fbpx
Monday, July 7, 2025

Library said allowing gender-critical talk could “test bounds of hate speech”

Staff at an Ontario public library accused a prominent British author of leaning “far-right” and nearing “hate speech” in internal deliberations about whether to allow her to give a talk at a library venue.

The Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship (SAFS), a Canada-based group dedicated to free speech and academic freedom, attempted to book a theatre at the London Public Library in London, Ont. for a talk by Joanna Williams, but was barred from doing so.

The library told the group the booking violated its policies on workplace and sexual harassment and would pose a risk of property damage or personal injury if allowed.

The library refused to explain how, even when event organizers pointed out that Williams’ events had never had such issues.

In internal emails, obtained by True North under freedom of information laws, it’s clear that library management took issue with Williams’ body of work.

The booking request was quickly elevated to library CEO Michael Ciccone.

“She’s definitely controversial and would draw protests and attention,” Ciccone wrote in an email. “She considered (sic) a TERF and leans far-right without totally going there.”

In an email to True North, Williams called Ciccone’s accusation shameful.

“Justifying censorship on the basis that defending women’s rights is a ‘far right’ position is a slur not just against me but against a century of feminism,” Williams said. “The London Public Library has behaved shamefully.”

Ciccone asked his staff to “ask around a bit” to see if SAFS had been denied space elsewhere.

Ciccone later sent out a note to other library heads through a Canadian Urban Libraries Council email list.

“Has anyone else received this request for a room booking?” Ciccone asked. “The author appears to be of the Megan Murphy (sic) ilk.”

Ciccone was referencing Feminist Current founder Meghan Murphy, a gender-critical writer who has been denied event space at other libraries, though notably permitted to proceed with an event at the Toronto Public Library in face of sharp criticism.

Todd Kyle, head of the Brampton Library, replied to Ciccone suggesting SAFS’ attempt at securing a venue might be a “test.”

“We didn’t receive a booking request,” he said. “I know some people in the SAFS. Do you think this is a test?”

It was not, in fact, a test. SAFS routinely holds its annual meetings in London and had rented space from the London Public Library in 2019.

Library spokesperson Ellen Hobin replied to Ciccone that if the event were permitted, SAFS and Williams would need to be “made aware of the code of conduct / no hate speech.”

“Tricky to see how we can say no especially when we hosted them in 2019,” she said.

Neither Hobin nor Ciccone responded to a request for comment.

Ciccone floated it might be possible to deny the space on a technicality, pointing out that SAFS answered ‘no’ to a question on the booking form asking if it had third-party insurance, a requirement of booking space.

“I believe we offer a package through the City for this which I think most renters utilize,” Hobin told Ciccone.

“Oh well,” Ciccone replied.

Hobin then revisited the “hate speech” provision.

“Looking at her work though, it’s hard not to imagine that it could test the bounds of hate speech,” she wrote.

As previously reported by True North, the day after Williams’ talk was to take place, the library allowed a booking by Palestinian comedian Amer Zahr, whose past comments include explicit support for violence and designated terrorist groups.

In the Zahr case, library officials worked with Zahr’s team to combat criticism of the event and actively courted community support to defend the event.

The same people involved in the Williams decision expressed concern that cancelling Zahr’s booking would be “an insult to the London Muslim community” and “possibly be in violation of the performer’s charter (sic) rights.”

There was no such concern for Williams and SAFS.

NHL rescinds Pride tape ban after pushback from leftist activists

The NHL announced the reversal of its ban on Pride tape only a few weeks after implementing it due to pushback from activists.

This decision was made after consultations with the players’ union, the NHL Player Inclusion Coalition, and other stakeholders. The original ban, established earlier in October, prohibited players from using rainbow-coloured Pride tape during on-ice activities, including games, practices, and warmups.

The reversal comes only a few days after Arizona Coyotes defenceman Travis Dermott used the then-banned Pride tape on the shaft of his stick during the game. Dermott has not heard from the league about whether he will face reprimand. He said that he felt his message portrayed in the one game was enough and did not plan to continue wearing Pride tape in the near future. 

Many leftist activist groups also stood up against the NHL’s Pride ban. 

