Derek Frum, constitutional lawyer and critic of vaccine passports, warns they violate Charter rights in Alberta despite Premier Jason Kenney’s opposition, as private companies like the Edmonton Oilers enforce mandates in public venues. He cites Israel’s vaccinated hospitalizations and Sweden’s near-zero deaths to question lockdowns’ efficacy, urging documentation of employer coercion for legal battles. Frum argues governments prioritize political control over science, crushing dissent like Pastor Coates, while Kenney’s repeated school shutdowns—despite his 2021 apology—highlight leadership failures amid coordinated pushes from figures like Dr. Joseph Vipond and the Calgary Chamber. The episode reveals a fractured civil liberties defense, with Rebel News flooded by calls over workplace and school mandates, exposing lasting risks to freedoms under crisis governance. [Automatically generated summary]
Oh, hey rebels, it's me, Sheila Gunread, and you're listening to a free audio-only recording of my weekly Wednesday night show aptly called The Gun Show.
But you know what?
This is the internet.
So you can listen or watch whenever you feel like because that's the beauty of not being tied to terrestrial radio.
Now, tonight, my guest is someone who I guess if you pay attention to civil liberties in Alberta, you already know who he is, but he might be a new face to some rebel viewers outside of the greatest province in Canada, greatest place on the face of the earth, Alberta.
It's Derek Fromm, and he's a constitutional lawyer based out of Calgary.
And tonight we're talking about vaccine passports and how the coronavirus pandemic has really been used to crush civil liberties, not only in Alberta, but really across the board and across the world.
Now, if you like listening to the show, then I promise you're going to love watching it.
But in order to watch, you need to be a subscriber to Rebel News Plus.
That's what we call our long-form TV-style shows here on Rebel News.
Subscribers get access to my show as well as Ezra's nightly Ezra Levant show, David Menzies' fun Friday night show, Rebel Roundup, and Andrew Chapados's new-ish show.
Andrew says it's only eight bucks a month to subscribe.
And we're doing something special during the election.
We want to give you a sneak peek behind our paywall.
If you use the coupon code election at rebelnewsplus.com, we'll give you free access to our paywalled shows for the duration of the election.
And then when the election's all done, you can decide if, you know, if you like us and you want to go study.
So just go to rebelnewsplus.com, coupon code election for free, all access to our paywalled shows.
And now please enjoy this free audio-only version of my show.
Vaccine Passports: Coercive Incentives?00:15:33
Some governments and now private companies are imposing vaccine passports.
What's the motivation here?
Are vaccine passports even effective?
And why is almost no one bothering to fight back against them?
I'm Sheila Gunn-Reed, and you're watching The Gunn Show.
British Columbia is currently bringing in a vaccine passport system that doesn't even allow for medical or religious exemptions to the rules.
Just look at this.
BC's vaccine card for public activities leaves disabled people feeling trapped.
As the province announced its plans for a proof of vaccine system for restaurants, concerts, and other quote, non-essential spaces, there are concerns that people with disabilities and those who can't get vaccinated are being excluded.
Now, the province of Quebec, they've lost their mind too.
They're bringing in a similar vaccine passport system in the next couple of weeks using a QR code.
However, here in Alberta, our government has rejected the idea of a vaccine passport.
Our Premier Jason Kenney has even said that he will oppose any efforts by the federal government to impose a vaccine passport system on us here in Alberta.
However, what's truly the difference if private companies are opting to do it instead of the government, like the Edmonton Oilers and the Calgary Flames, who are making proof of vaccination mandatory to attend a hockey game in a publicly funded facility?
And our premier, who tells us he's against vaccine passports, he's notably silent on the issue.
Now, one person who is definitely not notably silent on the issue of vaccine passports is Calgary-based constitutional lawyer Derek Frum.
And he joined me tonight in an interview we recorded yesterday night to discuss the constitutional issues with vaccine passports, the obvious ineffectiveness of a vaccine passport in preventing the spread of the coronavirus, and why he thinks coerced vaccination is the constitutional hill to die on.
Joining me now from his Calgary home is Calgary-based lawyer Derek Frum.
Now, Derek, you're a new face, I think, to Rebel viewers, but definitely not to me.
