Tuesday, May 10, 2022




‘Alarming’ Roe v. Wade draft ruling shows Canada must protect abortion access: minister

Aya Al-Hakim - Yesterday 
Global News

The U.S. Supreme Court draft ruling on overturning the right to abortion in Roe v. Wade demonstrates why Canada must continue to "stand up" to protect access to abortion, says one cabinet minister.

In an interview with The West Block guest host Eric Sorensen, Minister of Families, Children and Social Development Karina Gould said news that the U.S. Supreme Court appears set to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling is "very alarming" and drives home the need to protect access in Canada.

"We're not immune to the forces that want to limit or restrict a woman's right to access abortion services in Canada," said Gould. "We have to, first of all, stand up and protect it."

Read more:

However, she did not provide any specifics when pressed on what she's going to do next to address the fact that abortion isn't accessible everywhere in Canada.

A leaked initial majority draft opinion first reported on May 2 by Politico suggests the court has voted to overturn the 1973 decision that established a constitutional right to abortion in the U.S. The resulting outcry has seen Canadian leaders weighing in to advocate for abortion access, while facing questions about continued challenges facing access to abortion domestically.

Ontario, Canada's most populated province, has the most abortion clinics in the country with 23, according to the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada.

Quebec has 12, Alberta and Manitoba have three, British Columbia has eight, New Brunswick and Saskatchewan have five and the other provinces and territories have four or less abortion clinics.


"We need to be doing everything we can to ensure that if someone needs access to sexual and reproductive health services, it is available to them wherever they live in this country," Gould said.


Gould explained that most of the power to improve abortion access in Canada lies with provinces through their authority on health care.

"That's why we're using the tools available at the federal levels of the Canada Health Act," she said.

One of these tools was used in 2021 when the federal government withheld health transfers to New Brunswick in relation to events at Clinic 554 in Fredericton.

The Blaine Higgs government was criticized for refusing to pay for abortion services offered at Clinic 554, forcing it to scale back its operations.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said at the time that New Brunswick is not getting its full health funding because it continues “to make it difficult for women to access the full range of reproductive services."

Gould said the tools that the federal government has used don't happen in a vacuum.

"They happen after conversations between the federal and provincial government, between the ministers. Those conversations are absolutely ongoing," said Gould.

"And the message that we sent from the federal government is that the provinces and territories have a responsibility to uphold the Charter rights of their citizens when it comes to access to reproductive and sexual health services. And certainly, we will continue to press that and to work with them."
CANADA
$45M sexual, reproductive health fund not yet released a year later: advocates



The Canadian Press


OTTAWA — A year after the federal government announced a $45-million fund for organizations making sexual and reproductive information and services more available, advocates say none of the money has been released.

Frederique Chabot, director of health promotion at Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights, said her organization applied to the fund. Her group promotes reproductive and sexual rights and provides Canadians with direct support and referrals.

"In terms of the actual announcements, (they have) not been made yet in terms of who will get the funding," said Chabot.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government sought to assure Canadians last week that it would protect access to a safe and legal abortion, following the unprecedented leak of a U.S. Supreme Court draft decision that would overturn that right south of the border.

But the turmoil in the United States has heaped new scrutiny on the Trudeau government’s promises on abortion and the speed at which it is implementing them.

The government announced the fund, to be spread out over three years starting in 2021-22, in last year’s budget. Health Canada was tasked with administering the fund to community-based organizations focused on reproductive and sexual health.

Those organizations spread public awareness, create inclusive training for sexual and reproductive health-care providers and help people who have travel long distances to access abortion care.

By the start of 2022, $16 million from the fund was projected to be spent, according to last year’s budget.

A spokesperson for Health Canada said it has signed nine contribution agreements worth $15.2 million, but did not confirm whether any funds had been released.

"Funding will be provided in accordance with the terms of the agreements," said Charlaine Sleiman.

She said the projects include two related to abortion access, five for LGBTQ communities and two for youth. Two have elements focusing on Indigenous Peoples, and per capita funding of $9.7 million will be given to support Quebec-based organizations, she added.

Joyce Arthur, executive director of Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, said she has heard advocates in the field reporting delays in releasing the funds.

“The money is kind of waiting there, and paperwork or contracts should be signed or something like that. There's a holdup and it's frustrating,” said Arthur, whose organization has not applied for the funding.

Jill Doctoroff, executive director of the National Abortion Federation of Canada, said her organization submitted a proposal and is waiting to hear back.

Chabot of Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights said it is worth celebrating the government for making “unprecedented” investments in sexual and reproductive health, and it’s understandable that it would take some time to set up the fund.

“They had to build that program from the ground up. Who's going to be the grant officers? How is this money going to be disbursed? How are we going to track it?” Chabot said.

"But then let's make sure that this investment doesn't go to waste and this needs to be a permanent fixture of Health Canada moving forward."

Doctoroff said three years of funding is not sufficient.

"Access issues aren't going to be addressed in a three-year period. You need to have ongoing dedicated funding for people who need to access abortion," she said.

Arthur said there are concerns that the three years could come to an end before Health Canada gets around to disbursing some of the money.

Once the funding dries up, organizations that spent those years building capacity and scaling up their services would have to scale them right back, likely undoing whatever progress was made, she said.

Those who access the services would also feel these effects, she added.

"They can come to rely on these programs, and could even in some cases be life-saving for them. And then it's like having the rug pulled out from under them," Arthur said.

Action Canada hopes to see the one-off investment renewed alongside longer-term structural changes to already overstretched health-care systems across the country.

Specifically, Chabot said she hopes to see a portion of investments into the health-care system be dedicated to sexual and reproductive health, adding it has been siloed and neglected for a long time.

"We are seeing really big problems across the country, despite the fact that it's a core aspect of people's health, and it's not treated as such," Chabot said.

