A popular Calgary-based gay talk show host says his show was dropped by the LGBT network OutTV after he voiced support for Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and her recently announced gender and parental rights policies.
Plus, the University of Waterloo has disabled several vending machines on campus after students discovered that the snack dispensers had facial recognition technology installed.
And United States officials have been pressuring the Canadian government to re-impose visas on Mexican citizens after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau did away with the requirement in 2016.
Tune into The Daily Brief with Cosmin Dzsurdzsa and Lindsay Shepherd!
Canada’s first-past-the-post voting system has contributed to 157 years of stable democratic governance in Canada, a track-record few countries can match. Yet calls for “electoral reform” have been increasing, based on the claim that FPTP is fundamentally undemocratic. Because candidates in a constituency need only a plurality rather than an outright majority of votes to win a seat, a party can win a solid majority, form a government and impose its will on the country with only a minority of public support.
Two activist groups, Fair Voting BC and the Springtide Collective for Democracy, argued at the Ontario Superior Court last year that FPTP was unconstitutional, that its failure to provide exact parity in the impact of each individual vote violates Section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. And last month, a group of MPs brought a motion in the House of Commons seeking to re-examine electoral reform. Both the lawsuit and the parliamentary motion were unsuccessful – but the issue is not likely to die.
Opponents of FPTP say a simple, more democratic option is available: proportional representation, or PR. Under PR, the number of seats allocated to a party reflects as closely as possible the percentage of the popular vote it received. As the activists argued before the court, “The adoption of a PR system in Canada would produce governments that represent virtually all voters.”
The problem is that there’s no evidence Canada’s democracy suffers because of FPTP, and plenty to suggest that PR would be worse.
Critics of FPTP often cite the work of the mid-20th century French political scientist Maurice Duverger. In particular, the so-called Duverger’s Law holds that FPTP tends to result in a two-party state, as in the United States, because it pushes people to vote “strategically.” Strategic voting means that people avoid supporting small parties regardless of how closely they align with their own views because such a vote is wasted. A vote for a “big tent” party that’s more likely to win, by contrast, makes a person’s vote “count” for more.
Duverger, like Fair Voting BC and the Springtide Collective, believed the remedy to strategic voting is replacing FPTP with PR. This makes sense at first glance since PR countries, such as Belgium and the Netherlands, do have more parties elected to their legislatures than, say, Canada or the UK. Individuals are voting for both small and large parties, which suggests an absence of strategic voting.
Once you begin to study the voting behaviour of a PR country, however, this theory comes apart. Levels of strategic voting are effectively the same in a PR country as in one with FPTP. This is because PR makes it nearly impossible for a single party to win an outright majority of votes, and so a coalition of several parties is generally required to form government.
Under such a scenario, voters will often abandon their favourite party for one that’s more likely to become part of a multi-party government. And research has shown that the odds of strategic voting are actually elevated in a PR system, given the greater number of parties and the volatility of coalitions. Allocating votes proportionately is thus no more or less democratic than allocation by plurality, at least where strategic voting is concerned.
A related argument – that coalition governments promote compromise among parties and hence foster broad public approval – may sound appealing, but it too fails on closer inspection. Coalition governments actually tend to be less accountable and less predictable than governments elected under FPTP because voters have no control over which parties are included in any coalition, how they sort out their internal differences or which party’s elected members are named to the governing cabinet.
As a result of such messy compromises, a small party can end up with an outsized role. After all, negotiating parties will embrace unpopular ideas if it means forming a government and remaining in office. Germany’s Green Party, for example, last year forced its coalition partners to back environmental legislation opposed by a majority of Germans.
PR can also allow fringe parties to find a way into parliament which, in turn, can give a greater public voice to extremism. It is much easier to win a few seats if they are allocated proportionally across an entire country than if seats must be won individually on a riding-by-riding basis as is the case under FPTP. In this way, small, radical parties can work their way into government once they establish an electoral foothold.