Why don't you give us a bit of a background about who and what you are, the things that you have been working on in the past, because you're definitely not one of those homemade lawyers that plague the internet post-COVID.
Give us a little bit of your CV, if you will.
Okay, so I've been a lawyer for about 10 years, and I started my practice, and I articled with the Canadian Constitution Foundation in Calgary.
So originally, I worked with John Carpe and then Marty Supkoff, Chris Schaefer, Howard Anglin, a bunch of names that many people will know.
And I spent 10 years there.
And over that time, I was able to work through a number of important constitutional cases that made it to the Supreme Court of Canada.
One that's very important and was a lot of work was the R. V. Como case, which was actually an interprovincial trade case regarding beer.
That was about seven years of my life from its inception in, I think, about 2012 to we got a decision seven years later from the Supreme Court.
So I've been a long time, my entire legal career, I've been an advocate for personal liberty, for open borders within Canada, for economic freedom, and for the rights that are enshrined in the Charter.
Now, one of the reasons I wanted to have you on the show is because you've been so outspoken.
One of the few lawyers out there, I think really with the exclusion of our Fight the Finds lawyers and then the Justice Center, you're one of the few lawyers out there that is so outspoken about the trampling of civil liberties during the time of the coronavirus.
And lately, you've really been on my radar because you've been very outspoken against vaccine passports in one form or another, either from government or from private business.
But why are you so concerned about vaccine passports?
Well, it's actually a long, long explanation will be required for that, but I'll try to keep it short.
No, you can have all the time you want.
Oh, lovely.
Now that was a misprint.
So it became very obvious early on when I was a young lawyer, well, 10 years ago, that when government gives itself a tool, it creates a tool through legislation that it can use, that tool isn't always used how it was expected to be used.
So, for instance, there's all sorts of legislation in Canada called civil forfeiture legislation.
And originally, that was intended to strip criminals of the proceeds that they earned through criminal activity.
But it has since been completely turned on its head and turned into a revenue stream for government agencies to strip Canadians who have done nothing wrong of their property and fill government coffers.
So this has happened.
And it's not unusual to be able to follow a particular tool from its inception to how it ultimately is used by government.
So it was very obvious to me because I'm familiar with this pattern.
It is, I think, inevitable for most legislation to have this result.
And when I see lockdowns happening, and in the first one happening in Alberta last March, it became very obvious to me that this was precedent setting for the future, that it will be used by successive governments for other purposes.
And it's not a question of if that will happen.
It's a question of when it will happen.
I can guarantee you that.
There is not a tool that the government ever gives itself that it will not use again.
And so, for instance, this vaccine passport that we're all very concerned about now and vaccine mandates, they're kind of two sides of the same coin in many ways.
But what that will be right now, it seems reasonable.
We're just going to use it for a temporary period of time.
They say this.
But you know what?
I can tell you that when they find there's an appetite for it in Canada or that the Canadian population will, for the most part, tolerate this sort of violation of rights and freedoms, our freedom to move freely and be participants in the economy and social life of our country.
If that is tolerated by Canadians, it will be used again.
And it will be different crises in the future.
And there's no question in my mind that Canadians get used to it and it will show up again.
So that's why we need to fight this now.
This is really a hill to die on because it's inevitable.
It's inevitable that it will be used against us in the future.
Well, we're seeing it already.
I mean, in British Columbia, they are bringing in a vaccine passport system that really doesn't even allow for reasonable accommodation.
They're just saying you have to get a vaccine.
You have to present your papers, as they say, if you want to participate in everyday normal life.
And it doesn't even matter.
It's not tied to hospitalizations.
It's not tied to positive case counts.
Take that for whatever you will.
And there's no reasonable accommodation.
You can't say, well, I am an Orthodox Catholic.
I cannot take a vaccine that is made with fetal tissue.
The only vaccine that you have available for me today contains fetal cell lines.
I can't take that in good conscience.
It doesn't matter.
Then I can't participate in society.
There's none of those exemptions being made in BC.
What do you think the chances are that BC's vaccine passport system with no accommodations, what do you think the chances are that that would withstand a constitutional challenge?
So in 2016, if we were having this conversation, I would say it's clearly going to be found to be unconstitutional.
In 2021, I don't know what to say.
