To the Point for the Week of October 12, 2025
It was a short week, with Monday being Thanksgiving, but a lot happened in four days. The government of Ontario is gearing up for a critical fall sitting of the Ontario Legislature, one that will test whether slogans like “build faster,” “protect Ontario,” and “unleashing the economy” translate into action. Meanwhile, the feds are employing a strategy with origins on the gridiron and the hardwood in the lead-up to the federal budget.
ONTARIO
Welcome Back, Premier
The return of the Ontario Legislature this coming Monday, October 20th has got the ONpoint team humming the theme to Welcome Back, Kotter. The Premier, however, is singing a different tune. The shock wave of Stellantis’ decision to shift production of the Jeep Compass from Brampton to Illinois continues to reverberate, intensifying the economic and fiscal pressures on the government and the expectations placed upon it to deliver on its mandate to protect Ontario. We believe the fall sitting will be the most consequential of Doug Ford’s tenure as Premier.
The government’s sole priority is executing on its mandate to protect Ontario from the impacts of ongoing trade friction with the United States. Strategically, it rests on three fundamental objectives: facilitate growth, enable economic independence, and reduce regulatory burdens. Tactically, it will come in the form of implementing critical elements of two major pieces of legislation passed during the last session, alongside the introduction of “Buy Ontario” procurement legislation. There are also signs the government is assembling another round of legislation targeting housing, transit, and growth planning, an extension of its broader effort to speed up approvals and tighten Queen’s Park’s grip on how Ontario builds.
First, the government has launched a regulatory consultation on Special Economic Zones included in Bill 5, the Protecting Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act, which received Royal Assent on June 4th. Bill 5 streamlined mining approvals, replaced the Endangered Species Act with the Species Conservation Act, and created Special Economic Zones (SEZs). The SEZ framework allows large-scale development projects to move faster by suspending or modifying certain provincial and municipal laws within defined geographic areas. The consultation, launched October 2nd, runs until November 16th. Once complete, the government is widely expected to designate the Ring of Fire as Ontario’s first SEZ.
Designating the Ring of Fire as an SEZ would mark the Ford government’s strongest step yet in advancing its “Protect Ontario” agenda. Politically, it would transform a long-stalled mining vision into a demonstration of provincial authority, positioning Queen’s Park as a leader in national critical minerals development while testing how far its fast-track approach to resource projects can go.
Second, the government is expected to implement provisions outlined in Bill 17, the Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act. The three most transformative sections, which include expanded development-charge deferrals, interest relief during the deferral period, and rate protection allowing builders to pay whichever is lower (the frozen or current DC rate), all require proclamation by the Lieutenant Governor in Council before taking effect.
Politically, these proclamations are significant because they represent the moment Queen’s Park will shift billions in upfront costs from builders, and ultimately homebuyers, to municipal tax bases. Delaying proclamation gives the government flexibility to manage municipal backlash, particularly from large cities angered by the loss of predictable revenues, and to fine-tune regulations in response to industry feedback. Once proclaimed, these measures will crystallize Ford’s promise to make housing cheaper while deepening tensions over local autonomy and fiscal risk for cash-strapped municipalities.
The Premier signalled on October 6th that the government will also introduce “Buy Ontario” legislation when Queen’s Park resumes. The plan would require provincial and municipal procurement to prioritize Ontario-made goods and services, from vehicles and construction materials to cleaning supplies, whenever a competitive Ontario supplier exists. Politically, it allows the government to position itself as the defender of local jobs and businesses against U.S. tariff fallout, while using the leverage of public-sector contracts to pressure manufacturers to keep production in-province.
There is also growing talk at Queen’s Park that the Ford government is preparing another push to reshape how Ontario plans, builds, and pays for growth. After months of positioning around “Protecting Ontario,” the next phase may shift focus from vision to execution, with housing, transit, and infrastructure once again in the crosshairs.
The signs point to a broader rethink of how municipalities plan for growth and recover its costs. Quiet conversations in policy circles suggest the province could look to simplify official plans and standardize their structure, making them easier to approve and align with provincial priorities. Development charges, a long point of friction between Queen’s Park and municipalities, also appear to be under review, a long overdue conversation as charges meant to pay for infrastructure seem to keep finding their way to general coffers.
On the infrastructure side, attention is turning to water and wastewater systems, particularly in fast-growing regions. There is speculation about new regional delivery models and financing tools aimed at keeping pace with housing targets without overburdening local taxpayers. Some see this as the province testing the waters for broader reform, while others see it as a sign that local service delivery could be the next area brought under tighter provincial coordination. Either way, the stalemate between building houses and infrastructure needs to come to a head.
If the past few sessions are any indication, the government is unlikely to make small moves. The fall could bring another sweeping set of measures designed to centralize control, reduce local bottlenecks, and keep construction on schedule. Whether that adds up to efficiency or overreach will depend on where you sit and how fast you build in these uncertain times.
Doug Ford’s fall agenda is as much about politics as policy. As they say, though, good policy makes good politics. With trade tensions rising, municipalities pushing back, and industry watching closely, the Premier is under pressure to prove that “Protecting Ontario” means more than slogans; it means delivery. The coming months will show whether Queen’s Park can maintain control of the message and the machinery. Either way, the return to the Legislature sets the stage for a defining chapter in Ford’s tenure, one that will test how far a government can go in the name of “Protecting Ontario”.
