Bill C-257

An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act (protecting against discrimination based on political belief)

This enactment amends the Canadian Human Rights Act to add political belief and political activity to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination.

Freedom of Political Expression

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table another petition in support of Bill C-257, a bill that, coincidentally, stands in my name. I thank the petitioners for bringing this petition to me to table in the House.

The petitioners note that Canadians have a right to be protected against discrimination and that they can face political discrimination. While there are various other prohibited grounds of discrimination, political belief is not currently included in the Canadian Human Rights Act. Bill C-257 would add political belief or activity as prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act. In addition to protecting Canadians from discrimination, it would allow for free and open debate within Canada without people being worried about consequences.

The petitioners want the House to support Bill C-257 and also defend the rights of Canadians to peacefully express their political beliefs.

[Nusaiba Al-Azem, Director of Legal Affairs, National Council of Canadian Muslims]

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon. I'd like to thank the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage for the invitation to speak today and for all the important work you do.

My name is Nusaiba Al-Azem. I'm the director of legal affairs at the National Council of Canadian Muslims. I'm pleased to be here today during this important study in this committee on the protection of freedom of expression. The question of this committee in looking at the means for government to protect freedom of expression is a profound one, as it forms our major and main concern around what is, in our view, the most fundamental challenge to free expression in Canada today.

Our submission is quite simple. The most pressing challenge to free expression in Canada has become the wanton use of the notwithstanding clause—that is, section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms—by governments across Canada to derogate from our charter rights, including freedom of expression.

In our view, the overuse of section 33 has become nothing short of a constitutional crisis. We all learned in grade school civics—even I learned in law school—that the usage of the notwithstanding clause, if used improperly to attack fundamental freedoms like section 2 of the charter, would mean the end of that government. I recall my professor using the words “political suicide”. Unfortunately, our grade school civics lessons were wrong. That professor was wrong.

We at NCCM warned of this at what we viewed to be the beginning of this crisis, when we went to court some years ago to challenge Bill 21, for which we currently await leave to the Supreme Court of Canada. Bill 21, of course, to us, remains the enshrinement of stripping away the rights of minorities and the right to free expression and freedom of religion, backed by the notwithstanding clause, to make it so that Muslims, Jews and Sikhs cannot freely express their faith by wearing a turban, a hijab or a kippah and be, for example, a public school teacher. Multiple courts in Quebec have agreed that the ban is discriminatory but is saved by the notwithstanding clause.

While NCCM and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association previously successfully went to court to stop Bill 62, which in some ways was a predecessor and prohibited women wearing a niqab from riding a bus or getting a library card in Quebec, thus far, the notwithstanding clause has become a tool raised by governments in Ontario, Saskatchewan and Quebec as a constitutional get-out-of-jail-free card to evade judicial review. Its use has been threatened in many more provinces as well.

Our recommendation to this committee is the following: that this committee begin a specific study on the appropriate use of the notwithstanding clause. Make no mistake: the very future of our federation is at risk when quasi-emergency powers become normalized in this way.

Our second concern, which we view as a current fundamental risk to the freedom of expression in Canada, relates to the need to protect freedom of expression in this austere House. We support pieces of legislation that have been put forward to better protect freedom of expression, like the Conservative private member's bill, Bill C-257, which would protect against discrimination based on political belief.

We have seen too often attacks on freedom of speech against those who would speak for controversial causes, as somehow support of Palestinian human rights is regarded to be and has been over the last year. We have seen many cases, for example, of people losing their jobs for simply raising public concerns about the Israeli military invasion in Gaza. We have seen a concerted suppression of Palestinian expression and narratives, and we think that's wrong. We recommend that the government explore ways to make sure that the critique of any foreign government, whether that's Israel, China, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Russia or India, is always protected.

I look forward to the questions from committee members. Thank you.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from Canadians who share their condolences with the member for Kingston and the Islands on being passed over for cabinet again. I am sorry, I am misreading it.

This is a petition in support of Bill C-257. It is a private member's bill I have tabled that seeks to protect the fundamental rights of Canadians by adding political belief and activity as prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act. This bill would combat political discrimination.

The petition calls on members of the House to support Bill C-257 and to defend the rights of Canadians to peacefully express their political opinions.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I will conclude with a petition in support of Bill C-257, which would ban discrimination on the basis of political belief or activity. The petitioners want to see the House support Bill C-257 to protect Canadians from political discrimination.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, the next petition is in support of Bill C-257. It is a private member's bill that stands in my name that would add political belief or activity as prohibited grounds of discrimination to the Canadian Human Rights Act.

This bill would protect Canadians from discrimination on the basis of their political views. Currently, while Canadians are protected in the federal jurisdiction from discrimination on the basis of many different criteria, there is no protection against discrimination on the basis of political views. This lack of protection can have a chilling effect when people maybe limit their public comments on issues that are important to them for fear they might face professional or other forms of discrimination or retaliation.