I'm very discouraged, both at the members of my profession.
I'm very discouraged at how quickly Canadians caved in to fear.
And I'm very discouraged that our governments have decided that there's a one-size-fits-all solution that they are trying to sell as a temporary solution, but really is a permanent solution in disguise.
And this is what I mean by that.
So vaccine passport, if you don't participate and take the vaccine, you may lose your job, you may lose your livelihood, your kids are impacted, and so it's a coercive form of government incentive to force a particular type of behavior.
And they may say, well, it's just, it's a couple months long, it's going to expire.
But if your need is to put food on the table now, if you want to participate, if you're going to miss an opportunity or your kids are going to miss an opportunity for their development in whatever that is, if that's sports, school, anything like that, some sort of extracurricular activity, people who miss those opportunities and just take a vaccine, those are actually permanent consequences.
A child who is left behind, that could have repercussions for their entire life, not to be hyperbolic about it, but it could.
If you lose your job and you're having difficulty putting food on the table, there could be long-term consequences to that.
And if you choose, again, to take a vaccine, you betray your principles, you have this internal conflict for the rest of your life.
Or let's say you suffer an adverse effect from the vaccine.
That could also be permanent.
And so I don't buy the government's argument that this is a reasonable way to do things and that it's only temporary in nature.
Some of these consequences, the effect of a temporary mandate, a temporary vaccine passport, might be permanent in nature.
And so it's very discouraging to me the way they're selling it.
They should have reasonable accommodations built into it.
The most obvious one, and I think everyone who's a reasonable person can agree with this.
And that is a hill to die on when I say everyone who's a reasonable person can agree with what I'm going to say.
If you've had COVID-19 and have recovered, you're immune.
You have better immunity than a vaccine will provide you with.
Broad immunity.
In fact, there's good evidence now that you risk more by taking the vaccine than someone who hasn't been infected.
So the government is not only not listening to you, that you should be exempt from their irrational little game that they've set up, but they're putting you at risk for incentivizing you to do something that's more risky than if you didn't do it.
So it's just very clear that this is not a well-thought-through plan.
And I've been struggling trying to figure out what the idea is behind it.
All I can think of is that, is that we've gotten to the point where the mob in the most, you know, the most sad sense of the word is now in control and politicians are responding to incentives driven by mob mentality.
And so they're grasping at straws, trying to maintain power.
And this is the last straw they've grasped at recently.
Yeah, I mean, they do keep telling us to follow the science, but it would seem that they are chasing the politics and the votes here.
Without getting too technical, and this probably won't go up on YouTube.
It'll probably end up on Rumble anyway.
But I mean, when we see what's happening in Israel with one of the largest vaccination rates in the free world, and the majority of their hospitalizations now are people who have received the vaccine, as in sounds like the vaccine is failing six months out.
And instead of seeing that, examining the data and reacting accordingly here in Canada, we are just pursuing the same, I guess the right word is failure.
Yeah, it's a failed strategy that we continue to pursue.
Lockdowns didn't prevent COVID from spreading.
The NPIs in general didn't.
The non-pharmaceutical interventions didn't prevent it from spreading.
Now, it can be responded to what I just said: that well, we don't have a control group.
We don't know what would have happened if it weren't that way.
But you know, Sweden is still a pretty good example.
And I did check it today.
They are getting a few more cases than they have been through the summer, but their deaths are still riding zero.
And it seems to me that we chose a flawed policy and we're sticking with it.
And we're going to do more of the same and expect different results.
And you're right, the Israeli data is troubling.
I don't know at this point if it's an indication of what we called ADE or if it's an indication of failing vaccine efficacy over time.
It seems to be one of the two.
I think we have enough data now to say, and there's scientific studies demonstrating this.
You don't have to take my word for it, that the vaccine efficacy is fading.
The longer out you are from your vaccine dosage that you took, the less immunity you still have.
And the data from the UK seems to be backing that up as well.
And so when we start looking at what we do know, vaccine efficacy seems to be fading.
And people who have taken the vaccine still are carrying the virus and are able to spread the virus and do occasionally get sick from it.
So what purpose does a vaccine passport serve?
So if we run the game as a like a game in our mind, like a game of chess, we know the rules.