FPTP’s strength lies in its predictability and clarity. Canadians have historically been mainly governed by majority governments. The people know what to expect as the dominant party is free to implement its campaign promises. Once the public become dissatisfied, they can eject the governing party from office decisively, as shown in the 1993 federal election which saw the Progressive Conservatives virtually erased from their comfortable majority of seats to just two MPs. This sort of electoral punishment is impossible with PR as a party that loses representation can continue to participate in the next coalition.
The supposed benefits of PR are illusory. PR would not solve the dilemma of strategic voting and it would mean less accountable government, not more. Canada has thrived for over a century-and-a-half not in spite of its first-past-the-post way of voting – but because of it. The assumptions and rhetoric of “electoral reform” advocates are fundamentally wrong.
A Canadian Arts student from Calgary flies to Vancouver twice a week to attend his classes at the University of British Columbia.
Originally posting his story to Reddit, Tim Chen said that on Tuesday and Thursday, he flies to Vancouver in the morning and returns to Calgary at night.
“I found there’s absolutely saving on rent since I don’t need to pay rent in Calgary (live with my parents) except just casually paying for utilities, and it’s much cheaper than renting a 1b for 2k or more in Vancouver,” Chen wrote in his Reddit post.
Chen saves more than double what he would pay to live in Vancouver while studying at UBC. He spends about $150 per round-trip flight twice a week, equating to $1,200 a month, compared to the $2,700 he would have to pay for rent.
“I thought, why don’t I just stay at Calgary and then just fly here, it’s like a one-hour flight, that’s like the same as taking a bus,” said Chen during an interview with CTV.
The student had previously been renting in Vancouver for years prior to taking a break from school. When he decided to return, he was shocked at the housing prices.
The average asking rent for all types of apartments in Vancouver was $3,059 in 2023, remaining the most expensive city in Canada. However, while rents in Canada increased by 9% between 2022 and 2023, Vancouver prices declined by 0.7%. The decrease followed an increase of more than 20% in 2022.
Over the past two years, asking rents in Canada have increased by a total of 22%.
While average asking rents for all residential properties in Canada ended the year at a record-high of $2,178 in December 2023, Vancouver’s one-bedroom rental price averaged at $2,700, an increase of 4% since 2022.
Despite its high asking prices, places to rent remain extremely difficult to find in Vancouver — which had a 0.9% vacancy rate in October 2023, unchanged from its value the year prior. The country as a whole posted a record-low vacancy rate of 1.5% in 2023.
Chen has three hours of classes a day when he attends university. After his classes, he jumps back on the bus to the airport, a routine he says gives him plenty of time to focus on his schoolwork in the air.
He plans to continue flying to UBC for his two classes until the end of the academic year when he is set to graduate.
The X page Historic Vids shared a shortened clip of Chen’s interview on Wednesday. The video has already accrued over 60 million views despite being up for less than 24 hours.
The top reply to the post has 1.4 million views and almost 50,000 likes.
“When you can fly for cheaper than you can rent, life is upside down,” said one user.
Chick-fil-A is set to tantalize taste buds across Alberta with the announcement of three new restaurants opening this year, the first part of a plan to establish 20 locations in the province by 2030.
Construction on the first Chick-fil-A in the province will begin at West Edmonton Mall in February, which will be up and running by the late summer.
The other two locations planned to open this year will be on Macleod Trail in Calgary and at South Edmonton Common. Construction on these two locations will begin in the spring.
“The new Chick-fil-A locations in Calgary and Edmonton will be the first to open outside Ontario since the first Chick-fil-A restaurant began serving guests at Yonge & Bloor in Toronto in 2019,” said the organization in its press release.
Calgary previously had a location within the YYC International Airport but closed its doors a few years ago.
Paul Trotti, the Vice President of International Operations, said that each Chick-fil-A restaurant in Alberta will be led by an entrepreneur, an independent local Owner-Operator committed to creating jobs, developing leaders, and impacting the community they serve.
