The University of Western Ontario quietly dropped its vaccine mandate on Tuesday months after legal challenges and protests from students opposed to the requirement.
Western made the announcement in a “situational summary” posted on its website on Nov. 29. The post-secondary school claims that the decision to revoke the mandate came following consultations with public health officials.
Western University has just quietly announced that their controversial vaccine mandate is over effective immediately:https://t.co/X1pNpNsXGj
“Western has committed to regularly reviewing our vaccination policy. Based on the latest consultation with our medical experts and local public health, we are revoking our vaccination policy and will no longer require students, employees, and visitors to be vaccinated to come to campus,” Western wrote.
While students are not required to be vaccinated to attend the university anymore masking is still required for the foreseeable future.
“After careful consultation with health experts and members of our community, Western’s masking requirement will continue until the end of fall term,” an official statement reads.
Soon after the university announced its mandate, students opposed to the vaccine requirement organized a mass protest on campus grounds.
Protestors opposed the mandate on the grounds that it violated bodily autonomy and was not necessary given what scientists now know about Covid-19.
According to protest leader Kendra Hancock, the mandate was a form of coercion employed by the university.
“So far it’s overwhelming for people feeling like they’re absolutely forced into this situation,” Hancock told True North in August.
On Tuesday, the group Enough Is Enough Western tweeted that “accountability will come” to the university over its coercive methods.
We polled approximately 950 @WesternU students, with %86.6 of vaccinated students expressing they felt coerced. Accountability will come.
One legal challenge to the university’s mandate was dismissed by a judge who claimed that the school was “expressly permitted to govern its (own) affairs.” As of September, some students launched yet another challenge to the booster mandate after being denied religious exemptions to the vaccine.
The University of Calgary’s Haskayne School of Business is looking to hire a new professor, however the position is only open to black people.
Haskayne Business School @HaskayneSchool at @Ucalgary is hiring a new prof: "This position is only open to qualified Black scholars." Applicants may “focus on any discipline.” It doesn't matter, so long as one’s skin color corresponds with the desired huehttps://t.co/xgKZwd6mAupic.twitter.com/WuYK8Odpfh
The online job posting for Assistant, Associate or Full Professor, which features multiple Indigenous land acknowledgements, notes that the opening is not limited to a specific subject.
Rather, applicants can apply to teach any of the Haskayne School’s “core areas of focus.” These include: accounting, business technology management, entrepreneurship, finance, marketing, operations management, organizational behaviour and strategy.
The university then notes that the position “is only open to qualified Black scholars,” giving Black Pioneer, African and Caribbean as examples.
U of C says the successful black applicant’s qualifications and experience will determine whether they become an Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or a Full Professor.
The university says the position will “establish an active research program that focuses on any discipline within business provided it is aligned with the University of Calgary’s, and the Haskayne School of Business’ strategic plans” and that “the successful candidate will have the opportunity to be part of a prolific and diverse research environment.”
In addition to providing a CV, cover letter, statement of research interests and statement of teaching philosophy/teaching dossier, applicants must state that they “self-identify as Black” and provide a “statement on equity, diversity and inclusion.”
Applicants must also “complete an attestation confirming their eligibility for (the) position in the application process.”
U of C says the position is part of its “Inclusive Excellence Cluster Hiring Initiative”, which it created to “advance and embed the institution’s commitment to equity, diversity, inclusion and accessibility, Indigenous engagement, and inclusive excellence.”
The university says 45 professors from “equity-deserving groups” will be recruited through the initiative over three years.
However, the U of C’s hiring practice received criticism online, including by renowned Canadian author and psychologist Jordan Peterson – who is a former professor at the University of Toronto.
In a tweet, Peterson wrote, “How black do the applicants have to be? Who tests them? Is it DNA or will casual visual observation suffice? Welcome to the new improved Canada: brought to you by your state-funded universities.”
How black do the applicants have to be? Who tests them? Is it DNA or will casual visual observation suffice? Welcome to the new improved Canada: brought to you by your state-funded universities. https://t.co/DENDPVIhGa
The University of Calgary is not the first Canadian post-secondary institution to include race in its hiring process. Back in 2018, Halifax’s Dalhousie University made headlines after it restricted a Dean of Students position to “racially visible” and Indigenous applicants.
Meanwhile, Laval University in Quebec City was denounced earlier this year for a job posting for a Canada Research Chair in its biology department that excluded white males – as previously reported by True North.
