Manitoba Committee Hansard — Human Resources Committee, Sitting 7 (40th Legislature, 2nd Session)

40-2-hr7

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session - Fortieth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Standing Committee on Human Resources Chairperson Mr. Matt Wiebe Constituency of Concordia Vol. LXV No. 7 - 6 p.m., Monday, September 9, 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

363 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES Monday, September 9, 2013 TIME – 6 p.m. LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia) VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Mr. James Allum (Fort Garry-Riverview) ATTENDANCE – 11 QUORUM – 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Mses. Allan, Irvin- Ross, Hon. Mr. Rondeau, Hon. Ms. Selby, Hon. Mr. Swan Messrs. Allum, Friesen, Helwer, M mes. Mitchelson, Rowat, Mr. Wiebe Substitutions: Mr. Smook for Mrs. Rowat APPEARING: Hon. Jennifer Howard, MLA for Fort Rouge PUBLIC PRESENTERS: Mr.

Corey Shefman, Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties Ms. Karen Friesen, private citizen Mr. Rick Peters, private citizen Ms. Carolyn Peters, private citizen Mr. Adam Crookes, private citizen Ms. Karella Crookes, private citizen Ms. Chantelle Friesen, private citizen Ms. Jolene Funk, private citizen Mr. Kelly Friesen, private citizen Mr. Dale Funk, private citizen Mr. Ryan Zacharias, private citizen Mr. David Halstead, private citizen Ms. Suzanne Toews, private citizen Ms. Jennifer Thompson, private citizen Ms. Shirley Schroeder, private citizen Mr. Brian Schroeder, private citizen Mr.

Samuel Harder, private citizen Ms. Rebecca Hein, private citizen Mr. Devin King, private citizen Mr. John Hiebert, private citizen Mr. Ken Peters, Gateway Church Mr. Evan Wiens, private citizen Mr. Markus Reimer, private citizen Mr. Reece Malone, private citizen Mr. Bill Bage, private citizen Ms. Sara Peters, private citizen Mr. Ron Lambert, private citizen Ms. Melissa Penner, private citizen Mr.

Stephen Kennedy, private citizen WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: Mary-Jane Kehler, private citizen Cindy Wiebe, private citizen MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION: Bill 18 –The Public Schools Amendment Act (Safe and Inclusive Schools) * * * Clerk Assistant (Ms. Monique Grenier): Good evening. Will the Standing Committee on Human Resources please come to order. Before the committee can proceed with the business before it, it must elect a new Chairperson. Are there any nominations for this position? Hon. Andrew Swan (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I nominate Mr. Wiebe as Chair. Clerk Assistant: Mr.

W iebe has been nominated. Are there any other nominations? Seeing none, Mr. Wiebe, would you please take the Chair. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you. Our next item of business is the election of a Vice -Chairperson. Are there any nominations? Mr. Swan : Yes, I n ominate Mr. Allum as Vice-Chair. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Allum has been nominated. Are there any other nominations? Seeing none, Mr. Allum is elected Vice-Chairperson. This meeting has been called to consider Bill 18, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Sa fe and Inclusive Schools).

I'd like to inform members of the committee that, in accordance with our agreement of the House dated June 20th, the committee may, by leave, decide to

364 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 hear from presentations in addition to those 30 scheduled for tonight's mee ting–I believe there's actually 34 scheduled for tonight's meeting. Since there appears to be more than 30 presenters on the list before you, what is the will of the committee? My apologies. So the agreement was that there are 30 scheduled–there should be 30 scheduled for each night. Tonight we have more than 30. What is the will of the committee? Mr. Swan : Let's proceed until we've heard all 34 that are present tonight. Mr.

Chairperson: Is there agreement to hear all presenters until we're completed? [Agreed] On the topic of determining the order of public presentations, I will note that we do have out-of-town presenters in attendance marked with an asterisk on the list. With this consideration in mind, then, in what order does the committee wish to he ar presentations? Hon. Nancy Allan (Minister of Education): Well, we have in previous evenings just gone with the numerical order, seeing as 80 per cent of the –or 90 per cent of the list is from out of town, and that was actually Mr. Goertzen's recommendation a couple of nights ago.

So we –it's been working for us and we haven't –so we're prepared to proceed in that way. Actually, and the other reason for that is because individuals who were signing up in the Clerk's office have been told where they are in the order, so they would arrive and think that they were in a certain specific spot, and then get here and it would be rearranged. So that's why I'm suggesting that. Mr.

Chairperson: Is it the will of the committee to hear the presenters in the 'numor' –numerical order listed on the sheet? [Agreed] A written submission on Bill 18 from Mary-Jane Keller, private 'cit'–Kehler, sorry–private citizen, has been received and distributed to committee members. Does the committee agree to have this document appear in that 'tran' –Hansard transcript of this meeting? [Agreed] Before we proceed with presentations, we do have a number of other items and points of information to consider.

For the information of all presenters, wh ile 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 photocopying, please speak with the staff and they can help you with that. As well, I'd like to inform presenters that , in accordance with our rules, a time limit of 10 minutes has been allotted for presentations, with another five minutes allowed for questions from committee members.

Also, in accordance with the rules agreed in the House for meetings hearing from presenters on Bill 18, if a presenter is not in attendance when their name is called, they will be dropped to the bottom of the list of tonight's presenters. If the presenter is not in attendance when their name is called the second time tonight, they will be dropped to the bottom of the global list of presenters. With regards to the process for speaking in committee, I would like to advise members of the public that proceedings of our meeting are recorded in order to provide a verbatim transcript.

Each time someone wishes to speak, whether it be an MLA or a presenter, I first have to say the person's name. This is a signal for our staff, our Hansard staff, to turn the mics on and off. Thank you for your patience. We will now proceed with public presentations. Committee Substitution Mr. Chairperson: I'd also like to inform the committee that there has been a substitution on the committee, Mr. Spook –sorry–Mr. Smook for Mrs. Row at. Smook for Rowat. Apologize for the mistake. * * * Mr. Chairperson: I will now call on Corey Shefman, Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties. Mr.

Shefman, do you have written materials for distribution? Mr. Corey Shefman (Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties): I do. Mr. Chairperson: I'll ask the staff to assist you in distributing those, if you just give them a moment to do so. And you may proceed with your presentation, then, when you're ready, Mr. Sheffield–Shefman. Mr. Shefman: Thank you. Honourable ministers, members of the committee, members of the

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 365 Legislative Assembly, as you've heard, my name is Corey Shefman. I'm the president of the 'manis' – Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties. I'm also a lawyer in Winnipeg, and I am a gay man. It's my pleasure and honour to appear before this committee for the first time on behalf of the Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties.

MARL is a non -profit human rights and civil liberties organization which, since 1978, has sought to promote respect for fundamental human rights and civil liberties and to defend, extend and foster the recognition of those rights and liberties in Manitoba. MARL is the Manitoba affiliate of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and Manitoba's premier human rights organization. MARL values the rights and liberties of all Canadians, and it is in situations exactly like these, where the real issue is a conflict of rights, that MARL's role is particularly important.

Bill 18 has generated an enormous amount of discussion, and it is important to acknowledge that opponents of the Bill do have valid concerns. However, there is a real risk that the real issues which do exist with Bill 18 may be drowned out by the excess of emotion generated from overblown rhetoric and those neglecting to put the safety of our youth first. Let m e be clear: MARL supports the aim and overarching methods of the bill. We support the mandatory requirement that schools allow the formation of various socially conscious groups.

And we support the mandatory requirement that schools permit activities which promote the awareness and understanding of, as well as respect for all people with the explicit inclusion of people of all sexual orientations and gender identities, people with disabilities and anti-racism and gender equity issues. * (18:10) These spe cific protections recognize that members of certain groups are targeted more often and more–often more harshly than others.

According to a 2009 study of Canadian students, 59 per cent of LGBTQ high school students face verbal harassment at school, compared to only 7 per cent of non LGBTQ students. Perhaps most important, however, is that 73 per cent of LGBTQ students reported feeling unsafe at school. Ladies and gentlemen, this is unacceptable. And these are the facts. These are how young people are being treated in our schools–our schools. And make no mistake, it's the hatred, the vitriol and the rhetoric coming from certain segments of our communities that encourages and fosters exactly this treatment of LGBT students.

We support this bill in large part b ecause it simply recognizes that there are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students in every single school in Manitoba and these students must be protected. No one will be required under this bill to attend a GSA event, a gay -straight alliance event , and no one will be forced to advocate for human rights–for gay rights if they choose not to do so. But , yes, schools and communities will have to acknowledge that there are GLBT students in their schools and communities. However, we do have some specif ic concerns, and I'd like to address them now.

I'd first like to draw your attention to

section 3 of Bill 18, which amends

section 1.2(1)(

a) of the act. It would–we would propose that invasion of privacy be added to the

section to take into consideration t he realities of our digital world where much of our personal information is stored behind only the most basic of security measures. As we've seen in recent highly-publicized incidents throughout this country, the invasion of privacy is a serious bullying issue. Subsection (1)(

b) of that same

section we fear may be overbroad. The objective requirement that is behaviour which, quote , "should be known to create," end quote, is too subjective in our opinion and may in the wrong circumstances intrude too far into the frame of expression. And second, the language, negative school environment, should be clearly defined so as to prevent inconsistent application. For example, it may be changed to read, hostile school environment, instead of negative, which we feel better captures the intended scope of the section. We propose that

section 1.2(1)(

b) therefore read, quote, therefore creates or is likely to create a hostile school environment for another person. Academic freedom and the importance of challenging students to question their preconceptions may sometimes involve discussions which do not have a place outside the classroom but are absolutely crucial to be had within the classroom, questions like the–discussions, that is, like the one we're having today about conflicts of rights. It is extremely important that classroom discussion not be stifled. Therefore, we propose in

section 3 of the bill that section–that a

section 1.2(4) of the act be added, quote, for greater certainty, bona fide discussion of any issue of school or public importance should not be deemed to be bullying, end quote.

366 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 Moving on, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one of the most important documents for Canadians across this country. When crafting policies as contemplated by the amended

section 41(1.7), schools and school boards should not only have regard for the code but also for the Charter. Moving on, with regards to the amended

section 41(1.8), we are concerned with the possible implications of the use of the term equity instead of equality. We believe that this may be an incorrect use of the term and suggest that further input be sought from specific stakeholder organizations that may be c oncerned with that –with the equity instead of equality. Next, there will always be those who feel unrepresented or underrepresented, this is something that MARL knows special –especially well.

MARL and similar organizations exist to promote human rights an d civil liberties , regardless of the specific issue of the day, and we suggest adding to the list of protected student groups, organizations that, quote : promote civil liberties and human rights generally . End quote. In addition to these specific concerns, we also have a number of more general concerns. There has been some question since the bill was first made public as to whether it applies to private schools. In the interest of providing clarity to educators, parents and students, we suggest that this fact to be added to the bill explicitly.