Person A is vaccinated, person B is not.
Vaccines, Liberty, and Morality00:10:21
Person A is worried, person B is not.
Person A has as much protection as they can from the pharmaceuticals as they can get at this point in time.
And they can still get sick.
They can still spread the sickness to others, but yet they're demanding of person B that person B's liberty is restricted.
That is irrational.
That is a game that does not make any sense.
And, you know, if it were 2016, a court could clearly review that and under section one of the charter would say, government, you have to provide a very good reason why you're restricting liberties the way you are.
And this restriction is beyond what is necessary.
And there's a good potential that the government's plan would be curbed by the courts.
But not in 2021.
And I think we've seen that all play out already at the COVID jail level with our constitutional challenge of the COVID incarceration program of completely healthy innocent people abducted from the airport.
When you put it that way, it sounds crazy, but it's happening and it was upheld by the court.
And the craziest thing that came out in that court case was: if you presented at the airport and you just said, you know what? I'm sick, they would send you straight home to quarantine for 14 days.
If you presented as healthy, you had to quarantine for three days, then go home for 14 days.
So, again, doesn't make any sense, right?
Yep.
And so, kind of in a joking way, I've been telling people the two first casualties of the COVID pandemic were rationality and the rule of law.
Yeah.
And so, I mean, we're this whole thing can be viewed through a lens of like game theory.
And we discovered the rules as we've been going along as scientific studies come out.
Oh, it's aerosol.
The spread is in the air.
Well, then at that point, masks became irrelevant.
And what we're really should be concerned about is the amount of airspace around us in a room.
Smaller rooms get saturated more quickly with aerosol particles of virus.
And if we're in a large ventilated space, there's not much concern.
So my kids should never have been stopped from playing hockey this year.
It was irrational.
They're in a large space.
There's no concern about an aerosol particle being passed around at any great degree at that such a large space.
Kids aren't at risk and masks were useless in that environment.
But no, we can't do that because the mob is in charge and the government will just comply with whatever the mob wants.
So we have to punish children.
Yeah, we're writing policy based on other people's irrational fear.
And so many of those people very rarely have children, but they want to hold your children captive to their fear.
I wanted to ask you really quick before we move on about, I noticed the police in Toronto, they've come out against forced vaccination.
And I'm having a really difficult time finding Christian charity in my heart for them.
And I know that I should because this is probably their little, you know, moment where they're mugged by reality because this is starting to affect them.
But they spent a summer and a winter and a spring flattening protests of people who didn't want to wear masks inside.
And now when the chickens come home to roost and they have to comply by the COVID regulations, it's a bridge too far.
Do you think we're going to see more police forces speak out and more even nurses and doctors who've had their unions acting as mouthpieces for the lockdown movement?
Do you think we're going to see more individuals in the public sector speak out against these vaccine mandates?
I actually, I do.
I do think that.
And I think the problem is kind of twofold.
One is Canadians are kind of asleep generally.
We're too trusting of our governments.
We've never, our generation has never had to fight for any sort of freedom at all.
It's been completely without cost to us.
And we've also never really seen the value of freedom demonstrated to us either.
We haven't been in the Dominican looking across at Haiti or we haven't had to escape Cuba.
We've never, most of us have never experienced that.
But there is, in my experience, there is one sort of Canadian that does understand that.
And Mr. Levant will appreciate this.
Canadians that have been dragged through vexatious human rights tribunal proceedings all of a sudden are woken up to the fact that we live in a country where you can't say what you want to say freely.
You have to worry what your neighbors might think of what you're saying.
And that sort of thing, when a vexatious and frivolous complaint is made against somebody and they have to spend a year of their time responding to it and they have to hire a lawyer, it costs them thousands of dollars.
And even if they're exonerated in the end, their name is dragged through the media as being a bigot.
Those people come out the other end and they have very different views on freedom and liberty.
They become zealots and they understand and they understand because their close proximity with having lost their freedom.
And so I think now I hope that those Canadians that have not appreciated what they have, now that they're on the cusp of losing something very significant, maybe they'll wake up.
Maybe they'll stand up.
I really hope they will.
Because I've got to tell you, it's the majority of us.
And we've been saying this stupid bromide for a year and a half that we're all in this together when nothing could be further from the truth.