In response to True North’s request for comment, a University of Calgary spokesperson sent a press release and a webpage link on the “Inclusive Excellence Cluster Hiring Initiative.”
Campus Watch keeps an eye on what’s happening at schools across Canada. Do you have a story to share about a college or university near you? Let us know at [email protected].
Government spending numbers recently reported by Statistics Canada which show spending declining in several sectors across all government levels are “significantly skewed”, a well-known business professor claims.
According to a recent Statistics Canada overview, total government expenditures on economic affairs tanked by -32.7% this year across municipal, provincial and federal governments.
However, Carleton University Sprott School of Business associate professor Ian Lee told True North that the overview doesn’t paint an accurate picture.
“These numbers are significantly skewed by the winding down of pandemic support programs and payments of all kinds across the federal and provincial governments,” said Lee in response to interview questions via email.
“If you examine total government spending in 2019 and compare to 2021-22, government spending is much higher than pre-pandemic.”
Alongside a reduction in economic spending, the report claimed that governments spent -14.8% on defence totalling only $482 per capita this year compared to $566 per capita in spending reported between 2020-2021.
Social protection also saw a decline in spending per capita by -20.3%. Meanwhile, spending was up in general public services (+8.3%), public order and safety (+5.6%) and health (+5.1%).
The Fraser Institute found in an August report that total federal spending was 27% higher this year than in 2019-2020.
“In summary, while spending is declining in 2022 as the pandemic comes to an end, total government spending across the board has increased dramatically since the year before the pandemic,” said Lee.
Federally, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre has blasted Ottawa for “uncontrolled spending” which he claims contributed to the current inflationary crisis.
On Monday, Poilievre tweeted a video of Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem admitting that if the government cut pandemic stimulus sooner it could have mitigated some of the affects of inflation.
“The Liberals’ uncontrolled spending with borrowed and printed cash led to the inflation and higher prices we have today. Even the Bank of Canada agrees,” tweeted Poilievre.
While before the House of Commons finance committee last week, Macklem told parliament that he believed that the federal government should have eased off on stimulus much sooner.
“If we knew everything a year ago that we knew today, yes I think we should have started tightening interest rates sooner to withdraw the stimulus,” said Macklem.
“(If) there would have been less stimulus in the economy, there would have been less demand, (inflation) would have been less.”
“Policies aimed at mitigating the effects of inflation on citizens really need to be targeted, targeted on the most vulnerable, and temporary, temporary while this is an inflation problem,” he continued.
Protests show no signs of slowing down in China, even as observers fear how the authoritarian government of Xi Jinping may start to crack down on them.
Meanwhile, the Ottawa school board is back in the news – not for pushing mandates this time, but for hiring a staff member tasked with dealing exclusively with transgender students.
And a constitutional rights group is sounding the alarm over Brampton’s attempt to prohibit election signs on private property.
Tune into The Daily Brief with Anthony Furey and Jasmine Moulton!
In recent decades, however, indigenous identity theft by white Canadians has skyrocketed in lock-step with the growing status, influence, privilege, and wealth that faking Indian pedigree now yields.
Ironically but unsurprisingly, pretendianism is simply the other side of the tarnished racial-cum-ethnic differentiation coin: for most of the long period of contact between the first settlers of Canada and the later European immigrants, pretending to be white, like passing for white in America among mixed pedigree people, was an important strategy for coping with racism and other forms of oppression.
The best known recent pretendian case involves Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, widely regarded as one of Canada’s most successful and honoured indigenous scholars and legal professionals, who for decades claimed to be of aboriginal ancestry through her putative Cree father William Turpel. According to an October 12 CBC exposé, she even referred to herself as the “first Treaty Indian” appointed to the judicial bench in Saskatchewan history.
The CBC asked Turpel-Lafond how her father, William Turpel, could be Cree when his parents were British. “She refused to answer, only hinting at family secrets and shame, saying ‘I will never call anyone out’ … However, in a public statement days after the story was published, Turpel-Lafond declared that her father had been adopted.”
The CBC recently called Turpel-Lafond out again by releasing the official birth certificate for William Turpel, registered with BC’s Vital Statistics Agency, showing that he’s the child of two British parents.
As might be expected, many indigenous activists have become increasingly outraged by this pretendianism.
