.jpg)
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
No word yet on who’ll replace Jansen.
Meanwhile: “If they have their way, it’ll start in 2030.”
“The lack of anything at all — I don’t get it.”
“I’m checked out.”
“We’ve got time.”
“We need to get it done right.”
That mood hung over the party’s provincial council meeting this weekend.
The meeting — which featured riding association presidents, the executive council and other party brass — was designed as a “special meeting” for the organizers behind the upcoming leadership race to gather feedback. Most went in expecting a listening session, but some were still looking for a few breadcrumbs about the post-Crombie contest.
Instead, many walked away Sunday unsure how long it’ll take for the party to pick a new leader — and convinced the process could drag out.
“Nothing is resolved,” said one source, while a second described the meeting as “run-of-the-mill.”
At the meeting, it became clear the party is split. A survey taken during the session found that 42 percent want a new leader chosen by May or June, 29 percent by September or October and 13 percent by November or December.
While a majority agree the contest should conclude next year, two sides have formed. On one side are those pushing for a prolonged contest, arguing it’ll give the party room to breathe, draw stronger candidates and bring in cash. On the other side are those pushing for a shorter race, warning that dragging things out risks losing momentum and relevance. Meanwhile, some warned that overlapping with the municipal cycle could sap resources at a time when local campaigns will already be competing for money, media and manpower.
“There are the people who don’t want to sit and wait, and those who’ve been around for a long time and like to think everything takes 24 months to do,” one participant said.
“The party is clearly pushing to delay the race egregiously late,” another added. “Why is beyond me.”
Not everyone’s on board. “I don’t feel there’s a rush to decide on how we’re going to vote for a leader. We’ve got time. Let’s do it right. Let’s attract great candidates. Let’s decide who we are as a party, what values we want to hold, get a feel for where the electorate is, and pick the right leader who embodies all of that,” a third source, who wasn’t at the meeting, said.
A separate survey of the membership asked the same question. Here’s some of what they want to know:
In any case, don’t expect a fast-tracked, federal-style leadership contest. Privately, some expect it’ll be months before the rules of the race land.
Over at executive council: Noah Parker, the new regional vice-president with New Leaf-ties, wrote a pair of motions — one of them aimed at setting clear timelines and expectations for the Leadership Vote Committee. Some on council considered it “bad form” and clashed with Parker over it, according to sources familiar, arguing it risked tying the working group’s hands. The motions ultimately didn’t advance.
Asked about it, Parker didn’t mince words. “[It’s] no surprise there are folks who aren’t thrilled with my contributions to council,” said Parker in a statement. “I’m happy to give them time to see my perspective and that of the members who elected me. We need to move efficiently, and with a renewed focus on changing the way we do things,” he added.
“I’m committed to pushing our party forward collaboratively with my colleagues on the executive council.”
But one source noted it was a motion from Parker that pushed the party to launch a deeper consultation process to begin with — a reminder, they said, that he’s had a say in shaping the very process he’s been skeptical of.
Speaking on background, a party spokesperson said the process must be done right. “These things take time… The one thing that we’re hearing from our survey is that [the membership] value having a good, strong leader in place; and holding a leadership race that is accessible for all,” they said.
“With this process, we want to make sure that we’ve heard everyone’s voice.”
The spokesperson couldn’t say when the working group is expected to set the rules and submit them to the executive council for approval.
Until then: Would-be contenders are in wait-and-see mode. Rob Cerjanec — “all but in,” we’re told — has been on tour, including a stop in The Bay this weekend. Lee Fairclough was in Kitchener Centre and Mississauga-Lakeshore for their riding associations’ annual meetings.
Andrew Boozary is expected to speak at the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario)’s convention in Hamilton next weekend.
Meanwhile, Karina Gould has formed an exploratory group led by John O’Leary to sound out support. “There’s a group of people around her, but she’s not necessarily convinced,” one source said.
And scratch one out: Catherine McKenna, the ex-climate change minister who endorsed Nate Erskine-Smith in 2023, says she’s not throwing her hat in. “Flattering but absolutely not,” she wrote in an email.
Thank you for reading POLICORNER. Were you at Sunday’s provincial council meeting? Where are you on the timing debate? I want to hear from you — and I’ll keep you anonymous. We’re back in your inbox on Monday.
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
No word yet on who’ll replace Jansen.
Meanwhile: “If they have their way, it’ll start in 2030.”
“The lack of anything at all — I don’t get it.”
“I’m checked out.”
“We’ve got time.”
“We need to get it done right.”
That mood hung over the party’s provincial council meeting this weekend.
The meeting — which featured riding association presidents, the executive council and other party brass — was designed as a “special meeting” for the organizers behind the upcoming leadership race to gather feedback. Most went in expecting a listening session, but some were still looking for a few breadcrumbs about the post-Crombie contest.
Instead, many walked away Sunday unsure how long it’ll take for the party to pick a new leader — and convinced the process could drag out.
