Manitoba Committee Hansard — Human Resources Committee, Sitting 6 (40th Legislature, 2nd Session)

40-2-hr6

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Fortieth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Standing Committee on Human Resources Chairperson Ms. Melanie Wight Constituency of Burrows Vol. LXV No. 6 - 10 a.m., Saturday, September 7, 2013 ISSN 1708-6655

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Fortieth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital NDP ALLUM, James Fort Garry-Riverview NDP ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley NDP ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson NDP BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli NDP BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park NDP BRAUN, Erna Rossmere NDP BRIESE, Stuart Agassiz PC CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East NDP CHIEF, Kevin, Hon. Point Douglas NDP CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan NDP CROTHERS, Deanne St.

James NDP CULLEN, Cliff Spruce Woods PC DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk NDP DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood PC EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne Lac du Bonnet PC FRIESEN, Cameron Morden-Winkler PC GAUDREAU, Dave St. Norbert NDP GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Liberal GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach PC GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson PC HELWER, Reg Brandon West PC HOWARD, Jennifer, Hon. Fort Rouge NDP IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Richmond NDP JHA, Bidhu Radisson NDP KOSTYSHYN, Ron, Hon. Swan River NDP LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. Dawson Trail NDP MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St.

Johns NDP MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden PC MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Flor, Hon. Logan NDP MARCELINO, Ted Tyndall Park NDP MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel NDP MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East PC NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake NDP OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River NDP PALLISTER, Brian Fort Whyte PC PEDERSEN, Blaine Midland PC PETTERSEN, Clarence Flin Flon NDP REID, Daryl, Hon. Transcona NDP ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Kewatinook NDP RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia NDP ROWAT, Leanne Riding Mountain PC SARAN, Mohinder The Maples NDP SCHULER, Ron St. Paul PC SELBY, Erin, Hon. Southdale NDP SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St.

Boniface NDP SMOOK, Dennis La Verendrye PC STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo PC STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin NDP SWAN, Andrew, Hon. Minto NDP WHITEHEAD, Frank The Pas NDP WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WIGHT, Melanie Burrows NDP WISHART, Ian Portage la Prairie PC Vacant Morris

261 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES Saturday, September 7, 2013 TIME – 10 a.m. LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIRPERSON – Ms. Melanie Wight (Burrows) VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park); Ms. Sharon Blady (Kirkfield Park) at 4:01 p.m. ATTENDANCE – 11 QUORUM – 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Ms. Allan, Hon. Mr. Chomiak Messrs. Cullen, Dewar, Maloway, Marcelino, Pedersen, Schuler, Mrs. Stefanson, Mr. Whitehead, Ms. Wight Substitutions: Hon. Mr. Swan for Hon. Mr. Chomiak at 3:29 p.m. Mr. Smook for Mr. Cullen at 3:51 p.m. Hon. Mr. Rondeau for Mr.

Whitehead at 4:01 p.m. Ms. Braun for Mr. Maloway at 4:01 p.m. Ms. Blady for Mr. Marcelino at 4:01 p.m. Hon. Mr. Robinson for Mr. Dewar at 4:14 p.m. Mr. Goertzen for Mr. Schuler at 4:14 p.m. Mrs. Driedger for Mrs. Stefanson at 4:14 p.m. Mr. Friesen for Mr. Pedersen at 4:14 p.m. APPEARING: Hon. Jon Gerrard, MLA for River Heights PUBLIC PRESENTERS: Mr. Ed Hume, private citizen Mr. George Edenhoffer, private citizen Mr. Susan Eberhard, Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools Mr. Chad Smith, Rainbow Resource Centre Mr. Donn Short, private citizen Ms. Kelly Moist, CUPE Manitoba Ms.

Deborah Schnitzer, private citizen Mr. Michael Nelson, Brandon Pride Committee Mr. Patrick Woodbeck, Rainbow Ministry Mr. Robert Charach, Linden Christian School Ms. Celesta Thiessen, private citizen Mr. Leo Thiessen, private citizen Ms. Sydney Davies, Maples Collegiate Gay-Straight Alliance Mr. Roger Armbruster, private citizen Ms. Elfrieda Penner, private citizen Ms. Naomi Kruse, Manitoba Association of Parent Councils Mr. Tim Koop, private citizen Ms. Cheryl Froese, private citizen Mr. Ryan Appel, private citizen Mr.

John Hoogerdijk, Canadian Reformed School Society of Winnipeg, Inc., Operating Immanuel Christian School Mr. Arie Veenendaal, Dufferin Christian School Ms. Sandra Saint-Cyr, private citizen Mr. Luke McAllister, private citizen Ms. Crystal Klassen, private citizen Mr. Joey Reimer, private citizen Ms. Keziah Thiessen, private citizen Mr. Joel Nedohin, private citizen Mr. Brad Unger, private citizen Mr. Lawrence Hamm, private citizen Ms. Melanie Froese, private citizen Mr. Brad Klassen, private citizen Mr. Roger Giesbrecht, private citizen Mr. Kris Kenemy, private citizen Mr. John Fehr, private citizen Ms.

Shahina Siddiqui, private citizen Ms. Kathy Plett, private citizen Mr. Kelvin Plett, private citizen Ms. Darlene Duce, private citizen Ms. Lindsay Brown, private citizen Mr. Silas Giesbrecht, private citizen Ms. Jess Reimer, private citizen Mr. Mark Reimer, private citizen Mr. Bob Loewen, private citizen Ms. Bonnie Loewen, private citizen Mr. Scott Wells, private citizen Ms. Carla Schmidt, private citizen Mr. Brian Schmidt, private citizen Ms. Kristy Penner, private citizen MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION: Bill 18 –The Public Schools Amendment Act (Safe and Inclusive Schools) * * *

262 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 Madam Chairperson: We're going to begin. The Standing Committee on Human Resources will please come to order. Before the committee can proceed with the business before it, it must elect a new Vice-Chairperson. Are there any nominations? Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selk irk): I nominate Mr. Marcelino, Tyndall Park. Madam Chairperson: Are there any other nominations? Mr. Marcelino has been nominated, and hearing no other nominations, he is elected the Vice-Chairperson.

This meeting has been called to consider Bill 18, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Safe and Inclusive Schools). As per agreement of the House dated June 20th, today we will hear from 56 of the presenters registered to speak on Bill 18, and you have the list of those presenters before you. On the topic determining the order of public presentations, I will note that we do have a special-needs request today, and so, with that, we would ask if that person and their caregiver could go first. And–they are George Edenhoffer, No. 50, and Mr. Ed Hume, No. 22.

And also, with regard to the order of the presenters, it has been suggested –yes, Minister Allan. Hon. Nancy Allan (Minister of Education): Last night what we did–usually the procedure can be that we ask out–rural people to go first, but last night the MLA for Steinbach suggested that we just go in order because most of the presenters are rural and it's not going to make that big a difference. So is –do we have the unanimous consent to do that today? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Ms. Allan: Or leave, sorry. Madam Chairperson: Sorry. Mr. Ron Schuler ( St. Paul): Yes.

We normally we do take out -of-town presenters first. I think, however, that a lot of people will have been called and told where they are –what number they are as a presenter and some of them may not be here today 'til later on this evening because committee does sit 'til late into the evening. So I think that would be fair for them if we would do it in order. Madam Chairperson: Great. So all agreed and is everyone agreed with regard to th e special needs? [Agreed] Excellent. So that's where we're going to begin after I've gone through this. All right.

So I would also like to remind members of the committee that, in accordance with agreement mentioned above, the committee may also by leave decide to hear from presenters in addition to those scheduled for tonight's meeting. Before we proceed with presentations, we do have a number of other items and points of information that we need to consider. For the information of all presenters, while written versions of presentations are not required, if you are going to accompany your presentation with written materials, we ask that you provide 20 copies.

If you need help with the photocopying, please speak with our staff. As well, I would like to inform presenters that, in accordance with our rules, there's a time limit of 10 minutes allotted for presentations and then there's an additional five minutes allowed for questions. So, in the 10 minutes, at nine minutes, I will try to remember just t o give you a little note that there's one minute left, just so you can wrap it up. I'm not being rude; I'm just trying to let you know that there's a little bit of time left.

Also, in accordance with the rules agreed in the House for the meetings –hearings from presenters on Bill 18, if a presenter is not in attendance when their name is called, they will drop to the bottom of the list of tonight's presenters. If the presenter is not in attendance when their name is called a second time tonight, they will be dropped to the bottom of the global list of presenters. Prior to proceeding with public presentations, I would like to advise members of the public regarding the process for speaking in committee.

The proceedings of our meetings are recorded in order to provide a verbatim transcript, so each time someone wishes to speak, whether it's an MLA or a presenter, I first have to say the person's name. That's the signal for Hansard recorder to turn the mics on and off. Okay. So I'll be doing that, and thank y ou for your patience. We're now going to proceed with the public presentations, so I will now call on Mr. Ed Hume, private citizen, and Mr. George –to be followed by Mr. George Edenhoffer, private citizen.

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 263 Floor Comment: Edenhoffer. Madam Chairperson: Edenhoffer, thank you so much. And did you have materials? Mr. Ed Hume (Private Citizen): Yes, I do. I'd like to have this distributed, if I could, please. Madam Chairperson: Thank you and just go ahead whenever you're ready. Mr. Hume: Okay. The first thing I'd like to mention, I'd like to thank the Clerk of the committee today for extending the courtesy to George Edenhoffer, who's a friend of mine, and to be able to speak first, so we certainly appreciate that.

The other thing I want to mention is, when G eorge makes his presentation following my presentation, I'm going to be here as assistance with him. I'm just –so that's why I will be here for the first two presentations. Are you listening, Bill 18 public hearing committee members? Are you really listening? First, no one here today, including me, would ever be against antibullying policy. Having been an educator for over 39 years, 33 years as a retired teacher and the last six years a substitute teacher, I have seen the daily effects of bullying on youth first-hand in our schools.

All students need to be protected against this demeaning, disgusting and hurtful practice. Unfortunately, many youth have been bullied at one time or another, including me, and the negative memories can remain a lifetime. Youth bullying, sadly to say, doesn't end there. It continues into the adult world and we continue to feel its negative effect in the workforce, government, corporate leadership and in community life.

If bullying is to be reduced or curbed, we need to call it whenever we see it –in school, at home, in government and in the workplace, and expose it to the light of conscious condemnation, nipping it in the bud before it can get rolling. * (10:10) All forms of bullying, whether it is physical, verbal or cyber, need to be addressed in our society. Schools are a natural place to start our antibullying efforts. Bill 18 sets out to do this, but, unfortunately, instead of attacking bullying on a general level, which we can all agree on, it has become too specific.

By giving special protection to gender equality, anti -racism, people with disabilities and people of all sexual orientations and gendered identities, including student -led clubs or groups that use the name gay -straight alliance, the government is actually saying bullying these groups is worse than other groups of affected students, like different student body types –fat, skinny, short; students with lower academic grades and students of different religious affiliations. In short, by offering special protection of some groups, we are putting other groups of students at greater risk of being bullied.

Other students might consider them uncool and pick on them. Ultimately, we need to encourage student-teacher dialogue in our schools that respects all different student groups, including the 'protecsh' – including the four special groups Bill 18 has highlighted. Fundamentally, every student should receive equal protection and equal opportunity. Thus, specific groups should not be highlighted in this bill. Secondly, in my opinion, Bill 18 attacks the religious freedom found under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Sikhs, since none of these groups support the homosexual lifestyle.

