Back To Top

MPP Lisa MacLeod

Progressive Conservative Party | Nepean, ON

CLC rating: Pro-abortion, anti-free speech, anti-traditional marriage

Not SupportableLight Rating

Not Supportable
Not Supportable
Rating Comments: MacLeod introduced a motion at the legislature asking for swift passage of Kathleen Wynne's unconstitutional bill to ban pro-life expression on public sidewalks within a certain radius of abortion facilities.

On June 28 2015, MacLeod made the very un-conservative decision to undermine family values by marching in Toronto's extremely lewd homosexual Pride Parade.

First elected (yyyy.mm.dd): 30-Mar-06
Previous Occupation: Manager, Sobeys Inc. ; PC Party policy advisor
Percentage in last election: 39.2% (2022)
Victory margin last election: 5.8% (2022)
Religion / Faith: Presbyterian
Constituency Offices
Unit 222/3, 250B Greenbank Rd.
Nepean, Ontario
K2H 8X4
Tel: 613-823-2116
Fax: 613-823-8284
Parliamentary Office
Mailing address: Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries
Hearst Block, 9th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M7A 2A1
Tel: 416-314-1400

Here is Lisa MacLeod's voting record relating to life and family issues:

Votes, Surveys and Policy Decision Vote Score
Explicit 2010/2015 sex education curriculum
The Ontario Liberal government of Kathleen Wynne & Dalton McGuinty introduced a sex ed curriculum for the 2010 school year that would have forced public & Catholic elementary schools to encourage masturbation, celebrate homosexuality and gender identity confusion, and teach about anal and oral intercourse. The curriculum sought to give gay-positive teaching on homosexual relationships by Grade 3. In Grade 5 children would be taught that homosexuality is inborn and cannot be changed, a claim that has no scientific backing whatsoever. In Grade 6 it would give instructions on the pleasures of masturbation and discussed vaginal lubrication. In grade 7 children would be taught about "oral" and "anal sex". Thanks to public outcry from parents and religious leaders, this dangerous curriculum was "postponed" by the government. However, once Kathleen Wynne received a strong Liberal majority and the threat of an election was past, she announced that the controversial curriculum would be implemented in September 2015. Since the original preview of the curriculum in 2010, it has come to light that it was written under the direction of a man, Benjamin Levin, who has confessed to child pornography related charges. That makes sense given the explicit, age-inappropriate nature of the curriculum. It is feared by many parents and education observers that the curriculum may have been designed to 'groom' children so as to make them available for sex. Other parties with whom the Liberal government consulted to formulate this program included radical gay activists groups like Gay Ontario (now Queer Ontario) and Egale Canada. [Jan. 2010-present]
Supports bad
Bill 13, 3rd reading, which radically sexualized the school curriculum and forced all Catholic & Public schools to accept homosexual-activist clubs
Officially called The Accepting Schools Act, this bill which became law, forced Catholic schools to accepts student gay pride clubs known as GSAs, even over the objection and constitutional rights of Ontario's Catholic bishops. The law also injected radical sexual theories into the curriculum to be taught at the earliest grades. These sexual theories include "gender identity", the disputed notion that a child’s gender is not necessarily connected to their physical anatomy and that it’s perfectly normal for little boys to think they’re little girls; and the 6-gender theory which teaches children that there are 6 diffeerent genders (LGBTTIQ theory), not just male & female. All this was done under the deceptive ruse that these changes were necessary to reduce bullying and punish bullies. The bill also embeds a biased, anti-Christian slur into the curriculum designed to label all people of faith who adhere to traditional biblical norms of human sexuality as if they were "hateful" or "bigoted". Unfortunately, this bill was passed on June 4, 2013 by a vote of 65 to 36, despite parental protests that took place in the streets, at Queens Park and outside MPP consituency offices.
No ok
Bill 77, 2nd reading, to make it illegal for psychologists and therapists to be able to provide help to individuals who experience unwanted same-sex attraction or unwanted gender identity confusion, even if the patient is desperately seeking that therapy.
Bill 77, "The Affirming Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Act, 2015", introduced by New Democratic Party MPP Cheri DiNovo, a minister of the United Church of Canada, bans “any practice that seeks to change or direct the sexual orientation or gender identity of a patient under 18 years of age, including efforts to change or direct the patient’s behaviour or gender expression.” This Bill would prohibit “change” therapy, a form of cognitive psychotherapy that treats unwanted feelings through exploratory conversations between therapist and client intended to understand the childhood causes of the unwanted feelings. In justifying her sweeping Bill, DiNovo declared, “We will not tolerate questionable practices that attempt to suppress people’s true identities,” thus presuming by rhetoric alone that homosexual impulses reveal, rather than undermine, a person's "true identity". [2nd reading passed 52 to 0 on April 2, 2015]
Yes bad
Bill 13, 2nd reading, the so-called "Accepting Schools Act" which sexualized the school curriculum and forced homosexual-activist clubs on Catholic and Public schools
