Manitoba Committee Hansard — 5 September 2013 (Human Resources Committee, Sitting 4, 40th Legislature, 2nd Session)

40-2-hr4

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. 4 - 6 p.m., Thursday, September 5, 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

139 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES Thursday, September 5, 2013 TIME – 6 p.m. LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia) VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Ms. Melanie Wight (Burrows) ATTENDANCE – 11 QUORUM – 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Ms. Allan, Hon. Messrs. Bjornson, Swan Ms. Braun, Mr. Briese, Ms. Crothers, Mr. Friesen, Mrs. Rowat, Mr. Wiebe, Ms. Wight, Mr. Wishart Substitutions: Mr. Smook for Mrs. Rowat Mr. Helwer for Mr. Smook at 7:22 p.m. PUBLIC PRESENTERS: Mr. Adam McAllister, private citizen Mr.

Reg Klassen, Manitoba Association of School Superintendents Ms. Tamar Thiessen, private citizen Mr. Edward Penner, private citizen Ms. Rebecca Sawatzky, private citizen Ms. Alison Johnston, Brandon Teachers' Association; Ms. Debra Arpin, CUPE Local 737; and Mr. Mark Sefton, Brandon School Division Mr. Bryan Schroeder, Christian Heritage School Mr. Tim McAllister, private citizen Ms. Sarah Dyck, private citizen Ms. June Derksen, private citizen Mr. Darrel Guenther, Crestview Fellowship Church Ms. Jasmine Harder, private citizen Ms. Michelle Gawronsky, Manitoba Government and General Employees’ Union Mr.

Michael Sitko, private citizen Mr. Nicholas Semenowich, private citizen Ms. Amanda Friesen, private citizen Mr. Rodolf Friesen, private citizen Mr. Glenn Loewen, private citizen Mr. Gord Utz, private citizen Mr. Jason Monkman, private citizen Mr. Dave Sauer, Winnipeg Labour Council Ms. Francie Humby, private citizen Mr. Bruce Martin, Calvary Temple Ms. Margaret Jablonski, private citizen Mr. Bill Rempel, private citizen Ms. Darcey Bayne, Springs Christian Academy Ms. Myla Krauskops, Austin Christian Academy Mr. Bradley Warkentin, Trinity Baptist Church Mr. Ron Koleba, Winnipeg Evangelical Free Church Mr.

Phil Najda, private citizen MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION: Bill 18 –The Public Schools Amendment Act (Safe and Inclusive Schools) * * * Mr. Chairperson: Good evening. Will the Standing Committee on Human Resources please come to order. Our first item of business is the election of a Vice-Chairperson. Are there any nominations? Ms. Deanne Crothers (St. James): I nominate Ms. Wight. Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Wight has been nominated. Are there any other nominations? Hearing no other nominations, Ms. Wight is elected Vice-Chairperson.

This meeting has been called to consider Bill 18, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Safe and Inclusive Schools). As per agreement of the House dated June 20th, tonight we will hear from 28 of the presenters registered to speak on Bill 18, and you have the list of those presenters before you. 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, in what order does the committ ee wish to hear presentations? Hon.

Andrew Swan (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I suggest we do hear from the out-of-town presenters first.

140 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 Mr. Chairperson: Is that the ag reement of the committee? [Agreed] I would also like to remind members of the committee that, in accordance with the agreement mentioned before, the committee may also decide to leave to –sorry–may also, by leave, decide to hear from presenters in addition to those scheduled for tonight's meeting. Before we proceed with presentations, we do have a number of other items and points of information to consider.

For the information of all presenters, while written versions of presentations are not required, if you are going to accompany your presentation with written materials, we ask that you provide 20 copies. If you need help with photocopying, please speak with our staff. As well, I would 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 the 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 a second time tonight, they will be dropped to the bottom of the global list of presenters. Prior to proceeding with public presentations, I would like to advise members of the public regarding the process for speaking in committee.

The proceedings of our meetings are recorded in order to provide a verbatim transcript. Each time somebody 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 Hansard staff to turn the mi cs on and off. Thank you for your patience. We will now proceed with public presentations. Hon. Nancy Allan (Minister of Education): Yes, Mr.

Chair, I'm looking at my list, and I notice that the No. 10 speaker is Alison Johnston from – president of the Brandon T eachers' Society, and I'm just curious if that individual is from out of town because she's not marked on the list as out of town. Mr. Chairperson: If I can suggest that the staff check with Ms. Johnston, and if there's any other individuals who are from o ut of town who have not been indicated as such on the list, please just speak with our Chamber staff. They will assist you with having your names prioritized. And we do have one individual, Mr.

Reg Klassen, president, MASS, who has indicated that he is f rom out of town, so I'd like to inform the committee to mark your sheets as such. Committee Substitution Mr. Chairperson: I would also like to make the following membership substitutions effective immediately for this standing committee: Mr. Smook for Ms. Rowat. * * * Mr. Chairperson: I will now call on Adam McAllister, private citizen. Mr. McAllister, please come to the podium. Do you have any written materials for the committee? Mr. Adam McAllister (Private Citizen): No. Mr. Chairperson: Okay.

You may proceed, then, when you are ready with your presentation. Mr. Adam McAllister: Okay, well, my name is Adam McAllister. I am 18 years old and I graduated from the Steinbach Regional Secondary school in 2012. I am very thankful for this chance I have been given to speak on Bill 18 before our elected officials and everyone else present tonight. I believe that it is good when groups are formed that bring like -minded people together. When students realize that there are others who support them in their strugg les, they don't have to walk in fear.

I also can say, alongside every person in this room, that bullying is always wrong. The behaviour of one individual or group harassing another should never be tolerated. With what we know about Bill 18, we can easily s ee that its aim is to eliminate bullying in every Manitoba school that receives public funding. For this I thank our provincial government. One thing I didn't say when I introduced myself is that I was the valedictorian of my graduating class at SRSS. Thr oughout my time in high school, I discovered that I didn't want to stand by when someone was being bullied.

I made it my aim to love every single person I met by treating them as a significant person and giving them my full attention. I gave up the chance to have best friends because my goal was to be friends with everyone. That is why my classmates chose me to be the valedictorian. On top of that, I joined student groups that had values

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 141 which I shared. It was often hard to be friends with people who were bullied and show them their value when others tried to destroy it, yet I feel some things I did made a difference. I always had the full support of teachers and my principals when I tried to make a positive change in my school. Every teacher in my school w anted so badly for bullying to end. My principal encouraged groups to be formed that would have a positive impact on the school culture.

One such group that I was a part of was the morning devotions program which met every morning before classes to start–before classes started to encourage students. Though my school wasn't a Christian school, the administration chose to support this program because of the good things it was doing and how it helped create a safe and inclusive learning environment in the school. If this group began to make my school an unsafe place in any way, the administration would notice and they would make sure that the school wasn't allowed to operate.

They care so deeply about all the students that they make sure the right groups are allowed to be in the school. Bill 18 contains many passages that undoubtedly help makes schools a safer place. However, it also has passages that remove a school administration's ability to monitor which groups are in the school and ensure that they are hel ping to create a safe and inclusive learning environment. One of the roles of teachers and principals is to be in charge of activity that goes on in their school and to stop any behaviour that is harmful to students.

With Bill 18, if someone wants to make a gay-straight alliance, for example, or any other group, the school administration isn't allowed to determine if that group will help improve the school or if it will be negative for the school. The students are placed in charge, not just to run the group, but even to override the decision that wouldn't allow the group to be created for a good reason for the school. Bill 18 also doesn't mention other groups like religious groups, the group I was a part of which helped the school.

But I actually appreciat ed that the administration of the school had the authority to say, is this group helpful to the school or is it not? But the bill doesn't even mention those groups.

It just says–it mentions specifically the gay-straight alliance, which I actually don't think is bad in essence, but the schools need to be able to determine if that group is going to help the school or if it's not. * (18:10) And why can't faith -based schools be allowed– yes, like, Bill 18 also –oh, yes, why can't faith -based schools allow only s tudent groups to be formed that would help make the school a safer place as determined by them?

A group such as a gay -straight alliance may only cause division and fear in a religious school because the basis of that group might be found to divide the students who have chosen to enrol in religious instruction. This group may or may not go against the very instruction they are receiving.

I would like to suggest to the members of this committee that the bill be revised to allow administrations to determine which groups are formed in schools to ensure that they are creating a safe and inclusive environment, not to single out certain groups and to say these groups have to be allowed in a school based on what the students want, not allowing the administration to help make the school a safer place. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thanks very much, Mr. McAllister, for your presentation tonight. We'll now move on to questions. Ms. Allan : Well, Adam, thank you very much for your presentation.

I'm going to tell the MLA for Steinbach that you were the valedictorian at your school and that he better be careful because you might be running for politics someday. Thank you so much for your presentation. And thank you, you've obviously done a lot of work reading Bill 18 and put a lot of thought into your presentation. And all the best with your future, I think it's going to be a bright one. Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden -Winkler): Thank you, Adam, for coming and presenting to us this evening.

In a former career, I was a teacher and, actually, I did my teaching practicum at SRSS, so I know your school very well. It's a lovely community and it's a great school. I appreciate what you had to say to us this evening, especially when you said that a school administration should have autonomy, they should have authority to determine what kind of groups will actually make for a safe and inclusive environment. I just wanted to ask you a quick question.

What do you think about the fact that schools weren't consulted in terms of–like, in terms of the coming up with bill, that there wasn't a wide and comprehensive consultation of schools in terms of arriving at this

142 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 legislation? Do you think that's something that should have taken place? Mr. Adam McAllister: Yes, I think it should have and I think, like, any group–for example, the MTS is a group of –a teacher society, the union there, and they should actually talk to their teachers, I think, and see, yes, which ones support the bill, so they can have that knowledge, and ask every teacher which ones don't support the bill, so then they can kind of stand as one and actually know where they stand instead of just the top person there.

And I also think that, like, for the group I was involved in, it was cool because we talked to the principal and he had to allow the group and he did allow it because it helped the school. But I think, like, with Bill 18, there –they wouldn't have to talk to the principal, they would just say, you want to make this group–and there's a bill about it, so you have to be able to do it, and the principal, it doesn't really matter what they think about that. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, once again, thanks for your time tonight.

I will now call on Reg Klassen, president , Manitoba Association of School Superintendents. Mr. Klassen, do you have written materials for distribution to the committee? Okay, I'll just ask the staff to help you distribute those. And you may proceed with your pre sentation when you're ready. Mr. Reg Klassen (Manitoba Association of School Superintendents): Okay. Should be 20. We tried to count them twice, so.

On behalf of the Manitoba Association of School Superintendents, I'd like to thank you for the time that you've given to so many people, including ourselves, our association, for a chance to speak to Bill 18. As the Manitoba Association of School Superintendents, we believe the public school is the only societal institution where children from diverse backgrounds gather for a common purpose: to become educated.