Chabot and Arthur said they would like to see a federal health transfer that would have strings attached, such as ensuring provinces improve access to sexual and reproductive health care in their jurisdictions.

The government said it would work with provinces and territories to ensure "equitable and appropriate access" to a full range of reproductive and sexual health services in any upcoming Canada Health Transfer funding discussions, according to last year's budget.

During the 2021 election, the Liberals promised to introduce regulations under the Canada Health Act to ensure abortion services were clearly medically necessary and publicly funded.

Trudeau said last week he has directed Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos and Status of Women Minister Marci Ien "to look at the legal framework'" around abortion to ensure women's rights are protected under his government and those in the future.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 8, 2022.

———

This story was produced with the financial assistance of the Meta and Canadian Press News Fellowship.

Erika Ibrahim, The Canadian Press
BC’s Abortion Problem Is Access, Not Laws

The Canadian Press


News that the Supreme Court of the United States may overturn its landmark abortion decisions and clear a path for state legislatures to ban and criminalize abortion has brought renewed attention to the need for increased access to reproductive health care in British Columbia.

In 1973, Roe v. Wade established a constitutional right to an abortion, which the court ruled was protected under the 14th amendment’s right to privacy. Most of Roe was upheld in the subsequent 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

In the interim years, many states including Texas have attempted or passed legislation limiting abortion through term limits as low as six weeks, parental or spousal consent requirements, and imposing costly and cumbersome standards for medical facilities offering abortion care.

And at least 13 states have “trigger” laws in place that would automatically ban all first and second trimester abortions if Roe is overturned. There has been a flurry of anti-abortion legislation even in the days since the news of the court’s intention broke, with state legislators trusting the Supreme Court to uphold increasingly restrictive abortion laws.

A leaked draft opinion from Justice Samuel Alito Jr., obtained by Politico, suggests a majority of the court’s nine justices have decided to overturn Roe in a pending case.

On Tuesday, B.C. Finance Minister Selina Robinson said any clawback of abortion access in the province would be “over my dead body.” That same day, the federal minister of families, Karina Gould, said American people will be able to get abortions in Canada.

But doctors and advocates in B.C. say the province still lacks many services and supports to make universal access to abortion and reproductive health care a reality.

And Canada has its own violations of reproductive freedom and racism to grapple with, such as the historical and ongoing forced sterilization of Indigenous and Black women.

“What we’ve seen in the United States has made us all sit up in our seats,” said Angela Marie MacDougall, executive director for the non-profit Battered Women’s Support Services.

“But we need to understand that our access to abortion care is still stratified along gender, race and class lines in B.C.”

A 1988 Supreme Court of Canada decision, R v. Morgentaler, struck down an existing federal abortion ban and decriminalized abortion. There is no constitutional right to an abortion, as Roe established in the United States.

Attempts by some federal and provincial governments to limit abortion rights have been unsuccessful. Abortion is currently treated like any other medical procedure, decided between the patient and their health-care provider.

However, access to abortion varies greatly depending someone’s geographic location, financial means, race and immigration status.

In B.C., all five surgical abortion sites, which provide about one third of abortions, are located in the south of the province: one in Victoria, three in Vancouver and one in Kelowna. This means access for people in northern, rural and remote areas is particularly difficult.

“B.C. has some of the most liberal abortion provisions in Canada,” said Dr. Ruth Habte, a gynecological resident physician in Vancouver. “But there is still quite the disparity in access.”

In B.C., the abortion pill is available at no cost for people less than nine or ten weeks along. A doctor needs to prescribe it, which they can do virtually, and then the patient can pick it up at any pharmacy.

Virtual options became much more available during the pandemic, with the aim of making medical abortions easier to access, said Dr. Heather Smith. But, she added, many people may not know they are pregnant until after ten weeks.

Issues of stigma and shame around abortion also persist, particularly in small communities where a patient knows their doctor might not be willing to prescribe the pill.

Smith, based in Prince George, is the only family doctor between Williams Lake to the south, Dawson Creek to the north, the Pacific coast to the west and the Albertan border to the east

Anyone past 16 weeks in the North needs to travel south to Vancouver or Victoria for care. Evidence shows the later someone receives an abortion, the more likely it was a wanted pregnancy that needed to be terminated for their own health.

That puts intense financial and emotional strain on people already navigating a stigmatized process, Smith said. There is some support for travel costs available for Indigenous people with federal status or those who receive employment or disability government assistance, but not for most.

Poor, Indigenous, racialized people and single parents have the hardest time finding the money, taking time off work and arranging child care for a surgical abortion, which can see people spending three days in hospital if they are closer to term.

“Who watches your kids if you’re a single mom with no family nearby?” asked Smith.

These barriers are magnified for migrants and people with precarious or undocumented immigration status, said Karina Villada, a community connector at the non-profit Watari Counselling and Support Services in Vancouver. “It’s like, are they paying for the abortion, or paying the rent, or paying for the groceries?” she said.

Language barriers make even finding and booking appointments difficult, and MSP coverage doesn’t begin for documented people until 90 days after they arrive in B.C. The waiting period, which disproportionately harms migrants, means many people pay out of pocket or wait to terminate until they are further along.

Villada has driven as far as Chilliwack to bring people to their appointments in Vancouver. Many come from places where abortion is criminalized, magnifying the stigma and shame they may feel in their decision. “They feel alone, and they feel invisible,” Villada said.

A majority of people who get abortions already have children, and pregnancy is a risk factor for people experiencing gender-based or intimate partner violence, MacDougall added.

Habte, Smith and MacDougall all want to see the province fulfil its promise to make all forms of prescription contraception free under PharmaCare. The current NDP government campaigned on the promise in 2020, but it hasn’t been in either of its last budgets.

