Emergencies Act appeal to the Supreme Court shows Mark Carney is not so different from Justin Trudeau after all
6
Protestors set up a blockade at the foot of the Ambassador Bridge, sealing off the flow of commercial traffic over the bridge into Canada from Detroit, on Feb. 10, 2022. The Freedom Convoy protests and blockades were nothing police couldn’t handle using the Criminal Code, writes Josh Dehaas. Photo by Cole Burston/Getty Images
There was never any question what Prime Minister Mark Carney thought about the Freedom Convoy protesters in Ottawa. In a Globe and Mail op-ed published on Feb. 7, 2022, the “Ottawa resident and former governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England” wrote that the convoy was “terrorizing” people, that women were being forced to “flee abuse,” and that the elderly were “afraid to venture outside their homes.” He accused the organizers of “blatant treachery” and “sedition,” and proposed the government respond by “choking off the money.”
A week later, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau followed Carney’s advice, invoking the Emergencies Act for the first time in history to create shocking regulations that banned funding of or travelling to protests and ordered financial institutions to search for and seize bank accounts of suspects without warrants. This authoritarian overreach echoed around the world.
Still, I held out hope that the findings by a Federal Court judge and three judges of the Federal Court of Appeal that the invocation of the Act was unlawful and that the regulations made under it violated Charter rights would give Carney pause. Perhaps he believes in Charter rights more than his predecessor? If not, I thought maybe he would stand down from an appeal to emphasize a break with his predecessor. Turns out I was foolish to have been hopeful. In an application for leave to the Supreme Court of Canada that landed in my inbox on the last possible day, I learned that Carney is doubling-down on Trudeau’s illegal invocation.
In their application materials, the federal government makes the same basic argument they made before: some Freedom Convoy supporters had blockaded border crossings, and a handful of individuals near the Coutts, Alta., border blockade were found with a cache of firearms, so it was reasonable for Trudeau to take unprecedented measures to shut down freedom of expression and invade the privacy of all Freedom Convoy supporters nationwide.
As alarming as the blockades and the Coutts cache were, they were nothing police couldn’t handle using the Criminal Code. In fact, they had made their arrests and ended the border blockades by the time Trudeau dropped the bomb. As we, at the Canadian Constitution Foundation, explained in the federal courts — with agreement from all four judges who looked at the question — there was no justification offered by Trudeau for declaring a national emergency, suspending the right to support and travel to certain kinds of protests, and temporarily tossing away the ancient right to security against unreasonable searches by freezing bank accounts without warrants.
In their leave application, the government argues that the Federal Court of Appeal decision “hamstrings governments’ ability to respond effectively to future crises,” but this is simply not true. The Emergencies Act is explicit that governments can take extraordinary measures to deal with situations that pose a serious risk of violence and that cannot be dealt with using existing laws.
We must not forget that the Emergencies Act was Parliament’s genuinely noble response to previous prime ministers who had abused their power in times of crisis, including interning Japanese Canadians during the Second World War and denying habeas corpus to innocent Quebeckers during the 1970 October Crisis. It was designed to prevent prime ministers from over-reacting and suspending rights except when genuinely warranted. Like any law, it can be amended if Parliament sees fit. But why bother with democracy when you can roll the dice in the courts instead, I suppose? It turns out Carney is not so different from Trudeau after all. (National Post, March 18, 2026)
Josh Dehaas is Counsel with the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a legal charity that challenged the invocation of the Emergencies Act and the rules made under it in the Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal.
The Spirit of the Inquisition & Thought Control Lives on at the Toronto Catholic District School Board: Two Teachers Fired for “Racist” Posts
The following is the CBC’s not very newsy report on the firing to two Toronto Catholic teachers for allegedly “racist” posts over the Christmas holidays. The CBC provides no information as to what the posts said or who the teachers were or what their side of the story might be. Note that the vindictive Board seeking to cause maximum harm to their fired employees reported the matter to the Ontario College of Teachers which could take away their teaching certificates. Make no mistake about it, we live in a minority-controlled intellectual police state. “Freedom of thought” “freedom of expression” — these words from the Charter of Rights and Freedom are a sorry joke and empty promise.
A few more details did emerge from a CP24 report (March 16, 2026): “
CP24 previously reviewed a screengrab of what appears to be a series of messages on a shared social media platform in which a racist image is shared.
Another teacher reportedly responded to that image, saying “LMAO where are the chicken wings, (explicative) (N-word) are all the same.”s
“The Toronto Catholic District School Board says two high school teachers are no longer employed by the board after being accused of exchanging racist messages on a school social media page.
Advocacy group Parents of Black Children said last month that messages between two teachers at James Cardinal McGuigan Catholic High School found on a student athletics Instagram account included a racist slur and an anti-Black meme.t
The group accused school officials of not taking immediate action after a student who had access to the Instagram account screenshotted the exchange and notified the school’s principal.
The school board says the teachers were immediately placed on leave after school leadership received the images, and those teachers are no longer working for the board.
It also says it has reported the matter to the Ontario College of Teachers.
