Barry Neufeld, a former B.C. school trustee, faces a $750,000 fine for opposing SOGI 123 education, with the tribunal labeling his critiques as discrimination akin to Holocaust denial despite no reported harm. Lawyer Hatam Keir argues the ruling oversteps Supreme Court hate speech standards, risking broader censorship of dissent. Alberta’s October 19th independence referendum and an "Independence Tour" featuring speakers like Sheila Gunnry highlight sovereignty debates amid economic grievances, framing free speech and provincial autonomy as urgent battles against perceived federal overreach. [Automatically generated summary]
Just a crazy case out of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, which is saying a lot because they're all crazy.
A guy who was elected to a public school board just got fined $750,000 for saying he disagrees with transgenderism in the curriculum.
And by the way, that's going to be paid to any gay teachers.
I wonder if the gay population of teachers in Chilliwack, B.C., well, why wouldn't you say you're gay if you're going to get thousands of dollars from this prize money?
It's the strangest thing.
I'll take you through it.
Just crazy time.
But first, let me invite you to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus.
It's the video version of this podcast.
Just go to RebelNewsPlus.com, click subscribe.
It's eight bucks a month.
You get all that great video and the satisfaction of supporting Revolus because we take no government money and it shows.
Tonight, two stories of a civilization in decline.
And of course, I mean Canada.
It's February 20th and this is the Esther Levant show.
Shame on you, you censorious bug.
Hey, some good news.
Our friend Tommy Robinson is in the United States.
This is good news because he needed a special visa waiver to be allowed to travel to the U.S. given his UK legal convictions.
And the fact that he got those waivers demonstrates that the United States State Department does not believe the UK government's views about Tommy Robinson.
The U.S. has very strict border policies, especially these days.
They love deporting people.
So for them to admit Tommy in a special decision shows they just don't credit the UK's justice system anymore, not when it comes to political prisoners like Tommy Robinson.
That is amazing to me.
Here is a fun video Tommy recorded just after landing in Washington.
You can see how excited he is.
That's right, I'm in the United States of America.
Can you see how happy I am?
It's been a long time coming.
I've dreamed about this moment for so long.
In 2017, I was given an invite by 10 members of Congress to come and visit here and talk about the decline in free speech in Britain, which now the entire world knows about.
But back then, 45 British MPs wrote to the American Embassy in London and they blocked my travel.
45, that's three times as many MPs who had ever spoke about grooming.
They didn't want me to come here to talk about the problems that Britain faces.
Why Speech Matters00:15:14
Well, tough shit.
I'm now here.
You hold no weight anymore.
You have zero credibility to the British Parliament.
The whole world now looks upon you as a laughing stock.
So I'm in the United States of America.
If you want to keep up to date with what I'm doing here, it's Tommyinusa.com.
That's exciting news and proof that America is heading in the right direction when it comes to speech.
But I'm sure you saw this story about speech in British Columbia.
An elected school board trustee was just ordered to pay $750,000 for hurting the feelings of transgender people because of his political views, which he honestly holds and for which he was voted into office as a school board trustee.
Let me read to you from the regime media's report and then a little bit later, we'll talk to a lawyer about him.
This is an incredible report in CTV, which I think was written by Canadian press, so it'll be in every newspaper.
And it somehow forgets, whoopsies, to interview anyone on the free speech side of the debate.
That's a trick, isn't it?
So this is the CTV version.
Former Chilliwack school trustee Barry Neufeld has been ordered to pay $750,000 in damages to LGBTQ2S plus teachers after the BC Human Rights Tribunal found dozens of public statements amounted to discrimination or hate speech.
So speech, merely speaking, is discrimination now, especially when your job is specifically to speak honestly and from the heart about matters in the public interest.
That's discrimination.
Just speaking is discrimination.
I thought discrimination was, okay, you're not going to allow someone to rent a hotel room because they're black.
You're not going to allow someone in your restaurant because they're indigenous, whatever.
You're actually making a choice.
You're banning someone.
You're firing someone because you find out they're gay.
That's discrimination.
No, it's discrimination just to have a different point of view now, is it?
There's no such thing as the right not to be offended.
I'm sorry, that is a fake thing.
That is Orwellian.
That's a counterfeit human right.
That's the government power to silence you.
That's not a human right.
Let me read a little bit.
The decision released Wednesday caps a human rights case nearly a decade in the making and concludes that Neufeld's public attacks on sexual orientation and gender identity education, known as SOGI 123, helped create a poisoned work environment for queer and trans teachers in Chilliwack.
Now, his job was to oversee sex education.
