Education
Teacher refuses to give up fight for free speech after being canceled for objecting to LGBT books
From LifeSiteNews
Ontario’s Divisional Court dismissed Carolyn Burjoski’s application for a judicial review of the January 2022 decision by school trustees to kick her off the board, but she will appeal the decision.
A now-retired Canadian teacher who was silenced for voicing concerns over LGBT books in school libraries vowed to continue to fight for her right to free speech after she was muzzled by her board.
Last year, longtime Waterloo Regional District School Board (WRDSB) teacher Carolyn Burjoski was stopped mid-presentation by then-board chairman Scott Piatkowski at a Board of Trustees meeting on January 17, 2022, because she was criticizing LGBT books in school libraries.
Piatkowski went as far as to expel Burjoski from the meeting. The next day she was made to work from home and told to keep her mouth shut under the threat of losing her retirement benefits. Piatkowski then told legacy media that Burjoski was “transphobic” and was using “hate speech” in the board meeting. Of note is that Piatkowski is a longtime supporter of the socialist NDP party.
Burjoski’s fight for justice began after she was removed from the board meeting because she exposed the dangers of LGBT books in school libraries. According to court documents, during her presentation, Burjoski revealed that some of the books made it “seem simple or even cool to take puberty blockers and opposite sex hormones.”
“I was ejected from a Board of Trustees meeting for criticizing the age appropriateness of sexual content in children’s books in elementary school libraries,” she said.
In May 2022, Burjoski filed a $1.7 million defamation suit against the WRDSB and Piatkowski that remains before the courts.
In June 2022, Burjoski applied for a judicial review of Piatkowski’s decision to suddenly stop her presentation, claiming it violated Ontario’s Human Rights code.
On November 29, three judges with Ontario’s Divisional Court dismissed Burjoski’s application for a judicial review of the January 2022 decision by her trustees to kick her off the board.
School board showed ‘display of authoritarian speech suppression in a public forum,’ says canceled teacher
Burjoski, in an update to social media last Thursday, said she would fight the dismissal of the judicial review with an appeal.
“I was silenced and removed for voicing my concerns about age-inappropriate content in some elementary school books. My respectful presentation was cut short by the chair who wrongly accused me of violating the Human Rights Code,” Burjoski said.
“This was not just a violation of my right to free expression, but a stark display of authoritarian speech suppression in a public forum where diverse viewpoints should be welcomed and discussed.”
Burjoski said that her judicial review being dismissed “is deeply concerning” and could set a “troubling precedent for free expression in Canada, empowering school boards and other public bodies to silence and censure every voice they disagree with.”
“So today, I am escalating this matter to the Ontario Court of Appeal by filing a notice of motion for leave to appeal. This is not just about a school board meeting. It’s about the integrity of open dialog on important issues in our educational system and other public forums.”
Burjoski noted how a true democracy “thrives on diverse opinions and the freedom to express them.”
“It’s vital that our judicial system protect our charter rights against administrative overreach that stifles our free speech,” she noted.
“I am fully committed to this cause and am deeply grateful to the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms for sponsoring this appeal pro bono.”
She encouraged “everyone” to support JCCF financially in its “relentless work to safeguard Canadian freedoms.”
Burjoski suffered a breakdown from the entire ordeal, which was so bad that she had to be taken to the hospital by ambulance. She said she is “still in recovery from this trauma.”
She has documented her ordeal on her website cancelledteacher.com.
Yesterday, LifeSiteNews reported that the WRDSB recently decided to get rid of the word “parent” on a slew of official documents and replace it with “caregiver” or “family.” Not all WRDSB members were on board with the change, however.
Better data, better outcomes for Alberta students |
To help schools address classroom complexity, Alberta’s government will begin collecting annual data on class size and composition.
Over the past three years, Alberta has welcomed more than 80,000 new students. With this unprecedented growth, classroom complexity and class sizes are among the biggest issues facing schools and teachers across the province.
To meet this challenge head on, Alberta’s government will work with school boards to gather yearly data on class sizes and composition. This information will be used to better understand staffing, student needs and classroom complexity. School boards will be required to submit data on Alberta classrooms by Nov. 24, and by January, this data will be made publicly available and will then be released annually.
Data collected on classroom complexity will help the province understand and address issues in schools, including class sizes, and support strategic investments in classrooms. Over the next three years, school boards will be provided with funding to hire 3,000 teachers and 1,500 new education assistants to support students with complex needs.
“We are ready to work with school boards and teachers to address classroom complexity and class sizes. We have heard them loud and clear and we are taking bold action to address these issues.”
Alberta’s government is establishing a Class Size and Complexity Task Force to begin work immediately on identifying solutions to the challenges facing Alberta classrooms. Alongside new annual data collection, the task force will ensure every student gets the attention and support they need to succeed. Details about the task force will be shared in the coming weeks.
“This data will provide essential insight into classroom realities, guiding evidence-based decisions and advocating for sustainable funding to address complexity, ensuring every student and educator in Alberta has the support to thrive.”