Finally, and I believe most importantly, is the issue of enforcement. Although the bill currently requires school boards to put in place, quote: "a respect for human diversity policy ," end quote, and to accommodate any students who wish to establish and lead certain activities and organizations, there doesn't appear to be any follow up, any built -in recourse aside from a court order that the student or parents or I suppose teachers may seek if the school board or school fails to abide by these requirements.

We suggest that either the minister, the Ombudsperson or some other individual with proximity to the school system, be empowered to issue compliance orders with appropriate punishments if those orders are not followed. This bill is about bullying, but more than that it's about the kind of society that we as Manitobans want to build for ourselves, for our children and for our grandchildren, what kind of province we want to live in. I believe most Manitobans be lieve that we can continue to move towards becoming a truly inclusive and just society.

MARL understands that when rights come into conflict, emotions can run high. Those – these questions go to the very core of who we are as a country, who we are as Canadi ans, but a balance can always be struck. Compromise can always be had. We believe that Bill 18 does an admirable job of balancing competing interests, of reaching that compromise. I’m happy to answer any questions the committee may have. Mr. Chairperson : Thank you very much, Mr. Shefman, for your presentation this evening. We'll now turn to questions. Ms. Allan: Thank you very much, Mr. Shefman, for this very well-thought-out presentation.

I just wanted to comment on the consequences issue that you ra ised in your brief. All schools have to have a code of conduct according to the Safe Schools Charter. But we have heard this issue come up since Bill 18 was introduced of the 4th of December last year, and I have sent letters to all of my education partner s, including the Manitoba Federation of Independent Schools, which represents the funded independent schools that the Manitoba government funds.

And we will be working with them on the oversight committee to determine a provincial code of conduct so that those consequences for bullying will be clear and they will be common across the province. We've got an excellent working relationship with our education partners and we are very confident that that'll be good work here in the province of Manitoba. Thank you once again for being here this evening. Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden -Winkler): Thank you, Corey, for coming to present to us this evening. You've got a well -prepared presentation to us and I know you've given considerable thought to this.

I wanted to just remark one thing you stated in your presentation. You said there will always be those who feel under -represented or unrepresented. And you actually suggested to even add to the list of protected student groups in that amended

section 41(1)(a)–(1.8)(a). I wanted to ask you just with respect to t he Manitoba Human Rights Code, now The Human Rights Code, of course, already prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, race and gender and, as a matter of fact, so does Bill 18. The differen ce comes in because the Manitoba Human Rights Code additionally protects social

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 367 disadvantage or religion and creed or ethnicity. Bill 18 is silent on those matters. I would ask just for your comment on why do you think it is that the Bill 18 does not mirror the Manitoba Human Rights Code. Mr. Shefman: With respect, I don't think I can speak to why the bill doesn't speak to it. I think I can speak to why MARL isn't suggesting that we add each of the enumerated groups. Would that be okay if I answered your question in that manner? Mr. Cameron Friesen: Yes, that would be fine. Mr.

Shefman: Our issue with the list of enumerated groups comes down to the fact –a couple of facts. First of all, if we are looking at the statistics and the facts in terms of which students are feeling targeted in schools, which students are being victimized disproportionately, it's the protected groups. It's students with disa bilities, it is women, it is LGBTQ students. It's not generally, for example, religious students–I'm religious myself, I should have clarified that at the beginning–or students from different socio-economic backgrounds, for example.

What's more, we found in our discussions with our stakeholders, with students and teachers and individuals across the province, that it is the students in the enumerated groups in –that are currently in the bill that are in need of this protection. The reason that we've suggest ed adding specifically groups that promote civil liberties and human rights generally is as a catch -all for the –maybe the smaller groups that we can't enumerate in the bill because it's impossible, of course, to enumerate every single group in the bill, in any law.

And so we believe that having this –these generalized groups in the schools accomplishes the same thing that MARL accomplishes, which is to make sure that every group is represented. * (18:20) And I have to tell you that we've received many comments from individuals who disagree with our position or believe that our position takes one side unfairly in this particular discussion. And I've been very thankful that I've had the opportunity to discuss with some of these people who've called our offic e about these issues and to discuss how when rights compete in this manner we need to find a balance.

Bill 18 finds that balance. As I said, and I think this is important, nobody by mandating the groups that were mandate–that are being mandated, nobody is being forced to participate in these groups. I would also suggest–and, finally, before I finish my answer–but also suggest that I personally, and in my role as president of MARL, have not heard of any student who is –who has been not permitted to start a group of the type that you're talking about, be it religious or with regards to socio- economic status, at their school.

If these examples exist, of course, we'd be happy to work with those people to come up with a solution on our end, but we haven't heard of that happening. Mr. Chairperson: Time for q uestions has expired. Thank you once again for your time, Mr. Shefman. We'll now call on Karen Friesen, private citizen. Good evening, Ms. Friesen, do you have written materials for submission to the committee? Ms. Karen Friesen (Private Citizen): Just this. Mr. Chairperson: Please proceed whenever you're ready, then. Ms. Karen Friesen: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

I'm grateful to live in and be part of a country that has in its Legislature the fundament al freedom of (

a) conscience and religion, and (

b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. It matters today not only that we speak to our government about our concerns, but that our government listen to the hearts and concerns of its people. I would like to start with a question to all of you: How many of you were bullied in school when you were growing up? I was bullied from grade 4 to high school. It was a small town and I was new to the 'comm'–the school and the community, and the kids noticed some physical features about me that I did not notice myself and I became the brunt of their jeers.

The teachers never noticed; at least if they did, they did nothing about it. I did not feel I had a voice and so I did not say anything. Instead, I becam e a bully, too, for which I am ashamed of. I can honestly say that had this bill been enlisted at the time, it would have done little to help my situation because there already is written into our Charter of Rights the right for equality and equal protection.

But what if a teacher had taken the time to notice or care, and what if the kids who had bullied would have had their parents brought in and they would have been able to hear what their bullying had done to the victim, and would this not also give a voice to the victim?

368 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 I think our teachers have an incredible job and most of them do it well. But Bill 18 will take more power away from the teachers and potentially force them to look the other way.

Section 15.(1) plus (2) of the Charter of Rights st ates: the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic group or origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. It does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its own–object to the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups included–including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

Section 29 states that nothing in this Charter can do away with or criticize or make inferior any rights or privileges guaranteed by or under the Constitution of Canada in respect of denominational, separate or dissentient schools. Bill 18 puts at risk our freedom to teach that marriage should be between one man and one woman, and that sex should be practi sed under the confines of heterosexual marriage. So what will this bill accomplish? I believe it will cause gr eater division. Look at what has done – what it has done already before it has been enforced.

It is singling out one people group which, I might add, is 2 per cent of the population being bullied. I ask what you intend to do about the other 98 per cent; either include all people groups or none at all. My biggest concern is not the bill's intentions to protect students from bullying, but rather the infringements on our rights and freedoms as citizens of Canada. For example,

section 1.2(1) of Bill 18 states: Bullying is behaviour that should be known to cause harm to another person's feelings or self-esteem. That is a very broad definition. It would likely hurt my grandkids' feelings if I said, no, you can't eat your food on the c ouch while watching a movi e. By definition of this bill I would be bullying them. It is not the government's job to parent our children and to instill values and morals; that is the job of the parents. I thank you for this opportunity and I hope you will strongly consider how this bill will affect all people, not just one group. Thank you. Mr.

Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation this evening, Ms. Friesen. We will now move to questions. Ms. Allan: Thank you very much, Ms. Friesen, for being here this evening and for coming to the Legislature to make a presentation on Bill 18. We appreciate the comments that you've made. And once again, thank you. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thank you, Karen, for coming to present to us this evening. I appreciate what you had to say. You've given my colleagues and I a lot to think about.

You mention the fact that the bill as written would have provided little difference in your own situation having been someone who was both bullied and then later on bullied yourself, and I wondered if you would just comment on the extent to which you feel that the bill, as written, does it offer any real practical tools that would help teachers and administrators in real situations make a difference in our schools? Ms.

Karen Friesen: Well, I think the Charter of Rights already touches on that and it would appear that that already is not being either made known to people or to students that it is their right that they be treated equal and that they would be told that either by the teachers or by the parents and that that would be something that would be made known. So I don't know–because that's already in place that why would Bill 18 be any different when that already could be enforced wit h the fact that it's in the Charter of Rights. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks once again for your time.

We'll now call on Rick Peters, private citizen. Mr. Peters, you have written materials for distribution? Mr. Rick Peters (Private Citizen): Yes, I do. Mr. Chairperson: We'll ask the staff to help you distribute those and you may proceed when you're ready. Mr. Rick Peters: Thank you. As mentioned, my name is Rick Peters and I just thank you for the opportuni ty that I have here this evening to provide my opinion on Bill 18.

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 369 I'm uncertain if any of what is being said by any of the presenters here will matter at the end of these hearings. Our current government seems to be bent on passing legislation , whether legal or not. Over 300 of these presentations will be heard and whether or not there will be any resulting changes to the bill remains to be seen. I am not optimistic. But I'm also not scared to say that I was wrong about the hearings with the committee and say that it did have an effect after all. Bullying is

an act that is deeply hurtful to students and it should not be tolerated. I did take a little bit of time to look over the safe schools

section of our Public School Act; this only left me scratching my head even more. Why are we taking the time to make an amendment to a –to legislation that is already in place? If there's a need to change the act why is there such a broad definition? Bill 18, as currently proposed, defines bullying as behaviour that (

a) is intended to cause or should be known to cause fear, intimidation, humiliation, distress or other forms of harm to another person's body, feelings, self -esteem, reputation or property. Does this wording not leave the impression that the minute my child walks through the doors of a school that he or she is both a victim and a perpetrator? Hurt feelings and feelings of a person's self-esteem happen each and every day in the real world. It happened to me in school. It happens at work. It happens in friendships. My son was not invited to a birthday party of one of his friends at school. Were his feelings hurt?

Absolutely. Was he intentionally not invited? I believe so. Was he bullied? Under the proposed definition the argument could be made that , yes, he was. Under the

section characteristics and forms of bullying in the proposed bill it reads, (

a) characteristically takes place in a context of a real or perceived power imbalance between the people involved and is typically, but need not be, repeated behaviour; may be direct or indirect; and may take place by any form of expression including written, verbal or physical. This

section is also left wide open. If my child indirectly, not knowingly, hurts another child's feelings, he or she under this wording could be accused of bullying. Under the section, Student activities and organizations, in the proposed bill it reads: A respect from human diversity policy must accommodate pupils who want to establish and lead activities and organizations that (

a) promote gender equity, antiracism, the awareness and understanding of and respect for people of all sexual orientations and gender identities and use the name gay -straight alliance or any other name that is consistent with the promotion of a positive school e nvironment that is inclusive and accepting of all pupils. Are people of all sexual orientation and gender identities not already protected under T he Human Rights Code?

Why the need to put legislation such as this into T he Public Schools Act when it alrea dy exists? * (18:30) I understand that Premier Selinger has publicly stated that the law has to be broad enough to cover all the groups that are required to be protected under human rights legislation. If this is the case, why , then, is there a need to single out one small faction of our society such as the grey –gay-straight alliance in Bill 18?