Prior to the NHL reversing its ban, Eagle Canada, a government-funded trans rights organization, critiqued the league, saying, “the NHL has decided to side with the voices of anti-2SLGBTQI hate.”

Scotiabank also challenged the NHL’s ruling. They promoted a give away for 5,000 rolls of Pride tape at branches across Canada. 

Pride nights had previously been a topic of contention within the NHL. Last season, some players chose not to participate in pregame warmups when their teams donned rainbow-themed jerseys. 

This season, teams were informed they could not wear themed jerseys during warmups, covering a range of causes from military appreciation to Hockey Fights Cancer and Pride night. 

“It would be appropriate for clubs not to change their jerseys in warmups because it’s become a distraction and taking away from the fact that all of our clubs, in some form or another, host nights in honour of various groups or causes and we’d rather them continue to get the appropriate attention they deserve and not be a distraction,” said NHL commissioner Gary Bettman regarding the league-wide ban of themed jerseys.

Reflecting on the contentious issue, Dermott articulated the complex landscape players navigate.

“It’s such a fine line where the league wants to look good, and the league wants to support all of these things, but you also don’t want all of the negativity that can come from someone not supporting it, and you don’t want to force people who don’t support something to support something, and I completely understand that point of view,” he told the Athletic.

Air Canada accused of racially profiling British MP over Muslim name

A UK Labour MP was stopped while boarding a flight to Canada “because his name was Mohammad.” 

Last week, Mohammad Yasin, an MP for Bedford, was traveling with a group of other British MPs from the UK Commons’ Leveling Up, Housing and Communities Committee when he was pulled aside for additional questioning by Air Canada officials.

Yasin was asked where he was born and whether or not he was carrying a knife or any other weapons. 

He was asked a series of similar questions upon his arrival into Canada and again during his return trip home, according to Daily Mail.

The issue was discussed in the UK Commons and the Labour chairman of the committee Clive Betts said he would contact Canada’s high commissioner in the UK to discuss the unacceptable “racist and Islamaphobic nature” of the incident.

‘When the committee checked in for their flights at Heathrow, all Members got through with the exception of the Member for Bedford, who was delayed for questioning for a considerable period,” said Betts. “He was told it was because his name was Mohammad.”

“He was also asked whether he was carrying a knife, or other offensive weapon, he was also asked where he was born,” added Betts. “The questioning was undertaken by officials from Air Canada and we believe the Canadian government, and despite him already having been given a visa to enter Canada.”

“After proving he was an MP with the help of my committee clerk, he was eventually allowed through.”

“At Montreal airport, the same issues were raised by Canadian immigration.”

“On return at Toronto airport on the way back, he was again challenged and got on his flight with the assistance of my consul general, who was very helpful.”

Betts continued, “’He has received apologies from the parliamentary secretary to the Canadian minister for immigration and Air Canada, however, given the racist and Islamophobic nature of these challenges, I believe that it is worth writing to the Canadian high commissioner, which I will do.”

Air Canada responded by issuing a formal apology, saying, “Unfortunately Mr Yasin was designated for additional screening prior to his flight after a security check, but he was still able to travel as planned as he was quickly cleared.”

“We are following up internally the handling of this particular matter to ensure procedures were properly followed and we have also been in touch with UK and Canadian authorities,” said a spokesperson for Air Canada. “’We regret any inconvenience or upset this situation may have created for Mr Yasin and have reached out to apologize.”

Betts said that his party had also notified their high commissioner in Ottawa about the incident.

“We raised the issue with our high commissioner in Ottawa, who was very supportive, and amazed at what happened given the multicultural nature of Canada as an open and welcoming country,” said Betts. “She has raised it with the Canadian government, and… I would also raise it in Parliament to try and ensure that no-one in the future is treated in this way.”

Deputy Speaker Sir Roger Gale responded to Bett’s concerns by saying, “I am sure that the whole House will share the dismay at the treatment of the Member for Bedford.”

Gale then said the incident was “wholly unacceptable under any circumstances” but emphasized that it was “particularly concerning, occurring as it did, in the course of official travel on parliamentary business.’

Clean tech agency distributed tens of millions of taxpayer dollars inappropriately: report

Source: sdtc.ca

A report commissioned by the federal government revealed that Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) has been violating its contribution agreement with the federal government, distributing tens of millions of taxpayers dollars inappropriately. 

