Ottawa’s mayor can influence housing, transit, roads, policing, property taxes and dozens of other services residents encounter every day. But what about federal workers returning to the office? High-speed rail? Immigration? Or decisions about federal properties downtown?
One of the challenges in comparing candidates for mayor is figuring out where municipal responsibility begins and ends. Canada has three levels of government, and they don’t all control the same things. Health care and education are primarily provincial responsibilities. Immigration, national defence and the federal public service are primarily federal matters. Municipal governments are responsible for many of the services that shape daily life in a city. But in Ottawa, those lines can become particularly blurry.
As the national capital and home to a large federal workforce, decisions made by the Government of Canada can have an unusually direct effect on Ottawa’s transit system, downtown businesses, housing market, roads and long-term development.
So when should a federal or provincial issue matter in a municipal election?
What does Ottawa’s mayor actually control?
The first thing to understand is that Ottawa’s mayor does not govern the city alone. City Council makes decisions about municipal services, policies and spending. Ontario has also given Ottawa’s mayor additional strong mayor powers, including responsibility for proposing the municipal budget and certain powers involving City administration and provincial priorities such as housing and infrastructure. Council continues to have significant authority, including the ability in prescribed circumstances to amend the mayor’s proposed budget and override a mayoral veto with a two-thirds vote. That means promises made during a mayoral campaign still generally require some combination of Council support, City staff implementation, available funding and in many cases cooperation from other governments.
At the municipal level, candidates can meaningfully propose policies affecting areas such as:
- OC Transpo and the LRT
- roads, traffic and cycling infrastructure
- zoning and development
- housing approvals and municipal housing programs
- property taxes and the City budget
- parks, recreation and libraries
- policing and community safety
- homelessness and supportive housing
- accessibility and Para Transpo
- economic development
- downtown revitalization
Those are obvious subjects for a municipal election. But Ottawa has another category of issues that isn’t quite as straightforward.
When a federal decision becomes an Ottawa issue
Consider the federal government’s return-to-office policy. The mayor of Ottawa cannot determine how many days federal public servants must work in an office. That’s a federal decision. But the consequences don’t stop at the doors of federal office buildings. The City says increased federal on-site work is expected to increase traffic and transit demand, and Ottawa developed a Transportation and Mobility Strategy partly in response. The City’s plan includes measures involving transit, traffic, parking and other ways of moving around Ottawa.
The City has estimated that as many as 65,000 additional weekly trips downtown could occur by fall 2026.
Suddenly a federal workplace policy is also affecting municipal transportation. It can affect downtown businesses. It can influence OC Transpo ridership. It can change traffic patterns. It raises questions about parking, cycling and commuting. And the future of federal office space is connected to an even larger municipal question: what should downtown Ottawa become?
The City’s 2026 Downtown Revitalization Framework identifies office downsizing, changing work patterns, housing pressures, reduced daytime foot traffic and an overreliance on the federal government among the challenges facing downtown Ottawa. Its strategy includes rebalancing downtown toward a broader mixture of residential, commercial, institutional and tourism uses. A mayor can’t dictate federal workplace policy, but a mayor can certainly have a position on how Ottawa should respond to it.
Alto is another example
Alto, the proposed high-speed rail network connecting Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and other cities, isn’t a City of Ottawa project. It’s a federal initiative and Ottawa’s mayor cannot simply approve or cancel it. Yet its potential effect on Ottawa could be enormous. The project could fundamentally change intercity transportation and Ottawa’s connections with Toronto and Montreal. The City is also a landowner that could be affected by route investigations and planning for the project. That creates legitimate municipal questions.
Where should an Ottawa station be located? How should it connect with the LRT and OC Transpo? What effect could high-speed rail have on development? What land could be required? What should the City advocate for during planning?
A candidate’s position on Alto therefore tells voters something meaningful even though City Hall doesn’t control the project.
What about immigration?
Immigration policy provides another useful example of where we should be careful. Ottawa’s mayor does not determine Canada’s immigration targets. So asking mayoral candidates whether Canada should admit 300,000, 500,000 or some other number of newcomers isn’t really a municipal-policy comparison. But population changes resulting from federal immigration policy can affect things City Hall does need to plan for. Population growth changes projections for housing demand, roads, transit, water and sewer infrastructure, recreation facilities and the amount of land the city may eventually need for development. There are also municipal questions involving newcomer services, economic development and the ability of a growing city to accommodate new residents.
The relevant question for a mayoral candidate isn’t necessarily:
What should Canada’s immigration policy be?
It’s more likely:
How should Ottawa respond to population changes created partly by federal immigration policy?
That’s a municipal question.
Indigenous relations don’t fit neatly into one jurisdiction either
Indigenous affairs are also frequently described as a federal responsibility, but that doesn’t mean municipal governments have no role. City decisions involving land use, development, consultation, housing, cultural recognition and relationships with Algonquin communities can raise legitimate municipal questions. The distinction matters. A mayoral candidate’s opinion about a federal treaty negotiation may have little to do with their ability to run Ottawa. A candidate’s position on Indigenous consultation involving a major Ottawa development could be directly relevant.
Where Compare Ottawa draws the line
At Compare Ottawa, we don’t think every opinion expressed by a mayoral candidate belongs in a municipal-election comparison. Candidates are citizens too. They can have opinions about federal elections, provincial politics, foreign affairs, education, health care or any number of subjects that City Hall doesn’t control. That alone doesn’t make those opinions municipal policy. Instead, we think an issue outside direct municipal jurisdiction becomes relevant when there is a clear and significant Ottawa impact and candidates are proposing, supporting or opposing a municipal response.
That can include questions such as:
How should Ottawa respond?
What should the City advocate for?
What should Ottawa plan differently because of the decision?
How would the candidate use the mayor’s office to represent Ottawa’s interests?
This is why Compare Ottawa tracks the federal return-to-office issue and Alto alongside traditional municipal subjects such as housing, transit, property taxes and community safety. The jurisdiction may be federal. The consequences can still be very local.
A mayor is also an advocate for the city
There is another part of the mayor’s job that is harder to measure than a budget vote or a transit policy. The mayor is one of Ottawa’s most visible representatives to other governments. Municipalities regularly need provincial and federal cooperation to fund infrastructure, build housing and deliver major projects. Ottawa Council, for example, approved a federal partnership in 2026 intended to help deliver 3,000 homes, illustrating how municipal priorities can depend on decisions and funding from another level of government. That means voters may reasonably want to know how candidates would advocate for Ottawa, even when the final decision isn’t theirs to make. The important distinction is between influence and authority. A candidate shouldn’t be credited with having the power to deliver something that belongs to another government. But voters don’t need to pretend those decisions have nothing to do with Ottawa either.
The question voters can ask
When you encounter a mayoral candidate talking about something that sounds federal or provincial, a useful test is:
What could the mayor actually do about it?
If the answer is essentially nothing, it probably shouldn’t carry much weight in a municipal election. But if the answer involves Ottawa’s budget, services, planning, infrastructure, advocacy or negotiations with another government, there may be a legitimate municipal policy worth comparing. Ottawa’s next municipal election takes place on October 26, 2026. Between now and then, Compare Ottawa will continue tracking what candidates propose, not just which level of government ultimately signs the cheque, but what the next mayor could realistically do about the issues affecting the city.