The definition of bullying in this bill is so encompassing that if students inadvertently hurt another student's feelings with a single off -handed comment or ges ture, they could be charged with bullying. There are other jurisdictions that have laws that make it clear that bullying is harassment and not off-handed comments. By contrast, this bill faces hurtful but inadvertent comments on the same level as severe physical and verbal abuse. Some forms of interaction are clearly more damaging than others and the law must reflect that.

A common characteristic in many of the proposed laws of this form in Canada focus on combatting homophobia. Antibullying legislation would be – would better serve children if it promoted respect for all students because of their values as human beings regardless of their characteristics. This would ensure the principles of tolerance without undermining the religious freedom of faith -based s chools through forced acceptance of principles that contradict what they believe.

After all, we have heard many times that the reason for Bill 18 is to create a safe and caring learning environment for all of the students in our classrooms. I would like to challenge this committee and this government to be a leader in our country and come up with legislation that truly does include all students and not just one specific group. Has a study ever been done in Manitoba schools with respect to the reasons for being bullied? I would venture to guess that it would be fairly close to the

370 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 one that was done in the Toronto area. A study of students in grades 7 to 12 by Maria Yau and Janet O'Reilly found that the top three causes for bullying were body image, with gr ades and cultural background coming in second and third respectively. Gender and religion came in tied for a distant fifth place cause for bullying. A suggestion I would have is that we do a study here in Manitoba to determine the top causes for bullying a nd go after those top causes first. This bill is being proposed to protect our children from being bullied.

Perhaps you should be focusing equally as much on the bullies themselves. I do believe that being a bully is not a natural characteristic of a ch ild. There are reasons that perpetuate a child to become a bully and I realize that there's likely not one single cause, rather a multitude of them. What is being done to help these children? Is it perhaps that the real agenda behind Bill 18 lies with the agendas of the LGBTQ and of the Manitoba Teachers' Society? Why the focus of one group? Is there perhaps a sexual agenda behind this?

The Manitoba Teachers' Society passed a resolution on May the 25th of this year to lobby the provincial government to reva mp its entire spectrum of existing curricula to include the LGBTQ issues, people and values. Am I or are my children being pressured into values that we do not believe in? It sure feels that way to me. And , if I feel that way, Bill 18's definition of bullying will leave me a victim. At last year's annual general meeting, the Manitoba Teachers' Society decided to lobby the government to prevent parents from opting their children out of any portions of the Manitoba curriculum.

As a parent, am I being pressured into having my children being taught things that I do not agree with? As a parent of four children currently in grades 7 to 12, my wife and I are very much of the philosophy that teaching our children is a joint responsibility between mom and dad and the teachers in our schools. We appreciate our teachers and we tell them that, but we also let them know that we are in this together because we believe that is the best way. It is not the responsibility of government to be manipulating children into whatever the government is being pressured into.

Thank you for listening, and I really appreciate the time that you take to be here every evening. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Peters, for your presentation this evening. I will now move to questions. Ms. Allan : Thank you very much, Mr. Peters, for being here this evening and taking the time to put together a presentation about Bill 18. We appreciate the comments that you have made and, once again, thank you for being here. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thanks, Rick, for coming out this evening.

You have four kids from grade 7 to 12, so you're obviously a busy guy, and I know that school has started up now so thank you for making the time because it shows that this is obviously important to you. We've asked the same quest ions that you've asked in terms of what studies have been conducted in Manitoba, and, actually, through the course of this committee it's been revealed that there has been some studies done in Manitoba and they reflect very much the same kind of findings as the Toronto study.

But I appreciated your comment to say that there would–that what's really needed is a study to determine what really is needed when it comes to all of this, and I wondered if you would just comment on something. In the process of Est imates, the Minister of Education indicated that in the province of Manitoba, instances of bullying is not tracked and reported to this minister. So to what extent do you think we can be successful if we're not actually , even as a province, tracking instances of bullying as and when they take place in Manitoba schools? Mr.

Rick Peters: I think that we could–we could start tracking them and have the divisions either report them or we do a study, a survey of the students and of the schools and ask them if t hey feel that bullying is a problem or what things they are being bullied for, and just ask that question. Leave it to them. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks once again for your time this evening. We'll now call on Carolyn Peters, private citizen. Ms. Peters, do you have written materials for distribution? Ms. Carolyn Peters (Private Citizen): I do. Mr.

Chairperson: We'll just ask the staff to help you distribute those. Ms. Carolyn Peters: Thank you.

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 371 Mr. Chairperson: Feel free to start whenever you're ready. Ms. Carolyn Peters: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. First, I want to express my appreciation for the opportunity to speak to the standing committee here today. I recognize the sacrifice that you are making and I want to thank you for that. So, opportunity. Today I want to speak to you about an opportunity that you all have. Opportunity, however, is very different than being opportunistic. I'll start by telling you a little bit about myself.

As a child, I was raised to do the right thing and have a positive attitude, regardless of my circumstances. The underlying lesson I learned along the way was to refuse to allow another individual to exert power over me through their words or actions, but to choose my response to be positive and to forgive. The next stage of my life brought me to parenthood of my own. My husband spoke earlier, so we have been busy, and we do have four teenagers ranging in age from 12 to 17, so that does leave us very busy. Our children have experienced incidents in school of inappropriate behaviours, rude and hurtful comments.

One of our chi ldren was pantsed in school. Is everybody familiar what pantsing is? No? Pantsing is when you– when one child goes and pulls down the pants of another child in school for the purpose of humiliation, all right? So, I certainly wouldn't want to have that happen to me. And it's no fun in a school setting. Now, the other –one of our children, our son Josh, was born with a cleft palate and, as such, experienced bullying as a result of his physical differences. On the other hand, our kids have also been perpetrators of bullying to some of their classmates.

Adults in the education system have made some good decisions regarding some of these incidents. Other educators, however, exhibited bullying tactics of their own towards our children. This happens. We live in an imperfect world. Life is not fair. What are we going to do about it? As a mom and dad, we teach our children right and wrong; that is our job. We teach them about how to have a positive attitude, how to apologize and make things right. We teach them ab out their sexuality and how to be respectful. We teach them how to say some very difficult words: I was wrong and you were right.

And this is our responsibility. I have never gone to school, dropped off my children and said, here you go. Raise my children the way you believe is right. That's my job. In preparing for this presentation–I apologize – I watched the Amanda Todd video. How many of you have watched it? It's heartbreaking. My children never experienced that kind of harassment, and I wholeheartedly support reinforcing antibullying legislation, especially for cyberbullying. Law enforcement needs to get involved in situations such as this, as well as the recent case involving Rehtaeh Parsons in Nova Scotia.

Both are incredibly tragic cases where the perpetrator should have been stopped, or someone should have stepped in. They were failed b y educators, by law enforcement and by the student body. * (18:40) When you look at both cases, neither, however, have anything to do with gender identity issues. My concern with Bill 18 is that the NDP government is focusing on gender identity issues and the GSA groups rather than the much more prevalent issues that cause bullying. Why not focus on social justice groups and school -wide events that encourage acceptance regardless of our differences?

Why not protect and respect the religious beliefs and the various faith communities? To truly support human rights, all groups should be equally represented rather than the one group appearing to have favouritism by their government. Our 15-year-old son, Josh, spent many evenings researching Bill 18 and the ramifications of the proposed antibullying bill. He sent his viewpoints to our local MLA, to the Education Minister, the Education critic as well as the Prem ier (Mr. Selinger). We want to also thank you, Kelvin Goertzen, who opened his comments to the Legislature with excerpts from Josh's paper.

As I was preparing for this presentation, I asked Josh, who is now in grade 11, what message he felt I should focus on, and his response, just to remind the committee what their job was, and that's what I'm going to attempt to do. To have the genuine desire for positive change is admirable; to be manipulated by any group to only achieve their agenda is not. The role of the committee is not to be pressured by the Manitoba Teachers' Society or their president and his agenda, is not to be pressured by the Rainbow Society or any LGBTQ group.

To quote Nancy Allan: It is to create safe and caring learning environments for a ll of our

372 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 students. It is not to provide preferential treatment to the group that provides the most pressure. That, committee members, would be responding to bullying to keep the bully happy. I bring this back full circle. As I mentioned earlier, the und erlying lesson I learnt along the way from my parents, was to never allow another individual to exert power over me through their words or actions, but to choose my response, to be positive and to forgive, to do the right thing. This is often not the easy path to take. I don't want to be here tonight.

I am a weepy person and I did not want to be crying in front of all of you, let me tell you, and I think that you probably have other things to do tonight as well. So–but I believe that this is the right th ing to do. The legislation Assembly of Manitoba states, and I quote: Since the public has the opportunity to have direct input into the law making process, the committee stage is important. Members of the public may present oral and written submissions concerning proposed bills. After the public has been heard from, the sponsor of the bill and the opposition critics may make opening statements.

The committee then proceeds to a clause- by-clause consideration of the bill. At this time, amendments may be proposed and considered. This is the responsibility, as I understand it, before the committee. CTV News, on September 3rd, reported a quote from Nancy Allan: I'm not prepared to make any amendments that don't provide safe and caring environments for all sc hools–for all students in our schools. The Huffington Post writes on September 9th that Education Minister Nancy Allan has vowed to press ahead with the bill regardless of public input.

I would really like to believe that the media has misinterpreted these comments. I would like to believe that this process that we're a part of is not in vain. In closing, Mr. Chairperson, I would propose that you, along with the H onourable Nancy Allan as the sponsor of the bill, and the rest of the committee make the following two amendments to Bill 18: one is to replace

section 1.2(1)(

a) and (

b) with the following:

Interpretation: bullying: 1.2(1) In this act, bullying is behaviour that is so severe, pervasive or objectively offensive that it substantially interferes with a student's educational opportunities or benefits and places the student in actual and reasonable fear of harm to the student's person or property. The second recommendation is to provide for a truly safe and caring learning environment for all human diversity. It is impossible to include all differences, and highlighting only a few discriminates against the rest. To replace

section –my recommendation is to replace

section 41(1.8)(

a) and (

b) with the following: That student activities and organizations: 41(1.8), A respect for human diversity policy must accommodate pupils who want to establish and lead activities and organizations that promote antibullying, respect and inclusiveness for all students regardless of their gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, family status, political belief, disability or socio-economic level. And, as some of the previous presenters have mentioned, this is part of what is in The Human Rights Code already.

I believe that when we are given the o pportunity to lead, we have a greater responsibility to ensure that the rights of all, including the overlooked and underprivileged, are heard. You, as our government representatives, have an opportunity, and I ask that you use it well. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation this evening, Mrs. Peters. We'll now move to questions. Ms. Allan: Well, Mrs. Peters, thank you so much for your presentation. Bill 18 is very emotional. It's a very emotional piece of legislation and I want you to know that you are in a safe place.

