Alberta
Child and Youth Advocate says Pepper Spray is used far too often in Alberta Young Offender Centres

From the office of Alberta’s Child and Youth Advocate
Child and Youth Advocate releases special report on OC spray and segregation in Alberta’s young offender centres
Alberta’s Child and Youth Advocate has completed a special report on oleoresin capsicum spray (OC spray, commonly referred to as pepper spray) and segregation in young offender centres.
The Advocate is making four recommendations related to reducing the use of OC spray and segregation as well as increasing accountability measures.
“Young people in custody often have complex needs and may present with difficult and challenging behaviours,” said Del Graff, Child and Youth Advocate. “It is imperative that the Young Offender Branch explores approaches to improve the health and well-being of young people while ensuring a safe environment for everyone. I sincerely hope the recommendations from this report will be quickly acted on to improve the circumstances for youth in custody.”
From January to March 2019, the OCYA received input from over 100 stakeholders through community conversations and one-to-one interviews. Young people, youth justice stakeholders, and community stakeholders shared their perspectives and experiences.
The purpose of this report is to provide advice to government related to improving the safety and well-being of young people in custody.
A copy of the report: “Care in Custody: A Special Report on OC Spray and Segregation in Alberta’s Young Offender Centres” is available on our website:
http://www.ocya.alberta.ca/adult/publications/ocya-reports/
The Child and Youth Advocate has the authority under the Child and Youth Advocate Act to complete special reports on issues impacting children and youth who are receiving designated government services. This is the Advocate’s fourth special report.
The Office of the Child and Youth Advocate is an independent office of the Legislature, representing the rights, interests and viewpoints of children and young people receiving designated government services.
Executive Summary
In 2016, the Young Offender Branch, Ministry of Justice and Solicitor General, changed its policy, making it easier for correctional peace officers to use OC spray on incarcerated young people. Since then, the use of OC spray in youth justice facilities has steadily increased. By inflicting pain to control behaviour, the use of OC spray can damage relationships with youth justice staff, undermine rehabilitation efforts, and further traumatize young people.
The use of segregation in young offender centres is also a concern, as it can result in physical, psychological, and developmental harm to young people. Segregation is occurring without sufficient guidelines and safeguards to protect the well-being of young people. The current use of segregation undermines the Youth Criminal Justice Act’s (YCJA) principle of rehabilitation and reintegration. If segregation must occur for safety reasons, it should be short-term and must include meaningful interactions, mental health supports, and programming.
Further, complaints and review processes at young offender centres must be transparent and strengthened so that young people can challenge decisions without facing repercussions. They have the right to be supported through those processes by a person such as an advocate. Public reporting will also help ensure accountability and promote fair treatment of young people in custody.
Increased accountability changes behaviour and choices. Under the old policy, when the tactical team had to be called to use OC spray in youth justice facilities, it was only deployed once in approximately four years. Since correctional peace officers have been able to carry and use OC spray, it has been used on young people 60 times in the last three years. In the last four weeks of finalizing this report, OC spray was used 10 times. This example is alarming and highlights the importance and timeliness of this report.
The treatment of young people in custody should uphold their human rights, in alignment with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC).The current use of OC spray and segregation contradict the intention of the UNCRCand other United Nations rules and conventions.1 The Advocate urges the Young Offender Branch to review its policies and practices to ensure they align with the goals of its legislation and support the human rights of the young people they serve.
The Advocate is making the following four recommendations:
- OC spray should only be used in exceptional circumstances, if there is an imminent risk of serious physical harm to a young person or others.
- The Young Offender Branch should review and update their policies and standards to reduce the number of hours a young person can be segregated, ensure that they receive appropriate programming and supports, and improve conditions within segregation.
- The Young Offender Branch should develop an impartial complaints and review process for young people. An impartial multi-disciplinary committee that includes external stakeholders should hear complaints and reviews, and young people should have access to a supportive adult.
- The Young Offender Branch should monitor and publicly report all incidents of OC spray use and segregation annually.
Alberta
Median workers in Alberta could receive 72% more under Alberta Pension Plan compared to Canada Pension Plan