“I see the downstream effects of people not having access to contraception every day when I go to work,” said Habte, noting the distress unwanted pregnancies can cause.

When asked by The Tyee on Wednesday, Health Minister Adrian Dix said the province would make good on its promise but did not say when.

“We’re committed to it and we’re going to do it,” he said.

Smith also noted that addressing the growing family doctor shortage will ensure more people have timely access to reproductive health care with a physician they trust and who is trained to offer care like she does.

Habte encouraged concerned British Columbians to channel their frustration and fear into advocacy to their MLAs and other elected officials for better contraception and abortion access here in B.C. “There are tangible things we can do,” she said.

Abortion and contraception are significant aspects of reproductive rights, MacDougall said, but they need to be looked at in a “broader” framework of reproductive justice that includes anti-racism and decolonial practices.

Much of what is known about reproductive health is built on experiments that exploited and maimed enslaved Black women, she added. Black women have long been at the forefront of reproductive justice advocacy.

“The core of reproductive justice is really a deeper understanding of the human rights to control our sexuality, our gender, our work, and our reproduction,” said MacDougall.

“And it can only be achieved when all women and girls have complete economic, social and political power and resources to make healthy decisions about our bodies, our families, our communities, in all areas of our lives.”

Moira Wyton, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, The Tyee
Margaret Atwood Stands Against ‘Enforced Childbirth’ In Abortion Rights Op-Ed





Corey Atad - Yesterday 
ET Canada

© Photo: Jeremy Chan/Getty Images

The author of "The Handmaid's Tale" is standing up for choice.

Over the weekend, Canadian novelist Margaret Atwood penned an op-ed for the Guardian, responding to the leaked draft opinion indicating the U.S. Supreme Court may overturn Roe v. Wade.

The famous and controversial 1973 ruling enshrined a federal right to abortion access in America.

"Nobody likes abortion, even when safe and legal. It’s not what any woman would choose for a happy time on Saturday night," Atwood began. "But nobody likes women bleeding to death on the bathroom floor from illegal abortions either. What to do?"


Comparing the prospect of a ban on abortion to slavery, Atwood explained, "Women who cannot make their own decisions about whether or not to have babies are enslaved because the state claims ownership of their bodies and the right to dictate the use to which their bodies must be put."

"If the state is mandating enforced childbirth, why should it not pay for prenatal care, for the birth itself, for postnatal care, and – for babies who are not sold off to richer families – for the cost of bringing up the child?" she continued. "And if the state is very fond of babies, why not honour the women who have the most babies by respecting them and lifting them out of poverty? If women are providing a needed service to the state – albeit against their wills – surely they should be paid for their labour."

Atwood went on to discuss the importance of choice on the issue of abortion.

"We say that women 'give birth.' And mothers who have chosen to be mothers do give birth, and feel it as a gift. But if they have not chosen, birth is not a gift they give; it is an extortion from them against their wills," she wrote.

"No one is forcing women to have abortions. No one either should force them to undergo childbirth," Atwood added. "Enforce childbirth if you wish but at least call that enforcing by what it is. It is slavery: the claim to own and control another’s body, and to profit by that claim."

‘Enforced childbirth is slavery’: Margaret Atwood on the right to abortion

The US supreme court draft ruling on abortion is an assault on fundamental individual freedoms. The Handmaid’s Tale author reflects on the issues at stake

What kind of country do you want to live in?’ … Margaret Atwood. 
Photograph: Derek Shapton/The Guardian

Sat 7 May 2022 

Nobody likes abortion, even when safe and legal. It’s not what any woman would choose for a happy time on Saturday night. But nobody likes women bleeding to death on the bathroom floor from illegal abortions either. What to do?

Perhaps a different way of approaching the question would be to ask: What kind of country do you want to live in? One in which every individual is free to make decisions concerning his or her health and body, or one in which half the population is free and the other half is enslaved?

Women who cannot make their own decisions about whether or not to have babies are enslaved because the state claims ownership of their bodies and the right to dictate the use to which their bodies must be put. The only similar circumstance for men is conscription into an army. In both cases there is risk to the individual’s life, but an army conscript is at least provided with food, clothing, and lodging. Even criminals in prisons have a right to those things. If the state is mandating enforced childbirth, why should it not pay for prenatal care, for the birth itself, for postnatal care, and – for babies who are not sold off to richer families – for the cost of bringing up the child?

And if the state is very fond of babies, why not honour the women who have the most babies by respecting them and lifting them out of poverty? If women are providing a needed service to the state – albeit against their wills – surely they should be paid for their labour. If the goal is more babies, I am sure many women would oblige if properly recompensed. Otherwise, they are inclined to follow the natural law: placental mammals will abort in the face of resource scarcity.

Demonstrators protest against the draft abortion ruling outside the US supreme court in Washington. Photograph: Allison Bailey/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock

But I doubt that the state is willing to go so far as to provide the needed resources. Instead, it just wants to reinforce the usual cheap trick: force women to have babies, and then make them pay. And pay. And pay. As I said, slavery.

If one chooses to have a baby, that is of course a different matter. The baby is a gift, given by life itself. But to be a gift a thing must be freely given and freely received. A gift can also be rejected. A gift that cannot be rejected is not a gift, but a symptom of tyranny.

We say that women “give birth”. And mothers who have chosen to be mothers do give birth, and feel it as a gift. But if they have not chosen, birth is not a gift they give; it is an extortion from them against their wills.

No one is forcing women to have abortions. No one either should force them to undergo childbirth. Enforce childbirth if you wish but at least call that enforcing by what it is. It is slavery: the claim to own and control another’s body, and to profit by that claim.

 This is an edited extract from Burning Questions by Margaret Atwood, published by Chatto & Windus.