More people, I think, have cried in this room than I can begin to tell you. And I appreciate you showing emotion because, you know, we all are parents and when our children are hurt, we want to do the best for them. Thank you for your presentation and for coming in to see us this evening. Thank you for the suggestions that you have made in regards to amendments to the legislation. We appreciate that and I can guarantee you that I do not make legislation in regards to any organizations.

This is a piece of legislation that is supported by my caucus 100 per cent, and it's in–and it is going to protect all students in our schools. Thank you so much for being here. We appreciate it. Ms. Carolyn Peters: I just want to resp ond saying that I do disagree that it will protect all students.

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 373 I disagree wholeheartedly on that statement. Thank you. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thank you, Carolyn, for coming. You should not be ashamed about a few tears. You have courage and you have conviction and you have compassion, and you shared that in your presentation with us this evening. You've given us a lot to think about. I liked your suggestions for the bill changes. I think you think like a legislator. You brought in some bill changes and some amendments that I think would be–that the minister would be wise to consider.

I just wanted to ask you, at the local level, where your children go to school , are there already some good efforts in the schools that attempt to get at this issue of i ncluding students and, in your words, encouraging acceptance regardless of differences? Ms. Carolyn Peters: Yes, there certainly are. There is a social justice committee and there's also –they've had projects come in like Rachel Scott, who was part of the Columbine –her brother was part of the Columbine shooting. That was helpful, and they also recently had The Robb Nash Project, which is just fabulous.

I don't know if any of you have had the time to take a look at his comments, and he actually has comments specifically about the gay -straight alliance and how those types of things actually have been found to be ineffective for students of this nature. And another comment, you know, this is one of things that my son Josh had mentioned, was when you create small groups like the gay-straight alliance you end up creating cliques, and that's really not what we want. We want to have them –everyone feeling accepted and regardless of their situation.

But I also really disagree with the fact that when you want some re ligious exercises in your school, you have to have a petition of 60 to 80, yet you can't–you don't need that–the same isn't done for these, for the other side of the beliefs, right, to have a petition for a gay-straight alliance. It's different rules for d ifferent segments of the population. So that's something I think really should be considered. Mr. Swan : Yes, well, thank you for coming down and presenting. I've got two daughters of my own, one who's a teenager, the other who becomes a teenager tomorrow, so– Floor Comment: Good luck. Mr.

Swan: Thank you very much. I've just got a comment and a question. Like you and I think everybody else, I was certainly touched by the Amanda Todd case and the Rehtaeh Parsons case. I'm the provincial Justice Minister a nd I instructed my officials to work with officials from across the country to see if there were gaps in the Criminal Code that need to be filled. And, indeed, they came up with some ideas of how we could strengthen the criminal law for the most serious circumstances, and I'm certainly hopeful the federal government will bring forward– Mr. Chairperson: One minute. Mr.

Swan : –items which will be very helpful and will certainly support that. The question I've got for you is that Bill 18 already contains in s ection 41(1.7) the requirement that in preparing its respect for human diversity policy a school board must have due regard for the principles of T he Human Rights Code, meaning all of the principles of The Human Rights Code that are contained in the draft clause that you've written. Does that

section give you some comfort that, indeed, when the schools are sitting down now, in light of Bill 18, that they will indeed be including all of those considerations? Mr. Chairperson: Mrs. Peters, you have about 30 seconds. * (18:50) Ms. Carolyn Peters: I'm not sure that I would have confidence in that, no. But the point that I'd like to make in this is the fact that, really, everyone needs – the comment that I proposed there was for the student-led organizations, rig ht–versus the actual point that you're referring to, which is a

section before that, I believe. So what I'm referring to is a student-led organizations, that they as well need to be inclusive for all and not point out one specific segment. But I also, ju st, seeing as you're here, I have to also say, thank you, I'm appreciative that you disagreed with the definition of bullying as well, Minister Swan, in your comments to, in Legislature, with Jon Gerrard's statements. Mr. Chairperson: Thanks–[interjection]–thanks very much. Order –[interjection] Order– [interjection] Order. Time for questions has expired. Once again, thanks very much for your presentation tonight. Now call on Adam Crookes, private citizen.

374 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 Do you have written materials for distribution to the committee? And can you help me with the pronunciation of your last name? Do I have it right, Crookes? Mr. Adam Crookes (Private Citizen): Crookes, yes. Mr. Chairperson: Crookes. Thank you very much, and you may proceed then when you're ready. Mr. Crookes: Thank you for letting me come and speak. I strongly oppose Bill 18 the way it is written. I want to start off by saying I am against all forms of bullying against all of God's people.

The way the bill is written, it really only gives protection f or four things: gender, race, sexual orientation and disabilities. Yes, I agree all children should be protected from all of these things, but how can it be that religious beliefs are explicitly left out? I, for one, was the victim of bullying. I could be a poster child for that. For almost all of my grade 4 to grade 9 years I was called all kinds of names due to my size and the poor family that I had come from. Fast-forward 25 years, and my daughter this last year was a major victim of bullying.

And, m atter of fact, she missed the last three days of school because me and my wife were not comfortable with her going and being in that situation anymore. So it's very, very sad. It is a fact that bullying has to do with body image, their grade, gender, sexual orientation accounting for about 5 per cent, along with religion for another 5 per cent. So my question is: Why do we want to give the kids more to worry about and talk about? As a parent, it should be my choice what my kids are taught and exposed to. It should not be the school board or the government's job to tell me how to raise my kids.

There are enough programs and clubs that I can sign my 'kibs' –my kids up for after school, and there's just –there's no way of protecting them all. There's just so ma ny different things that you can put in there. Let's not also forget our freedom of religion, what happens to not be written in here. And that's it. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Crookes, for your presentation this evening. We'll now move to questions. Ms. Allan: Thank you very much, Mr. Crookes, for your presentation this evening.

And I hope, in regards to your daughter's situation, that the officials in the school help you and your wife with that. And thank you so much for being here this evening and for your comments. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thank you for coming, Adam, to present to us. I'm sorry to hear that your daughter has experienced bullying in the school system. I know how much trouble that causes for individuals and for families. It's a terrible burden to bear. But we thank you for making the time this evening to come out to present and to give your views on this important subject. Mr.

Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks once again for your time. We'll now call on Karella Crookes, private citizen. Ms. Crookes, do you have written material for distribution to the committee? Ms. Karella Crookes (Private Citizen): Just this. Mr. Chairperson: Okay. Please proceed when you're ready. Ms. Crookes: Thank you. Good evening. I strongly oppose Bill 18 as it is written. I am 100 against–per cent against bullying of any kind, but, unfortunately, this bill only lists a small portion of these groups that may be bullied. The list of things that children can be bullied for is endless.

If we are going to protect certain groups, we need to ensure that we protect all groups. We are a democratic country, and all deserve to be treated with safety and respect, no matter our beliefs or lifestyle. In a democracy, we, the people, have a voice–all people, not just one or two groups. Tolerance, acceptant–acceptance and inclusion are a two -way street. They should not be extended only to certain groups as listed in Bill 18, but to all Canadians. If it is not, the result would be bullying and persecution for those not specifically listed, including those who hold certain religious beliefs.

By elevating the rights of only certain groups, you are disregarding the rights of others, and that is not being inclusive. A democratic government cannot play favourites. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Ms. Crookes, for your presentation this evening. We'll now turn to questions. Ms. Allan: Thank you very much, Mrs. Crookes, for your presentation this evening. We appreciate the comments that you've made. And I hope that things work out with your daughter.

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 375 Mr. Cameron Friesen: Karella, thanks for coming, thanks for sharing with us and thank you for the concerns that you've expressed about the fact that what we really want to do is protect all students in our schools. And we thank you for your thoughts on this matter. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks again for your time. We'll now call on Chantelle Friesen, private citizen. Good evening, Ms. Friesen. Do you have written materials for distribution to the committee? Ms. Chantelle Fri esen (Private Citizen): No, I don't. Mr.

Chairperson: You may proceed whenever you're ready. Ms. Chantelle Friesen: First off, I just want to thank you for this opportunity for hearing my voice on concerns and thoughts about Bill 18. Good evening. My name is Chantelle. I grew up here in Manitoba. I'm here today to speak my concerns about Bill 18. I was first made aware of the needs of students back in grade 10 when our psychology teacher took us downtown to Winnipeg for the weekend to help less fortunate children.

It became very obvious to me that the most of these children were not taken care of by their parents the way that they should have been, and needed a lot of love. It shudders me to imagine how much they would fee–or how they would feel if they a lso would have been bullied for being poor. The students I saw in downtown Winnipeg would most likely have been bullied, or as result had became one for their body image and appearance. I have an aunt who teaches elementary school presently and has done for 29 years, can honestly say that body image and appearance and ability level are the main types of 'bulling'.

According to a recent survey called Stop a Bully, name -calling occurs 63.5 per cent and homophobic comments occur 15 per cent. She cannot imagine to form a group of students– for example, who are all in a club because they are overweight or unusual tall or very small or wear glasses, the geeks and et cetera–that would only emphasize their differences. All students in essence just want to fit in an d feel accepted and loved. To hold fat student activities is just absurd as holding gay-alliance activities.

Segregated groups activities would only escalate phobias and not make individuals feel they are part of a school. The students are encouraged not to form exclusive 'gloop' –clubs as a –as that will not create the unity a class and school needs. Furthermore, as a Christian teacher, my aunt teaches that all students are created equal. She teaches that each individual is uniquely created by God and she explains to all students in her care that everyone has talents and is a useful member of society.

This year, as it was last year, within the first few days of school an overweight student was made fun of and was called fat at recess. My aunt spoke to the victim's parents and told her that she prayed that that would not happen again and she explained to all students in her class that no one in her class was allowed to make any such comments to another students because each student has a heart with a feelings and that each heart is precious. She talks to her students about including all people when they play and interact in school and not to judge others by their looks.

When this happened to the last year's overweight student in September, it was dealt with by the teacher and the principal, and not one of the more than 300 students mocked her for being overweight. Everyone knew such bullying was not accepted. She's never had a gay student yet, but she would not dream to isolate the student and label the stude nt as different, but to encourage others to look at the heart of the gay student and to make him and her feel loved.

Sadly, boys who have been hurt just because they did not have the right last name or the right skin or right clothes, and now hurt others w ith words and actions. Girls often bully slyly and not the lesser, overweight, geeky or poor girls be part of the elite group. That is the real, predominant issue at schools. In elementary school, it starts and as the bullies get stronger and unchecked, t he victims get weaker and so much pain is endured without help. Bill 18 does not address these needs.

My cousin was bullied by a sly girl who was smart enough to con a very smart –a school –smart grade 5 teacher to think that she was innocent about her bull ying at school. Another of my cousin was bullied from hockey long enough without help from a teacher, despite the parent's plea, that he himself

376 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 became a bully. Another cousin had a run away from his bully at lunchtime or else he would get beat up. This is just a small synopsis of real issues of bullying. Gays should not be targeted, isolated, nor labelled; neither should many minority groups and issues in school. * (19:00) Ironically, Bill 18 demands that a Christian school to enforce to have gay alliance, but Christians are not allowed to form a group according to Bill 18, amendment 4 and 5, which states –amendment 4 allows the formation of groups .