From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill and Joel Emes
Moving from the CPP to a provincial pension plan would generate savings for Albertans in the form of lower contribution rates (which could be used to increase private retirement savings while receiving the same pension benefits as the CPP under the new provincial pension), finds a new study published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.
“Due to Alberta’s comparatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes, and younger population, Albertans would pay a lower contribution rate through a separate provincial pension plan while receiving the same benefits as under the CPP,” said Tegan Hill, director of Alberta policy at the Fraser Institute and co-author of Illustrating the Potential of an Alberta Pension Plan.
Assuming Albertans invested the savings from moving to a provincial pension plan into a private retirement account, and assuming a contribution rate of 5.85 per cent, workers earning the median income in Alberta ($53,061 in 2025) could accrue a stream of retirement payments totalling $454,741 (pre-tax)—a 71.6 per cent increase from their stream of CPP payments ($264,968).
Put differently, under the CPP, a median worker receives a total of $264,968 in retirement income over their life. If an Alberta worker saved the difference between what they pay now into the CPP and what they would pay into a new provincial plan, the income they would receive in retirement increases. If the contribution rate for the new provincial plan was 5.85 per cent—the lower of the available estimates—the increase in retirement income would total $189,773 (or an increase of 71.6 per cent).
If the contribution rate for a new Alberta pension plan was 8.21 per cent—the higher of the available estimates—a median Alberta worker would still receive an additional $64,672 in retirement income over their life, a marked increase of 24.4 per cent compared to the CPP alone.
Put differently, assuming a contribution rate of 8.21 per cent, Albertan workers earning the median income could accrue a stream of retirement payments totaling $329,640 (pre-tax) under a provincial pension plan—a 24.4 per cent increase from their stream of CPP payments.
“While the full costs and benefits of a provincial pension plan must be considered, its clear that Albertans could benefit from higher retirement payments under a provincial pension plan, compared to the CPP,” Hill said.
Illustrating the Potential of an Alberta Pension Plan
- Due to Alberta’s comparatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes, and younger population, Albertans would pay a lower contribution rate with a separate provincial pension plan, compared with the CPP, while receiving the same benefits as under the CPP.
- Put differently, moving from the CPP to a provincial pension plan would generate savings for Albertans, which could be used to increase private retirement income. This essay assesses the potential savings for Albertans of moving to a provincial pension plan. It also estimates an Albertan’s potential increase in total retirement income, if those savings were invested in a private account.
- Depending on the contribution rate used for an Alberta pension plan (APP), ranging from 5.85 to 8.2 percent, an individual earning the CPP’s yearly maximum pensionable earnings ($71,300 in 2025), would accrue a stream of retirement payments under the total APP (APP plus private retirement savings), yielding a total retirement income of between $429,524 and $584,235. This would be 22.9 to 67.1 percent higher, respectively, than their stream of CPP payments ($349,545).
- An individual earning the median income in Alberta ($53,061 in 2025), would accrue a stream of retirement payments under the total APP (APP plus private retirement savings), yielding a total retirement income of between $329,640 and $454,741, which is between 24.4 percent to 71.6 percent higher, respectively, than their stream of CPP payments ($264,968).

Joel Emes
Alberta
Alberta ban on men in women’s sports doesn’t apply to athletes from other provinces

From LifeSiteNews
Alberta’s Fairness and Safety in Sport Act bans transgender males from women’s sports within the province but cannot regulate out-of-province transgender athletes.
Alberta’s ban on gender-confused males competing in women’s sports will not apply to out-of-province athletes.
In an interview posted July 12 by the Canadian Press, Alberta Tourism and Sport Minister Andrew Boitchenko revealed that Alberta does not have the jurisdiction to regulate out-of-province, gender-confused males from competing against female athletes.
“We don’t have authority to regulate athletes from different jurisdictions,” he said in an interview.
Ministry spokeswoman Vanessa Gomez further explained that while Alberta passed legislation to protect women within their province, outside sporting organizations are bound by federal or international guidelines.
As a result, Albertan female athletes will be spared from competing against men during provincial competition but must face male competitors during inter-provincial events.
In December, Alberta passed the Fairness and Safety in Sport Act to prevent biological men who claim to be women from competing in women’s sports. The legislation will take effect on September 1 and will apply to all school boards, universities, as well as provincial sports organizations.
The move comes after studies have repeatedly revealed what almost everyone already knew was true, namely, that males have a considerable advantage over women in athletics.
Indeed, a recent study published in Sports Medicine found that a year of “transgender” hormone drugs results in “very modest changes” in the inherent strength advantages of men.
Additionally, male athletes competing in women’s sports are known to be violent, especially toward female athletes who oppose their dominance in women’s sports.
Last August, Albertan male powerlifter “Anne” Andres was suspended for six months after a slew of death threats and harassments against his female competitors.
In February, Andres ranted about why men should be able to compete in women’s competitions, calling for “the Ontario lifter” who opposes this, apparently referring to powerlifter April Hutchinson, to “die painfully.”
Interestingly, while Andres was suspended for six months for issuing death threats, Hutchinson was suspended for two years after publicly condemning him for stealing victories from women and then mocking his female competitors on social media. Her suspension was later reduced to a year.
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy2 days ago
Canada’s New Border Bill Spies On You, Not The Bad Guys
-
Addictions1 day ago
Why B.C.’s new witnessed dosing guidelines are built to fail
-
Business1 day ago
Carney Liberals quietly award Pfizer, Moderna nearly $400 million for new COVID shot contracts
-
Energy2 days ago
CNN’s Shock Climate Polling Data Reinforces Trump’s Energy Agenda
-
Opinion1 day ago
Charity Campaigns vs. Charity Donations
-
Business1 day ago
Mark Carney’s Fiscal Fantasy Will Bankrupt Canada
-
COVID-191 day ago
Trump DOJ dismisses charges against doctor who issued fake COVID passports
-
Opinion1 day ago
Preston Manning: Three Wise Men from the East, Again