When government tells private schools associated with these faith groups that they have to include gay-straight alliance clubs in their school if requested by a student, they are telling them to violate their core faith values. For example, in the Christian Bible, God's Word clearly doesn't support the hom osexual lifestyle. Quote: You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female. It is an abomination–in Leviticus 18:22. And: It is unnatural–in Romans 1:26,27. Other scriptural references also support these two principles. There's a misunderstanding that needs to be corrected here.

Just because Christians don't accept the homosexual lifestyle, it doesn't mean Christians hate homosexuals. Christians are instructed to love God first, and to love their neighbours as themselves–in Matthew 22. Based on their religious convictions, Christians are instructed to love homosexuals just like anyone else. But that doesn't mean they have to endorse their lifestyle. I can love an alcoholic, but that doesn't mean I have to endorse–or I have to endorse alcoholism. I can love the sinner but hate the sin.

If the government were to pass Bill 18 in the form it is now, this bill would most likely be challenged in the Supreme Court of Canada, just like the Whatcott decision in Saskatchewan. Thirdly, the government's view is that some of these private schools are receiving money, therefore they have no right to refuse Bill 18, or else. The implication is that their government grants could be

264 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 reduced or withdrawn altogether. Is this situation not a form of blackmail? I hereby remind the government that these private schools are actually doing the 'financ' –a financial favour to the public purse, since private tuition reduces government spending on education. I therefore raise the question: Is B ill 18 being fair to private schools? Is government acting fairly towards private schools? Is government not especially violating their religious freedom? Fourthly, whatever happened to critical thinking and the ability to criticize anything in public?

Presently, it seems that to criticize anything controversial that a government supports is considered and looked upon as being paranoid or having a phobia. What has happened to free speech in this country? If you criticize anything in the homosexual culture these days, you are considered homophobic, which essentially shuts down any real critical debate on issues involving that culture.

Since Bill 18 overemphasizes bullying against one group, mainly homosexuals, it is my opinion that there is a deeper set of motives at work here, represented by various aspects of the United Nations' social engineering Agenda 21 program. The promotion of this program has become a dangerous trend in our society. Finally, the present attitude of the Minister of Education (M s. Allan) and her government is troubling.

In spite of the tremendous opposition that exists, as footnoted here, and I'll just read through the footnoted names quickly, people who have opposed the bill, or want amendments: the Manitoba Islamic Associatio n; Jewish learning centre; Sikh Cultural and Seniors Centre; Coptic Heritage Society; many local Christian churches; Evangelical Fellowship of Canada; Vic Toews, MP for Manitoba; Rod Bruinooge, MP for Manitoba; Sid Green, lawyer and former NDP Cabinet minister; the Whatcott Supreme Court decision; the Robb Nash article; and 3,000 pieces of correspondence on the bill, mostly opposed to it, as quoted in the Winnipeg Free Press, February the 26th.

In March 16th, the Winnipeg Free Press article, the Educat ion Minister stated, and I quote: "The government is comfortable with the proposed legislation and unwilling to make any substantive changes." In a Winnipeg Free Press

article on May 2nd, the Minister of Education was quoted as saying: Her government is determined to pass Bill 18 before breaking for summer, so it will in effect – so it will be in effect when class –classes start in September. I'm just about finished, thank you. How can elected representative hold such an undemocratic, rigid, arrogant and, may I dare say, bullying attitude, even before there has been any public hearings? Is members of the public to assume–as–are members of the public to assume this is a done deal? Why bother presenting at the hearings?

In a democratic country, where open debate, free speech, collaboration and compromise are valued, you would hope this isn't the case. No one is arguing against antibullying legislation. But let's consider amendments to Bill 18 that would protect all students and be fair all people. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Very good timing, Mr. Hume. Mr. Hume: Ten minutes right on? Madam Chairperson: It was perfect. Thank you so much for –perfect timing –for presenting. And we'll do the questions and then go on to Mr. Edenhoffer, if that's okay. All right, so, Minister Allan. Ms. Allan : Thank you very much, Mr.

Hume, for being here today and presenting to the committee. We appreciate it and we look forward to hearing your other colleague who is here with you today. Mr. Schuler: Thank you very much for coming, Ed, and to everybody else in this room. Very nice morning here in Manitoba and we're not going to get very many like this. We appreciate that you're here. And if I understand you correctly, it's not that you're opposed to protecting gay and lesbi ans from bullying–[interjection] Just, you have to wait and then be recognized.

So what would you like to see, a more of a Nova Scotia style which puts in, basically, that there can be no bullying of any kind and then puts

definitions to that? What would you like to see, if not this bill? Mr. Hume: Okay, well, personally I'd like to see it more a generic style, where all students are–you know, as soon as you start naming groups, you isolate other groups. So I think it needs to be clearly stated that all g roups need to be protected. So I would like to see that clearly delineated that way, without singling out special groups for special attention.

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 265 Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Innovation, Energy and Mines ): Yes, thank you for your presentation. Just base d on your presentation, I want to ask you a question. Would you be against holding an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting in a school setting? Mr. Hume: Are you talking about, now, with students or adults renting a facility? What –can you define what you're talking about here? * (10:20) Mr. Chomiak : I'm finding the –I'm trying to stay away from generic.

I'm trying to determine whether or not it would be acceptable under the circumstances for you to not believe in a lifestyle but still accept a gathering of people with regard to that lifestyle. Mr. Hume: Specifically, with the alcoholism or– Mr. Chomiak: Yes, with alcohol. Mr. Hume: Would I be opposed to that –having that? I mean, we're–I think we all want the–to see the betterment of all people. It makes it for a stronger, healthier society if we're able to help those that are addicted, have certain addictions, to make them stronger makes us all stronger. So, no, I certainly wouldn't be opposed.

Madam Chairperson: All right. Mr. Hume: Okay. Madam Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thank you again for coming to present. And now we will move to Mr. Edenhoffer, and just give him a moment, if we could, to come up. And was there any additional materials to hand out? No. Okay, thank you. So, whenever you're ready, Mr. Edenhoffer. Mr. George Edenhoffer (Private Citizen) : Well, thank you for giving me this opportunity. I would have to take a little different angle on this subject. As you may imagine, I've had lots of bullying when I was a student in most stages of schooling.

But, fortunately, my family made –they were very supportive of me, and they helped me in ways that would prepare me for life. And the one thing that they insisted on is that I understand that it's not what happens to you that determines your outcome; it's what you do with what happens to you. So bullying actually prepared me for life because there are lots of bullies in life. And so it is important to understand that we live in a world where bullying happens, not that I endorse it or anything like that, but all you have to do is pick up the paper and see it.

Well, I –throughout my life I haven't –I wasn't able to study a lot of history and the unavoidable fact that I've noticed was that by far –I mean by a country mile, most bullying happens by governments. You can research that. So I'm concerned because I see that religious freedom is being bullied into an arena that it doesn't want to be in. Getting back to the school system, the problem that I see is that if we completely outlaw every kind of delinquent, we are also infringing on freedom because when y our government –when there's no room for delinquency, there's also no room for freedom.

And that is the way that life is, as I have learned, but it doesn't matter because it's what we do with what we–what happens to us that matters. * (10:30) I'm also con cerned that there's a–looking at this bill in terms of the gay and straight alliance, the – according to my research and you can look it up, too, it does seem to me that there's an underlying growth to prove, to promote homosexual behaviour by making it more acceptable or by normalizing it.

Not that I have anything against the people but looking at the rest of the world the way that the rest of the world is, homosexuality is an anomaly and I don't believe that it's wise to normalize an anomaly. All of nature would collapse in that kind of a situation, and it does appear to me that United Nations Agenda 21 is in support of all this kind of normalization because it is hopefully reduce population. This being one method. So basically we need to look further than our noses. Madam Chairperson: I'm just going to interrupt for just one moment and ask for leave for Mr.

Edenhoffer to be able to complete, if that's okay with the committee. [Agreed] Please, go ahead just for a few minutes to finish off. Mr. Edenhoffer: I'm almost there. The –so at some point when you look at where in your head this comes from, because it's very common for people in charge to try to achieve their goals by way of –or by

266 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 cold means, when they knew that it's not a popular act. So I'm open to your questions. Madam Chairperson: Thank you so much for presenting, and we will move to questions now. Any questions from the committee? Ms. Allan : Well, thank you, Mr. Edenhoffer, for being here today. It truly is our honour and our privilege to have you here today to make a presentation and share your thoughts on Bill 18. You started your presentation today talking about how you had a very, very s upportive family, and I am so pleased that you mentioned that.

I think we would all hope that in our lives we have supportive families, but not all students do these days and sometimes school is the only safe place that they have. School is their safe place, and that's why we have this legislation before us today, because we want to create safe and inclusive schools for all students. And I think you and I would both agree on that. Thank you so much for your presentation and thank you for being with us today. It's our honour and our pleasure. Mr. Schuler: George, before you go, normally as a committee, we don't rank presentations and reflect on presentations.

In the 15 years that I've been a member of this Legislature, yours is one of the most courageous, and I'd like to thank you for coming out today. It takes a lot of courage, and to Ed Hume's question when he started his, he said: Committee, are you listening? Well, I think you got it. We were all listening very intently and we appreciate that you came out. You put a different perspective on it, and we really appreciate the fact that you shared with us out of your personal life.

And I certainly can't understand everything that you've gone through, but the fact that you've come here to committee, you've given us a lot to think about. I want to thank you for that. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I want to thank you for coming and for making your presentation. It took a lot of effort, and I think we really appreciate your being here, as you've already hea rd, and I want to say thank you. Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park) : Yes, one of the statements that you made, it's regarding the room for delinquency, I like that. You said that if there's no room for delinquency, there's no freedom.

Is there any way that you could maybe elaborate on what you said? Because from my point of view, I was a delinquent child and I remember every delinquency that I had, and I enjoyed it. Madam Chairperson: Mr. Edenhoffer, do you have a comment? Mr. Edenhoffer: Well, yes, I love delinquents, even though I've been bullied. You know, like I say, my – what I meant was that by enacting so many laws that a person has no room for delinquency that that would–like, especially when you're stretching boundaries. You're stretching the envelope.

And bullying is one of the delinquent behaviours that we do as kids, and we need, again, coaching on how to respond to that. So that's what I meant. * (10:40) Madam Chairperson: Thank you. Thank you so much. Seeing no further questions, I'd just like to thank you once again for making the effort in coming down to speak, both of you. Thank you so much. And we will move on to our next presenter, and that will be Susan Eberhard and Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools. And do you have any materials? [interjection] All right, we'll get some help for you to get those handed out, and then whenever you're ready.

You can begin whenever you're ready. Ms. Susan Eberhard (Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools): Honourable Nancy Allan and members of the Human Resources Committee, my name is Susan Eberhard. I am the executive director of the Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools and will represent them in this brief today. The Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools, referred to as MFIS for t he rest of the brief, was incorporated in 1974 for the purpose of representing the funded independent schools to the provincial government.