“Alberta has an incredible growth story and is an exciting place for us to continue our expansion in Canada. We can’t wait to offer new guests in the province an authentic Chick-fil-A experience,” said Trotti.
The entrepreneurs in Alberta are expected to hire approximately 80-120 employees at each location.
Rick Christiaanse, CEO of Invest Alberta, said that Alberta is one of the best places to do business in Canada. He added that Chick-fil-A fits perfectly with the province’s rapidly growing and diverse region.
“Chick-fil-A’s expansion into Alberta will have a positive impact on our economy in the region by creating jobs and new entrepreneurial opportunities throughout the province,” he said.
Alberta’s Minister of Jobs Matt Jones said the province has created an investment-friendly environment where companies like Chick-fil-A feel confident about expanding their business.
“With rapid growth and low taxes, our province is an ideal location to establish new stores. Alberta’s growing, young, and diverse population means Chick-fil-A will have the future employees and customers they need to succeed,” said Jones.
Chick-fil-A employs more than 200,000 individuals across its 3,000 restaurants in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Canada. By 2030, the company also plans to expand into Europe and Asia.
In 2022, the company had a revenue of $18.8 billion.
Chick-fil-A is currently accepting applications from aspiring franchisees for Ontario and Alberta.
In a united front, opposition parties are urging the immediate release of uncensored documents regarding the dismissal of two scientists at the national microbiology lab amid allegations that they collaborated with China.
The Conservatives, New Democrats, and Bloc Québécois collectively pressed on Thursday for the documents to be released as soon as possible. The push aligned with the recommendations of a special committee of MPs who reviewed the files and advocated for the content to be released publicly.
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre joined the call with a post on X.
“Trudeau must release the documents related to what happened in Winnipeg. No more hiding. No more excuses. End the coverup,” he said.
The NDP and Bloc also joined Poilievre in his call for release.
“The NDP urges the government to comply with the recommendation of the special committee in charge of evaluating the information on the firing of the two scientists and release the documents,” said NDP House Leader Peter Julian.
Bloc Spokesman Julien Coulombe-Bonnafous called for the release of the documents, as recommended by the committee.
“It should be done in the next few days, and we encourage the government to do it as quickly as possible,” he said.
The special committee of MPs assigned to review the censored documents said that most of the information redacted from Public Health Agency of Canada documents appears to have been withheld to shield the organization from embarrassment rather than to protect national security.
According to a Feb. 19 letter acquired by the Globe and Mail, the committee is recommending the majority of the documents be made public. The letter was sent to House leaders of the Liberals, Conservatives, NDP, and Bloc.
The recommendation says that the records be made public at the next sitting of the House of Commons, which is set to resume next week.
An unnamed source, for protection against prosecution under the Security of Information Act, with direct knowledge of the material, said that uncovered information would reveal that scientists Xiangguo Qiu and her husband, Keding Cheng, provided confidential scientific information to China.
Prior to being fired in 2021, the two scientists had their security clearances revoked and were escorted out of the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg in July 2019.
The documents regarding the dismissal of the two scientists were withheld for national security reasons, claimed the government.
The government withholding documents led opposition parties to vote to declare the Liberals in contempt of Parliament. The Liberals took then-House speaker Anthony Rota to court to prevent the release of the documents. The case was never heard because the 2021 election was called — an election now under suspicion of Chinese electoral interference.
The letter determined that the majority of records from the PHAC related to the firing of the scientists should be released to Canadians.
Committee members acknowledged that documents from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service warranted enhanced protection against disclosure, yet they proposed alternative methods like detailed summaries to convey information.
The federal government has to decide whether to release the documents or not.
“The information appears to be mostly about protecting the organization from embarrassment for failures in policy and implementation, not legitimate national security concerns, and its release is essential to hold the Government to account,” said the letter from the committee.