Former PC Alberta justice minister loses bid to stay contempt of court decision

EDMONTON — A former Alberta justice minister has failed to persuade a judge to set aside a ruling that found him in contempt of court for witness intimidation.


© Provided by The Canadian Press

Jonathan Denis failed to make a case for why the lower-court ruling should be stayed, Alberta Appeal Court Justice Ritu Khullar said Monday.

Khullar noted that Denis has already filed a challenge of the contempt decision and an appeal hearing remains the best place to hash that out.

"This court cannot generally stay an actual decision, such as a finding of contempt," Khullar wrote in her decision.

"Whether that finding stands or not will be determined in the appeal proper."

Denis had also asked the judge to delay penalties and costs he could face for contempt until after the appeal is heard. He argued that he is facing harm to his reputation and that three of his firm's lawyers and one client have left over the affair.

He said there is a concern that the plaintiff, Dr. Anny Sauvageau, may not have the funds to compensate him if he wins the appeal.

Khullar, however, refused to grant that request.

She said Denis failed to persuade her that delaying a hearing into penalties and costs would somehow cause permanent damage to his law firm.

"Inconvenience and thrown-away costs do not amount to irreparable harm in this case," wrote Khullar.

Denis was found in contempt on April 13 after his law firm wrote a letter threatening to sue Sauvageau, Alberta's former chief medical examiner, for defamation while she was giving testimony in her wrongful dismissal lawsuit against the province.

Sauvageau is suing the government for lost wages and benefits after her contract was not renewed in 2014.


She alleges she was forced out of the job as punishment after raising concerns over what she saw as political interference in cases and over billing on body pickups. The government has said she was acting outside the scope of her job and making questionable decisions.

Denis is not a defendant in the lawsuit but was justice minister at the time of the allegations.

The trial judge who found Denis in contempt, Court of Queen's Bench Justice Doreen Sulyma, said the threatening letter to Sauvageau made her fearful of testifying plainly and honestly, and prompted another witness to beg off testifying altogether.

Last week, Denis's lawyer, Brendan Miller, argued for the stay. He said, among other things, Sulyma should not have made such a consequential decision as contempt of court without allowing Denis to first put up evidence and cross-examine witnesses in his defence.

Khullar agreed. She said while Sulyma was working to keep the two-month Sauvaugeau trial on schedule and avoid a mistrial, "the proper procedure to be followed in addressing the concerns raised by the (defamation threat) letter does raise a serious issue to be tried (on appeal)."

Miller responded to Khullar's decision in a short statement: "We are pleased that the Court of Appeal found that there is a serious issue to be tried regarding our position that the proper procedure was not followed at the lower court.

"This matter is over one letter sent from one lawyer to another, and we believe there could have been an entirely different result had the proper procedure been followed."

This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 9, 2022.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Denis

Jonathan Brian Denis, ECA QC (born September 22, 1975) is a Canadian politician and lawyer. On May 9, 2012, he was named Solicitor General, Attorney General, and Minister of Justice for the province of Alberta. He represented the constituency of Calgary-Acadia (formerly Calgary-Egmont) as a

 ...

See more

Federal COVID-19 supports expire today as Ottawa says 'extraordinary' measures no longer needed

Nick Boisvert - Saturday, May 7,2022

Canada's last remaining COVID-19 emergency benefits expire today and the federal government says it has no plans to renew its unprecedented support programs, created in response to the pandemic.


© Alyse Stuart
A worker stands in a plant processing crabs in Badgers Quay, N.L. A union representative for fishing industry workers says pandemic benefits are still needed in the sector.

Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland's office says Canada's surging job growth and record-low unemployment rate is evidence that ongoing pandemic support will not be needed beyond May 7.

"From the onset of the pandemic, our relentless focus was on jobs — on keeping Canadians employed and on keeping their employers afloat," Freeland's press secretary Adrienne Vaupshas said in an email.

"With our economy in this position, the time for extraordinary COVID support is now over," Vaupshas added, echoing a declaration made by Freeland during her introduction of the 2022 budget in April.

Public health officials are also saying they're cautiously optimistic about signs that transmission levels are on the decline.

During a Friday news conference, Chief Public Health Officer Dr. Theresa Tam said Canada is experiencing "decreasing transmission in many areas." Some indicators, such as wastewater virus levels, indicate that the Omicron wave is "showing signs of a potential plateau," Tam added.

The expiration of benefits means workers will no longer be paid by the government should they need to self-isolate due to a positive COVID test, or if they have to leave work to care for a child due to sickness or pandemic-related school closures.

A program for workers forced off the job due to local lockdowns also ends today.

Programs designed to support hard-hit businesses, such as one that subsidized a portion of employee wages, are also ending.

The following programs are among those expiring on May 7:
Canada Worker Lockdown Benefit
Canada Recovery Sickness Benefit
Canada Recovery Caregiving Benefit
Canada Recovery Hiring Program
Tourism and Hospitality Recovery Program
Hardest-Hit Business Recovery Program


Applications for these programs can be made retroactively and will continue to be accepted by the government after May 7. Those applying for workers' benefits have 60 days to submit their claims, while businesses have 180 days.

Workers still 'live and exist in a pandemic'

Alyse Stuart, a union representative for the Fish, Food and Allied Workers in Newfoundland and Labrador, said Ottawa's decision to end the benefits ignores the pandemic's continued disruption of Atlantic Canada's fishing sector.

She described a wave of infections running through processing plants that are just now ramping up for the busy summer season.

Most workers in these facilities don't have access to paid sick days, Stuart said, which is forcing them into a difficult choice between self-isolating and missing paycheques or going to work while sick.

"For us, it's kind of this perfect storm where these benefits are ending while we're just experiencing our own wave in these rural communities," Stuart told CBC News.