The challenge for educators is to define what we believe about education in a manner that encompasses the values of a democratic society, respects the inherent uniqueness of the individual student and, at the same time, provides equity of opportunity and ensures achievement for all.

Along with the many purposes of public education, as educators we have a responsibility to assist children to view themselves as capable of contributing to the public good and preparing them to do so; to encourage in children a balance of intellectual and social development, social consciousness and preparation for life; to educate each child in a manner consistent with justice, fairness and equity; to empower each child w ith the knowledge and skills to live a positive, fulfilling life in a manner consistent with acceptance of others and respect for democratic values in a diverse society; and to assist children to develop an optimistic view of the future and a confident awareness of their potential to be an active participant in that future.

To achieve these purposes , we must provide safe, caring and welcoming learning environments for all children, engage all students in learning to their individual capacities, respect an d nurture the co-responsibility with parents and guardians for the education of their children, listen to and build relationships with the community and engage with the community to build awareness and understanding of the purposes and value of public educ ation and engage the community in opportunities to develop and support education for the public good.

As we have previously indicated in correspondence with Minister Allan, the Manitoba Association of School Superintendents strongly endorses Bill 18. The proposed legislation further supports the work that is being undertaken in schools throughout our province to provide all students with safe, caring and inclusive learning environments.

In many of our schools there are student activities and organizations that promote gender equity, antiracism, awareness and understanding of people who are disabled by barriers and awareness and understanding of and respect for people of all sexual orientations and gender identities. As an association, we have expressed co ncern that the proposed wording of Bill 18,

section 41(1.8), places the responsibility on pupils to establish and lead activities that promote human diversity such as gay-straight alliances. Students involved in organizations such as gay-straight alliances are often some of the most vulnerable and may not be prepared to initiate such an undertaking. It is our hope that the legislation will recognize the rights of both students and staff to initiate and lead appropriate initiatives that will make our schoo ls even safer, more caring and inclusive for all. And just before I read the final concluding paragraph, I will share with you a little anecdotal story.

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 143 I heard students present on a gay -straight alliance group that they had in their school. They went to their guidance counsellor, who went to their principal, who went to the superintendent to ask if they could start one and the answer was, of course, throughout the system. And so these students began. They put up posters. The posters were torn down. They quietly put the posters back up and after a while the posters weren't torn down anymore. As to when the meeting was, it was very open about what they were doing.

And when these students presented they had a certain wow factor as to what happened in their s chool. It was students from all walks of life; there wasn't a whole lot of conversation about their gender orientation or their sexual orientation, but more conversation about getting to know each other. And what happened is the kids on the periphery, the kids that are left out that don't have the large circle of friends that aren't sure about themselves began talking to each other in such a manner that suddenly they had belonged to a community which they hadn't belonged to before.

I believe that's what thi s bill intends. In conclusion, I would like to restate that the Manitoba Association of School Superintendents strongly supports the intent of Bill 18. Together with the provincial government and our education partners, we are committed to providing the very best for the students in our care. Thank you again for listening. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Klassen, for your presentation this evening. Now, I'll turn to questions. Ms. Allan : Thank you very much, Reg, for your presentation.

I, a s the Minister of Education, value tremendously the partnership that we have with your association. You are the leaders in our province in so many different ways. You are creating civil society because of so much of the work that you do, and I appreciate it so much and I know officials in my department do as well. I would also like to say thank you to your new staff officer who is working with you, Ken Klassen, from Steinbach.

I know Ken has been a support to us as well, and we appreciate the opportunity to have you here this evening to make your presentation and, of course, we always look forward to working with you in the future to make our schools better places for young people. * (18:20) Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thanks, Reg, for coming, and I do appreciate also the work of the Manitoba Association of School Superintendents. And we welcome you here this evening. And thank you for the presentation that you have given and the considerable thought that I know that you and your organization have given to this subject.

I know that you stated in your presentation that there's considerable work under way, throughout the province, in schools to provide all students with a safe and inclusive learning environment. I wonder, do you have a concern as an organi zation at all, about the fact that this bill is silent, unlike the Manitoba Code of Human Rights, when it comes to protections to other groups, including things like ethnicity, creed and religion, and social disadvantage. Do you have a concern that you have about the fact that this bill does not go in that direction? Mr.

Klassen: No, I do not think that we have a concern about that. I think those things are fairly well enshrined in other legislation and in the way that we believe that we need to live ou r lives. So I think that that's well looked after there. I think what this attests to is it takes care of creating some space and opportunity for those people that are, as I said before, on the periphery and don't have a place to go in order to have their voices heard, as easily as some others might. Mr. Cameron Friesen: One more question is: Have you heard from– Floor Comment: Is my time up? Mr.

Cameron Friesen: It might be –that might be signalling–that might be a signal. I'll talk louder. Have you hear d from any of your schools or superintendents that say that they don't think that this bill will give them concrete tools to be able to do the work of making safe and inclusive schools? Mr. Klassen: I think that –I would disagree with your–the way you've w orded your question, quite frankly, because the concrete tools for working with safe schools are already there. I think this helps solidify some of those things.

As superintendents, we've been handing in safe-school plans for quite a few years now, and there has been a lot of work done around ensuring that our schools are safe places for kids. But one of the things that I think that most educators adhere to

144 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 is that whenever there is an unfair act by any child towards another, it's addressed immediately. A nd I think that we need to make sure that when we hear about those things, then we need to address them immediately. And I think school divisions and teachers and principals do that on a regular basis. The challenge is always to finding out about it because kids don't always share. What this provides is an avenue for some kids to share when they might not have another way of doing it, because of a community that welcomes them. Mr.

Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks for your time. I apologize for the distraction. Ms. Allan : The funny thing is, it was the former minister of Education's vehicle. Mr. Chairperson: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I'd like to inform the commit tee that Alison Johnston has, indeed, indicated that she is from out of town and would like to be considered as such. And also that a new list with 30 presenters has now been distributed to the committee. I will now call on Tamar Thiessen, private citizen. Good evening, Ms. Thiessen. D o you have written materials for distribution? Ms.

Tamar Thiessen (Private Citizen): Yes. Mr. Chairperson: We'll ask the staff to help you distribute that. And you may proceed with your presentation, then, when you're ready. Ms. Thiessen: Good evening. My name is Tamar Thiessen. I am from Blumenort, Manitoba. What bothers me about Bill 18, I do not want to take religion out of our schools. I am concerned that our kids won't be able to read their Bible in school and/or pray.

Shouldn't Manitoba parents be able to choose between (1) public schools with GSAs where Bible reading and prayer is allowed, and (2) faith- based independent schools without GSAs, where Bible reading is taught and prayer is encouraged? Yes, I think we should have the right to choose. But Bill 18 does not give us that right because it says that all Manitoba schools, including faith-based independent schools who'll receive even partial government funding, must allow gay -straight alliance student organization to promote its activities, if a student requests one.

Why can't there b e an exception for faith- based independent schools to say no thanks to people who request GSAs, provided that the school have appropriate alternative antibullying plans in pl ace? I wish there would be an exception. If we, as Christians, have to accept students who believe that gay sex is moral, then LGBTQ students should be–should have to accept our beliefs as well. It's unfair that it's suddenly in with the new and completely out with the old.

If gay -straight alliance student organizations are awarded protection under the law, then Christian Bible -based student organizations should also be awarded equal protection in our province. Alternatively, if all Manitoba schools are not forced to accommodate Christian Bible -based student organizations, then all Manitoba schools should not be forced to accommodate gay -straight alliance student organizations. The law should treat all groups equally. The law should not offer special protection to one group and not the other group.

Therefore, two options would be acceptable: either one saying that all schools must have gay -straight groups and all schools must have Christian groups, or saying that no schools can have grey-straight groups and no schools can have Christian groups. In closing, I feel a new antibullying bill should be introduced that provides appropriate consequences for bullies and educate safety and support for all students without trampling all over freedom of religion rights. And if we do this, Manitoba will be a much safer and more tolerant province. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much. Order. Order.

I'd like to remind members of the public who are observing the committee tonight, please do not disturb the committee proceedings by applauding or commenting of any kind from the audience. Thank you very much for your co-operation tonight. I just want to say thank you very much, Mrs. Thiessen, and now turn to questions. Ms. Allan: Well, thank you very much, Tamar. Have I–am I saying your name right? Tamar?

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 145 Ms. Thiessen: Yes, Tamar. Ms. Allan : It's a beautiful name. Thank you very much. I'll give you a quiet applause for your presentation, and I want to thank you very much. I know it can be very intimidating to come into this room and make this kind of a presentation in front of so many people, but I want to thank you so much.

Obviously, you put a lot of work into your presentation and you've made some comments that are your comments, that are your personal comments and your personal reflections, and I want to thank you so much for being here this evening and coming in from Blumenort to make your presentation. It's much appreciated. Mr. Cameron Friesen: I also want to thank you, Tamar, for coming this evening and making your voice heard and bringing your opinion and your thoughts and your beliefs to this committee hearing. I just wanted to ask you what you think about the bill's threshold for determining what bullying is.

It says that bullying can be

an act that if you had your feelings hurt or if you've had your self -esteem damaged, any of that could amount to bullying. I'm just asking you to comment on that, what you think of that part of the bill. Ms. Thiessen: I think getting your feelings hurt once, I don't think is exactly bullying. I think bullying is if it happens twice or more. I think sometimes bullying might –the first time, might just be a misunderstanding. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thank you once again, Ms. Thiessen, for your presentation tonight. I'll now call on Edward Penner, private citizen. Good evening, Mr. Penner.

Do you have a written materials for the committee this evening? I'll ask the staff to help you dis tribute those. And you may proceed then when–with your presentation when you are ready. * (18:30) Mr. Edward Penner (Private Citizen) : Good evening. My name is Ed Penner, and I'm not going to comment on this because it's too long. And somebody wrote it for me, and it says on there, just a truck driver. That maybe should read truck driver, not just. But anyway, that was years ago. I have only one concern and that is that the bill is–if somebody thinks it's hidden, it's not.

It's very obvious that this bill’s intentions are quite clear, and that is to do away with the freedom of every other group except gay -straight alliance, and that's something that–I'm not surprised. I would like to ask the minister : Why would she not be willing to support –seeing that we have this government who's always very supportive of minorities, then why not support the minority of the Christians who we claim to be? And , if everybody claims to be a Christian, well, that's great, then support the majority. But I think there's not a hidden agenda, there's a clear agenda and the future will tell that.