Jean Teillet, the great-grandniece of Louis Riel, an Indigenous rights lawyer, and the writer of a new report for the University of Saskatchewan called Indigenous Identity Fraud had this to say in a Globe and Mailcolumn:
“In recent years, there have been a series of high-profile media exposés of people who are falsely taking on an Indigenous identity. They are being called “pretendians.” The word blends “pretend” with “Indians.” It’s a cute word, too cute. The use of the word pretend makes it sound like a game, like something fun, like action with no consequences. People don’t cause harm when they pretend, and pretending has an air of innocence about it because that’s what children do.
There is nothing innocent about falsely assuming Indigenous identity. It’s fraud – intentional deception for personal gain. Lies about the person’s lived experience, their family and where and how they grew up are repeated over decades. Most of the lies play to stereotypical beliefs about Indigenous people. Usually by working for and with Indigenous people, the imposter gains access to opportunities, jobs, money, prestige and power. It’s a deft twist on impersonation. It’s identity theft, it causes harm, there’s a lot of it going on, and it’s a serious problem… And that will happen because thousands of individual Canadians have falsely assumed an Indigenous identity.”
“Thousands” is a big but not unexpected number given that self-identification is all that is still required in most cases to reap the advantages of indigenous status.
But this begs the question of why these racial/ethnic group rewards exist at all, a question Jean Teillet and others have avoided or downplayed likely because they accept the basic premises of the divisive scourge called identity politics with Indigenous identity theft being the inherent outcome of differential treatment based on birthright.
Indeed, that different rewards for different categories of people is a natural, normal, and healthy way to organize a society is given extraordinary official legitimacy in Canada via the Charter of Rights and Freedoms’ affirmative action clause and the protection of indigenous rights in Section 35 both of them guaranteed by the 1982 Constitution.
Such beliefs allow Teillet to opine that: “Perhaps the greatest harm of all [of identity theft] is the sense of suspicion that now prevails and the loss of trust. Fraud is a poison, and it taints everything it touches. Indigenous identity fraudsters make a mockery of truth and ethical standards. We should care deeply about Indigenous identity fraud and every measure should be taken to put a stop to it.”
For me, “the greatest harm of all is the sense of suspicion that now prevails and the loss of trust” when Canadian citizens are granted all manner of scarce benefits and resources based on the colour of their skin or the ethnic affiliation of their parents. Moreover, it is an incontrovertible logical and observable fact that favouring some people for their identity automatically disfavours others with a different identity.
So why are we so zealously promoting racial and ethnic animosity in a country most of whose citizens believe all Canadians should be equally allowed to openly compete for access to scarce social and economic resources? And why should one’s birth status — in this case, the inherited right to an Indian status card and a myriad of other privileges — determine privileged access to power, privilege, prestige, and prosperity in what is supposed to be a nation based on freedom, fairness, and equality of opportunity?
To paraphrase Teillet, we should take every effort to put a stop to this unethical practice.
Hymie Rubenstein is editor of The REAL Indian Residential Schools newsletter and a retired professor of anthropology, The University of Manitoba
With the Public Order Emergency Commission’s fact-finding hearings now concluded, Commissioner Paul Rouleau has until February to deliberate and issue his report. While there is no precedent for the Emergencies Act’s use, the law spells out the threshold needed for its use to be justified.
Understanding this requires looking at the Emergencies Act as well as the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act.
The Emergencies Act details four types of emergency – a public welfare emergency, a public order emergency, an international emergency, a war emergency. When Justin Trudeau’s government invoked the act on Feb. 14, it declared a public order emergency, which means Part II of the act is the pertinent section.
Under section 16, a “public order emergency means an emergency that arises from threats to the security of Canada and that is so serious as to be a national emergency.”
This is where the CSIS Act comes in. The Emergencies Act says the term “threats to the security of Canada” “has the meaning assigned by section 2 of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act.”
In full:
(a) espionage or sabotage that is against Canada or is detrimental to the interests of Canada or activities directed toward or in support of such espionage or sabotage,
(b) foreign influenced activities within or relating to Canada that are detrimental to the interests of Canada and are clandestine or deceptive or involve a threat to any person,
(c) activities within or relating to Canada directed toward or in support of the threat or use of acts of serious violence against persons or property for the purpose of achieving a political, religious or ideological objective within Canada or a foreign state, and
(d) activities directed toward undermining by covert unlawful acts, or directed toward or intended ultimately to lead to the destruction or overthrow by violence of, the constitutionally established system of government in Canada,
The CSIS Act is clear that its definition of security threats “does not include lawful advocacy, protest or dissent” unless that protest incorporates any of the four listed activities.