The board says it takes racism and discrimination “extremely seriously” and recognizes the impact this incident has had on the school community. (CBC News, March16, 2026)
Announced Trans Mayoralty Candidate in Hamilton Threatens Juno News For “Misgendering”; That Is, Telling the Truth Why I’m NOT backing down on my Hamilton mayoral race reportingMelanie BennetMar 19Dear Juno News readers,We don’t normally do this, but I am interrupting our regular Juno Jump Start report to let you know that Juno News is staring down the barrel of more lawfare because of my journalism.It is all thanks to my latest story about a trans-identified sex worker who is running to become the mayor of Hamilton.The individual featured in the piece contacted us to threaten legal action because we allegedly “misgendered” him. It is our editorial policy to tell the truth, and that means we don’t gloss over biological reality to please the woke mob.We knew this story would draw heat – and it has.The subject has threatened serious legal action, claiming our factual reporting amounts to libel, defamation, and harassment. We have faced down lawsuits before, and we will never let them stop us from reporting the truth.Here’s the actual email response from our Editor-in-Chief, Candice Malcolm:
The entire Juno Newsroom is in agreement, and I stand completely by what I reported.Men are not women. Men cannot become women. We will not gaslight our readers into pretending they can.The CBC and other tired old legacy outlets that are dependent on government handouts may happily go along with the delusion, just like they did with the Tumbler Ridge shooter, but Juno News will not. We will never.Let me be clear: Juno News is prepared to defend our work – and your right to read the truth – all the way to the end. We will not retract, we will not apologize, and we will not bend to pressure, no matter how aggressive the demands or how deep the pockets behind them.
Niagara Region chair Bob Gale at a regional council meeting on Feb. 26. (Niagara Regional Council)
Social Sharing
Niagara Regional Chair Bob Gale has abruptly resigned, just hours after anti-racism groups in Niagara demanded he apologize for owning a signed copy of Adolf Hitler’s infamous manifesto, Mein Kampf.
The Niagara Region Anti-Racism Association (NRARA) and Justice 4 Black Lives Niagara said in a joint statement on Wednesday that they condemned Gale for purchasing and owning the book signed by Hitler, the leader of the German Nazi Party and architect of the Holocaust, in which six million Jewish people were systematically murdered along with millions of Roma, 2SLGBTQ+ and other victims.
“[We] demand a public explanation and apology,” the groups said.
Within hours, Gale wrote a formal letter of resignation to Ontario Municipal Affairs Minister Rob Flack, effective immediately. A spokesperson for Flack told CBC the minister has accepted Gale’s resignation.
Gale, who stirred up a hornet’s nest of controversy in recent weeks over his proposals to dramatically reshape the landscape of Niagara’s municipal government system, did not mention Mein Kampf by name in his letter or confirm he owned it specifically.
He said he was merely the “owner of a historical book found in many libraries.”
Gale noted he is also the owner of a range of important historic documents.
Gale purchased book in 2010
According to Niagara heritage consultant Jon Jouppien, who has appraised many of Gale’s items for decades, including a Mein Kampf signed by Hitler, his collection is worth millions of dollars.
“It’s not to be taken as an insult to any anti-racist group,” Jouppien told CBC News. “It was collected in the sincere interest of history.” Jouppien added that “not many people have the resources [Gale has]” to preserve rare items and that his collection is a contribution to history.
Gale, a former police officer, is also known in the region for running his family’s oil company starting in the 1980s.
Gale said, in his letter, “as everyone knows, I am a passionate historian with a broad collection of historical art and artifacts,” adding, “my collection includes an 1859 letter from anti-slavery advocate John Brown, a letter from George Washington, a letter from Winston Churchill and Vatican archives.”
The anti-racism groups said they received information from a whistleblower that Gale purchased Hitler’s book, written when the future dictator was in prison, from auction in 2010 and that the book and Hitler’s signature were authenticated in 2018.
The groups questioned the acts of buying and taking the time to get an “authenticated signature of the genocidal fascist dictator responsible for the holocaust and World War II.”
Under Hitler, Nazis also banned opposing political parties, trade unions, the right to strike and, according to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, closed down or took over anti-Nazi newspapers, controlled what news appeared in media, banned and burned books that they categorized as un-German and controlled what soldiers wrote home during the war.
Jouppien says the inscribed copy, among the rest of Gale’s collection, were appraised “simply for insurance issues so that a general value can be put on the item that’s lost to a fire or stolen.”
In his appraisal report, prepared for the Certified Appraisers Guild of America, Jouppien said Hitler’s signature was “challenging” to authenticate but he believed that “to the best of his judgement the signature in this volume is authentic,” when compared to other examples.
An invoice issued by National Book Auctions to Robert Gale of Niagara-on-the-Lake, seen by CBC, details the purchase of the book on Dec. 5, 2010 for an amount of $6,345. U.S.-based Rare Book Hub, which maintains a database of rare book sales, confirmed a copy of Mein Kampf was sold on that date. Their record describes the copy as being inscribed by Hitler to his “close friend” Max Sauerteig.
According to the appraiser, Gale was “only imitating” Thomas Barnett, an English-born collector who built Canada’s first museum in 1827 in Niagara Falls.
Saleh Waziruddin of NRARA said “Bob Gale needs to explain himself publicly and apologize for owning one of the most notorious pieces of antisemitic hate.”
Sherri Darlene, founder of Justice 4 Black Lives Niagara, said in the joint statement that it’s no secret that racism has been a problem in the region for a long time.
“It’s shocking but not surprising that Niagara’s highest elected municipal official owns hate literature,” she said.
Member of ‘communist party circulated document,’ Gale said
The controversy comes at a time in which white nationalist groups in Niagara are becoming increasingly bold.