Although you will run into difficulties , you might win, but at the end you will lose. So–but, whatever. I realize I'm not that gifted in saying exactly what I'd like to say. I would be able to say that better when I'm not in public. But I know what we used to do with bullies and that's not 'acsolid' anymore. But at one time, if there was a bully, that was only short -lived because we dealt with them immediately and that was the end of it. I didn't like bullies. I don't think you do, but you're making a long procession out of it to get something else in and jab on the side. That will come your way. Thank you. Mr.

Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Penner. Now, we'll turn to questions. Ms. Allan: Well, Ed, thank you very much for your presentation, and I want you to know that my father was a truck driver. I was born and raised in MacGregor–and he ran Allen's Transfer –and so was my brother. So I have a high regard, obviously, for truck drivers, and I want to thank you so much for your presentation this evening and for your comments in regards to Bill 18. Thank you for being here. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thank you, Ed, for coming this evening and making your opinion known here at this committee.

I wanted to ask you what you thought of Bill 18 in regard to the absence of any condition that would require parents to be contacted when it has been deemed to be the case that bullying has taken place . What do you think of that? Mr. Penner: I would think that has to do with the fact of–that that would put too much power into the

146 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 parents' and the teachers' hands. It is easier to take it all away and then we can do as we will. Mr. Swan: Mr. Penner, thank you for coming down and presenting to us today, and I just wanted to ask about one thing.

Bill 18 contains a provision that in preparing it s respect for human diversity policy a school board must have due regard for the principles of the Human Rights Code, and that Hum an Rights Code contains protections against discrimination for a whole range of things , which includes religion or creed or religious belief, religious association or religious activity. So this bill will specifically require divisions and schools in setting their policies to make sure their policies have respect for that as well. Does that make any difference to you in terms of what you've told us tonight? Mr. Penner: Thank you, Mr.

Swan, for the question, gives me an opportunity. But I believe it's Professor Short, if he has his way, then that will change. He will–he says that you– he would–that it would be against the human rights for anybody to believe that they should have the right to institute Christianity or anything like that. You – that's what his long term–it's in here, you can read it, and that's how I answer your question. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, once again, thank you so much for your time tonight. I'll now call on Rebecca Sawatzky, private citizen. Good evening, Ms. Sawatzky.

Do you have written materials for the committee tonight? Ms. Rebecca Sawatzky (Private Citizen): I do. Mr. Chairperson: I'll ask the staff to help you distribute that, and you may proceed with your presentation when you're ready. Ms. Sawatzky: Hi, I'm Rebecca Sawatzky. I'm from Otterburne, Manitoba. Bill 18 states in

section 41(1.8) all pupils are to be accepted equally. Charter of Rights and Freedoms was brought into effect so that we may have our freedom to believe what we want. Bill 18's goal is to create a common ground that we establish a respect for human diversity, have respect for everybody , whether they are Christian or non-Christian. We as Christians are being pushed around and pushed down because we stand firm in our belief, yet we're not accepted ; yet we are to accept all people no matter what they believe. We want the same treatment as everyone else, to be accepted and respected.

Where's Canada's freedom they claim to give? If we have freedom, then why have faith -based schools been forced to change? That is not freedom. If Canada is known for freedom and equality, Christians deserve the same treatment as every other group of people in Canada. God is an important part of our lives–not for everybody, but for a lot of people in Canada. And the national anthem states, God keep our land glorious and free. And if you look at our neighbour country to the US, they've pushed God out. They have a lot of school shootings and a lot of other things happening, and then people go and ask, where is God?

Is that really where we want Canada to go? Because when I look at our country, that's what I see. Faith -based schools being forced to change our beliefs or standards are discrimination against our faith. And that's equality? We all want to be res pected, so please don't force us to change if you don't want to be forced to change. Let us live our lives with the right to have faith-based schools. Let us teach our children about God. If they can be taught about God, that will make a big difference in the life of our children and the lives that they come in contact with. They could be touched by the love of God.

So, please, don't ask us to change if others don't want to change. We all want respect, so respect us as Christians. Don't just push us around, just–as you respect everybody else. No – not everyone wants their children to be taught about God, and that is fine. That is everybody's personal opinion. But there are plenty who do. So meet all of our needs. I don't see how forcing faith- based schools t o change will change bullying. It will cause nothing to change. Children will still bully, whether it is faith-based school or not.

Bullying comes from the homes that children come out of and how did the – and how the child is raised, whether they are Christian or non-Christian. The school has nothing to do with it. We live in a country that lives by their name of being known for freedom. Then live out that name. Let faith -based schools continue their way of teaching and all other groups of people attend other schools. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Ms. Sawatzky, very much for your presentation this evening.

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 147 We'll now turn to questions. Ms. Allan: Rebecca, thank you very much for your presentation this evening. We appreciate you taking the time to come here to reflect on Bill 18 and provide us with your comments. Thank you, again. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Rebecca, thank you for coming this evening and making your opinions and your thoughts and your beliefs known. Did you say you're from Arborg? Floor Comment: Otterburne. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Oh, from Otterburne. Thank you very much for coming. I know that community.

Rebecca, do you think that if the bill is implemented as it's written now, will it actually be effective in your community, in your schools, at stamping out bullying? Ms. Sawatzky: I don't really think so. No, I don't. Because what is written–yes, okay, everybody wants to be accepted, but why are they pushing aside Christianity? They're just bringing in the gay-straight alliance. Ever ybody else is being forced aside, so why does that change –it doesn't change anything. Then the Christians will get bullied and the gays will be accepted. So what does that change? Bullying is still happening.

I really don't think it will change anything. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, once again, thanks so much for your time tonight. Now call on Alison Johnston, president of the Brandon Teachers' Association. Ms. Johnston, do you have written materials for the committee? Ms. Alison John ston (The Brandon Teachers' Association): I do, Chair. But, before I begin, I'll ask your indulgence. In filling out the application to come in here today, it was my intent to represent one of three groups fro m the Brandon School Division, and I thought I had made that clear, and I'm asking your indulgence.

We've come a long way to speak and I'm asking that you allow all three of us to speak at the same time? Mr. Chairperson: Is there leave of the committee to allow three presenters? [Agreed] Floor Comment: Thank you, Chair. Mr. Chairperson: I'd like to ask the presenters that will be presenting with you to have their names – write their names for use in Hansard and maybe just speak their names into the microphone before they start speaking so that we have that as well on Hansard, as well, okay? * (18:40) Ms. Johnston: My name is Alison Johnston, and I'm president of the Brandon Teachers' Association. Ms.

Debra Arpin (CUPE Local 737) : Good evening, my name is Debra Arpin, and I am president of CUPE Local 737, the support staff of the Brandon School Division. Together, we represent the unionized employee groups of the Brandon School Division. We are pleased to make this presentation that supports Bill 18. Often, CUPE members are referred to as support staff. This is a good description of the role that my membership play in the Brandon School Division. They provide support for students in the classroom, hallway, office, the library, on the school bus and many other areas.

I t is the human support that students need in order to be successful and productive. In our view, Bill 18 will provide the legislative support through law that will enshrine safer, more inclusive schools for all of our students. The pop duo, Macklemore and Ryan Lewis, currently have a song on the radio entitled same lung–sorry, Same Love.

The lyrics have a strong message, and I would like to quote some of them to you: I can't change / Even if I wanted to / I can't change / Even if I tried / 'Til the day tha t makes my uncles be united by law / When the kids are walking around the hallway plagued by pain in their heart / A world so hateful some would rather die than be who they are / A certificate on paper isn't going to solve all, but it's a – I'll change the word–darn good start. The CUPE members believe this bill is needed and it's a great place to start. Ms.

Johnston: This summer I had the opportunity to attend an equity and social justice seminar sponsored by the Manitoba Teachers' Society. At this seminar, many equity issues were addressed. A representative from Egale Canada led one of the sessions. Egale Canada is an advocacy organization that advances equality for Canadian lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and their families. In the session, each participant was given a star. And on each of the points they filled in things such as family, friends, school, hopes and dreams for the future. Each of these is important support that all of

148 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 us need as we negotiate our way through life. A circle was formed and the moderator described what life would be like if it was determined that we were different and a support was taken away. Imagine what a star would look like if one or more of the supports were torn off from our individual support system. Participants were confronted with exactly that feeling. It was an extremely powerful moment for me and brought clearly into focus what dilemmas LGBQT students face as they deal with their sexuality and gender identity issues.

In the debriefing following the exe rcise, a general consensus was that people wanted to do whatever they could to retrieve their points and put their stars back together. Public education is an entrenched right for all citizens of Manitoba. For the members of the Brandon Teachers' Association, each student has the right to be a star shining brightly in the sky. In order to do that, a star requires all of its points. In our view, the passing of Bill 18 by the Manitoba Legislature will ensure that the public school point of every student's s tar will never be torn from its rightful place.

Bill 18 will assist our students to achieve their potential free from discrimination. We are pleased to support this legislation. Mr. Mark Sefton (Brandon School Division): And my name is Mark Sefton. I am the chair of the Board of Trustees, Brandon School Division, so I guess we could say that I'm representing the employer. We believe–the board–we believe that student safety and security is paramount, absolutely paramount, when considering the factors that affect student engagement and learning.

I think it's safe to say that every person in this room wants a school environment that facilitates and optimizes learning. We all want students to be able to take maximum advantage of the learning opportunities they may experience. For years, Brandon School Division has been working to improve student safety and security. We've implemented many policies geared at providing the optimum environment to engage students actively in their own learning. Over the past three years, we've consulted with many student groups, seeking their input on improvements that we could implement to improve their learning experience.

One of the most common recommendations arising from those consultations was that we continue to work to minimize bullying. When students feel safe, they feel that they belong. They come –become more engaged in their school and in their learning. Their understanding and achievement improves. We believe that the provisions of Bill 18 enhance that safety and belonging for our students.

On March 25th of this year, the board of trustees of Brandon School Division passed the following motion: that the Brandon School Division supports the intent of Bill 18, including the provision that would allow students to es tablish and lead organizations that use the term gay -straight alliance. I want to stress that this motion was approved unanimously. There was no dissenting opinion expressed during the debate, and in the approximately 154 days since we approved that motion, I have not had a single person from the community express to me their disagreement or dissatisfaction with our decision–not one.

Over the years, we've had students establish and lead many activities and organizations within our school division that promote gender equity, anti-racism and respect for others. There have been a multitude of antibullying rallies and presentations. The students have done a fabulous job of organizing those events. In each of our high schools, students have also requested and organized gay-straight alliances at one time or another over the past decade. The students involved have indicated that these organizations provided a greater sense of community for them within our schools.

They have reported that they feel more safe and more valued. Students need our leadership. As adults, we talk about equality of human rights but we sometimes don't walk our talk. We find convenient exceptions to treating all others with the dignity and respect that they deserve as human beings. Student s notice this. They do not appreciate our –adults'–lack of commitment. They find it disingenuous and a little scary sometimes. We need to make a clear statement and back it up with action. The board of trustees of Brandon School Division believes that Bill 18 is one part of making that statement and taking action.

