On Friday, the Globe and Mail published an op-ed from the whistleblower at CSIS who leaked documents to the media which alleged Chinese interference in Canada’s elections.
Plus, amid allegations of Chinese interference in Vancouver’s municipal election, British Columbia Premier David Eby says he wants a full briefing from CSIS.
A food supply expert tells True North that milk farmers have long been dumping milk that exceeded their quotas, but the supply management fix is no longer appropriate while Canadians grapple with economic pressure.
These stories and more on The Daily Brief with Anthony Furey and Andrew Lawton!
Toronto’s George Brown College is offering students trauma counselling and telling them they can file a human rights complaint after a guest lecturer said and displayed the “N-word” in a presentation last week.
The lecturer, Markham deputy director of people services Janet Ashfield, has been placed on leave despite apologizing — causing outrage from scholars supportive of academic freedom.
Some guest speaker at George Brown College used the N-word in a presentation. So the college president (who formerly ran @BrockUniversity during its own descent into woke madness) is offering students counselling for presumed trauma, & urging them to file human rights complaints pic.twitter.com/iVYBTkMmSM
According to CBC News, the incident occurred Wednesday when Ashfield was speaking virtually to human resources management students. As part of her presentation, she offered a real-world case study of two firefighters losing their jobs over offensive social media posts, and asked students how they would have dealt with the situation.
She quoted one of the offensive posts that contained the “N-word”, saying the word out loud. The word was also not blurred out in her presentation – though was censored in a screenshot in CBC’s article.
SCREENSHOT: Part of Ashfield’s presentation to George Brown College students obtained and published by CBC News. (CBC News/George Brown College)
The latter triggered some students, with one confronting Ashfield to ask her to respond to comments in the chat. Ashfield responded to concerns about her use of the word by saying “you are absolutely right. That is an absolutely inappropriate word to be used, but that’s the word that was used.”
“Clearly, it’s uncomfortable, but you cannot work around words and say, ‘Well, you know, it was really inappropriate what they said,'” the lecturer said. “I need to know what they said. I need to understand what they said in order to go forward.”
Students however disagreed with her, with one saying “I don’t agree that it should be said at all, especially from someone who’s Caucasian. It’s a very racist term.”
The student’s sentiments were echoed by Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) strategist Destiny Udoh, who told CBC it is unacceptable to use the “N-word” in an academic context.
Following the incident, George Brown President Gervan Fearon issued a statement stating that the school had launched an investigation into the matter. “Giving embodied voice and life to the N-word and other racial slurs is completely unacceptable, inhumane and undermines efforts to create a safe and broadly supportive and inclusive learning environment,” the statement reads.
Fearon said that the incident was “harmful and can be a traumatizing experience,” adding “we are connecting directly with the students from the class to provide any and all supports necessary and have made counselling support available through our Counselling and Student Well-being Team.”
Students were also told they could discuss the matter with the college’s Anti-Racism, Equity and Human Rights office and “make a complaint with a Human Rights Advisor. ”
Following the lecture, Ashfield sent a letter to the class and to the media where she apologized for using the “N-word”, noting she had not previously said the word out loud when doing her presentations.
“In my attempt to teach students about fostering a safe and respectful workplace, I used inappropriate language that contradicted my core objectives for the discussion,” reads the letter sent to CBC.
“My intention was to provide an informative presentation, but I know that regardless of the context in which the language appeared, it is unacceptable in all circumstances.”
Ashfield has been placed on administrative leave by the City of Markham, with spokesperson Bryan Frois saying the city “stands firmly against all forms of hate, racism and discrimination.”
The treatment of Ashfield by students, the university and her employer was condemned by the Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship (SAFS), who sent a letter to Fearon defending her.
SAFS president Mark Mercer told True North that Ashfield “had nothing to apologize for” as “she did absolutely nothing wrong”. He added that “the students themselves, though, by complaining about Ashfield’s mention of the word, are asking to be coddled and treated disrespectfully.”
Mercer says the most unfortunate thing about the incident are the actions of the professor and Fearon, noting that “both are academics whose first concern should be with the academic mission of their institution.”
“To seek to ban words and to advocate punishment for those who use or mention certain words is to destroy the ethos of openness and candour that should mark any place of higher learning.”
This is not the first time that the use of the “N-word” in an academic context has caused controversy in Ontario’s postsecondary institutions. University of Ottawa professor Verushka Lieutenant-Duval faced harsh criticism from students and activists in September 2020 after she said the “N-word” in her Art and Gender class while explaining how certain marginalized groups have reclaimed slurs.