While the convoy did receive donations from the United States and elsewhere, the Commission heard that the meaning of “foreign influenced activities” refers specifically to influence by foreign states, not protest sympathizers who happen to live in other countries.
Even if there exists a “threat to the security of Canada” as defined by the Emergencies Act and CSIS Act, the former requires it rise to the level of a “national emergency,” which has its own definition.
From section 3 of the Emergencies Act:
For the purposes of this Act, a national emergency is an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that
(a) seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such proportions or nature as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with it, or
(b) seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada and that cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada.
In the federal government’s closing arguments Friday, the government’s lawyer said that there were threats to public safety in Ottawa and other protest sites across the country. He also argued that the government considered all other alternatives under existing authorities and found them to be inadequate.
For there to be a public order emergency as defined by the Emergencies Act, there must be a threat to the security of Canada as defined by the CSIS Act, as well as a national emergency as defined by the Emergencies Act, and the situation must be outside the ability of existing laws in Canada to address.
There is a caveat in section 17(1) of the Emergencies Act, which is that the Governor in Council – the cabinet – ”believes, on reasonable grounds” that the threshold has been met.
This distinction was subject to a fair bit of scrutiny in the closing weeks of the Commission, especially with conflicting information coming from CSIS. CSIS found that there was no threat to the security of Canada as defined by the CSIS Act, but CSIS director David Vignault nonetheless recommended the invocation of the Emergencies Act.
National security and intelligence adviser Jody Thomas testified that the CSIS definition of security threats was “very narrow and outdated” and should be updated, though it is still the law of the land.
Rouleau’s report is due by statute February 20, 2023, the anniversary of the revocation of the public order emergency.
The Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB) is currently in the process of hiring a full-time position that will be exclusively devoted to engaging with transgender students.
We're hiring! The OCDSB is currently looking to fill the position of Trans and Gender Diverse Student Support Coordinator. Interested? Applications will be accepted until November 30 at 2:00 p.m. Learn more and apply today: https://t.co/8FgcIeiQ03pic.twitter.com/EUyWrbqeJb
In an online job posting for “Trans and Gender Diverse Student Support Coordinator”, the OCDSB says the position “assists and supports 2SLGBTQ+ students and families well-being and overcoming challenges; educating staff and building partnerships among schools.”
The Coordinator will also collaborate “with local 2SLGBTQ+ communities and organizations in support of student success.”
The job posting includes a list of needed skills that include being knowledgeable on “intersectionality, anti-oppression, and anti-racism” as well as having experience “applying these frameworks in an institutional setting and/or while working with children and youth.”
The board notes that applicants should also be familiar with “community resources and services for trans, gender diverse, and 2SLGBTQ+ youth and families in Ottawa.”
As for credentials, the posting says applicants must have a gender studies or social work diploma or degree – or education in a related field. It adds that a “minimum two years of experience working with trans, gender diverse, and 2SGLBTQ+ children, youth and/or communities” is preferable.
The board also considers “lived experience as a Two Spirit, trans, nonbinary or gender diverse person” is to be an asset, and notes that black, Indigenous and coloured applicants will be prioritized in the hiring process.
The posted salary range is $54,674 to $70,594 per year.
The OCDSB’s “Trans and Gender Diverse Student Support Coordinator” job opening comes amid several controversies related to transgender issues taking place in Ontario schools.
As previously reported by True North’s Sue-Ann Levy, the Toronto District School Board issued a controversial census that asked elementary students if they were transgender and if they knew about breast binding and tucking. The census ended up being shelved.
A mother also told True North’s Sue-Ann Levy that a Durham District School Board teacher read a book on transgender issues to her son’s grade 1 class.
A recent study from the UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute estimates that the number of transgender youth in the United States has doubled in the last five years – a figure some find concerning.
It’s no accident the number of transgender youth doubled in the last 5 years, and children mastectomies are up 389%. It’s a direct result of the radical ‘woke’ agenda being pushed on our kids by so-called “healthcare professionals,” MSM/social media, and even Biden directly. pic.twitter.com/FliY3MWuET
What do you call someone who says something that isn’t true under oath?
On Friday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took the stand at the Emergencies Act inquiry. Trudeau was the final witness to testify in the 4-week long process, which resulted in the total unravelling of the government’s narrative surrounding the invocation of the never-before-used Emergencies Act.
Trudeau testified that he never insulted the unvaccinated. If you put aside calling the unvaccinated “racists” and “misogynists,” well then maybe he didn’t insult the unvaccinated. We will leave that up to you to decide.