This bill which ultimately became law, forced Catholic schools to accepts student gay pride clubs known as GSAs, even over the objection and constitutional rights of Ontario's Catholic bishops. The law also injected radical sexual theories into the curriculum to be taught at the earliest grades. These sexual theories include "gender identity", the disputed notion that a child’s gender is not necessarily connected to their physical anatomy and that it’s perfectly normal for little boys to think they’re little girls; and the 6-gender LGBTTIQ theory which teaches children that there are 6 different genders, not just male & female. All this was done under the deceptive ruse that these changes were necessary to reduce bullying and punish bullies. The bill also embeds a biased, anti-Christian slur into the curriculum designed to label all people of faith who adhere to traditional moral norms of human sexuality as if they were "hateful" or "bigoted". Unfortunately, this bill was passed on June 4, 2013 by a vote of 65 to 36, despite parental protests that took place in the streets at Queens Park and outside MPP consituency offices. [2nd reading passed 66 to 33 on May 3, 2013]
No ok
Marched in a Gay Pride Parade or endorsed it
Gay Pride festivals are controversial, often feature mock sex acts in public and are offensive to many, perhaps most, Ontarians. As such it is inaprropriate for an elected representative to endorse one side of this socially divisive issue. Elected officials are supposed to represent ALL their consituents, not just the politically correct ones.
Marched bad
Bill 150, to eliminate voter fraud in internal party elections, second reading
This bill, officially called the ‘Ensuring Transparency and Integrity in Political Party Elections Act’, aimed to eliminate the voter fraud, ballot-box stuffing, falsified ballots and other rigging of votes that has been commonplace in the PC Party of Ontario with respect to candidate nomination elections, Party President and Executive Committee votes, wherein the party establishment cheats in order to rig the vote for its preferred candidate, or to block candidates they do not like. Those who oppose this bill can only object because they wish to continue conducting voter fraud. Passed 2nd reading Dec 12, 2019 by a vote 95-0.
Yes ok
Bill 12, Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccinations in the Education and Healthcare Sectors, second reading
This bill was crafted to compel workers in the education and healthcare fields to submit to being injected with the abortion-tainted Covid-19 vaccines even against their will, or suffer discriminatory measures from their employers, which could have led to unemployment and poverty. This coercive bill to force people to choose between their conscience and their livelihood amounts to a legislative attack on democacy in Ontario. Defeated at 2nd reading on October 21, 2021 by a vote of 34-16.
No ok
Bill 28, 3rd reading, which banned the words mother and father from Ontario law and socially-engineered the family such that children can now have up to 4 legal parents, none of them blood-related
Bill 28, third reading: Styled with the deceptive, slogan-like title All Families Are Equal Act, this Marxist-inspired bill radically redefines the societal understanding of what a family is. It undermines the parent-child relationship between natural parents and their biological offspring. The Liberal government bill erases the words mother and father from all provincial laws and government records, including birth certificates, which will have the harmful trickledown effect of purging the use of the words mother and father from our collective vocabulary throughout the rest of society, including but not limited to school curricula, charities, and employer speech codes. In a stunning piece of social engineering that will produce immense harm to children, the bill also creates situations in which a child can have 4 or more legal parents, thus obliterating the very concept of the natural family from the forming mind of the child. Another foreseeable, adverse effect of legalizing 4-parent situations for children is that it will help bring about the legalization of polygamy. [Passed 79-0 with 28 abstentions, Nov 29/16]
absent or abstained --
Bill 84, 3rd reading, to legalize the form of homicide known as euthanasia, and to falsely redefine it as a form of medical treatment within the Ontario health care system
Euphemistically named the Medical Assistance in Dying Statute Law Amendment Act, 2017, Bill 84 codifies the abandonment, by the radical Ontario Liberal government, of medical professionals who are being coerced by the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons (OCPS) into complicity with assisted suicide killings. The OCPS is forcing physicians who conscientiously object to this homicidal practice to make so-called effective referrals for assisted suicide, meaning that if a physician is unwilling to kill his patient, he must refer that patient to a physician who is willing to do the killing, while the Ontario Liberal government does nothing to protect the conscientious physician from such coercion. [Passed 61-26 with 20 abstained or absent, May 9/17]
absent or abstained --
Bill 129, 2nd reading, to protect the conscience rights of health care workers from being compelled to participate in euthanasia and other practices they deem to be unethical
The "Regulated Health Professions Amendment Act (Freedom of Conscience in Health Care), 2017" was introduced by PC MPP Jeff Yurek. This well-meaning bill aimed to strike a balance between the Wynne Liberals' Bill 84 (euphemistically named "Medical Assistance in Dying Statute Law Amendment Act, 2017") which regulates the practice of medical homicide in Ontario, on the one hand, and the conscience rights of healthcare professionals who refuse to put their patients to death, on the other. The defeat at 2nd reading of Bill 129 illustrates the Wynne Liberals' insideous determination to give free reign to the pro-assisted suicide Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons, which is forcing Ontario physicians, regardless of their conscientious beliefs, to be complicit in the homicidal practice of Assisted Suicide through making "effective referrals". This means if a physician is unwilling to kill his patient, he must refer that patient to a physician who is willing to do the killing. [Defeated 23-39 with 44 abstained or absent, May 9/17]