We have not all been in this together.
And we've been telling our kids, take one for the team.
Why we would tell our young men that they should get vaccinated and risk the potential heart problems when they're at zero risk from COVID is beyond me.
But you know what?
This take one for the team thing needs to go by the wayside because our team sucks and we shouldn't be loyal to it.
We need to have people that actually understand the importance of individual liberty.
There's no one that knows what's in your best interest, Sheila, better than you.
The government should not be in the business of telling you what your interests are.
That is wrong.
You know what your interests are better than anyone in the world.
Maybe you should take the advice of those around you that love you because people can get confused sometimes, but that's actually something they've earned through their relationship with you.
No bureaucrat sitting in Ottawa can tell you what you should do.
They can't know you.
They can't know your life.
Canadians need to wake up and realize that our number one enemy here is actually not a virus.
Our number one enemy is our governments using this against us.
All of this is precedent setting.
Well, and it's interesting to watch the evolution of this misplaced sense of civic duty that you have to participate in this mass experiment with what looks to be a failing medication to be a good citizen.
And if you care about freedom and everybody minding their own business and getting to do what they want with their life and with their family, you're the bad guy.
And the scold and the tattletale is the good citizen now.
It's very East Germany.
Yeah, it is.
And it does remind me.
So I am not an expert on this.
I've read a little bit of it and I encountered some of it in law school, but some of the interesting studies that were done on the German courts during the time around World War II is fascinating.
And about how the rule of law was often followed, but when the law is perverse, the rule of law is nothing wonderful.
Like you can have evil laws and you can follow them to a T.
And so many conservatives and lawyers and liberals alike will say the law was complied with.
Well, you know what?
Evil laws should not be followed.
And that's what makes a law evil and what makes people able to evaluate that?
Well, it's they have to have a prior moral theory.
You have to have some sort of an ethical foundation for your life where you can evaluate laws.
And so that's the other thing I worry about with Canada through all this is I've seen so many people that I've respected fall in line because it's the law.
The government said this.
Well, I really hope that you had a moral view of what's right and wrong.
And that is a, you know, it's another argument that we can have with people or discussion about what right and wrong are.
But the fact that people won't even evaluate what's happening is shocking to me, completely shocking, because that's exactly the problem that they had in Germany.
That's exactly the problem.
The law was followed.
The law was evil.
Like, people, you got to wake up.
We got to evaluate what's happening, not just comply.
Well, and I think to go off on a little bit of a tangent, but I think that's why some of the crackdown, the COVID crackdown, particularly here in Alberta, was so harsh on churches, is that the government can never bring people who answer to a higher moral code into compliance with a bad law because they are doing exactly what you're saying.
They're evaluating the law through a specific moral lens and saying, no, I cannot in good conscience abide by that law.
And I think that's why the crackdown was so harsh.
It was meant to discourage anybody else who's guided by that moral compass.
Maybe they, you know, to discourage them from getting the idea that maybe they should stand up to.
Yeah, I would agree with that.
And I mean, it's sort of trite now, all this these months later, but Caesar doesn't like competition.
Caesar's Crackdown00:02:34
Yeah.
And I've learned, like, I've learned through my experience doing constitutional litigation in a charity that if you stand up and you put your head up and fight the government, what happens is they crush you.
They absolutely come to crush you.
So I had that conversation on QR 77 with a host here in Calgary just before Christmas.
And we were discussing these sorts of matters.
And at that time, Pastor Coates had just done his now famous sermon and put it on YouTube.
And so I had that conversation.
And then later we took it offline and the discussion was: well, I hope the government of Alberta takes a reasonable approach.
And I said, there's going to be no reasonable approach.
It doesn't work that way.
If you stand up against the government, they have to make an example of you.
They are coming to crush you.
That's the only way it works.
So I had a client, Bruce Montague.
He was famous back in late 90s, early 2000s for protesting the gun registry.
He's a gunsmith from rural Ontario, and he intentionally did not register his firearms collection.
He wanted to get arrested to do a constitutional challenge.
And so here he is.
He's just a guy who didn't do his paperwork and he wanted to get his day in court.
And so he finally, after two years of trying, protesting it, publicly flaunting it in front of the RCMP, he finally got arrested.