To evade this responsibility would be to deny students the maximum opportunity to optimize their learning environment. Students also need to see that adults in the province can set aside their dif ferences and pull together on behalf of youth–our future. Everyone in this room wants our youth to have the best possible learning experience in the province's classrooms. We believe that Bill 18 takes a giant step in that direction, and we encourage you to approve this very

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 149 important legislation. We believe that our students are worth it. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Sefton, for your presentation, Ms. Arpin–sorry–and Ms. Johnston. Now to move to questions. Ms. Allan : Well, thank you very much, Mark, for your presentation and thank you for your leadership at the Brandon School Division. And, of course, I always enjoy my visits and my discussions with the Brandon School Board trustees and senior administration. And, actually, I was just talking to Andrew today about my next visit, so I look forward to seeing you shortly.

Floor Comment: Shortly. Ms. Allan: Well, maybe not real short, but soon. And Alison and Deb, thank you for your presentations this evening. It's obvious that you have students at the centre of your deliberations and at the centre of your work. So thank you to you for all three of you presenting and for coming in from Brandon to make these presentations. We appreciate it immensely. Mr. Cameron Friesen: I want to thank all three of you for coming in this evening and presenting, Alison, Deb, Mark. I know the Brandon School Division.

As a matter of fact, not too long ago, I had a chance to have a tour and a walk -through of your Neelin off-campus site in the downtown area, and you're doing some fascinating work there with some tremendous success, right in the heart of the downtown, giving opportunities to students who just haven't succeeded for whatever reason in the normal, conventional setting.

And to be doing it, as you are, unilaterally and funding it locally, it's seeing tremendous success, and I've just been excited to actually visit with some of the graduates of that program and seen the great places they've gone on to. * (18:50) Mark, I had a quick question for you.

I noticed, at the start of your presentation, you said you believed that student safety and security is paramount, and I wondered if you had a concern as a school division or a board of trustees when it came to the fact that Bill 18 does not actually mandate any kind of action that would require reporting to police in instances when acts of bullying would be deemed to be of a criminal nature. Can you comment on that for me? Mr. Sefton: No, actually, I don't have big concerns about that because those kinds of procedure s are already in place in our schools.

With all the other policies we have regarding situations in schools, it doesn't specifically say that police must be called in this instance. So the same would apply with the implementation of Bill 18, in my opinion. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, once again, thank you so much for your time tonight. We'll now call on Bryan Schroeder, principal , Christian Heritage. Mr. Schroeder, welcome. Do you have written materials for the committee this evening? Mr. Br yan Schroeder (Christian Heritage School): I do. Mr.

Chairperson: I'll ask the staff to help you distribute those, and you may proceed then when you're ready. Mr. Schroeder: Dear special committee, my name is Bryan Schroeder and I'm the principal at Christian Heritage School in Brandon. I believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Creator and that He loves everyone. As a Christian, I am called to love people and show the love of Christ to all people. I believe perfect love drives out fear and that fear is a curse and destroys. We do not want to act out of fear. I think fear is one motivator of the creation of this bill, not love. It must be amended.

I work at a funded, independent school. Parents choose to pay tuition costs so that their children can be educated according to the B iblical perspectives, truths and principles that are highly valued in our school constitution and community. We are not perfect, but just like every other human being we have been created by a loving God who passionately wants us to know Him, and He made it possible through His Son, Jesus Christ. I'm here to oppose Bill 18 on behalf of our school board as it is currently written not out of fear, anger or hate, but out of love. I love children. They are wonderful.

I believe God created people and desires to draw all people into a saving relationship with his Son, Jesus Christ. I believe in a God who offers true life, true hope and true grace. I hate bullying. People can be mean. Children need to be trained in good character, love, respect, hono ur and

150 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 truth. Students who act like bullies need to be corrected in their behaviour with discipline and love. Victims need to be shown compassion, be educated and be trained in various ways as well. Bill 18 is poorly written and poorly attempts to deal with bullying in our schools, but we need to go back to the drawing board. We need to try again. No student should be bullied for any reason. Disciplinary action should be taken when students act as bullies, but that's the hard part to understand.

The vagueness of the definition of bullying in Bill 18 leaves administrators acknowledging all acts of unkindness as bullying or even unintentional acts as bullying, which then would need to be documented, reported to parents, followed up with di sciplinary actions. This would all be done with significant

interpretational and application challenges due to the current definition of bullying in the bill. The term bullying used to be associated with evil and malicious behaviour, but it's now been trivialized with everyday talk and interactions. It's lost its edge. What is bullying? I see it as repetitive, intentional, targeted behaviour that intimidates, scares or hurts someone one way or another. There's too much guessing with the definition presente d currently in the bill. Bill 18 currently specifically protects certain groups of students. This doesn't make any sense to me.

Students who are bullied for gender, race, sexual orientation and disabilities are going to be specifically protected by law? What about religious beliefs? What about social class? What about body image, languages spoken? I'm sure you're aware the Toronto District School Board completed a 99- page study in 2006 which they titled A System Overview Study that covered extensive aspects of 105,000 Toronto students' experiences at school.

One topic was bullying and they discovered that the reasons why students were bullied were broken down into the following frequency percentages: body image, 38 per cent; grades, 17 per cent; cultural background, 11 per cent; language, 7 per cent; gender and sexual orientation, 5 per cent combined; and religion, 5 per cent. Just as many students were bullied for religious reasons as gender and sexual orientation and many others for much more common re asons. Yet for specific protection for students for those reasons are not included in this bill. I truly love the children at my school.

Love comes from a pure heart, a good conscience and sincere faith. As a Christian, I believe God loves all people, wha tever choices they make. The Bible teaches that everyone is in need of a saviour because of the sinful nature people are born with. Redemption is found in Jesus Christ. I am not concerned with the lifestyle choices of individual people because I will love them anyways. I may not agree with their lifestyle choice, but it's their individual choice. That person makes the choice to live a certain way, just like each of us makes choices every day.

However, Bill 18 is currently written to give much authority–legal authority–to a specific group of people making personal lifestyle choices, which falls under the name of human diversity such that they can now influence others by establishing and leading activities and organizations at schools that promote the awareness and understanding of and respect for people of all sexual orientations and gender identities, meanwhile apparently having due regard for the principles of the Human Rights Code. This is completely backwards.

Our school has a theological perspective of a God-ordained design for heterosexual marriage and sexual relationship between one man and one woman. This is one reason why parents choose to send their children to be educated according to such a personal and significant Biblical value. However, if the government decides to incorporate and authorize a much more liberal perspective and world view on sex and sexuality that take –that makes the decision – that takes the decision -making authority and power away from the schools and parents, where is their freedom of religion?

I understand many students of various races, nationalities, languages, backgrounds, social classes and more, make their own lifestyle choices as they grow older and sexuality is included in that realm of decision making. They need to continue to be educated, mentored and trained in character, wisdom, love and faith in order to make wise choices. Parents have the right and freedom to educate and influence their children according to their religious values and associations, thereby crea ting some parameters and understanding of what they believe to be good and bad choices, right and wrong choices.

If the school system is under a law that determines what is a right and wrong perspective towards sexual orientation and gender identity and

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 151 even goes as far as allowing students to lead organizations in school where they can educate other students according to their own personal preferences and understandings of sexual orientation lifestyle, the freedom of religion and right to educate would then be stripped from parents and schools, particularly independent schools.

The goal here does not be –does not appear to be one that is about antibullying; it is clearly one which is focused on providing powerful influence to integrate a world view on all sexual orientations and gender identities under the guise of promoting a positive school environment that is inclusive and accepting of all pupils. That is backwards thinking, and I pray, Minister Allan, and each of you respectively see that.

By standing behind this bill , I believe you are setting a new lower standard for the respect of citizens' constitutional rights to religious and associational freedoms and thereby violating those rights and freedoms in the process. I believe you are enforcing select belief systems and world views looking to create a homogeneous school system rather than upholding and encouraging unique cultural and religious upbringings chosen by parents for their children.

You'll be limiting the capacity of religious schools to teach and administer their schools in a manner 'constistent' with their religious beliefs and would seriously infringe on the parents' freedom to educate their children according to the tenets of their faith. I believe are–you are disregarding the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,

section 2(d). I believe you are lacking clarity by stating that a school board must have due regard for the principles of the Human Rights Code. Does that mean that religious families who want to exercise their rights to freedom of conscience religion, expression and association by teaching their children from their faith -inspired perspective will gain or lose support in our school system? I believe you are creating a second class of students because only some groups of students would have special status. This will cause more exclusion not inclusion.

I believe in the creation of antibullying clubs or programs where all bullying, including bullying towards LGBTQ students, is combated. The Canadian Red Cross stand- up-to-bullies plan provides prevention and intervention strategies which focus on fixing bullying behaviour, not on the traits of lifestyle choices of victims. I believe such resources and approaches to the bullying in our schools would respect the rights and freedoms of parents and independent schools, and focus on the student's behaviour and not the lifestyle choices or personal preferences of the victims.

I will continue to educate my staff, students and parents about bullying so that we can significantly decrease such malicious behaviour. Thank you for this opportunity to present publicly and hopefully be heard with the goal of Bill 18 being amended for the future. Please revisit this bill and rewrite it so that it can truly address the bullying issues in today's schools. May the Lord give you wisdom, insight and love as you seek to make the best decisions possible for all people in this province. Thank you. * (19:00) Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Schroeder.

We'll now move to questions. Ms. Allan : Bryan, thank you very much for this presentation. It is very obvious that you have put a lot of work into this presentation and it is very thorough. Thank you for coming from Brandon to make the presentation on behalf of your school, and all the best in the scho ol year ahead of you , and thank you, once again, for your remarks. Mr. Cameron Friesen: I al so want to thank you, Bryan, for coming this evening. You've given us a very thoughtful and comprehensive prepared viewpoint, and we thank you for it. Thanks for making the time in coming here from your community.

I just wanted to ask you–I'm also aware of that Toronto's district school board study and of their findings, and I guess I would ask you this. If it was left to you, how would you take Bill 18 and create the conditions in which you believe all students would be protected, even those with physiologically distinguishing features, people from different cultural backgrounds or language, and all of those things? How would you create that equity? Mr. Schroeder: Thank you. I believe a proactive approach based on school policies and action taken by the administrators with a well- informed and trained staff.

I believe that addresses it. I believe if

152 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 you specifically protect a group of students by law it's going to cause greater issues in the future. Mr. Cameron Friesen: One last question. Do you have an antibullying club in your school? Mr. Schroeder: Sorry–thank you. We don't have an antibullying club in the school, but we do train the staff. We do train the students. We inform parents. We provide resources, but we don't specifically have a club. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks again for your time tonight. I'll now call on Tim McAllister, private citizen. Mr.