“Nothing is resolved,” said one source, while a second described the meeting as “run-of-the-mill.”
At the meeting, it became clear the party is split. A survey taken during the session found that 42 percent want a new leader chosen by May or June, 29 percent by September or October and 13 percent by November or December.
While a majority agree the contest should conclude next year, two sides have formed. On one side are those pushing for a prolonged contest, arguing it’ll give the party room to breathe, draw stronger candidates and bring in cash. On the other side are those pushing for a shorter race, warning that dragging things out risks losing momentum and relevance. Meanwhile, some warned that overlapping with the municipal cycle could sap resources at a time when local campaigns will already be competing for money, media and manpower.
“There are the people who don’t want to sit and wait, and those who’ve been around for a long time and like to think everything takes 24 months to do,” one participant said.
“The party is clearly pushing to delay the race egregiously late,” another added. “Why is beyond me.”
Not everyone’s on board. “I don’t feel there’s a rush to decide on how we’re going to vote for a leader. We’ve got time. Let’s do it right. Let’s attract great candidates. Let’s decide who we are as a party, what values we want to hold, get a feel for where the electorate is, and pick the right leader who embodies all of that,” a third source, who wasn’t at the meeting, said.
A separate survey of the membership asked the same question. Here’s some of what they want to know:
In any case, don’t expect a fast-tracked, federal-style leadership contest. Privately, some expect it’ll be months before the rules of the race land.
Over at executive council: Noah Parker, the new regional vice-president with New Leaf-ties, wrote a pair of motions — one of them aimed at setting clear timelines and expectations for the Leadership Vote Committee. Some on council considered it “bad form” and clashed with Parker over it, according to sources familiar, arguing it risked tying the working group’s hands. The motions ultimately didn’t advance.
Asked about it, Parker didn’t mince words. “[It’s] no surprise there are folks who aren’t thrilled with my contributions to council,” said Parker in a statement. “I’m happy to give them time to see my perspective and that of the members who elected me. We need to move efficiently, and with a renewed focus on changing the way we do things,” he added.
“I’m committed to pushing our party forward collaboratively with my colleagues on the executive council.”
But one source noted it was a motion from Parker that pushed the party to launch a deeper consultation process to begin with — a reminder, they said, that he’s had a say in shaping the very process he’s been skeptical of.
Speaking on background, a party spokesperson said the process must be done right. “These things take time… The one thing that we’re hearing from our survey is that [the membership] value having a good, strong leader in place; and holding a leadership race that is accessible for all,” they said.
“With this process, we want to make sure that we’ve heard everyone’s voice.”
The spokesperson couldn’t say when the working group is expected to set the rules and submit them to the executive council for approval.
Until then: Would-be contenders are in wait-and-see mode. Rob Cerjanec — “all but in,” we’re told — has been on tour, including a stop in The Bay this weekend. Lee Fairclough was in Kitchener Centre and Mississauga-Lakeshore for their riding associations’ annual meetings.
Andrew Boozary is expected to speak at the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario)’s convention in Hamilton next weekend.
Meanwhile, Karina Gould has formed an exploratory group led by John O’Leary to sound out support. “There’s a group of people around her, but she’s not necessarily convinced,” one source said.
And scratch one out: Catherine McKenna, the ex-climate change minister who endorsed Nate Erskine-Smith in 2023, says she’s not throwing her hat in. “Flattering but absolutely not,” she wrote in an email.
Thank you for reading POLICORNER. Were you at Sunday’s provincial council meeting? Where are you on the timing debate? I want to hear from you — and I’ll keep you anonymous. We’re back in your inbox on Monday.
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
No word yet on who’ll replace Jansen.
Meanwhile: “If they have their way, it’ll start in 2030.”
“The lack of anything at all — I don’t get it.”
“I’m checked out.”
“We’ve got time.”
“We need to get it done right.”
That mood hung over the party’s provincial council meeting this weekend.
The meeting — which featured riding association presidents, the executive council and other party brass — was designed as a “special meeting” for the organizers behind the upcoming leadership race to gather feedback. Most went in expecting a listening session, but some were still looking for a few breadcrumbs about the post-Crombie contest.
Instead, many walked away Sunday unsure how long it’ll take for the party to pick a new leader — and convinced the process could drag out.
“Nothing is resolved,” said one source, while a second described the meeting as “run-of-the-mill.”
At the meeting, it became clear the party is split. A survey taken during the session found that 42 percent want a new leader chosen by May or June, 29 percent by September or October and 13 percent by November or December.
While a majority agree the contest should conclude next year, two sides have formed. On one side are those pushing for a prolonged contest, arguing it’ll give the party room to breathe, draw stronger candidates and bring in cash. On the other side are those pushing for a shorter race, warning that dragging things out risks losing momentum and relevance. Meanwhile, some warned that overlapping with the municipal cycle could sap resources at a time when local campaigns will already be competing for money, media and manpower.
