Welcome back to Adjournment Proceedings, our weekly long read series. We publish a new edition every Friday. In this week’s edition, we look at why Ontario political parties aren’t responding to the results of the foreign interference public inquiry that warned that nomination contests and leadership races are the most vulnerable.  

Missed a week? Take a look through our archives here.

The federal foreign interference inquiry warned that leadership races and nomination contests are among the easiest ways to influence Canadian politics. But none of Ontario’s major political parties have adopted the safeguards the commission recommended.

The issue has resurfaced ahead of the Ontario Liberal Party’s leadership race. MP Nate Erskine-Smith, who recently announced interest in running for the position of Ontario Liberal leader, suggested the party should reconsider its voting rules and align them more closely with the advice of the federal inquiry.

“It is better to follow the advice of the foreign election commission,” he told iPolitics.

Earlier in February, the Ontario Liberals released the official rules for their leadership race, confirming that anyone aged 14 or older who resides in Ontario, including international students and temporary foreign workers, can participate in the vote. Only Canadian citizens are eligible to vote in the actual provincial elections.

But the Liberals are not alone.

The Ontario Progressive Conservative Party and the Ontario NDP also allow non-citizens to become members and vote in internal party contests under broadly defined membership rules. None of the parties have indicated that they have plans to revise those rules following the release of the 2024 federal public inquiry into foreign election interference.

The Ontario Progressive Conservative Party has similar language in its constitution regarding membership and voting eligibility. The PCs held their annual general meeting on Jan. 31 but did not move to amend those provisions.

The 2024 public inquiry into foreign election interference warned that leadership contests and nomination races are particularly vulnerable to outside influence and recommended stronger safeguards around internal party processes. It also includes the recommendation of not allowing non-Canadian citizens to vote.

Political scientist Stewart Prest of the University of British Columbia said the risks identified by the inquiry do not stop at the federal level.

“I think absolutely there’s a strong case that political parties at all levels need to be mindful of these issues,” Prest said. “Not every recommendation is going to be directly portable to the provincial level, but there are similar challenges and similar solutions whether we’re talking about federal or provincial politics.”

Political parties occupy a unique space in Canada’s political system: they are private organizations, largely free to set their own rules.

But that independence can also create vulnerabilities, Prest said.

“They’re vulnerable because they’re not being as closely monitored or supported by intelligence institutions within the state,” he said. “At the provincial level, they’re somewhat off the radar.”

That means attempts to influence outcomes could play out in smaller internal contests, such as riding nominations, where participation is limited and margins are tight.

“You can have campaigns of influence playing out not across the board, but perhaps in particular ridings where margins are thin,” Prest said.

The federal inquiry heard similar warnings from national security experts, who testified that internal party processes often receive far less scrutiny than general elections while still determining who ultimately appears on the ballot.

Heidi Tworek, Canada Research Chair and director of the Centre for the Study of Democratic Institutions at the University of British Columbia, said the inquiry deliberately highlighted these overlooked pressure points.

“One of the things the commission pointed to was that we focus so much on the actual election that we sometimes don’t look at the rest of the potential avenues for interference,” Tworek said.

Nomination races and internal party votes, she noted, can be particularly attractive targets.

“They’re spaces where there’s less scrutiny and potentially more leverage,” Tworek said. “You have lower turnout and lower numbers, so a few people can potentially make more of a difference.”

For now, however, Ontario’s political parties appear reluctant to revisit their rules.

Within the Ontario Liberal Party, one longtime organizer said the issue has come up internally but changing the eligibility requirements would require amending the party’s constitution, a process that can only occur at a membership convention.

“The problem has always been that this is outlined in the OLP constitution, so there’s no authority for the executive council to unilaterally make this decision,” the source said.

Tworek said it is disappointing to see parties avoid engaging with the recommendations more directly, given the extensive research and testimony that informed the inquiry.

“It’s a bit disappointing to see them not take those recommendations seriously,” she said.

Even in the absence of proven interference, the perception of vulnerability can still damage trust in the political system, experts warn.

Prest said that just raising the possibility of foreign influence can undermine the legitimacy of political outcomes if safeguards are not clearly in place.

“The possibility of interference is one issue,” he said. “But the perception of interference can also become a serious problem.”

That risk extends well beyond federal politics.

Prest recalled being asked by a reporter whether foreign interference had affected a Vancouver municipal election, a question that was asked despite no clear evidence that this had occurred.

“Just having people ask that question shows that at any level of government there is both the possibility of interference and the perception of it,” he said.

Tightening membership and voting rules could help address both concerns.

Prest suggested a reasonable compromise could still allow broad participation, including younger voters and permanent residents, while drawing clearer limits.

“It still opens the tent wide to participation,” he said. “But it also makes clear that there are limits to participation. It’s not an anything-goes environment.”

“Without well-governed, legitimate political parties,” Prest said, “trust in our political process starts to break down.”

Neither the Ontario NDP nor the Ontario PC Party responded to multiple requests for comment. The Ontario Liberals provided the following statement, hinting that changing the party’s constitution to abide by the foreign interference inquiry recommendations might be on the table in their next AGM:

“The Ontario Liberal Party has already taken concrete steps to protect the integrity of the leadership election. First, the party has implemented two-step verification for members, making it harder for anyone to try to work the system. Second, as part of the leadership race, every voter will be required to verify their identity. Voting will be conducted online, and each vote will leave a digital footprint,” the statement read.

“To further strengthen safeguards in the future, additional measures — including potential constitutional amendments — could be considered at the next Annual General Meeting.”