Lieutenant-Duval was suspended and says she was doxxed by a disgruntled student, who published her phone number and personal email address online.
In response to the incident, the University of Ottawa formed an academic freedom committee which concluded that freedom of expression needed to be affirmed and warned against censorship.
A George Brown College spokesperson would not comment on if the school had considered academic freedom implications of Wednesday’s event, opting instead to send True North Fearon’s Mar. 16 statement on the matter.
The Toronto college previously made headlines for requiring that students declare that they benefited from the “colonization and genocide of Indigenous people” in order to be allowed into online classes — amid its adoption of an “anti-racism action plan” calling for the prioritization of decolonization and equity values.
So farewell then to Vincent Ke, the MPP for Toronto’s Don Valley North and alleged bagman for Chinese dictator Xi Jinping.
He can now be found deep in the back benches of Queen’s Park, sitting as an independent.
Ke has resigned from the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario so as not to sully the government and reputation of Premier Doug Ford and to clear his own name. That’s his story.
A March 10 report by Global News referred to intelligence reports and unnamed sources who said that Ke served as a “financial intermediary” in Communist China’s election interference network in Canada.
“While the Global News allegations about me are false and defamatory, I do not want to be a distraction to the government and take away from the good work Premier Ford is doing for the province of Ontario,” Ke said in a statement.
“Therefore, I will be stepping away from the PC Caucus in order to dedicate my time to clearing my name and representing my constituents.”
The Global News report says that, according to sources, Ke received around $50,000 from the Chinese Consulate in Toronto as part of a $250,000 fund allocated for Beijing’s interference network. The funds were allegedly channeled via a series of intermediaries.
The article cited a Privy Council Office (PCO) report which says that the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) network in the Toronto area includes at least 11 candidates who ran in the 2019 federal election, at least 13 aides, and an unnamed Ontario MPP.
“While the allegations against Mr. Ke are not proven, they are serious and deserve his full and undivided attention as he works to clear his name,” Ford said in a statement. “As a result, and out of an abundance of caution, Mr. Ke offered to step away from the Ontario PC caucus to sit as an independent.”
Wenbin “Vincent” Ke has been the MPP for the Toronto riding of Don Valley North since 2018 and is the first mainland-Chinese Canadian immigrant elected as a Progressive Conservative MPP.
Ke was born in Quanzhou, Fujian China, and immigrated to Canada in 1998. He holds an undergraduate degree in engineering from Fuzhou University in China and a Master’s from Ruhr University in Germany.
Prior to his election, Ke worked for Conec — a German firm which has sites in Shanghai and Brampton — from 1999 to 2018. His role with the company was as an electronic engineer.Ke is also registered as an insurance agent by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario.
This is not the first time Ke has been publicly linked to the Communist Party of Canada. His ties to the Chinese consulate were questioned by National Post writer Tom Blackwell in a 2019 article.Blackwell reported that Ke maintained ties with groups linked to the Chinese Communist Party’s United Front Work Department.
Blackwell provided Ke’s office with a list of questions about his connections to the Chinese government including the possibility he joined the Chinese Communist Party, his ties with the Chinese consulate and a 2013 trip to China for a government-run workshop.
In response, Ke’s office said that he was “honoured to be a part of Doug Ford’s government” and that he would focus on “ensuring a strong voice for the constituents of Don Valley North at Queen’s Park.
Ford’s office also provided a response, stating that “MPP Ke is an important part of the Progressive Conservative caucus and represents his constituents with their best interests in mind”.
A 2021 article by Blackwell described Ke as seeming “over-eager to defend China, rather than being too worried about anti-Asian hate,” after Ke and Scarborough-Agincourt MPP Aris Babikian spoke out about a sign at a Chinese physician’s office describing COVID-19 as “Wuhan pneumonia.”
So, he was on the radar before Global News latched on. His evasiveness, however, only adds to the suspicious.
Despite Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s refusal to call a public inquiry into allegations of Chinese interference in the 2019 and 2021 federal elections, a majority of Canadians continue to pressure the government to do so – including politicians of all political stripes.
In British Columbia, Premier David Eby is calling on CSIS to give him a full briefing on the matter. Meanwhile, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre continues to pressure the government to share more details about these allegations.
As Anthony Furey explains, Canadians deserve more information about exactly how much influence the Chinese regime had on our elections.
A new study by the Bank of Nova Scotia has revealed that 55% of investors are concerned about how inflation could cut into their retirement plans.
According to the Scotia Global Asset Management Investor Sentiment Survey involving 1,022 Canadians, 59% of people were pessimistic about their investment plans – a significant jump compared to 33% who said the same in 2021.