In a followup statement issued Thursday morning, Waziruddin said Mein Kampf reflects the same kind of hatred as those groups.
“White supremacist groups are publicly intimidating us in Niagara, pushing antisemitic conspiracy theories against migrants and trans people, so it was just untenable for any official, let alone the top politician, to hold on to a signed book that same hate is based on,” he said.
Waziruddin and Darlene urged Gale to destroy his copy of the book.
Gale was appointed regional chair by Flack in December following the death of former chair Jim Bradley. Flack cited Gale’s “strong record of public service” in announcing the appointment.
Gale said in his resignation letter Wednesday that “a member of the communist party circulated a dated document” that showed he owned a “historical book,” and that he was a target for some people when he undertook the work to begin “fixing the issues” at the Region.
“There was a strong vocal minority who decided they would stop at nothing in order to keep their fiefdoms and addiction to power and tax dollars,” he said. “They wish to paint a picture that is untrue and hurtful to my family, my friends, and those in Niagara that believe in the hard work I have undertaken.”
Earlier this year, Gale told the province he was “deeply contemplating” the possibility to amalgamate Niagara’s 12 municipalities to a one- or four-city model. After push back from residents, some local mayors and regional councillors, Niagara’s regional council voted in late February to hold Gale back from “any further action” concerning amalgamation.
CBC News has reached out to Gale for further comment.
Whatcott Update, In Toronto collecting signatures and new court date April 9
Bill Whatcott standing at the corner of Spadina and Dupont in his riding collecting signatures to run for Parliament
Dear Friends,
I landed in Toronto at 2 pm today. Everything about the flight spoke about the need for me to run and share my message and Christ centred election platform with the people of Toronto.
To see Bill’s, Godly, Christian, conservative, election platform for woke Toronto go here:
My flight lasted 4 1/2 hours from Edmonton to Toronto. Normally, when I fly with WestJet or Porter I have no idea what the politics or ideology of the stewardesses serving me are. Usually their uniforms are pretty and professional. On Flair today nothing was left to imagination. My stewardess had a large nose ring, was wearing short sleaves showing off a massive number of tatoos on her arms and she had a so-called pride, black lives matter, transgender flag lapel on the front of her shirt. I considered saying something, but decided to focus on the work awaiting me in my University-Rosedale riding instead. Anyways, I had little interaction with the stewardess. Flair is the ultimate no-frills flight. No water, no snack, no nothing, unless you are willing to pay a premium price. I chose to starve and dehydrate until I got off the plane as I didn’t want anymore of my money going to their corporate agenda. On their Instagram I informed Flair that so long as promoting sodomy is their corporate priority I won’t be flying with them.
Anyways, after I got my rental car I headed straight to the Elections Canada office in downtown Toronto. I learned that as of today the Conservative Party of Canada has not named a candidate to run for University-Spadina riding. I assume they will find someone, but it is amazing in my view that four days into the by-election being called they still don’t have a candidate.
The Chief Electoral Officer is a true federal bureaucrat and spoke like one, but he was helpful and seemed non-partisan. I pulled out my election flyer with an almost naked sodomite hugging Carney, a murdered unborn child, and a crow I shot last year and turned into a tasty stew. The Electoral officer winced a little and proceeded to act like he didn’t notice my election flyer and proceeded to give me some pretty useful information in regards to making sure my campaign complies with the election act.
By 4:30 pm I was on the street collecting signatures. It is not easy to get people to sign, but I got 17 signatures so far. Amongst those I approached, I noticed some Liberal supporters were polite and willing to sign my nomination paper. Their attitude is their mind is made up and they will be voting for the pro-abortion Danielle Martin who will likely take this riding by a massive margin, but they see the value of allowing independants like myself to run and have their voice heard. I stress to potential electors that signing my paper is not an endorsement of my politics or a vote for me, it only means they feel I should be allowed to run. Some of the Danielle Martin supporters are actually polite and open minded, so I let them know I was truly grateful they were willing to sign my paper to allow me to run.
Anecdotally, the hard left people in the riding are less friendly. I approached two black lesbians and asked them to sign my nomination paper. They didn’t know my election platform and didn’t care, they just walked on. Awhile later I approached a heavily tattooed woman with a dozen or so piercings and we chatted a bit and I petted her dog. When I asked her if she would sign my nomination paper, she demanded to know my politics. I had an idea she was no conservative and I didn’t want to lie to her, so I picked what I thought were the least controversial parts of my platform and talked about the need to restore law and order and tackle the massive drug plague in Toronto. As soon as I said that she shut down and said “I’m not signing your paper” and walked away.
A lot of immigrants live in the riding and some of them were friendly and approachable. One Ukrainian girl started signing before telling me she was not a citizen after I asked and one Israeli immigrant did the same. I thanked them but explained for them to be an elector they needed to be a citizen. I guess that’s why Elections Canada recommends you get more than 150 signatures, even though the requirement is 100 signatures.
Anyways, by 7:30 pm it was getting dark and I was getting tired so I packed it in. Tomorrow my official agent and I will be opening my election bank account. Pray we have no problem doing this. Pray I get all the signatures I need and get my paper work in before I have to go back to Alberta. I have 5 days to get this done. If anyone reading this lives close to Toronto and can help for even an hour or two I would be grateful.