Furthermore, SDTC board members and executives were incentivised with big bonuses to erroneously distribute these taxpayer dollars with little oversight, the report found. 

The Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton report, commissioned by Innovation, Science, and Economic Development Canada (ISED), found that SDTC’s seed fund, which distributes $50,000 to $100,000 grants to clean tech companies, violates the crown corporation’s contribution agreement with the federal government. 

Specifically, the ISED mandates that SDTC review the projects its funding to ensure its grants don’t surpass 50% of the total project costs.

However, the Raymond Chabot report found that SDTC had not been following this procedure before approving projects for funding, noting that there was a significant chance SDTC were overpaying firms.

From 2019 to 2022, 180 seed fund projects were funded, totaling $17,551,275. 

Raymond Chabot sampled 19 companies that received multi-million dollar grants from SDTC and found that three of them did not meet the partnership requirements stipulated in SDTC’s contribution agreement with ISED. 

While the names of these three companies were redacted in the report, a whistleblower told True North the three companies are Semios, Miovision Technologies, and GHGSat. 

The report says that funding these companies violated SDTC’s mandate, as they have “elements of commercialization,” which is inconsistent with SDTC’s mandate and violates the contribution agreement with ISED. 

SDTC had approved GHGSat for $20,000,000 on September 15, 2021, $17,000,000 for Semios on January 20, 2022, and $16,580,000 for Miovision, totalling $53,580,000.

SDTC is actively funding 141 companies as of August 31, 2023 with contributions ranging from $500,000-$20,000,000.

The report also notes that another funding stream was potentially non-compliant with SDTC’s goals to fund sustainable development technologies to help reduce Canada’s carbon emissions, though the details of the non-compliance were redacted. 

“However, it appears that the [REDACTED] stream is potentially non-compliant with section 2.02 of the Contribution Agreement,” reads the report.

The report also revealed that SDTC’s board had approved and distributed $38.4 million worth of COVID-19 relief payments to each active company within their portfolio while bypassing SDTC’s conflict-of-interest policies. 

Raymond Chabot reviewed 21 of the hundreds of companies that received Covid relief payments and found that unnamed board members had conflict-of-interest declarations associated with six of these companies, or 29% of them. 

No one on the board recused themselves from voting on the Covid relief payment scheme, and the report says that board members acknowledged that the lack of consideration of conflicts of interest was “inappropriate.”

Extrapolated to the 118 companies that received relief payments in 2020 and the 102 companies that received relief payments in 2021, SDTC potentially sent out 68 relief payments with conflicts of interests, or about $11.14 million worth of payments. 

Furthermore, the SDTC executive and board members were incentivised to distribute the Covid relief funds with year-end performance bonuses. 

As part of SDTC’s corporate goals for the fiscal year 2019-2020, SDTC was tasked with distributing $120.7 million, a 31% increase from fiscal year the year prior. 

On March 23, 2020, a week before the end of the fiscal year, SDTC’s board approved $20 million for Covid relief payments, distributing $17.9 million before the end of the fiscal year. 

SDTC’s 2019-2020 annual report notes that the clean tech fund had distributed $122 million. Had the board not approved the Covid relief fund, SDTC would have come up approximately $16 million short of its goal. 

For the 2019-2020 fiscal year, the CEO was incentivised with a performance bonus up to $95,250 while vice presidents were incentivised with bonuses of up to $48,000. Other board members received up to $10,920.

In 2020-2021, SDTC was tasked with disbursing $162 million and ended up disbursing $146 million.

However, on March 9, 2021, SDTC had approved $25 million in funding for COVID-19 relief payments and ended up disbursing $20.5 million in relief payments. Had the board not made this approval, SDTC would have only distributed $101.5 million that fiscal year. 

The CEO, vice presidents, and board members were incentivised with performance bonuses up to $96,000, $48,000, and $11,000 respectively. 

In response to the Raymond Chabot report, Innovation Minister François-Philippe Champagne announced the temporary suspension of funding for all new SDTC projects until corrective measures were put in place.