He disagreed with transgenderism being taught in schools, especially to children of tender years.
It's not a poisoned work environment.
He's not against trans people or gay people, for all I know.
He's against teaching young kids about radical sexual expression.
The tribunal determined he breached three sections of the Human Rights Code, including employment discrimination, discriminatory publications, and hate speech, and ordered him to compensate dozens of teachers impacted by his conduct.
The ruling also underscores that school trustees have a legal duty to uphold safe and inclusive learning environments.
Stop the BS, please.
No one was unsafe here.
No one went to the police because they were unsafe.
No one, you know, called 911.
There's no policeman in the world that would lay such charges.
No prosecutor who would prosecute.
No judge who would fight against them.
So they went to BC's kangaroo court, the worst one in the country, the BC Human Rights Tribunal.
I remember when I wrote a book called Shakedown about this more than a dozen years ago.
This is the same BC Human Rights Tribunal that, ha ha ha, there was a woman who worked at a McDonald's and refused to wash her hands.
And McDonald's said, you can't work at McDonald's if you don't wash your hands.
And the tribunal ordered them to hire her anyways.
Isn't that super gross?
I'll never forget that story because that just shows how gross the BC Human Rights Tribunal is.
The real rules of justice do not apply.
I'll keep reading.
The tribunal awarded $750,000 to the Chilliwack Teachers Association for equal distribution amongst LGBTQ2S plus class members.
The panel estimated the class likely includes between 45 and 163 teachers, but the exact number will be confirmed by the CTA during distribution.
Hey, if you're gay, you get cash.
You don't have to show any damages other than you don't like what he said.
That's not damages, like if someone hits your car or assaults you.
That's called a difference of opinion.
And if you're gay, you get money, thousands of dollars.
So, hey, if you've ever had romantic feelings, even just in your own head, about someone, now's the time to come out of the closet.
It's literally worth thousands of dollars to you to say you're gay.
Now, we've had in immigration law people falsely claiming to be gay, so they can falsely claim they were discriminated back home, so they're allowed to come in as refugees.
They later then bring their four wives and children over.
If you think I'm joking, I am not.
Being gay pays, and in Chilliwack, it's about to pay out thousands of dollars.
Expect the number of gay teachers to, I don't know, double, triple, quadruple.
Why would you not say you're gay?
And by the way, having a straight spouse is no proof you're not gay.
The BC Human Rights Tribunal is murdering BC Human Rights.
Now, I'm not going to read all of it, but here's a gem from the CTB story.
The panel issued a cease and refrain order prohibiting Neufeld from repeating similar conduct, as in their preemptively stopping him from talking about these things, even now, even to journalists.
Now, I'll jump ahead in the story.
It also concluded that six of his public posts, referred to jointly as hate speech publications, in the decision violated Section 71B of the code.
This provision prohibits the publication of speech that is likely to expose a person or a group of class or persons to hatred or contempt because of their protected characteristics.
This is colloquially referred to as hate speech, the decision explains.
So, this isn't a real court, and it's not a real judge, and it's not real prosecutors, but it just sentenced a man for hate, a feelings crime.
The liberals in parliament, may I remind you, want to make it a life sentence to be found guilty of hate.
Let me read some more.
The panel also declined to order mandatory anti-discrimination training, writing that Neufeld's views appear clearly entrenched, making such an order unlikely to be effective.
Additionally, since Neufeld is no longer a trustee after losing his bid in the 2022 election, the panel said this training would not lead to a less discriminatory workplace for the complainants.
Could you imagine being told you had to undergo re-education on something as nuts as transgenderism?
Who would be the teacher in that RuPaul or something?
But why bother?
You've just hit the guy with a $750,000 fine.
But seriously, why not make it $750 million?
Why not make it a $750 billion fine, just to be safe?
I'll read some more.
Neufeld had argued throughout the hearing that his statements weren't derogatory towards LGBT2QS plus people, and that he was simply criticizing government policy, particularly the SOG123 curriculum.
He maintained that his comments reflected legitimate concerns and evidence-based viewpoints and not discrimination or hatred.
Well, don't you see that is how you win a debate in 2026?
The vast majority of real people are against transgender extremism, by which I mean men in women's prisons, men in women's bathrooms, men in women's sports, the sexualization of young kids.
And if you think an old man named Neufeld is the problem, may I invite you to talk to any new immigrant from Asia or Africa or the Middle East about this?
So, yeah, no big deal.
No need to convince anyone they're wrong.
No need to debate anyone.
Just ban them from saying things you don't like, especially those pesky elected politicians.
