Alberta
Alberta backs Saskatchewan in court battle defending parental consent for ‘pronoun changes’
From LifeSiteNews
‘Saskatchewan and Alberta agree that the key figures in children’s lives are their parents, and our provinces are both committed to supporting families and children so that they can work through unique needs together,’ the provinces wrote in a joint letter in defense of parental rights.
Alberta has announced its support of Saskatchewan’s policy requiring parental consent for children to go by different pronouns at school amid a lawsuit against the policy by an LGBT activist group.
On April 9, Alberta Minister of Justice and Attorney General Mickey Amery and Saskatchewan Minister of Justice and Attorney General Bronwyn Eyre revealed that Alberta will intervene in Saskatchewan’s Parents’ Bill of Rights case challenging their new pro-family laws.
“Saskatchewan and Alberta agree that the key figures in children’s lives are their parents, and our provinces are both committed to supporting families and children so that they can work through unique needs together,” the joint statement read.
“Notifying parents and requiring their consent before a child’s name or pronouns can be changed in schools, and before classroom discussions about gender identity and other sensitive subjects occur, ensures that the parent-child relationship is respected and paramount,” it continued.
The pronoun policy is just one part of Saskatchewan’s new “Parental Inclusion and Consent Policies,” which also include provisions that ensure parents are allowed to opt their kids out of sex-ed, and that third-party presentations from groups such as Planned Parenthood will be prohibited from taking place.
After the policies were put forth, LGBT activist group UR Pride Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity at the University of Regina, represented by Egale Canada, filed a lawsuit to reverse the pro-family laws.
While a judge has ruled in favor of the LGBT group, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe announced in response that he will invoke his government’s notwithstanding clause to protect the legislation from the courts.
The notwithstanding clause, embedded in section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, allows provinces to temporarily override sections of the Charter to protect new laws from being scrapped while higher courts make a determination on the constitutionality of the law.
The case is set to be heard in the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. During the case, Saskatchewan will now be supported by Alberta, which has committed to intervene in the appeal.
“Alberta will seek to advance legal arguments that Saskatchewan’s use of section 33 of the Charter (the Parliamentary Supremacy Clause) should have prevented Saskatchewan’s Court of King’s Bench from reviewing the constitutionality of the Education (Parent’s Bill of Rights) Amendment Act, 2023 legislation,” the province promised.
“This case has the potential to impact not only parental rights across Canada, but also the application of the Parliamentary Supremacy Clause, which has been an integral piece of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Constitution of Canada since 1982,” it declared.
Similar to Saskatchewan, Alberta recently introduced its much-anticipated pro-family legislation protecting children and parental rights from the worst results of transgender ideology, including banning doctors from medically ‘transitioning’ children, requiring parental consent for pronoun changes in school, and barring men claiming to be women from women’s sports.
Recent surveys have shown that Moe is acting in the interest of Saskatchewan parents by introducing legislation protecting school children from LGBT propaganda.
According to an August 2023 survey, 86 percent of Saskatchewan participants advocated for parental rights, supporting the province’s new approach to the LGBT agenda in schools.
Furthermore, over 40,000 Canadians have pledged their support for Saskatchewan’s fight for parental rights in the classroom, also calling on all other provinces to follow suit.
Additionally, a Saskatchewan teacher wishing to remain anonymous previously told LifeSiteNews that she feels guilty about keeping secrets from parents and supports the decision to keep parents informed.
“I fear that we are not supporting students or parents when we keep secrets,” she explained. “We have many students using alternate names, which sometimes changes frequently during the year, and then are asked by parents if we were aware of the changes after the fact. I feel responsible for keeping the secret and I don’t think it’s fair. I think schools are already taking on too many ‘parent roles’ and it’s important that parents play the ‘parent role’ not teachers!”
From LifeSiteNews
“If the federal government refuses to abide by the constitution, we will take them to court again to defend our jurisdiction and the thousands of Albertans who work in the petrochemical sector”
Alberta has rejected the Liberal government’s “unconstitutional” federal plastics registry and production limit.
In an April 25 press release, Alberta’s Environment Minister Rebecca Schulz promised to take Liberal Minister of Environment and Climate Change Steven Guilbeault to court over his proposal to create a plastics registry, mandating companies to report their plastic production and implementation.
“If the federal government refuses to abide by the constitution, we will take them to court again to defend our jurisdiction and the thousands of Albertans who work in the petrochemical sector,” Schulz declared.
“This unilateral announcement is a slap in the face to Alberta and our province’s petrochemical industry, and the thousands of Albertans who work in it,” she continued.
Guilbeault’s plan, set to be implemented in September 2025, would mandate that businesses record how much plastic they place on the market in addition to the amount of plastic waste generated on their commercial, industrial, and institutional premises.
Companies would then report that amount to the federal government. The plan exempts small businesses which produce less than one tonne of plastic each year.
