Accessibility Errors Found on Nearly All Major Canadian Public Websites

Reading time: 7 minutes

Here at AChecker, we conducted two rounds of accessibility checks on 48 prominent Canadian public-facing websites in September 2025 and again in late February 2026. With Ontario's deadline for full digital accessibility having passed at the end of 2025, these two snapshots allow us to see whether public-facing websites are moving in the right direction.

In both rounds, 47 of the 48 sites (98%) returned at least one detected accessibility error. Statistics Canada was the only exception. The February data tells a mixed story: some organizations have made meaningful improvements, while others have seen their scores decline, and the majority have not moved at all.

Disclaimer: These results are based on automated testing using AChecker. No single tool can detect all accessibility barriers. Comprehensive evaluation should include multiple tools, manual review, and testing by people with disabilities. Results indicate potential issues and are not a definitive compliance assessment.

Accessibility Is Not a Niche Issue

According to Statistics Canada, more than 8 million Canadians live with a disability that affects their daily activities. This represents roughly 27% of the population.

At the same time, Canada's regulatory environment around digital accessibility has reached a tipping point. The Accessible Canada Act continues expanding its scope across federally regulated industries. Provincial legislation such as Ontario's Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act is becoming more stringent. Ontario's stated goal was to be fully accessible by the end of 2025, with all levels of government, private-sector organizations, and non-profits required to comply.

Against this backdrop, the accessibility of public-facing websites plays a critical role in ensuring equitable access to information, services, and civic participation.

Key Findings

• 98% of sites tested showed at least one detected accessibility error in both September 2025 and February 2026
• Statistics Canada remains the only site with zero detected errors across both rounds of testing
• Colour contrast issues were the most frequently detected problem in both rounds
• 10 sites recorded a change in accessibility score between September 2025 and February 2026: 6 sites improved their score; 4 sites declined
• The biggest improvement was Government of Prince Edward Island (+6 points) and CIHR and Canada Energy Regulator (both +5 points)
• The biggest decline was Polaris Institute (-7 points), followed by Human Rights Internet and Natural Resources Canada (both -2 points)
• Federal government websites continue to score higher on average than other categories

What Changed: September 2025 to February 2026

The table below shows all sites where the accessibility score changed between our two rounds of testing.

Sites with Score Changes

Website / Institution	Sep Score	Feb Score	Score Change	Sep Errors	Feb Errors	Error Change	Status
Polaris Institute	89	82	-7	1	2	+1	Declined
Natural Resources Canada	97	95	-2	1	2	+1	Declined
Human Rights Internet (HRI)	92	90	-2	1	1	0	Declined
Government of Manitoba	87	86	-1	4	4	0	Declined
Environment and Climate Change Canada	94	95	+1	1	1	0	Improved
Fair Vote Canada	80	82	+2	9	7	-2	Improved
Engineers Without Borders Canada	83	86	+3	7	5	-2	Improved
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)	91	96	+5	3	1	-2	Improved
Canada Energy Regulator	91	96	+5	3	1	-2	Improved
Government of Prince Edward Island	88	94	+6	2	1	-1	Improved

Score Change = change from September 2025 to February 2026.

Of the 38 remaining sites, 34 were completely unchanged across score, errors, and warnings. Three sites saw minor shifts in errors or warnings without a change in overall score: Export Development Canada gained one error, Government of Nunavut reduced its error count by one, and National Film Board of Canada lost one warning.

Lowest-Scoring Websites (February 2026)

The following organizations recorded the lowest accessibility scores in the February 2026 dataset. Where scores changed since September 2025, the previous score is shown for comparison.

Institution	Sep 2025 Score	Feb 2026 Score	Change
Bloc Quebecois	78	78	0
Polaris Institute	89	82	-7
Liberal Party of Canada	82	82	0
Fair Vote Canada	80	82	+2
Government of Manitoba	87	86	-1
Government of Northwest Territories	86	86	0
Royal Canadian Mint	86	86	0
Engineers Without Borders Canada	83	86	+3
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC / Radio-Canada)	87	87	0
Green Party of Canada	88	88	0

Scores reflect February 2026 testing. Change column reflects movement since September 2025.

These results continue to show that accessibility challenges are not limited to one sector. They appear across political organizations, advocacy groups, and government websites. Notably, Polaris Institute's decline of 7 points moved it from a mid-range score (89) into the bottom tier.

Most Common Accessibility Issues Detected

Across both rounds of testing, the most frequently detected issues remained consistent:

• Insufficient colour contrast, which can make text difficult to read for users with low vision or colour-vision deficiency
• Links without discernible text, which can limit usability for screen reader users
• Form elements without visible labels
• Missing or invalid accessible names for interactive elements
• Small or poorly spaced touch targets

These are foundational accessibility issues and are typically among the first to be flagged in automated testing. The persistence of these same issues across both rounds of testing suggests that fixes are not being systematically applied across the broader landscape.

