COVID-19
Fraud and Abuse Denied EI Claims for the Unvaccinated
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Lee Harding
Should Canadians who lost their jobs over vaccine mandates have been denied Employment Insurance? Certified financial examiner Lex Acker says no, and that $12.9 billion of EI should have been paid out.
Acker presented his findings June 2 in Regina at the National Citizens Inquiry on COVID-19. His wife, a Nanaimo, BC nurse not named in his testimony, lost her job due to non-compliance with vaccine mandates.
Late in 2021, federal Employment Minister Carla Qualtrough announced that unvaccinated employees would be denied Employment Insurance (EI), but Acker’s wife applied just the same.
According to Acker, a subsequent appeal included a reference to a Supreme Court ruling in which medical coercion was found to equate to assault. An EI agent admitted to Acker that the appeal “got everyone’s attention” at the federal agency but was denied anyway.
Acker applied for all documentation related to the decision and received 1200 pages. Included was a 12-page document entitled BE Memo 2021-10, which directed EI agents on how to administer claims for the unvaccinated.
“The memorandum is not linked to any legislative or regulatory amendments,” the memo explained.
Given the minister’s announcement all such cases would be denied, the memo seems little more than pretense, despite its apparent departure from normal practice.
The memo mandated three requirements to establish a finding of misconduct for an applicant.
- “The employer has adopted and communicated a clear mandatory vaccination policy to all affected employees;”
- “The employees are aware that the failure to comply with the policy would cause a loss of employment;”
- “The application of the policy to the employee is reasonable within the workplace context.”
According to the response to Acker’s wife, which Acker included in a sworn affadavit, the EI agent on the case asked the Vancouver Island Health Authority for the appropriate documentation. The Ei agent noted such documentation was never received, yet denied the claim with the words, “Misconduct proven.”
The EI memo explicitly stated that claimants could still bring Charter arguments forward. Then again, the memo also validated an “employer’s professional expectations,” an apparent veiled reference to vaccination. The memo explained that it was not enough for applicants to say they suffered “discrimination.” Instead, ”the client must be able to demonstrate how they were discriminated against and on what grounds.”
It’s not clear how that would happen if the minister directed all applications to be refused.
Remarkably, the EI agent in Acker’s case acknowledged stated arguments against the safety and efficacy of the vaccines, but said assessing such judgments was beyond the scope of an EI agent, as were “Charter Rights violation arguments.” The agent told Acker to turn to “the Courts, Human Rights Commission, Labour Standards” instead.
The memo said that claimants citing a religious exemption had to show “a clear link” with proof “that the client’s religion is preventing them from being vaccinated” but not use a Bible or Qu’ran.
“[T]he interpretation of sacred texts by the client themselves must not be seen as a particular practice required by their faith,” the memo explained.
The employer also had wide discretion on what medical exemptions to accept.
“In some cases, the employer can refuse to accept a medical certificate because it does not meet the conditions of the employer’s mandatory vaccination policy,” the memo explained.
“However, the client could have another credible medical reason, such as a mental illness or other condition justifying their refusal.”
If the suggestion mental illness could have contributed to vaccine refusals isn’t biased, then what is?
On Substack, Acker estimated a 9.7% termination rate from positions in B.C. Health, based on vacant positions. His analysis of employer pension contributions suggested similar termination rates of 8.6% to 11.5%.
Acker extrapolated these vaccination and employment rates, and the average EI payout of $26,000, to estimate that unvaccinated Canadians forfeited $12.9 billion in EI claims.
A lay perusal of the criminal code by the analyst suggested potential avenues for litigation, such as fraud, breach of trust by a public officer, and disobeying a statute. Tort for misfeasance in public office might also be a civil remedy.
Acker said the EI rejections were due to systemic fraud and abuse, and he has made a good case. Canadians bemoaning the failed government response to the pandemic have yet another reason to demand accountability.
Lee Harding is a Research Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
From LifeSiteNews
A judge ruled that the Ontario Court of Justice is already ‘satisfied’ with Chris Barber’s sentence and taking away his very livelihood would be ‘disproportionate.’
A Canadian judge has dismissed a demand from Canadian government lawyers to seize Freedom Convoy leader Chris Barber’s “Big Red” semi-truck.
On Friday, Ontario Court of Justice Judge Heather Perkins-McVey denied the Crown’s application seeking to forfeit Barber’s truck.
She ruled that the court is already “satisfied” with Barber’s sentence and taking away his very livelihood would be “disproportionate.”
“This truck is my livelihood,” said Barber in a press release sent to LifeSiteNews.
“Trying to permanently seize it for peacefully protesting was wrong, and I’m relieved the court refused to allow that to happen,” he added.
Criminal defense lawyer Marwa Racha Younes was welcoming of the ruling as well, stating, “We find it was the right decision in the circumstances and are happy with the outcome.”
John Carpay, president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), said the decision is “good news for all Canadians who cherish their Charter freedom to assemble peacefully.”
READ: Freedom Convoy protester appeals after judge dismissed challenge to frozen bank accounts
“Asset forfeiture is an extraordinary power, and it must not be used to punish Canadians for participating in peaceful protest,” he added in the press release.