The day after minister Champagne announced the government would be pausing SDTC funding, SDTC released a statement defending itself, saying there is no evidence of wrongdoing and that it will not be conducting an investigation.

“We note the report found no clear evidence of wrongdoing or misconduct at SDTC and indicated that no further investigation is merited,” read a statement from the crown corporation.

In a statement to True North, SDTC said that its board is reviewing the report carefully and will work to “ensure further compliance.”

“The SDTC Board of Directors and leadership team are carefully reviewing the RCGT report and are taking action to implement the government’s recommendations as quickly as possible to minimize disruption to Canada’s sustainable innovation ecosystem,” reads the statement.

“We are redeploying internal resources to this effort and are bringing on external expertise to ensure that we can further strengthen compliance with the contribution agreement while maintaining the same high level of efficiency and speed of business processes that Canadian entrepreneurs have come to expect.”

Compensation for firearm owners “woefully inadequate” say provincial firearms chiefs

In a recent Senate hearing on Bill C-21, concerns about compensation for firearm owners and potential impacts on public safety took centre stage as provincial firearm authorities slammed the government for shortchanging Canadians. 

The second panel of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security, Defence and Veterans Affairs featured Teri Bryant, Alberta’s Chief Firearms Officer and Robert Freberg, Saskatchewan’s Commissioner and Chief Firearms Officer. The two speakers voiced their concerns surrounding compensation for legal firearms users and potential impacts on public safety.

One notable point of contention was the federal government’s consultation process or lack thereof. When asked about consultations between federal officers and the Saskatchewan firearms office before the bill was introduced, Freberg succinctly responded, “It was zero.”

“We’ve looked at the initial offers of compensation and they’re woefully inadequate,” said Robert Freberg. He added that Bill C-21 fails to give value to the accessories that people bought for their firearms.

Although the Liberal government introduced Bill C-21 as an attempt to crackdown on violent gun crime, critics of the legislation have called it a gun control ploy that unfairly targets law-abiding Canadians. Concerns about how the government defines “assault-style weapons” have led some to say that it further restricts hunting rifles and could impact traditional Indigenous ways of life.

A group of professors, researchers, and firearms policy experts say Bill C-21 will do little to combat violent crime and may even do more harm than good, reported National Post. This group sent a letter addressed to the Prime Minister, major leaders of federal parties, and the house public safety committee saying that the bill will “punish hundreds of thousands of Canadian hunters, farmers, trappers, collectors, and sport shooters.” 

“This legislation expects and trusts law-abiding firearms owners to voluntarily turn their handguns for destruction without compensation, potentially after multiple decades of safe and legal ownership, storage, and use,” pointed out Freberg. 

Freberg emphasized that, ironically, the legislation “does not trust those same owners now to engage in the commerce of purchasing and selling handguns between each other.”

The recently passed Saskatchewan Firearms Act mandates that where the federal government seeks to expropriate handguns or any other firearms and renders them of no value, the federal government must pay the fair market price prior to their destruction.

Teri Bryant weighed in on the legislative actions, emphasizing the responsibility to the public. She noted that the Alberta government has taken legislative action to protect the interests of firearms owners and public safety.

“The point of this legislation is that many of the ideas that they were putting forward could actually have negatively affected public safety,” she stated.

While not in favor of the federal government’s gun confiscation, Bryant stressed the importance of its execution not endangering the Alberta public. 

“We will make sure that their actions do not pose a risk to Alberta society at large,” she said. 

Committing to the interests of both the public and firearm owners, she added, “If these unfortunate measures are pushed through, we will protect the interests of the society at large in Alberta and of firearms owners in particular, with respect to compensation. We will make sure that any compensation is full, adequate, and prompt.”

The government’s approach to firearm confiscation might not only be lacking in fairness but might also have unintended consequences for public safety, according to the firearms experts.

“There hasn’t been a strong plan put together on the actual confiscation process,” said Freberg.

Freberg explains that many people have been taking their firearms to post offices and hardware stores in rural Saskatchewan. 

“It’s certainly not secure to leave a bunch of firearms there,” he said. 

Firearms may be stolen to commit further crimes, but generally, these are not handguns or restricted prohibited firearms. Rather, they are predominantly non-restricted or firearms that have been modified or home-built, explains Freberg. 