"For our members, and certainly for our rural communities, the time is still now for extraordinary measures because we continue to live and exist in a pandemic."
Small businesses struggling with debt


The Canadian Federation of Independent Business is also warning that the end of business-focused supports could make it hard for struggling businesses to get back on their feet.

"Whether the supports that end this weekend are still the right supports is probably a good debate that we can have," said Corinne Pohlmann, senior vice president of national affairs at CFIB.

She said the expiration of benefits today may be appropriate, but she called on Ottawa to consider further long-term support for businesses that have accumulated large amounts of debt during the pandemic.

The group specifically wants to see Ottawa forgive half of all debt acquired through the Canada Emergency Business Account program and to extend the repayment deadline by an extra year to December 31, 2023.

The average small business debt now stands at $140,000, according to CFIB figures, and businesses in sectors like the arts and hospitality are even deeper in the red.

"We need to still think about how we can help those hard-hit businesses that are struggling under debt that they had to accumulate through no fault of their own," Pohlmann said.
Indigenous women face higher rates of systemic discrimination, violence by RCMP, says report

A new report by a coalition of human rights advocates is calling on the federal government to establish an independent external review of Canada's national police force to address its treatment of women.

© Jackie Hong/CBC
A Yukon RCMP officer ties a red ribbon symbolizing missing and murdered Indigenous women to a staff outside the Kwanlin Dün Cultural Centre in Whitehorse on May 5.

Ka’nhehsí:io Deer -
Published May 9, 2022

The Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action (FAFIA) says its report finds there is "growing evidence of systemic discrimination and violence" against women by the national police force. According to the 56-page document, Indigenous women are disproportionately impacted.

"Indigenous women and girls have long been targets of sexualized violence and exploitation at the hands of state actors, including the police," said Pamela Palmater, a Mi'kmaw lawyer and chair in Indigenous governance at Toronto Metropolitan University, during a virtual news conference Monday.

Palmater researched and co-wrote the report with Sivangi Misra, Ashley Major, and Shelagh Day of FAFIA. The report was financially supported by the Department for Women and Gender Equality, the Government of Canada and is a part of the Implementing Women's International Human Rights Project.

The organization, which is made up of women's human rights advocacy organizations across Canada, compiled and analyzed news reports, public inquiries, and documents published in the last decade. The report says they show evidence of a pattern of discrimination, harassment, and assault against women by officers of the RCMP.

FAFIA is calling on the Canadian government to establish an independent external review of the RCMP to address how it treats women both as an employer and service provider.

In an emailed statement to CBC News, an RCMP spokesperson said the force is aware of the report.

"The RCMP is subject to review by a number of external review bodies," the statement continued.

"As we've demonstrated in the past on a variety of subjects, we welcome any examination that could improve our operations. While acknowledging there remains much to do, the RCMP has been active in implementing change."

The report was submitted to federal Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino and Women and Gender Equality and Youth Minister Marci Ien.

In an emailed statement, the minister of Public Safety wrote "There is absolutely no place for misogyny, harassment or violence within the RCMP or in Canadian society."

"For too long, there has been a culture within the RCMP that is permissive of systemic inequities and has led to misogyny, discrimination, harassment and workplace violence."

The statement said the ministry is implementing reforms by creating the Independent Centre for Harassment Resolution, strengthening oversight of the RCMP's Management Advisory Board and ensuring that the RCMP's workforce is more reflective of the diversity of the country.

The ministry of Women and Gender Equality and Youth has not yet responded to a request for comment.

Land defenders 'vilified'


Palmater said a culture of misogyny and racism in the RCMP was made evident by former Supreme Court Justice Michel Bastarache's 2020 findings in his report on the implementation of the Merlo-Davidson Settlement, on the sexual harassment of RCMP employees.

"If female RCMP officers are not safe from sexual assaults by male officers, it should be no surprise that marginalized Indigenous women and girls are not safe either," said Palmater.

The study also cites other reports, including the final report of the national inquiry into missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls, as evidence of the RCMP's failure to prevent violence against Indigenous women and girls, and failure to thoroughly investigate their disappearances and deaths.

It also says Indigenous land defenders, many of whom are women, are "vilified, surveilled, criminalized, and subjected to violence by the RCMP" by being arrested and forcibly removed from their territories.

"These acts and failures violate women's right to equality and non-discrimination," said Shelagh Day, the chair of FAFIA's human rights committee.

"Canada cannot have a credible national action plan on violence against women or a credible national action plan on missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls until the culture of misogyny and racism in the RCMP is rooted out."

"The systemic issues that this report raises, as well as the many instances, sadly of and horrifically of discrimination, are echoed in a number of institutions right now in this country, military, prisons, as well as within the police," said Sen. Kim Pate at the news conference.

"While there has been a lot of effort to try and address these issues, we see the very real need for the kinds of calls for accountability and oversight that FAFIA has brought forward."
Emails reveal how the RCMP changed its story about arresting journalists in Wet'suwet'en ra


The Canadian Press
Updated May 9, 2022:

 This article was updated to clarify that filmmaker Michael Toledano was restrained with handcuffs after being detained by RCMP on Nov. 19, 2021. He was not initially restrained with zip ties. But he told The Narwhal that police added zip ties to reinforce the restraints after a key broke off in the handcuffs.

  LONG READ

As police helicopters moved into unceded Wet’suwet’en territory and dropped off armed tactical officers accompanied by police dogs on Nov. 19, 2021, photojournalist Amber Bracken was reporting live updates.

She was inside a tiny house occupied by Indigenous land defenders and their allies.

Since December 2018, Bracken had taken on multiple assignments covering the unfolding conflict over Indigenous Rights and the 670-kilometre fracked gas Coastal GasLink pipeline proposed by Calgary-based energy giant TC Energy in British Columbia. The B.C. government has authorized construction of the pipeline without the consent of Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs but with support of elected chiefs from First Nations alongside the project’s route.