As reported recently by LifeSiteNews, the Canadian government claimed that Barber’s truck is an “offence-related property” relating to his involvement in the 2022 protests against Canada’s COVID mandates.
At this time, the court ruling ends any forfeiture proceedings for the time being, however Barber will continue to try and appeal his criminal conviction and house arrest sentence.
Barber’s truck, a 2004 Kenworth long-haul he uses for business, was a focal point in the 2022 protests. He drove it to Ottawa, where it was parked for an extended period of time, but he complied when officials asked him to move it.
On October 7, 2025, after a long trial, Ontario Court Justice Perkins-McVey sentenced Barber and Tamara Lich, the other Freedom Convoy leader, to 18 months’ house arrest. They had been declared guilty of mischief for their roles as leaders of the 2022 protest against COVID mandates, and as social media influencers.
Lich and Barber have filed appeals of their own against their house arrest sentences, arguing that the trial judge did not correctly apply the law on their mischief charges.
Government lawyers for the Crown have filed an appeal of the acquittals of Lich and Barber on intimidation charges.
The pair’s convictions came after a nearly two-year trial despite the nonviolent nature of the popular movement.
From LifeSiteNews
Protestor Evan Blackman’s legal team argues Trudeau’s Emergencies Act-based bank account freezes were punitive state action tied directly to protest participation.
A Freedom Convoy protester whose bank accounts were frozen by the Canadian government says a judge erred after his ruling did not consider the fact that the funds were frozen under the Emergencies Act, as grounds for a stay of proceedings.
In a press release sent out earlier this week, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) said that Freedom Convoy protestor Evan Blackman will challenge a court ruling in his criminal case via an appeal with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
“This case raises serious questions about how peaceful protest is treated in Canada and about the lasting consequences of the federal government’s unlawful use of the Emergencies Act,” noted constitutional lawyer Chris Fleury. “The freezing of protestors’ bank accounts was part of a coordinated effort to suppress dissent, and courts ought to be willing to scrutinize that conduct.”
Blackman was arrested on February 18, 2022, during the police crackdown on Freedom Convoy protests against COVID restrictions, which was authorized by the Emergencies Act (EA). The EA was put in place by former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government, which claimed the protests were violent, despite no evidence that this was the case.
Blackman’s three bank accounts with TD Bank were frozen due to his participation in the Freedom Convoy, following a directive ordered by Trudeau.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, in November of this year, Blackman was convicted at his retrial even though he had been acquitted at his original trial. In 2023, Blackman’s “mischief” and “obstructing police” charges were dismissed by a judge due to lack of evidence and the “poor memory of a cop regarding key details of the alleged criminal offences.”
His retrial resulted in Blackman getting a conditional discharge along with 12 months’ probation and 122 hours of community service, along with a $200 victim fine surcharge.
After this, Blackman’s application for a stay of proceedings was dismissed by the court. He had hoped to have his stay of proceedings, under section 24(1) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, allowed. However, the judge ruled that the freezing of his bank accounts was legally not related to his arrest, and because of this, the stay of proceedings lacked standing.
The JCCF disagreed with this ruling, noting, it “stands in contrast to a Federal Court decision finding that the government’s invocation of the Emergencies Act was unreasonable and violated Canadians’ Charter rights, including those targeted by the financial measures used against Freedom Convoy protestors.”
As of press time, a hearing date has not been scheduled.
In 2024, Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley ruled that Trudeau was “not justified” in invoking the Emergencies Act.
In early 2022, the Freedom Convoy saw thousands of Canadians from coast to coast come to Ottawa to demand an end to COVID mandates in all forms. Despite the peaceful nature of the protest, Trudeau’s federal government enacted the EA in mid-February.
After the protesters were cleared out, which was achieved through the freezing of bank accounts of those involved without a court order as well as the physical removal and arrest of demonstrators, Trudeau revoked the EA on February 23, 2022.
Argentina’s Milei delivers results free-market critics said wouldn’t work
‘Almost Sounds Made Up’: Jeffrey Epstein Was Bill Clinton Plus-One At Moroccan King’s Wedding, Per Report
Saskatchewan woman approved for euthanasia urged to seek medical help in Canada rather than US
Danielle Smith slams Skate Canada for stopping events in Alberta over ban on men in women’s sports
-
Business1 day ago
Argentina’s Milei delivers results free-market critics said wouldn’t work
-
Business2 days agoState of the Canadian Economy: Number of publicly listed companies in Canada down 32.7% since 2010
-
espionage18 hours agoCarney Floor Crossing Raises Counterintelligence Questions aimed at China, Former Senior Mountie Argues
-
International2 days agoDOJ fails to fully comply with Friday deadline for Epstein files release
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days agoHunting Poilievre Covers For Upcoming Demographic Collapse After Boomers
-
Business12 hours agoTaxing food is like slapping a surcharge on hunger. It needs to end
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta’s new diagnostic policy appears to meet standard for Canada Health Act compliance
-
Business1 day agoDeadlocked Jury Zeroes In on Alleged US$40 Million PPE Fraud in Linda Sun PRC Influence Case