However, Schulz explained that the registry would negatively affect Alberta, as “plastics production is a growing part of Alberta’s economy, and we are positioned to lead the world for decades to come in the production of carbon neutral plastics.”
“Minister Guilbeault’s proposal would throw all of that into jeopardy and risk billions of dollars in investments. This includes projects like Dow Chemical’s net-zero petrochemical plant in Fort Saskatchewan, a $9-billion project that will create thousands of jobs,” she warned.
Schulz further pointed out that the mandate will not reduce plastic production since countries such as China will produce more plastic to make up for Canada.
“If the federal government limits plastic production in Canada, other countries like China will just produce more. The only outcome that this federal government will achieve will be fewer jobs in Canada,” she explained.
Schulz’s statement comes after the November decision by the Federal Court to rule in favor of Alberta and Saskatchewan, declaring that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government overstepped its authority by classifying plastic as “toxic” and banning all single-use plastic items, like straws.
Essentially, the ruling overturned Trudeau’s 2022 law which outlawed manufacturing or importing plastic straws, cutlery, and checkout bags on the grounds of government claims that plastic was having a negative effect on the oceans. In reality, most plastic pollution in the oceans comes from a few countries, like India and China, which dump waste directly on beaches or in rivers.
The November ruling was only one of two recent court rulings that have dealt a blow to Trudeau’s environmental laws.
The second ruling came after Canada’s Supreme Court recently sided in favor of provincial autonomy when it comes to natural resources. The Supreme Court recently ruled that Trudeau’s law C-69, dubbed the “no-more pipelines” bill, is “mostly unconstitutional.” This was a huge win for Alberta and Saskatchewan, which challenged the law in court. The decision returned authority over the pipelines to provincial governments, meaning oil and gas projects headed up by the provinces should be allowed to proceed without federal intrusion.
The Trudeau government, however, seems insistent on defying the recent rulings by pushing forward with its various regulations.
Company sentenced for workplace fatality
An oilfield equipment supplier will pay $360,000 related to a workplace fatality.
On Feb. 21, 2024 in the Red Deer Court of Justice, Isolation Equipment Services Inc. pleaded guilty to one charge under the Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Code for failing to take measures to eliminate the potential danger of equipment or material that was dislodged or moved. The Crown withdrew 28 other charges under OHS legislation. The company was sentenced on April 24.
The charges stem from an incident on a Red Deer construction site on Jan. 13, 2022. A worker operating an overhead crane was positioning a valve bonnet when the equipment released from the rigging, striking and pinning the worker. The worker sustained fatal injuries.
The company will pay $360,000 in total penalties, including a $1,000 fine. Under a creative sentence, $359,000 will be paid to Energy Safety Canada to develop supervisor and competency programs targeting those who work with new, young and inexperienced workers.
The Occupational Health and Safety Act provides a creative sentence option in which funds that would otherwise be paid as fines are directed to an organization or project to improve or promote workplace health and safety.
Both the company and the Crown have up to 30 days to appeal the conviction or penalties.
Alberta’s OHS laws set basic health and safety rules for workplaces across the province. They provide guidance for employers to help them ensure their workplaces are as healthy and safe as possible while providing rights and protections for workers. Charges under OHS laws may be laid when failing to follow the rules results in a workplace fatality or serious injury.
Quick facts
- Jobs, Economy and Trade does not provide sentence documents. These are available through the Red Deer Court of Justice.
- Victim fine surcharges apply to fines payable to the Crown. The $1,000 fine in this case includes the 20 per cent surcharge. Surcharges are not applied to payments to other entities, in this case Energy Safety Canada, under creative sentences.
- Fatality investigation summaries are posted to alberta.ca/fatality-
investigation-reports 60 to 90 days after court proceedings conclude.
Related information
Japanese study finds ‘significant increases’ in cancer deaths after third mRNA COVID doses
Maxime Bernier warns Canadians of Trudeau’s plan to implement WEF global tax regime
A Coup Without Firing a Shot
WHO Official Admits the Truth About Passports
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoDesperate Liberals move to stop MPs from calling Trudeau ‘corrupt’
-
conflict2 days agoCol. Douglas Macgregor torches Trump over support for bill funding wars in Ukraine and Israel
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy1 day agoThe end of Canada: The shift from democracy to totalitarian behavior in the ‘pandemic era’
-
Energy1 day agoReflections on Earth Day
-
Alberta21 hours agoAlberta rejects unconstitutional cap on plastic production
-
Great Reset2 days agoTerrorists Welcome: Chronic counterterrorism lapses at the border demand investigation
-
Business19 hours agoUN plastics plans are unscientific and unrealistic
-
conflict2 days agoCol. Douglas Macgregor: US is ‘facing disaster’ as it funds overseas wars while bankrupt