He also said to the Commission that the Emergencies Act did not suspend protesters’ fundamental rights and freedoms, and that he wished he had done more to convince Canadians to get vaccinated.
Tune in to the latest episode of Ratio’d with Harrison Faulkner
A constitutional rights group is sounding the alarm over Brampton’s attempt to prohibit election signs on private property.
On Monday Canadian Constitution Foundation litigation director Christine Van Geyn made public a letter her organization sent to Brown and City Council expressing their concerns.
“We are writing to you because we have concerns about the constitutionality of a municipal prohibition on all election signs, including on private property,” wrote Van Geyn.
Van Geyn argues that the proposed by-law violates Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which grants “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.”
Last Wednesday, Brampton City Council passed a motion to introduce a new bylaw to ban external signage on private property.
“Signs can still be distributed to residents for display inside their homes in their windows. It’s not as though candidates are prohibited from displaying and creating their own signs and offering them to residents,” zoning and sign bylaw services manager Elizabeth Corazzola told council.
“Any sign that is then displayed on the exterior of the building would obviously be in violation of the bylaw.”
Council cited persistent problems with sign tampering, visual clutter, distractions for drivers and the environment as justifying the signage ban. Additionally, the city wants to increase fines for those found violating bylaws pertaining to signs.
Van Geyn said on Twitter that her organization is ready to litigate on the matter if Brampton City Council doesn’t reconsider introducing the bylaw.
“To the extent that it prohibits individuals from putting municipal election signs on their own property it is an unjustified restriction on the right of those residents to freedom of expression, in particular, their constitutionally protected right to engage in political speech,” said Van Geyn.
“This violation of the Charter protected right of Brampton residents cannot be justified in a free and democratic society. The Sign Bylaw lacks a rational connection to a valid public purpose, is not minimally impairing and is disproportionate.”
Despite the growing chorus of voices weighing in on the massive protests breaking out in China against the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) and its zero-Covid policies, the Canadian federal government remains largely silent on the issue.
Protests – which are extremely rare in heavily-policed China – broke out against the CCP after an apartment fire killed ten people and injured nine in the western city of Urumqi. They were allegedly stuck in their residences because of the latest strict lockdown imposed on them by state officials.
Conservative Party of Canada deputy leader Melissa Lantsman tweeted in support of the Chinese protesters speaking out against their regime. “Stunning images being shared of protests happening across China, at a scale not seen in decades,” said Lantsman.
Stunning images being shared of protests happening across China, at a scale not seen in decades.
Conservative MP Michael Chong praised the protesters and invoked the memory of the Tiananmen Square massacre. “We remember the Tiananmen Square massacre of 5 June 1989. The world is watching,” said Chong.
Conservatives support the brave Chinese protesting. Their courage is an inspiration to all people fighting for freedom & democracy. They remind us that these universal values are for all.
We remember the Tiananmen Square massacre of 5 June 1989. The world is watching.#cdnpoli
But Canadian government officials have yet to comment on the protests despite the recent attempt by the federal government to take a stronger stance against the regime in Beijing.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and key cabinet ministers like Defence minister Anita Anand and minister of Foreign Affairs Melanie Joly have not yet commented on the protests.
Although the Trudeau government has been touting their long-awaited Indo-Pacific strategy to deepen economic and militaristic ties in the region in a way that pivots away from China.
Leader of the Opposition and Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre also has not commented on the protests in China.
“Incredible scenes of defiance continue to emerge out of China. The human spirit can be trampled on by tyrants and dictators but it can never be broken.,” Conservative Senator Leo Housakos remarked, retweeting a video showing the vast scale of the protests in the Chinese region of Wuhan.
Incredible scenes of defiance continue to emerge out of China. The human spirit can be trampled on by tyrants and dictators but it can never be broken. https://t.co/h8bkobLaWD
NDP leader Jagmeet Singh has also refrained from commenting on the Chinese protests. Nor has Maxime Bernier, leader of the People’s Party of Canada, despite the PPC being the most ardent and active defender of freedom during the pandemic.
Former Ontario MPP and Conservative Party leadership candidate Roman Baber came out with a scathing criticism of Canada’s politicians and legacy media for refusing to speak out against “Communist tyranny” against the Chinese people.
“It’s time for Canadian politicians to grow a backbone and stand firm with the Chinese people against Communist tyranny,” Baber wrote.
It's time for Canadian politicians to grow a backbone and stand firm with the Chinese people against Communist tyranny.