McAllister, do you have written material for the distribution of the committee? Mr. Tim McAllister (Private Citizen): No. Mr. Chairperson: Okay. We'll allow you to proceed, then, when you're ready. Mr. Tim McAllister: Hello everyone. I want to thank you for this opportunity to speak and present to everyone here. I just want to say that I am against bullying in all forms for all people. I believe that the greatest commandment in the Scripture is to love God and to love my neighbour as myself.

All people are my neighbours and I continually am trying to love all people regardless of differences of belief or lifestyle. Bill 18 specifically gives protection from bullying to four things: gender, race, sexual orientation and disabilities. I'm happy to agree with you guys that all children should be protected and no child should ever be bullied for any of these things. The problem is, however, that religious belie fs are explicitly left out, and, Minister Allan, you've so far refused to amend the bill in any way.

I want to refer to the 2006 study that the previous presenter just mentioned by the Toronto school board, and they're the biggest school board in Canada. They did a survey and, yes, I'll j ust go over the stats again. And they found that the biggest reason for bullying was body image at 38 per cent; following by grades at 17 per cent; cultural background at 11 per cent; followed by language at 7 per cent; then gender and sexual orientation a t 5 per cent combined; and then religion at 5 per cent as well.

So you can see that people were bullied for religious reasons just as much as gender and sexual orientation, and that's a study done by the largest school board in Canada. When this fact is c ombined with the weak definition given to the act of bullying, the results could be devastating for children of faith and schools of faith. The definition of bullying in Bill 18 includes hurt feelings. Bill 13, a similar bill that is now law in Ontario, de fines bullying much more appropriately as aggressive and repeated behaviour.

As a result of these two things, (1) religious beliefs are not specifically protected, and (2) bullying is defined so loosely as to include hurt feelings, there's the real possibility that children could be accused of bullying merely for talking about their religious beliefs or for engaging in a religious activity at school. And, you know, just my personal belief as a Christian, you know, I've got a lot of issues. I sin and I've got a lot of problems, and I'm working on that to try to improve my life.

I pray to God and I ask for forgiveness for –from those things, the sins that I commit, and, you know, I would have no desire to promote, you know, my sin behaviour. I don't want to engage in, you know, enriching that behaviour. I'll tell you guys right now, you know, in the past and still currently, sometimes I just am prone to lying and obscuring truth, and I'm striving to live a more wholesome life and a life without sin, recognizing that I will still likely fail in the future, but I look to God to help me live a life continually growing in character and to be more like Him.

And if I'm endeavouring to live my life like this, would I want to have around me or create or promote a group that would celebrate lying and the concealing of truth? Absolutely not. I don't want to glorify sin and I wouldn't expect a faith-based organization to glorify

an act that they would also disagree with. This is the dilemma that faith-based schools ha ve with this bill. The requirement to promote all sexual orientations and use the name gay -straight alliance for a student group encourages lifestyles that are not honouring to God. Just as I would not expect a school of faith to promote lying and permit groups that uplift lying to exist, I would not expect a school of faith to be able to obey Bill 18 as it is currently written and still stay true to their organization's code of moral standards.

I believe that protecting children from bullying and religio us freedom are both important Canadian values. I believe that if the teachers and principals and parents of our province are empowered to creatively tackle bullying in our schools, that there are many solutions to be found on this issue which don't need to infringe on the freedom of religion in

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 153 the public and faith- based schools of our province, whether Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Hindu or any other faith. I do not support Bill 18 the way it is currently worded. Please revise it to contain more specific and stronger antibullying protection and to exempt faith-based independent schools from anything that goes contrary to their faith principles. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. McAllister, for your presentation this evening. We'll now move to questions. Ms. Allan : Tim, thank you so much for your presentation this evening.

It was obviously one that you put a lot of thought into and those were your personal reflections, and we really appreciate your comments this evening. Thank you for being here. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thank you, Tim, for coming. It was a very honest and sincere presentation and we thank you for make –taking the time to make it this evening. You made reference to Ontario's legislation. I've also read that legislation; I have some quest ions like your own. I wondered if you would just comment on us. Ontario's legislation offers stronger –a stronger definition of what constitutes bullying.

I just wanted to ask you, in your mind, what's wrong with the idea of bullying being defined as maybe even having taken place only one time and constituting damage to your self -esteem or you suffered hurt feelings? What's wrong with that? Mr. Tim McAllister: In my mind, I just see that as an administrative nightmare. How are teachers that are already trying to take control and teach and nurture a classroom of 25 and principals that are looking at–over hundreds of students, how are they going to add to their plate every report of hurt feelings? That just seems logistically impossible.

Just from a, you know, pragmatic view, how are we going to enforce this bill? And then I would just ask the question, why do we want to create a bill that we're going to be doomed to failure enforcing it when it actually gets passed? Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, once again, thanks for your time this evening. Now call on Sarah Dyck, private citizen. Evening, Ms. Dyck. Do you have written materials for distribution? We'll ask the staff to help you distribute those, and you may proceed when you're ready. * (19:10) Ms. Sarah Dyck (Private Citizen): Hello. My name is Sarah Dyck.

I'm a Manitoban not too far out of the public school system –I graduated in 2006 –and I'm concerned with Bill 18 as written. I'm also a graduate from the University of Winnipeg, 2012, having maintained excellent marks and rappo rt with my professors and fellow students. I am intelligent, able to think and reason, and I have some authority in the public education system, not a ton, but some. I was bold in classes, willing to be a dissenting voice, and yet I was able to make friend s of many different backgrounds. And I'm a Chris tian living out a relationship with Jesus Christ.

This is, in part, going to reiterate what my brother Tim said, but this is why I am concerned about Bill 18: first of all, I am against all bullying in all forms of all people. Bullying is never acceptable for any reason. I believe that the greatest commandment in Scripture is to love God and to love your neighbour as yourself. All human beings are our neighbours and we are called to love all people regardless of differences in belief or lifestyle.

My issue with Bill 18 has nothing to do with being in favour of bullying, but rather with the wording of the bill which protects certain groups of children over others. Bill 18 specifically gives protection from bullying to four categories of children: gender, race, sexual orientation and disabilities. I am happy to agree that all children should be protected and no child should ever be bullied for any of these reasons. The problem is, however, that religious bel iefs are explicitly left out, as well as many of the other reasons why children are bullied.

And Education Minister Nancy Allan has so far refused any amendments of the bill. When this fact is combined with a weak definition of –given to the act of bullying, the results could be devastating for children of faith and schools of faith. The definition of bullying in Bill 18 includes hurt feelings. Bill 13, a similar bill that is now in law in Ontario, defines bullying much more appropriately as aggressive and repeated behaviour.

As a result of these two things, that religious beliefs are not specifically protected and that bullying is defined so loosely as to include hurt feelings, there is the real possibility that children could be accused of bullying merely for talking about their religious beliefs or for engaging in religious activity at school. Lastly, I believe that religious freedom and protecting children from bullying are both important

154 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 Canadian values. I believe that if the teachers and principals an d parents of our province are empowered to creatively tackle bullying in our schools, that there are many solutions to be found on this issue which don't need to infringe on the freedom of religion in the public and faith- based schools of our province, whe ther Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Hindu or whatever world view you hold. Essentially what I am trying to say is that Bill 18 is both too broad and too narrow in its scope of protection.

First of all–and to go dive in a little bit more to these two things, it is too broad in its definition of bullying. If bullying can be defined 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, or (

b) is intended to create or should be known to create a negative school environment for another person, then one simple act of disagreeing can be misconstrued as

an act of bullying. Now, one bit –big disagreement that is –has been highlighted in this whole debate is one of world view. Independent faith- based schools that defend their right to teach their world view feel that this bill is inhibiting that right. For example, the word sin seems to be offensive to many people. Some could even say this word creates a negative environment for them or harms their self- esteem. However, this word is a word of a certain world view, namely Abrahamic faiths, does not equate to either hate speech or bullying.

As a Christian who is passionate about the Bible, a book of faith that was written over thousands of years, saying that something is sin has never made my God or Christians or Jews or Muslims, for that matter, bullies. I sin, but I certainly do not hate myself. In the same way that a parent teaches his son or daughter that a hot stove should not be touched, God has provided guidelines for us to live by. Most of these form the foundation of many public laws – for example, against murder, stealing, et cetera–but some of which are more of the matter of the heart, for example, pride. First Peter 5, verse 5(

b) says, clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. In no way do I think that all of God's laws should be le gislated by a provincial or federal government, so don't hear me wrong there; I do not want that at all. But what we, as Christians, do ask is that we remain free to practi se and teach the faith that our forefathers have been practi sing for the past 2,000 years. God is love, as it says in First John 1, verse 8. His son Jesus died so that we can have life, and life includes following his commandments.

A lot of this is highlighted in First John, if any of you are desiring to look further. The Bible is mostl y addressed to Christians, not to nonbelievers. Those who share the Christian world view can agree that sin is a common thread throughout the Bible, and those who do not base their lives on it should take no offence to what it says. If a Jewish person fee ls that eating certain foods is sin, I take no offence as I do not hold that world view. Christian morality is based on this book, the Bible, and I ask the committee: What are your morals based on?

You have the freedom to disagree with me and do what you l ike, but please, also give me the freedom to disagree with you and do not take me as a bully when I do. As written, this broad definition of bullying suggests that a mere disagreement can be the cause of hurt feelings and, therefore, punishable by the school administrators. The foundations of our legal system are in the freedom that we have to state our opinions and disagree with each other in order to find the best solutions for all. Are we really going to take this freedom away from our children, thus c rippling them as they enter adulthood?

Secondly, this bill is too narrow in its scope of student protection. As already was said before, it is very important for the named groups to be protected under government legislation, and they are. It's awesome.

U nder Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms as well as the human rights act, singling out a few minority groups both makes them stick out more, therefore, potentially more susceptible to becoming targets of bullying, but it also serves to exclude other groups that feel like a bullied minority, for example, students who practise a certain religion, not just Christianity, any religion, or who come from different socio -economic backgrounds. Those are just two examples; there are many, many more.

It's–just f or a personal slant on things, when I was in high school I was frequently questioned, interrogated and mocked for what I believe. I would not have considered it bullying then, those –that wasn't even in my scope of imagination. But according to this bill it definitely would be. I was fairly adept at sticking up for myself ; however, there were definitely times that I was pressured to do

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 155 things contrary to my beli efs in order to try to fit in. There was a decent Christian presence in the school I attended, including an interschool Christian fellowship group, ICF, that was available to me. Yet this did nothing to stop the mocking from happening. Although the support was there, the bullying continued. In university, bullying took different forms and was more l ike intellectual intimidation, fear to write or say what I really thought or believed rather than the outright mockery that I experienced in high school, yet it prevailed.