Notice gender, sexual orientation, racial and disability groups are covered but not religious. With a list, some end up left out. An amendment by making it a law for Christian schools will force these schools to drop Biblical principles. How can a gay -straight alliance be formed in a Christian school when the whole point of a Christian education is to f ollow the morals of Scripture. Scripture clearly forbids the acceptance of homosexuality. Furthermore, amendment 1, 2 and 3 are worded very broadly and do not detail all that is happening in bullying, and it definitely does not address enough solutions.

The reality and the pain and hurt of all bullying should be addressed by teaching teachers and parents to recognize bullies early, even in kindergarten. Money should be spent to get speakers, performers and behavioural specialists to come and teach students in assemblies and classrooms and community centres and, as a result, make it a high priority to abolish all bullying. We need to target the heart of the people and accept others for the uniqueness created by their Heavenly Father and not segregate them wi th alliance and activities that will only target them for further more prejudice. Thank you. Mr.

Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Ms. Friesen. We'll now move to questions. Ms. Allan: Well, thank you very much, Ms. Friesen, for your presentation. It's obvious you have put a great deal of thought into your presentation, and I want to take this opportunity to thank you for your reflections about Bill 18 as well as your suggestions. Thank you very much for being here this evening. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thank you, Chantelle, for coming and presenting this evening. The comments and concerns that you express line up with those of many, many others who have come to this committee.

They also line up with some experts who actually express th e same kind of concerns that you have when it comes to the clubhouse effect or what you talked about isolating students according to certain identifying factors. I appreciated the comments you put on the record about your auntie's classroom and how the work in her classroom actually works to create compassion and empathy and understanding and kindness in the hearts and the minds of her students, and I think that's a great approach to have in a classroom, you can tell her for us. Thank you for coming. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms.

Friesen, for your presentation. We'll now move to –we'll now call on Jenni Funk, private citizen. Jenni Funk, private citizen. Good evening, Ms. Funk. Do you have written materials for distribution? We'll just ask the staff to help you distribute those, and you may proceed when you are ready. Ms. Jolene Funk (Private Citizen): Hi, my name is Jolene Funk, and I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to present on Bill 18. I am a mother of three children in grade 3, kindergarten and preschool.

I believe Bill 18 has been drafted with good intentions to create a safe and inclusive school environment for all children. I believe that nobody should be bullied for any reason, and all students should feel safe at school. I a lso believe that Bill 18, as it is currently written, will not accomplish that intended goal. I am concerned with Bill 18, as it is currently written, for the following reasons. The definition of the word bullying is too vague. The definition is so broad that it can include any and everything.

It minimizes real bullying and creates an environment where unintentional hurt feelings can occur. This definition of bullying is so generic that it will be almost impossible to enforce and will cause more unnecessary work for our teachers. As we all know, each child varies greatly at his or her level of development, understanding and maturity. One thing can mean a totally different thing to another, therefore creating hurt feelings. All this takes is a

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 377 little teacher and parent intervention, not government policing. North Dakota has a very well -worded antibullying law. It states that bullying is so severe, pervasive or objectively offensive that it substantially interferes with the student's educational opportunities; places the student in actual and reasonable fear of harm; places the student in actual and reasonable fear of damage to the property of the student; or substantially disrupts the orderly operation of the public school. This, I believe, is a perfect example of how Bill 18 should be amended.

It does not single out any groups and does not exclude others. I also believe that a revised Bill 18 should include notice to parents of the bullies and their victims because, after all, it is their child to discipline, not the government's. Number 2, Bill 18 specifically protects children in four categories and four categories only: gender, race, sexual orientation and disabilities. Creating specific groups only singles them out to be bullied more.

It also leaves out many other reasons as to why children are bullied, like, for their faith, their looks, their grades and their family's economic stance, to name a few. Children get bullied for these examples way more than or, at the very least, the same amount as they do for their gender, race, sexual orientation or disabilities. Where is the protection for these groups? Why are there only a few being singled out? I believe the wording needs to be changed to include everyone.

When parents and students choose an independent faith -based school, they do so specifically because it offers a certain school environment and set of values. Bill 18 erodes that choice by requiring these schools to ac commodate and promote groups whose beliefs are in direct contradiction to the teaching of many independent face–faith-based schools. According to the current wording of Bill 18, Christians and other religions are being bullied by the government into promoting lifestyles in their schools that they do not stand for.

No independent faith-based school should be forced into doing things against their beliefs. According to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as Canadians, we have the right to freedom of religion. Bill 18 is taking that away. In conclusion, I agree all bullying needs to stop, but Bill 18 is a weak response to a serious issue and will cause more problems than it solves. The wording needs to be amended to include freedom of religion for al l faith -based schools and to have a clear definition of bullying and its consequences. Thank you for your time. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms.

Funk, for your presentation this evening. We'll now move to questions. Ms. Allan : Thank you very much, Ms. Funk. I appreciate the presentation that you have made tonight and your comments in regard to Bill 18, and we appreciate you being here this evening. Thank you. Mrs. Bonnie Mitchelson (River East): Thanks very much, Jenni, for your very well-thought-out presentation, as many have been. I think all the presentations we've heard, so far tonight anyway, have been well thought out, and people are speaking from personal experience and from their own beliefs.

I want to say especially that you have obviously read the bill and thought a lot about it and did some research into what is happening elsewhere and have put forth some very thoughtful amendments that we're hoping might be considered as we begin to go clause by clause and look at moving this bill forward. And so I want to thank you for that. It's great to see recommendations for ways that, you know, a bill could be strengthened and improved. So thank you for your presentation, Jenni. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks again for your time this evening.

I'd like to make a correction for the committee. I–the last presenter we called was Jenni Funk. However, the presenter was actually Jolene Funk. So, very similar names, but different presenters. So I'm just going to go ba ck to No. 8, presenter No. 8, and call once again: Jenni Funk, private citizen. Okay, seeing that Ms. Funk is not here, we will drop her name to the bottom of the list. An Honourable Member: Which one isn't here? Mr. Chairperson: Jenni Funk, presenter N o. 8, has been called and now has been dropped to the bottom of the list.

378 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 I will now call on Kelly Friesen, private citizen. Good evening, Mr. Friesen. Do you have written materials for distribution this evening? Mr. Kelly Friesen (Private Citizen): No, I don't. Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed whenever you're ready. Mr. Kelly Friesen: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for listening to our views here tonight as Manitoba citizens speak out for our concerns for Bill 18. The bill has been na med the antibullying law. The schools in Manitoba have bullies and, of course, those that are being bullied.

There are many reasons to pick on our kids: from their size, colour, religion, language, social status, even being shy, disabled, poor academics, p oor in sports, socially challenged and even, yes, sexually orientated–orientation. Growing up, I was bullied for many of these reasons. To simply bow my head before a meal was to be ridiculed for being a Bible thumper, in a Christian community at that. T o be a poor sport, to be–sorry–to be poor at sports got me jeers from fellow students and last to be chosen on a team. * (19:10) To be short and chubby got the girls sneering and shunning me as I walked by.

I also became the punching bag for the stronger kids in my class. Most days I had hisses for–most days I had–sorry, I'll start this over. Most days had me hissing–that's hiding for cover, as not to draw attention to myself for fear of being pushed down and pinned to the ground to be submitted to a crowd of chants and cheering. I did not fit into the community as well, either, for not knowing the German language. I am shy, and grades were barely passing at best. It all added up to being a great target for the bullies in my grade. This went on through elementary and junior high.

Thankfully, in high school, I went to a school most of my previous class did not attend. It was a relief to attend a school where I could be myself and was accepted. In this atmosphere I excelled in sports and academics and became more socially active. This story could be told by many of you and countless Manitobans. It is not new nor will it be changed without awareness and hard work. My humble opinion is that Bill 18 would not have improved my silent pain that I experienc ed most of the days in school; for instance, I admit that a larger part of my being bullied was from hurt feelings.

I anticipated snide remarks and took great offence from it. My teachers may have been somewhat aware of this treatment, but I can't imagine how they would have policed it among all the students in the playground. I also can't imagine my bullies being persuaded to stop because it was legislated. How many 9 -year-old to 14 -year-old boys or girls even know the knowledge of the law of the land. We don't give this much –we don't even give them that much responsibility at that point. Who is going to police this bill? What are the consequences of bullish behaviour?

Kids will find ways to pick on each other, in or outside of the schools. My, again, humble suggestion would be to bring the bully and the victim together and have each of them talk about what they experienced. Parents should be involved to get –parents should also be involved; if there is some understanding of what the other is going through, the bully and the victim, it may bring some sympathy and even restoration to the individuals. This concept is being used in northern Canada. I've heard of many success stories up there. Ultimately, the bully needs to genuinely apologize and the victim ne eds to forgive.

Parents need to be involved, and teachers or supervisors need to detect this behaviour. I'm completely against bullying, of course, of any kind as I was a victim myself. We are all deserving of a safe place to be educated and an opportunity to excel in our own way. I don't believe this bill addresses the majority of Manitobans' bullying issues; in fact, it almost seems like a bullying law and not an antibullying law. Again, my humble opinion. The bill does not address the countless issues we have all faced in one form or another. It seems only to isolate one particular group.

It seems by pointing out a specific group places all the emphasis on them and everyone else just better live up with –better live with their pain. As soon as you protect one group, there is another that will be offended. I'm also curious why you chose to target this group. I'm only one of 300- plus speeches you will have, no doubt, have to hear them all by –or have heard a lot of them by now, but this whole sexual orientati on aspect seems like an attack on the Christian community. I am sure you are aware how we as Christians stand on this issue.

However, are you aware how Christians are to treat those who oppose them? It is with love just as Christ loved us. To force a Christian to love someone or tolerate someone living contrary

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 379 to God's Word should not be difficult but already in practice. You may ask, then, why is this law such a big deal if we already love those that live outside of God's ways? We are told to love other s but to hate the sin. This sin –this hate for sin needs to be deciphered between the individual and the individual's actions. All of us have sin in our life. If we were to hate people because of our sin, we would hate everyone. Instead, we can love that person, separating the individual from their sin.

If we wanted to discuss the topic of sexual sin, we as heterosexuals have the gay and lesbians beat by a long shot. Our sin of adultery, fornication, incest, pornography and so on has our population deeply messed up. Bottom line: we already have a Charter of Rights that seems to have covered the main points of our freedom here in Manitoba. If we add to this, we are likely taking away from another to accommodate. Place some education posters and videos in the kids' hands to battle bullying, promoting speaking out and encouraging restoration between the victim and the bully.

Both the victim and the bully are hurting and need help. Thanks for taking the time to listen to me this evening. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation this evening, Mr. Friesen. We'll now turn to questions. Ms. Allan : Mr. Friesen, thank you very much for your presentation this evening and for the personal story that you shared with us about being bullied and the silent pain that you experienced because of your hurt feelings. I'm sure that was very difficult for you. Thank you as well for the comments and the thoughts that you have presented to us this evening. Thank you. Mr.