“There are the people who don’t want to sit and wait, and those who’ve been around for a long time and like to think everything takes 24 months to do,” one participant said.
“The party is clearly pushing to delay the race egregiously late,” another added. “Why is beyond me.”
Not everyone’s on board. “I don’t feel there’s a rush to decide on how we’re going to vote for a leader. We’ve got time. Let’s do it right. Let’s attract great candidates. Let’s decide who we are as a party, what values we want to hold, get a feel for where the electorate is, and pick the right leader who embodies all of that,” a third source, who wasn’t at the meeting, said.
A separate survey of the membership asked the same question. Here’s some of what they want to know:
In any case, don’t expect a fast-tracked, federal-style leadership contest. Privately, some expect it’ll be months before the rules of the race land.
Over at executive council: Noah Parker, the new regional vice-president with New Leaf-ties, wrote a pair of motions — one of them aimed at setting clear timelines and expectations for the Leadership Vote Committee. Some on council considered it “bad form” and clashed with Parker over it, according to sources familiar, arguing it risked tying the working group’s hands. The motions ultimately didn’t advance.
Asked about it, Parker didn’t mince words. “[It’s] no surprise there are folks who aren’t thrilled with my contributions to council,” said Parker in a statement. “I’m happy to give them time to see my perspective and that of the members who elected me. We need to move efficiently, and with a renewed focus on changing the way we do things,” he added.
“I’m committed to pushing our party forward collaboratively with my colleagues on the executive council.”
But one source noted it was a motion from Parker that pushed the party to launch a deeper consultation process to begin with — a reminder, they said, that he’s had a say in shaping the very process he’s been skeptical of.
Speaking on background, a party spokesperson said the process must be done right. “These things take time… The one thing that we’re hearing from our survey is that [the membership] value having a good, strong leader in place; and holding a leadership race that is accessible for all,” they said.
“With this process, we want to make sure that we’ve heard everyone’s voice.”
The spokesperson couldn’t say when the working group is expected to set the rules and submit them to the executive council for approval.
Until then: Would-be contenders are in wait-and-see mode. Rob Cerjanec — “all but in,” we’re told — has been on tour, including a stop in The Bay this weekend. Lee Fairclough was in Kitchener Centre and Mississauga-Lakeshore for their riding associations’ annual meetings.
Andrew Boozary is expected to speak at the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario)’s convention in Hamilton next weekend.
Meanwhile, Karina Gould has formed an exploratory group led by John O’Leary to sound out support. “There’s a group of people around her, but she’s not necessarily convinced,” one source said.
And scratch one out: Catherine McKenna, the ex-climate change minister who endorsed Nate Erskine-Smith in 2023, says she’s not throwing her hat in. “Flattering but absolutely not,” she wrote in an email.
Thank you for reading POLICORNER. Were you at Sunday’s provincial council meeting? Where are you on the timing debate? I want to hear from you — and I’ll keep you anonymous. We’re back in your inbox on Monday.
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
No word yet on who’ll replace Jansen.
Meanwhile: “If they have their way, it’ll start in 2030.”
“The lack of anything at all — I don’t get it.”
“I’m checked out.”
“We’ve got time.”
“We need to get it done right.”
That mood hung over the party’s provincial council meeting this weekend.
The meeting — which featured riding association presidents, the executive council and other party brass — was designed as a “special meeting” for the organizers behind the upcoming leadership race to gather feedback. Most went in expecting a listening session, but some were still looking for a few breadcrumbs about the post-Crombie contest.
Instead, many walked away Sunday unsure how long it’ll take for the party to pick a new leader — and convinced the process could drag out.
“Nothing is resolved,” said one source, while a second described the meeting as “run-of-the-mill.”
At the meeting, it became clear the party is split. A survey taken during the session found that 42 percent want a new leader chosen by May or June, 29 percent by September or October and 13 percent by November or December.
While a majority agree the contest should conclude next year, two sides have formed. On one side are those pushing for a prolonged contest, arguing it’ll give the party room to breathe, draw stronger candidates and bring in cash. On the other side are those pushing for a shorter race, warning that dragging things out risks losing momentum and relevance. Meanwhile, some warned that overlapping with the municipal cycle could sap resources at a time when local campaigns will already be competing for money, media and manpower.
“There are the people who don’t want to sit and wait, and those who’ve been around for a long time and like to think everything takes 24 months to do,” one participant said.
“The party is clearly pushing to delay the race egregiously late,” another added. “Why is beyond me.”
Not everyone’s on board. “I don’t feel there’s a rush to decide on how we’re going to vote for a leader. We’ve got time. Let’s do it right. Let’s attract great candidates. Let’s decide who we are as a party, what values we want to hold, get a feel for where the electorate is, and pick the right leader who embodies all of that,” a third source, who wasn’t at the meeting, said.
