Doug Ford and the Rise of Authoritarian Neoliberalism in Ontario
Executive Power as a Tool of Domination
Doug Ford’s leadership of Ontario since 2018 illustrates a shift toward authoritarian neoliberalism, a mode of governance that centralizes executive authority to enforce market-oriented reforms while actively weakening democratic institutions, public oversight, and constitutional protections. This paper analyzes Ford’s use of key executive tools, Bill 5, Ministerial Zoning Orders (MZOs), and the notwithstanding clause to bypass legislative debate, override local governance, and insulate capital from public regulation. These interventions reveal a consistent pattern of statecraft that consolidates power in the executive branch to suppress dissent, neutralize opposition, and implement neoliberal restructuring from above.
While neoliberalism is often rhetorically associated with a smaller state, in practice, it frequently relies on a strong and centralized state apparatus to impose market logic, especially when public resistance or democratic institutions stand in the way. This fusion of market fundamentalism and executive coercion defines authoritarian neoliberalism (Bruff, 2014). Doug Ford’s tenure as Premier reflects this convergence. While publicly presenting his government as cutting red tape and empowering everyday Ontarians, Ford has significantly expanded the powers of his office, centralized decision-making, and utilized legislative and constitutional mechanisms to curtail democratic accountability in favour of elite interests. His governance advances a political model in which capital is freed only by subordinating democratic governance to executive fiat.
Bill 5 and the Suspension of Law
One of the clearest illustrations of authoritarian neoliberalism under Ford is Bill 5: Protecting Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act (2025), which grants cabinet sweeping authority to create “Special Economic Zones” (SEZs) where any provincial law or municipal bylaw can be suspended at the government’s discretion. The legislation imposes no meaningful limits on the scope of these exemptions, enabling the executive to override labour standards, environmental protections, public health regulations, land-use planning codes, and Indigenous treaty rights, all without public consultation, legislative debate, or judicial oversight (Canadian Environmental Law Association [CELA], 2025). By enabling the selective suspension of the rule of law, Bill 5 represents a dramatic consolidation of executive power and a pivot toward deregulated corporate development, justified in the language of economic growth, hallmarks of authoritarian neoliberal governance.
Ministerial Zoning Orders (MZOs): Bypassing Local Democracy
Ford’s government has also aggressively expanded the use of Ministerial Zoning Orders (MZOs), which authorize the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to override local planning decisions and unilaterally approve developments. Once considered extraordinary measures for urgent needs, MZOs have become routine under Ford, with more issued in two years than all previous Ontario governments combined (Environmental Defence, 2022). This tactic has fast-tracked projects backed by politically connected developers, often in environmentally protected areas such as the Greenbelt and sensitive wetlands. By bypassing municipal authority and public consultation, MZOs further concentrate executive power while undermining local democracy and environmental stewardship. Their use illustrates how authoritarian neoliberalism disables decentralized governance in order to expedite private capital accumulation.
The Notwithstanding Clause: Constitutional Bypass
Ford’s government has normalized the use of Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the notwithstanding clause, to preempt judicial scrutiny and suppress dissent. In 2021 and 2023, it was used to impose limits on third-party political advertising during elections, drawing widespread criticism for infringing on freedom of expression and undermining democratic participation (Governing Council of the Law Society of Ontario, 2023). However, the most controversial use occurred in 2022 during the education workers’ strike, when Ford’s government invoked the clause to force a contract on 55,000 low-wage school support staff, making strike action illegal under threat of massive fines. The legislation sparked public outrage, mass protests, and a general strike threat that forced the government to repeal the bill. This use of the notwithstanding clause to suppress labour rights was widely condemned as an attack on the constitutional right to free association and collective bargaining rights the Supreme Court has affirmed as foundational to democratic governance. Designed as an extraordinary legal mechanism, the clause has, under Ford, become a routine instrument of executive convenience. Its repeated use signals a deeper authoritarian logic in which constitutional rights are treated as expendable when they conflict with economic goals, austerity agendas, or the consolidation of political control.
Populist Rhetoric, Neoliberal Substance
Underlying these authoritarian practices is a populist narrative that frames Ford as a defender of “the people” against “elites,” and “activist judges.” This rhetoric mirrors the political style of figures like Donald Trump, who similarly deployed anti-establishment language to justify authoritarian measures that ultimately served elite interests. Like Trump, Ford positions himself as a straight-talking leader willing to bypass bureaucratic delays and defy institutional norms to “get things done.” Ford has cultivated a persona sometimes dubbed “Captain Canada,” a folksy, down-to-earth figure who champions “common sense” solutions while attacking progressive values and urban intellectualism. This carefully crafted image legitimizes executive overreach by portraying dissent and institutional resistance as obstacles to the will of the people. Yet in practice, Ford’s policies have consistently favoured wealthy corporate developers, private capital, and politically connected actors. This populist-authoritarian duality is a defining feature of authoritarian neoliberalism: it uses anti-elite discourse to dismantle public protections and democratic institutions while entrenching economic power at the top (Brown, 2015). By masking elite-serving, market-driven reforms as popular empowerment, Ford’s administration deepens inequality and consolidates executive control while claiming to speak for the working class.