I mean, why don't we just hand over the schools and our children to the BC Human Rights Tribunal?
Oh, right, we did.
Here, I'll read some more.
Kassari Govander, BC's Human Rights Commissioner, and an intervener in the case, welcomed the ruling, particularly the way it underscores that people in power still have human rights obligations while engaging in political debate.
Quote, occupying an elected position, such as being a school trustee, can mean that hateful and discriminatory messages are seen as more credible and can spread faster and further, which in turn can mean that the impact of those messages is intensified, Govander told CTB News.
I'm not going to read the whole thing.
Not a single civil libertarian is quoted.
Frankly, I doubt that anyone at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association of the BC Civil Liberties Association would even side with Neufeld.
I mean, they long ago stopped being for actual free speech, except for their side.
So they'd call Drag Queen Story Hour for kindergarten.
They would call that free speech.
That's what they mean by free speech.
Just you're not allowed to criticize that, even in an elected school board.
That makes you a denier of transgenderism.
Yeah, that's a pretty serious sign that your civilization is in decline.
Not just the transgender extremism, but the censorship and lawfare and litigation to maintain the appearance that people support this insanity.
It really reminds me of the decadence of Rome.
Caligula would find it fascinating.
So there's that.
And then there's this I saw today.
Look at this tweet.
Totally switching subjects now, but am I really?
I'm talking about civilizations in decline.
Here's a tweet from the Globe and Mail.
Out of nowhere.
I love those three words.
Out of nowhere.
Canada became poorer than Alabama.
How is that possible?
Yeah, out of nowhere.
Just sort of sneaked up on us.
Not sure who might be to blame.
Probably nobody.
I mean, really, it just happened.
Yeah, we're in a bit of a mess.
Stay with us for more.
Human rights commissions are like baby courts or quasi-judicial tribunals.
They're not actually run by judges.
They don't have the same rigorous civil procedure.
For example, hearsay is allowed.
There's all sorts of lower standards for evidence.
And as you can see, the rulings are quite wacky sometimes.
This isn't a joke, though.
A $750,000 penalty, a kind of class action lawsuit.
Again, without the checks and balances of a real class action lawsuit, it's an out-of-control legal creation.
Take it from me.
I went through the whole thing about 15 years ago, 20 years ago now in Alberta.
Joining us now to talk about this latest case of censorship through a so-called human rights commission is a lawyer for charter advocates working with the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms.
His name is Hatam Keir.
Hadam, nice to meet you.
Thanks for joining us today.
Hi, thanks for having me on.
I'm shocked by this case.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around it.
Let's just confirm the basic facts.
What you have here is a former school trustee who was elected to debate these matters and oversee these matters.
He obviously was a strong critic of sexual education in the progressive style that is the norm in British Columbia.
He apparently used language that was a little bit, I don't know, spicy as considered by some.
And instead of just satisfying themselves with debating him or beating him in an election, they took him before the human rights tribunal, and they got a $750,000 payday, whether or not they can collect, I don't know.
Did I more or less get the facts straight there?
Yeah, yeah, you got the main facts that happened.
And what's particularly interesting about this case is how the Human Rights Tribunal arrived at its decision.
And I think it lends to that point you were raising earlier about the lower standards that people potentially face when they're before these tribunals.
Well, I mean, they convicted this guy of hate speech.
Hate speech and hate crimes are in our criminal code.
There's all sorts of checks and balances.
One of them, there's various defenses.
For example, honest belief, religious belief.
You have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
These are some of the natural checks and balances when you go to a real grown-up court.
But this is a baby court, and they didn't have those same standards, did they?
So they just convicted this guy of a hate crime.
Well, even in the context of human rights cases, the Supreme Court has actually been pretty clear about setting a high standard for what hatred means.
There's a pretty high-profile case a few years ago with a comedian.
This is the Ward case, where, again, the Supreme Court reiterated: you know, it's not enough that someone says something offensive.
Hatred is a very high bar.
It refers to an exceptional kind of speech that caused detestation and vilification of a group of people.
And in this case, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal did reference that decision and that case law.
However, the end result was that the tribunal found that separating the concept of gender identity and biological sex is almost mandatory.
So insisting that gender identity is no different from biological sex erases the category of trans people, so says the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal.
And that erasure contributes to the promotion of hatred and what makes Mr. Neufeld's speech hate speech.
So I would put it to you.
I mean, listen, we don't know everyone's mind, but you travel in different circles and people talk about this perhaps in hushed tones a little bit, because were they to stand up in a town hall and announce their views on transgenderism, they might get in some sort of trouble.