Petitioners call on the House to support Bill C-257, which would protect Canadians from political discrimination.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to table a number of petitions on behalf of my constituents. I hope there will not be too much heckling. Although heckling is allowed, we certainly would not want to throw out the baby with the bathwater in that regard.

The first petition I am tabling is in support of Bill C-257, which is an excellent private member's bill I have tabled in the House. It would add political belief and activity as prohibited grounds of discrimination within the Canadian Human Rights Act. Petitioners note that currently there is no prohibition against discriminating against someone on the basis of their political beliefs, and that adding that prohibition would align well with prohibitions on discrimination on the basis of other characteristics already protected in the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Petitioners note in particular that it is in the best interests of democracy to protect public debate and the free exchange of ideas. Political discrimination can deter individuals from participating and limit their ability to participate freely in public debate. Bill C-257 would protect the free exchange of ideas that helps to advance the common good through substantial exchanges among free people.

Petitioners therefore want the House to pass Bill C-257 and to take other measures to defend the rights of Canadians to peacefully express their political opinions.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, next, I would like to table a petition in support of the private member's bill, Bill C-257. This bill proposes to add political belief or activity to the Canadian Human Rights Act as prohibited grounds for discrimination. Right now we cannot discriminate against someone on various named criteria but there is no prohibition against discriminating against someone on the basis of their political views. Political discrimination can also particularly undermine the free flow of ideas and debate within a democratic society and it is in the best interests of Canadian democracy, petitioners note, to protect public debate and the exchange of differing ideas by acting to combat political discrimination.

Petitioners therefore call on the House to support Bill C-257 and to defend the rights of all Canadians to freely and peacefully express their political opinions.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Madam Speaker, I have a couple of petitions to present today.

The first petition is from Canadians from across the country who are concerned about political discrimination. They are calling on the House of Commons to adopt Bill C-257. This bill seeks to add protection against political discrimination to the Canadian Human Rights Act. The petitioners also note that Canadians face political discrimination and call for the government to quickly pass this bill and defend the rights of all Canadians to peacefully express their political opinions.

[Dr. Yipeng Ge, Family Doctor, As an Individual]

Thank you. Good afternoon.

My name is Yipeng Ge. I'm a family doctor currently practising in primary care and refugee health in Ottawa.

I completed medical school at the University of Ottawa and was awarded the Anne C. Amberg Prize, a convocation award for the best combination of academic accomplishment and sensitivity to community health issues.

I completed my master's of public health and health and social behaviour with a certificate in public health leadership from Harvard University. Also, as a scholar and practitioner of anti-racism and health equity, I was on the Canadian Institutes of Health Research anti-racism advisory committee, and I helped develop anti-racism education for the University of Ottawa's department of family medicine.

During my time at Harvard University, which was when I first visited Palestine, I deepened my learning on settler colonialism and bearing witness to apartheid and occupation as determinants of Palestinian health, as this has been my area of study here on Turtle Island related to indigenous health in Canada.

I was a resident in public health and preventive medicine at the University of Ottawa's faculty of medicine. I sat on faculty council, the highest governing committee for the faculty, and I was on the board of directors for the Canadian Medical Association last year.

I learned intimately this past year that the boundaries of freedom of expression in Canada have been severely limited as it pertains to speech in support of health and human rights for Palestinians and Palestine. My experience of institutional anti-Palestinian racism and limitations on our freedom of speech parallels the stories of many who have chosen to speak out about human rights violations in Palestine.

Anti-Palestinian racism is a form of racism and discrimination adjacent to Islamophobia and anti-Arab racism, but it is also distinct from both. It is a form of racism that seeks to silence, exclude, erase, stereotype and dehumanize Palestinians and their allies. This often results in severe sanctions and disciplinary actions that profoundly impact the lives of Palestinians and their allies, a practice that has been advised against by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. This is a freedom of expression issue.

Last year around this time, a family doctor and faculty member shared my social media posts and publicly mischaracterized them as anti-Semitic and inflammatory and sent them to the university and the Canadian Medical Association. He was someone who was neither a patient nor a direct colleague or supervisor of mine. My social media posts were from my personal accounts, and in no way was I trying to speak from any of my places of employment or affiliation. These posts were criticized as being inflammatory, racist and anti-Semitic simply because they advocated for Palestinians having the same human rights as everyone else, aligning with international law.

I met with senior leadership of the Canadian Medical Association, and my social media posts were criticized. I was pressured to put together a public apology and provide personal one-on-one apologies to certain people in high-ranking positions and who hold influence in the association. Soon after, I received a phone call from the university informing me of my immediate and indefinite suspension, citing a level-three breach of professionalism for my social media posts. A level-three professionalism breach means repeated instances of an individual's behaviour and conduct despite intervention, or a concern for the individual's clinical care or quality of care of services.