So my fear is that in the eagerness to protect a few, more will begin to fall into the categories of needing protection and more and more legislation will need to be created. I feel that this bill is a good start, yet amendments will serve to accomplish the goals it actually sets out to do. So , instead of naming a few groups, can we not say that protection should be for all and maybe even suggest, as was mentioned earlier, antibullying clubs rather than clubs for a specific group of people?

And, instead of allowing a simple, unintended remark to give a student the label of bully, can we not give a more specific and intentional definition to the word, putting specific plans in place so the bully themselves can learn to accept everyone? So this is a final note to Minister Nancy Allan and those others who drafted the bill. I really respect and admire the heart behind this bill. I really do, and I think that the goal of having a safe and inclusive school environment for all is so necessary.

Yet, can you not see why the debates that have been raging since this bill was released, that this is, in fact, not able to accomplish the goal of making everyone feel safe and included? Perhaps we can work together to draft a legislation that can truly be a work of co - operation. Maybe this province can function like a true democracy and work together to be come a province that is safe and inclusive for all, maybe. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Ms. Dyck, for your presentation. We'll now move to questions. Ms. Allan : Well, Sarah, I respect and admire your heart that you put into this presentation.

I think it was fantastic, and do I understand that Adam is your brother as well, the first speaker? Well, I just want you to know that you just edged him out as the new candidate in Steinbach. Sorry, Adam. This was a terrific presentation. Thank you so much for being here, and it's obvious you put a lot of thought into this presentation–are a very articulate person. Thank you. Very thoughtful. * (19:20) Mr. Cameron Friesen: Sarah, I want to also thank you for coming this evening and sharing with us.

You are someone who has been the target of bullying, and you have endured it and you have – you've survived and you've thrived and you learned to cope, and you've given us some very good things to think about this evening. I also remark that you were the– you sa id your brother spoke earlier, and I thought that it was interesting you shared a number of similar themes. And in my family sibling s squabbled, but I can see you've reached some level of understanding and agreement in your family. I had a question for you because you made an interesting point.

You talked about the fact that singling out a few minority groups can make them stick out more and can potentially make them more susceptible to acts of bullying because you've isolated them from the other groups. And I was thinking about–I've heard that comment before even from experts and I was thinking about the degree to which the clubhouse approach–if I can use that term– works against the goal of empathy and compassion and reaching out and fostering that kind of understanding.

I wonder if you would just comment on that approach, like, the clubhouse approach as opposed to more general antibullying clubs in schools. Ms. Dyck: Yes, I would just say that naming those specific groups –gay-straight alliance, I actual ly haven't looked a lot into that specific group but even the name in itself, it presents a certain idea in children's minds, right?

And people who grow up in whatever family, yes, okay, we need to accept people, but having that specific singled- out group named, I think, yes, will create that –almost a spotlight and, I don't know, just increase the amount of attention that's put on people.

Whereas, yes, say an antibullying club would be more inclusive for all, and it's just saying anybody who has been a victim in any way, shape or form, whether perceived or in reality, then would be welcome and able to feel welcome there.

156 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, once again, thanks for your time tonight. Committee Substitution Mr. Chairperson: Before calling the next presenter, I'd like to inform that committee of the following membership substitution: Mr. Helwer for Mr. Smook. * * * Mr. Chairperson: I'll now call on June Derksen, private citizen. Ms. Derksen, do you have written materials for distribution? Ms. June Derksen (Private Citizen): No, I do not. Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed when ready then. Ms. Derksen: Okay. Hello.

My name is June Derksen, and I'm from a small French community in the southeast of the province. First of all I want to say thank you for giving me the opportunity to share my heart in this matter of Bill 18. I'm here because I love my country, I love freedom and I love the right to choose and because I love people –all people –and because I am greatly saddened by what I have seen and heard since the whole bill has come out.

I was teased and belittled during my early school years about my ethnic background a nd about my religious beliefs, so I believe I have some understanding of how much damage can be done when someone is bullied. And I understand that it's a problem that needs to be addressed. Having said that, I cannot see how Bill 18 as proposed addresse s the issue of bullying in that it does not even give a clear definition of what bullying actually is, nor does it give any clear consequences – which makes sense, because I'm not sure how you can state clear consequences for unspecified acts of violation.

In essence, it says you will be punished for breaking the rules but we aren't going to tell you what the rules are. Rather than a quest for safety and equality of all children, it has given freedom, safety and rights specifically to a minority group of students and removing the same from the majority. The gay-lesbian groups have the right to say : Our way of life is acceptable and good and all should embrace it. But the heterosexual group does not have the right to say: Our way of life is acceptable and good and all should embrace it.

From years past I have heard from friends that I have had in the gay community that they felt they had to stay quiet and hide their beliefs and be silent about their lifestyles, and it was wrong. But now it seems as though that same community is saying to the religious communities, you have to stay quiet and hide your beliefs and be silent about your lifestyle, and that's just as wrong. My thought is how can this be moving forward in a positive way if we are re -enacting and perpetuating further dissension by taking the muzzle off one group and putting it back on another?

The bill does not address the prevention of bullying at all, but rather seeks to define sexual orientation. The bill, as written, leaves the door wide open for false accusations, personal vendettas and for religious persecution–or you could call it religious bullying. It actually promotes bullying anyone whose views differ.

I do not share the same beliefs as the LGBTQ community, nor do I share many of the belie fs of the Jewish, Islamic or Hindu, Catholic communities , but I will stand for and agree to their right to hold to their beliefs and to teach those beliefs to their children because that's part of what makes our country great –the freedom to choose . I taught my children what I believe to be right and true. Don't all parents want to do that for their children? And when the children grow up, they then themselves can choose what they want to believe.

When private schooling became an option for my children, I gave them the choice of whether they wanted to go to a private, faith- based Christian school or continue in the public school system. One chose to switch immediately. The other –one chose public high school and the other changed his mind two years in and sw itched to the private, faith -based school. The reason I mention this is because it's about respecting individual rights and allowing choice and not punishing for differences of beliefs, personal values or opinions.

Doing that usually only causes rebellion and anger, and I would think that the same principle would hold true for our country. Since the proposed bill, I have seen peaceful communities turn on each other and draw lines of segregation where there weren't any before. They've hurled threats and accusations, name calling, divisions in families and longstanding friendships. Those for and against and even those on the same

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 157 side of the issue are angry at each other because some speak up and some stay silent, and all the while our children and our teenagers watch, listen and learn. In a TV interview on Remembrance Day, Mr. Selinger allows parents to opt out to their children based on religious purposes. He states, and it's about freedom and freedom of religion and freedom to live in our society, which i s what our veterans all fought for, and I agree with Mr. Selinger, freedom for all.

So far this bill has done nothing but cause more dissension and more separation between different groups rather than unifying. You cannot legislate belief systems and moral codes in a free, democratic society or it is no longer a democracy. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Ms. Derksen, for your presentation this evening. We'll now move to questions. Ms. Allan : Well, thank you very much, June, for your presentation this evening. It's important that we hear your personal reflections on Bill 18, and how you feel it has affected the community that you live in and some of your surrounding communities.

I know that this has been a very difficult topic and a very difficult discussion for many people, but I think it's an important dialogue that we have to have. So thank you so much for being here this evening and sharing your personal reflections on Bill 18. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Thank you, June, for coming. I really appreciate you having the courage to tell us about being bullied because of your ethnic background. I really appreciate you being able to tell the story about what this has done –this bill has done in the fabric of your community. That takes courage to say. Thank you for sharing it here tonight.

I'm a little disappointed you didn't bring notes along because there was a lot you said that now I'm thinking about, and I'll have to go back and check the official record later on to reread what you said. There was some very thoughtful comments that you made. I guess my comment to you was just this. Earlier in your presentation, you made the remark that you were concerned about the lack of clear consequences in the legislation for acts of bullying, and earlier this evening we had an individual stand up and said they shared no concern that there were not clear consequences spelled out in this legislation.

Why would clear consequences make a difference for you in this legislation if those things could be enshrined there? Ms. Derksen: In order for there to be clear consequences set out, then I –the assumption is that there is then a clear definition of what bullying is. So I don't see how you can have the consequences without the crime, so to speak. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing n o further questions, thanks so much for your time, once again. Now, call on Darrel Guenther, Crestview Fellowship Church. Do you have written materials for distribution to the committee? Mr.

Darrel Guenther (Crestview Fellowship Church): Yes, I do. Mr. Ch airperson: We'll just ask the staff to help you distribute those, and do I have the pronunciation of your last name correctly? Mr. Guenther: Guenther, yes. Mr. Chairperson: Guenther. Mr. Guenther, you may proceed when ready. * (19:30) Mr. Guenther: First o ff, I want to thank you for allowing me to speak here to the committee this evening. My name is Darrel Guenther and I'm the pastor at Crestview Fellowship Church here in Winnipeg.

As I will read my presentation here this evening, remember the fact that I'm doing so personally, as well on behalf of the congregation that I represent. During my present ing here, if I use the singular I, please remember that there is a congregation that is of like mind. I have addressed this presentation with the board that I work under and have a mandate from the members to present on their behalf. We believe we are to speak up on issues that we believe in. Speaking on behalf of a faith- based organization most likely raises some flags right away.

There have been many things done throughout history under the flag of faith that have not been done in love. One thing that I believe we, as believers, are called to do, is to love. In fact, in Colossians 3, verse 12, it says, clothe yourself with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. And then it says in verse 14, and over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity. I want to apologize, if I may, for the times past when the Church has not done this. I believe we can have a–different opinions on matters and still remain

158 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 rational people dealing in love and respect. I want to state right off the bat that bullying is wrong. It is wrong in our schools as well as in all areas of society and in all forums. I believe we can all agree on this point. I remember my junior high years were not all that pleasant. I was bullied, seeing I was almost as wide as I was tall. All people should be protected in a school system that falls on the administration to provide a safe learning environment for all students.

This includes protection from bullying in regards to race, sex, religion, physical or mental condition and the brands of jeans that you wear. As human beings we all bear the image of God, and for that reason alone, respect should be given to each individual. What I wish to address here today are some of the issues, aspects of Bill 18 that I feel are in need of further study or do not line up with our belief system. We live in a wonderful country. This was discovered many years ago by the gener ations who came before us.

I'm representing a Mennonite church, and one of the reasons that our forefathers came to Canada was to have both freedom of religion and education. I am proud of my heritage of faith and I believe that from the Mennonite settlers on, we, as group, have done many great things for this province, as well as the communities we live in. There are aspects of Bill 18 that I believe need revision. I've read Kelvin Goertzen's notes speaking on the subject of Bill 18 to the Legislative As sembly on May 6th. I've not done the research, but from Mr. Goertzen's remarks, it would appear that a more thorough bill be drafted.