A looming recession weighed down on respondents’ minds, as 61% expressing worries about such a possibility.
Another 58% said market volatility was a major issue while 40% cited rising interest rates. 37% said that geopolitical developments were a major risk.
“These results indicate that investors have current concerns about meeting their retirement goals; however, regular meetings with financial advisers and having a written financial plan diminish those concerns,” head of Scotia Global Asset Management, Neal Kerr said.
The BMO Real Financial Progress Index also found some worrying trends. Their study found that only 52% of women were confident about retiring and that 73% didn’t have a financial plan to reach retirement.
“As the cost of inflation and the financial impacts of the pandemic have significantly affected many women, it’s understandable that they are feeling the need to rebuild their savings and feeling less confident about retiring at the age they had planned,” said BMO head of everyday banking Gayle Ramsay.
“With most women reporting they have no financial plan in place, they can start to alleviate their anxiety and take control of their finances by evaluating their budgets, adjusting spending habits accordingly and committing to a savings and retirement plan.”
This week on the Alberta Roundup with Rachel Emmanuel, Rachel interviews Calgary Pastor Derek Reimer who was arrested and charged after protesting at a drag queen story hour at a public library.
Rachel and Reimer discussed his case, as well as a new bylaw in Calgary which prohibits “specified” protesters from coming within 100-metres of a public building, and which expands the harassment bylaw to include intimidation.
Reimer was arrested in Calgary for a second time just one day after Rachel spoke with him.
Michael R.J. Bonner is a historian and a communications and public policy advisor based in Port Perry. In Defence of Civilization is his new book, now available for pre-order from Sutherland House.
When we talk about human flourishing, what is it that we want to flourish? When we speak of decline, what is declining?
When progressives talk about progress, what do they think is progressing? And when conservatives invoke stability and continuity, what is meant to be stable and continuous?
Each question might have a different answer, depending on your perspective.
We could think about the flourishing or decline of a specific person, a family, a company, or a government. But when we think about human beings in general, what are we talking about?
We used to use the word ‘civilization’. That word is out of fashion now, and it has many critics. The naysayers call the concept of civilization ‘Euro-centric’, ‘colonial’, ‘patriarchal’, and so on. We shouldn’t be deterred by such labels. Civilization, and all its connotations of stability and rootedness, is an extremely important concept, and we shouldn’t neglect it.
What is civilization? I think a lot of us would agree that we can recognize civilization when we see it. We can see it in fine art, architecture, literature, music, mathematics, well-functioning government, and even an orderly household. We don’t really need an abstract definition.
But sometimes we should remind ourselves that civilization is fragile. In fact, civilization has declined or collapsed many times in the past, and may do so again.
Recent history should be a reminder of this. Since the late 1990s, we’ve lurched from one crisis to another: terrorism, warfare, financial collapse, sluggish recovery, declining birth rates, pandemic, inflation…
At the very least, recent events are proof that history is not a story of limitless progress.
But this is exactly how most of us probably think of it. The Western belief in progress is so deeply ingrained that very few of us ever question it. Yet there is no good reason to think this way.
The expectation that things will always get better is basically an article of faith. It appears to be backed up by the rapid acceleration of technological change from the industrial revolution onwards. And it seems to be justified by the ever-expanding personal freedoms within liberal societies since the end of the Cold War.
Those developments are unusual, though, and the beliefs that they have encouraged have no basis in the larger scene of human history. No one at any other time expected technology to advance endlessly, nor was there any sense that moral or social progress was an inevitable process of history.
Many of us also want to assume that there is a necessary relationship between technological and social development, as though a technological society must necessarily be a better one. But in reality there is no such connection.
The history of the twentieth century proves this. Rapid technological and scientific change did not make us better, more virtuous, or more civilized. Arguably, science and technology served only to abet more efficient methods of homicide and oppressive social control. The Nazi and Soviet tyrannies are obviously the most extreme examples of this error. But the mistake was made everywhere: eugenics, social Darwinism, and utopian fervour were fashionable everywhere.
The old ideologies are extinct now. But instead of stability and rootedness, every day we awaken to a strange world of new things. The pace of technological change continues to accelerate. Virtual socialisation in an imaginary online universe, 3D-printed fake meat, eating bugs, colonising space, growing babies in artificial wombs, robot sex dolls, genetically-engineered immortality, suicide pods, transhumanism, and downloading human consciousness into machines are only a few recent innovations. And there is still a blind faith that science, technology, and innovation will somehow cure all our problems.