On this chilly day in November, Bracken captured images for The Narwhal and posted more than a dozen tweets detailing what was happening before someone cut off power and communications. Moments later, she and documentary filmmaker Michael Toledano would be arrested by the RCMP and restrained — Bracken restrained with zip ties and Toledano restrained with handcuffs — preventing them from being able to fully report on the major incident.

This was not the first time police in Canada arrested journalists covering Indigenous Rights issues in recent years. Journalists Karl Dockstader and Justin Brake were also arrested under similar circumstances in separate incidents.

Canadian courts have described this type of police response targeting journalists as an overreach, interfering with press freedoms and keeping the public in the dark about what really goes on during complex and dangerous police operations. They have also noted that interference with the press should especially be avoided when it relates to coverage regarding Indigenous Rights.

The RCMP has argued that it respects journalists and wants to set boundaries to ensure everyone is safe.

In the case of the November arrests, the RCMP initially alleged that Bracken and Toledano had breached a civil injunction that prohibits people from interfering with construction. One month later, Coastal GasLink said that it would no longer pursue charges against the two, but did not explain why.

Newly released emails obtained by The Narwhal provide fresh insight into how some of the highest ranking members of the RCMP viewed the work of journalists covering the conflict.

They also reveal stunning contradictions between what RCMP officers told their commissioner and members of the public versus what actually happened during the raid.

Braken and Toledano’s arrests drew international media attention and escalated an ongoing controversy over the RCMP’s efforts to restrict journalists from exercising their right to report from within injunction zones without risking arrest.

One day after the arrests, RCMP Chief Superintendent John Brewer sent off a 430-word email to RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki and other high-ranking federal police officials, offering his explanation for the arrests.

Brewer is the gold commander of a special British Columbia unit of the RCMP that works with fossil fuel and other natural resource companies, including TC Energy.

His email alleged that the journalists were activists and his unit, also known as the Community-Industry Response Group, or C-IRG, was about to produce the evidence.

“CIRG is preparing the package for court on Monday which will articulate the reasons for arrest and the background activities of these individuals which bring into question their impartiality and show they have been advocating and assisting the protesters,” Brewer wrote in his email.

Less than three minutes later, according to time stamps on the emails reviewed by The Narwhal, Eric Stubbs, an RCMP assistant commissioner forwarded Brewer’s message to Wayne Rideout, a senior provincial government official.

Stubbs publicly stated, in the wake of the arrests, that he was “willing to work with the media” and that the RCMP followed direction from the courts to not interfere with the work of journalists. But the language used in the emails and other evidence from the scene appear to a different story.

“Give this a read as it helps a bit on the journalist perspective and the approach taken,” Stubbs wrote in an email as he sent Brewer’s note to Rideout, the assistant deputy minister and director of police services for the B.C. Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General.

But the package of evidence that would supposedly show how journalists were supporting protesters never materialized.

To piece together the sequence of events, The Narwhal reviewed dozens of pages of records, released through provincial and federal access to information legislation, as well as more than an hour of video and audio recordings of the incident and dozens of affidavits filed with the B.C. Supreme Court by the RCMP last November.

Sworn affidavits signed on the same day as the emails from Brewer and Stubbs by another RCMP officer, Constable Benjamin Laurie, did not offer any claims or evidence that either Bracken or Toledano were assisting or advocating for protesters, nor did they mention any of the “background activities” of the journalists alleged by Brewer.

The affidavits instead suggested the journalists should face charges since they had not identified themselves or left when RCMP first knocked on the door of the tiny house to inform people inside they were breaching the Coastal GasLink injunction.

“I think it is a telling detail that the supposed ‘package’ that was being prepared for the court proceedings on Monday was, to the best of my knowledge, never tabled,” Brent Jolly, president of the Canadian Association of Journalists, told The Narwhal. “This fact should compel the public to think critically about all the facts presented in any case and urge the public to consider the source of any reports and any potential agendas they are attempting to advance.”

The affidavits also appeared to suggest the RCMP was well aware that Bracken and Toledano were covering unfolding events, noting police officers had tracked interactions in the region with both journalists over the years in an active criminal investigations database — PRIME-BC — even though neither journalist had committed any crime.

Bracken and Toledano were detained for days, along with more than a dozen land defenders, following the arrests. Their detainment delayed the publication of images and video footage showing how heavily armed police used a chainsaw and an axe to break down the door before pointing firearms at people inside the tiny house and arresting them.

“The idea that powerful people are maligning me behind my back is creepy,” Bracken said, when asked to comment on the contents of Brewer’s email.

“The idea that they can do this in secret, without needing to produce any evidence is a chilling comment on the state of press freedoms in Canada. I hold myself to the highest standard of ethical reporting and have not been given an opportunity to respond to these false allegations.”

Bracken has earned international acclaim for her work, which has been published in a range of publications, including The Guardian, the Toronto Star and The Globe and Mail. She recently earned international World Press Photo of the Year honours for an image she captured for The New York Times that shows a roadside commemoration of children who died at the Kamloops Indian Residential School.

Toledano’s 2019 short film, Invasion, which documents Wet’suwet’en resistance to the Coastal GasLink pipeline and the RCMP raids that year, was an official selection at Toronto’s Hot Docs Festival. He is currently working on a feature-length documentary, Yintah, for the CBC.

TC Energy publicly criticized the credibility of Bracken and Toledano, without offering any detailed evidence or explanation. In December, when the company announced it was not pursuing charges against the two journalists, it told CBC News it had “ongoing concerns with respect to the fairness and approach of these individuals.”