Those involved in the first years were included as a partner in Manitoba's education and prepared the way for the positive relationship we now enjoy with the Department of Education and the minister's office. All funded independent schools follow Manitoba curriculum, employ certified teachers and meet the legislative and regulatory requirements. Manitoba's 59 funded independent schools comprise approximately 14,000 of the province's enrolled students. The schools represent approximately

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 267 17 faith associations, many ethnicities, rural and urban populations and varied socio -economic groups. The MFIS works respectfull y and co-operatively with Manitoba's diverse families. The MFIS has been very pleased with the relationship that we have enjoyed with the Province of Manitoba over the last number of years. We are grateful for the partnership that has developed but are concerned with the fact that we, as partners in education, were left out of the consultation process for the drafting of Bill 18.

This is ironic, considering the bill is aimed at fostering inclusiveness. The MFIS and its member schools respect the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Manitoba Human Rights Code. We applaud the work that has been done over the years in protecting human rights and have often been at the forefront when it comes to educational initiatives and student voice in these matters. We als o support the intention of Bill 18 to equip schools to prevent and address incidents of bullying and would choose for all students to be safe in Manitoba schools.

However, we are concerned with some of the language in Bill 18 and the ramifications that i t may have for all Manitoba schools, their staff, families and students. While MFIS clearly understands that this is an amendment to The Public Schools Act that does not apply to our independent schools, unless ordered by the Minister of Education, accordi ng to

section 60.5(

g) in the Manitoba Public Schools Act, we support safe and inclusive schools and the premise behind the legislation. We request that consideration be given to a change in the language to ensure that all students are protected and incl uded.

We also request that if a decree is made by the minister to have this implemented in independent schools, that it be postponed until further consultation is carried out with MFIS, to ensure that the act and the implementation guidelines accompanying it fall in line with the government's agreement and commitment to ensure that independent schools are able to offer a learning milieu suffused by the tenets of their faith and the communities that they serve. The Minister of Education (Ms.

Allan) ha s indicated that those independent schools that are faith-based are essential to meet the needs of some Manitoba families and that the legislation is in place to support the faith- based institutions. While MFIS supports safe and inclusive schools and the premise behind the legislation, we would request that independent schools be able to implement it in a manner that is respectful of their independence and the communities that they serve.

Upon the premise that the provincial government believes that f aith-based schools have the right to practise the follow tenet– and follow the tenets and teachings of their faith as part of their educational programming, we request considerations and changes that indicate this. If funded independent schools are inclu ded in Bill 18, we request the insertion of the phrasing from the first agreement signed with Manitoba's independent schools. This would serve to assure that the previous statements of the Honourable Nancy Allan, Minister of Education, would be honoured.

These sections of The Public Schools Act would be applied to Manitoba's independent schools in accordance with the unique religious and cultural objectives of an independent school and its community. We also request changes in the language would be implemented to respect the independence of our institutions and the communities that they serve. Our first area of concern with the bill in

section 1.2 is how the term bullying is defined. Our concern with this se ction is the broadness of the definition. While we acknowledge that someone who is bullied may experience distress or harm to their feelings, one must also admit there are many causes for distress and feelings that are not connected to bullying. We could anticipate that a staff person in a school might say things at any given time that might cause distress or harm to a student's feelings. Will that staff person now face the accusations of being a bully?

A tone, a facial expression, a call to the office, an explanation of a term or historical event are common occurrences in a school but might be perceived as bullying under this definition. The MFIS recommends a succinct definition be used to replace the present definition. The second area of concern for the MFIS is the proposal of one tool to be used to address the needs of someone who is bullied.

The tool I'm referring to is the formation of a group with activities and/or an organization that will promote gender equity, antiracism, the awareness and underst anding of and respect for people who are disabled by barriers, or the awareness and understanding of and respect for people of all sexual orientations and gender identities. There has rarely been one solution to give support. There is rarely one soluti on to educate.

268 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 There is rarely one solution to the issues of life. In education, tools for support or educating are not usually legislated, but are more often recommendations in handbooks or guidelines. We are aware of the research conducted proving an efficacy of this tool. The group, the organization, however, perhaps research of other tools might prove to be equally effective, or perhaps research of various tools used together might prove an even greater efficacy.

We often hear that the latest research has proved that the previous research was only partially effective or a partial study. Why is the Province about to pass legislation on research of one area only? In addition, the name of the tool is going to be made a law through legislation. Educ ators have been known for their affection of changing terms in an endeavour to finally produce the solution to an issue at hand. The name gay -straight alliance is ironically non- inclusive of many groups that are bullied within legislation for the inclusive schools.

MFIS recommends the naming of tools that promote and support inclusion being–be moved from the legislation to guidelines included within Manitoba education publications and that support groups not be named by a law, but rather by the members of t he group who are determining the goals and mission of the group.

The third area of concern is the differential treatment of an individual and/or group on the basis of ancestry, nationality, ethnic background, religion or creed or religious belief, religious association or religious activity, age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital status, source of income, political belief, association or political activity, physical or mental disability or related characteristics or circumstances or soci al disadvantaged that are ignored by the proposed Bill 18.

MFIS recommends the inclusion of all these areas from the Manitoba Human Rights Code be added to Bill 18 to avoid their omission which might result in discrimination or bullying. * (10:50) MFIS s upports the concept of safety, inclusion and positive experiences as fundamental to all of Manitoba's schools. Bill 18 is an attempt to move schools in this direction, but we feel it is in need of improvement, improvement that should be result of all the e ducational partners working together for the goal of safety, inclusion and positive experiences in every Manitoba school.

The MFIS board of directors thanks you, the committee, for this opportunity to give their perspective in the presentation today. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation. And questions from the committee? Ms. Allan : Thank you very much, Susan, for your presentation today. I value the working relationship that my department officials and I have with you. Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools has been a partner of ours for a very long time and will continue to be a partner. Thank you for the suggestions in your presentation.

Bill 18 is a framework for creating safer and inclusive schools, and we will continue to work with you to give you a comfort level that I will be honouring my commitments that I have made to the Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools. We will also work with you in regards to the implementation guidelines around the framework of legislation. There was a similar process in Ontario in regards to Catholic schools, and I know that MFIS is looking at those guidelines now, and we will continue to work with you.

In regards to the consequences that had been mentioned at this –by the opposition in regards to their–one of their criticisms of the legislation is that there are no consequences in the legislation. I made an announcement that we would have put together a provincial code of conduct, and that would be done by our oversight committee with all of our education partners on it. And it is critical that MFIS is part of that discussion and that dialogue, and I want to thank you for making a commitment to work with us in regards to what those consequences will look like.

Thank you for your pres entation, and it's wonderful that you're here with us today. Madam Chairperson: Thank you. Mr. Schuler: Thank you very much for coming this morning, and we appreciate the fact that you put together a very well -thought-out and that you gave suggestions. That's very important. Troubling to the committee is the sentence on page 1–I'll quote your words–but are concerned with the fact that we, as partners in education, were left out of the consultation process for the 'tra' –drafting of Bill 18. End quote.

That is a concern because we would think that all vested interest groups, especially those that are going to be directly impacted, that they

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 269 would have been consulted on this piece of legislation; that would've been a courtesy. You've put forward concerns and you've put forward suggestions. My question to you is: Have you had a chance to meet with the minister since the introduction of the bill to lay this out and have a discussion with her about your concerns and the kind of changes you're recommending in your presentation, or is this the first opportunity that you've had? Ms. Eberhard: Thank you, Mr. Schuler.

Yes, we actually have met on several occasions to meet with Minister Allan, and we have also been in discussion with the deputy minister and some of hi s staff to present certain ideas. We're not always quite sure where we are in the process, so always looking for more contact, which has been offered to us by Minister Allison–Allan this morning. Madam Chairperson: Thank you. Mr. Gerrard: Thank you, Susan, for your very carefully put-together brief with a lot of good ideas, and–thank you. An Honourable Member: Use the mic, Jon. Mr. Gerrard: I've got two here. Okay.

Thank you very much for your well together – put-together presentation, for how you art iculated a number of concrete suggestions. I just want to say thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you so much. We heard that, thank you. Seeing no further questions, thank you again for coming down. Very much appreciated. And our next presenter is Chad S mith, the Rainbow Resource Centre. Do you have any materials, Mr. Smith? Mr. Chad Smith (Rainbow Resource Centre): Yes, I do. Madam Chairperson: All right. Our staff will come and help you with that, and then you can begin as soon as you're ready. Mr. Smith: Great, thank you.

First, thank you to the Standing Committee on Human Resources for giving us all the opportunity to speak. Good morning. My name is Chad Smith. I am a social worker and I'm the executive director of the Rainbow Resource Centre. We wor k with thousands and thousands and thousands of Manitobans that are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and two- spirit, and so I'm speaking on behalf of my community of thousands and thousands and thousands of people.

The Rainbow Resource Centre is the community and resource centre for the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, two- spirit and allied communities in Winnipeg, across Manitoba and northwestern Ontario. The centre is a safe space for the community and provides LGBT individuals with a place to meet, learn and grow, much like GSAs do. We provide social programming, social support, counselling services and antihomophobia education and diversity training across our province and within northwestern Ontario.

In 2012, our centre was recognized with the Human Rights Commitment Award of Manitoba by the Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the 'manitobia' so– Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties. Last year we saw 112 individuals within our drop-in counselling pr ogram, provided 926 individual counselling appointments and provided group counselling and support throughout the year to the LGBTQ community.

We hosted a total of 215 different groups and events for the community over the year, and our education program provided 208 antihomophobia and diversity training workshops to a total of 4,683 individuals last year. We are well aware of the effects of homophobia and of the need for Bill 18. Specific to Bill 18 is the connection that our centre has with LGBT youth. E ach year, our centre hosts Camp Aurora, which is a summer camp specifically for LGBT and allied youth. The camp provides a safe space for 55 youth, and for many of them this is their first time ever attending a summer camp program.

Often they've experienc ed discrimination, harassment and violence for being LGBT, and the idea of attending a summer camp isn't fun, it is terrifying. Camp Aurora provides an incredible opportunity for LGBT youth to experience nature, summer camp, outdoor activities and the chance to make new friends, all the while not having to hide who they are for fear of the repercussions of violence. At the Rainbow Resource Centre, we provide counselling, support, acceptance and safety for LGBT youth. Our youth program hosted a total of 121 workshops at the centre for LGBT youth last

270 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 year and had a total of 2,156 youth visits. Our youth program is built on three pillars: creating community for LGBT youth, developing leadership skills through youth -identified activities and building self-esteem and resiliency in our youth. Creating community allows LGBT youth to meet other youth like themselves. Developing leadership skills helps to create youth that contribute now and in the future, through positive community development and citizenship.

And sadly, we have to build self-esteem and resiliency, for our youth often get to be themselves when they come to our centre only to have to leave and go back to a world that tells them that they aren't welcome, where their schools aren't safe and to families that don't want them. At our centre, we support LGBT youth that often aren't supported in other places in their lives. Many of our youth come from great schools that have GSAs, places where they feel safe to be themselves and to be a part of their school and their community without having to hide who they are.

Many of our youth come from great families, with parents and caregivers that drop them off at the centre, that will come to the events that the youth put on and attend different programming events that we host. But sadly, many of our youth don't have safe schools with GSAs or safe families with parents who accept who they are. Every year we play host to youth that turn 18, and on their birthday, they don't receive a cake or presents. Instead, parents that are disgusted that their child identifies as LGBT give them the gift of homelessness.

