Did voters choose minority , or are Conservatives rewriting the story ?

saobserver.net · Feb 20, 2026 · Collected from GDELT

Full Article

Published 11:30 am Friday, February 20, 2026 By Wilbur Turner Ever since Matt Jeneroux crossed the floor to join the Liberal Party of Canada, bringing the government’s seat count to 169, Conservatives and their supporters have been repeating the same indignant refrain. Canadians voted for a minority Liberal government, they say. This is not what voters wanted. This is somehow illegitimate. You can almost hear the outrage dripping from the words, as if something improper has happened behind closed doors. In fact, Pierre Poilievre even called it a dirty backroom deal. But beneath the indignation lies a much simpler truth. Nothing improper has happened at all. What we are witnessing is not a crisis of democracy. It is a crisis of disappointment. And there was no check box on the ballot for a “minority government.” Canada’s parliamentary system has never worked the way its loudest critics are now pretending it should. Canadians do not elect governments directly. They elect individual Members of Parliament to represent them in the House of Commons of Canada. From there, the government is formed by whichever party can command the confidence of that chamber. That confidence is not frozen in time on election night. It evolves. It shifts. It reflects the decisions of elected representatives as they respond to political realities, their constituents, and their own conscience. This flexibility is not some loophole. It is the foundation of the system itself. What seems to be animating so much of the current outrage is the idea that voters rendered a permanent and unchangeable verdict on election day, and that anything which alters the balance afterward is somehow a betrayal. But that has never been how our democracy functions. Members of Parliament are not the property of their parties. They are elected as individuals. Over the course of Canadian history, MPs have resigned, sat as independents, joined other parties, and yes, crossed the floor. Sometimes those moves have helped Conservatives. Sometimes they have helped Liberals. In each case, the legitimacy of the action was not determined by whether one side approved of the outcome. It is difficult to ignore the fact that much of the anger today is not rooted in principle but in politics. The narrative that Conservatives have carefully cultivated since the election has been that Canadians rejected the Liberals, that the government was weakened, that its authority was somehow diminished. That narrative becomes harder to sustain when the government’s seat count inches to within one of a majority. The numbers no longer tell the same convenient story, and so the argument shifts. Suddenly, it is not about what is constitutional or democratic. It is about what feels unfair to those who do not like the result. But fairness in a democracy does not mean guaranteeing a permanent advantage to one side or another. It means respecting the rules of the system, even when they produce outcomes you would rather avoid. No ballots were discarded when Matt Jeneroux made his decision. No riding lost its voice in Parliament. No voter was stripped of their representation. An elected Member of Parliament exercised a choice that he was legally and constitutionally entitled to make. If his constituents disagree with that choice, they will have their say the next time they go to the polls. That is the accountability mechanism built into our system. What is far more concerning than the floor crossing itself is the growing willingness of political actors to undermine confidence in democratic institutions simply because they do not like how those institutions are functioning. Suggesting that Parliament has somehow become illegitimate because one MP changed parties sends a corrosive message to Canadians. It tells them that democracy is only valid when it produces the “right” result. It encourages cynicism. It erodes trust. And it risks teaching people that our system is something to be tolerated only when it serves their side. It is also worth asking an uncomfortable but necessary question. If the situation were reversed, if a Liberal MP had crossed the floor and handed the Conservatives greater power, would we be hearing the same anguished cries about the will of the voters being violated? Or would we instead be seeing triumphant press conferences and declarations that common sense had prevailed? Deep down, most Canadians already know the answer. Principles are easy to defend when they align with your interests. They are harder to defend when they do not. In the meantime, the country continues to face real and pressing challenges that have nothing to do with whether the government holds 168 seats or 169. Canadians are worried about housing costs, about health care, about affordability, about the uncertain world beyond our borders. They expect their elected officials to focus on those issues, not to spend their days relitigating the outcome of an election through procedural complaints and wounded pride. Democracy is not weakened when Parliament evolves. It is weakened when political leaders choose grievance over governance. Canadians voted for a Parliament, not a frozen moment in time. They voted for a system designed to adapt, to respond, and to function in the real world. That system is working exactly as it was designed to work. The rest of the outrage may be politically useful for some, but it does nothing to strengthen the country. In the end, it is not a defence of democracy. It is simply the sound of people unhappy with the results. Wilbur Turner is a seasoned political strategist and community advocate based in Kelowna. Drawing from hands-on experience in political campaigns, he brings a passionate commitment to civic engagement and delivers incisive, approachable commentary on the political and social forces shaping our communities and nation. Honoured with an Honorary Doctor of Laws from the University of British Columbia for his profound community impact, Turner also pens thought-provoking pieces as QueerGranddad on Substack.