Cameron Friesen: Thank you, Kelly, for coming this evening and sharing your story. We've heard from so many people who have come to tell us about what it means to be bullied in schools. It's a pain that does not go away easily. We've also heard from bullies who've come in and talked about year s of being racked with guilt, trying to find their victims and locate them and try to make amends.

What I appreciated in your presentation this evening is the ideas that you put forward about actually bringing in people together to try to create that empat hy and to try to provide an opportunity for restitution to take place. I appreciated those comments and I think they're important. I think that your comments about the difficulty of policing this are valid. I just wanted to make one comment and ask for your feedback on it. I've asked this of a few people. I noticed you said very specifically that parents need to be involved.

I know that when I read this bill there is no provision in this bill for parents to be involved. Are you concerned with the fact that, when I read Bill 18, you cannot find any indication in this bill that parents be involved in any way? Mr. Kelly Friesen: Yes, that would be a concern. And I certainly do believe that it –that the parents do need to be involved, yes. Mr. Swan : Now, Mr . Friesen a couple times has mentioned something not in the bill that's already in The Public Schools Act. Based on his last question, does it give you–[interjection] Sorry, I've got the floor.

Does it give you any comfort The Public Schools Act already provides that if there is harm, there's an obligation on the school to contact the parent? Mr. Kelly Friesen: Sorry, could you repeat the question? Mr. Swan: Just to make it clear, The Public Schools Act, which already exists, says that if a child is harmed, the school already has an obligation to call the parent. Does that give you any comfort based on the question Mr. Friesen asked you? Mr. Kelly Friesen: Yes. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks once again for your time this evening. I'll now move to presenter No. 11, Dale Funk. Mr.

Funk, do you have written materials for distribution to the committee? I'm going to ask the staff to help you distribute those, and you may proceed whenever you're ready. Mr. Dale Funk (Private Citizen): Hello. My name is Dale Funk. Thank you for this opportunity to speak about my thoughts on Bill 18. I appreciate that bullying is being addressed, but I feel that this effort has missed the target. I do not support bullying of any forms, and all students should feel safe at school. I'm a father of three children, one in grade 3, one in

380 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 kindergarten, and the other is in preschool. I live in Mitchell, Manitoba, and I'm a roofer by trade. I do not think that Bill 18 should be implemented as it is wr itten for the following reasons. The definition of bullying is very broad. If somebody's feelings are unintentionally hurt,

an act of bullying hasn't occurred. How can an indirect act of hurting someone's feelings label a person as a bully? * (19:20) Certain groups are protected under Bill 18, and it doesn't protect others. Four groups are protected. I feel that protecting certain groups and not others is unfair; it's showing favouritism. Every student should have an equal protection, not some students or most students, but everyone. GSAs are being used as a specific example here. Bill 18 will protect GSAs and give them the right to promote themselves.

Every other group not in this category is left out for the school administration to decide whether it p romotes a positive or negative school environment. Religious rights are not protected; this is huge for me. How can such a large group not be protected, yet GSAs are singled out and protected? There are no exemptions for independent schools. I'm a Christi an and I attended a Christian school. This bill will force a Christian school, for example, to accommodate GSA groups. GSAs will be allowed to promote itself within independent faith-based schools.

They can't –the Canadian Constitution Act promises me my re ligious freedom. I feel that this bill will take that away. I want a school for my kids to go to that reflects and promotes my faith, that defines the person you see here today. Forcing religious schools to accommodate groups that contradict its beliefs i s a perfect recipe for a negative school environment. I'm scared where this bill will take us. I feel that the government is going too far. Forcing schools to accommodate certain groups and not all is favouritism. Bill 18 tells me that the government cares for those groups the most.

Section 41(1.8) should be omitted from Bill 18; by doing this, it'll show equal rights for all. I'm a hard -working person with debt and lots of bills to pay for. I have never contemplated home - schooling until now. I do realiz e it's good for kids to socialize with others, but at what price? I want the best for my kids and soon I'm not even sure if a Christian school will be able to offer that. I want them to stay on the best Christian path as possible. I don't know that I'm–I don't know what I'm going to do. I want a school that promotes Christian values and Christian values alone.

A school shouldn't be forced to compromise its beliefs. Promoting a homosexual lifestyle within a Christian school compromises its values. My brother has now decided to home -school his daughter. She just entered grade 3. He was always thinking about home -schooling his kids, and when Bill 18 came around, it cemented his decision. He also wants to enrol his kids into a Christian school when they are ol d enough, and now he's not sure what he is going to do. Like I, he will wait and see how this all plays out.

In conclusion, I ask that Bill 18 be amended to work on the definition of bullying and let schools have the right to allow or deny promotion of gr oups in order to sustain a positive school environment. Instead of singling out groups have an antibullying group where all who are bullied are welcome. They are all there for the same reason; why single them out? Thanks. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Funk, for your presentation this evening. We'll now move to questions. Ms. Allan: Mr. Funk, thank you very much for your presentation this evening and thank you for your reflections on Bill 18.

We appreciate you being here tonight. And I know you're a hard worker because you're in the trades, and my 26- year-old daughter's an electrician. So all the best and all the best with your three young children. Thank you for being here this evening. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Dale, thanks for coming this evening. Thank you for joining us at committee and taking time out of your busy

schedule to be here at the Manitoba Legislature and to take part of this process, which I believe is so important to the development of good legislation and also to democracy and the exercise of democracy. You made some very good comments to us today. I'm sad to hear that you're contemplating home-schooling as a result, but I'll tell you very

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 381 honestly you're not the first person to express it at this committee. I wondered do you think there'll be others – Muslim, Jewish, Sikh, Protestant, Catholic, Coptic, others of different faiths–for whom home -schooling might also become an option because of the wording of this bill? Mr. Funk: For sure –like, yes. We're a big group. Religious people are a big group. We're not even listed on the bill to be protected. And I see a lot of people pulling their kids out of school because of this for sure; I want to.

I'm a hard worker, but could I afford it financially? I don't know. My hands are tied and it kind of sucks. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks once again for your time this evening. I'll now call on Cindy Wiebe, private citizen. Cindy Wiebe, private citizen? Ms. Wiebe's name will be dropped to the bottom of the list. I will no w call on Ryan Zacharias, private citizen. Mr. Zacharias, do you have written materials for distribution? Mr. Ryan Zacharias (Private Citizen): I do, yes. Mr. Chairperson: If I could just ask the staff to help you distribute those.

And you may proceed with your presentation whenever you're ready. Mr. Zacharias : Good evening. Thank you for having me. My name's Ryan Zacharias. I'm not here representing any organization or gr oup. I'm just someone that could have been possibly affected by Bill 18, had it in place at the time while I was still in school. Eight years ago when I was in middle school I was bullied. Bullying is a well -known concept to many folks in society.

Some have first -hand experience as a result of being victimized, or if you've even been the instigator, while others know only through shared stories and experiences from friends, family, and acquaintances. Many know that bullying exists, but only few can truly understand and comprehend the kind of toll that it takes on someone. At a time when having friends is crucial, where popularity is treated like currency, middle and high school proposes to be an extremely delicate part of one's life.

Going to school eve ry day and being told that you're a fag, a queer, or being told that you have no friends, being told that no one likes you, that hurts. Even when it's not true, when you know it's not true, the mental anguish that goes along with such statements really tak es a chunk out of your self-esteem and your overall positivity. As a result, rather than wanting to go to school, you're forced to it. Once feigning illness no longer allows you to stay home, you're subjected to a Monday-to-Friday

schedule of verbal and physical abuse. This is not to say that there are no measures currently in place which allow for the intervention of bullying. Among other things, teachers and counsellors are there to help students with any problems they may have. However, and this is from experience, sometimes the problem is not resolved but is only temporarily bandaged. While they try to be as supportive as possible, there is often a lack of connection between parties. Sometimes you just need to talk to someone you can better relate to. For example, people who enjoy chess can join the chess club.

People who enjoy a specific sport can join a sports team. Why can't people who are having a tough time in school be able to form their own kind of group or alliance? Critics of Bill 18 have c ited that the definition of bullying is too vast. The reality is that bullying does have a wide span. Just to name a few, there is cyberbullying, physical bullying, verbal bullying, and bullying by intimidation. A narrow or overly specific definition of bullying would cause confusion and would likely miss specific kinds of violence or abuse.

Critics say that Bill 18 would put teachers and other crucial people at risk because of the concept of hurt feelings. While I can see where there would be a similarity between criticizing someone and having someone feel like they're being verbally bullied, I believe that youth are able to understand the difference between being told they need to practise something versus being told they are useless and will never be a part of whatever it is they want to do. The notion that Bill 18 won't actually stop bullying is actually a fair one.

If someone wants to do something and they feel that strongly about it, they will do it, regardless of possible consequences. Bill 18, however, is a step in the right direction, as it at least shows that there is progress being made in what seems to be an endless quest to end bullying. As someone who has suffered through and recently gotten over their fair share of both physical and mental abuse, allow me to be the voice for the youth

382 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 with none. Allow me to speak for the ones who are afraid to be heard, and allow me to be known by many. As much as counselling and mentorship help, youth need peer support. To be able to discuss your problems with someone who can relate to you, to someone who has been through or is currently going through what you are, would make schools a much more comforting and welcoming environment. The youth will feel better, much better about when they spend their day i n a place where they at least know that there's always someone there who can help with what's needed.

Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation this evening. We'll now turn to questions. Ms. Allan : Thank you very much, Rya n, for your presentation this evening, and thank you for telling us your personal story because I think your personal story is important , and I think that young people these days would be proud to have your voice speak for young people that experience the same kinds of things that you have experienced. Thank you for being here and all the best. * (19:30) Mr. Cameron Friesen: Ryan, thank you for coming and sharing with us this evening. It takes courage to come here.

As a young person, you've told your story and we appreciate you taking the time to do it in these long committee evenings. I want to ask you a question about the reporting of bullying as being someone who experienced bullying. There's been some concern expressed that when there is a reporting of bullying, it can actually lead to more instances of bullying, and in some jurisdictions, some educators and some experts and even some politicians are considering the idea of, like, a non- reported bullying or an anonymous way of reporting bullying instances.

What do you think of the idea of anonymous reporting of bullying instances? Would it have helped you? Mr. Zacharias: By chance, I'm familiar with BC. They're introducing that kind of thing where you can report it online. Just –could you elaborate on your question a little, please? Mr. Cameron Friesen: I'm actually just wondering what you think about that idea to–the idea that somehow bullying or instances of bullying could be reported in an anonymous way so as to not lead to reprisals. Mr.

Zacharias: I think that if a student goes to, say, a teacher, principal, any official in school, there's definitely a chance where there could be that kind of bias backlash; you're known as a rat, a snitch, that kind of thing. I believe 'anom' –sorry, anonymity would be a great start, as well as, perhaps, peer support because as I was saying before, peer support really is, you know, what students are looking for. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks again for your time this evening. We'll now call on David Halstead, private citizen. Good evening, Mr. Halstead.