I would like to see in the bill a component of reporting of bullying, the investigation protocol as well as the consequences or the punishment of those who bully. I understand there's been very little consultation with parent advisory groups or the general public in the drafting of this bill. I would really encourage this to happen. The main area of concern is subsection 41(1.8)(

b) that says, use the name gay -straight alliance or any other name that is consistent with the promotion of a 'posable' –positive school environment that is inclusive and accepting of all pupils. With this component in the bill, it is my belief tha t this will promote the teaching of sexual relationships that are outside the conservative Biblical view on sexual relationships. If this enters private schools in Manitoba, many of which hold to a conservative theology of sex, then Bill 18 will violate those schools' freedom of religion.

If Bill 18 is implemented as written, I believe it violates Canada's promise to immigrant settlers in the 1870s of perpetual freedom of religion and the right to educate their young according to their faith. I understand that letters to our Education Minister from leaders of the Manitoba Catholic, Sikh, Jewish, and Muslim communities share similar concerns about our religious freedoms.

While we all agree that bullying in our schools needs to be reduced as much as poss ible, many faith -based organizations, ours included, are convinced that Bill 18 aims to promote the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer lifestyle as normal, rather than ensuring safety at school. We believe that sex is beautifully designed and shoul d be enjoyed only by married, heterosexual husband and wife. Bill 18 aims to teach that this B iblical view of sex is false. Herein, most likely, is the main point of dispute.

Bill 18 requires all public and private schools to accommodate gay -straight alliance if one student requests such. When a school accommodates a student organization, it officially approves of that organization's goals and activities. It would provide space for meeting and most likely a faculty or staff supervisor. That being said, it implies that the school with a gay -straight alliance endorses a very liberal view of sex. I would like to argue that faith -based schools need to have their faith, their beliefs protected, including a conservative view of sex.

Accommodating a gay -straight alliance violates this faith-based view of sex, and, therefore, it violates our freedom of religion. As this would get introduced into the classroom, students would be subjected to issues that may not be age- or time -appropriate and disrespe cts their parents' rights and duties to provide their children with sex education they deem appropriate. If Bill 18 is implemented, many Manitoba public school students, teachers and taxpayers who honestly hold to a conservative view of sex would be in conflict.

Bill 18 has most likely already increased bullying directed at these students and teachers who believe in conservative theology of sex and has created a less -than-safe learning environment for them. Some of Manitoba's best public school

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 159 teachers and administrators dare not challenge the establishment on Bill 18. They are really caught in a tight spot. Bill 18 may bully some of Manitoba's best teachers out of employment. I would like really to encourage this committee and our provincial government to rework Bill 18 with public input to provide a method of reporting of bullying, the investigation protocol of incidents, consequences for offenders and protection against bullying pursued in a way that does not violate the freedom of religion.

It is, in my view, that this be done now prior to passing the bill so that this matter would be worked out with love and respect and not in litigation. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Guenther, for your presentation this evening. We'll now move to questions. Ms. Allan : Thank you, Pastor Guenther, for your presentation this evening on behalf of your congregation. I appreciate you taking the time to be here this evening and to provide us with your reflections on Bill 18. Mr.

Cameron Friesen: Thank you, Pastor Guenther, for joining us this evening, for coming and delivering this message on behalf of your board and on behalf of your congregation. In your last paragraph, you identify a number of shortcomings that you see with the bill, and you talk about the absence of a reporting mechanism and an investigation protocol of incidents. I think that's all very noteworthy. It's some of the concerns that we've raised as well in the Legislature in this session.

I just wanted you to know, because you had indicated that you, yourself were bullied, but for different reasons, and previous speakers this evening indicated that according to some studies the vast majority of bullying incidents has to do with physiologically distinguishing characteristics and things. So how do you get there in our schools? How do you actually provide that broad- based and inclusive protection of all students regardless of what distinguishes them? Mr. Guenther: Well, in the school system there's educators, and I think that's where it starts right from the ground up.

People with differences are different, but it's okay to be different, and I think the whole education system should concentrate on that and really f ocus on that and to teach people that differences do exist and they exist in each one of us. Some are more hidden than others, and yet it's okay to be different because we are all uniquely created. And so I think it's an education process. Mr. Chairperson : Seeing no further questions, thanks again for your time. Now I'll call on Jasmine Harder, private citizen. Good evening, Ms. Harder. Do you have written materials for distribution? Ms.

Jasmine Harder (Private Citizen): I do not, sorry. Mr. Chairperson: Okay, you know, no problem at all. You may proceed when ready. Ms. Harder: Okay. I want to begin by saying thank you to Ms. Allan and all the members of the committee for this opportunity to present my thoughts on Bill 18. My name is Jasmine Harder. I'm from Steinbach, Manitoba. I'm a 22-year-old mom. I have two young children who will be of the school age in the next few years. Like most of us, I have had experiences with being bullied. I've never been physically bullied, but I have been verbally and emotionally bullied.

I've also been at fault for bullying. Haven't we all? * (19:40) When I was in school, bullying rarely had anything to do with sexual orientation. Bullies would pick on people because of their looks, mostly, and sometimes their religion, wealth or personality. I was bullied in elementary school. A boy on my bus would verbally bully me, and I would go home feeling very defeated. In grade 7, again, I was bullied. A girl in my school told embarrassing rumours about me that were untrue. I'm sure there are more times that I have been bullied that I can't remember, but the problem is that I didn't reach out for help.

I didn't tell anyone that I was being bullied. I also remember bullying others. I remember, in elementary and middle school, my friends and I would laugh at others and exclude them when we would hang out. It is never okay to bully someone for any reason. We are imperfect people living in an imperfect world, and no bill is going to magically solve all our problems. We have so many rules, but do they perfectly stop or fix everything? They do not. Laws and rules are great when used properly, but we can't expect them to solve all of our problems perfectly. I am thankful for laws and rules, but at that point –at

160 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 what point is the government stepping over the parental line? Parents need to step up and start knowing what's going on in their kids' lives. Kids need parents to model how to love others that are different and think different than themselves. Parents need to build more relat ionships with their children and actually listen so their kids will tell them what's going on in their lives.

There are other ways to help bullying besides a bill, and I think working with families and their communication is a better solution–also working with the bullies to improve their actions and working with the victims being bullied. I do think there should be consequences at school for bullies, but parents should be notified first. Bill 18 is not the solution to bullying. It has too many flaws that would most likely breed hatred and more bullying among groups. Some of the problems with Bill 18 are as follows. Bill 18's definition of bullying is far too vague.

Hurt feelings happen to everyone, and everyone has hurt someone's feelings. Where is the line drawn as to what gets punishment and what doesn't, as well as the type of punishment given? Bill 18 lacks consequences for bullies and help for the victim being bullied. Bill 18 should require schools to notify the bully's parents and the victim's parents. I believe that Bill 18 should not force faith-based, independent schools to allow activities and organizations to form that would be in contradiction with their religious beliefs.

I would like to encourage a change for the word must, and in its place, put may, for independent schools. Thank you for your time, and God bless you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Ms. Harder, for your presentation this evening. We'll now move on to questions. Ms. Allan : Thank you so much, Jasmine, for your presentation, and thank you. Many people have shared their personal stories over the last few evenings with us about being bullied, and I know that you shared yours with us this evening, and I thank you for that. And it certainly doesn't make anybody happy when these kinds of situations occur.

I did like the fact, though, that one of the things that you talked about in your presentation is how important it is for people to reach out for help, and I wish more people would do that. Once again, thank you so much for being with us this evening and thank you so much for your presentation. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Jasmine, thanks for coming tonight and thanks for sharing your story. You shared about being the victim of bullying and about being the subject of untrue information t hat's being distributed.

I can only imagine how troubling that is, and for you to come and share your story is meaningful to all of us here around the table this evening. I know that you made a point of noting in your remarks this evening that the bill s tops short of requiring schools to notify parents of when bullying had taken place, either in the case that a child was the perpetrator of bullying or was the victim of bullying. Why do you think that is an important feature for a piece of legislation of this kind? Ms. Harder: To have the parents involved, is what you're saying? Mr.

Cameron Friesen: Yes, that's right, to have parents involved and communicated with by school authorities, teachers and administrators. Ms. Harder: Because I think that is whe re the root of it is. I think it's with parents and I think parents are not doing their job nowadays. I think they are allowing schools and allowing churches and allowing everyone else to run their kids' lives and teach them, and that's not their responsibility. It's the parents' responsibility. Mr. Cameron Friesen: So just one other question then: So what does it suggest to you that this legislation doesn't contain such a provision ?

What does it suggest to you? Ms. Harder: What do I suggest in its place–sorry? Mr. Cameron Friesen: I'm just saying, what does it suggest to you that the bill then doesn't contain what you see as an important feature of connecting parents to the school? Why would the legislation appear in that w ay, because it's a question I've wondered myself. Ms. Harder: I guess that's just how I've read it and that's how I understand it. And it just doesn't seem like they go to the parents first. It seems like the government, in a whole, wants to take our kids and fill them with the world, is what they want to do. Mr.

Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks again for your time this evening. Now I'll call on Michelle Gawronsky, president , MGEU.

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 161 Ms. Gawronsky, do you have a written materials for distribution? Ms. Michelle Gawronsky (Manitoba Government and General Employees' Union): Yes, I do. Mr. Chairperson: I'll ask the staff to help you distribute those. Can I just first double -check that I have the pronunciation of your name correctly? Ms. Gawronsky: Gawronsky. Mr. Chairperson: Gawronsky. Thank you very much. And I'm just going to ask if you have somebody that you'd like to have at the podium with you, you do need to ask leave of committee to do that if you'd like do that. Ms.

Gawronsky: I ap ologize for that. She's not speaking. I'm speaking, but she was just going stand with me on it. Is–do I have permission? Mr. Chairperson: Okay. Is there leave of the committee to allow the presenter to have somebody at the podium? [Agreed] Thank you ver y much. You may proceed when you're ready. Ms. Gawronsky: Thank you very, very much for your indulgence. Good evening, and my name is Michelle Gawronsky and I am the president of the Manitoba Government and General Employees' Union.

I'm here today with Chantal Théroux, an MGEU member and the gay, lesbian, bi, transgender and two- spirited representative on our Equality & Human Rights Committee. I'll be speaking on the entire committee's behalf, and I want to express my appreciation for the opportunity. When I asked the committee members for their input into my remarks tonight, one shared her own story. She said she was bullied for 11 years–or pretty much her entire public school life –despite appealing to teachers for help. She said, and I quote: As a teenager, I wondered whether anyone would notice if I wasn't alive anymore.

