What is the test for establishing a material change of circumstances in a parenting judgment?

When one compares the detailed terms of the parenting judgment and the evidence of the petitioner and apply them to the three requirements as set out in Gordon v. Goertz, supra, I am satisfied that the petitioner has not established a material change of circumstances. The parties, to their credit, have worked hard at co-parenting the children. The petitioner’s wish is to eliminate the respondent’s veto. However, paragraph 2 of the judgment details a process of consultation by the respondent on issues of parenting concerning the health and education of the children. It does provide that the respondent shall have the final decision with “due consideration to the petitioner’s opinion”. It is obvious from the petitioner’s evidence that the respondent is following the terms of paragraph 2 with consultation and that the current arrangement has worked well in the interest of the twins.