Every year for the past four years that I have been in my position as executive director, we are contacted by youth that turn 18 and are kicked out with nowhere t o go and only a bag of clothing and their belongings, if they're lucky. We help 18-year-old kids figure out how to be adults overnight, how to find a room or an apartment, how to go on social assistance to help pay for this room or apartment, how to try and stay in school while dealing with the fact that their families don't want them, and the centre provides them with the food and support that these families don't give.

We also play host to youth under 18 whose families discover that they are LGBT, and th ese youth are also often given the gift of homelessness, depending on the situation, and they may become involved with the child welfare system. We help youth try and figure out how to stay in school and how to feel good about themselves after their parents and families have made them feel like nothing. Twice a week we host youth programming; twice a week we hear stories from the youth that attend our centre, stories of being beaten up at school, harassed, picked on, threatened, over and over.

We hear the stories of youth that use self-harm, cutting themselves on their arms, their stomachs, their legs and their bodies as a way of coping, because for these youth the physical pain that self-harming behaviours create is easier to tolerate than the emotional pa in that they experience just because of who they are. * (11:00) We hear the stories of youth that struggle daily with thoughts of killing themselves and ending what they see as a horrible existence with no future just because of who they are: lesbian, gay , bisexual, transgendered, two- spirit.

We help them feel good about who they are in a world that is often structured to make them feel worthless and like nothing; a world that tells them that they are evil, less than, sinners, mentally ill, sick and disgusting; a world that tells them that a school group or a club that tries to make their schools feel like a safer and more accepting place, a school group or a club that welcomes and accepts who they are shouldn't be allowed; a world that says such a group i s morally corrupt.

We help connect LGBT youth with people who accept who they are with communities that have real family values, values of love, acceptance and understanding. We help connect them with faith communities that value who they are and accept that their Creator made them who they are with no mistakes and with no faults in their Creator's image. The past two years, we have hosted a provincial GSA conference with attendance from students and teachers and schools from across the province, from Winnipeg, Brandon, Thompson, The Pas, Flin Flon, Gimli, Portage la Prairie, Eriksdale and Kenora, to name some.

GSAs make a difference in schools, and schools are requesting the tools and training to support youth and make their schools safer places. Bill 18 will help them do this. During the school year, the Rainbow Resource Centre is contacted by 10 to 15 schools a month with questions ranging from how to support a student that is being bullied for being LGBT, to how to make their school safer for transgender youth, to how to handle incidences of homophobia, to how to create a GSA. This year's

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 271 third annual conference will play host to over 400 students and teachers from across our province and northwestern Ontario. To quote Heather Anderson, a teacher invo lved with the GSA at Vincent Massey Collegiate in Winnipeg, GSAs save lives. The work that we do with youth and the safe spaces that we create with youth are mirrored in Bill 18.

The youth that come to our centre, that attend schools with GSAs, talk about their schools, talk about their teachers, talk about feeling connected, having friends and feeling safe, regardless of what their home life looks like. These youth participate and contribute to their schools, to their communities and help make their school s and neighbourhoods safer and more welcoming. They are more connected to their schools and do better in their classes.

These youth like who they are and while their 'stu'–their schools may not be perfect, they are a lot better and a lot safer than the sch ools attended by our youth that don't have GSAs. At the Rainbow Resource Centre, our youth program is about community, leadership and development and building self-esteem and resiliency. Our youth program creates safe spaces, encourages community participation and development and challenges ideas of oppression and works to support human rights. Bill 18 will help create safe spaces and inclusion for all students, not only LGBT students.

Bill 18 will combat bullying and provide schoolteachers and administr ators with the tools to investigate bullying and support students. Today, I've chosen to use my presentation time to reflect on the realities of many LGBT youth, the realities that we experience every week. At these–as these hearings continue, you will hear the voice of exclusion repeatedly telling you why Bill 18 should not be passed, why Bill 18 shouldn't be allowed. I'm here to remind you of the voices of the youth that Bill 18 will help to protect. Bill 18 will help to change these realities within ou r schools and our communities.

As a social worker, I value that our government values the safety of all students. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Smith, for coming to present. Questions from the committee? [interjection] Minister Allan. Ms. Allan: Oh, sorry. Chad, thank you so much for your presentation today, and thank you for all of the work that Rainbow Resource Centre does for LGBTQ youth all across our province. It is important work, and I also want to say I understand you're leaving.

It makes a lot of people sad, but I know it's still going to be a great organization and I know whatever you choose to do, it's going to be fantastic. Thank you for being here today, Chad. Mr. Schuler: Chad, thank you very much for coming today. There's probably a lot of things you could've been doing on a beautiful morning like this, and you chose to be here at committee and let your voice be heard and those that you represent. We appreciate that very much as a committee, to hear all presenters, and i t was very well written and thank you very much. Mr.

Gerrard: Yes, I want to thank you, Chad, for putting, very clearly, the perspective of the situation at the Rainbow Resource Centre and the people that you deal with and the work that you do. Thank you for that. I think your presentation is a really valuable contribution today and thank you. Mr. Chomiak: Yes, I want to thank you because the committee was very troubled yesterday when we heard a presentation that 95 per cent of people who are bullied, this bill wouldn't make any difference.

And your presentation sa ys something totally opposite to that, and something which I think more actively and accurately reflects the reality out there. So, with those words, I want to thank you for bringing some of those statistics to this 'communi'–to this committee, because I think it will help us to deal with some of the troubling statements that we heard yesterday. Floor Comment: Thank you. I would invite any member of the committee to come down– Madam Chairperson: Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith: –to the Rainbow Resource Centre, and I'd be glad to give a tour. Ms.

Allan: Actually, if you can get to the Rainbow Resource Centre, they have, for the first time in Canada, a display, and it's a display about what happened to gay people during the Holoca ust and it is incredibly moving and phenomenal.

272 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 Madam Chairperson: All right. Seeing no further questions, I just thank you once again for coming down, taking the time. And our next presenter is Donn Short, professor, private citizen. And do you have any materials? – [interjection] Okay, thank you. So you can just go ahead then, whenever you're ready, Mr. Short. Mr. Donn Short (Private Citizen): Thank you very much. Freedom of religion is a fundamental right. It can even go to the essence of someone's identity. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms affords expressed protection to freedom of religion in

section 2(a) . But as the Supreme Court has also consistently asserted, religious rights are not unlimited. In the Supreme Court of Canada's landmark decision in 1985, Big M Drug Mart, the court defined freedom of religion under

section 2(

a) of the Charter in this way: the essence of the concept of religion is the right to entertain such religious beliefs as a person chooses, the right to declare religious bel iefs openly without fear of hindrance or reprisal. However, in the same decision, the Supreme Court also underscored that freedom of religion is, and I'm quoting, subject to such limitations as are necessary to protect public safety, order or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. Madam Justin 'wil' –Justice Wilson, in the Jones decision in 1986, is worth noting.

Freedom of religion under the Charter –and this, again, is a quote–does not require the Legislature to refrain from imposing any burdens on the practice of religion. The ultimate protection of any particular Charter right must be measured in relation to other rights and with a view to the underlying context in which the apparent conflict, if there is one, arises. One such other Charter ri ght is the right to equality protection offered by

section 15(1). The Supreme Court of Canada in its 1985 –1995 decision in Egan has confirmed that sexual orientation is included in the Charter's equality provisions. Those asserting freedom of religious r ights can do so only by first acknowledging that their right is not unlimited and that gay and lesbian students have rights which must also be respected, acknowledge – and acknowledged on an equal basis. Not only has the Supreme Court of Canada made it ver y clear that rights are not absolute, the Court has also emphasized that there is no hierarchy of rights in the Charter.

That defining principle was articulated in the Court's decision in 1994 in Dagenais. A hierarchical approach to rights which places s ome rights over others must be avoided, both when in interpreting the Charter and when developing the common law. When the protected rights of two individuals come into conflict, as can occur, Charter principles require a balance to be to 'chee' –to be ac hieved that fully respects the importance of both sets of rights. The Supreme Court of Canada has given a very broad

interpretation of protected religious belief and practice in its 2004 decision in Amselem, in which the court made clear that there is no requirement on a person asserting the protection of a sincerely held religious belief, that they must establish that that belief is part of religious dogma or doctrine. * (11:10) A sincere belief is a belief that brings the holder closer to the divine, w hether or not other co-religionists, other followers of that particular religion, share that belief. In other words, the test is purely subjective.

Religious belief may be subjective and personal and may vary from one individual to the next, but where it is alleged that religious freedoms have been infringed, it is not enough for someone to claim that their religious rights have been infringed. In the Supreme Court's decision in scolaire, the Court emphasized that in order to establish an infringement on religious freedom, objective evidence of the infringement would be required.

The Supreme Court of Canada made it very clear in the reference regarding same- sex marriage that merely recognizing the equality rights of one group, in the instance before of sexual -minority students in the instance of Bill 18, does not in itself constitute an infringement of the rights of another. Here those asserting are claiming that their religious freedom rights have been infringed. The question would be: Would a reasonable people believe that permitting GSAs constitute an infringement of freedom of religion where no religious beliefs are being imposed on anyone?

Students and staff alike are still free to continue to believe whatever they wish. It is not enough just to claim your rights have been infringed. Constructing safe schools by permitting the establishment of GSAs ensures that sexual minority

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 273 students have access to education the way all other students do. Permitting GSAs –permitting students to form a GSA has no impact on anyone's belief system, students, parents or anyone else. To put what I am saying in very informal terms, if there is a GSA meeting going on in room 211 of your high school, you are free to sit in room 308 and not like it. You are free to walk the halls and really not like it. You are at liberty and have the full right to eat in the cafeteria with full regret that the GSA is going on in your school.

The mere existence of the GSA does not in any way impact on your ability or freedom or right to believe whatever you want. Nobody is demanding that you like it and nobody is demanding that you participate in it. There is zero impact on your religious freedoms. The fact that someone may object so strenuously to the presence of the GSA in their school actually confirms that those religious beliefs are intact.

Also in scolaire, the Supreme Court has made it very clear, in the context of religion, that a claim by parents that exposing their children to the religious values and belief system that might be different from those that the parents are trying to pass on to their children will not prevail as a claim of infringement on religious freedoms under the Charter. And again, I quote: Parents are free to pass their personal beliefs on to the ir children, if they so wish. However, the early exposure of children to realities that differ from those in their immediate family environment is a fact of life in society.

The suggestion that exposing children to a variety of facts in itself infringes their religious freedom or that of their parents amounts to a rejection of the multicultural reality of Canadian society and ignores the government's obligations with regard to public education. Although such exposure can be a source of friction, it does not in itself constitute an infringement of

section 2(

a) of the Charter. It is only actual and significant interference by the state that triggers infringements on religious rights not perceived infringements or even trivial or insubstantial burdens. Any argument by a staff member or teacher who might be required to perform an administrative task in relation to a GSA, such as booking a room or bringing in a guest speaker or photocopying posters, would at most be a trivial or insubstantial burden and would not constitute an infringement of their religious freedom rights. I do not believe that Bill 18 infringes on religious beliefs at all.

Assuming that religious freedom rights and sexual orientation rights did conflict, at most this would be a competing r ights claim. The Supreme Court of Canada has said that competing rights claims should be reconciled, if possible, through accommodation, and if a competition is inevitable, then through balancing. Balancing competing rights claims must be approached on a case-by-case basis and by answering the question, which would be posed in this case as: Would the benefits of Bill 18 outweigh its negative effects on freedom of religion if, indeed, there were any?

