Every affiliation event this project holds, verified and unverified alike. The unit is the event: a caucus that moved together is one row with several participants. Each row states how well dated it is, how well evidenced it is, and whether it meets the publication standard.
172 events, not people — 27 of 172 of the events matching these filters meet the publication standard
This list counts events, not people. A group event is one row here and several people in a person-based tally. Withdrawn records are excluded from this listing. Coverage report
19 of 188
Carried to another party
A seat given to one party at an election, sitting under another party’s banner without an election in between. This is the floor-crossing figure, and it is the only figure that may be published under that name.
47 of 188
Left a caucus for the crossbench
The member left a caucus and sat as an independent. No party gained the seat. This figure has its own headline and is never added to the one beside it — adding the two is the single error this whole classification exists to prevent.
24 of 188
Joined a party from the crossbench
Counted toward neither headline above. The outbound leg of the same episode is already in the crossbench figure, so counting the return as well would count one person twice. Whether the voters were asked in between is the interesting question, and it is answered separately below.
These two figures are never summed. A seat carried to another party and a member who left a caucus for the crossbench are different acts, and a total that merges them answers no question anybody asked.
Measured over the records these filters admit, not over the whole database. The record-wide figures are on the coverage report. This selects RECORDS holding at least one participation of the class asked for, and each matching record still lists all of its people — so a group record where nine members crossed and one left for the crossbench matches either filter, and shows all ten either way. To count acts rather than records, read the figures above, which count people.
Every leg below states where the seat went: to another party, or out of a caucus to the crossbench. The two are counted separately and never share a total. The tally beside each is for the events on this page only, not for the record as a whole.
Evidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Farah MohamedNon-affiliated→ToIndependent Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely onThat the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.How it countsCounted toward neither total.How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250604-CBF6307E
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
David RichardsNon-affiliated→ToConservative Party of CanadaFrom the crossbenchWhere the seat went: The member left the crossbench for a partyThe return leg: a member sitting outside every caucus joins one. Sometimes the caucus they had left, sometimes another.What you may rely onThat the member ended in a caucus. Whether a general election fell between the departure and this return is the question that separates two very different sequences, and it is answered per leg by `independent_return_intervals`, not by this badge.How it countsCounted toward neither total. The outbound leg of the same episode is already counted as a departure to the crossbench, and adding this one would count a single person twice for one episode.
On June 3, 2025, in the Senate of Canada, the recorded affiliation of David Richards changes from Non-affiliated to the Conservative Party of Canada. The event record cites one source, a…
Joined a party2 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250603-F6222C50
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Charles S. AdlerNon-affiliated→ToCanadian Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250526-55FC0DA8
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Sandra PupatelloNon-affiliated→ToCanadian Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250520-EC95A8D4
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Tony InceNon-affiliated→ToCanadian Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely onThat the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250513-D7DEDB57
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Dawn ArnoldNon-affiliated→ToIndependent Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250502-D8EBD9F2
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Katherine HayNon-affiliated→ToProgressive Senate GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250501-0C5BDF0A
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Peter GuthrieUnited Conservative Party→ToIndependentTo the crossbenchWhere the seat went: The member left a caucus and sat as an independentThe change begins at a party and ends outside every caucus. No party gained the seat. A designation such as “Independent Liberal” or “(Not in Caucus)” is on this side of the line: it describes an alignment, not a caucus membership.What you may rely onWhere the member sat afterwards, and only that. Whether they walked out or were expelled is `voluntary_status`, which is recorded separately and reads unknown on most legs; /coverage has the live share.How it countsCounted as its own figure and never added to the floor-crossing total. They are different acts, and a single number that merged them could not answer either question.
Expelled from caucus1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-NWS-20250416-822ADF99
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Baltej S. DhillonNon-affiliated→ToIndependent Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250410-51EE7AE9
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Martine HébertNon-affiliated→ToIndependent Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250409-B55F2A26
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Danièle HenkelNon-affiliated→ToProgressive Senate GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250408-9D96D9C1
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Nancy Karetak-LindellNon-affiliated→ToIndependent Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250325-BE9E83EE
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Scott SinclairUnited Conservative Party→ToIndependentTo the crossbenchWhere the seat went: The member left a caucus and sat as an independentThe change begins at a party and ends outside every caucus. No party gained the seat. A designation such as “Independent Liberal” or “(Not in Caucus)” is on this side of the line: it describes an alignment, not a caucus membership.What you may rely onWhere the member sat afterwards, and only that. Whether they walked out or were expelled is `voluntary_status`, which is recorded separately and reads unknown on most legs; /coverage has the live share.How it countsCounted as its own figure and never added to the floor-crossing total. They are different acts, and a single number that merged them could not answer either question.
Expelled from caucus1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-NWS-20250307-710204F3
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Jordan KealyConservative Party of British Columbia→ToIndependentTo the crossbenchWhere the seat went: The member left a caucus and sat as an independentThe change begins at a party and ends outside every caucus. No party gained the seat. A designation such as “Independent Liberal” or “(Not in Caucus)” is on this side of the line: it describes an alignment, not a caucus membership.What you may rely onWhere the member sat afterwards, and only that. Whether they walked out or were expelled is `voluntary_status`, which is recorded separately and reads unknown on most legs; /coverage has the live share.How it countsCounted as its own figure and never added to the floor-crossing total. They are different acts, and a single number that merged them could not answer either question.