Democracy Undermined: The Electoral Context
Ford’s consolidation of power is further enabled by a persistent crisis of democratic engagement. In the 2022 provincial election, he secured a majority government with the support of the lowest voter turnout in Ontario’s history - just 43% (Elections Ontario, 2022). This trend deepened in the 2025 election, where, despite escalating public discontent over environmental destruction, labour suppression, and executive overreach, Ford was re-elected amid similarly low turnout and fractured opposition. The continuation of majority governance under conditions of mass disengagement and widespread disenchantment reflects a legitimacy crisis, in which electoral victory no longer equates to broad democratic consent. Low turnout not only weakens the moral authority of sweeping legislative mandates but also creates fertile ground for authoritarian neoliberalism, which thrives when public resistance is fragmented and institutional checks are eroded. Ford’s ability to implement sweeping market reforms, suspend laws, and override rights with minimal resistance illustrates how disengagement becomes a structural enabler of executive overreach. As democratic participation withers and electoral legitimacy grows increasingly hollow, governance becomes less about representation and more about the consolidation of elite-serving power under the guise of popular mandate.
Conclusion
Doug Ford’s tenure as Premier of Ontario exemplifies the logic and tactics of authoritarian neoliberalism: the concentration of executive power to impose market reforms, suppress dissent, and weaken democratic checks. Through legislation like Bill 5, which enables the cabinet to suspend laws in designated economic zones, Ford has facilitated deregulation and private development with minimal public oversight (CELA, 2025). His widespread use of MZOs has bypassed local governance and environmental protections to benefit private capital (Environmental Defence, 2022). His deployment of the notwithstanding clause, not only to restrict political speech but also to suppress labour action during the education workers’ strike, reflects a willingness to treat constitutional rights as barriers to be overridden in the name of state agendas (Governing Council of the Law Society of Ontario, 2023). All of this is framed within a populist discourse that conceals elite-serving policies behind claims of public empowerment. Compounded by record-low voter turnout and rising political disengagement, Ford’s administration marks a dangerous turn in Ontario politics, one in which governance is restructured to serve elite capital accumulation, not democratic accountability or the public good.
References
Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the demos: Neoliberalism’s stealth revolution. Zone Books.
Summary: Brown explores how neoliberal rationality undermines democratic institutions by redefining citizens as market actors and reshaping law, education, and governance to serve capital. Relevance: Provides the theoretical framework for understanding how neoliberalism erodes democratic norms—central to the analysis of Ford’s governance style.
Bruff, I. (2014). The rise of authoritarian neoliberalism. Rethinking Marxism, 26(1), 113–129.
Summary: Bruff introduces the concept of authoritarian neoliberalism, arguing that neoliberalism increasingly relies on coercive state power to impose market logic. Relevance: Serves as the core conceptual foundation for the term “authoritarian neoliberalism,” used throughout the essay to characterize Ford’s policies.
Canadian Environmental Law Association. (2025). Analysis of Bill 5 and its implications for legal oversight and environmental governance in Ontario.
Summary: This report outlines how Bill 5 grants cabinet the authority to exempt projects in SEZs from environmental, labour, and planning laws without public input. Relevance: Cited to show how Ford’s government selectively suspends legal protections for the benefit of private capital under the guise of economic growth.
Environmental Defence. (2022). Unchecked power: The Ford government’s use of Ministerial Zoning Orders (MZOs).
Summary: This report documents Ford’s dramatic increase in MZOs, often favouring developers over communities and environmental protections. Relevance: Used to demonstrate how the executive bypasses democratic planning processes to serve politically connected private interests.
Elections Ontario. (2022). Official results and voter turnout: 2022 Ontario general election.
Summary: Provides official statistics on the 2022 election, including the historically low turnout of 43%. Relevance: Supports the argument that Ford’s mandate rests on weak democratic participation, posing risks to legitimacy and accountability.
Governing Council of the Law Society of Ontario. (2023). Legal commentary on the Ford government's use of the notwithstanding clause.
Summary: Offers legal critique of Ford’s repeated use of the notwithstanding clause to bypass electoral and labour rights. Relevance: Used to illustrate Ford’s disregard for constitutional rights and judicial oversight as part of his authoritarian governance style.