A separate survey of the membership asked the same question. Here’s some of what they want to know:
In any case, don’t expect a fast-tracked, federal-style leadership contest. Privately, some expect it’ll be months before the rules of the race land.
Over at executive council: Noah Parker, the new regional vice-president with New Leaf-ties, wrote a pair of motions — one of them aimed at setting clear timelines and expectations for the Leadership Vote Committee. Some on council considered it “bad form” and clashed with Parker over it, according to sources familiar, arguing it risked tying the working group’s hands. The motions ultimately didn’t advance.
Asked about it, Parker didn’t mince words. “[It’s] no surprise there are folks who aren’t thrilled with my contributions to council,” said Parker in a statement. “I’m happy to give them time to see my perspective and that of the members who elected me. We need to move efficiently, and with a renewed focus on changing the way we do things,” he added.
“I’m committed to pushing our party forward collaboratively with my colleagues on the executive council.”
But one source noted it was a motion from Parker that pushed the party to launch a deeper consultation process to begin with — a reminder, they said, that he’s had a say in shaping the very process he’s been skeptical of.
Speaking on background, a party spokesperson said the process must be done right. “These things take time… The one thing that we’re hearing from our survey is that [the membership] value having a good, strong leader in place; and holding a leadership race that is accessible for all,” they said.
“With this process, we want to make sure that we’ve heard everyone’s voice.”
The spokesperson couldn’t say when the working group is expected to set the rules and submit them to the executive council for approval.
Until then: Would-be contenders are in wait-and-see mode. Rob Cerjanec — “all but in,” we’re told — has been on tour, including a stop in The Bay this weekend. Lee Fairclough was in Kitchener Centre and Mississauga-Lakeshore for their riding associations’ annual meetings.
Andrew Boozary is expected to speak at the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario)’s convention in Hamilton next weekend.
Meanwhile, Karina Gould has formed an exploratory group led by John O’Leary to sound out support. “There’s a group of people around her, but she’s not necessarily convinced,” one source said.
And scratch one out: Catherine McKenna, the ex-climate change minister who endorsed Nate Erskine-Smith in 2023, says she’s not throwing her hat in. “Flattering but absolutely not,” she wrote in an email.
Thank you for reading POLICORNER. Were you at Sunday’s provincial council meeting? Where are you on the timing debate? I want to hear from you — and I’ll keep you anonymous. We’re back in your inbox on Monday.
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
No word yet on who’ll replace Jansen.
Meanwhile: “If they have their way, it’ll start in 2030.”
“The lack of anything at all — I don’t get it.”
“I’m checked out.”
“We’ve got time.”
“We need to get it done right.”
That mood hung over the party’s provincial council meeting this weekend.
The meeting — which featured riding association presidents, the executive council and other party brass — was designed as a “special meeting” for the organizers behind the upcoming leadership race to gather feedback. Most went in expecting a listening session, but some were still looking for a few breadcrumbs about the post-Crombie contest.
Instead, many walked away Sunday unsure how long it’ll take for the party to pick a new leader — and convinced the process could drag out.
“Nothing is resolved,” said one source, while a second described the meeting as “run-of-the-mill.”
At the meeting, it became clear the party is split. A survey taken during the session found that 42 percent want a new leader chosen by May or June, 29 percent by September or October and 13 percent by November or December.
While a majority agree the contest should conclude next year, two sides have formed. On one side are those pushing for a prolonged contest, arguing it’ll give the party room to breathe, draw stronger candidates and bring in cash. On the other side are those pushing for a shorter race, warning that dragging things out risks losing momentum and relevance. Meanwhile, some warned that overlapping with the municipal cycle could sap resources at a time when local campaigns will already be competing for money, media and manpower.
“There are the people who don’t want to sit and wait, and those who’ve been around for a long time and like to think everything takes 24 months to do,” one participant said.
“The party is clearly pushing to delay the race egregiously late,” another added. “Why is beyond me.”
Not everyone’s on board. “I don’t feel there’s a rush to decide on how we’re going to vote for a leader. We’ve got time. Let’s do it right. Let’s attract great candidates. Let’s decide who we are as a party, what values we want to hold, get a feel for where the electorate is, and pick the right leader who embodies all of that,” a third source, who wasn’t at the meeting, said.
A separate survey of the membership asked the same question. Here’s some of what they want to know:
In any case, don’t expect a fast-tracked, federal-style leadership contest. Privately, some expect it’ll be months before the rules of the race land.
Over at executive council: Noah Parker, the new regional vice-president with New Leaf-ties, wrote a pair of motions — one of them aimed at setting clear timelines and expectations for the Leadership Vote Committee. Some on council considered it “bad form” and clashed with Parker over it, according to sources familiar, arguing it risked tying the working group’s hands. The motions ultimately didn’t advance.
Asked about it, Parker didn’t mince words. “[It’s] no surprise there are folks who aren’t thrilled with my contributions to council,” said Parker in a statement. “I’m happy to give them time to see my perspective and that of the members who elected me. We need to move efficiently, and with a renewed focus on changing the way we do things,” he added.