My lawyer called tonight and told me we need another court hearing to deal with my “hate crime” case. I can’t say anything much as the case is under a publication ban. Anyways, I promised my lawyer in the event I win this by-election and stay out of jail, I will give her a cushy patronage position as my top legal advisor. It remains to be seen if she quits her private practice for bountiful government largesse from potential Member of Parliament Bill Whatcott or not.
To read about my “hate crime” and why I am being dragged to Toronto a second time go here: MassResistance
My next court date is April 9 at 9:00 am. I think my lawyer and the Crown will be appearing virtually, but seeing as I am in the riding campaigning and seeing as the Superior Court is in my riding, I will likely appear this time in person.
Election Day is April 13th, 2026….
Existing in Toronto is not cheap. If you would like to help with my living expenses while I am here you can go here: https://www.lifefunder.com/whatcott/
In Christ’s Service, Bill Whatcott
“Know therefore that the Lord your God is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and steadfast love with those who love him and keep his commandments, to a thousand generations.” Deuteronomy 7:9
Seven Air Canada pilots who refused complying with controversial Covid-19 vaccine mandates on religious grounds will soon be compensated by the airline Seven Air Canada pilots who refused complying with controversial Covid-19 vaccine mandates on religious grounds will soon be compensated by the airline after an arbitrator ruled that their rights had been violated.In his ruling, Arbitrator James Hayes stated, “All of the grievors testified honestly and the substantive nexus between their religious beliefs and objections to the employer mandatory vaccination policy was manifest.”
Additionally, Hayes noted that the Air Canada union “has made out a prima facie case of workplace religious discrimination pursuant to the Collective Agreement and the Canadian Human Rights Act.”Air Canada was ordered to compensate the pilots, most of whom were captains, within 60 days for denying their religious exemptions. The arbitration decision stated that the arbitrator would “remain seized in the unlikely event that calculation of those damages becomes an issue.”The pilots were part of a group called Free to Fly, which advocates for workers affected by refusing to adhere to government COVID-19 vaccination mandates
.“I am thrilled these seven men (Colin Finlay, David Sibley, Aric Verduyn, Darren Tucker, Matthew Griffin, Christopher Olson, and Kale Haley) were able to bring glory to God throughout this arduous process,” wrote Free to Fly co-founder Greg Hill in a statement on Thursday. “They gave powerful, Biblical reasons for the hope that is within them – the only true source of hope and light for our dark world!”Hayes ruled that the seven pilots should have been “placed on initial paid leaves of absence, as had been their pilot colleagues granted exemptions at the outset” instead of being fired.The COVID-19 vaccine mandate, implemented in October 2021 under former prime minister Justin Trudeau, placed an unprecedented and sweeping burden on federal workers and those in the transportation sector.
Those who chose to abstain were prohibited from travelling by air, boat, or train, both domestically and internationally, resulting in thousands of Canadians losing their livelihoods for failing to comply.“God speaks to us in many ways through a well-formed moral conscience and often we can be to distracted to listen. But in this case, I heard Him clearly in my heart and soul: that to take the vaccine would be to go against His will for me,” said Air Canada Captain Colin Finlay.Finlay, who is Catholic, said his faith prevented him from getting the shot because of its connection to aborted fetal cells.“For me, this was not a matter of personal preference or politics.
It was a matter of obedience to God and fidelity to my Catholic faith,” he added.Air Canada Captain Christopher Olson also objected to the vaccine because fetal cell lines from aborted babies were used in the making of the mRNA shots.“My faith is with me at all times and informs all of my decisions, including decisions about what I allow into my body. Therefore, as companies around Canada began discussing mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policies, I immediately recognized the potential conflict with my faith,” wrote Olson.According to Hayes, the rationale for seeking religious exemptions by Olson, Finlay and the five other pilots was “sincere.”“I find without hesitation that Captain Olson’s objection to vaccination was grounded in sincere religious conviction,” reads the ruling.
The ruling follows a similar decision last year that saw Canada’s second-largest airline, WestJet, ordered to compensate an employee “wrongfully terminated” for refusing to be vaccinated.Calgary Justice Aldo Argento ordered the airline to pay Duong Yee $65,587.72—the equivalent of 11 months’ salary—after her termination on Dec. 1, 2021, when she declined to be vaccinated.“The plaintiff’s refusal to comply with the company’s vaccination policy did not impact her job performance,” Argento wrote in his decision. “It did not endanger the defendant’s employees or the public as the plaintiff was working from home. While a future, partial return to work was anticipated, that was not yet implemented.”
78 year old former School Trustee Barry Neufeld arrested at Chilliwack Court House, as officer grabs handcuffs, Nov 24, 2025. Neufeld was arrested (as reported previously by The New Westminster Times) due to his inability to pay more than $50,000 to Chilliwack School Trustee Carin Bondar in relation to a defamation suit she brought against him. image NWT
BC’s “Human Rights” Tribunal last week ordered former Chilliwack School Board Trustee Barry Neufeld to pay $750,000 to the Chilliwack Teachers Association over injury to the “dignity, feelings and self-respect” of a small but unknown number of LGBT teachers and staff.
What vile hatred did Mr. Neufeld promote to warrant a $750,000 punishment? Did he suggest that all the gay teachers in Chilliwack should be fired? Or forced to undergo conversion therapy?
