Recent elections would suggest Canada is increasingly integrating immigrants, visible minorities and others from diverse gender, social, and religious backgrounds into the country’s political life. From 2015 to 2021, demographics and political realities combined for slow and steady increases in the number of these candidates and elected MPs.

This analysis looks at both contexts to assess whether the upward trend in diversity continued in the recent federal election, specifically for women, visible minorities, Indigenous Peoples, religious minorities, and the LGBTQ community.

The candidates

Table 1 shows the number of visible-minority candidates seeking office did again rise in 2025, no doubt reflecting the continued increase of diverse populations in urban Canada. On the other hand, there is an overall pattern of decline for two key groups: women (down 2.4 per cent) and Indigenous Peoples (down 0.9 per cent).

There also remain notable disparities in political participation among visible and religious minorities and immigrant groups. This reflects a variety of factors; for example, how they are concentrated in specific ridings, the proportion who become citizens, the influence of ethnic media, their historical voting patterns, degree of political participation and general political habits.

Table 2 looks at the number of candidates from major visible-minority groups along with the parties they ran for compared with the previous election in 2021. Group population percentages serve as benchmarks.

Between 2021 and 2025, participation of visible-minority candidates rose to 20.1 per cent from 18.2 per cent among all candidates from the six largest parties: the Liberals, Conservatives, New Democrats, Bloc Québécois, Greens, and the People’s Party of Canada (PPC). This increase was driven by significant increases in the Conservative Party and PPC. The majority of visible-minority candidates were men.

While there is a significant one-to-one relationship between visible minority and religious minority groups, there is nevertheless considerable religious diversity within South Asian, Black and Arab/West Asian groups. Table 3 breaks down candidate religious diversity by party. It also shows the overall participation of these groups in this election as compared with their share of the population in the 2021 federal census. Muslim candidates were over-represented among Liberals and the NDP, Sikhs among Conservatives, and Hindus among Greens. Women formed the minority of all religious minority candidates.

Our analysis also shows that 33 candidates identified as Christian. These candidates were either faith leaders or stressed their Christian credentials. Thirteen were with the Conservatives, 11 with the PPC, four with the NDP, three with the Greens, and two for the Liberals.

MPs elected

Table 4 reveals that the decline in women candidates is reflected only slightly in the overall decrease in the number of women as MPs (down 0.2 per cent). This is not the case for Indigenous office-seekers, who had a lower percentage of candidates in 2025 (0.9 per cent) but increased their presence in the House of Commons slightly (by 0.2 per cent).

The continued increase in visible-minority candidates is seen in a larger number of visible minorities elected as MPs: 17.8 per cent in 2025 from 15.7 per cent in 2021. This was related to the efforts of the Conservative Party to recruit more such candidates.

Table 5 compares visible-minority MPs by party and group. It shows, on balance, decreases among Liberals and increases among Conservatives across most groups. In general, Arab/West Asian representation increased the most, while the presence of Latin Americans and Filipinos decreased. There were no individuals of Korean or Japanese origin election. No visible-minority candidates running for the Bloc and Greens were elected. As for gender distinctions (not included in the table), women formed 35 per cent of all visible minorities elected compared with 30 per cent of all women who won seats.

Other analysis results not reflected in these tables show that only religious-minority candidates running for the Liberals and Conservatives were elected. Two-thirds were elected under the Liberal banner. Representation of women from religious minorities was slightly less overall than the percentage of successful women candidates.

Eleven per cent of MPs elected were immigrants to Canada, a percentage that matches their share of all candidates.

There was a significant decline in LGBTQ candidates and MPs elected: 31 candidates and three elected in 2025 compared with 62 and six in 2021. The NDP had the largest number of candidates (6.8 per cent), followed by the Liberals and Greens (0.9 per cent) and the Conservatives (0.3 per cent.) No Bloc or PPC candidates self-identified as LGBTQ.

As noted earlier, women and Indigenous Peoples stalled out in their efforts to increase their representation in Parliament. There would appear to be a glass ceiling at around 30 per cent for women and four per cent for Indigenous Peoples. On the other hand, there does not appear to be a hard ceiling for visible minorities, whose elected numbers continue to reflect immigration and citizenship trends.

Comparison with other countries

Visible-minority MPs at 17.8 per cent and Indigenous Peoples MPs at 3.4 per cent are relatively strongly represented when comparing Canada with the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom. But that’s not true for women (30.3 per cent) when looking at Australia and the U.K.

In the U.S., women represent 28 per cent of Congress. Visible minorities make up 25 per cent and immigrants four per cent, even though they make up a much larger share of the general population. Less than one per cent of Congress members are Indigenous.

In Australia’s 2022 election, 38 per cent of parliamentarians elected were women, 6.6 per cent were visible minorities, 4.8 per cent were Indigenous, and 10 per cent were immigrants.

In the U.K., the 2024 election delivered 41 per cent women members to the House of Commons, 14 per cent visible minorities and about 10 per cent immigrants.

In summary, differences in political-party representation reflect dissimilarities in demographic trends (such as higher growth rates of visible minorities), overall election dynamics, political-party recruitment efforts, and the extent to which groups feel their concerns are reflected in political platforms and messaging.

This article was first published on Policy Options and republished with permission.

Methodology: Candidate profiles and assessments are based upon candidate photos, names and bios, general web searches, and ethnic and other media that focused on particular groups (e.g., Indigenous, Muslim, South Asian etc.). In addition, ChatGPT name analysis was used for assessment of probable religious background as well as for historical election data for women and Indigenous Peoples along with previous election-diversity analysis by the authors and Joanna Everitt at the University of New Brunswick.

Jerome Black is a retired member, and former chair, of McGill’s Department of Political Science. Over the years he has carried out research and published in the areas of Canadian political behaviour, strategic voting, women and politics, and, more recently, the experience of ethno-racial minorities in Canadian politics.

Andrew Griffith is the author of ‘Because it’s 2015…’ Implementing Diversity and Inclusion, Multiculturalism in Canada: Evidence and Anecdote and Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias: Resetting Citizenship and Multiculturalism. He is a regular media commentator and writes on his blog, Multiculturalism Meanderings. He is the former director general for Citizenship and Multiculturalism, has worked for a variety of government departments in Canada and abroad, and is a fellow of the Environics Institute.

The Hill Times

Editor’s note: This piece was updated on June 9 at 4:20 p.m., to remove reference to the Samara Centre for Democracy in the methodology, and reference the research of Joanna Everitt at the University of New Brunswick.