“I’m committed to pushing our party forward collaboratively with my colleagues on the executive council.”
But one source noted it was a motion from Parker that pushed the party to launch a deeper consultation process to begin with — a reminder, they said, that he’s had a say in shaping the very process he’s been skeptical of.
Speaking on background, a party spokesperson said the process must be done right. “These things take time… The one thing that we’re hearing from our survey is that [the membership] value having a good, strong leader in place; and holding a leadership race that is accessible for all,” they said.
“With this process, we want to make sure that we’ve heard everyone’s voice.”
The spokesperson couldn’t say when the working group is expected to set the rules and submit them to the executive council for approval.
Until then: Would-be contenders are in wait-and-see mode. Rob Cerjanec — “all but in,” we’re told — has been on tour, including a stop in The Bay this weekend. Lee Fairclough was in Kitchener Centre and Mississauga-Lakeshore for their riding associations’ annual meetings.
Andrew Boozary is expected to speak at the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario)’s convention in Hamilton next weekend.
Meanwhile, Karina Gould has formed an exploratory group led by John O’Leary to sound out support. “There’s a group of people around her, but she’s not necessarily convinced,” one source said.
And scratch one out: Catherine McKenna, the ex-climate change minister who endorsed Nate Erskine-Smith in 2023, says she’s not throwing her hat in. “Flattering but absolutely not,” she wrote in an email.
Thank you for reading POLICORNER. Were you at Sunday’s provincial council meeting? Where are you on the timing debate? I want to hear from you — and I’ll keep you anonymous. We’re back in your inbox on Monday.
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
No word yet on who’ll replace Jansen.
Meanwhile: “If they have their way, it’ll start in 2030.”
“The lack of anything at all — I don’t get it.”
“I’m checked out.”
“We’ve got time.”
“We need to get it done right.”
That mood hung over the party’s provincial council meeting this weekend.
The meeting — which featured riding association presidents, the executive council and other party brass — was designed as a “special meeting” for the organizers behind the upcoming leadership race to gather feedback. Most went in expecting a listening session, but some were still looking for a few breadcrumbs about the post-Crombie contest.
Instead, many walked away Sunday unsure how long it’ll take for the party to pick a new leader — and convinced the process could drag out.
“Nothing is resolved,” said one source, while a second described the meeting as “run-of-the-mill.”
At the meeting, it became clear the party is split. A survey taken during the session found that 42 percent want a new leader chosen by May or June, 29 percent by September or October and 13 percent by November or December.
While a majority agree the contest should conclude next year, two sides have formed. On one side are those pushing for a prolonged contest, arguing it’ll give the party room to breathe, draw stronger candidates and bring in cash. On the other side are those pushing for a shorter race, warning that dragging things out risks losing momentum and relevance. Meanwhile, some warned that overlapping with the municipal cycle could sap resources at a time when local campaigns will already be competing for money, media and manpower.
“There are the people who don’t want to sit and wait, and those who’ve been around for a long time and like to think everything takes 24 months to do,” one participant said.
“The party is clearly pushing to delay the race egregiously late,” another added. “Why is beyond me.”
Not everyone’s on board. “I don’t feel there’s a rush to decide on how we’re going to vote for a leader. We’ve got time. Let’s do it right. Let’s attract great candidates. Let’s decide who we are as a party, what values we want to hold, get a feel for where the electorate is, and pick the right leader who embodies all of that,” a third source, who wasn’t at the meeting, said.
A separate survey of the membership asked the same question. Here’s some of what they want to know:
In any case, don’t expect a fast-tracked, federal-style leadership contest. Privately, some expect it’ll be months before the rules of the race land.
Over at executive council: Noah Parker, the new regional vice-president with New Leaf-ties, wrote a pair of motions — one of them aimed at setting clear timelines and expectations for the Leadership Vote Committee. Some on council considered it “bad form” and clashed with Parker over it, according to sources familiar, arguing it risked tying the working group’s hands. The motions ultimately didn’t advance.
Asked about it, Parker didn’t mince words. “[It’s] no surprise there are folks who aren’t thrilled with my contributions to council,” said Parker in a statement. “I’m happy to give them time to see my perspective and that of the members who elected me. We need to move efficiently, and with a renewed focus on changing the way we do things,” he added.
“I’m committed to pushing our party forward collaboratively with my colleagues on the executive council.”
But one source noted it was a motion from Parker that pushed the party to launch a deeper consultation process to begin with — a reminder, they said, that he’s had a say in shaping the very process he’s been skeptical of.
Speaking on background, a party spokesperson said the process must be done right. “These things take time… The one thing that we’re hearing from our survey is that [the membership] value having a good, strong leader in place; and holding a leadership race that is accessible for all,” they said.
“With this process, we want to make sure that we’ve heard everyone’s voice.”
