a consequence of principled governance, it shouldn’t be surprised when voters eventually decide to look elsewhere. History suggests they will.