Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Alberta

Parent and gender dysphoria groups granted intervenor status in New Brunswick school policy case

Published

6 minute read

News release from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is pleased to announce that two groups, Gender Dysphoria Alliance and Our Duty Canada, have been jointly granted intervenor status in a constitutional challenge to a New Brunswick education policy. The policy requires that parents be notified when their child intends to undergo a gender transition by using a different name and pronouns at school.

On August 17, 2020, the New Brunswick government created Policy 713, which prohibited teachers from informing parents that their child had adopted a new name or pronouns at school (unless the child consented to such disclosure).

On June 8, 2023, the government changed the policy to require that parents of students under 16 years of age be notified by the school before the formal use of a different name or pronoun. “Formal” refers to the use of names and pronouns in the classroom and in school records.

The change to Policy 713 brought a firestorm of criticism and media coverage because it was the first of its kind in Canada to support parental rights on this issue. New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs stated that he believes he has the support of parents in the province on this issue.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) brought a constitutional challenge against the Province of New Brunswick as represented by the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development, on September 6, 2023. The CCLA argues that Policy 713 infringes the students’ rights to freedom of expression, to equality, and to life, liberty and security of the person.

“The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has filed a court challenge against the right of parents to be fully informed about what is happening with their own children at school,” stated John Carpay, President of the Justice Centre.

“The Supreme Court of Canada explained in B.(R.) v. Children’s Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto that the parental interest in bringing up, nurturing and caring for a child, including medical care and moral upbringing, is an individual interest of fundamental importance to our society,” continued John Carpay.

On May 2, 2024, Justice Richard Petrie of the New Brunswick Court of King’s Bench granted intervener status to two groups: Gender Dysphoria Alliance is comprised of transsexual adults who seek to promote an evidence-based approach to gender dysphoria. Our Duty Canada is a peer support network for parents of children struggling with gender dysphoria and transgender ideation. As intervenors, they now have the right to present evidence to the court. The Justice Centre is providing for the legal representation of both groups, which seek to uphold the constitutionality of the amended Policy 713.

Prior to granting intervenor status, on March 5, 2024, Justice Petrie ordered that any proposed intervenors file the evidence they intend to present.

Gender Dysphoria Alliance and Our Duty Canada submitted the following testimonies as evidence:

  • The written testimony of a New Brunswick mother whose child underwent a social transition in school, about which she was not informed;
  • The written testimony of a young woman from Alberta who began to adopt new pronouns at school without her parents’ knowledge; she ultimately reversed course (detransitioned) after her parents became aware of her situation and were able to assist her;
  • The written testimony of the young woman’s father.

Karin Litzcke of Our Duty Canada says, “[Our] members are pleased to have an opportunity to contribute to the development of jurisprudence in this area. What has happened to us could happen to any parents under policies that promote secrecy from families. We are grateful to the Justice Centre for its assistance in advocating for the interests of children and parents in court.”

Speaking on behalf of Gender Dysphoria Alliance, Aaron Kimberly says, “The Gender Dysphoria Alliance is pleased with the decision to grant us intervention status in this case. We believe New Brunswick’s policy is an important safeguarding measure for children experiencing gender incongruence, since we know that most kids with this experience turn out to be gay or lesbian, not trans. Prematurely labelling kids “trans” and socially transitioning them is a psychosocial intervention that risks putting pre-gay kids onto an unnecessary medical pathway.”

Hatim Kheir, lawyer for both groups, says, “The Supreme Court has affirmed that parents in Canada have the right to guide the moral upbringing of their children. This case provides an opportunity for the Court to apply those rights to issues surrounding gender which are becoming increasingly relevant in our society.”

Alberta

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith Discusses Moving Energy Forward at the Global Energy Show in Calgary

Published on

From Energy Now

At the energy conference in Calgary, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith pressed the case for building infrastructure to move provincial products to international markets, via a transportation and energy corridor to British Columbia.

“The anchor tenant for this corridor must be a 42-inch pipeline, moving one million incremental barrels of oil to those global markets. And we can’t stop there,” she told the audience.

The premier reiterated her support for new pipelines north to Grays Bay in Nunavut, east to Churchill, Man., and potentially a new version of Energy East.

The discussion comes as Prime Minister Mark Carney and his government are assembling a list of major projects of national interest to fast-track for approval.

Carney has also pledged to establish a major project review office that would issue decisions within two years, instead of five.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Punishing Alberta Oil Production: The Divisive Effect of Policies For Carney’s “Decarbonized Oil”

Published on

From Energy Now

By Ron Wallace

The federal government has doubled down on its commitment to “responsibly produced oil and gas”. These terms are apparently carefully crafted to maintain federal policies for Net Zero. These policies include a Canadian emissions cap, tanker bans and a clean electricity mandate.

