Trans activists push for inclusion in Alberta human rights act
ALBERTA / Province adding sexual orientation to legislation, 11 years after Vriend
Ted Kerr / National / Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Share |

Alberta Culture Minister Lindsay Blackett announced last week that the provincial government plans to amend the province's Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act to formally include sexual orientation.

Blackett's announcement comes 11 years after the historic Vriend vs Alberta case in which the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that sexual orientation must be included under human rights legislation across the country. Alberta was the only jurisdiction in Canada to not embrace the ruling.

NDP MLA for Edmonton-Strathcona, Rachel Notley, has continually brought up the Vriend decision during her time in politics and she welcomes Blackett's plans. But she says that 11 years of resistance has created "a validation of homophobia that still exists in sectors of Alberta."

While many from Edmonton's queer community applaud the province's step forward, some have concerns about the proposed changes to the Alberta Human Rights Commission and a provision that would allow parents to exclude their children from learning about sexual orientation in school.

Trans activists are also concerned. While specifics are still vague, there has been no mention of gender identity in the proposed legislation.

Activists hoped that by the time the Progressive Conservative government got around to including sexual orientation into the legislation, gender identity would also be included.

"It's frustrating to offer to get involved with the push for human rights and do whatever is needed to secure our inclusion only to see that trans is never put on the table for discussion at all," says Alberta-based trans activist Mercedes Allen. 

"The exclusion of trans people from this legislation is disappointing, but hardly surprising," says fellow activist Josie Cross. "Perhaps I am just cynical but I can hardly see Alberta taking a lead in human rights. If gender identity and expression are ever protected under human rights legislation I would expect this to happen on the federal level before Alberta takes similar action."

Notley is puzzled by the culture minister's exclusion of gender identity in the new plan. "It is interesting that they have gone that way," she says.

Cross hopes that a possible backlash could put pressure on the government to include gender identity under the proposed new legislation. "I think it is only a matter of time before trans people are protected under law," says Cross. "Both the Greens and NDP made the inclusion of such protections part of their platform in the last federal election. I only hope that the trans community and their supporters realize this, and seize the opportunity to place pressure on political parties."

In the face of exclusion, both Cross and Allen see this as a monumental time for trans activism in Alberta.

But as Allen points out, "transgender peoples' desire to remain invisible" will be a challenge in activating the community for change.

Cross agrees but is a bit more prosaic. "Transgender people are characteristically quiet about their status, but I believe this is a time at which solidarity is very important, as it will make a great difference in the long run."