And so what did they do?
Well, they found him a couple of hours from home at a trade show.
They arrested him in front of his daughter.
She was, I think, 12 at the time, left her stranded without her dad.
Dad got hauled off to prison.
And so that was the first thing.
So then the next thing they did is they went after his gun collection, which fine, it was part of the criminal act.
They took that and then they went into his house.
They took everything from his house, his computers, his wife's cookbooks, all the silverware.
The whole house was emptied.
It was a house that was empty.
They took that from him.
And then they started a civil forfeiture proceeding against his house.
They're going to take this 50-some-year-old man who tried to try to get his day in court to do a constitutional challenge for the good of Canadians, and they're going to crush him.
They took his house away, his house that he built with his own hands.
So this is what happens in my experience: is that they can't broach any competition.
Government Monopoly Crush00:03:21
The government can't have a competitor.
It's a monopoly.
They're the only game in town.
They don't like it when other people stand up to them.
So Pastor Coates and the past, other pastors that have stood up, this is the only response that could be expected.
The government has to come in and crush them.
And that is not acceptable.
That is not acceptable.
Well, it's not even close to over yet.
One of our Fight the Finds clients, Church in the Vine in Edmonton, they're still receiving tickets and charges because they're sort of backdating them now to all the times that they didn't let Alberta Health Services and Occupational Health and Safety, another long arm of the government they used to crush these churches, come in and interrupt their services.
So, you know, it never ends.
And, you know, when I see sort of backdating of tickets and charges, I know there's another lockdown coming, just as you predict.
They will do this again.
And they are already taking care of the troublemakers in advance.
Yeah.
Yeah.
That's, I can guarantee they're thinking that way.
And, you know, the government is just another actor.
They're a very special actor in society because they're venerated for some reason by many Canadians as being somehow that when a politician or a bureaucrat works for the government, that they suddenly stop being a human and they're an angel with the motivation of an angel.
It's mind-numbing to me how people can believe this with all the evidence to the contrary.
They're just another actor that has extraordinary powers and yet is not held in check.
And that's my big worry with all this: the Constitution is supposed to hold the government in check.
It's supposed to be there.
The rule of law is supposed to be there for Canadians to rely on in times when we most need it.
You know, in freedom of expression cases, it's not for saying things that the status quo believes.
Like, I like the color of the sky when it's like it is outside right now.
That is not controversial.
I don't need constitutional protection from the state when I say that.
It's when I say controversial things about controversial topics that the Constitution has to be there to protect me because that's what we've all agreed on.
That's what it's for.
But yet, in times like this, I find that the Constitution is a very hard document to rely on.
It's like being at a baseball game.
You have to, you're the cleanup batter.
You have to win the game for your team, and you're going to work with a bat that you know is going to shatter in your hand and cut you.
You can't rely on it.
And that's what I worry right now with the Constitution and the Charter: it is a broken bat.
At a time when we need it, we need to hit one out of the park for freedom.
That bat is going to break in our hands and damage us.
And we can't rely on it.
And that honestly is my biggest concern.
Yeah, somebody once told me to view the Constitution as a restraining order against the government.
You know, it should be the rules of the game that they have to follow.
They find ways to get around it.
They sure do.
Premier's Silence Matters00:07:40
Now, I wanted to ask you really quickly about Premier Jason Kenney, who has been noticeably absent during this federal campaign as one of the, at least now, although he wasn't always a vocal opponent against the lockdown.
Jason Kenney today is much different from Jason Kenney 90 days ago or a year ago.
However, he's sort of been disappeared, I think, from the campaign trail when normally he is out there in the forefront during these things.
But he has said that he would be against vaccine passports and he would fight the federal government if they sought to impose one.
And yet he hasn't said anything while Jason, while Justin Trudeau won't shut up about vaccine passports.
And while here in Alberta, we've seen the flames, we've seen the Oilers, they're all bringing in vaccine passports for you to be in attendance and the stampede.
Again, if you wanted to watch live music at the stampede, you had to produce proof of vaccination or submit to a medical test, which I can't even believe I'm saying, but that's the world we live in now.
Where's Jason Kenney?
Is my question for you?
Oh, boy, that is such a tough one.