Yes ok
Bill 89, 2nd reading, to give Childrens Aid agencies the power to ban Christian and other faith-based couples from adopting children, and the additional power to seize biological children from parents who disagree with LGBT and transgender ideologies.
Bill 89, introduced by Liberal MPP Michael Coteau, Minister of Children and Youth Services, under the disarming title of Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2017, actually gives the Ontario government and its child protection agencies, sweeping new powers to scrutinize and investigate families for having a Christian world view with regards to traditional marriage and human sexuality, and for not bowing down to the LGBT ideological agenda. Bill 89 empowers government agencies to seize children from their parents - using the pretense of serving the best interests, protection and well-being of children - if the parents refuse to affirm homosexual ideation in their child or the delusion that so-called gender can be the opposite of real, biological sex . This totalitarian bill also subjects potential adoptive or fostering parents to interrogations regarding their attitudes on LGBT ideology, as a litmus test for their suitability to become parents, leading to the disqualification of those who will not conform to the leftist world view of the government. [Passed 83-0 with 23 abstained or absent, March 9/17]
Yes bad
Bill 89, 3rd reading, to give Childrens Aid agencies the power to ban Christian and other faith-based couples from adopting children, and the additional power to seize biological children from parents who disagree with LGBT and transgender ideologies.
Bill 89, introduced by Liberal MPP Michael Coteau, Minister of Children and Youth Services, under the disarming title of Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2017, actually gives the Ontario government and its child protection agencies, sweeping new powers to scrutinize and investigate families for having a Christian world view with regards to traditional marriage and human sexuality, and for not bowing down to the LGBT ideological agenda. Bill 89 empowers government agencies to seize children from their parents - using the pretense of serving the best interests, protection and well-being of children - if the parents refuse to affirm homosexual ideation in their child or the delusion that so-called gender can be the opposite of real, biological sex . This totalitarian bill also subjects potential adoptive or fostering parents to interrogations regarding their attitudes on LGBT ideology, as a litmus test for their suitability to become parents, leading to the disqualification of those who will not conform to the leftist world view of the government. [Passed 83-0 with 23 abstained or absent, March 9/17]
No ok
Bill 163, 2nd reading, to create unconstitutional, 'No Free Speech Zones' on public sidewalks near abortion facilities, and to criminalize life-saving, peaceful, pro-life witness
This unconstitutional bill by the Kathleen Wynne Liberal government aims to violate our fundamental rights to freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and the right to protest. It creates "No Free Speech Bubble Zones" across Ontario, of between 50-150 metres outside every abortuary and hospital where children are killed in-utero. Pro-life Canadians who pray peacefully outside the killing centres, or who hold a sign - even silentely, or who offer pregnant women a pamphlet with scientific facts about prenatal development, will be considered serious criminals and face 6 months in prison plus up to a $5000 fine for the first offence, with a second offence escalating to 1 year in prison plus $10,000 fine that is clearly to intimidate Canadians with financial ruin. Sadly, second reading passed by a vote of 85 Ayes to 1 Nay, on October 17, 2017, with shameful support by the alleged "Opposition", the "pretend conservative" Patrick Brown PC's.
Yes bad
Bill 163, 3rd reading, to create unconstitutional, 'No Free Speech Zones' on public sidewalks near abortion facilities, and to criminalize peaceful pro-life witness
This unconstitutional bill by the Kathleen Wynne Liberal government aims to violate our fundamental rights to freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and the right to protest. It creates "No Free Speech Bubble Zones" across Ontario, of between 50-150 metres outside every abortuary and hospital where children are killed in-utero. Pro-life Canadians who pray peacefully outside the killing centres, or who hold a sign - even silentely, or who offer pregnant women a pamphlet with scientific facts about prenatal development, will be considered serious criminals and face 6 months in prison plus up to a $5000 fine for the first offence, with a second offence escalating to 1 year in prison plus $10,000 fine that is clearly to intimidate Canadians with financial ruin. Third reading passed by a vote of 86 Ayes to 1 Nay, on October 25, 2017, with shameful support by the alleged "Opposition", the "pretend conservative" Patrick Brown PC's.
Yes bad
Bill 3, An Act to prohibit harassment based on enforcement or adoption of public health measures relating to COVID-19, second reading
This tyrannical bill, introduced by Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath, aimed to muzzle and punish the free speech of Ontarians who refuse to kowtow to the increasingly harsh and unscientific Covid public health decrees. The bill would create as-yet undefined and arbitrarily-designated "safe zones" in which any suggestion of alternative views or evidence that contradicts the government-enforced Covid mandate narrative could result in crippling fines of up to $25,000. With this bill, the NDP, along with the sole Ontario Green Party MPP, has revealed its savage attack on free speech and dissenting views in the public square and is showing ever-clearer signs of its socialist ideological pedigree of top-down totalitarian government. This Orwellian bill was defeated at 2nd Reading on Nov. 4, 2021 by a vote 46 to 20.
No ok