Do you have written materials for distribution? I'll ask the staff to help you distribute those. And you may proceed with your presentation when you are ready. Mr. David Halstead (Private Citizen): Good evening, ministers and MLAs. I'm a life -long educator, high school, college, university, a little bit of international experience, and for the last 12 years I've been reading that brain research as it relates to behavioural development as it –and a predictor – bullying, and I've given workshops across Canada, into the States, New Zealand and Australia.

I–first of all, I'm going to try to get two -day workshops reduced down to 10 minutes so just hang tough. An Honourable Member: Go. Mr. Halstead: Go. First of all, bullies are everywhere, whether they're in churches or at schools or in community clubs. They may even be in this room; who knows? Bullies are everywher e. When bullies are in an organization, they leave the place physically and psychologically disturbed and people perform–underperform.

Prior to deciding that I would make a presentation, I was dismayed by some of the articles– some of the items that I read in the paper, and I really got the impression that a great many people, both inside the House and outside the House, were not taking bullying seriously. This is not a game, folks. People die because of bullying. It's a life -and-death struggle for any number of young people on any given day, and last night, I just mentioned this, what I was going to do today, and my neighbour said that his friend's son in Toronto, who's in grade 12, and all of a sudden, he was gone. Not sure, I wasn't able to

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 383 get all the de tails but there he was and the surprise was, there was no inkling as to why this happened but bullying was –other than bullying was in the background. The principal reason we have a brain is to keep us alive. Bullies have problems staying with the course b ecause of some cognitive or emotional frailty; they overreact to differences; they try to establish their spot and other people are hurt by it. Our principal emotion is fear.

If it was love, we could all go home tonight because there wouldn't be a need for this bill; there wouldn't be a need for this committee. Fear is dominant. We fear change; we fear new information. We fear people that don't talk like us, that don't look like us, that don't share our social values, who succeed when we don't succeed and who are smarter than us and are better athletes than us. We fear them , and out of these fears comes some kind of conv oluted sense that they need to be put in place, they need to be punished in some way.

And so we have this frenzy in our communities and have had that–this frenzy in our communities forever and ever. With reference to 1.1(1), when I'm doing my workshops, I'm talking about bullying in the sense of it being repeated, it's been –it's 'one -directional'; it's cruel. There are big things happening here, and they're happening repeatedly. One instance seldom is a bullying incident. However, most bullying incidents by themselves are really not all that serious. However, multiple bullying incidents become really problematic.

As for people knowing what they should do and what they shouldn't do, our jails are full of people that should have known not to do certain things. But they're there. One of the things about bullying is lower levels of empathy. Baron -Cohen writes that empathy is one's ability to be sensitive to the needs of others and to be able to act in an appropriate manner–to be sensitive to the needs of others and act in an appropriate manner. Bullies do not do this, or very seldom do they do this. The imbalance of power in 1.2(2): The imbalance of power comes in many forms.

It could be physical size, age, group support or group indifference. Bullies know how to read this thing. They know when it's safe for them. They also, in many cases, receive parental and community support, whether it's tot ally open or somewhat behind the scenes. They feel a sense of entitlement. Bullies abuse their power advantage to diminish the physical and psychological status of their victims. Bullies are cowards. Seldom is a 98 -pound weakling going to tackle a 210- pound football player, unless he thinks he can run really fast or he's really smart.

They choose their victims carefully, and they choose their modes of attack carefully. Hence, bullies find ways of isolating their victims and intimidating them; otherwise, they work in the shadows of the school, whether it's behind the lockers in the locker room or in the washrooms or around the school corner. Wherever it is, they are in the shadows. This is why cyberbullying is such a creative thing for them. It's a godsend for them because they can try to operate behind the scenes on the social media. They can say all kinds of things, they think, about others without being caught.

I've mentioned before and I'll mention again: Bullying is repetitive and most individual acts are of little consequence, but over and over again the cumulative effects are significant. Leanne Nazer-Bloom writes: Bullies –victims–pardon me – live with intense feelings of loneliness, rejection, hopelessness and anger. I think you've heard some of that tonight already. Didn't use–necessarily use those words, and I probably didn't use those 'wor'–wouldn't have used those words; although, I talk about the thing a lot. Four words: loneliness, rejection, hopelessness and anger.

Therefore, it's not difficult to appreciate why there are suicides and why there are extreme acts of violence conducted by victims of bullying. In actual fact, victims of bullying are punished more times in schools than bullies themselves–why?–because they overreact to situations and they get caught. To me, it's unconscionable, morally wrong, for anyone to advocate that victims of bullying be denied access to support programs that are either professionally or peer driven. * (19:40) In

summary, let me emphasize a few things. We're living in 2013. We're living in Canada. We're living in a country that has a high level of education, and it also has many cultural traditions. It's populated by many who have fled countries where there's been political or religious persecution. It's popul ated by people who fled because of economic deprivation, and they found safety and opportunity within our borders. We have, as has been mentioned earlier tonight, many freedoms including the freedom of thought,

384 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 beliefs, opinion, oppression –expression, pardon me, freedom of association, critical, freedom to live life with liberty and security. But with all freedoms come responsibilities, and freedoms may clash, requiring that priorities and accommodations be established. Item 2 . Over the generations things change. Things change –have changed in this province and, for example, in terms of women's rights women have been–all of a sudden were allowed to vote, many years ago. Mr. Chairperson: One minute remaining. Mr. Halstead: Okay, sorry.

Let's just go to item three, diagnostic manual. Homosexuality is not a mental disease; it's a genetic thing. We need informed, supportive leadership. We need to be able to respond to the new information that's out there, and, lastly, I'll just finish up with this–several items. Manitobans need to realize that bullying is a human frailty that is cruel, uncivilized and can be deadly. That victimization is unwarranted, unwanted, negatively impacts on human well -being for the lifetime; it can be self -destructive.

All students deserve to attend school safely and treated with dignity, and, lastly, we must be willing to study, to grow, to open ourselves to reviewing certain aspects of our social values and responsibilities and arrive at 21st-century solutions to make our communities healthier and to dynamically provide support and care to the healing of victims of bullying. Mr. Chairperson: Time for presentation –for your presentation has expired. Thank you very much, Mr. Halstead, for your presentation this evening. We'll now turn to questions. Ms.

Allan : Well, I know it was tough to put a two-day workshop into 10 minutes, Mr. Halstead, but you definitely tried. Thank you so much for your presentation this evening, and thank you for your commitment to this topic. All the best, thank you. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Mr. Chair, first , I just wanted to ask if there'd be agreement around the committee table to have Mr. Halstead's full report entered into Hansard so there'd be a permanent record of your full report. I noticed that he did not get a chance to get down to the bottom of it. Mr.

Chairperson: Is there agreement of the committee to include the entire written submission from Mr. Halstead in the written –in the Hansard of this evening. [Agreed] Good evening, Thank for the opportunity to speak to what I believe is an incredibly important issue and Bill. I have been a high school teacher and counsellor, a college teacher, counsellor and Dean of Students, an university administrator and for the last dozen plus years have been reading the relevant brain research and writing and speaking on brain development as it relates to learning and behaviour specifically bullying.

This later interest has included workshop presentations across Canada, the USA, Australia and New Ze aland and the writing and publishing of the book The Bully Around the Corner. First a few general comments. #1 Bullies are everywhere within our society including: student's homes, their school yards, and community recreation facilities, administrative and corporate structures of all kinds, church congregations and hierarchies, team sports etc.

You name it, they are there, and they are rendering their environments physically and psychologically unhealthy and underperforming. #2 I am dismayed by some of the comments and concerns raised before and now during this set of hearings. Let's cut to the quick, and realize that bullies kill people either directly or indirectly. For many students bullying is a life and death issue. In the scale of issues to be addressed here life should be the priority.

This is not a game. #3 The principal reason for having a brain is survival and most people bully because a minor to major cognitive and/or emotional frailty impedes their ability to compete and interact with others in a normal, safe manner. #4 Our dominant emotion is fear. If our dominant emotion was love we wouldn't need Bill 18 or this hearing. We fear change, we fear new information, we fear people who do not look like us, who do not speak like us, who do not share our culture or cultural values, who succeed where we don't succeed, who are smarter, who are better athletes etc.

In other words we fear people who are different and in some convoluted way are seen as being threats. These perceived threats lead many people to bully those who are different. With reference to Bullying behaviour 1.2(1) while the writing of this definition may meet the requirements of a legislative bill, in my workshops I explain bullying as

an act of cruelty motivated by a range of negative emoti ons, perhaps some mental

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 385 shortcomings, some inappropriate parental and community attitudes and a lower than normal sense of empathy.* While we may know what is right and wrong, the reality is that the emotional urge to survive coupled with "wrong headed" c ognitive messaging can lead us to do things which are just wrong. Our jails are full of people who knew or should have known better but committed crimes anyway. *Baron-Cohen writes (and I paraphrase) that empathy is one's ability to be sensitive to the needs of others and to be able to act in an appropriate manner.

With reference to 1.2(2) the imbalance of power comes in many forms. It could be physical size, age, group support or group indifference and, unfortunately, may come from parental and community biases including feelings of entitlement to name a few. Bullies abuse their power advantage to diminish the physical and psychological status of their victims. Furthermore, most bullies are cowards and they choose their victims and their modes of attack carefully.

Hence bullies find ways of isolating their victims, intimidating them and otherwise causing harm in the "shadows" of the school, playground or other community areas, or in era of the new technology, using social media to abuse and defame the victims, all the while trying to hide their identity. The vast majority of bullying is repetitive and most individual acts of bullying may be observed as of little consequence but when these acts are repeated over and over again the cumulative effects upon the victims are significant.

In the words of Leanne Nazer-Bloom victims are left with intense feelings of loneliness, rejection, hopelessness and anger . Therefore, it is not difficult to appreciate that suicide or extreme acts of external violence can be the outcomes of being bullied. To me it is unconscionable, morally wrong for any one to advocate that victims of bullying be denied access to support programs that are either professionally or peer driven. In

summary let me emphasize. #1 This 2013, we are living in Canada, a country of many cultural traditions and populated by many who have fled, or are descendents of those who have fled, political and/or religious persecution or economic deprivation and have found safety and opportunity within our borders. We have many freedoms including the "Freedom of thoughts, beliefs, opinion and expression …, Freedom of association, … Freedom of right to have life, liberty and security.

But with freedoms come responsibilities and freedoms may clash requiring that priorities and accommodations be established. #2 Over the generations societal changes* have taken place in Manitoba many of them focussed on women specifically voting rights, property rights, career options just to name a few. These did come about easily and some of these and others issues still need work. Attitudes had to change.

Research, education, persistence and a willingness to find new solutions were the answers and are still the answers. *Staub writes that the se changes happen when "we have a positive view of others, concern for their welfare and a feeling of responsibility for others … upholding basic moral principals like justice … and empathy." #3 The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in its last two editions did not and does not consider homosexuality as a mental disorder but rather a genetic condition that occurs and has occurred throughout all time.