If I died today, would anyone care? Today she credits the love of a parent for saving her from becoming another tragic statistic. Today she has become an activist on our committee to speak up for those like her who have found themselves excluded and bullied for simply being themselves. At the MGEU we don't represent the teachers and we don't represent students, for that matter. But we do represent close to 40,000 working Manitobans and we know bullying is a major issue in our workplaces as well as our schools. We all have to make a living. We all have to go to school.

We must go to work or go to school in an environment not necessarily of our own choosing, but go we must. And that me ans each and every one of us deserves to be treated fairly no matter what our race, gender, sexual orientation–fair treatment to be viewed as a valuable human being, not matter who you are. It’s not too much to ask; it's not too much to expect, yet unfortunately this kind of fairness must be hard won. We must plan for it, fight for it and believe in it, even in 2013. This is where unions and legislation like Bill 18 have a role to play, and that's why we're here. We support Bill 18.

Over three decades, the MGEU's Equality & Human Rights Committee has been actively promoting social inclusion in the workplace and in our communities. The UN department of economic and social development has declared that social inclusion follow –fosters stable and safe societies that are, quote, based on respect for the dignity of each individual, diversity, 'plurism', tolerance, non-discrimination, non-violence, equality of opportunity, solidarity, security and the participation of all people including disadvantaged and vulnerable groups and persons.

We are lucky enough to live and work in a province that is not terribly far from this ideal. Our children are lucky enough to take many of these things for granted, but our societal institutions, our governments, our schools, our social agencies, our places of worship, our unions, must never take them for granted.

A socially inclusive society is a process that our leaders must build step by step, always moving forward and never really stopping. * (19:50) Today we know for a fact t hat a student whose sexual orientation or gender identity deviates from the norm is far more likely to be bullied by their peers in school. We know this social exclusion can have dire consequences for that student: a sense of entrapment, low self -worth, de pression and, ultimately, the suicides that have become too common on the nightly news. We know these things, so what is to be done?

162 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 I'm here today to support this government's effort to take that next step. The creation of gay-straight alliances in our schools is a small thing that could have a big impact. At the very least, it will allow us to continue our journey towards being a truly socially inclusive province. At the very least, it will send a message to bullied kids, like our committee member once was, who are waiting for the adults in their life to take the lead and set the example. I applaud our leaders' stand and their decision to not just acknowledge the problem, but to act.

And on a personal note–and I wrote this as I was here tonight –my gran dfather was a minister and he lived his life, raised his children, who raised their children, and I have raised my children and have full confidence that my children are now raising their children with love and acceptance of everyone. And I realized tonight how fortunate I was to be raised in love and not judgment. Bill 18 needs to be passed, please. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Ms. Gawronsky, for your presentation this evening. We'll now move to questions. Ms.

Allan: Well, thank you very much, Michelle, for your presentation this evening, and thank you, Chantal so much for being with us this evening and for the work that you are doing as a representative in equality in human rights committee, and the work that you are doing to build a more inclusive societ y is very, very important. Thank you for the comments that you have made in your presentation this evening. We appreciate them. Thank you. Mr. Cameron Friesen: Michelle, thank you for coming, and, Chantal, thank you for standing here tonight in solidarity and in expressing your viewpoint on this issue.

I did want to just make mention of one thing. I know that you shared about, you know, Chantal's story, and at one point you mention that she was bullied for years, the entire public school life, despite appealing to teachers for help, and it brought me back to the question I asked of the previous presenter. And I thought about the fact that this bill doesn't contain a necessity for schools to be in contact with parents and families when bullying acts are deemed to have occurred. Do you feel like such a condition or provision would strengthen the bill?

I don't know if it could've made a difference in this case, but do you feel like it could strengthen the bill to make sure that that strong communication is taking place between school and home? Ms. Gawronsky: I believe that there are rules and regulations in –within the school systems now that when they see anything going on they have an obligation to contact parents already. So the bill is definitely here to stop bullying, and it's a responsibility, then, that the schools will definitely make open that they can have alliance clubs within. Mr.

Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thanks once again for your time this evening. Now call on Michael Sitko, p rivate citizen. Mr. Sitko, do you have written materials for distribution? Mr. Michael Sitko (Private Citizen) : No, Sir, I do not. Mr. Chairperson: You may proceed when ready. Mr. Sitko: Honourable Minister and members of the subcommittee, for thousands of years, education has been around, teaching and training one generation to the next in the necessary skills required to function with the workforces of the day.

There have been two very distinct and clear boundaries that have existed within education and family. Madam Vice-Chairperson in the Chair Schooling was about reading, writing and arithmetic. Values, morals, religion, cultural etiquette were and always have been the responsibility of the family to teach and to train their children in. Today those lines are becoming more and more blurred. As parents abdicate their responsibility to chase after the almighty dollar, more and more of the responsibility for social, moral, ethical and cultural training is being foisted upon our school systems. This is not right.

In doing so, the quality of education is becoming more and more diminished in our nation's schools with more and more being expected of our teachers and school systems that is not their responsibility nor their rightful place to be doing. It is n either the responsibility nor the place of our government or education system to teach and train our children on issues outside the arena of reading, writing and arithmetic . Social, moral, ethical and cultural training are the responsibility of each family and community and culture group.

One of the things that Canadians are known for is for our cultural diversity and not being a group of people who are a melting-pot type of society. It is not the place nor the right of government or the education system w hich they represent to dictate to

September 5, 2013 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 163 the people what types of culture, social, moral or ethical beliefs should be held by the children of our families. This is the right and responsibility of each individual family. Have we not learned anything from the atrocities and the horrors of those who suffered not so many years ago from the residential schools where entire generations were taken away from loving homes and families, stripped of their cultural–of their culture and re -educated in the ways which one group of people in society felt was correct and right?

We need only to look to the damage caused by the foolishness of those decisions to see that education has a very clear and defined role: to educate on things that we all hold in common and agree on, such as reading, writing and arithmetic.

When the government steps in and decides to begin to make decisions that begin to strip our youngest Canadians of their most basic rights, the right to social, moral, ethical and religious training according to their cul tural background and beliefs, assuming the responsibility to re -educate our children to state-run and sponsored belief, we run the risk of losing the most valuable asset that we possess as Canadians, and that's the distinctions of who each of us is as a people group. That's what makes Canada great.

When the government steps in and decides to take away what it means to be Canadian from the Canadian people, it's time for the people to step in and take away the government's responsibility to govern. The gover nment carries a responsibility to protect Canadians and the Canadian way of life and not promote and champion the way of life of one group of Canadians over others which this – elements of this bill clearly does. We have seen what happened when we have done this in the past.

We need only look to our First Nations brothers and sisters to see the damage that has been done to them as a society for which we are all still paying both physically and emotionally. It's time for parents to get back to parenting, the schools to get back to educating and each to strive towards excellence in their respective roles. One of the beautiful things about Canada is that we are a multicultural society, a society that represents many different nationalities, faiths and cultures . Our diversity is one of the greatest strengths we have of being Canadian.

Let's get back to the basics that we can all agree on–reading, writing and arithmetic–and leave the parenting to parents. Let's see to it that Canada, that we all know and love, and the beauty of her multicultural heritage is preserved for many generations to come. It's time for the government to get out of Canadian families and to focus on its purest intention which is to govern the framework and structure of Canadian society allow ing all cultures, faiths and societies to enjoy the freedom of being a Canadian. I want to read to you an excerpt from the Winnipeg Free Press from earlier this year. The

article was on the bullying bill, Bill 18; specifically,

section 1.2(1) defines bull ying as behaviour that " 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." This definition is so encompassing that if students –if a student inadvertently hurt another student's feelings with a single offhanded quip, they could be charged with bullying.

Compare this with North Dakota's law that describes bullying as conduct which is so severe, pervasive or objectivel y offensive that it substantially interferes with a student's educational opportunities or benefits and places a student in actual reasonable fear of harm to the student's person or property. North Dakota's definition makes it clear that bullying is harassment and not offhanded comments. By contrast, Manitoba's Bill 18 places hurtful but inadvertent comments on the same level as severe physical and verbal abuse.

This confusion makes it more difficult for school administrators to use common sense and to ens ure that any disciplinary measures are appropriate and effective. Some forms of student interaction are more damaging than others, and the law must reflect these differences. Mr. Chairperson in the Chair The other problem with this bill is that it threatens religious freedom.

Specifically, Bill 18 requires all schools, including independent faith-based schools, to facilitate student groups that may undermine the school's religious values, those values which are protected and enshrined in our Constitution. * (20:00) In its enthusiasm to stamp out bullying, the Manitoba government appears prepared to run roughshod over the right of private religious schools to uphold their faith. I want to also point out, on

164 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA September 5, 2013 May 5th of 2012, there was an

article in the CTV News that was covered of a Christian student suspended multiple times from their school for wearing a T-shirt that simply said nothing more than life is wasted without Jesus. This type of bullying is already occurring, as is the type of bullying that's being subjected to by the lesbian and gay community. Yes, they are being bullied. So are all the other students. So is everyone else. This happens on a regular basis and happens to all of us, quite frankly. Creating legislation that protects one group of people over another is just morally wrong.

It's absolutely absurd, and to think that we could stand here tonight and the other nights that we've been here and the nights that you will continue to be here and listen to members of your provincial community coming in here who are not part of a union or part of a Manitoba teachers society or part of one of these other groups which are all interconnected together, and hearing all of the community members who are speaking against the way this bill is written and then listening to highly educated intelligent people in official positions in our province who, when are confronted with the very real and obvious issues that are presented with this bill, for them to say, well, I can't see any problem with it.

I mean, it 's very obvious that there's an agenda. It concerns me that the minister has publicly made comments on the news that despite what transpires at these committee hearings, that she intends to continue to pass this legislation unamended. It concerns me that men like Ben Levin, who was just charged with a –counts of child pornography–and the like have been intimately involved in the development of curriculum within this province, as well as Ontario's province, specifically in the areas of the LGBT. It concerns me that this bill is so obviously an agenda bill.

It continues to amaze me that so many learned people from official positions in the MTS, Ministry of Education, superintendents and CUPE members seem to miss the obvious common sense observations made by m any of us average citizens. One can only assume that they are intentionally ignoring the issues that exist within this bill. One last question: What other bill would receive this much opposition, and it not be obviously seen by members of this Legislature as political suicide if it was to continue to be pursued if it was not such an, obviously, an agenda being pushed through?

There is nothing covered up that will not be exposed, nothing secret that will not be made known. Therefore, what you have said in darkness, will be heard in the daylight, and what you have whispered in private rooms, will be shouted from

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	40-2-hr4
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	40th 2nd hansardpdf hr4.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	e90a28e1f2cd5cbfe7533da353185e905ee10ded

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