Here are quotes from Lisa MacLeod on various life and family issues:

Regarding the opressive Ontario Human Rights Commission:  "We don't want to be in a place in Ontario, or in Canada, where there are 'thought police'. . . My question is, if we have fundamental freedoms in this country, is it for an unelected bureaucrat to put caveats on those freedoms?" [Podcast interview on ASTTR blog, Aug. 27, 2008]

Here are the answers for the questionnaire as provided by Lisa MacLeod on 2018.

Question Response
Do you acknowledge that human life begins at conception (fertilization)? Refused to respond
Are there any circumstances under which you believe a woman should have access to abortion? (note: a surgical or medical intervention, designed to prevent the death of the mother but but which results in the unintended and undesired death of the pre-born child, is not an abortion. e.g. in cases of tubal pregnancy or cervical cancer) Refused to respond
Will you support measures to stop funding abortions with taxpayers' money in Ontario? refused to respond
Do you agree women have the right to be thoroughly informed about the serious health consequences of abortion, the development of the child in the womb and the alternatives to abortion? refused to respond
Will you support legislation to protect the right of health care workers who refuse to participate in procedures which are in violation of their religious or conscientious beliefs? refused to respond
Will you protect the rights of parents to educate their children according to their faith in matters of moral principles and beliefs concerning abortion, contraception and homosexuality? refused to respond
Will you oppose euthanasia and instead support measures to promote “palliative care”, the purpose of which is to alleviate pain, and enhance the quality of life for terminally ill patients and those with disabilities? *Euthanasia is the direct and intentional killing of a person by action or omission, with or without that person’s consent, for what people mistakenly believe are compassionate reasons. refused to respond
Will you oppose euthanasia and instead support measures to promote "palliative care", the purpose of which is to alleviate pain, and enhance the quality of life for terminally ill patients and those with disabilities? *Euthanasia is the direct and intentional killing of a person by action or omission, with or without that person's consent, for what people mistakenly believe are compassionate reasons. refused to respond
Will you oppose euthanasia and instead support measures to promote ?palliative care?, the purpose of which is to alleviate pain, and enhance the quality of life for terminally ill patients and those with disabilities? *Euthanasia is the direct and intentional killing of a person by action or omission, with or without that person?s consent, for what people mistakenly believe are compassionate reasons. refused to respond

Here are the videos available for Lisa MacLeod.

Video #1

Watch Video

Macleod expresses legitimate concern over the free speech destroying Ontario Human Rights Commission.

Video #1

Watch Video

Macleod expresses legitimate concern over the free speech destroying Ontario Human Rights Commission.

Video #1

Watch Video

Macleod expresses legitimate concern over the free speech destroying Ontario Human Rights Commission.

Video #1

Watch Video

Macleod expresses legitimate concern over the free speech destroying Ontario Human Rights Commission.

  • Legend for Light
    Rating System
  • Green Light
    GREEN light means the person supports CLC principles and is rated as SUPPORTABLE
  • Red Light
    RED light means the person is NOT SUPPORTABLE
  • Amber Light
    AMBER light means voters should be cautious about the candidate. CLC is still evaluating this individual, does not have enough data, or their record is mixed. View their quotes & voting history to help you decide.
Want to See How the Parties Compare on Policy?