Dr. Qiu authored over 120 scientific papers from 2000 to 2021, many in partnership with Chinese researchers. Documents reveal that four months before their removal from the lab, Dr. Qiu was involved in sending two viruses to the Wuhan institute — Ebola and Henipah.
Qiu was previously accused of selling state secrets, contributing to creating Chinese bioweapons programs, and even helping create Covid-19.
Qiu previously collaborated during her Ebola research alongside Major-General Chen Wei of the People’s Liberation Army, a military wing of China’s ruling Communist Party. The General has been described as the nation’s ultimate expert in biological and chemical weapons defenses.
The agency asserts that their termination was not connected to these virus transfers.
🚨ANOTHER TRUDEAU COVER-UP🚨
PMJT refused to turn over the Winnipeg Lab documents in 2021 claiming national security concerns.
He lied. Now we learn that it was all about protecting PMJT's health agency from embarrassment.
Students at the University of Waterloo discovered that they had been subjected to facial recognition technology without their consent after a vending machine malfunctioned earlier this month.
A snack dispenser showed an error message that read: Invenda.Vending.FacialRecognition.App.exe on its screen.
Students were not asked permission to have their faces scanned, nor were they made aware of the facial recognition technology prior to using the machine, which was monitoring their movements and purchases.
“This is completely unacceptable!” former Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, Ann Cavoukian, told True North.
“Who authorized the use of facial recognition in a vending machine, clearly without the consent of the individuals whose faces were being captured? The impact of this unauthorized access to such sensitive personal data is extensive, not only to privacy but extending to identity theft, etc.”
Cavoukian is now the executive director of Global Privacy & Security by Design Centre.
The company that produces the machines, Invenda, claims that its “demographic detection software” is compliant with the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation laws and that the company is open about its surveillance.
Invenda claims that the technology is used to determine the age and gender of customers.
However, it remains to be confirmed whether or not the use of this technology is in line with Canadian privacy laws.
Canadian Tire broke privacy laws in B.C. last April, after the company was found to be using facial recognition technology without notifying customers.
The province’s privacy commissioner said that the retailer failed to show sufficient reasoning for collecting facial data, even if they had asked customers permission beforehand.
“We wouldn’t have known if it weren’t for the application error. There’s no warning here,” Waterloo student River Stanley told CTV News.
Stanley was responsible for bringing the Invenda discovery to the university’s newspaper.
In response, the University of Waterloo pledged to have the Invenda machines removed “as soon as possible,” asking that the technology be disabled in the interim.
Students took it upon themselves to cover the camera lens with gum and paper in the meantime.
Alberta, like New Brunswick and Saskatchewan, will soon require schools to get parental consent before officially changing the name or pronoun of a student under age 15, thanks to new policies announced by Premier Danielle Smith. And schools must notify parents before students are taught about gender, sexuality and sexual orientation, so parents can opt in or opt out.
Reaction to the policies, which also include a ban on gender reassignment surgery for kids 17 and under, was fast and furious. Prime Minister Trudeau decried them while federal Employment Minister Randy Boissonnault described them as a “NATO moment” where an attack on one community’s rights should be viewed as an attack on everyone’s rights.
Clearly, these issues polarize Canadian politicians. But a wide, consistent body of empirical evidence shows that parental involvement improves student achievement and general wellbeing. Obviously this involvement should not end once children set foot in a school building.
But whatever your view on the Alberta government’s new rules, there’s no denying the inherent problems of a government monopoly on education, from which parents are largely excluded.
According to the latest statistics, 93.8 per cent of Alberta students attend government schools (though the share of students in government schools is decreasing). The provincial government creates the curriculum, hires the teachers and sets education policy. Even independent schools and charter schools won’t receive provincial funding unless they follow the provincial curriculum and hire government-certified teachers.