The spokesperson couldn’t say when the working group is expected to set the rules and submit them to the executive council for approval.
Until then: Would-be contenders are in wait-and-see mode. Rob Cerjanec — “all but in,” we’re told — has been on tour, including a stop in The Bay this weekend. Lee Fairclough was in Kitchener Centre and Mississauga-Lakeshore for their riding associations’ annual meetings.
Andrew Boozary is expected to speak at the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario)’s convention in Hamilton next weekend.
Meanwhile, Karina Gould has formed an exploratory group led by John O’Leary to sound out support. “There’s a group of people around her, but she’s not necessarily convinced,” one source said.
And scratch one out: Catherine McKenna, the ex-climate change minister who endorsed Nate Erskine-Smith in 2023, says she’s not throwing her hat in. “Flattering but absolutely not,” she wrote in an email.
Thank you for reading POLICORNER. Were you at Sunday’s provincial council meeting? Where are you on the timing debate? I want to hear from you — and I’ll keep you anonymous. We’re back in your inbox on Monday.
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
No word yet on who’ll replace Jansen.
Meanwhile: “If they have their way, it’ll start in 2030.”
“The lack of anything at all — I don’t get it.”
“I’m checked out.”
“We’ve got time.”
“We need to get it done right.”
That mood hung over the party’s provincial council meeting this weekend.
The meeting — which featured riding association presidents, the executive council and other party brass — was designed as a “special meeting” for the organizers behind the upcoming leadership race to gather feedback. Most went in expecting a listening session, but some were still looking for a few breadcrumbs about the post-Crombie contest.
Instead, many walked away Sunday unsure how long it’ll take for the party to pick a new leader — and convinced the process could drag out.
“Nothing is resolved,” said one source, while a second described the meeting as “run-of-the-mill.”
At the meeting, it became clear the party is split. A survey taken during the session found that 42 percent want a new leader chosen by May or June, 29 percent by September or October and 13 percent by November or December.
While a majority agree the contest should conclude next year, two sides have formed. On one side are those pushing for a prolonged contest, arguing it’ll give the party room to breathe, draw stronger candidates and bring in cash. On the other side are those pushing for a shorter race, warning that dragging things out risks losing momentum and relevance. Meanwhile, some warned that overlapping with the municipal cycle could sap resources at a time when local campaigns will already be competing for money, media and manpower.
“There are the people who don’t want to sit and wait, and those who’ve been around for a long time and like to think everything takes 24 months to do,” one participant said.
“The party is clearly pushing to delay the race egregiously late,” another added. “Why is beyond me.”
Not everyone’s on board. “I don’t feel there’s a rush to decide on how we’re going to vote for a leader. We’ve got time. Let’s do it right. Let’s attract great candidates. Let’s decide who we are as a party, what values we want to hold, get a feel for where the electorate is, and pick the right leader who embodies all of that,” a third source, who wasn’t at the meeting, said.
A separate survey of the membership asked the same question. Here’s some of what they want to know:
In any case, don’t expect a fast-tracked, federal-style leadership contest. Privately, some expect it’ll be months before the rules of the race land.
Over at executive council: Noah Parker, the new regional vice-president with New Leaf-ties, wrote a pair of motions — one of them aimed at setting clear timelines and expectations for the Leadership Vote Committee. Some on council considered it “bad form” and clashed with Parker over it, according to sources familiar, arguing it risked tying the working group’s hands. The motions ultimately didn’t advance.
Asked about it, Parker didn’t mince words. “[It’s] no surprise there are folks who aren’t thrilled with my contributions to council,” said Parker in a statement. “I’m happy to give them time to see my perspective and that of the members who elected me. We need to move efficiently, and with a renewed focus on changing the way we do things,” he added.
“I’m committed to pushing our party forward collaboratively with my colleagues on the executive council.”
But one source noted it was a motion from Parker that pushed the party to launch a deeper consultation process to begin with — a reminder, they said, that he’s had a say in shaping the very process he’s been skeptical of.
Speaking on background, a party spokesperson said the process must be done right. “These things take time… The one thing that we’re hearing from our survey is that [the membership] value having a good, strong leader in place; and holding a leadership race that is accessible for all,” they said.
“With this process, we want to make sure that we’ve heard everyone’s voice.”
The spokesperson couldn’t say when the working group is expected to set the rules and submit them to the executive council for approval.
Until then: Would-be contenders are in wait-and-see mode. Rob Cerjanec — “all but in,” we’re told — has been on tour, including a stop in The Bay this weekend. Lee Fairclough was in Kitchener Centre and Mississauga-Lakeshore for their riding associations’ annual meetings.
Andrew Boozary is expected to speak at the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario)’s convention in Hamilton next weekend.
Meanwhile, Karina Gould has formed an exploratory group led by John O’Leary to sound out support. “There’s a group of people around her, but she’s not necessarily convinced,” one source said.
