Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

National

Former human rights tribunal chair speaks out against Trudeau’s ‘Online Harms’ bill

Published

6 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

‘If this passes, God help us, because I don’t know where it will go,’ former chair of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal David Thomas warned of Trudeau’s ‘Online Harms’ bill.

A former chair of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has warned that the Trudeau government’s proposed “Online Harms” bill could have a devastating impact on speech in the nation.

During a March 13 interview with independent media outlet True North, lawyer and former chair of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal David Thomas blasted Bill C-63, the Online Harms Act, which could jail Canadians for “hate speech,” warning Canadians to be careful what they post online.  

“What we are likely to see right away is a chilling effect,” Thomas explained, adding that the proposed legislation will have “a big impact on free political discourse in this country and I think that’s what we should all be concerned about immediately.”  

“If this passes, God help us, because I don’t know where it will go,” he lamented.  

Appointed in 2014 for a seven-year term, Thomas is the former chair of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, the body tasked with adjudicating violations of the Canadian Human Rights Act.  

“The reason I am speaking out right now is that nobody who is on the tribunal is free to speak, they’re like judges sitting on the bench,” he revealed.   

“That’s why I think it’s important for somebody with inside knowledge to convey these concerns about this legislation,” Thomas continued.  

He explained that the “vagueness” of the proposed legislation means that “that nobody really knows” what would be considered “hate speech.” He warned it would cause uncertainty and fear across Canada. 

Thomas described the Online Harms Act as “an incredibly damping piece of legislation, which I think, of course, will infringe on our Charter rights to freedom of expression.” 

Thomas further warned that if the bill is passed, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal will be overrun with the number of cases against Canadians for “hate speech.” 

“To adjudicate these cases themselves takes years. When someone lodges a complaint when they get a final decision, it would not be surprising if it took three to five years or even longer,” he predicted.   

“That’s a terrible thing, especially for an administrative tribunal which is supposed to be delivering access to justice to the public,” Thomas lamented.  

Bill C-63, introduced a few weeks ago, will create the Online Harms Act and modify existing laws, amending the Criminal Code as well as the Canadian Human Rights Act, in what the Liberals claim will target certain cases of internet content removal, notably those involving child sexual abuse and pornography. 

However, the bill also seeks to punish “hate speech” and increase punishments for existing hate propaganda offenses in a substantial manner. 

Penalties for violations of the proposed law include $20,000 fines and jail time, including life in prison for what it deems the most serious offenses.  

According to the proposed legislation, the bill would not only punish those who committed a “hate crime” but also those suspected of committing one in the future.   

“A person may, with the Attorney General’s consent, lay an information before a provincial court judge if the person fears on reasonable grounds that another person will commit; (a)an offence under section 318 or any of subsections 319(1) to (2.‍1); or (b) an offence under section 320.‍1001,” the text of the bill reads.  

Thomas is not alone in his concerns over the legislation. Increasingly, prominent Canadians and even Americans have begun commenting on Trudeau’s authoritarian rule over Canada, particularly his restricting of internet speech. 

Earlier this week, tech mogul Elon Musk called the proposed legislation “insane” as the new law would “allow judges to hand down life sentences for ‘speech crimes.’” 

In late February, prominent Canadian anti-woke psychologist Jordan Peterson warned the new bill would undoubtedly lead to his criminalization. 

Similarly, a top constitutional lawyer warned LifeSiteNews that the legislation will allow a yet-to-be-formed digital safety commission to conduct “secret commission hearings” against those found to have violated the law, raising “serious concerns for the freedom of expression” of Canadians online. 

Additionally, Campaign Life Coalition recently warned that Bill C-63 will stifle free speech and crush pro-life activism. 

2025 Federal Election

Taxpayers urge federal party leaders to drop home sale reporting to CRA

Published on

Party leaders must clarify position on home equity tax

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on all party leaders to prove they’re against home equity taxes by pledging to immediately remove the Canada Revenue Agency reporting requirement on the sale of primary residences.

“Canadians rely on the sale of their homes to pay for their golden years,” said Carson Binda, CTF B.C. Director. “After the government spent hundreds of thousands of dollars flirting with home taxes, taxpayers need party leaders to prove they won’t tax our homes by removing the CRA reporting requirement.”

Right now, the profit you make from selling your home is exempt from the capital gains tax. However, in 2016, the federal government mandated that Canadians report the sale of their homes to the CRA, even though it’s tax exempt.

The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation also spent at least $450,000 to study and influence public opinion in favour of home equity taxes. The report recommended a home equity tax targeting the “housing wealth windfalls gained by many homeowners while they sleep and watch TV.”

“A home equity tax would hurt seniors saving for their golden years and make homes more expensive for younger generations,” Binda said. “If the federal government isn’t planning on imposing a home equity tax, then Canadians shouldn’t be forced to report the sale of their home to the CRA.”

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

‘Sadistic’ Canadian murderer claiming to be woman denied transfer to female prison

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

The logical decision to house the male murderer with men flies in the face of the Liberal Party’s official stance, which is to incarcerate prisoners according to their ‘self-identified’ gender.

A Canadian man who butchered his family and now claims to be a woman will not be allowed to transfer to a female prison.

On April 8, Correctional Services Canada (CSC) announced that Mohamad Al Ballouz, who brutally murdered his wife and two children, will be sent to a men’s prison, despite claiming to be a woman, according to CTV News.

“When there are overriding health and safety concerns, the request is denied and alternatives are put in place to meet the offender’s gender‑related needs at the institution where they are incarcerated,” the CSC statement reads.

Following an assessment of Al Ballouz request, CSC confirmed that he “will be incarcerated in a men’s institution.”

On December 16, Al Ballouz, a 38-year-old from Quebec, was found guilty second-degree murder of his wife Synthia Bussières, first-degree murder of five-year-old Eliam and two-year-old Zac, and one count of attempted arson.

Crown prosecutor Éric Nadeau revealed that the murder took place in September 2022 when Al Ballouz slaughtered his family at their Brossard apartment. He stabbed his wife 23 times before suffocated his children and trying to set the apartment on fire. He then ingested windshield washer fluid, which is believed to have been a suicide attempt.

During the trial, Quebec Superior Justice Eric Downs described Al Ballouz, as having a “sadistic character” and being “deeply narcissistic.” He was sentenced to life imprisonment with no chance of parole for 25 years.

Throughout the trial, Al Ballouz, a biological male, claimed to be a woman and demanded that he be referred to as “Levana,” a change which was made after he was charged for his crimes. Notably, the Canadian Broadcasting Report’s (CBC’s) report of the case refers to the convicted murder as “she” and uses his fake name.

Following his sentencing, the murderer requested to be sent to the Joliette Institution for Women; however, Downs responded that is a decision for Correctional Service Canada.

However, Al Ballouz’s case caused an uproar on social media as many pointed out that putting the murderer in a women’s prison would pose a danger to female inmates.

Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre has condemned the Liberal policy and promised that he would end this practice if elected.

“Surreal: A man who killed his wife and two kids now claims he is a woman to go to a female prison,” he wrote in a December 22 post on X.

“I can’t believe I have to say this: but when I’m PM, there will be no male prisoners in female jails,” Poilievre continued. “Period.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X