Screen capture from BC Human Rights Tribunal Homepage. Image: from HRT website
Here is the first of dozens of comments made by Mr. Neufeld from 2017 to 2022, reprinted by the BC “Human Rights” Tribunal in its 50,000-word, 64-page ruling:
“The Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) program instructs children that gender is not biologically determined, but is a social construct. … allowing little children to choose to change gender is nothing short of child abuse. But now the BC Ministry of Education has embraced the LGBTQ lobby and is forcing this biologically absurd theory on children in our schools.”
And here is the last comment of Mr. Neufeld that the Tribunal reprinted in its lengthy decision:
“… if an anorexic person is suffering, you don’t pat them on the back and say, here, here, I’ll give you some diet pills, and you don’t have to eat as much. Sometimes the loving thing is saying something very challenging to a person who’s struggling with a problem. If an alcoholic is suffering because they can’t find any booze, you don’t hand them a case of beer. You tell them to, you know, buckle up and do without. Give them a cup of coffee instead.”
The other opinions expressed by Mr. Neufeld from 2017 to 2022 are like the first and last comments here above: standard, run-of-the-mill citizen opposition to radical transgender ideology.
Screen capture of page from recent BC Human Rights Tribunal decision regarding Barry Neufeld. Image: from BC HRT website
The local teachers’ union was outraged that an elected Trustee would publicly and repeatedly state his belief that there are only two sexes, that children should not be exposed to transgender ideology in schools, and that gender-confused children should be provided with compassionate help rather than with puberty blockers, opposite-sex hormones and eventual gender-reassignment surgeries.
The teachers’ union found a like-minded ally in the BC Human Rights Tribunal. Both organizations fervently embrace unscientific transgender ideology. Neither organization understands that free expression is the cornerstone of a democracy that embraces a diversity of opinions, and that facilitates healthy debate about controversial issues. Like other censors throughout human history, they believe in “free speech for me, but not for thee.”
Rather than seeking to persuade parents and other citizens to support SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity), the teachers’ union and the “Human Rights” Tribunal instead use coercive state power to silence and punish their political opponents. They use section 7 of BC’s Human Rights Code, which prohibits “discriminatory publications” that indicate “discrimination” or even “an intention to discriminate” against a person or group, or that is likely to expose a person or group to hatred or “contempt.”
Section 7 pertains only to speech. It does not prohibit discrimination in services, tenancies, property purchases, job ads, wages, employment and trade union membership. Section 7 applies to all speech in all public places, everywhere in BC, online and off-line. Non-criminal, non-hateful “discriminatory” speech in public is illegal in BC. Only fully private communications are exempted.
Mr. Neufeld is not the first person whose basic human right to speak freely has been trampled into the ground by the Tribunal.
In 2019, the Tribunal ordered political activist William Whatcott to pay $55,000 to unsuccessful NDP candidate Morgane Oger, who felt offended by a plain-spoken election flyer titled “Transgenderism vs. Truth.” The flyer included the following: “Because gender is God-given and immutable, “transgenderism” is an impossibility. A male cannot “transition” into a female, nor can a female “transition” into a male. One can only cross dress and disfigure themselves with surgery and hormones to look like the gender they are not.” The Tribunal ruled that Mr. Whatcott violated section 7 of the Human Rights Code because the flyer demonstrated “an intention to discriminate against Morgane Oger in a critical area of public life, namely participation in an election as a candidate for public office.”
Barry Neufeld has been punished for expressing opinions intended to support, protect, and advocate for the well-being of young people. British Columbians who love freedom and democracy should be outraged by the Tribunal imposing its woke ideology on citizens by censoring conservative and libertarian speech. Citizens should not be punished for speaking out to protect young people from irreversible harm (such as permanent infertility) that results from unscientific transgender ideology.
But the real culprit is not the Tribunal. It’s BC’s Human Rights Code that makes non-criminal political speech punishable in the first place.
The best way to prevent further injustices of this kind is to repeal section 7 from BC’s Human Rights Code.
Some might argue that repealing section 7 opens the door to signage like “Apartments for Whites only” or “women need not apply.” But signs like that are clearly prohibited by sections 8-14 of the Human Rights Code. Sections 8-14 already outlaw discrimination in any accommodation, service or facility customarily available to the public, including hiring and employment practices.
Repealing section 7 would place all people in BC on an equal footing, by removing the Tribunal’s power to punish speech that it disagrees with under the false pretext of “promoting human rights.” The federal Criminal Code prohibition against the wilful promotion of hatred against an identifiable group (section 319) would not be impacted in any way. The amended Human Rights Code – without section 7 – would continue to prohibit discrimination in the provision of goods and services, the same way that it does now.
Powell River paramedic and life-long resident Ted Vizzutti. Photo: Contributed
It was supposed to be all about reconciliation with First Nations.
But that’s not how it turned out for Powell River born and raised paramedic Ted Vizzutti, forced out of his job based on unsubstantiated allegations of racism.
The Tla’amin First Nation took umbrage with the town’s namesake, Israel Wood Powell, and asked that the City change its name.
Like thousands of other townsfolk, Ted Vizzutti pushed back.
Disapproving of the name change cost Vizzutti his job.
BC Emergency Health Services (“BCEHS”) forced the 38-year veteran out of his beloved career, accusing him of racism.
Vizzutti, as described in some detail below, spent 38 years doing often life-saving work for people in his community, regardless of their background.
Like a lot of paramedics, Vizzutti fits the profile of the heroic first responder.
How and why did Ted Vizzutti get drummed out of his job?