The analysis is deeply contextual, there is no absolute rule that applies without context, without looking at the facts of the actual situation. What are the facts? The facts disclose the need to do something about the pressing and substantial problem of widespread bullying in schools generally and the issue of homophobic, transphobic and gender-based bullying, specifically. Addressing bullying purely as a generic phenomenon is merely our refusal as a culture to face our fears.

Far from resulting in isolation by specifically mentioning homophobic bullying, leading bullying as a generic phenomenon results in isolation. The facts disclose scientific evidence that schools with GSAs and/or antihomophobia policies offer benefits to all students, regardless of sexual orientation. The provincial government has a cons titutional responsibility to deliver education in the province and to ensure that the ability of students to access education is free from burdens based on differential treatment. Homophobic, transphobic and gender - based bullying is differential treatment.

Bullying of any kind is based upon a desire to vilify difference and often to establish the victimizer as a member of the privileged class of what is normal, dominant or desirable. In truth, most school boards and schools throughout Canada are decades behind the progress made outside the context of schools in the larger Canadian society, where great strides have been made in addressing discrimination based upon sexual orientation, as well as the achievement of full citizenship of sexual minorities in pre sent-day, complex, multicultural Canada.

Rather than undermine Bill 18, the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Canada confirms that Bill 18 is on solid legal ground and I support it strongly. Thank you.

274 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Professor Short, for coming down to present, and we'll now have committee questions. Ms. Allan: Professor Short, thank you so much for being here today, and I should let you know that that is a wonderful presentation. And, of course, I'm going to remember all of it, so I was wondering if there'd be a possibility of getting a copy of it, because I would like a copy of that presentation. And also, thank you so much for writing the book.

I appreciate the book and, actually, a –many presenters here have mentioned the work that you have done, so thank you so much for being here today. Mr. Schuler: Donn, I can save you a lot of work. Minister, Hansard will be out within the week, and then everything you've said, the minister will get. Donn, thank you very much for coming– appreciate it. Like we've said to many other presenters, probably a lot of other things you'd rather be doing outside. And very important for individuals to come forward. This is a right you have and we appreciate that you took that opportunity. Mr.

Gerrard: Yes, I want to say thank you for coming forward and presenting so clearly many of the Supreme Court and other rulings that have occurred and interpreting them for us. I think the wonderful thing about a committee meet ing like this is that we get a wide variety of input, scholarly input like yourself, which is very helpful from people who have personal experiences with bullying and to get this cross-section of opinion as we look at how we move forward on this bill is, I think, very impressive. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you so much.

Seeing no other questions, we appreciate you coming down, spending the time. Thanks, once again. Floor Comment: I actually do have some copies if you'd like. I'm treating you like my students; I'm not handing out the handouts until after I'm done. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Professor Short. Our next presenter is Kelly Moist, president of CUPE Manitoba. Do you have anything to hand out? No? Okay, then you can just go a head whenever you're ready. Ms. Kelly Moist (CUPE Manitoba): Hi. Thank you to the committee for allowing me to come speak today.

And I'd also like to thank all of the presenters seated behind me because I'm proud to be part of a society where citizens put this much importance on political engagement, so I thank all these that come before you today. CUPE Manitoba is pleased to have this opportunity to be speaking to the standing committee on education to express our support for Bill 18, The Public Schools Amendment Act, which is –which has, as its objective, the promotion of safe and inclusive schools in our province.

CUPE Manitoba represents approximately 25,000 workers across the province, including teachers' aides, librarians and school support staff province-wide, as well as members of the Rainbow Resource Centre. Our members share the government's conviction that all forms of bullying and discrimination have no place in Manitoba schools. This bill provides vital tools necessary to help stop the many ne w forms of bullying and cyberbullying that we face in our society.

The requirement for all school boards to establish respect for human diversity policies is a positive step, to help ensure harassment and bully -free school environments for all students. We strongly agree that there needs to be this proactive type of legislation to ensure a safe place for LGBT students in particular. * (11:20) A survey by Egale Canada revealed that 64 per cent of LGBT students feel unsafe while at school and 58 per cent of straight students report feeling upset by homophobic comments. In fact, over two thirds of students are hearing homophobic expressions like that's so gay on a daily basis.

Many of these young people have been subjected to belittling, humiliation and physical harm simply because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation or identity. With respect to gender identity, an overwhelming 74 per cent of trans youth have been verbally harassed about their gender expression. The effects of all of thi s hateful behaviour can be devastating, often leading to trauma, depression and, in worst cases, suicide. CUPE has a proud tradition of being at the forefront of the struggle against harassment and discrimination in our workplaces and in the broader community.

Homophobic and transphobic bullying is an attack on human rights and it hurts everyone from the targets to the witnesses to society at large. Moreover, it is not just a schoolyard issue; it pervades our workplaces and our communities. In

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 275 fact, many of our LGBT members still face verbal and physical harassment at work, preventing them from fully participating in our society. CUPE's ongoing campaign, speak out and stop bullying, embraces the same principles of diversity and antidiscrimination tha t are advanced in Bill 18. I've a copy here of the pamphlet which we use in this campaign and have to say it is one of the most popular brochures ever produced by our union.

We have requests from all over the country for these materials, not just from ou r members but from schools, churches and community groups. In addition, CUPE proudly supports and promotes other initiatives which work to prevent homophobic and transphobic bullying, such as the Day of Pink and Egale's safer schools campaigns.

It appears from the media coverage that one of the most controversial aspects of the bill, according to its detractors, is the requirement that schools accommodate students who want to establish and lead activities and organizations that promote gender equity, anti-racism, the awareness and understanding of and respect for people who are disabled by barriers or the awareness and understanding of and respect for people of all sexual orientations and gender identities, and the use of name gay -straight alliance or any other name that is consistent with the promotion of a positive school environment that is inclusive and accepting of all peoples.

Egale Canada explains that a GSA is a student-run group that provides a safe place for any and all students to meet and learn about all different orientations, to support each other while working together to end homophobia and to raise awareness and promote equality for all human beings. In addition to being a group dedicated to support, it also strives to educate the surrounding areas and the community on different gender and equality issues.

We fail to understand why allowing this type of activity in our schools in construed by some in such a negative fashion, and we strongly believe that the aspect of this bill will be a positive step forward to help ensuring a safe and inclusive school environment. In closing, we would like to reiterate that we commend Minister Allan and her colleagues in the government for introducing Bill 18, which will further help protect students from c yberbullying and promote a safe, respectful and accepting learning environment for all students.

The changes contemplated in Bill 18 will send a powerful message that we as Manitobans are committed to ensuring that all students in our province have the right to feel safe and welcome at school, and we urge you to pass this bill. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you, Ms. Moist, for making this presentation. We'll go now to questions for the committee. Ms. Allan: Kelly, thank you so much for your presentation, and thank you for all of the work that you have done across Canada in regards to equality and diversity. And thank you for mentioning the work that Egale has been doing. Dr.

Catherine Taylor has worked with Egale and is –they published their book this year in regards to statistics about young people and how they feel in schools, and it's not just LGBTQ youth, it's straight students as well, and you mentioned those statistics and how disturbed people can be in school about what happens in regards t o language and activities. So thank you for mentioning that. And thank you for being here with us today. Mr. Schuler: Kelly, thank you very much.

In your opening statement you thanked people for taking up their citizen right and coming forward and being part of the process, and that applies to you. Thank you for being here. Mr. Gerrard: Thank you for coming, Kelly, and one of the questions which has been fairly hotly debated here has been the definition of bullying, all right, whether hurt feelings shoul d be enough to–and the use of the word hurt feelings in the definition. And as we have heard opinions on both sides, I'd just like to offer you an opportunity to express yours. Ms. Moist: Thank you.

I kind of believe that if a student is complaining to a teacher or another student about hurt feelings that that's something that's worthy of investigating. I think that to err on the side of it being simply hurt feelings is disastrous, and we've seen the results of that. But I believe that it's incredibly important which is why, on behalf of all of the members of CUPE, I'm here supporting this bill. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you.

276 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 Seeing no further questions, thank you once again for taking the time to come down. Our next presenter is Deborah Schnitzer–and if I pronounce that wrong, please let me know –private citizen. Do you have anything to hand out? Yes, she– no? All right. Go ahead whenever you're ready. And correct my pronunciation for me. Ms. Deborah Schnitzer (Private Citizen) : It was brilliant. Madam Chairperson: Thank you. Ms. Schnitzer: I'm absolutely –I have a frog. I'm sorry. I will –oh, well. I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here.

I –and I'm speaking in favour of this very courageous and important piece of legislation. I'm going to read an excerpt from a piece I presented as a context for what I would like to say today. This was part of a month -long series of town hall presentations regarding whether or not Winnipeg School Division No. 1 ought to introduce what at the time was defined as antihomophobia education for all practitioners. This original presentation was made to school board trustees on November 9th, 1999. That is 15 years ago.

The policy, while hotly contested on the basis of many of the arguments that we will have seen and heard in the past months in relation to bill C 18, was subsequently approved. November 9th, 1999–I will speak it in the present tense as it was written. Unhappily, it's a present tense that it still obtains in so many heart-wrenching ways. My son told me he was gay when he was 15.

He told me he was gay and he shared with me the range of strategies he had had to develop in school to protect himself from comments –fag, fairy, queer, freak, wimp, sissy, wuss, fruit –from the language of hate that circulated endlessly in corridors, classrooms, schoolyards, lunchrooms. It was clear that if he ever came out, he would be attacked verbally, emotionally, psychologically and physically.

At every turn, he had to amputate integral parts of his identity, conceal his history, his story, his narratives, his experience, the values within his family, extinguish his human right to be represented, valued, treated equally and fairly as a complete human being. He was disabled by a school culture that had no way of handling the intolerance and abuse, the silence that annotated every dimension of his inter action with his peers, teachers, classroom text resources.

Some religious, secular and political groups have decided that one way of life is better than another, and so that antihomophobia education should be dismissed, believing that it will only promote tolerance for second -class, perverse, perhaps, life choices. We celebrate diversity in every aspect of the Manitoba curriculum and school culture. Excellence in education is measured by the system's–the educational system's ability to comprehend and ensure that erasure of identity is not prerequisite for good standing within a school community.

And so, while my son is raised to believe in equality of all human beings, cultures, language, races, religion, gender and orientation, the school system could not adequately address that range of rights. My son had no recourse, no way of ensuring that his identity is valued within his community. His peers, teachers, administrators, staff, curriculum writers, assessment officers, superintendents, edu - cation prof essors remained mute, silent, unable to respond to the world in which he lives, works and contributes.

And the rights of my eldest son are excluded, his voice silenced, and so are the rights and voices of my second son, younger, heterosexual and unable to deal with precisely the same intolerance that documents his brother's school life. In the corridor, the classroom, the lunchroom, the playground, when his peers used hateful names –hateful words to name homosexuals, he has no safe, meaningful and ongoing way of dealing with that intolerance, no way to express his profound respect and love for his brother, for the values and realities within his family and his community.