But I put it to you that most Canadians are challenged by the idea of transgenderism.
I think they put up with it if it's a private matter.
They say, okay, nobody's business but theirs.
But then when it becomes into the public square, girls' sports, girls' bathrooms, girls' change room, women's prisons, then all of a sudden, what you just talked about, is there a distinction between a biological sex and a gender identity or gender expression?
That's not just a debating point anymore.
It's not just an interesting thought experiment.
On that question turns whether or not a man can go into a change room with women.
And I put it to you that most Canadians, that's my hunch, but I think polls would support it.
Most Canadians would find that troubling.
Most Canadians Find Transgenderism Troubling00:07:42
Are you saying to me that by this human rights tribunal, they're guilty of hate?
Potentially.
You know, obviously every case is going to be assessed on its own merits, but the tribunal was very clear in saying that the statement itself distinguishing biological sex and gender identity is an essential denial of transgender people.
You know, that word denial, I see it used here and there.
I mean, you see denialism used with regards to residential schools, the Kamloops question of are there graves under there?
And if you dare take a position, you're called a denier, as if you're, I don't know, a Holocaust denier or if you're like a flat earther.
It's not a legit.
I think that word denier or denial, it's loaded.
It implies that there is, you're either on our side and correct, or you're on the other side, and it's a malicious decision to deny reality.
I don't, I think there are very few things that should be sacrosanct.
And even those, immune to debate, I mean.
And transgenderism certainly shouldn't be one of it.
I feel like the Human Rights Tribunal is too big for its britches.
I feel like it wants to be a grown-up court and a legislature all at once.
What do you think?
Your point about the implications of the word denial, I think, are really relevant to the way this decision was framed.
The tribunal noted that the question of whether transgender people exist and are entitled to dignity in this province is as valuable to ongoing public debate as whether one race is superior to another.
So they directly equate this idea, and the implication being that there's no legitimate debate over whether one race is superior to another.
And so therefore, there really isn't room for ongoing debate as to what the implications of being transgender are or what that means for human gender and sexuality more generally.
I find that incredible.
I find that worrying.
Now, I don't know.
I've never met Mr. Neufeld.
You've read the case carefully.
I've just read the media reports.
It seems like he was unrepresented.
Did he have legal counsel or did he go in on his own?
Do you know?
No, he had legal counsel before the tribunal.
Oh, that's right.
You know what?
Actually, it was our old friend who used to work with the JCCF, right?
I'm sorry, I just forgot his name.
Yeah, James Kitchen.
James Kitchen.
Sorry, that's right.
I did see that.
It felt like one of those cases that you have this irascible troublemaker like Bill Whatcott, who just won't stop talking about something.
And the entire state keeps coming down on him again and again.
And it just makes him tougher.
It's like an egg.
The hotter the water you put him in, the harder he boils.
I don't think anyone will ever change Mr. Neufeld's mind.
In fact, the ruling sort of said that when they refused to put him in a re-education camp, they said, we're not going to crack this nut.
I don't know.
There are some people out there who are so stubborn, they simply refuse to believe that men can be women.
And what do you do with some of that stubborn?
I don't know.
I guess you bill them 750 grand.
Do we know anything about what's going to happen to you?
Do you know if there's going to be appeal?
I hope there will be.
I don't know.
I certainly hope there is.
This is a troubling decision.
And like I said earlier, it seems to be at odds with what the Supreme Court has said hatred means.
It's a high bar.
You know, this kind of dates, like the hatred provisions in the criminal code were challenged at the Supreme Court in the 90s, and the Supreme Court narrowly approved them.
But that rested on this very high bar for what hatred means.
It's supposed to be the worst kind of speech.
It's supposed to refer only to the sorts of things that could lead to a group of people essentially facing a genocide or something comparable to that in Canada.
But this case essentially blows the lid off that definition and greatly expands how it can be applied.
You know, I think I remember reading that case.
I mean, I think it was in 1990.
I think it was a 5-4 ruling.
I think Beverly McLaughlin, who went on to become the Chief Justice, wrote the dissenting view.
And if I recall, and I'm going from my memory here, she said, this is a slippery slope.
And the other judges said, no, no, this will be so rarely used.
We're going to uphold the Constitution.
Nothing to worry about here.
Maybe I've got some of my details there wrong, but you could see that slippery slope starting to slip in 1990.
Here we are 36 years later.
And I guess they didn't throw him in prison.
So there's that.
I don't know.
If I recall, Premier Eby was actually the head of the BC Civil Liberties Association in his day.
Is that right?
I think he's always been sort of a progressive lawyer.