No prior conversations were held and no concerns were ever raised before regarding my social media posts or professionalism. Patient safety was raised as a concern. However, in my duties as a resident in public health, I was completing a rotation at the Public Health Agency of Canada without any individuals working under me whom I was responsible for supervising and also without direct patient contact. The university's professionalism subcommittee, which reviewed my case, recommended immediate reinstatement without any disciplinary action. They suggested an apology be issued by the university, which they never gave. I feel deeply harmed by the university, which caused emotional and psychological distress and permanently altered my career path in public health.

As I sat on faculty council this past year, I witnessed multiple cases of medical students' social media posts being discussed as professionalism concerns, and it was clear that a fair process was not being followed. It was shared during these meetings that there were no clear bylaws or processes, and their legal counsel was creating the processes as they went. There were statements shared in these meetings that were rooted in anti-Palestinian racism and anti-Muslim and anti-Arab hate without any accountability.

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario has informed me of multiple complaints against me of a similar nature related to social media posts and not related to my clinical competency and conduct within the clinical setting. This is taking away time and resources from me, my legal counsel and, ultimately, the college itself in managing legitimate cases related to professional competence and conduct.

My purpose today is to ask the standing committee for support in holding institutions to account for overstepping in their policing of people's right to free speech and to recognize the appalling normalization of anti-Palestinian racism in educational institutions and places of employment, such as the University of Ottawa and the Canadian Medical Association. This is a non-partisan issue. There are solutions that are already being proposed, including Conservative private member's Bill C-257, an act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act, protecting against discrimination based on political belief.

Last week, the Alberta premier, along with the justice minister, said that their government will review professional regulatory bodies such as the College of Physicians and Surgeons, which play the important role of regulating professional competence and conduct, and introduce legislation next year to limit how they can police their own members on their speech.

Thank you.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the next petition that I am tabling is in support of a private member's bill that I have tabled in the House, Bill C-257. It is an important bill, according to petitioners, who say that Canadians have a right to be protected against discrimination and that Canadians can and do face political discrimination. Petitioners note that it is a fundamental right to be politically active and that discrimination on the basis of political views can limit people's ability to be actively involved in the political conversation.

Bill C-257 would add political belief and activity as prohibited grounds of discrimination within the Canadian Human Rights Act. Petitioners ask the House to support Bill C-257, which bans discrimination on the basis of political belief or activity. They want to see the House act to defend the rights of Canadians to peacefully express their political opinions.

[Leslyn Lewis, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to present a petition signed by Canadians across this country, as well as residents of Haldimand—Norfolk. These petitioners believe the government should recognize that Canadians can and do suffer from political discrimination, and that Canadians should be rightfully protected from such discrimination, in recognition of their rights to be politically active and vocal. These petitioners believe that it is important to protect public debate and the open exchange of ideas if we are to uphold democracy in Canada.

As such, they are calling on the House of Commons to support Bill C-257, which seeks to add protection from discrimination on the basis of political belief or activity to the Canadian Human Rights Act, and to defend the rights of all Canadians to peacefully express their political opinions.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the residents of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo.

Today, I am presenting two petitions. The first petition is from Canadians who wish to support Bill C-257. They wish to have the definition of discrimination expanded to include political belief and activity as an enumerated grounds of discrimination.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition today signed by Canadians from across the country.

The petitioners call on the House of Commons to ensure that Canadians have the right to be protected against discrimination. Canadians can and do feel political discrimination, and it is a fundamental Canadian right to be politically active and vocal. It is in the best interests of Canadian democracy to protect public debate and the exchange of differing ideas.

The folks who have signed this petition are in support of Bill C-257, which seeks to add the protection of political discrimination to the Canadian Human Rights Act. The petitioners call on the House of Commons to adopt this bill quickly and to defend the rights of Canadians to peacefully express their political opinions.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, the next petition I am tabling is in support of Bill C-257, a private member's bill that I put forward in the House, aimed at combatting the pernicious phenomenon of political discrimination.

The petitioners note that Canadians have a right to be protected against discrimination and that they can and do face political discrimination, which is discrimination on the basis of their political views. There is no reference to political belief or activity currently in the Canadian Human Rights Act as a prohibited grounds of discrimination. Bill C-257 would add political belief and activity as prohibited grounds of discrimination.

The petitioners therefore call on the House to support Bill C-257 and to defend the rights of Canadians to peacefully express their political opinions free from political discrimination.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, my next petition is in support of an excellent private member's bill that I put forward, Bill C-257.

The petitioners ask the House to recognize that political discrimination is a serious problem in this country, and that our human rights legislation provides protection for people from various kinds of discrimination but does not protect people from discrimination on the basis of political views or activity. The petitioners note that Bill C-257 would make that simple change, to protect people from discrimination on the basis of their political views.

The petitioners call on the House to support Bill C-257 and, further, to defend the rights of Canadians to peacefully express their political opinions.