The record misleads
Toronto's push for constitutional protection from Queen's Park stalls at the last Executive Committee of the term
An advisory body co-chaired by David Delgran and Bruce Ryder urged Toronto to pursue a constitutional amendment and city charter to shield it from unilateral provincial interference, and publicly criticized the city manager's recommendation to study it for another year. In a long, contested debate Matlow moved to forward the report to other governments and continue the advisory work, but after Bravo and Perks objected that the Mississaugas of the Credit had not been consulted, Matlow struck the forwarding clause and kept only the clause continuing the advisory work. The substantive report-back now lands with the next council after the October 2026 election.
Motion by Matlow carried unanimously as amended; item reads as full committee endorsement of continuing the municipal-autonomy work.
Who did what
- Councillor Josh Matlow (Ward 12) moved and amendedMoved to forward the report to other governments and continue the advisory work
- Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4) questioned staffPressed that forwarding a constitutional-relationship report requires government-to-government consultation with the Mississaugas of the Credit first
- Councillor Alejandra Bravo (Ward 9) questioned staffArgued the Mississaugas of the Credit are title rights holders with a treaty and cannot be treated as just another group to forward an item to
- Councillor Stephen Holyday (Ward 2) questioned staffQuestioned the whole direction, raised risks of local government running amok and duplicated services across the Mississauga border
- Councillor Neethan Shan (Ward 25) questioned staffAsked staff whether forwarding the report would be interpreted as council's position
From the floor
“The province, however, while committed to that principle in theory, has often disregarded it in practice. Municipalities have no secure autonomy.”Speaker not identified
“We're disappointed in the recommendation that the city manager has made accompanying our report to have it subject to further study with another report to come back to the executive committee a year from now. Frankly that strikes us as the wrong approach.”Speaker not identified
“For something where we would be considering changing constitutional relationships, do you think that part of the work that needs to be done before council takes a position on this would be that government-to-government conversation with the Mississaugas of the credit?”Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4)
“You can't say they're just like every other group. They have a treaty with the crown. They are an order of government.”Councillor Alejandra Bravo (Ward 9)
“With your support, I'm going to remove item one, deal with that later, and then I'm going to keep number two and all is well, and let's move forward.”Councillor Josh Matlow (Ward 12)
“If we had multiple meetings of council over the next few months, might be a bit of a different scenario, but based on the time we have now, it's it's going to be the next term of council.”City staff
“So this was not an attempt in any way to delay it needlessly, but it is for us to bring back to you some other considerations.”City staff
“There's an unspoken endorsement when the council sends it, and if we're going to do that, I'd really like the work to be 100% finished.”Councillor Stephen Holyday (Ward 2)
Also in this item
• The advisory body co-chairs publicly rebuked the city manager's own recommendation on their report, calling a one-year study 'the wrong approach' and urging urgency.
• The proposed pathway is a single-province constitutional amendment under section 43 of the Constitution Act 1982, requiring only Ontario and the federal parliament, the mayor called it 'new information.'
• Forwarding the report was blocked because the Mississaugas of the Credit, as treaty title rights holders, had not been consulted on a matter touching constitutional relationships.
The journey
What happens next
The report is public; Holyday said he would tell residents to email it to their MPP. Residents can press the next council, which will receive the staff package, and the advisory work continues. Public engagement was recommended as a core part of the process.
Decision
Matlow's motion carried unanimously as amended: item one (forwarding the report to other governments) was removed mid-debate; item two (continuing/re-establishing the advisory body's work) was kept; staff will report back with a package next term; a clause thanking the co-chairs was added.
Watch it happen
Jump to this item in the meeting video
Why is this story here?
Stories are ordered by how much weight a decision carries and how directly it reaches daily life. They rise as a decision date approaches and fall as they age.