Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

National

Free expression trial of Amy Hamm nears its end

Published

4 minute read

News release from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is providing lawyers for British Columbia nurse Amy Hamm, whose disciplinary hearings will conclude on March 18-19, 2024. Oral arguments, beginning at 10:00 a.m. PT, will conclude the hearing before the three-person Disciplinary Committee of the British Columbia College of Nurses and Midwives in Vancouver. Lawyers will also answer any questions the panel may have following the submissions. The public is invited to view the proceedings online.

The prosecution of Amy Hamm over the off-duty expression of her opinions dates back to September 2020, when she co-sponsored a billboard featuring the words, “I ♥ JK Rowling” – a reference to the famous British author who, in 2019, came to the defense of a British woman whose employment contract was terminated after expressing “gender critical views.”

Two complaints by members of the public to the College about Ms. Hamm’s involvement with the billboard led to an investigation. That resulted in a 332-page report on Ms. Hamm’s activities, including a collection of her tweets, podcast transcripts and articles she had authored on the topic of gender identity and its conflict with women’s rights and the safeguarding of children.

The charge against Ms. Hamm reads, “Between approximately July 2018 and March 2021, you made discriminatory and derogatory statements regarding transgender people, while identifying yourself as a nurse or nurse educator. These statements were made across various online platforms, including but not limited to, podcasts, videos, published writings and social media.” The hearing began on September 21, 2022, and the panel heard 20 days of testimony, including approximately five days of challenges to the expert evidence provided by Ms. Hamm.

Much of the hearings to date has concentrated on the qualification, testimony and questioning of expert witnesses for both sides. The College presented as experts Dr. Elizabeth Saewyc and Dr. Greta Bauer, who argued that statements made by J. K. Rowling were “transphobic” and, by extension, so were Ms. Hamm’s. In Ms. Hamm’s defense, her legal team presented experts Dr. James Cantor, Dr. Kathleen Stock and Dr. Linda Blade.

As stated in their February 19, 2024, written submissions to the Committee, Ms. Hamm’s lawyers argue that:

  1. There is no evidence of breach of standards or bylaws, nor a case for a finding of unprofessional conduct;
  2. Her statements do not have a sufficient nexus to her status as a nurse to warrant regulatory interference;
  3. Her speech is reasonable and scientifically supportable;
  4. There is social value to her speech;
  5. Her advocacy is conducted in good faith, including to affect political change;
  6. She believes in the truth of her statements;
  7. There is no evidence of “discrimination” or “harm;”
  8. The infringement of her Charter right to freedom of expression, belief and opinion cannot be justified on a proportionate balancing against the objectives of the College.”

Lisa Bildy, lawyer for Amy Hamm, stated, “A key issue in this case is whether professionals can express criticism of gender identity ideology or other political issues in the public square without being subject to regulatory discipline. We argue that the College has allowed itself and its disciplinary process to become participants in a public and political controversy on which it should not be taking a side. The College should enforce high standards of performance for nurses and midwives when caring for their patients, and otherwise refrain from taking sides on political, cultural and moral issues that are debated in the public square. The College has lost its way.”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Undemocratic tax hike will kill hundreds of thousands of Canadian jobs

Published on

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Devin Drover 

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is demanding the Canada Revenue Agency immediately halt enforcement of the proposed capital gains tax hike which is now estimated to kill over 400,000 Canadian jobs, according to the CD Howe Institute.

“Enforcing the capital gains tax hike before it’s even law is not only undemocratic overreach by the CRA, but new data reveals it could also destroy over 400,000 Canadian jobs,” said Devin Drover, CTF General Counsel and Atlantic Director. “The solution is simple: the CRA shouldn’t enforce this proposed tax hike that hasn’t been passed into law.”

A new report from the CD Howe Institute reveals that the proposed capital gains tax hike could slash 414,000 jobs and shrink Canada’s GDP by nearly $90 billion, with most of the damage occurring within five years.

This report was completed in response to the Trudeau government’s plan to raise the capital gains inclusion rate for the first time in 25 years. While a ways and means motion for the hike passed last year, the necessary legislation has yet to be introduced, debated, or passed into law.

With Parliament prorogued until March 24, 2025, and all opposition parties pledging to topple the Liberal government, there’s no reasonable probability the legislation will pass before the next federal election.

Despite this, the CRA is pushing ahead with enforcement of the tax hike.

“It’s Parliament’s job to approve tax increases before they’re implemented, not the unelected tax collectors,” said Drover. “Canadians deserve better than having their elected representatives treated like a rubberstamp by the prime minister and the CRA.

“The CRA must immediately halt its plans to enforce this unapproved tax hike, which threatens to undemocratically take billions from Canadians and cripple our economy.”

Continue Reading

Economy

Number of newcomers to Canada set to drop significantly

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Jock Finlayson

Late last year, Statistics Canada reported that Canada’s population reached 41.5 million in October, up 177,000 from July 2024. Over the preceding 12 months, the population rose at a 2.3 per cent pace, indicating some deceleration from previous quarters. International migration accounts for virtually 100 per cent of the population gain. This includes a mix of permanent immigrants and large numbers of “non-permanent residents” (NPRs) most of whom are here on time-limited work or student visas.

The recent easing of population growth mainly reflects a slowdown in non-permanent immigration, after a period of increases with little apparent oversight or control by government officials. The dramatic jump in NPRs played a key role in pushing Canada’s population growth rate to near record levels in 2023 and the first half of 2024.

Amid this demographic surge, a public and political backlash developed, due to concerns that Canada’s skyrocketing population has aggravated the housing affordability and supply crisis and put significant pressure on government services and infrastructure. In addition, the softening labour market has been unable to create enough jobs to employ the torrent of newcomers, leading to a steadily higher unemployment rate over the last year.

In response, the Trudeau government belatedly announced a revised “immigration plan” intended to scale back inflows. Permanent immigration is being trimmed from 500,000 a year to less than 400,000. At the same time, the number of work and study visas will be substantially reduced. Ottawa also pledges to speed the departure of temporary immigrants whose visas have expired or will soon.

Remarkably, NPRs now comprise 7.3 per cent of the country’s population, a far higher share than in the past. The government has promised to bring this down to 5 per cent by 2027, which equates to arranging for some two million NPRs to depart when their visas expire. There are doubts that our creaking immigration and border protection machinery can deliver on these commitments. Many NPRs with expired visas may seek to stay. That said, the total number of newcomers landing in Canada is set to drop significantly.

According to the government, this will cause the country’s total population to shrink in 2025-2026, something that has rarely happened before.

Even if Ottawa falls short of hitting its revised immigration goals, a period of much lower population growth lies ahead. However, this will pose its own economic challenges. A fast-expanding population has been the dominant factor keeping Canada’s economy afloat over the last few years, as productivity—the other source of long-term economic growth—has stagnated and business investment has remained sluggish. It’s also important to recognize that per-person GDP—a broad measure of living standards—has been declining as economic growth has lagged behind Canada’s rapid population growth. Now, as the government curbs permanent immigrant numbers and sharply reduces the pool of NPRs, this impetus to economic growth will suddenly diminish.

However, Canada will continue to have high levels of immigration compared to peer jurisdictions. The lowered targets for permanent immigration—395,000 in 2025, followed by 380,000 and 365,000 in the following two years—are still above pre-pandemic benchmarks. This underscores the continued importance of immigration to Canada’s economic and political future.

Instead of obsessing about near-term targets, policymakers should think about how to ensure that immigration can advance Canada’s prosperity and provide benefits to both the existing population and those who come here.

Jock Finlayson

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X