The name change discussions date to the City of Powell River’s formation of a “Joint Working Group” in 2021, which led to an ultimately inconclusive city-wide consultation process in 2022.
A detailed, July 2022 report, summarizing the consultations revealed broad-based community opposition to the name change leading the working group to stand down and call for a “time of reflection.”
As illustrated in the below graphic, survey data included in the Working Group report revealed that a majority of both “racialized” and “white” residents were either “strongly opposed” to or “leaning no” on the proposed name change.
Survey results from Powell River’s Joint Working Group Report analysed by race. Image from Powell River Joint Working Group Report.
Despite the “time of reflection,” proponents and opponents of the name change continued to advocate for their positions.
According to news reports, on May 4th, 2023, Vizzutti appeared with a group of other residents at Powell River City Hall to voice opposition to a proposal to change the City’s name, some wearing “I (heart) Powell River” t-shirts.
Vizzutti had made a post to his personal Facebook page inviting people to the City Hall gathering. The post was entitled “Say no to the name change of Powell River.”
Vizzutti’s Facebook post about the event seemed entirely benign.
“We, the citizens of Powell River,” wrote Vizzutti, “are coming together to tell elected officials that we are not in favour of a name change for our city. Please come out in support with your signs and voices. Two wrongs don’t make a right.”
According to Vizzutti, a group of protesters in favour of the name change gathered outside Powell River City Hall for the May 4th council meeting. Vizzutti says one of the protesters, threatened to have him fired from his job.
The next day, May 5th, Vizzutti received a severe Code of Conduct violation letter from Sheree Haydu, Manager, Clinical Operations, Sunshine Coast for BCEHS, demanding he appear at a meeting to address alleged “racism.”
According to Haydu, “On May 4, 2023, the Employer was made aware of your involvement in the following allegations: Circulating racist, anti-indigenous, and defamatory content on social media and door to door.”
According to Vizzutti, counter-protestor approached him and yelled close to his face “We’re going to get you fired!”
Sure enough, the next day, Vizzutti was summoned to the disciplinary meeting.
A series of meetings and correspondence ensued, resulting in Vizzutti leaving the employ of BCEHS.
A May 30th letter from Haydu included an expanded list of new vague and inflammatory allegations against the 58-year-old Mr. Vizzutti, including:
“You have impacted community members and made them feel unsafe.”
“Your comments and actions have impacted the Tla’amin First Nations community wherein they do not feel safe to call 911.”
“You have directly impacted your colleagues where they feel unsafe.”
Vizzutti says, upon reading the allegation that Tla’amin members felt “unsafe” calling 911, he phoned a friend within that community. The community member, according to Vizzutti, said that he was unaware of anyone declining to call 911 due to feeling “unsafe.”
The New Westminster Times spoke to Sheree Haydu by phone to ask questions and seek comment. Haydu declined to comment and referred the New Westminster Times to BCEHS media relations.
A series of questions were sent to Haydu by email seeking evidence that would substantiate the serious allegations leveled at Vizzutti.
Those questions were forwarded to BCEHS Manager, Media and Issue Communications Bowen Osoko, who responded via email: “We are unable to comment on confidential human resources matters as per privacy legislation, including any of the personal information you provided.”
Prior to a scheduled meeting with BCEHS, Vizzutti’s union representatives told him that he was going to be fired at the meeting. The union reps told Vizzutti that if he retired before they fired him, he could avoid loss of income and a lengthy fight.
In the face of the total loss of his income, the prospect of a lengthy dispute, Vizzutti decided to retire.
In response to Vizzutti’s retirement, the investigation was put in abeyance, but to Vizzutti’s great surprise, the BCEHS letter from Haydu included new threats, restrictions and insults.
“Should you choose to pursue employment with BC Emergency Health Services or Provincial Health Services Authority in the future, we reserve the right to re-commence and conclude the investigative process,” wrote Haydu, effectively cutting off any future BCEHS employment prospects for Vizzutti indefinitely.
“Often when paramedics retire, they work part-time or move to other locations where they offer their services if needed,” said Vizzutti in an interview. “With this threat of reopening the investigation, they have blackballed me across the entire province.”
Another Haydu directive was particularly humiliating to Vizzutti.
“Furthermore, as indicated in the initial 11.04 notice, you are prohibited from visiting any BCEHS property, including all stations and offices. I will arrange for any personal items currently stored at Station 229 to be returned to you as well as for you to return any BCEHS property including, but not limited to keys, ID Badge, and uniforms.”
“I was made persona non grata in a field where I had performed admirably and enjoyed a great deal of respect and seniority,” said Vizzutti. “I never did anything wrong but I am being treated like dirt.”
Based on our investigation, Ted Vizzutti was just one of thousands of Powell River residents voicing concern over the name change proposal.
Powell River Mayor Ron Woznow, elected in 2022, spoke candidly about the name change, which he said suffered from “a very flawed process.”
“The challenge with that was the majority of people in Powell River felt it was not a meaningful consultation,” said Woznow. “So what the city did was, rather than just going to talk to the residents of Powell River about this request, they put together a consultation process where the people from Powell River couldn’t go and ask a question.”
“So I think basically, where we’re at now, it’s been my position since I ran, is we have a request from the Nation, and it’s important that each member of Powell River has an opportunity to learn about the significance of this and then cast a vote as to whether or not they would like to do this or not,” said Woznow. “And if 50.1% want to do it, then council would take that to the provincial government and ask, if 50.1% or more don’t want to do it, then we’ll politely say to our neighbours, with regard to your request, the majority of people in Powell River would not like to do that.”