And scratch one out: Catherine McKenna, the ex-climate change minister who endorsed Nate Erskine-Smith in 2023, says she’s not throwing her hat in. “Flattering but absolutely not,” she wrote in an email.
Thank you for reading POLICORNER. Were you at Sunday’s provincial council meeting? Where are you on the timing debate? I want to hear from you — and I’ll keep you anonymous. We’re back in your inbox on Monday.
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
No word yet on who’ll replace Jansen.
Meanwhile: “If they have their way, it’ll start in 2030.”
“The lack of anything at all — I don’t get it.”
“I’m checked out.”
“We’ve got time.”
“We need to get it done right.”
That mood hung over the party’s provincial council meeting this weekend.
The meeting — which featured riding association presidents, the executive council and other party brass — was designed as a “special meeting” for the organizers behind the upcoming leadership race to gather feedback. Most went in expecting a listening session, but some were still looking for a few breadcrumbs about the post-Crombie contest.
Instead, many walked away Sunday unsure how long it’ll take for the party to pick a new leader — and convinced the process could drag out.
“Nothing is resolved,” said one source, while a second described the meeting as “run-of-the-mill.”
At the meeting, it became clear the party is split. A survey taken during the session found that 42 percent want a new leader chosen by May or June, 29 percent by September or October and 13 percent by November or December.
While a majority agree the contest should conclude next year, two sides have formed. On one side are those pushing for a prolonged contest, arguing it’ll give the party room to breathe, draw stronger candidates and bring in cash. On the other side are those pushing for a shorter race, warning that dragging things out risks losing momentum and relevance. Meanwhile, some warned that overlapping with the municipal cycle could sap resources at a time when local campaigns will already be competing for money, media and manpower.
“There are the people who don’t want to sit and wait, and those who’ve been around for a long time and like to think everything takes 24 months to do,” one participant said.
“The party is clearly pushing to delay the race egregiously late,” another added. “Why is beyond me.”
Not everyone’s on board. “I don’t feel there’s a rush to decide on how we’re going to vote for a leader. We’ve got time. Let’s do it right. Let’s attract great candidates. Let’s decide who we are as a party, what values we want to hold, get a feel for where the electorate is, and pick the right leader who embodies all of that,” a third source, who wasn’t at the meeting, said.
A separate survey of the membership asked the same question. Here’s some of what they want to know:
In any case, don’t expect a fast-tracked, federal-style leadership contest. Privately, some expect it’ll be months before the rules of the race land.
Over at executive council: Noah Parker, the new regional vice-president with New Leaf-ties, wrote a pair of motions — one of them aimed at setting clear timelines and expectations for the Leadership Vote Committee. Some on council considered it “bad form” and clashed with Parker over it, according to sources familiar, arguing it risked tying the working group’s hands. The motions ultimately didn’t advance.
Asked about it, Parker didn’t mince words. “[It’s] no surprise there are folks who aren’t thrilled with my contributions to council,” said Parker in a statement. “I’m happy to give them time to see my perspective and that of the members who elected me. We need to move efficiently, and with a renewed focus on changing the way we do things,” he added.
“I’m committed to pushing our party forward collaboratively with my colleagues on the executive council.”
But one source noted it was a motion from Parker that pushed the party to launch a deeper consultation process to begin with — a reminder, they said, that he’s had a say in shaping the very process he’s been skeptical of.
Speaking on background, a party spokesperson said the process must be done right. “These things take time… The one thing that we’re hearing from our survey is that [the membership] value having a good, strong leader in place; and holding a leadership race that is accessible for all,” they said.
“With this process, we want to make sure that we’ve heard everyone’s voice.”
The spokesperson couldn’t say when the working group is expected to set the rules and submit them to the executive council for approval.
Until then: Would-be contenders are in wait-and-see mode. Rob Cerjanec — “all but in,” we’re told — has been on tour, including a stop in The Bay this weekend. Lee Fairclough was in Kitchener Centre and Mississauga-Lakeshore for their riding associations’ annual meetings.
Andrew Boozary is expected to speak at the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario)’s convention in Hamilton next weekend.
Meanwhile, Karina Gould has formed an exploratory group led by John O’Leary to sound out support. “There’s a group of people around her, but she’s not necessarily convinced,” one source said.
And scratch one out: Catherine McKenna, the ex-climate change minister who endorsed Nate Erskine-Smith in 2023, says she’s not throwing her hat in. “Flattering but absolutely not,” she wrote in an email.
Thank you for reading POLICORNER. Were you at Sunday’s provincial council meeting? Where are you on the timing debate? I want to hear from you — and I’ll keep you anonymous. We’re back in your inbox on Monday.
A Sunday provincial council meeting came and went, and card-carrying Grits still don’t know when — or how — they’ll pick their next leader. But to start, a high-profile chief is out.
SCOOP — With Bonnie Crombie set to become an ex-Liberal leader, Sandra Jansen is out as her chief.