But this monopoly raises the stakes in every education debate because when most students attend government schools, and the government makes a decision affecting government schools, some parents will win while others will lose. Whenever a controversial social issue arises, school officials will inevitably upset some parents. That’s why it’s important to provide parents with as much school choice as possible. And there’s more the Alberta government can do to increase school choice.
Alberta parents can already enroll their children in schools of their choice including government public schools, independent schools, charter schools or homeschooling, although independent schools and homeschooling typically require some financial sacrifice from parents even after government funding. To expand access to all types of schools, particularly for lower-income families, the government should ensure that adequate provincial funding follows students to schools of their choice. Children and families are not one-size-fits all, so government shouldn’t force everyone into the same mold.
The same can be said for the curriculum. The government could mandate essential academic standards rather than enforcing one curriculum, and give schools more flexibility to innovate. Ensuring that all students can read, write and do basic math makes sense—forcing schools to adopt the latest social justice fads does not.
Because government public schools are meant to serve everyone, they must be as non-political as possible. This means that teachers must leave their personal political views at home and focus on educating their students. If they cannot do this, they should find a different career.
While most people recognize that parents are entitled to make decisions for their children, not all parents desire to have the same level of involvement. But it certainly makes sense for all parents to have the ability to be involved and informed about what’s happening at school.
The best way to avoid turning schools into political battlegrounds is to give maximum choice and flexibility to parents. Within the goalposts of academic standards, parents should decide where and how their children are educated. Parental involvement helps students. In terms of the research, there’s nothing controversial about that. Students and their parents deserve a school system that is less political and more flexible.
When governments make tough decisions, they’ll never please everyone. But if the Smith government wants to satisfy the widest swath of parents, it should increase the school options available to them.
Michael Zwaagstra is a public high school teacher and senior fellow with the Fraser Institute. Paige MacPherson is associate director of education policy studies at the Fraser Institute.
A popular Calgary-based gay talk show host says his show was dropped by the LGBT network OutTV after he voiced support for Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and her recently announced gender and parental rights policies.
David Oulton says he’s also faced online abuse from queer activists, who’ve called him homophobic slurs, labelled him as a traitor and accused him of supporting a genocide of transgender people.
Oulton has been the host of the award-nominated show called “Face to Face with David” since 2020. The LGBT-oriented fashion and entertainment show featured interviews with celebrities. While the show is self produced, it has been streaming on OutTV, in addition to other networks like Amazon Prime Video, Apple TV, Global TV and the Oprah Winfrey Network.
On Jan. 31, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced a ban on gender reassignment surgeries for minors, a ban on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for children under 16. She also created a requirement for parental notification and consent before a student under 16 can change his or her name or pronoun at school. Smith also announced a ban on biological males participating in women’s sports.
Gender identity can be a hard thing to talk about, especially when you are involved. But this conversation is extremely important and parental involvement is critical. Kids need to know we love and support them. My message to all Albertans: pic.twitter.com/i0ii57GLa6
Following the announcement, Oulton, who identifies as a centre-right UCP supporter, gave interviews to legacy media outlets.
“These are very complicated, nuanced topics. People were asking for policy and asking for some kind of regulation to be implemented- and so I think she’s managed to strike an appropriate balance,” Oulton told Global News.
Backlash from queer activists
Oulton says he then began getting hate from queer activists shortly after speaking to the media. Activists also took issue with an Instagram post of him with Smith.
“The level of homophobia and hate speech and nasty comments and messages and threats directed to me have been astronomical,” Oulton told True North. “And 99% of it is from within the LGBT community.”
Oulton provided True North with screenshots of some of the messages and comments he’s received.
“Hey David, you’re a f***ing traitor to your community. Go f**k yourself for the pain you’ve caused… You’re trash.”
“This is deplorable. I’m so glad we have people… to counter the deranged views from such a hateful member in the community. David Oulton you should be ashamed of yourself and no wonder your birth family dumped you.”