While the numbers are difficult to determine it may be safely assumed that at least 2 -3% of Canada's population are either homosexual or bisexual. #4 Adolescence is an extremely stressful time for all teens but immeasurably more stressful for individuals who come to the realization that their sexual orientation is not heterosexual. They definitely do not need to be denied critical support such as may be offered through a Gay Straight Alliance or similar structures. #5 Schools cannot be expected to deal with all the dynamics of bullying and the resulting victimization alone.

Informed, supportive leadership is needed in every community. #6 Change is difficult, but we no longer harvest our crops with sickles and flails, we no longer send messages to other regions of the world by steam train and sailing ships. New information and new technologies drive our economies and virtually every other facet of our lives.

The challenge for all in this room and for all Manitobans is to realize: • that bullying is a human frailty that is cruel, uncivilized and can be deadly, • that victimization is unwarranted, u nwanted, negatively impacts on human well being often for a life time and can be self destructive. All

386 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 students deserve to attend school safely and be treated with dignity, • and lastly we must all be willing to study, to grow and open ourselves to reviewing certain aspects of our social values and responsibilities and arrive at 21st century solutions to make our communities healthier and to dynamically provide support, care and healing to the victims of bullying. This is the moral thing to do. Lastly let us commit these words to our memory. The world of the victim of bullying is filled with loneliness, rejection, hopelessness and anger.

No one deserves to live like this. Thank you. Sources: Zero Degrees of Empathy: A New Understanding of Cruelty and Kindness–Simon Baron-Cohen The Bully Around the Corner: Changing Brains – Changing Behaviours–David Halstead Affluent, Angry and Alone: An Anecdote About Aiden–Leanne Nazer-Bloom The Psychology of Good and Evil: Why Children, Adults and Groups Help and Harm Others–Ervin Staub Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thank you, Mr.

Halstead, for being here this evening and sharing with us your opinion and your expertise in the area of what I must suspect is an area of specialization for you. I thought it was interesting that you seem to come back to a definition of bullying relying on a test of repetition, and in that sense, you take issue with the definition of bullying as offered by this legislation which defines in 1.2(2)(

a) bullying as not necessarily having to take place more than once. I just wondered if I could invite a comment from you in terms of the test of this definition being that bullying can be deemed to have happened if it takes place once. How do you explain that? Mr. Halstead: I think there are probably situations where there's some kind of let's say intense racial thing where all of a sudden some people are moving through a given area and are attacked just outright because they are of colour and somebody else isn't of colour. That's one of the examples I can think of.

But the literature seems to speak mostly of repetition of middling things. One of the expressions that sometimes is used has been nibbled to death by a duck. Just time and time and time again the person is ridiculed, is hit, is pushed into the locker, is, you know, shunned, whatever. But I suppose there are incidents where some kind of serious act can happen once based on some kind of differences, but it’s not where I am most of the time. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thank you once again for your time this evening. Now call on Suzanne Toews, private citizen. Ms.

Toews, do you have a written submission for the committee? Ms. Suzanne Toews (Private Citizen): No, I don't. Mr. Chairperson: Okay, you may proceed whenever you're ready. Ms. Toews: Hello, my name is Suzanne Toews. I am a wife, a mother, daughter, a sister, a Christian, and I am against bullying for all people. But I am here because I am concerned about Bill 18 as it is curren tly written. Like a lot of people I know, I have a child who's currently in the school system and has had to deal with a bully. My child has been bullied verbally for believing in God, and physically.

Currently, the bill gives protection to children under four categories; gender, race, sexual orientation and disabilities, and I totally agree with this. However religious beliefs are left out. What I am trying to teach my children is that there are different beliefs and opinions in the world, and while we may not agree with all of their views, we will not ever disrespect them as people, and that we obey the commandment of love your neighbour as yourself.

I am asking only for equal consideration to be given to all children, not to prevent rights to people but to also make sure rights are not removed from anyone either. This brings me to my second point that The Human Rights Code already covers gender identity and sexual orientation in it, but the Charter of Rights says that we also have freedom of religion, thought, belief, opinion and expression; this goes for all religions. And, if we respect the Charter, then we need to respect religious schools and their right to different beliefs and opinions.

The way the bill is currently written, it states wanting a safe and inclusive learning environment, the acceptance and respect for others and creating a positive environment. These are all wonderful goals, and I one hundred per cent want this kind of environment for my children, but if this can only come through

September 9, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 387 religious schools having to deny their beliefs or children not being able to freely talk about their religious beliefs, then that is bullying the schools. A few days ago I read on the Daily Hope with Rick Warren the statement only courageous people resolve conflict. I really hope that we can all be courageous enough to work together to building a better bill that includes all children, that maybe encouraging–encourages an antibullying group as an alternative, and that will empower our children to know what bullying is and what to do about it.

My daughter asked me what I was writing, and I told her I am writing a speech that says bullying is wrong and that all people should be protected. I think this is our common goal and I hope that we can get there. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you much–very much, Ms. Toews, for your presentation. It was very well done. We'll now move on to questions. Mr. Swan : Yes, Ms. Toews, thank you very much for being with our committee tonight and presenting, and I assure you that all the MLAs present do–we do listen to the presentations that are made.

And I do hope that you're able to work with the school to prevent the bullying issue that you've told us about tonight. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thank you, Suzanne, for coming and sharing this evening. I think your daughter would be proud of what you presented this evening.

I noticed that –I just wanted to –I don't know if you were here at the beginning, but the first presenter this evening said that he took no exception to the fact that there's no prohibition in this bill against discrimination on the basis of social or disadvantage or religion or creed or ethnicity; basically, he says those weren't needed because people aren't predominantly bullied for reasons of religion. That doesn't seem to be the experience of your daughter. Floor Comment: It was my son. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Can you just comment on that? Oh sorry, of your child. Can you just comment on that for us? Ms.

Toews : Yes. It's my son that was bullied. He was bullied last year for those beliefs; specifically, the teacher said that he was put in position to be with that child because my child was the only one that had –showed patience and kindness towards that child a nd then he was bullied verbally and physically. And, in regards to your statement before, we did not receive any calls from school. We had to go approach the school about it, and as of yet nothing has happened. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thank you once again for your time this evening.

We'll now call on Jennifer Thompson, private citizen. Good evening, Ms. Thompson. Do you have written materials for distribution? Ms. Jennifer Thompson (Private Citizen): No. Mr. Chairperson: Okay, y ou may proceed whenever you're ready. * (19:50) Ms. Thompson: Hello. My name is Jennifer Thompson. I'm a mother of two boys who attend public school here in Manitoba. I am here today because I have concerns about Bill 18 and how it is written. As a mother of children in the public school system, I am, of course, against all bullying for any reason.

I believe that we are to love everyone, regardless of belief or lifestyle choices. We certainly teach this to our children as it is God's greatest commandment in Scripture: Love God and love your neighbour. And in school, all children are my children's neighbours. Bill 18 gives protection to four specific groups of children: gender, race, sexual orientation and disabilities. While I am grateful for these g roups, as my children are both hearing impaired, and no child should be bullied for any of these reasons, I'm concerned for the omission of another group of children–those who have religious beliefs.

Because of those loose

definitions of what bullying can look like, my child may be punished for simply disagreeing with someone and hurting their feelings. If my child decides he wants to start up a Christian group in his school, will he be protected? Or be considered a bully because he does not share another group's beliefs or values. This bill needs to be all-inclusive, so that, indeed, it is going to make all children feel safe and included. Unfortunately, since

388 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 9, 2013 the release of this bill, that has not been the case. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mrs. Thompson, for your presentation this evening. We'll now move to questions. Mr. Swan : Yes, Mrs. Thompson, thank you for coming down and presenting to our committee tonight. It's appreciated that so many Manitobans have come down to give us their views on this bill. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thank you, Jennifer, for being here, for presenting to us. I know that it's important.

I think the message you gave is–gave us is that all children are worthy of our best efforts to make schools a safe place fo r them and we appreciate that message. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks again for your time. We'll now call on Shird –Shirley Schroeder, private citizen. Ms. Schroeder, do you have written materials for distribution of the committee? Ms. Shirley Schroeder (Private Citizen): I don't. Mr. Chairperson: Okay. Feel free to begin whenever you're ready. Ms. Schroeder: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

It's nice to see some faces of MLAs and ministers and 'ministerettes' and all the rest of you. So–and I'm very nervous, because, you know, I'd rather just, you know, stay in my little shell. So, but here I am, trying to be a good citizen and just speak my heart to you tonight. So, regarding Bill 18, my concerns being a citizen of Canada, a mother with children that are in school and a dedicated and practising Christian, I just thank you again for taking the time to hear me out.

I guess my biggest concern with Bill 18 is how it may infringe on my family's religious freedoms, freedoms that my country was founded on, but also the implications that this bill will have on Christian teachers in my school, my kids' schools, as well as the Christian schools here in Manitoba. Just reading the bill, there were some words that just caused a little bit of concern for me, words like feelings, promoting, accepting and accommodating human diversity.

And what concerned me there is when it comes into direct conflict with our religious beliefs as Christians, and for our Christian teachers, that they're going to be forced to comply when it comes into clear conflict with their belief. So then it makes me think ahead: What is this steppi ng toward, this so- called promoting, accepting and accommodating? Is it going to show up in our school curriculum in how the teachers are teaching my children, and are they going to be subtly taught to question their own gender or even encouraged to go down that path of thought? These are my concerns as a parent.

I so appreciate the value and skills that the teachers that have come across my children's paths, teaching them to read, write, reading, writing, arithmetic, right, and just preparing them to be an active part of society here in Canada. But yet I feel I remain the parent of my children, and I guess I just don't really appreciate the government trying to influence how I raise my children in regards to my Christian beliefs. So I just ask and I appeal to you: If you feel Bill 18 must be amended, I just ask that these changes do not come at the expense of anyone else's rights.

And please understand that I do not promote bullying. I am against it, like everybody else. I don't think anyone should hav e to go through being bullied. There's people close to me that have gone through it, and it's not fun. And I also believe that every human life is valuable. So, again, I just –I appeal to you and ask that if you're making any changes, that they don't come to–come at the expense of anyone else's rights. At the end of the last school year, I attended assembly, and as we stood up and we sang O Canada, those words really penetrated my heart.

So preparing this presentation, it's been a wonderful experience fo r me. It's made me think more about Canada and what makes Canada such a lovely place to live. So, as I was just thinking on Canada and the lovely words in that song, I just kind of researched it a bit online and found the original poem in 1908, written by Stanley Weir. And I'm just going to take up the whole 10 minutes for you guys, here, and I'm just going to read this to you because it really touched me, and it really–it brings across how Canada came to be. And I love it. O Canada / Our home and nat

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	40-2-hr7
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	40th 2nd hansardpdf hr7.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	9c7e57a8e19e3cefea3ae6414243ee7646dbf980

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