Jansen, an ex-Alberta cabinet minister who was brought on by Crombie post-election, departed this week. A party spokesperson confirmed she’s “on to new adventures,” adding: “we’re sad to see her go.”
Recall: Jansen’s hiring came as Crombie sought to prove she’d learned from the February election — and was serious about creating a “new culture” around her. She said: “We’ve brought in new talent, new energy, and new ideas — and that includes experienced organizers, digital-first communicators, and people who understand what it takes to win in every corner of Ontario.”
Her exit is timely. With the Liberal leader on her way out — though she says she’ll stick around until a successor is chosen — some expect more departures in the coming weeks.
No word yet on who’ll replace Jansen.
Meanwhile: “If they have their way, it’ll start in 2030.”
“The lack of anything at all — I don’t get it.”
“I’m checked out.”
“We’ve got time.”
“We need to get it done right.”
That mood hung over the party’s provincial council meeting this weekend.
The meeting — which featured riding association presidents, the executive council and other party brass — was designed as a “special meeting” for the organizers behind the upcoming leadership race to gather feedback. Most went in expecting a listening session, but some were still looking for a few breadcrumbs about the post-Crombie contest.
Instead, many walked away Sunday unsure how long it’ll take for the party to pick a new leader — and convinced the process could drag out.
“Nothing is resolved,” said one source, while a second described the meeting as “run-of-the-mill.”
At the meeting, it became clear the party is split. A survey taken during the session found that 42 percent want a new leader chosen by May or June, 29 percent by September or October and 13 percent by November or December.
While a majority agree the contest should conclude next year, two sides have formed. On one side are those pushing for a prolonged contest, arguing it’ll give the party room to breathe, draw stronger candidates and bring in cash. On the other side are those pushing for a shorter race, warning that dragging things out risks losing momentum and relevance. Meanwhile, some warned that overlapping with the municipal cycle could sap resources at a time when local campaigns will already be competing for money, media and manpower.
“There are the people who don’t want to sit and wait, and those who’ve been around for a long time and like to think everything takes 24 months to do,” one participant said.
“The party is clearly pushing to delay the race egregiously late,” another added. “Why is beyond me.”
Not everyone’s on board. “I don’t feel there’s a rush to decide on how we’re going to vote for a leader. We’ve got time. Let’s do it right. Let’s attract great candidates. Let’s decide who we are as a party, what values we want to hold, get a feel for where the electorate is, and pick the right leader who embodies all of that,” a third source, who wasn’t at the meeting, said.
A separate survey of the membership asked the same question. Here’s some of what they want to know:
In any case, don’t expect a fast-tracked, federal-style leadership contest. Privately, some expect it’ll be months before the rules of the race land.
Over at executive council: Noah Parker, the new regional vice-president with New Leaf-ties, wrote a pair of motions — one of them aimed at setting clear timelines and expectations for the Leadership Vote Committee. Some on council considered it “bad form” and clashed with Parker over it, according to sources familiar, arguing it risked tying the working group’s hands. The motions ultimately didn’t advance.
Asked about it, Parker didn’t mince words. “[It’s] no surprise there are folks who aren’t thrilled with my contributions to council,” said Parker in a statement. “I’m happy to give them time to see my perspective and that of the members who elected me. We need to move efficiently, and with a renewed focus on changing the way we do things,” he added.
“I’m committed to pushing our party forward collaboratively with my colleagues on the executive council.”
But one source noted it was a motion from Parker that pushed the party to launch a deeper consultation process to begin with — a reminder, they said, that he’s had a say in shaping the very process he’s been skeptical of.
Speaking on background, a party spokesperson said the process must be done right. “These things take time… The one thing that we’re hearing from our survey is that [the membership] value having a good, strong leader in place; and holding a leadership race that is accessible for all,” they said.
“With this process, we want to make sure that we’ve heard everyone’s voice.”
The spokesperson couldn’t say when the working group is expected to set the rules and submit them to the executive council for approval.
Until then: Would-be contenders are in wait-and-see mode. Rob Cerjanec — “all but in,” we’re told — has been on tour, including a stop in The Bay this weekend. Lee Fairclough was in Kitchener Centre and Mississauga-Lakeshore for their riding associations’ annual meetings.
Andrew Boozary is expected to speak at the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario)’s convention in Hamilton next weekend.
Meanwhile, Karina Gould has formed an exploratory group led by John O’Leary to sound out support. “There’s a group of people around her, but she’s not necessarily convinced,” one source said.
And scratch one out: Catherine McKenna, the ex-climate change minister who endorsed Nate Erskine-Smith in 2023, says she’s not throwing her hat in. “Flattering but absolutely not,” she wrote in an email.
Thank you for reading POLICORNER. Were you at Sunday’s provincial council meeting? Where are you on the timing debate? I want to hear from you — and I’ll keep you anonymous. We’re back in your inbox on Monday.