“Legal firearm owners have an important role to play, of course, in enhancing public safety, which is why Saskatchewan is focusing a great deal of effort on public education to ensure safe storage, licensing and use of firearms,” he said.

“Banning and seizing firearms is not the solution,” he said. 

He added that this fact has been overwhelmingly proven over and over in many studies that have taken similar action as the federal government is currently looking to pursue.

Gov foreign interference study calls for more online misinformation control

In response to growing concerns about foreign interference in Canada, the House of Commons ethics committee is calling on the government to adopt measures to combat misinformation online. 

On Tuesday, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy, and Ethics recently released a report, focusing on foreign interference tactics employed by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and Russia. 

The report also delved into allegations of communist China’s interference in past Canadian elections, as well as a donation to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation by a Chinese businessman.

The committee claimed social media platforms were “accountable for publishing false or misleading information.” Additionally, legislators called on the government to “develop policies to support the media ecosystem.” 

Other recommendations include imposing “targeted sanctions” against Canadian companies that are doing business with countries that engage in foreign interference operations. 

Among the key recommendations made by the committee are calls to establish a foreign influence registry to enhance transparency regarding foreign actors operating within Canada as soon as possible and implementing criminal penalties in the Criminal Code to address foreign interference, including harassment and intimidation by foreign states.

With regard to establishing a foreign agent registry, ethics committee vice chair and Liberal MP Mona Fortier said that she does not exactly know what the timeline will be for the government to act on the recommendation. 

“I understand that the foreign agent registry is the will of the government. Of course, the government wants to do it the right way and ensure that there are no unintended consequences for minority groups,” said Fortier.

“I would say that the will is there but the timeline I cannot answer that question.” 

In response to the increasing concerns over foreign interference, the Committee was designated to investigate tactics employed by foreign actors. Notably, this scrutiny was prompted by allegations regarding financial and other support from the PRC to candidates in the 2019 Canadian election.

Additionally, the committee recommended developing harsher rules for whistleblowers to illicitly disclose national security intelligence. Many of the reports about China’s foreign interference in Canada earlier this year relied on leaked information from intelligence sources. 

“That the Government of Canada strengthen rules and penalties governing illicit

disclosure of national security intelligence,” recommended lawmakers. 

Broadcasting groups says Apple must be included in Online News Act

The Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) is asking the Trudeau government to include Apple in its proposed regulations under the Online News Act, which would force the tech company to pay news publishers for content shared through Apple’s news app.

CAB says Apple News, a paid subscription service aggregating stories from different platforms, clearly falls within the Online News Act.

The CAB said it disagrees with the fact that only Google and Meta are currently included, “even though there are other platforms that benefit from the distribution of news content and are negatively impacting news businesses in Canada.”

“The CAB believes that such services should be scoped into the framework, rather than excluded up front,” it said.

Apple News already pays publishers to utilize their content, including offering commissioners for in-app purchases.

The Online News Act was implemented earlier this year for the purpose of forcing companies like Google and Meta to pay revenue to news outlets for content posted on their social media platforms.

Meta responded to the legislation by removing all news content and links from Facebook and Instagram to avoid the new requirements. 

Google has also confirmed that it plans to do the same if the government refuses to address its concerns. If this remains the case, news publishers won’t receive any money from the platforms.

The CAB’s request for Apple’s inclusion was part of the Trudeau government’s consultation with a number of media groups while drafting its regulations.  The final version has not yet been released.  

Hundreds of submissions have been received under the consultation, according to a spokesperson for Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge.

“As we’ve said all along, we are open to good and constructive ideas to improve the proposed framework. Our goal remains the same of creating fair deals directly between news organizations and tech giants that can and should contribute more,” said the minister’s spokesperson.

According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, companies like Bell, Rogers and the CBC are expected to get the majority of any revenue generated under the legislation, which is estimated to bring in $320 million in funding. 

Of that money, about $240 million would go to broadcasters.

Government officials said that Google would be expected to contribute about $172 million and Facebook $62 million per year should they be subjected to the new legislation.

The CAB said there should be “a specific clause to ensure that platforms sign deals with the most important providers of news in Canada before they can be exempt,” meaning platforms would be obliged to sign deals with “every eligible news business or any collective bargaining group employing 100 or more journalists in Canada.”