TC Energy declined to respond to a question from The Narwhal asking what it meant by ongoing concerns and did not address whether it had shared these views in its communications with Brewer.

The company is under pressure to complete the multibillion dollar pipeline, which has international ownership and financing, but is mired in significant cost overruns and delays that threaten its viability. It has also suffered significant losses in recent years after abandoning its Keystone XL and Energy East oil pipeline projects.

“Police simply don’t want the public to see what their ongoing seizure of Wet’suwet’en lands looks like,” Toledano said.

“Over three years of raids, police have arrested and detained journalists, removed journalists from the territory, set up media exclusion zones to entirely restrict access and even pointed a gun at multiple reporters.”

Brewer, Stubbs and other RCMP officials declined interview requests, choosing instead to respond to written questions from The Narwhal in a series of emails.

In one of those emails, The Narwhal typed up and sent a copy of Brewer’s Nov. 20 message to give them an opportunity to provide an explanation and full context.

But an RCMP spokesperson, Sergeant Chris Manseau, told The Narwhal that it would be “presumptuous” for its B.C. media relations staff and Brewer to comment on the email he sent, since they hadn’t seen the original, just The Narwhal's reiteration of it.

Manseau said that copying and pasting email contents is not the same as having the email itself, but he declined to elaborate on what additional details they would need to provide a comment about the remarks about the journalists, made in the email.

He also claimed that Brewer himself did not have a copy of his own email.

The email records obtained by The Narwhal also indicate that Brewer sent a copy of the email to himself.

The Narwhal asked the RCMP in a followup email if anyone had verified whether Commissioner Lucki and other high-ranking officers who received the email from Brewer in November had read it or could comment on it. The Narwhal also asked the RCMP whether the email was deleted.

The RCMP did not respond to these questions, explaining in a new email they had “provided everything we can with respect to this request.”

A free press is protected under Canada’s Constitution. Recent Canadian court rulings confirmed that civil injunctions restricting the movement of people or demonstrations in Canada do not apply to journalists who are covering these types of events — as long as the journalists are not interfering with the work of the police. If there are cases where police need to restrict access to journalists, the courts have said police need to minimize that action and avoid arresting journalists based on an officer's assumption that charges could later be dropped in court.

At that point, it’s too late, since the damage to press freedom would already be done, according to the recent rulings.

This standard was spelled out in a 2019 ruling by the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal regarding charges against journalist Justin Brake, who was reporting for The Independent, a publication based in the Atlantic province. Brake was covering opponents of a hydroelectric project at Muskrat Falls, including Innu and Inuit land defenders. The court noted in the ruling that it was “vital” to protect a free press, particularly for coverage of Indigenous land issues since Indigenous people have traditionally been underrepresented in Canadian media.

Last summer, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Douglas Thompson reinforced the standard by directing police to stop interfering with journalists without a valid reason. In his ruling regarding police action at old-growth logging protests, Thompson said there were “substantial and serious” examples of RCMP “interference with liberties of members of the public and members of the media.” He also said there were “unlawful actions” by the Mounties during those protests in the Fairy Creek watershed in Pacheedaht territory and in the neighbouring territory of Ditidaht First Nation. At this location, another private company — Teal Cedar Products Ltd. — has obtained an injunction against opponents seeking to disrupt its commercial activities on Vancouver Island.

At Fairy Creek, the RCMP and Canadian government officials used arguments that are similar to what the RCMP is now saying justifies its arrests of Bracken and Toledano — namely that the presence of the journalists as well as protesters claiming to be journalists was putting others in danger.

Justice Thompson noted the RCMP failed to produce credible evidence to support these claims at Fairy Creek. He also expressed his disappointment that the force submitted an inaccurate example of a journalist allegedly assisting protesters that was proven to be false, thanks to a recording captured by this journalist.

“It is fortunate that the journalist recorded the interaction with police that led to the allegation,” Thompson wrote in the ruling. “It is most unfortunate that the allegation was made.”

The injunction at Fairy Creek was later overturned, before being reinstated a few months later. However, neither ruling affected Thompson's findings regarding media access.

In his Nov. 20 email to Commissioner Lucki and other top RCMP management, Brewer wrote that his unit was following standards to identify journalists, as described in the Newfoundland and Labrador court ruling regarding Justin Brake.

Brewer also claimed, through an email sent to The Narwhal by an RCMP spokesperson, that he could say “with certainty” that “every police officer was briefed on the Brake decision prior to commencing enforcement.”

Audio recordings captured in the moments following Bracken’s arrest suggest otherwise.

One officer told Bracken: “If you are accredited media, we will deal with that. But everybody’s been arrested here for breach of that civil injunction. You had the option to leave and should have left. If you’re any credible media person, they would have left. I’ve dealt with hundreds, thousands of media people in my service, okay?”

Bracken later asked a second officer whether he knew about the case, to which he responded: “Am I aware of the ruling? No. Want to explain it to me?”

Bracken explained how Brake, whose first name she misstated as "Jason," not Justin, had followed a group of land defenders protesting the hydroelectric project. She told The Narwhal she may have misstated Brake's first name due to the stress of being arrested.

But she went on to explain to the officer how the court ruled that journalists could be present in such circumstances and not face arrest as long as they were not directly participating.

A third officer then appeared to respond by saying it would be “up to the judge to decide” her fate. Asked whether he was aware of the Brake case, he said. “I’m not aware of that.”

Brewer later said, through an RCMP spokesperson’s email, that he had “no knowledge” of these interactions between Bracken and the officers.

The RCMP told The Narwhal in its written responses that it arrested the journalists for staying inside the tiny house to capture images and video footage after police informed the pipeline opponents they were violating the injunction and asked them to leave. The RCMP declined to provide further details about how the presence of journalists was interfering with the operation.

