Bradford West Gwillimbury Mayor James Leduc is facing backlash over some of his public comments and behind-the-scenes behaviour.

Jeffrey Abrams of Principles Integrity, the town’s integrity commissioner, presented its report to council on Nov. 4 that determined Leduc had breached council’s code of conduct while making certain public comments.

Even though Principles Integrity acknowledged the mayor’s “genuine” public apology from the Oct. 7 council meeting, they felt the need to issue the public report in response to concerns from members of council “that the mayor has a tendency to ‘slip’ and repeat previously apologized-for behaviours.”

With the report presented to council, Leduc explained he’s hoping to return to the “very important business” of leading the town “effectively and efficiently,” a goal from which he said he’s “never wavered” as mayor.

“I’m committed to democratic process and the overall welfare of my community, BWG, and its constituents,” he said. “I have communicated an authentic and heartfelt apology in regard to the radio interview on Sept. 20, 2024, and endeavour to be more circumspect and present in communications going forward, understanding the erroneous impact words and language can have.”

While council has the authority to suspend a member’s pay for as long as 90 days, Principles Integrity didn’t recommend any monetary penalties.

Still, Coun. Nickolas Harper, whose April 7 complaint to the integrity commissioner resulted in the report, twice moved to have the mayor’s pay suspended — first for 60 days, then for 15 — but in both instances no members of council were willing to second those motions.

“I can’t accept a slap on the wrist or a hollow apology a year after silence and deception,” he said. “What we decide today will define where you stand and where we stand as a council, maybe not politically but morally.”

While the report brought him “no joy,” Harper said the best apology is “changed behaviour,” and all members of council “must act responsibly” because they’re “held to a higher standard.”

In an interview, the councillor explained he didn’t file his complaint with the integrity commissioner until April 7, because the issue took time to unfold and he wanted to ensure the information was factual and verifiable before acting.

‘Scandalous’ comments

Harper’s complaint contained two separate allegations against the mayor, and the vast majority of Principles Integrity’s report focused on what resulted in their determination that Leduc had breached the code.

The complaint claimed the mayor had undermined council by suggesting some members were motivated by racism when they voted against granting the special events permit last September for Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at (AMJ) Canada to host its annual Jalsa Salana conference in town in July 2025.

That was the beginning of a controversy that has left the group considering alternatives to keep their “broader vision alive,” after council passed a bylaw prohibiting “mega events” on farmland that essentially banned the conference.

Principles Integrity reported that Leduc appeared as a guest on a “well-known radio show” on Sept. 20, 2024, to discuss the application.

The mayor confirmed that was the John Oakley Show on 640 AM, but BradfordToday has been unable to find or listen to a copy of the episode. Requests for comment were not returned by either Oakley or Global News Toronto in time for publication.

Principles Integrity reported the host asked if there was “any tinge of xenophobia” or “people resistant to Muslims in their community,” with which Leduc allegedly agreed and explained that as a small farming community, “people get a little upset about it (immigration).”

Principles Integrity further report that Leduc “essentially blamed” “new” council members, implying they were motivated by racism in response to the questions about what had changed between approving the 2024 permit and denying the 2025 permit.

However, council’s composition had remained the same since taking office following the 2022 municipal election, and Principles Integrity concluded there was no evidence that there was even “the slightest tinge of xenophobia motivating the refusal of the permit.”

“Members of council are entitled to disagree with council decisions, so long as they do so respectfully,” Principles Integrity said in their report. “Speculating about a motive which amounts to racism, for which there is no evidence, on a radio interview, is scandalous.”

In his Oct. 7 apology, the mayor acknowledged his comments during the radio interview were incorrect, and called for more communications training to help better equip himself and other members of council for speaking with media.

“Upon much reflection, I recognize that my comments were inaccurate, inappropriate, and unfair. Let me be clear. I regret those remarks,” he said. “As your mayor, I must be willing to reflect on my actions, acknowledge when I fall short, and use these moments as opportunities to grow.”

Principles Integrity reported that Leduc had initially considered an apology for his comments “out of the question.” However, in an interview the mayor explained that came down to a disagreement over the distinction between xenophobia and racism.

He said that went on for “a long time,” before he agreed to disagree as the need to apologize was more important.

The mayor further explained that he previously intended to make that public apology during the Sept. 16 meeting, but the complainant, Harper, couldn’t attend the public portion.

In light of the report, Harper accused the mayor of having “weaponized racism” in what he sees as a “deliberate tactic” built on division to create conflict and fear.

“He is the root cause of instability and the division that has poisoned council’s credibility,” he said.

The councillor noted the mayor has issued apologies for his behaviour in the past, describing them as “red flags” and “part of a pattern of broken leadership.”

He also pointed to a section of Principles Integrity’s report that noted during the Sept. 16 council meeting the mayor denied having issued an apology — just four days after providing one.

While Abrams agreed there was a pattern of behaviour, he said they found it to be unintentional and several councillors noted that all people make mistakes.

Leduc thanked his colleagues for their feedback and committed to “reflect” and “do better.”

While Harper said the report “vindicates” the members of council who voted against the permit, in an interview he confirmed he was still “obviously not” satisfied with the outcome of the meeting.

“I held true to my integrity for those who demanded people be held accountable, and I think I held that line pretty well,” he said.

Councillor concerned with ‘coverup’

The other part of Harper’s complaint claimed that Leduc had pressured or improperly influenced staff to change their reports before bringing them to council or committee.

However, the report contains only one paragraph about this allegation and contains no finding of whether the alleged actions breached the code or any other guidelines. Instead, Principles Integrity noted “a comprehensive workplace investigation” was conducted by a third-party investigator and that “remedial steps” are already being taken.

In his presentation, Abrams explained “the ground has already been tilled,” and they didn’t see any public interest in re-examining the issue.

“The town of Bradford West Gwillimbury appears to be well-functioning and though issues may have arisen in the past, it is addressing them in a measured, professional manner,” he said.

Harper noted his and other councillors’ requests to see that third-party report have been denied due to confidentiality.

“When leaders deliberately hide or bury information from the public behind closed doors … and then a report like this is revealed, it will make the public question the trust it has in its own government,” he said.

The councillor insisted all members need to see the report and called for its release.

“We can’t have a clean house unless we put all the facts on the table,” he said. “For every minute that it’s not being disclosed, people will think that it’s a coverup.”

In an interview, town chief administrative officer Geoff McKnight explained that for the same confidentiality reasons, he also couldn’t comment on the third-party investigation including: the period of time when the mayor was allegedly pressuring staff, which reports may have been affected, when the third-party investigation took place, the results of the investigation or what remedial steps are being taken.

“Workplace investigations are conducted within a high level of confidentiality to ensure that employees have an environment in which they can confidently seek help with whatever workplace issues they face,” he said.

Other members of council also pushed Abrams for more information about the issue, but he declined to comment on specifics.

While beyond the scope of the report, Ward 3 Coun. Ben Verkaik suggested the issue could be resolved if the mayor were to relinquish the strong mayor powers he has used several times. That would remove his authority to unilaterally direct senior staff and once again have the CAO directed by a majority of council.

In response to the claims he pressured staff to alter report, Leduc told BradfordToday those were “false accusations” with no validity or record to support them.

The report from the integrity commissioner comes two weeks after the town committed to sign a pledge of respect, and follows an August report from the integrity commissioner showing they received 14 complaints between June 1, 2023 and April 30, 2025.