“Love the ‘gay bestie’ optics a week before putting queer kids in danger. The (fag) she’s with is a real (piece of s**t) for attempting to spin the UCP as allies.”
“Canada’s OUTtv has a proudly homophobic gay host who endorses conversion therapy for trans kids. David Oulton consulted on the UCP’s new anti-trans policy in Alberta and is happy with the result.”
Oulton said activists have even threatened to harm his dog.
OutTV parts ways with Oulton
Oulton says that rather than support him, OutTV caved to the mob and dropped his show.
“My entire income stream has dried up. I have lost every piece of future employment in the last couple of weeks. The next show that I was supposed to host I’ve been fired from,” he explained.
“I had an executive from another network tell me that I’m radioactive, and that my career is over. I’ve had other people in the entertainment industry, who were really good friends of mine, call me and condemn me for ‘helping the Premier to commit genocide.’”
Oulton told True North he found the reaction to be nonsensical.
“When people talk about extremism, they talk about the far-right. People don’t talk about the far-left who go out of their way to dismantle my show. (OutTV) stopped airing my show because of the backlash.”
In a statement to True North, OutTV CEO Brad Danks confirmed that Oulton’s show is no longer on the network.
“We can confirm David Oulten’s self-produced series Face to Face with David is no longer on OutTV in Canada and North America. The show was not cancelled as it was never an OutTV commission. The series is still available on other broadcasters, however, we have chosen to discontinue airing the series due to the focus of some of the episodes as well as declining viewership.”
Oulton told True North that while he remains available on other platforms for now, he says those will just be reruns of already produced episodes. He also said his reputation within LGBT entertainment circles has been ruined, after being labelled a transphobe.
A record of gay activism & transgender solidarity
Oulton’s deplatforming came despite him being a supporter of transgender rights. On his show, he has platformed transgender people, as well as drag queens.
“I’ve had drag queens and transgender advocates and allies on my show to educate around trans issues and understand and learn and gain an education around it,” he said.
Last June, Oulton joined A-list celebrities like Ariana Grande, Demi Levato and Shawn Mandes in signing a letter by LGBT organization GLAAD calling for social media companies to address misinformation around transgender healthcare and crack down on anti-LGBT hate on their platform.
He also told True North he’s associated with an initiative that helps LGBT youth escape Taliban-controlled Afghanistan and resettle in Canada.
Oulton’s support of Smith & her policies based on lived experience:
While Oulton supports transgender people, he said he has concerns with the push to transition young children, and believes safeguards should be put in place.
“I think we need to let children be children and that parents have a responsibility to raise their children and protect them and keep them safe,” said Oulton.
Oulton told True North he grew up in a very unstable, abusive household, and was put into adoption as a teenager. But he also believes that while bad parents do exist, they are vastly outnumbered by good parents who love their children.
He also believes Smith’s intentions on LGBT policy are of good faith.
“My experience with the premier has been nothing but amazing and showing allyship and support,” he said. “She’s shown me unwavering support multiple times.”
“She loves trans children. She’s got a family member, who’s going through this process. She’s got first hand experience dealing with these issues.”
Smith has publicly said she has a family member who identifies as “non-binary.”
Prince Edward Island municipal councillor John Robertson is facing potential removal for publicly challenging the narrative surrounding alleged mass graves at residential schools, citing doubts about the evidence and media portrayal. Canadian Constitution Foundation lawyer Josh Dehaas joined True North’s Andrew Lawton to discuss the potential implications for freedom of speech and political dissent in Canada.
This week on the Alberta Roundup with Rachel Emmanuel, Rachel unpacks Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s response to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau travelling to Alberta without letting Smith know or extending an invitation to meet. Later, Rachel breaks down Smith’s budget lookahead.
Also on the show, Rachel has news about when the federal government will reports its assessment of what portion of the Canada Pension Plan assets are Alberta’s.
And finally, Rachel has news about a popular fast food chain opening new locations in Alberta.