Despite the fact that City of Powell River’s public engagement process on the name change was by its own admission inconclusive and, as Woznow put it, “flawed,” the issue has suddenly been put back on the agenda.
At its January 16, 2024 Committee of the Whole meeting, a draft of the City’s “Strategic Priorities” was tabled that included this bombshell priority: “Take real steps towards a name change.”
The surprise inclusion of the name change as a “priority” brought out a large crowd to City Hall, some holding signs. It was evident at the January 16th meeting that the strategic plan was not unanimously supported.
At the meeting, councillors voted 6:1 to bring forward the plan for debate and possible adoption at the City’s February 15th, 2024 meeting.
Vizzutti, whose opposition to the name change seems very common in the town, feels that he has been unfairly singled out by BCEHS.
“The BCEHS is not only trying to take away my right to freedom of expression, their discriminatory actions are robbing me of my right to work,” said Vizzutti. “I’m at a time in my career where I can be helping new recruits learn the ropes, but they are blocking me from saving lives in the community like I used to.”
“I love my job,” said Vizzutti. “I wanted to keep serving my community, but they didn’t want me. It’s not fair.”
Who is Ted Vizzutti?
The bustling lunch crowd at popular Powell River Julie’s Airport Café seemed more like a family reunion for Ted Vizzutti. The hugs, high-fives, and “hey-how-are-ya’s” evoked a warm sense of community connection that people often associate with a small town.
South Harbour marina on Powell River’s waterfront on Malaspina Strait.
When the New Westminster Times met with Vizzutti, he said he had told no one in town why he was not at work. The truth is BCEHS had muzzled him.
When asked about his stand-out paramedic stories, Vizzutti recounted the kind of harrowing tails that regularly lead people to describe first responders as heroes.
“One thing about being a paramedic in a small town is that you often end up on calls where you know the people you are trying to help,” explained Ted. “It can make the job more emotional.”
A vivid memory Vizzutti shared was his first car accident.
“It turned out two of my high school friends went off the road at high-speed on their way back from Lund,” explained Vizzutti. “The car was going so fast when it hit the tree that the engine flew out and was found hundreds of feet away. The vehicle was suspended six feet in the air. When I managed to climb up to the wreckage, I found my young friend dead at the scene, impaled on a branch.”
Then there was the radio call from an injured logger, miles from nowhere, in a mountain up Powell Lake during a snowstorm, in the middle of the dense, slippery, and dangerous coastal forest.
“There were no roads in, so me and my partner commandeered a boat to head up Powell Lake to get closer to the guy,” explained Ted. “The boat malfunctioned, so we had to turn around and get ourselves another boat. We ended up at a trail head into the logger’s location and embarked on a multi-hour hike. Having no spiked boots, I almost broke my leg when I slipped on a log, but managed to free my pinned foot and carry on. The person had been struck by a fallen tree to his back and had been spitting up blood. We packaged him up and slid him down on the snow. This call lasted 6 hours. At that time I was making a call out wage of approximately $10 an hour.”
It was the kind of story that makes you ask yourself “why would anyone want to do this job?”
“I’m like everyone else who does my job. We don’t think of ourselves heroes,” says Ted, humbly. “We’re just doing our jobs.”
Vizzutti’s undeserved ouster from his job as a paramedic comes at a time of extreme staffing shortages across the entire BC healthcare system.
After several calls to the Tla’amin First Nation for comment, Director of Communications Davis McKensie called back. McKensie said that he was “new” and didn’t know much about the name-change topic, and said that he needed time to speak with others and back to us with possible comments.
As it turns out, contrary to what McKenzie told the New Westminster Times on the phone, McKensie appears in fact to be very knowledgeable about the Powell River name change process.
McKensie was a member of the above noted Working Group, formed in 2021.
Also, as disclosed and discussed at Powell Rivers’ January 16, 2024 Committee of the Whole meeting at City Hall (archived on video), McKenzie is in the midst of producing a documentary on behalf of the Tla’amin First Nation about the Powell River name-change process.
In an email, McKenzie stated: “I checked around and it looks like the Nation would decline to comment on this.”
The Ted Vizzutti story epitomizes the now common overreach of zealous Canadian bureaucrats seeking to rob citizens of their constitutionally protected right to freedom of expression.
Across Canada indigenous calls for geographic place name changes are put forward in the name of reconciliation with First Nations and “decolonization.”
As the story of Ted Vizzutti illustrates, “decolonization” could turn out to be the opposite of reconciliation.
A public square in the Westview area of Powell River, British Columbia has signage with two place names.
“The white people in Canada are subhuman because of what they’ve allowed to happen,” said former Chief Councillor of the Tla’amin First Nation KWAST-en-ayu (Maynard Harry) in a 90 minute phone interview with The New Westminster Times about the City of Powell River’s controversial name change proposal.
Tla’amin consultant and public speaker KWAS-en-ayu (Maynard Harry). Photo: from Indigenous Insights webpage.
KWAST-en-ayu reached out to The New Westminster Times following our story about veteran Powell River paramedic Ted Vizzutti, drummed out of his job after 39 years and called “racist” by BC Emergency Health Services for opposing his City’s proposed name change.
