backlash

Tuesday April 21, 2026

Ontario’s hasty jet purchase for Premier Doug Ford contrasts sharply with the stalled, necessary renovations of Canada’s 24 Sussex Drive, highlighting misaligned priorities and public backlash.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday April 21, 2026

Jet-Setting Mishap: Ford’s High-Flying Folly

Doug Ford's $28.9 million jet purchase sparks outrage over misaligned priorities amidst Ontario's pressing social challenges.

April 18, 2026

In recent headlines, the Ontario government’s hasty decision to purchase a $28.9 million private jet for Premier Doug Ford has sparked controversy and rapid reversal. This quick flip-flop stands in stark contrast to the prolonged debate over renovating the Prime Minister’s residence at 24 Sussex Drive—a decision mired in public scrutiny and indecision despite being necessary and arguably more fiscally prudent.

As reported by CBC and the Toronto Star, the Ontario government bought a Bombardier Challenger 650 for Ford’s travel needs, justifying it as essential for economic missions and countering U.S. tariffs. However, this decision was made with little to no public consultation or debate. Public backlash was immediate, with critics labeling it a “gravy plane” and highlighting its tone-deafness amidst rising living costs and fiscal constraints.

News: Doug Ford flip-flops, plans to sell recently purchased $28.9-million jet amid public fury

September 1, 2023

Opposition leaders and commentators rightly questioned the transparency and rationale behind such an expense. The rapid decision to sell the jet underscores the lack of foresight and critical evaluation—a knee-jerk purchase based on the assumption that Ontarians would quietly acquiesce.

Contrast this with the torturous debate over 24 Sussex Drive. The residence of Canada’s Prime Minister has long required repairs, but discussions have dragged on due to fears of public criticism over costs. This hesitation persists despite clear necessity; investing in the residence is not only about preserving a historic building but also ensuring the functionality and security of the Prime Minister’s home.

Here lies the irony: a prudent investment in national heritage and operational necessity is stalled by anticipated outrage, while a frivolous jet purchase proceeded swiftly, only to be undone by actual public fury.

Opinion: Memo to the PM: Fix 24 Sussex now

April 8, 2023

April 8, 2023

The juxtaposition of these two scenarios reveals much about political decision-making. It highlights a reactive rather than proactive approach—acting hastily on a luxury while dithering over a necessity. The Ontario jet saga illustrates the pitfalls of misjudging public priorities and the importance of transparency and public engagement.

Had the jet purchase been subject to the same rigorous debate as 24 Sussex, perhaps taxpayer money would have been better allocated. As noted by readers and critics, transparency in government spending is crucial, and decisions should reflect public interest, not personal luxury.

Investments in public assets, whether a prime minister’s residence or provincial travel capabilities, require thoughtful deliberation and public input. The public deserves transparency and accountability in how their money is spent. As governments navigate these decisions, the lessons from the jet and the residence should guide a more balanced, transparent, and prudent approach to governance.

In the end, it’s about making decisions that serve the public good, not just the whims of those in power.

 

Thursday May 29 2025

Premier Doug Ford's Bill 5, aimed at expediting mining in Ontario's Ring of Fire, faces backlash for lacking Indigenous consultation, echoing past missteps.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday May 29 2025

Published also in The Toronto Star, and on Reddit.

Ford’s Fast Track: Mining Progress or Consultation Overlook?

October 22, 2022

Back in 2019, Premier Doug Ford’s government tried to push through Bill 66, which threatened the Greenbelt and ignored environmental protections. Public outrage forced them to backtrack. Fast forward to 2025, and it seems the government hasn’t learned its lesson with Bill 5.

Bill 5 aims to speed up mining in the Ring of Fire region by creating “special economic zones.” This move is supposed to boost the economy, but it has angered Indigenous leaders and the public. Critics argue it’s like a repeat of Bill 66, ignoring the need for proper consultation with those affected.

