
Roman Baber
- Born
- August 9, 1980 — Leningrad, Soviet Union
- Education
- William Lyon Mackenzie Collegiate Institute; York University; Law degree at the University of Western Ontario
- Career
- Lawyer
- Political Experience
- MPP for York Centre from 2018 to 2022; Elected to House of Commons for York Centre in 2025
- Notable
- Removed from PC Party caucus for opposition to COVID-19 lockdowns; Candidate in 2022 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election
Based on publicly available information — may contain inaccuracies
Business & Financial Interests
Before entering politics, Roman Baber worked as a lawyer. His legal practice reportedly focused on civil and commercial litigation.
Key Relationships & Connections
Roman Baber has a well-known political history with Ontario Premier Doug Ford. Baber was first elected as a Progressive Conservative Member of Provincial Parliament (MPP) under Ford's leadership. However, Ford removed Baber from the PC caucus in 2021 after Baber publicly voiced his opposition to the government's COVID-19 lockdown measures.
Public Controversies
The most significant public controversy involving Roman Baber occurred in January 2021 while he was an Ontario MPP. He wrote an open letter to Premier Doug Ford arguing that the province's COVID-19 lockdowns were causing more harm than good and should be ended. As a result of this public dissent from the government's official policy, Premier Ford removed him from the Progressive Conservative caucus. Baber then sat as an independent MPP. This stance against lockdown measures became a central part of his political identity and was a key platform in his later campaign for the leadership of the federal Conservative Party of Canada.
Where Roman falls on key policy spectrums
Your Money
People & Society
How We're Governed
Land & Community
How does Roman Baber's voting record line up with your values?
Justice Piché-Messier was a repeat donor to the Liberal Party of Canada. His last donation of $1,250 was in spring 2024, and he was appointed to the bench in the fall of 2024. Do you believe that is appropriate, yes or no?
In fact, four judges, or 20% of all judges appointed in 2024 to the Superior Court of Quebec, donated either to the Liberal Party of Canada or to an electoral district association of the Liberal Party. Does that not concern you?
Minister, my comment was not with respect to the appointment before this committee but to the question asked generally. The question is this: What is the role of judges in society? I submit to you respectfully that it is not uncommon for governments to seek candidates that reflect their political ideology. That would be a question that could be derived and, in fact, allude to one's political
Attorney General, judges appointed to the bench must be above reproach. That means they must be devoid of any apprehension of bias. A donation to a political party is reflective of one's political ideology; therefore, it gives rise to an apprehension of bias. Lady Justice wears a blindfold for a reason. She doesn't favour red or blue. Will you commit to not name any past Liberal donors to the
Good morning, Attorney General. I welcome the opportunity to discuss judicial appointments. Are you familiar with the appointment of Justice Mathieu Piché-Messier to the Superior Court of Quebec, yes or no?
The justice minister has significant influence over every judicial advisory committee. You appoint the three public members, and you also select one out of the three choices given to you. At the same time, the judicial application form includes a question requiring applicants to express their views on the role of judges in a constitutional democracy. I actually believe that the previous version
C‑22 Mr. Speaker, part 2 of Billwould force providers to retain the metadata of all Canadians. Liberals say the data is no different than the phone book, but the phone book did not log every phone call in every location of every Canadian for the last 12 months. There are also real concerns that foreign actors would exploit a back door to encryption. Law-abiding Canadians do not want their privacy
Mr. Speaker, nobody is mixed up. In fact, the government has eliminated and deleted the previous mischief and arson provisions for places of worship and added a much more difficult standard. By adding the fact that the act on which we could predicate one of those offences has to be wilfully promoting hate, they have actually made it tougher to convict of mischief or arson of places of worship.