Transgender Bill C-16 on its way to the Senate

Legislation passed easily through the House with no recorded vote

OTTAWA (CCN)

Transgender Bill C-16 was sent to the Senate Nov. 18, despite an effort by one Conservative MP to have it reviewed in committee for its impact on freedom of expression.

The bill, which would add gender identity and expression to the Canadian Human Rights Act and to the Criminal Code’s hate speech provisions, passed easily through the House with no recorded vote since not enough Conservatives stood up to require one.

Conservative MP Cathay Wagantall tried to get an amendment passed to return the bill to the Justice Committee so each clause of Bill C-16 could be examined for its impact on freedom of expression. She criticized the “deeply flawed, undemocratic process” that saw the bill zip through the Justice Committee without hearing any witnesses outside of the Justice Minister.

“My concern is that dissent of any kind will be construed as hate speech and could subsequently lead to Human Rights Tribunal hearings or, worse yet, criminal charges being laid,” Wagantall said. “I am concerned that this bill would cause fear for many Canadians that they would not be able to even discuss public policy issues such as this one because they disagree with the government’s imposed agenda.”

Wagantall insisted the Justice Minister owes Canadians a clear answer to the impact of Bill-16 on immigrant groups and faith groups “who may be at odds with gender fluidity concepts.”

“Would they have the freedom to teach their children and practise their beliefs without being accused of hate speech or being accused of human rights violations? Yes or no?” she asked.

Wagantall stressed freedom of religion is a fundamental right. “Today we are debating at third reading a bill that proposes some very fundamental changes to definitions and principles of society. The imposition of a fundamental values system change of this magnitude must be given complete due process here in Parliament.”

She accused the government of short-cutting the democratic process by shutting out those who might have a different point of view who might “upset the politically correct apple cart.”

Wagantall brought up the case of University of Toronto Professor Jordan Peterson, who she said “is under constant attack for his refusal to use gender-neutral pronouns.”

In YouTube videos, interviews and speeches, Peterson has said he will refuse to use new pronouns to address those who do not identify with their biological sex. He said according to the Ontario Human Rights Act—and soon under Bill C-16—not using the new pronouns will be illegal.

Peterson, an expert in political psychology who has studied totalitarian regimes for the past 30 years, said in Ottawa Nov. 19 the government’s forcing people to say words they disagree with is a form of totalitarianism that must be resisted.

Yet, employers, educational institutions and, once the federal law is passed, an array of crown corporations and federally-regulated sectors such as banking, and telecommunications employers could face complaints if they refuse to use the desired pronoun of a trans person.

The Ontario Human Rights Commission states on its website: “The law recognizes that everyone has the right to self-identify their gender and that ‘misgendering’ is a form of discrimination.”

“Refusing to refer to a trans person by their chosen name and a personal pronoun that matches their gender identity, or purposely misgendering, will likely be discrimination when it takes place in a social area covered by the Code, including employment, housing and services like education,” the site says. “The law is otherwise unsettled as to whether someone can insist on any one gender-neutral pronoun in particular.”

Peterson, who received POGG (Peace, Order and Good Government) Canada’s Canadian Values Award in Ottawa Nov. 19, said his refusal to use transgender pronouns could result in a fine, $250,000 in legal fees, and, if he refused to pay the fine, a contempt of court citation and a jail term.

Liberal MP Sean Casey, parliamentary secretary to the Justice Minister, said the bill was brought in because of the increased risk of violence and harm trans individuals face.

He cited the Trans Pulse project, a study conducted in Ontario involving focus groups with 85 trans people in three cities, and a 2009-2010 survey of 433 trans Ontarians.

“Twenty per cent had been physically or sexually assaulted for being trans, and another 34% had been verbally threatened or harassed but not assaulted,” Casey said. “Many do not report these assaults to the police.”

Casey also pointed out the legislation had been studied previously as a private member’s bill brought by NDP MP Randall Garrison.

“Diversity and inclusion are values that are important to all of us as Canadians,” Liberal MP Chris Bittle told the House. “Canadians expect their laws to reflect these values, yet many trans people are not yet able to fully participate in society. This bill is an important step forward to their greater societal acceptance and inclusion.”

Conservative MP Michelle Rempel defended the bill, noting the higher rates of both suicide and depression among trans people.

“The reality is that many people who do not conform to the gender roles associated with the sex they were assigned at birth,” she said. “This is not a defect. This is not an illness. This is an expression of our uniqueness and of our humanity against what others in our society may pressure us to conform to be, and nobody in Canada or in the world should face discrimination for living his or her personal truth.”