Every great revival has been inspired not by a utopian vision of the future, but by whatever had already worked in the past. The scholars of the Renaissance wanted to imitate and surpass the achievements of ancient Rome. The Romans imitated the Greeks, and the Greeks imitated the civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia.
We have the advantage of being able to look back on five thousand years of civilization to tell us who we are and what we might be able to achieve again.
We’ve tried practically every kind of innovation imaginable in the 20th century, and none of it has made us better, more virtuous, or more civilized.
The majority of Canadians would reinstate capital punishment, according to a new survey.
The Research Co. survey released on Friday shows 54% of Canadians support the idea of bringing back the death penalty as punishment for murder.
“Most supporters of the death penalty believe it will serve as a deterrent,” the survey report said.
While the majority of respondents believe the death penalty will serve as a deterrent for criminals, most prefer to see life imprisonment sentences (53%) as opposed to actually sentencing convicted killers to death (37%).
The majority of death-penalty supporters (55%) said the punishment fits the crime, and half said the death penalty would save Canadian tax dollars by omitting imprisonment costs.
Roughly one-third of Canadians think reinstating the death penalty would be a mistake.
In that group, 66% are worried about courts mistakenly sentencing innocent Canadians to death, and 41% believe murderers should endure a prison sentence.
As the United States Office of Justice Programs writes, Canadians last issued the death penalty in 1962 to two men convicted of murder.
Fourteen years passed until 1976, when capital punishment underwent a ‘de jure’ abolition – the official ban of a practice which has already been socially and culturally discarded.
Did you see what happened on last night’s episode of “Sort Of?” You know, the big-hearted comedy about a gender-fluid nanny navigating their complicated existence. …No? How odd.
This week, the state broadcaster responded to a National Post column which claimed the CBC can’t measure up to the BBC. The CBC claims they have “award-winning Canadian creators.”
Plus, the Waterloo Region District School Board wants to hire more people – but only if you’re the right skin colour. Progress!
These stories and more on Fake News Friday with Andrew Lawton and Sue-Ann Levy!
Quebec’s government-run liquor stores are getting rid of the majority of their refrigerators in an effort to reduce carbon emissions.
The move is being criticized by Quebecers, amid the possibility of having to forgo chilled wine.
As reported by Le Journal de Montreal, the Societe des alcools du Quebec (SAQ) will remove two thirds of the refrigerators in its stores over the next 15 years. This will bring the total number of fridges in the SAQ’s store network from around 3000 to 900.
The changes will vary by store type, with the SAQ’s 279 classic stores going from an average of four fridges to just one. Meanwhile, the SAQ’s 92 “selection” stores, which offer a variety of premium alcohols, will go from having a dozen fridges to just three.
The SAQ’s 26 small format “express” locations will not be affected by the move.
SCREENSHOT: A breakdown consisting of the types of SAQ stores, the number of outlets, and the current number of fridges from Le Journal de Montreal.
SAQ spokesperson Genevieve Cormier says the changes “will require some adjustment, both from our employees and customers. But we are confident that, in the long run, the public will get used to this change and will appreciate the crown corporation’s efforts to reduce its environmental footprint.”
The liquor agency decided to proceed with the removal of the majority of its refrigerators after a two year pilot project which saw all fridges removed from three of its stores. The SAQ does not believe the removal of fridges will create great dissatisfaction among customers or have negative impacts on sales.
“The experience has allowed us to understand that customers accept to participate in the collective effort required by global warming,” said Cormier.
“At the same time, (customers) still want a minimum of refrigerated products… that is why we have decided to keep a third (of our refrigerators).”
The SAQ says its refrigerators are currently responsible for 9% of its carbon emissions, excluding transportation. It expects to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 83 tonnes, in addition to saving money from electricity costs associated with the fridges.
While the move has earned praise from some green industry leaders, it has also earned a fair amount of criticism.
Discussing the SAQ’s plans on his radio show, prominent Quebec commentator Richard Martineau said, “after (the SAQ) what will it be? Grocery stores? Orange juice will no longer be in fridges? Milk will no longer be in fridges?”
Martineau also sarcastically suggested the SAQ should axe air conditioning and heating in its stores to help save the planet.
Several Quebecers also took to social media to criticize the SAQ’s move.
It should be noted that this decision comes amid Quebec Premier Francois Legault pursuing a net-zero agenda. His government hopes to make Quebec carbon-neutral by 2050.
The SAQ began the process of removing fridges from its stores in January. It plans to remove them from 30 stores per year until it reaches its target. Fridges will in part be given to food banks.