And I really hesitate to say what I think his motivations are because I just don't know.
But he is noticeably absent.
And I do recognize exactly what you said: that he has come out on those issues in a very seemingly strong way.
But I think the best judge of future behavior is past behavior.
And so this is the Jason Kenney who apologized last May for shutting down schools and said it'll never happen again.
And then lo and behold, what was it, twice more he did it to us, to my kids.
And so past behavior, he's a man that seems to say one thing and he does another.
And, you know, this is a time in Canada's history where we require strong leadership.
We require someone who doesn't have aspirations beyond doing what's right.
Someone who's not looking for a future in Ottawa.
It requires a leader who is willing to take a tough stand and look at the actual consequences of what he's doing and the consequences of what might be done to us and say, this is my hill to die on.
That's the type of leader that Alberta requires right now.
And it's going to be a leader that has to buck against popular trends.
I mean, there's a very concerted effort in the media right now.
I think I could tell you the day it started.
I look back at my text messages, the day it started.
Joseph Vipon, that doctor from Calgary who works in the ER, started hitting the press that day advocating for more lockdowns and vaccine passports.
The Calgary Chamber of Commerce came out that day and advocated for vaccine passports.
I mean, this is, it looks like a concerted effort.
It doesn't make any sense when you understand what the vaccines do.
But my impression is that there's a lot of divergent interests at play here.
Public sector unions want one thing, and they're using this as an opportunity to get what they want.
The Chamber of Commerce is probably most interested in getting customers back, and they've miscalculated thinking that the way we can get customers most comfortable back in the flames arena and back in watching Oilers games, we can get more people back and feeling more comfortable about it if we can tell them the person sitting beside you has taken two vaccine doses.
I think it's a calculation on their part.
I think it's a miscalculation, but that explains, I think, why it's irrational from the point of view of looking at what the vaccine is actually capable of doing.
And Jason Kenney needs to step up and correct the record.
I think a strong leader would do so.
But I'm always worried that there's that idea like, oh, I'm moving on to Ottawa someday.
And right now, Alberta, Alberta doesn't need someone who's looking past doing the right thing now.
Yeah.
In a world of Cuomos, try to be a DeSantis.
And I'm not sure if we're not sure if we're getting that from Jason Kenney.
Now, before I let you go, because I promised you 20 minutes and I think we're going on 35.
I know that you have been giving advice to people about vaccine passports and a little bit of employment advice with regard to people who work in private industry who are potentially could face unemployment if they don't take the vaccine.
What is your one little bit of advice to those people out there?
Keep track of everything.
I think the most important thing is right now with your employer, all your interaction with them, whether you're unionized or not, whether you have a government employer or a private employer, is you need to keep track of everything that happens.
Build your case now.
Collect the evidence.
Every conversation, intentionally write down when it was, what it was about.
You need to have all that in place because if you're ultimately dismissed because you stand up for your own rights, you will do far better when you speak to a lawyer at that point if you have a clear line of evidence establishing your case.
Well, Derek, I want to thank you for being so generous with your time.
I'm a little ashamed it's taken so long to have you on the show because you're such a smart legal thinker and a true believer in freedom.
And I hope that you'll come back on again very soon.
Yeah, I'd be happy to.
Thanks Derek.
Derek tells me he's absolutely inundated by people who are calling with concerns and legal questions about being forced by their employers both in the public and private sector but also by their schools and post-secondary institutions to receive a vaccine they are morally or medically opposed to.
And friends, we're getting the exact same thing here at Rebel News.
People have questions.
But for me, the question remains, as it has through the entirety of this pandemic, where are all the civil liberties groups outside of, of course, FightTheFines.com and the Justice Center and the Canadian Constitution Foundation to actually stand up for the civil liberties of Canadians?
You know, it's pretty easy to stand up for civil liberties when no one, no government is taking them away, but it is hard work to fight the full force of the government when the government is trying to crush you and make an example of you.
Now, I'm not scared of hard work.
Derek is clearly not scared of hard work.
But we are definitely finding out that a lot of so-called civil libertarians fear hard work as much as they fear the coronavirus.
Well, everybody, that's the show for tonight.
Thank you so much for tuning in.
I'll see everybody back here at the same time in the same place next weekend.