FEDERAL
Flooding the Zone
You may never have heard the concept of “flooding the zone,” but you most certainly have seen it in action.
Flooding the zone originated as an offensive sports strategy. Essentially, it involves overwhelming one part of the playing surface with offensive players to force defensive players to make trade-offs in their positioning, creating scoring opportunities. In football, it meant attacking one side of the field with three receivers to force two defenders to decide whether to cover a short, intermediate, or long pass, but not all three. In basketball, it meant overloading one side of the court with three or four players, forcing the defence to commit to a zone instead of man-to-man coverage and opening passing lanes in the process.
Flooding the zone was co-opted as a political strategy by Steve Bannon, the U.S. right-wing political strategist who helped build the populist-nationalist movement known as Make America Great Again (MAGA — have you heard of it?), which propelled Donald Trump into the White House in 2016. The political application of flooding the zone involves overwhelming media, political opposition, and the public with a relentless torrent of announcements, provocative statements, and executive actions, especially those deemed controversial, all designed to create an information overload that makes focused opposition and accountability nearly impossible. President Trump is a master at this.
Bannon's insight was simple but devastating: if you saturate the information ecosystem with so much content—true, false, or somewhere in between—that journalists and opponents cannot keep pace, you effectively neutralize accountability mechanisms and control the narrative through sheer volume rather than accuracy.
This is the strategy the federal Liberals are deploying in the lead-up to the budget.
Of course, the Liberals would never admit they took a page from the MAGA playbook, and flooding the zone for them has its own flavour, since the media environment in Canada is far more forgiving for reasons unknown. The fundamentals remain the same: overwhelm the system with constant motion, dominate the conversation before critics can organize a response, and turn the pace of announcements into proof of competence.
Since early October, Ottawa has unveiled a new capital budgeting framework, a “cost-of-living” package for low-income Canadians, bail reform and public safety investments, immigration and border enforcement legislation, and a border security blueprint, all rolled out with multiple ministers, dollar figures, and national backdrops. Each announcement could have filled a week’s news cycle on its own. Instead, the Liberals have stacked them, ensuring that no single measure receives deep scrutiny (spoiler alert: bail reform isn’t bail reform at all).
It's not just these specific budget-related announcements. The Liberals’ strategy also involves flooding the zone with “expert opinions.” In late September, Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) Jason Jacques gave an exceptionally sobering opinion about the state of Canada’s finances, calling them “shocking” and “unsustainable.” He and former PBO Yves Giroux also had a lot to say about the government’s intent to separate operating and capital spending, with Jacques calling the government’s new framework of capital spending “overly expansive,” while Giroux flat out called it misleading. These are just two examples. With the budget on the horizon, the objective for the Liberals is to flood the zone with friendly expert analysis.
For example, in early October, former Parliamentary Budget Officer (2008–2013) Kevin Page, who now runs the Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy at the University of Ottawa, called Jacques’ analysis of Canada’s finances “just wrong” and said he should “walk back” those comments. Days later, Page issued an analysis defending the capital budgeting framework as an "important transparency improvement" that will help Parliament and Canadians see capital investment more clearly, arguing that deficit-financing long-term assets differs economically from deficit-financing current consumption and should be treated separately. Fast forward to a day ago, both Page and International Monetary Fund Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva made public statements declaring Canada has fiscal room to run even higher deficits than forecast, some estimates as high as $100 billion.
These expert opinions get picked up by friendly media and give cover to the government on its fiscal positioning, framing record spending as prudence rather than excess. What might otherwise read as a warning—rising deficits, ballooning debt—gets reframed as confidence in Canada’s resilience. By flooding the zone with credible-sounding validation, the Liberals aren’t just shaping the policy debate; they’re shaping the terms of what counts as “responsible.”
Like in sports, flooding the zone works until the defence adjusts. The Liberals have filled every lane of the political field—media, experts, and messaging—with so much activity that opponents are forced to chase the play instead of setting their own. It’s an impressive display of coordination and control, but it comes with a risk: when the noise clears, Canadians will judge not the speed of the government’s offence, but whether all that motion resulted in points on the board.
ABOUT TO THE POINT
To the Point – ONpoint Strategy Group's weekly roundup – cuts through the noise to deliver insight and analysis of key federal, provincial, and municipal stories shaping Canada's policy and political landscape. Designed for decision-makers and thought leaders, this newsletter is your go-to resource for staying ahead. Share these trusted insights with your network to spark meaningful conversations. Simply hit forward or follow ONpoint Strategy Group on X and LinkedIn to spread these valuable perspectives."
About ONpoint Strategy Group:
ONpoint Strategy Group is all about helping clients make an impact where it counts. Specializing in government relations and strategic execution, our team—Nico Fidani-Diker, Mariana Di Rezze, Krystle Caputo, David Morgado, Christopher Mourtos, Ellen Gouchman, and Brandon Falcone—works closely with clients to navigate complex political landscapes and bring their goals to life. With a practical, results-driven approach, we build strong relationships, craft winning strategies, and make sure every step brings clients closer to meaningful outcomes. We’re passionate about making sure our clients are heard, supported, and positioned for success.