How is an 8- year-old boy, how a 16- year-old boy, to speak up within the system, tha t would support him –that should support him and educate others, that cannot respond, is not ready to respond, does not think that it has the right to respond? How constrained are we? How illiterate do we remain? * (11:30) There has been a long and signifi cant history within the public school system of opening the mind and heart to differences that have been demonized and criminalized, so it is unthinkable for a school not to respond on issues of racism, sexism, classism and religious discrimination; unthin kable that if a

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 277 woman, a young woman, is harassed that the school will not respond; unthinkable that if an Aboriginal, a Jew, a Hindu is insulted, the school will not respond; unthinkable that if a straight male is verbally assaulted, the school will not respond.

I am resenting this context of November 1999 because I see in the drafting, passing and implemen - tation of earlier anti- homophobia education within the school division, educational communities an understanding of what it means to expand and deepen our grasp of human right practices in publicly funded institutions –an evolution that is intrinsic to the vision and practice of bill C 18.

Any school that is publicly funded in whole or in part must operate in compliance with the vision that ensures tha t no members of its complete or partial public schools will be silenced in terms of the right of antibullying or po–pro-rights advocacy and/or assembly.

Bill C 18 intends to respond to bullying within this context: bullying that includes homophobia, bi-phobia, trans -phobia in schools, bullying that includes a respect for gay -straight alliances, as well as related alliances among students, staff and faculties within educational communities which increasingly aspire to understand the impact of intolerance f uelled by ignorance and contempt. It meaningfully addresses issues of safety and security relating to equality in terms of race, culture, sexual orientation, ability and gender.

It demands awareness and practices that intervene and disrupt actions and attitudes that wound, disrupt, diminish and defile communities legally and ethically obligated to care for and support the rights of all its members. Will there be grey areas, conundrums, ambi - guities, contestations, opportunities for new learning, possible amendments borne of experience and growing expertise, the 'oppordunity' for ongoing reflection and refinement? I would hope so. My reading from my November 1999 presentation demonstrates this capacity to respond with intel - ligence and right action.

This i s why we exist as a democratic culture, alive to the teachings of the past and the present. We demonstrate the potential for the further evolution of human rights revisions that will embody developing and developed better and best practice in terms of inclusivity and antibullying. This is our shared responsibility, our human right. The members of educational communities that benefit from bill C 18 will also be those who inform our ongoing refinement of its form and application.

And I am less afraid of the grey areas that will lead to possible revision than I am of the grey areas that repudiate the need for bill C 18 in its current form at this time. Our children, their teachers, administrative staff, members of the public achieve increasing literacy about antibullying and the tools to eradicate its presence through this bill.

We can ask for more, but we won't discover its dimension unless we take this crucial and essential next step to the realization now of a better practice in place for public schooling space that honours the lives and experiences of all children and youth and provides those who are mandated to superintend those public spaces, spaces that are funded in full and in part by public funds, with the vision and tools to achieve that actuality. Thank you so much. Madam Chairperson: Thank you so much for coming down to present. Questions from the committee? Ms. Allan : Well, Deborah, thank you so much for your presentation.

Thank goodness you saved a presentation that you made 15 years ago so you could read it to us again today and add your comments about Bill 18. Trustee Kristine Barr from the Winnipeg School Division presented the first night of Bill 18 committee, and she started it with, well, here we go again. So thank you so much for being h ere today and we appreciate your presentation. Mr. Schuler: Thank you, Deborah, for being here – appreciate everybody who comes forward and puts some comments on the record, and committee thanks you. Mr.

Gerrard: Thank you very much for your presentation, and certainly it's reminiscent of what we heard many years ago. I think it's –sends a pretty important message. I would ask the question that I asked earlier, in terms of the precise definition of bullying, which becomes very important, and there's been a b ig debate over whether the word feelings should be included along with the other word– [interjection]–the word, feelings, hurt feelings, right?

And, you know, as someone who has been involved for many years, I'd like to give you an opportunity to talk spec ifically about, you know, the use of the word, hurt feelings, as part of bullying. Ms. Schnitzer: I would say as an educator, as a parent, as a member of the planet, that those words are internalized and carried as wounds forever and, therefore, they have to be taken seriously.

278 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 Name-calling is not a euphemism; it's a very serious offence against the rights of people. And we know what happens when those names are used publicly against individuals and they have to be understood with the full impact. Madam Chairperson: Thank you. Seeing no further questions, we'd just like to thank you one more time for coming down and taking the time. Much appreciated. Our next presenter is Michael Nelson, chair of the Brandon Pride Committee. Do you have any materials to h and out, Mr. Nelson? No, okay. Come on up, and go ahead whenever you're ready.

Mr. Michael Nelson (Brandon Pride Committee): Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Michael Nelson and I'm a resident of Brandon, Manitoba. I'm part of Brando n's LGBT community and then this past year's chair of the Brandon Pride Committee. I'm nervous. I'm here today on behalf of the Brandon Pride Committee to urge the Manitoba provincial government to approve Bill 18, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Safe and Inclusive Schools). As a committee, we've discussed this bill at length, and we fully support and believe in this piece of legislation.

I do not think many people in this room would dispute that our schools should be safe for any and all students and f ree from discrimination of any kind. There does, however, seem to be some controversy over the

section requiring school boards to establish respect for human diversity policies – sorry–and accommodating gay -straight alliances within all schools. In my esti mation, the spirit of this bill is to prevent bullying within our schools. As you know, bullying is defined in this bill as behaviour that is intended to cause or should be known to cause fear, intimidation, humiliation, distress, or othe r forms of harm to another person's body: feelings, self -esteem, reputation or property, or is intended to create or should be known to create a negative school environment for another person.

This is exactly what GSAs exists for. They exist in schools to educate and inform the schools they serve about bullying as it relates to the LGBT population within that school. It's also important to note that intolerance and discrimination does not just affect LGP –LGBT students within our schools, it affects every student. When any young person goes to any school they deserve to feel safe and respected in that environment. By not being inclusive and accepting of LGBT students and accommodating GSAs, schools stop being a place of growth, innovation and inspiration.

The Brandon Pride Committee itself has officially existed in Brandon for four years. In that short time, we have wo rked towards a safer and more inclusive experience for Brandon's LGBT population. Groups like the Brandon Pride Committee and gay -straight alliances within schools have an immeasurable impact. They allow people of all walks of life to feel like there's a place for them where they otherwise may not have. It is the hope of the Brandon Pride Committee that this bill gets passed in the Legislature with the safety and well-being of all Manitoba students in all of Manitoba's schools in mind. Thank you.

Madam Chairperson: Thank you for coming down to present. We'll now have questions from the committee. Ms. Allan: Well, I kind of feel awkward because I had to run out for –seriously, I had to run out. But thank you so much for being here today and I will get a synopses of your presentation. Thank you for the good work that you do in Brandon. I know that you have a ver y active pride committee and that's fantastic and thank you for making the trip here today to speak with us. Mr. Schuler: Michael, thank you for being here.

I know it's –for you guys, it's a shorter distance evidently than from Winnipeg to Brandon, so than ks for being here and putting your thoughts on record. Safe trip home. Mr. Gerrard: Yes, thank you very much for coming and presenting. One of the phrases in the legislation which has entailed a lot of debate has been the reference to whether hurt feeling s should be part of the definition, and the concern is that this would be too broad but from others that it's absolutely essential. And I'd like to give you a chance to comment. * (11:40) Mr. Nelson: I would just say it's essential as well.

I feel like n egative comments and hurt feelings definitely have a drastic–can have a drastic, negative impact on high school students, or any student, actually. Madam Chairperson: Thank you.

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 279 Seeing no further questions, thank you again. That's okay. It's okay. Thank you again for coming out. We appreciate it. And our next speaker is Patrick Woodbeck, minister, Rainbow Ministry, chair of the board. Do you have any materials to hand out, Mr. Woodbeck? Mr. Patrick Woodbeck (Rainbow Ministry): I do. Madam Chairperson: All right, we'll help with that. And you can go ahead whenever you're ready. Mr.

Woodbeck: In saying that, you will have a copy of what I'm going to say today but, being a true extrovert, I will try really hard to keep to this and not go off on tangents. Madam Chairperson: Thank you. Mr. Woodbeck: Good morning. My name is Patrick Woodbeck, and I'm the rainbow minister with the Rainbow Ministry, an outreach ministry of the United Church of Canada.

Our work at Rainbow Ministry is one of education to United Church of Canada congregations around affirming and welcoming issues and how they might become more inclusive of the LGBTTQQ, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, two- spirit, queer and questioning community. We also do outreach to the LGBTQ community, and are a visible sign of care and concern to this same community. Part of this work includes advocacy on behalf of this community, and it is in that capacity that I appear before you today.

We have seen first-hand the damage that is done to young people when they are marginalized, bullied and, in turn, not given a safe environment in which to grow. The loss of self -esteem and self -worth can last throughout a lifetime. School is a time of great change for young people, and it should be a time when they can flourish and grow into the people they were meant to be. But for those being bullied, that growth can and is stunted, and they may never reach their full potential. And this is a loss for all of us.

In 2011, Egale Canada Human Rights Trust, along with Catherine Taylor from the University of Winnipeg and Tracey Peter from the University of Manitoba, published Every Class in Every School, final report on the first national climate survey on homophobia, biphobia and transphobia in Canadian schools. This report paints a grim picture of the climate that many young people face in schools today.

This survey has given solid evidence to educators and administrators so that they might, as quoted from the report, "make evidence-based policy and programming decisions." The statistics speak for themselves : 70 per cent of all participating students, LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ, reported hearing expressions such as, that's so gay, every day in school ; a nd 48 per cent reported hearing remarks such as faggot, lesbo and dyke every day in school. More than one in five, 21 per cent of LGBTQ students, reported being physically harassed or assaulted due to their sexual orientation.

And 20 per cent of LGBTQ students and almost 10 per cent of non-LGBTQ students reported being physically harassed or assaulted about their perceived sexual orientation or gender identity. We, at Rainbow Ministry, see Bill 18 as a positive step forward for all youth who are seeking a safe environment in which to learn. Bill 18 calls administrators and educators to account and ensures a level of accountability. This accountability will ensure that all instances of bullying are investigated and dealt with by those who are in power.

There has been much opposition to this bill, and much of that opposition has centred on the provision of the bill which allows for the establishment of GSAs, gay -straight alliances, in all schools, should one be requested. There appears to be a great deal of opposition to the bill from certain faith groups who are stati ng that this provision allows for the formation of GSAs in faith -based schools and goes against their religious beliefs. As Christians, Rainbow Ministry, we also look to the Scriptures for guidance.

We are called in Scriptures to recognize the least among us and to ensure that those who the –who are the least are looked after. Matthew 25:42- 45 states: For I was hungry, and you gave me no food. I was thirsty, and you gave me nothing to drink. I was a stranger, and you did not welcome me –naked, and you did not give me clothing. Sick and in prison, and you did not visit me. Then they will also –will answer, Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison and did not care of you?

Then he will answer them, truly I t ell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me. Who could be more, of the least of these, than any child or youth who is being bullied? As Christians, we recognize that this passage talks not only about physical needs, being hungry

280 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 and fed, being thirsty and provided with drink, but also spiritual and emotional needs. Being sick and in prison, and being visited. Bill 18 clearly addresses the spiritual and emotional needs of young people who are being bullied by offering a clear avenue of accountability to administrators and a way for these young people to find the support they need, regardless of why they are being bullied.