Following meetings in Saskatoon in early June between Prime Minister Mark Carney and Canadian provincial and territorial leaders, the federal government expressed renewed interest in the completion of new oil pipelines to reduce reliance on oil exports to the USA while providing better access to foreign markets.  However Carney, while suggesting that there is “real potential” for such projects nonetheless qualified that support as being limited to projects that would “decarbonize” Canadian oil, apparently those that would employ carbon capture technologies.  While the meeting did not result in a final list of potential projects, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said that this approach would constitute a “grand bargain” whereby new pipelines to increase oil exports could help fund decarbonization efforts. But is that true and what are the implications for the Albertan and Canadian economies?


Get the Latest Canadian Focused Energy News Delivered to You! It’s FREE: Quick Sign-Up Here


The federal government has doubled down on its commitment to “responsibly produced oil and gas”. These terms are apparently carefully crafted to maintain federal policies for Net Zero. These policies include a Canadian emissions cap, tanker bans and a clean electricity mandate. Many would consider that Canadians, especially Albertans, should be wary of these largely undefined announcements in which Ottawa proposes solely to determine projects that are “in the national interest.”

The federal government has tabled legislation designed to address these challenges with Bill C-5: An Act to enact the Free Trade and Labour Mobility Act and the Building Canada Act (the One Canadian Economy Act).  Rather than replacing controversial, and challenged, legislation like the Impact Assessment Act, the Carney government proposes to add more legislation designed to accelerate and streamline regulatory approvals for energy and infrastructure projects. However, only those projects that Ottawa designates as being in the national interest would be approved. While clearer, shorter regulatory timelines and the restoration of the Major Projects Office are also proposed, Bill C-5 is to be superimposed over a crippling regulatory base.

It remains to be seen if this attempt will restore a much-diminished Canadian Can-Do spirit for economic development by encouraging much-needed, indeed essential interprovincial teamwork across shared jurisdictions.  While the Act’s proposed single approval process could provide for expedited review timelines, a complex web of regulatory processes will remain in place requiring much enhanced interagency and interprovincial coordination. Given Canada’s much-diminished record for regulatory and policy clarity will this legislation be enough to persuade the corporate and international capital community to consider Canada as a prime investment destination?

As with all complex matters the devil always lurks in the details. Notably, these federal initiatives arrive at a time when the Carney government is facing ever-more pressing geopolitical, energy security and economic concerns.  The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development predicts that Canada’s economy will grow by a dismal one per cent in 2025 and 1.1 per cent in 2026 – this at a time when the global economy is predicted to grow by 2.9 per cent.

It should come as no surprise that Carney’s recent musing about the “real potential” for decarbonized oil pipelines have sparked debate. The undefined term “decarbonized”, is clearly aimed directly at western Canadian oil production as part of Ottawa’s broader strategy to achieve national emissions commitments using costly carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects whose economic viability at scale has been questioned. What might this mean for western Canadian oil producers?

The Alberta Oil sands presently account for about 58% of Canada’s total oil output. Data from December 2023 show Alberta producing a record 4.53 million barrels per day (MMb/d) as major oil export pipelines including Trans Mountain, Keystone and the Enbridge Mainline operate at high levels of capacity.  Meanwhile, in 2023 eastern Canada imported on average about 490,000 barrels of crude oil per day (bpd) at a cost estimated at CAD $19.5 billion.  These seaborne shipments to major refineries (like New Brunswick’s Irving Refinery in Saint John) rely on imported oil by tanker with crude oil deliveries to New Brunswick averaging around 263,000 barrels per day.  In 2023 the estimated total cost to Canada for imported crude oil was $19.5 billion with oil imports arriving from the United States (72.4%), Nigeria (12.9%), and Saudi Arabia (10.7%).  Since 1988, marine terminals along the St. Lawrence have seen imports of foreign oil valued at more than $228 billion while the Irving Oil refinery imported $136 billion from 1988 to 2020.

What are the policy and cost implication of Carney’s call for the “decarbonization” of western Canadian produced, oil?  It implies that western Canadian “decarbonized” oil would have to be produced and transported to competitive world markets under a material regulatory and financial burden.  Meanwhile, eastern Canadian refiners would be allowed to import oil from the USA and offshore jurisdictions free from any comparable regulatory burdens. This policy would penalize, and makes less competitive, Canadian producers while rewarding offshore sources. A federal regulatory requirement to decarbonize western Canadian crude oil production without imposing similar restrictions on imported oil would render the One Canadian Economy Act moot and create two market realities in Canada – one that favours imports and that discourages, or at very least threatens the competitiveness of, Canadian oil export production.


Ron Wallace is a former Member of the National Energy Board.

Continue Reading

Trending

X