Share |


Reader Comments


 
Why?
I don't get the point of this legislation. Due to the Vriend ruling, isn't sexual orientation already covered in effect, if not in writing? It seems that this is more about ensuring that students don't have to learn about their queer peers in school. And by not explicitly including transpeople, which even the US Congress appears on track to do, what's the point?
Randy, Windsor Ontario
04/01/09 3:49 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Because
it's important to have these things in black and white. Legal precedents can be vague and subject to interpretation. For that matter, there are some precedents supporting protections for trans people -- but it's much better to be certain. I'm glad trans activists look ready to seize this opportunity and that the NDP is showing leadership on this issue, as it's doing on the federal level also.
Matt, Verdun QC
04/01/09 6:25 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
and because
In addition to the reasons Matt gave in his comment, it's also very important to see legislation amended, because trans people deserve to have the legislative body, society's elected representatives, declare us by that act to be equal members of society, entitled to equal dignity and enjoying equal validity and worth as human beings. That Alberta has resisted the Vriend ruling's call for the province to amend its statute for 11 years is nothing short of scandalous. And having spent the first 20 years of my life in the Edmonton area, I tend to agree that Alberta seems an unlikely candidate to become the second jurisdiction in Canada to include gender identity in its human rights legislation (the NWT is the only one at present.) Yet I've always found it so weird that for a number of years there in the 90s and early 00s, Alberta was the only province in Canada that was providing meaningful and accessible coverage for SRS under its provincial health plan. Sure they could afford it, but so could every other province too. Alberta chose to cover it. I wish I knew the story ab out just why they made that choice. As a final note, I just want to share my personal view that in addition to and just as important as (and arguably even moreso) the project of legislative amendment to add GI or GI/E as prohibited grounds of discrimination - we must also have those same grounds of equality declared to have their basis grounded and founded in the Constitution, specifically that kportion of the constitution that is the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 15. Legislation can be amended by parliament. The constitution cannot. Anyway, kudos to the folks in Alberta who are working on this project to get the Alberta statute brought into line with at least the last century, even if they don't get the province brought into the present century this time around.
Shannon Blatt, vancouver BC
04/01/09 11:42 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
But But But
but But But....Egale Canada has told us that everyone is protected! I guess they mean everyone who matters... No-one tell Gareth Kirkby about this, or he'll talk about Transpeople leeching off the Gays again. Well, Gays and Trans people worked together for gay employment rights. We worked together for gay marriage rights. It's our turn now, as even those on the bottom of the list eventually move to the top. We can't force others to help, but we refuse to remain silent if they don't.
Zoe Brain, Canberra ACT Australia
04/02/09 10:48 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Look who's (not) talking now!
In this piece--published by none other than Gareth Kirkby, producer of Xtra.ca--there is no mention of Egale Canada's Trans Committee and its chair, Mickey Wilson, Prairie Board member, Trans Board member of Egale Canada and resident of Edmonton. Maybe he is too busy compiling a national trans website--I thought Egale didn't have the money for things like this; it certainly hasn't the money to post its 2005 Trans Advocacy Policy. I think there are a number of other, long established, very detailed websites in Canada--maybe this is the trans leadership we need in Canada--silent, respectful, not requiring national LGBT organizations to live up to their Mandates and policy. But on the question of Egale's mandate, Egale seems to have lost the front page of its website--where the Mandate used to be; I guess a change is coming. One would have thought the leader of trans people Canada wide--with such roles--would have been a leader in his own province, if not as a representative of Egale Canada--maybe it won't let him--then on his own. Most trans people I know who are active seem unable to limit themselves. But then, I'm no longer a member of Egale Canada, nor the Trans Committee--and never its board--so I guess I just don't understand the true nature of trans advocacy.
Jessica Freedman, Ottawa Ontario
04/02/09 9:28 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Activists need to organize
As Matt mentioned, this is a great opportunity to seize, because it looks like the legislation will be going forward this spring. But that means trans activists need to act quickly: a petition, a demonstration in Edmonton, a Facebook group... there are lots of ways to organize. I hope the Alberta queer community can rise to the challenge!
Daniel, Barrie ON
04/02/09 11:50 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Not Exactly The ONly One
Alberta wasn't exactly the only one that was funding during the 1998 to 2008 period. B.C. was funding, as was New FoundLand and the slight bit given for surgery in Manitoba as well as Sask. Though I get your point. My therory has always been the reason Alberta was funding, began funding, is much the same as we see in Iran. So that, so they think, there won't be gay people.
femme, toronto on
04/03/09 8:53 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
giving with one hand, taking with the other
I was advised by a friend this morning that in yesterday's Alberta budget, funding for SRS was delisted effective immediately, with only a very limited grandfathering for those who are in the midst of a surgical proceses (e.g. a trans guy with a multi-step phallo procedure, who is part way through.) Those already approved will be denied funding I'm told. Sounds like Alberta didn't learn from the Ont. delisting case, and folks in AB will need to file human rights complaints to seek reinstatement of funding, or in the alternative, extended grandfathering, as was ordered in the Ontario matter. Disgusting. Alberta should be ashamed.
Shannon Blatt, Vancouver BC
04/08/09 5:36 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
giving with one hand, taking with the other
I was advised by a friend this morning that in yesterday's Alberta budget, funding for SRS was delisted effective immediately, with only a very limited grandfathering for those who are in the midst of a surgical proceses (e.g. a trans guy with a multi-step phallo procedure, who is part way through.) Those already approved will be denied funding I'm told. Sounds like Alberta didn't learn from the Ont. delisting case, and folks in AB will need to file human rights complaints to seek reinstatement of funding, or in the alternative, extended grandfathering, as was ordered in the Ontario matter. Disgusting. Alberta should be ashamed.
Shannon Blatt, Vancouver BC
04/08/09 5:36 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.