Left to sit as an Independent1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-NWS-20250307-531BCD4C
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Kristopher WellsNon-affiliated→ToProgressive Senate GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250304-D5F5391C
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Todd LewisNon-affiliated→ToCanadian Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250228-06826E8B
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Allister SuretteNon-affiliated→ToIndependent Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20250212-CC12C052
UnverifiedLegacy leadEvidence: UnverifiedNobody has stood behind this record with a citation. It was inherited, or entered from a lead, and it has not been checked against a source.What you may rely onTreat as a lead, not as a finding. Usable to know where to look; not usable as the basis of a published statement. Expect year-precision dates and unconfirmed party labels.Editorial status: Legacy leadThe label is a warning, not a formality. Legacy leads are the part of the record most likely to carry a wrong year, a collapsed episode, or a party label that did not exist under that name at the time.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Tara ArmstrongConservative Party of British Columbia→ToIndependentTo the crossbenchWhere the seat went: The member left a caucus and sat as an independentThe change begins at a party and ends outside every caucus. No party gained the seat. A designation such as “Independent Liberal” or “(Not in Caucus)” is on this side of the line: it describes an alignment, not a caucus membership.What you may rely onWhere the member sat afterwards, and only that. Whether they walked out or were expelled is `voluntary_status`, which is recorded separately and reads unknown on most legs; /coverage has the live share.How it countsCounted as its own figure and never added to the floor-crossing total. They are different acts, and a single number that merged them could not answer either question.
In 2025, in British Columbia, the recorded affiliation of Tara Armstrong changes from the Conservative Party of British Columbia to Independent. No source is cited for this event record: it…
Changed party affiliationno cited sourceCTF-E-000139
UnverifiedLegacy leadEvidence: UnverifiedNobody has stood behind this record with a citation. It was inherited, or entered from a lead, and it has not been checked against a source.What you may rely onTreat as a lead, not as a finding. Usable to know where to look; not usable as the basis of a published statement. Expect year-precision dates and unconfirmed party labels.Editorial status: Legacy leadThe label is a warning, not a formality. Legacy leads are the part of the record most likely to carry a wrong year, a collapsed episode, or a party label that did not exist under that name at the time.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Dallas BrodieConservative Party of British Columbia→ToIndependentTo the crossbenchWhere the seat went: The member left a caucus and sat as an independentThe change begins at a party and ends outside every caucus. No party gained the seat. A designation such as “Independent Liberal” or “(Not in Caucus)” is on this side of the line: it describes an alignment, not a caucus membership.What you may rely onWhere the member sat afterwards, and only that. Whether they walked out or were expelled is `voluntary_status`, which is recorded separately and reads unknown on most legs; /coverage has the live share.How it countsCounted as its own figure and never added to the floor-crossing total. They are different acts, and a single number that merged them could not answer either question.
In 2025, in British Columbia, the recorded affiliation of Dallas Brodie changes from the Conservative Party of British Columbia to Independent. No source is cited for this event record: it…
Changed party affiliationno cited sourceCTF-E-000138
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Suze YouanceNon-affiliated→ToIndependent Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20241127-8A27C91A
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Pierre MoreauNon-affiliated→ToProgressive Senate GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20241121-C068B138
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Tracy MuggliNon-affiliated→ToProgressive Senate GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20241120-0DE4E18C
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Paulette SeniorNon-affiliated→ToIndependent Senators GroupParliamentary groupRuled an appointment onboardingWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely on
Classified as appointment onboarding, not a floor crossing: this is the earliest Senate affiliation change this database records for this senator, a first move out of non-affiliated status…
Other affiliation change1 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20241025-4F87A5BA
Single sourcePending reviewEvidence: Single sourceOne source supports the record, with a locator, and it has been read. No second source has confirmed it independently.What you may rely onUsable with the source named in your own copy. Where the single source is a news report, the risk is that the report itself was the origin of a later chain of repetition.Editorial status: Pending reviewRead the attached sources yourself. What is pending is our judgement, not necessarily the evidence.This record does NOT pass the publication gate and is not publishable as verified fact.
Clément GignacProgressive Senate Group→ToCanadian Senators GroupParliamentary groupWhere the seat went: A parliamentary group is on one side of the change or on bothA parliamentary group is not a party and not the crossbench. It contests no election and holds no seat that voters awarded — the Senate has organised around groups rather than parties since 2016 — so moving into one carries no seat anywhere, and moving out of one is not a withdrawal to sit alone.What you may rely onThat the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.How it countsCounted toward neither total.
On October 25, 2024, in the Senate of Canada, the recorded affiliation of Clément Gignac changes from the Progressive Senate Group to the Canadian Senators Group. The event record cites one…
Changed party affiliation2 citations · 1 distinct sourcesCTF-E-PLI-20241025-E4EA5815
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.
That the change involved a group rather than a party. Most such legs are in the Senate; the ones in an elected chamber are listed for review, because a breakaway group of sitting members is a closer thing to a crossing than a Senate group change is.
How it counts
Counted toward neither total.
How the record counts it: Ruled an appointment onboardingThe ruling stored on this leg is not the one its two labels imply, and the ruling is what any published figure follows. The commonest reason is that the label changed at a general election, so the voters were asked and nothing was carried anywhere; the other is that no ruling has been made yet, which is not the same as none being needed.