Powell River paramedic Ted Vizzutti. Vizzutti was muscled out of his job by his employer for opposing the City’s name change. Contributed
KWAST-en-ayu is the founder of Indigenous Insight. He runs a seminar called “Colonizer Rehab,” and is credited with shaping the City of Powell River’s “Community Accord” through collaborative work with former Powell River mayor Stewart Alsgard.
The 2003 Community Accord, which laid the groundwork for Powell River’s ongoing engagement with the Tla’amin First Nation, states: “Paramount is the respect for and appreciation of each other’s diverse backgrounds.”
If KWAST-en-ayu is any indication, Tla’amin respect for people outside their community has dwindled to near zero.
“White people need to acknowledge their culture is lost,” said KWAST-en-ayu bluntly. “White settler culture is a lost culture because nothing good defines white people.”
“If I insult white people, I don’t give a sh-t,” admitted KWAST-en-ayu.
Judging from KWAST-en-ayu’s recent comments to this paper, and the strident vitriol of other Powell River activists, many proponents of the name change are also seeking to further a hard-left ideological agenda.
Latest Developments
On January 30th, 2024, Powell River City Council passed a motion whereby the City will engage in public consultation on the name change, leading to an official vote on the question coinciding with the next municipal election in 2026.
In recent weeks, public discourse in Canada has turned sharply toward Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act. On its face, it sounds reasonable: strengthen our ability to address hate crimes and online hate speech.
But protecting Canadians from real harm is not the same thing as expanding criminal law into areas that are already covered by existing legislation — and that expansion carries real risks to charter rights, free expression, and ordinary citizens.
This isn’t a fringe concern. It’s a constitutional concern.
⚖️ Canadian law already addresses hate conduct ⚖️
Canada’s Criminal Code already contains robust provisions to deal with hate-motivated offences:
Section 318 prohibits advocating genocide.
Section 319 makes it a criminal offence to publicly incite hatred or willfully promote hatred against identifiable groups.
Separate provisions exist for threats, intimidation, and mischief based on protected characteristics.
Courts have used these provisions to convict individuals engaged in actual harm, not merely offensive speech. Law-enforcement agencies already have the tools they need to prosecute violent conduct, including hate-motivated violence.
In other words: we are not defending a legal vacuum. The current law already covers serious criminal conduct.
Bill C-9 expands, rather than clarifies, legal discretion
One of the most troubling changes proposed by Bill C-9 is the removal of the requirement that the Attorney General’s consent be obtained before hate-propaganda charges proceed.
For decades, this safeguard ensured that prosecutors would exercise legal judgment and discretion before bringing charges involving nuanced and sensitive issues of expression. Removing this gatekeeper opens the door to expanded prosecution — and potential misuse — of criminal laws against speech.
That’s not theoretical. It’s legal advice echoed by civil-liberties organizations who warn that discretion without checks inevitably leads to inconsistent and ideologically skewed enforcement.
This is not about protecting extremists — it’s about ensuring that ordinary citizens are not drawn into criminal proceedings for controversial but non-violent expression.
The definitions remain unclear — and that matters
Bill C-9 attempts to define “hatred” more precisely, but precision in law enforcement isn’t created simply by putting words on paper. Many terms remain subjective and open to interpretation.
What one person sees as strong political opinion, another might see as “hate.” Historically, courts have been cautious about defining these concepts because:
Context matters,
Intention matters,
And words have different meanings in different settings.
Yet Bill C-9 lowers the threshold for criminal charges and shifts the burden toward the speaker — not the listener.
That’s why legal scholars worry that the threat of prosecution — even if convictions are rare — can chill free speech, peaceful protest, and legitimate debate.
Removing the “good-faith” safeguard is dangerous
Currently, the Criminal Code contains a section — Section 319(3) — that protects statements made in a good-faith attempt to describe or discuss religious texts or beliefs, even if those statements might offend.
A recent committee vote accepted an amendment that would remove this defence entirely. This has profound implications:
Reading from religious scripture in a devotional context could be misinterpreted as “promoting hatred.”
Preachers, teachers, and authors could be exposed to criminal investigation for discussing sacred texts.
This “removal of the good-faith defence” isn’t a minor technical tweak — it’s a substantive change that affects how ordinary citizens engage in religious and philosophical discourse.
This matters because free expression is a foundation of Canadian democracy
The Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly held that freedom of expression is protected under Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That protection includes speech that is controversial, offensive, or unpopular, so long as it doesn’t directly cause harm.
Bill C-9 tilts the balance toward criminalization of speech that is non-violent and controversial — and in doing so, it risks eroding confidence in our legal system as a protector of fundamental rights, not a weapon against dissent.
We do not have to choose between safety and freedom. But we do have to defend the established legal framework that already holds violent and threatening conduct to account.
What citizens can do now
Parliamentarians are elected to represent the views and interests of Canadians. When a bill touches on core freedoms, citizens have every right — and every reason — to engage:
Encourage thoughtful, evidence-based debate rather than reactionary politics.
Our rights are not granted by Parliament — they are protected by law and deserve protection from overreach.
In closing
Bill C-9 may be well-intentioned in its aspirations, but intention is not law.
We do not need legislation that duplicates existing protections. We should not accept laws that expand criminal liability in ways that chill free expression and jeopardize civil liberties.
A strong democracy protects people from harm, but also from the overreach of its own institutions.
The Spirit of the Inquisition & Thought Control Lives on at the Toronto Catholic District School Board: Two Teachers Fired for “Racist” Posts