Quick facts
To inform decisions on addressing classroom complexity, data will be collected on total numbers of:
- all staff, per school, including roles
- substitute teachers
- district staff, listed by job title
- students, per classroom, per school
- severe, mild/moderate, and gifted/talented students, per classroom, per school
- English as an additional language (EAL) students, per classroom, per school
- refugee students, per classroom, per school
- First Nations, Métis and Inuit students, per classroom, per school
- Individualized Program Plans, per classroom, per school
- students waitlisted for assessment, per classroom, per school
- incidents of aggression and violence
- $55 million was provided in Budget 2025 to address classroom complexity.
- 8.6 billion is being invested to build and renovate more than 130 schools across the province.
- Budget 2025 is investing $1.6 billion in learning support funding to help meet students’ specialized learning needs.
- Budget 2025 is investing $1.1 billion to hire more than 4,000 teachers and educational staff.
Alberta
How one major media torqued its coverage – in the take no prisoners words of a former Alberta premier
(Editor’s note: I was going to write on the media’s handling of the Alberta government’s decision to order striking teachers back to work and invoke Section 33 of the Charter in doing so. But former Alberta premier Jason Kenney provided such a fulsome dissection of an absence of balance and its consequences in terms of public trust on X that I asked him if The Rewrite could publish it. He said yes and here it is – Peter Menzies.)
By Jason Kenney
This
”story” is an object lesson for why trust in legacy media has plummeted, and alt right media audiences have grown.
Here CTV “digital news producer” @AngeMAmato (she/her) writes a story about “experts” calling the use of Sec. 33 “a threat to democracy.”
Who are the experts?
A left wing academic, and a left wing activist. The latter, Howard Sapers, is a former Liberal MLA (which the article does not mention) for a party that is so marginal, it has not elected an MLA in over a decade.
For good measure CTV goes on to quote two left wing union bosses, who of course are predictably outraged.
A more accurate headline would be “Four people on the left angry about use of Notwithstanding Clause.” Which is the opposite of news. It’s the ultimate “Dog Bites Man” non-story.
Did the CTV producer make any effort to post a balanced story by asking for comment from academics / lawyers / think tanks who support use of Sec. 33? Did she call the @CDNConstFound or the @MLInstitute’s Judicial Power Project? Did she attempt to reach any of these four scholars, who just published their views in a @nationalpost op-ed last week?
Did she have an editor who asked why her story lacked any attempt at balance?
And did anyone at CTV pause for a moment to ponder how tendentious it is to accuse a democratically elected legislature of acting “undemocratically” by invoking a power whose entire purpose is to ensure democratic accountability?
She provides some historical context about prior use of Sec. 33. Why does that context not include the fact that most democratically elected provincial governments (including Alberta under Premier Lougheed, and Saskatchewan under NDP Premier Blakeney) agreed to adopt the Charter *only if* it included the Notwithstanding Clause to allow democratically elected Legislatures to ensure a democratic check and balance against the abuse of undemocratic, unaccountable judicial power?
Why does she not mention that for the first 33 years of the Charter era, the Canadian Courts ruled that there was no constitutionally protected right to strike?
Why doesn’t she quote an expert pointing out that Allan Blakeney defended the Saskatchewan Legislature’s 1986 use of Sec. 33 to end a strike as “a legitimate use of the Clause?” Or refer to Peter Lougheed’s 1987 commitment to use Sec. 33 if the courts invented a right to strike?
Many thoughtful criticisms can be levelled against Section 33. Being undemocratic is not one of them.
So why do we see so much agitprop like this masquerading as news from so many legacy media outlets?
IMO, there are two possible answers:
1) They are blind to their own biases; and / or
2) People like @AngeMAmato believe that they have a moral imperative to be “progressive journalists” which trumps the boringly old fashioned professional imperative to be objective and balanced.
Whatever the reason, “journalists” like this have no one to blame but themselves for growing distrust of legacy media, and the consequent emergence of non traditional media platforms.
 |
|
Invite your friends and earn rewards
Canadian MPs order ethics investigation into Mark Carney’s corporate interests
Canada Seizes 4,300 Litres of Chinese Drug Precursors Amid Trump’s Tariff Pressure Over Fentanyl Flows
Biden’s Autopen Orders declared “null and void”
Nobel Prize nods to Alberta innovation in carbon capture
-
Business1 day agoBank of Canada governor warns citizens to anticipate lower standard of living
-
Business2 days ago
Canada’s economic performance cratered after Ottawa pivoted to the ‘green’ economy
-
International1 day agoSagrada Familia Basilica in Barcelona is now tallest church in the world
-
Agriculture1 day agoCloned foods are coming to a grocer near you
-
Business2 days agoCanadians paid $90 billion in government debt interest in 2024/25
-
Fraser Institute1 day agoOttawa continues to infringe in areas of provincial jurisdiction
-
Alberta1 day agoGondek’s exit as mayor marks a turning point for Calgary
-
International1 day agoUS Reportedly Weighing Military Strikes On Narco Targets Inside Venezuela