Why Accessibility Needs to Be a Priority

Public websites are often the primary way people access information, services, and participate in public life. When accessibility barriers exist, users may be unable to:

• Read and understand content
• Navigate sites using assistive technologies
• Complete forms or access services independently
• Participate fully in civic and democratic processes

Improving accessibility helps ensure digital services work for everyone, including people with disabilities, older users, and those accessing content in less-than-ideal conditions.

Methodology and Full Results

We conducted both rounds of analysis using our Free Web Accessibility Checker. Each website was tested using the same automated methodology to identify repeatable, standards-based accessibility issues.

Automated testing highlights common accessibility barriers and provides a consistent baseline across sites. It does not replace manual or user-based testing. Findings should be viewed as an indicator of potential accessibility barriers, not as a definitive compliance assessment.

Automated tools, including AChecker, cannot assess the quality or usefulness of alternative text, evaluate keyboard navigation flows, determine whether content structure is logical or meaningful, or replace testing by people with disabilities.

Complete Results: September 2025 vs February 2026

Ordered by February 2026 accessibility score (highest to lowest). Rows with a score change are highlighted.

Website / Institution	Sep Score	Sep Errors	Sep Warn.	Feb Score	Feb Errors	Feb Warn.
Statistics Canada	97	0	3	97	0	3
Canada (Federal Portal)	96	1	0	96	1	0
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada	96	1	2	96	1	2
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada	96	1	2	96	1	2
Global Affairs Canada	96	1	2	96	1	2
Public Services and Procurement Canada	96	1	2	96	1	2
Department of Justice Canada	96	1	2	96	1	2
Fisheries and Oceans Canada	96	1	2	96	1	2
Digital Government Innovation	96	1	2	96	1	2
Grand Challenges Canada	96	1	2	96	1	2
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)	91	3	4	96	1	1
Canada Energy Regulator	91	3	5	96	1	1
Natural Resources Canada	97	1	1	95	2	2
Canada Revenue Agency	95	1	3	95	1	3
Health Canada	95	1	3	95	1	3
Department of Finance Canada	95	1	3	95	1	3
Indigenous Services Canada	95	1	3	95	1	3
Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada	95	1	3	95	1	3
National Defence	95	1	4	95	1	4
Environment and Climate Change Canada	94	1	4	95	1	4
Government of Prince Edward Island	88	2	3	94	1	4
Library and Archives Canada	93	2	4	93	2	4
Government of Nunavut	93	3	3	93	2	0
Public Safety Canada	92	2	5	92	2	5
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation	92	4	2	92	4	2
Export Development Canada	92	1	7	92	2	6
Canadian Human Rights Commission	92	1	5	92	1	5
Elections Canada	92	1	2	92	1	2
Veterans Affairs Canada	91	4	2	91	4	2
Canadian Future Party	91	2	5	91	2	5
Canadian Red Cross	91	1	8	91	1	8
Telefilm Canada	91	3	4	91	3	4
Government of Saskatchewan	91	2	5	91	2	5
Human Rights Internet (HRI)	92	1	4	90	1	5
National Film Board of Canada	89	4	4	89	4	3
New Democratic Party (NDP)	89	3	4	89	3	4
Government of Yukon	89	3	6	89	3	6
Green Party of Canada	88	5	3	88	5	3
Conservative Party of Canada	88	5	4	88	5	4
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC / Radio-Canada)	87	4	6	87	4	6
Government of Manitoba	87	4	6	86	4	7
Government of Northwest Territories	86	4	5	86	4	5
Royal Canadian Mint	86	6	5	86	6	5
Engineers Without Borders Canada	83	7	6	86	5	6
Polaris Institute	89	1	6	82	2	2
Liberal Party of Canada	82	7	7	82	7	7
Fair Vote Canada	80	9	4	82	7	5
Bloc Quebecois	78	6	6	78	6	6

Bold Feb Score values indicate a score change since September 2025.

AChecker encourages all organizations to treat accessibility as an ongoing responsibility rather than a one-time check. Automated testing can help identify where issues exist, but meaningful improvement comes from combining automated checks with manual testing, user feedback, and accessibility-aware design and development practices.

You can check your website's accessibility score using our free tool here.

Disclaimer: These findings are based on automated testing using AChecker's Free Web Accessibility Checker. No single tool can detect all accessibility barriers. A comprehensive evaluation should include multiple automated tools, manual expert review, assistive technology testing, and testing by people with disabilities. Results should be viewed as indicators of potential issues, not a definitive compliance assessment.