Bill 18 is not only addressing these young people who are bullied because of their sexual orientation or gender expression, it addresses bullying in all forms and for all reasons. We believe that we are told in Genesis that we are all made in God's image. That includes all of us: straight, gay, bisexual, transgendered, two- spirit, queer and questioning. We are all made in the image of God; made to be the way we were meant to be. We have a responsibility to ensure all young people have a safe place in which to learn, a pl ace that will nurture their learning and not stifle it.

We are also called as Christians to love one another as we have been loved–Matthew 22:34-40. When the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together, and one of them, a la wyer, asked him a question to test him: Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest? He said to them: You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the greatest and first commandment, and the second is like it: You shall love your neighbour as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Love is not found in fear in homophobia. It is not found in any youth to endure bullying. We need to challenge and empower ourselves and others to stand up against bullying for any reason. Bill 18 challenges and empowers those in power to stand in solidarity with those being bullied and ensures safety for all. We, at Rainbow Ministry, people of faith, as Christians, stand in solidarity with Bill 18. We encourage this government to continue to put the safety of all students first and pass Bill 18. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Woodbeck, for coming down to present. Questions from the committee? Ms.

Allan: Patrick, thank you very much for being here today. It's nice to see you again, as always. Thank you for the reflections on behalf of your ministry in regards to Bill 18, and we appreciate the work that you do in your church. And thank you so much for being here. Mr. Schuler: Patrick, thank you very much for being here and making your presentation. And like we said before, thank you for waiting your turn.

And there's better things you could probably do today, but we really appreciate the fact that you and everybody else is willing to come forward and let this committee know where you stand on this piece of legislation. So thank you. Mr. Gerrard: Thank you very much for coming and presenting so clearly. One of the issues that has come up repeatedly here is th e phrase –the reference to hurt feelings being included as part of what one would judge in terms of whether bullying is present or not.

And there are strong feelings, in this case, on both sides, that it would be absolutely necessary to include this phrase, and on the other hand, that this would need–lead to complaints which were too minor to be concerned about. So I'd ask you to comment. Mr. Woodbeck: As somebody stated before, that they would rather err on the side of caution than not on the side of caution. * (11:50) When dealing with issues of name -calling and issues of bullying, hurt feelings are a part of that, and the damage that can be done when someone is repeatedly denigrated and called down, that does hurt the feelings.

That hurts our self -perception, it hurts who we see ourselves as and how we see ourselves in relation to others. And so the idea of feelings, if we–if that was to be taken out of the bill, then what does that leave you with? Physical assault. How do you say that someone who calls someone else a name is not bullying, is not degrading that person, is not calling that person down? Madam Chairperson: Thank you. Seeing no further questions, I just thank you one more time for coming to present.

Our next presenter is robber –sorry, Robert Charach, principal of the Linden Christian School, and you can correct my pronunciation for me. Mr. Robert Charach (Linden Christian School): You did really well–close, Charach. Madam Chairperson: Charach, we're correct?

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 281 Mr. Charach: Yes. Madam Chairperson: And do you have anything to hand out? Mr. Charach: I do have 20 copies prepared. Madam Chairperson: All right. Staff will help you with that. And, yes, just go ahead whenever you're ready. Mr. Charach: Well, I do appreciate the opportunity to speak to you this morning, and after sitting here for two hours I also appreciate air conditioning in my office every day. My name is Robert Charach, and I serve as the principal of Linden Christian School.

Linden Christian School has a population of 860 students, employs over 100 staff and represents individuals from over 100 communities of faith. A number of our families do not attend church, yet understand and affirm the faith component that is an important part of our educational program. Parents sign a statement that acknowledges a Christian perspective is foundational part of our educational program. Inherent to our belief system is a reality that every person is born in the image of God and therefore is t o be treated with respect and love even if we disagree with their position on different issues.

External surveys affirm that Linden Christian is achieving the goal of creating a safe and caring learning environment, which is one of our core values. In a Yo uth Health Survey reported–report conducted by the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority for all students in grades 6 to 12, Linden Christian School reported these results: 92 per cent of our students strongly agree or agree that they feel close to the people in the school; 97 per cent of our students strongly agree or agree they feel safe in the school. Faith-based schools provide a moral, ethical and philosophical foundation to address bullying.

Faith-based schools strengthen the moral fibre of our communities, city and province. We are all concerned by the tragic impact of bullying. Bullying is a serious and growing problem, especially with the advancement in technology that allows students to interact through the use of that technology. This is a comple x and extremely difficult challenge for school leaders. Every one of us wants to find solutions to prevent the occurrence of tragedies families in our country have experienced in recent times.

The impact that social media plays in bullying needs to be the focus of training, education and public awareness, and I –not only for all staff, students and parents, but from grades K to 12. I believe that Bill 18 brings an important awareness to these–this problem, and yet there are concerns. Our first concern relat ed to Bill 18 is that the definition of bullying is too broad and will lead to adverse implication for educational leaders. There are important elements of the definition that are missing.

Firstly, the phrase pattern of behaviour – and one of our presenters already used the word repeated–needs to be included in the definition of bullying. In spring of 2013, the government hosted the safe and caring schools conference initiated by the Honourable Minister Nancy Allan, which was attended by representation from all school divisions within our province and seven delegates from Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools, which I was one. It is important to note that the experts in the field, when presenting on the issue of bullying, all included the words pattern of behaviour in their

definitions. We must make careful not to label all interactions, even negative ones, as bullying. Some interactions reflect immature behaviour, and others may warrant being labelled as criminal behaviour where direct police involvement is required. Please sit in my chair for a moment and consider the number of interactions that occur in a single day with a school population of over 800 students, or really any school regardless of the size. Students will disagree, may interact in a ru de or immature manner or debate an issue without tact and diplomacy and consideration for another person's opinion.

Feelings may be hurt, and self -esteem wounded. The reality: This happens in all schools. And to be frank, many political interactions that I have observed lack respect or consideration for the opponent, and some of your feelings may have been hurt. However, is this bullying? It may be defined as rude behaviour, unkind behaviour or unprofessional behaviour. These types of behaviours need to be corrected and addressed. However, when a definition of bullying is so broad, as presented in this legislation, every potential negative interaction becomes a bullying concern.

We must remember that children will express thoughts and emotions that, depending on the level of maturity and understanding, will require correction and teaching and should not be labelled bullying. The definition needs to be refined to

282 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 strengthen the legislation. Bullying involves a pattern of behaviour, and I strongly recom mend that the definition be adapted to include the words, pattern of behaviour or repeated behaviour. It is unwise to have such a broad definition for such a serious issue as bullying. There are additional concerns with the definition in terms of –such as , should have been known, will lead to

interpretational challenges which will open a Pandora's box of after -the-fact accusations and debate that will be unmanageable for a school leader. It is not hard to envision parents raising concerns and will accuse s chools that they have missed the warning signs of an issue. However, sometimes it is difficult, especially if the harassment is subtle in nature or a student has been secretive about an online relationship which has become abusive or toxic. The terms shoul d be known. It's far too ambiguous to include in legislation. It must be removed from

section 1.2(1)(a). Another concern which has been referenced in– by your questions, is the use of the term, causing harm to one's feelings. It is a reality that almost all students will have their feelings hurt in an unintentional manner. This type of incident is not at the same level as an ongoing bullying issue which the legislation hopefully wants to address. The other major area of concern from a faith-based perspective is the mandating of clubs that hold to positions that contradict important elements of a community's religious teaching.

Faith -based schools are voluntary educational communities where people join together around certain faith-based belief systems. Staff, parents and students voluntarily join faith -based schools with an understanding that the beliefs of the faith community will be central to the instructional environment. We are very open and direct about our core beliefs and we do not attempt them –attempt to force them on anyone. We are responding strongly to expectations that faith -based schools be required to support mandated clubs in our school that do not reflect our religious values.

Please understand, these concerns are not only held by Mani tobans who reside in communities such as the promised land of Steinbach. A large number of people in urban communities also have expressed concerns. And I'd like to share personally for a minute. I come from a very unique family tradition, both Jewish and Mennonite heritage. Relatives from both sides of my family came to Canada to escape religious persecution. Sadly, those who remained behind in European countries where religious freedom was not upheld ended up perishing.

We must remember that freedom of religion in conscience is a fundamental freedom under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is understood that not everyone in Canada will hold the same beliefs. However, the law clearly protects the communal aspects of religious freedom. Freedom of religion is to provide individuals the right to hold and declare their beliefs and practice, and the right to transmit one's faith to our children and to congregate or associate with individuals who share those religious beliefs. Faith -based schools provide a critical sense of community.

There was an understanding for those who choose to invest in a faith-based education that the core values of the faith will be upheld. Faith -based schools must be allowed to maintain the integrity of their beliefs. Thus, to require faith-based schools to adopt policies inconsistent with their beliefs is to infringe on the fundamental right of religious freedom. This may not have been the intent of the people who drafted Bill 18, however, we are concerned that the current way that Bill 18 is written may create a path that will impact the religious integrity of our faith-based learning communities.

Bill 18 needs to be amended to assure religious freedom of faith-based schools. The central issue for faith-based schools is that we cannot in good conscience affirm actions when they are in direct contradiction with our faith -based perspective. We must remember that faith -based schools are formed to support the values and teaching of the religious traditions of a specific faith-based community. * (12:00) Unfortunately, it appears that the debate has been positioned as a win- lose situation without any room for compromise on the issue of mandatory GSA clubs in all school settings.

I would encourage an option for faith- based schools to address bullying in a m anner that does not compromise their beliefs and still achieves the purpose of the legislation, preventing all forms of bullying. School-based solutions are best to address the challenge and the bullying as they open the door to the creative ideas that I believe gifted students and teachers of Manitoba are very capable of putting in to practice.

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 283 Thank you for the opportunity to share with you this morning and for your considerations of my ideas to strengthen Bill 18. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very m uch for coming down to present. We're going to turn to questions, and–Minister Allan. Ms. Allan: Thank you very much, Robert. It's nice to see you again and we appreciate the presentation that you have made this morning and thank you for being here with us today. Mr. Schuler: Thank you, Robert, for being here and for your presentation.

I just want to quote out of page 4, a sentence, and I quote: "I encourage an option for faith- based schools to address bullying in a manner that does not compromise their beliefs and still achieves the purpose of the legislation, preventing all forms of bullying." I have two questions for you:

(1) What kind of new approaches would your school put into place to address all forms of bullying? Perhaps you could give us an exam ple or two. Second question is: What kind of things are working in your school right now that address bullying? Mr. Charach : Thank you. I'd like just to respond to that question. You know, in our code of bullying we make a statement: bullying of any kind is unacceptable at our school and will not be tolerated and it goes on to outline that. So it's fundamental. What sort of new things we would do?

(1) I think we would like to strengthen the professional development of our teachers. You know, we have a fair number of new teachers so one of the things you want to do is teach them to look for the warning signs, the behaviour in students that may be experiencing some emotional distress. I envision forming a committee of our students. We're very unique because we're a K -to-12 school. But I'd like input from the students. I'd like to get selection from a number of students, partner with parents and staff and give them a charge. We're doing a lot of things well. How can we improve it, lower the gap?

How can we ens ure that all forms of bullying are being addressed? So I'd put them to a task and create sort of an action committee, and that would be one thing. And you asked the second question, what are some things that are doing –that we are doing that I think is h elpful is that we work very hard in building a sense of community and belonging. That's really important. You know, when we see –you know, you've got to be intentional. Just this week we had probably from kindergarten to 12, 80 new students enter our school.