The CAB has also requested that the government recognize positions like camera operators, sound technicians, video and audio editors to be included as journalists as well, according to the National Post.

The Andrew Lawton Show | The government’s own polling says Canadians think Trudeau is failing

A massive poll conducted by the federal government found that a majority of Canadians think Justin Trudeau is on the wrong track on nearly all issues. In spite of these numbers, the Liberals have doubled down on their record and ramped up their attacks on the Conservatives. Do you think there’s anything they could do to turn the ship around? True North’s Andrew Lawton weighs in.

Also, several Liberal and New Democrat politicians and left-wing media personalities have called for a “ceasefire” between Israel and Hamas. They claim to be speaking up for “peace,” but all they’re doing is denying Israel’s right to self-defence. JSpaceCanada chair Joe Roberts joins the show to discuss.

Plus, Girl Guides of Canada is banning its chapters from participating in Santa Claus parades because of the organization’s commitment to “secularism and inclusivity.” This comes as the Canadian Armed Forces prevents chaplains from offering religious prayers at Remembrance Day ceremonies. Veteran Tom Marazzo is back to talk about it.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE ANDREW LAWTON SHOW

The Daily Brief | Nazi invite kept secret by Liberal-NDP MPs

The Ontario NDP has booted MPP Sarah Jama from caucus for refusing to retract anti-Israel statements.

Plus, Liberals and NDP MPs vote to keep the Nazi invitation inquiry behind closed doors.

And a True North exclusive reveals that a clean tech crown corporation is funding companies tied to its board members.

Tune into The Daily Brief with Cosmin Dzsurdzsa and Noah Jarvis!

SUBSCRIBE TO THE DAILY BRIEF

Girl Guides won’t join Santa Claus parade, citing secularism policy

An Ottawa-area Girl Guides chapter is sitting out the Santa Claus parade to avoid breaching its commitment to secularism.

Organizers of the Kanata Santa Claus Parade invited several community groups to participate in the event, but the Girl Guides said they were unable to participate in any activities to do with “faith-based beliefs, behaviours and traditions” as part of its diversity, equity and inclusion policy.

“We got a response from the Girl Guides that Girl Guides of Canada does not allow them to be part of a Christmas parade,” said Kanata South Coun. Allan Hubley in an interview with CTV News Ottawa.

“(Girl Guides of Canada) is a secular organization, which means that Guiding is not affiliated with, nor privileges any religion or faith-based beliefs, behaviours and traditions,” reads the organization’s handbook, Guiding is for Everyone.

“As a secular organization, we welcome girls and women from all and no religious affiliations. Being a secular organization signals Guiding’s belief in providing a safe space and sense of belonging for all girls.”

The Girl Guides of Canada’s fear is that participating in the Santa Claus parade would be “promoting religious practices” which could lead to “unintentionally turning away future members who don’t share those beliefs.”

Christmas parades fall under the umbrella of events that “have their roots in religion” and therefore should be avoided by the group.

On Monday, Girl Guides CEO Shannon Benner released a statement discussing the group’s commitment to secularism. 

“(Girl Guides of Canada) has been working diligently to ensure that all activities offered by the organization are of a secular nature so that we are providing an inclusive space for all who choose to be members of Girl Guides of Canada,” said Benner.

“As a result, participating in activities that have a connection to a specific religious celebration are not part of the program offering at GGC. The Girl Guides program platform offers suggestions for Guiders and members looking to create inclusive and fun unit experiences.”

Several local leaders of the group have since confirmed that they will not be participating in the parade due to the policy. 

The GGC response came as a disappointment to Hubley.

“I couldn’t believe it at first,” Hubley said. “I said ‘please check.’ Apparently, there is something being sent out to all the groups to tell them that they can’t do that.” 

However, the Scouts are allowed to participate, noted Hubley.

“In my case, I have to tell my two granddaughters that they can’t be in the parade but their brother can, because he’s in the Scouts,” said Hubley.

Hubley said he hopes some Girl Guides will still attend the parade anyway.

“We just want everyone who can to be part of the parade because it’s all about celebrating the caring and giving and kindness of the season,” he said.

Related stories