But their explanations for the arrests also appeared to shift in response to questions from The Narwhal.

Carol Linnitt, The Narwhal's executive editor, notified the RCMP in advance of Bracken's reporting trip and that she was assigned to be on site.

The RCMP confirmed they were aware of the assignment but noted they had urged Bracken to identify herself at the first available opportunity.

“Given the dynamic nature of the incident, it would not be appropriate for the officer to debate with arrested persons,” said one response written by RCMP media relations on April 25 in response to a question sent to Brewer.

“I would add that the Brake decision allows a reporter to be there to report however they are required to identify themselves, and cannot participate in the protest. In this instance, there were repeated opportunities for those inside the structure to identify themselves and leave, only upon arrest did they identify themselves as media.”

Contrary to the RCMP’s claims, the Brake decision does not actually specify how or when a journalist is required to identify themselves. Instead, it states that someone performing journalist duties such as taking notes, capturing images, reporting, live-blogging or broadcasting should not be arrested, as long as they aren’t actively participating in a protest or interfering with police operations.

When asked about this, the RCMP offered a new explanation.

“The journalists were not arrested simply because they did not identify themselves, but because they, along with everyone in those structures, were given the option to exit and leave or face arrest,” wrote Sgt. Manseau in an email on April 29.

The RCMP spokesperson then appeared to question the relevance of the court decision’s definition of a journalist, and contradict previous statements that its officers were following the court’s standard.

“Your question about whether we consider the journalists to be assisting or advocating for other people on site is irrelevant to their arrest,” Manseau wrote.

The RCMP also said that it would have allowed Bracken and Toledano to continue documenting the arrests if they had left the tiny house at the first opportunity, although it was not clear whether the journalists would have been allowed to stay close enough to observe and record the interactions.

Bracken has covered other arrests of Coastal GasLink opponents, and said the RCMP did not allow journalists to get close enough to adequately observe the operations. She said that in previous years, the RCMP set up exclusion zones that prevented media from accessing locations where arrests were taking place.

Bracken said that she didn’t speak up during communications between RCMP outside the structure and land defenders inside, in order to avoid influencing the events, as per ethical standards and guidelines that require journalists to avoid interfering.

She added the tiny house was surrounded by heavily armed police — opening the door was not an option and climbing out the window did not feel safe.

In addition to The Narwhal giving prior notice about Bracken's assignment, the photojournalist was wearing identification badges to identify herself as a member of the press.

Brewer, who used quotation marks when referring to Bracken and Toledano as “journalists” in his email, also summarized the incident using language that was similar to a federal government briefing note about the arrests of journalists, prepared for Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino a few days later and dated Nov. 25, 2021. Both his email and the briefing note mentioned derogatory comments in response to police.

Video footage released by Toledano shows that neither he nor Bracken interfered with or insulted police officers in any way. The footage also shows that pipeline opponents asked police if they had search or arrest warrants and were told RCMP would be seeking those.

When asked why Brewer included the statement about derogatory comments in an email that described the arrests of journalists, the RCMP declined to say, suggesting they had not made “any assumptions” about who made the remarks.

Brewer’s unit and other federal surveillance projects monitoring the activities of Indigenous groups have prompted numerous public complaints and investigations over the years. Critics of the force have alleged that the RCMP is too cozy with energy companies and is being used as a private security force for the industry.

The RCMP told The Narwhal that it engages with all stakeholders when needing to discuss issues, and does so in-person, over the phone or virtually, depending on availability.

But questions remain about whether the RCMP is transparent about all of these interactions.

Through Canada's Access to Information Act, The Narwhal requested all correspondence between Brewer’s unit and TC Energy/Coastal GasLink from November. But the RCMP failed to locate a letter dated Nov. 2 that was sent by TC Energy to Brewer and Commissioner Lucki. Instead, The Narwhal obtained uncensored versions of the internal emails about the journalists and the correspondence with the pipeline company through a separate freedom of information request filed under provincial legislation to the B.C. ministry responsible for public safety.

The private correspondence revealed how TC Energy pressured Brewer and the RCMP commissioner in early November to crack down on opponents seeking to thwart construction of the Coastal GasLink project. The pipeline company also criticized the RCMP in the letter for not doing enough to enforce an injunction and stop “blockaders.”

In another email released to The Narwhal, Brewer told RCMP colleagues in November that someone from Coastal GasLink had told him that the “mood” at a work camp was deteriorating due to the actions of pipeline opponents.

An analyst working on the request told The Narwhal she asked Brewer about it in an email in February and a few times after that about whether he had additional records of his correspondence with TC Energy. But two months later, the access to information office of the RCMP said Brewer had still not responded to their requests to locate any files.

In addition, the RCMP censored another email sent by Brewer that described his communications with TC Energy and the unfolding situation on Wet'suwet'en territory, prior to releasing it through access to information legislation.

The B.C. government released an uncensored version of this email under the provincial freedom of information legislation.

The federal transparency law states that federal officials must release their records upon request to any Canadian who pays a $5 fee, unless there is a valid reason to refuse. Anyone who intentionally obstructs someone’s right of access to government records can face up to two years in prison and fines of up to $10,000, but police rarely investigate alleged violations.

Federal information commissioners have twice called out the RCMP over the past decade for failing to respect access to information legislation.

Most recently, the RCMP acknowledged that it was having “challenges” fulfilling its obligations under the legislation, Global News reported after the latest investigation by the information watchdog in November 2020.

When asked about its heavy censorship of correspondence related to the November arrests that were released without redactions by the B.C. government, and its failure to locate the TC Energy letter, the RCMP said it prioritized access to information requests and was complying with the law. An RCMP spokesperson also sent a written response on behalf of Brewer, stating that he was respecting the transparency law.

Matt Simmons, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, The Narwhal