We've got to put ourselves into the shoes of those students and we've got –we have mentors ready for them. We had people to meet them. We're going to do some things to integrate them into the community. So that's one of the things, you've got to build a s ense of community and you've got to celebrate community within a school. A third item that I –that we do in our school that I think is really important: we recognize different giftings. It's not just the athletic group or the, as I say to my athletic dire ctor, it's not just your groups that I love and highlight.

Our performing art students, they're highlighted, students who are artistic, some in creative dance. You need to highlight and celebrate a diversity of gifting and find–and really recognize that every student is unique. You know, some of you are aware–and it's just a thing that I want to share –we–I was sent a picture just yesterday from Nelba Marquez-Greene. Some of you may know that she was–you know, is now–from Sandy Hook.

And we had a former st udent who was killed in that tragedy and she sent me a picture–that's something that we do do for every student from K-to-6 that when they–we recognize three individual traits within that student. And she had the picture of her little daughter with that c ertificate, leadership, musical gifting, academic proficiency, and she said thank you for affirming her. You need to affirm individuals for their gifting and you need to ensure that they are part of the community and you need to be alert. And there's one more thing I'm going to say.

As an educational leader you need to be willing to respond. If I can just share for a quick minute –I probably have a minute left. I go back from my experience in the Winnipeg School Division, and there was a situation where we weren't aware of a student who was being harassed after school. It was a subtle thing, but, once you become aware, you need to act and I pulled the student in and he explained what was happening. It was after school. This kid was always saying, I’m going to get you, I'm going to beat you up. So then we thanked him for coming forward.

When a student comes forward, you need to respond and you need to put protection there for that student. It wasn't long. I said, you tell me if there's a problem. But I also alerted our EA in a classroom, you listen, and I made a comment to the whole class and I also talked to the individual. It took about

284 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 10 minutes; like, they were lining up for recess. I'll never forget it. He just whispered in his ear and our EA heard it. I’m going to get you after school, and that's where I responded. And then we took it to an administrator and we addressed it with an appropriate discipline measure. So it is the assurance of a response because nothing will impact. It's horrifying to he ar that there are students that are being physically beaten up in our schools. You need to address those matters in a manner that is just appropriate to the offence. Thank you.

Madam Chairperson: Thank you. Our time for questions is up. I know we –people had more things they wanted to say, but thank you so much. Mr. Charach: Sorry, I was a –that was a long answer. Madam Chairperson: No. We appreciate you coming down. Thank you so much. Our next presenter is Celesta Thiessen, private citizen. And do you have anything–seeing if I see her. Is she there? Yes. Do you have anything to hand out? Ms. Celesta Thiessen (Private Citizen): Yes, I do. Madam Chairperson: All right, we'll help you with that, and then if you could go ahead just as soon as you're ready. Ms.

Celesta Thiessen: Thank you for the opportunity to share my concerns about Bill 18. I was born in Winnipeg. I have two children, 10 and 4 years old. I consider bullying a very serious issue. In fact, I pulled my older daughter out of the public school system just last year. How she would be treated going into middle school was certainly a big part of the reason that I decided to home -school her for now. Her self -esteem and a sense of self-worth are still developing, and I felt that it was important I give her a safe place to grow and find her footing.

But my 4-year-old claims that she's going to school on the big yellow bus next year, and she might. And, as for my older daughter, right now I'm thinking she'll go back into the public school system in grade 9 when she's more stable and sure of herself. But, certainly, part of the reason that I decided to home-school her was because of what happened to me when I was that age. They told me I w as ugly. I still hate looking at photos of myself from back then when I was in grade 6.

There were three very aggressive bullie s in my class, two boys and one girl, but almost all the other kids joined in to varying degrees. None of them wanted to become the targets. After a while, I stopped telling on the bullies because nothing ever happened to them. It only seemed to make things worse. But bullying was very frightening because I knew that no one would help me. Once, when I got back to class first and it was only me and one of the male bullies in an otherwise empty portable, he said, I want to–then the swear word that means sex –you. As he leered and leaned towards me, I was absolutely terrified.

Another boy routinely exposed himself to me outside at r ecess. I felt there was nothing I can do about it. Once a group of kids cornered me outside up against the brick wall. They asked me if I knew what a condom was and drilled me about other sex- related questions. But I refused to answer, I didn't know what a condom was and I didn't want to know. I was only 11. I didn't tell my parents the details about what was going on. I felt they were powerless to help me too. The bullies got physical sometimes. I got shoved and tripped, but not every day. Usually, it wa s just the words.

Every day the bullies in my class said derogatory things to me. You're so ugly, fat, what a loser. Your hair is so messy, then they would touch my hair. Eeew, I'm dirty and disgusting. Why do you wear that? Your clothes are so ugly. You'r e weird. The words hurt and found their way deep inside of me. It took years until I was able to mostly shake free. But, on the last count, I knew they were right, and that was the only thing that didn't bother me when they said it.

I was weird and still a m, and that's why they really came after me, because I was different and I wouldn't conform to their pattern. * (12:10) Even my guidance counsellor thought so. When my mother went to the school to speak to the guidance counsellor about the difficulties I was having, she told my mother that I should try to be more like the other kids. In my class, most of the kids liked swearing and some of them had started experimenting with cigarettes or alcohol. The girls, aged 11 or 12, were all into makeup and boys. M y mother objected, that I didn't want to be like that.

The guidance counsellor conveyed that I would continue to be picked on if I didn't try to be more like the others in my class. My mother was frustrated. She came home and offered to buy me acid -washed

September 7, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 285 jeans; all the cool kids wore them. I refused. Outward conformance wouldn't be enough. And I knew I could never conform to the behaviour patterns of the other people in my class. My religion was the most important thing to me in my life. No matter what t hey did to me, I would never conform and I would continue to do what I knew to be right. I was different because of my religion. I was not protected, and nothing happened to the bullies. Bill 18 concerns me deeply. They say it's the antibullying bill, but I don't see how it's going to help stop bullying.

The bill doesn't state what's going to happen to the bullies. The bullies need consequences for their actions, they need help to heal the hurts in their own lives. But Bill 18 doesn't address what's going to happen to the bullies at all. Bill 18 does lay out some groups that are to be promoted in the schools, which is nice for those groups, I guess. But what is communicated when some groups are to be promoted in the schools and other groups are not? It seems to send a message that some people are illegitimate or have lifestyle choices that are not to be protected within the school setting.

Religious groups are not included in the list. It comes across to me like this: you're saying that what I am and who I am isn't worth mentioning or protecting and that my children won't have equal rights or equal protection in the school system. I was bullied because of my religion and nothing happened to the bullies. There are children who are now when I was then. Anyone different gets bullied–anyone. They need real help. Bill 18 is not okay as it is written. I would like to see Bill 18 changed so that all groups are listed equally, not certain groups being promoted over other groups.

It is also important that children and parents who feel powerless to stop the bullying are given clear con–a clear recourse for what they can do if they feel like the situation is not being addressed adequately at the school or school division level. I would like to see this included in amendments to the bill. We need something that will clearly define bullying and give some guidance as to what should happen to and for the bullies, while also upholding the freedom of all, including the freedom of religion. Madam Chairperson: Thank you so much, Mrs. Thiessen, for coming down and presenting.

We'll go to questions from the committee. Ms. Allan: Thank you very much, Mrs. Thiessen, for your very personal presentation today. It's –it–Bill 18 has been a very emotional piece of legislation for many people, and it has also brought up for me a lot of things that I remember about raising my own kids and things that happened.

I am sorry that you were bullied, and I have to tell you that the words that were used against you were completely and totally unacceptable, and I'm sure that those words hurt your feelings, and you made it very clear that they hurt you and they found their way deep inside you, and I'm sorry that that happened. I want you to know that Bill 18–there are many people that say that Bill 18 does not protect people of religion.

Section 41(1.7) 'requells'–requires school boards to respect all protected groups under Manitoba's Human Rights Code. That has always been the case and remains the case. And the legislation requires school boards to have due regard for the principles of The Human Rights Code and, in drafting their human diversity policy, the code includes religion as a protected characteristic. So I want you to know that we absolutely have respect and believe that you deserve equity, and that is very important to us in this legislation. Thank you for being here today. Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): Thank you very much, Mrs.

Thiessen, and thank you for being here today and sharing your incredible story. It's not an easy thing to do and takes a lot of courage to come forward and do that. So just on behalf of all of us, I just want to thank you for doing that today. Madam Chairperson: And seeing no further questions, we just thank you one more time. You're clearly, beautifully different. Our next speak–presente r, is Leo Thiessen, private citizen. And do you have any materials to hand out, Mr. Thiessen? Mr. Leo Thiessen (Private Citizen): Yes. Madam Chairperson: All right. We'll help you with that.

And then please go ahead, whenever you're ready. Mr. Thiessen: All right. Hi. Thank you for hearing me. My name is Leo Thiessen. I was 'lardly' –largely raised in Winnipeg. Six months after 9/11, I was laid off from my current job in Winnipeg and found employment in Steinbach. After working there for a year, my wife

286 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 7, 2013 suggested we move closer to my work to save travel time. So we've lived in Steinbach for the last 10 years. I'm 40 now. I have two children; one in grade 6 and one pre-school age. Thank you all for your dedication to helping create a good school environ ment for Manitoba. Thank you for the time that you take to ensure a safe environment for the children. And God bless you for that.

At one place of employment, I worked in an environment that–where I had what seemed to be a homosexual boss –the boss never volunteered this information and I didn't ask him –and an openly homosexual co- worker. I did not have a problem with this. I kept largely to myself and did not volunteer my opinions, speculative or otherwise, on the subject of gender identities. It was, and still is, my view that each person gets to choose their own lifestyle. They can really do whatever they want, as long as it's legal, of course.

I believe that ultimately everyone will be judged and sent to heaven or hell, but that time is not yet while we're here on earth, and each person can make their own choice while we're here. Besides, back then, I had my own sin issues in my life that I was working through, like pornography. So who was I to judge anyone else? One day, the homosexual co -worker approached me, one on one, and specifically asked me what my views were about homosexuality. Is it a sin or isn't it? I replied something like, whoa, I don't know what constitutes hate speech or not, so I can't do that.

But what I could do is give you my opini on on what I understand the Bible to say about it, if you want, and that would just be my opinion. The co- worker asked me for my opinion and seemed genuinely interested in understanding my position. I gave my opinion, something along the lines that I beli eve the Bible clearly indicates homosexuality is a sin, along with many other sins, such a lying or stealing. The conversation ended peacefully, as far as I knew. It turns out that this one -on-one conversation was not to remain private.

Rather, it was shared with the other–others in our small crew of about five people in this particular work cell. For the next several months, this work crew proceeded to verbally harass me daily, belligerently and loudly. It was unfortunate for me that there was one person the crew who was generally very witty, and I was –I became the focus of negative attention and derogatory joking–just let me find my place here. It became too much for me, so I emailed my boss. My boss was very good about it and the harassment stopped immediately –mostly stopped immediately.

A few months later, however, I found myself in a differen t work department altogether. I can't say for certain my m

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	40-2-hr6
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	40th 2nd hansardpdf hr6.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	6d12320c96e66e901cf8c8903e715988467185bf

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).