Nicole McMahon, University of Calgary
Harassment in local politics is increasingly becoming the stated reason that local politicians resign early or choose not to seek re-election. The instances of harassment at the local level have also been identified as barriers to recruiting new people to run for office, especially women. Some provinces have taken action in an effort to help local politicians who experience harassment and deter people from harassing local politicians. For instance, in February 2024, Quebec launched a helpline for local politicians and their families who are experiencing harassment to access psychological help.
The federal government is also being asked to step in to help make the job of local politicians safer. At the 2024 Annual Conference of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, harassment was identified as a "serious problem in Canada" that is most pronounced for “women, Black and racialized, and 2SLGBTQIA+ representatives." As a result, a resolution was passed requesting the federal government work with provinces, territories, and municipalities to protect local politicians from harassment, intimidation, and threats.
Given the rising instances of harassment and increasing calls for all levels of government to be involved in protecting local politicians from experiencing harassment, we need to develop a deeper understanding of the experiences of harassment from local politicians and their assessment of how well municipalities respond to harassment.
To understand experiences and perceptions of harassment in municipal politics, I use data from the 2025 Canadian Municipal Barometer. Local politicians were asked a series of questions about whether they experienced different forms of harassment and, if so, whether they were targeted based on a specific identity (gender, sexuality, race, religion, or none). The forms of harassment include: in-person insults, online insults, threats of harm, interference with property, harassment, and physical violence. Table 1 shows the proportion of respondents who said they had experienced each type of harassment.
Respondents were asked more specifically about whether harassment is a problem in their municipality (a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not a problem at all) and how effective their municipality’s response is to the harassment (very effective, somewhat effective, or not effective at all).
Table 1: Summary Statistics for Experiences of Harassment
In our sample (N=1633), 63% of respondents indicated they had experienced some form of harassment. Figure 1 illustrates the respondents who reported experiencing any form of harassment, by the targeted identity characteristic (if any). Respondents were asked to select all targeted identities that apply from the following categories: gender, sexuality, race, religion, or none.
The majority of the people who had experienced harassment (75%) said the harassment was not targeted at a particular identity characteristic. However, around 12% of respondents experienced harassment that was targeted at their gender and 4.4% of respondents indicated they were targeted based on race. A combination of identities (e.g., gender and sexuality) were less frequently identified by respondents, but the most common combination of targeted identities were gender and race (1.8%) and gender and sexuality (1.6%).
Figure 1: Experiences of Harassment, by Targeted Identity
Although three quarters of respondents had experienced harassment of some kind during their current term or in the campaign period that preceded it, the overwhelming majority of respondents do not perceive harassment to be a big problem in their municipality. Figure 2 shows the proportion of respondents who said they felt harassment in their municipality was not a big problem, somewhat of a problem, a big problem, or don’t know. Nearly 80% of respondents said harassment is either not a problem (39.6%) or somewhat of a problem (38.3%). A much smaller proportion of local politicians said harassment is a big problem in their municipality (6.8%) and few said they did not know (3.7%).
Figure 2: Perceptions of Harassment as a Problem
Respondents were also asked to rate their municipality’s response to harassment. Figure 3 visualizes the proportion of local politicians who selected each response option: very effective, somewhat effective, not effective at all, or don’t know. The results are mixed, however most local politicians felt their municipality’s response to harassment was “somewhat effective” (39.5%). There were nearly equal proportions of politicians who felt their municipality’s response to harassment was “not effective at all” (16.7%) or “very effective (17.8%).
Figure 3: Ratings of Municipal Response to Harassment
The 2025 CMB data shows that harassment is a common experience among local politicians. Approximately 63% of respondents in the 2025 CMB survey said they had experienced some form of harassment during their current term or campaign period. This is consistent with trends identified in Canada. For instance, the Union des municipalités du Québec (UMQ) found that 74% of mayors and city councillors in Quebec have reported experiencing harassment and/or intimidation (FCM 2024).
Notably, three-quarters of respondents said the harassment was not targeted at a particular identity characteristic, while a smaller proportion reported harassment based on gender (12%), race (4.4%), or a combination of identities. Again, this is consistent with trends identified by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities that reported harassment is most pronounced for women, Black and racialized, and 2SLGBTQIA+ representatives.
Despite the high reports of harassment, most local politicians do not perceive it as a major problem in their municipalities, with only 6.8% identifying it as a “big problem.” It is possible that the disconnect between personal experience and broader perception may reflect a belief that harassment is an unavoidable aspect of political life. However, these findings, combined with mixed evaluations of municipal responses, highlights the need for more comprehensive and coordinated strategies to protect local politicians from harassment.