News: Doug Ford government amends controversial mining bill to allay First Nation concerns

Doug Ford's call for a mandate to address potential U.S. tariffs distracts from his government's pressing domestic issues and highlights the necessity for Canada to diversify trade relations and reduce interprovincial barriers.

January 24, 2025

To Ford’s credit, he has skillfully tackled the challenges posed by the Trump administration’s trade actions, which threatens Ontario’s manufacturing base. By focusing on developing the mining of critical minerals, he has aligned with voter support for economic resilience and growth. However, what’s lost in this expectation granted by citizens is the crucial need for proper consultation with Indigenous communities.

Despite offering amendments to allow Indigenous-led economic zones, the government’s promise to consult with First Nations after the fact seems insincere. Indigenous communities should be involved from the start, not as an afterthought.

News: Doug Ford offers amendment to First Nations on mining bill but vows to speed development through ‘economic zones’

December 11, 2018

Reader comments highlight the need for genuine engagement and respect for Indigenous rights. The government’s approach of rushing development without proper input feels like a misstep, echoing past mistakes.

Consultation isn’t just a formality; it’s essential for fair and democratic decision-making. By not learning from the past, the Ford government risks repeating history with Bill 5. It’s time for a more inclusive approach that values the input of all Ontarians and respects the rights of Indigenous Peoples. Only then can we ensure a future that’s fair and sustainable for everyone.

A Test for Doug – Editorial Cartoon for Thursday May 29, 2025

Posted to Substack

After all these years since Canada kicked off its reconciliation efforts with Indigenous Peoples, you’d think we’d have the basics down by now. One of the most fundamental practices is meaningful consultation, especially when it comes to economic development that impacts our environment—whether it’s the sea, air, or land. And when it comes to something like mining, this should be a no-brainer.

December 11, 2018 – Environmentalists and critics accused Premier Doug Ford of breaking his promise to protect the Greenbelt, claiming that the changes introduced in Bill 66 undermined environmental protections and opened the area to development.

Yet, here comes Doug Ford, ready to defy common sense and try to limit consultation once again. This isn’t the first time he’s taken this approach, and it seems like another case of lessons not learned. It’s as if he’s trying to sneak this by, testing the waters to see how far he can push things.

Considering that less than half of Ontario’s voters bothered to cast a ballot, it might seem like Ford reads the 55% who didn’t vote as a kind of silent approval. But relying on voter apathy or disengagement is risky business. Silence doesn’t equal consent, especially when it comes to respecting the rights and voices of Indigenous communities.

Tuesday November 28, 2023 – The Ontario Liberal Party is set to announce its new leader, facing the challenge of overcoming voter apathy and past election setbacks to compete against Doug Ford in future elections.

In today’s animated editorial cartoon, which Substack subscribers get to preview before it hits the Hamilton Spectator, I’m being upfront about a new technique I’ve started using: AI for adding voice to the characters.

According to YouTube’s policy, it’s essential to disclose when content is altered or synthetic, especially if it seems real. This includes realistic sounds or visuals created with AI. With today’s technology, the line between real and fake is increasingly blurred, and AI-generated voices are impressively accurate.

One of my critiques of animated satire has always been the voiceovers for political figures. While some might be as skilled as David Levine at caricaturing, they often fall short of Rich Little when it comes to voice impressions. Now, with AI, replicating political voices is not only easy but also a bit unsettling.

In the animated clip below, I’ve used software to mimic the voice of Doug Ford. I believe it’s clear that it’s not really him, but for those who might be too convinced, there’s a disclaimer in place.

This is uncharted territory, and I’d love to hear your thoughts. If you have any feedback or want to start a conversation, now’s your chance.

Substack is an invaluable platform for me, especially given the uncertainties that come with being a staff editorial cartoonist. While I remain optimistic about my future, I am acutely aware of the unfortunate layoffs and newspaper closures that have impacted many talented colleagues in our field. Please Enjoy the animated making of my May 29, 2025 editorial cartoon below and thank you for your continued support!