Maybe he likes this kind of radicalism in his human rights commissions.
Do we know if there's any feedback from the legislature or from the premier on this?
Because it's a pretty dramatic decision for a little board or commission to make.
I'm not sure about the legislative response, but there's some serious implications for kind of local democracy at play, too.
And I hope the legislature can respond and intervene here.
Because you raised, Neufeld was a school trustee.
And he was criticizing the school board's policy in education.
He was criticizing the materials that children were being shown.
And one of the things the tribunal did is they essentially took a side on the debate.
They said that the SOGI materials that he was criticizing propose all these benefits.
They increase visibility, protection, and inclusion for transgender students.
And so essentially, there's no justification for Mr. Neufeld to be opposing these things.
Only a denier would be the Human Rights Code.
Yeah, they've ended the debate.
And if you're on the other side, you are a denier.
You know, get ready to pay up.
Wow.
You know what?
I'm so glad you guys are following this.
And I think James Kipchin is an alumnus of the JCCF, if I'm not mistaken.
And so I wasn't surprised to see his name on that.
Well, listen, keep your eye on this.
Keep up the good work.
I know the JCCF or the Justice Center is one of the leading civil liberties groups in Canada.
And I'm glad you're attentive to this.
Who knows?
Maybe if it goes to an appeal, you guys will intervene on the side of free speech.
Yeah, we'll definitely be keeping our eye on this troubling situation.
Great to talk with you.
Hadam Keir.
Good to meet you.
Thanks for having me.
All right.
Stay with us.
Your letters to me next.
Hey, welcome back.
Your letters to me.
Rory Kennedy says, I don't want Islam protected in any way.
Well, the Religious Freedom Fellowship that we were talking about is a specific focus on Christian and Jewish discrimination as an anti-Christian and anti-Jewish discrimination, partly because that's the bulk of it, especially on the Jewish side.
But as we talked about on the Christian side, most people just ignore it completely.
They don't even know it's just the new normal.
Churches burning, a subtle anti-Christian bigotry in the media.
So that's what this fellowship is about.
It's about stopping that.
Independence Tour Announcement00:02:56
Gary Wagner says, so accomplish something, Danielle.
So far, mostly talk.
Albertans are fed up.
That's been obvious for years.
The liberal socialists have been butt-pumping Alberta for over a decade, and nothing has been done about it.
And MOU is worthless.
The cost of living is relentless.
Our buying power is eroding every day.
Enough is enough.
Well, listen, no other premier in Canadian history has allowed a referendum to proceed.
And one will be proceeding in Alberta on October 19th.
And I very much do appreciate the Premier saying she will not take the bait of opposition journalists and condemn people who want to exercise their franchise and vote.
Why would she?
Why would she run errands for the CBC?
I think Danielle Smith is doing a good job.
Tamara Shield says, I'm a boomer who knows better than to believe any mainstream news, especially CBC.
I also support Alberta separation, plus never voted.
The Liberals never will.
Sadly, though, there are far too many foolish boomers and believe the lying propaganda.
It'll be very interesting to see how it goes.
I think you're going to see Operation Fear being used against Alberta independence.
That's literally what it was called in the UK during Brexit.
So it'll be interesting to see if they deploy some of those same anti-independence referendum talking points in Alberta as they did in the UK.
That's our show for the day.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all, until Monday, pardon me, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, see you at home.
Good night and keep fighting for freedom.
Hey, everybody, if you live in Alberta or are traveling there, can I invite you to attend our very interesting Independence Tour?
The lovely ladies and gents behind me there, Sheila Gunnry, Tamara Leach, and Corey Morgan, are on tour all over Alberta talking about Alberta's future and independence.
Corey's got a book on sovereignty.
Tamara Leach, of course, let's hold the line.
And Sheila's got a new book also on the lessons to learn from Quebec's attempts at independence.
These are the cities that the tour has yet to go to.
Red Deer tomorrow night, the 20th.
Edmonton on the 21st.
I'll be there, by the way.
Hope to see you.
Calgary on the 26th.
I'll see you there.
Madison Hat on the 27th.
I gotta go too.
I'll see you there.
Lethbridge on the 28th.
I'll be there.
Westlock on March 5th.
I'm sorry I can't make it there, but I might be able to switch things around.
And finally, Grand Prairie on March 6th.
You can see all these dates if you didn't catch them at once.
You can see them all at independence tour.com.
We've already sold out the Edmonton venue.
I'm worried we're going to sell out the others if you don't move fast.
So please go to independence tour.com.
If you're interested in Western Independence, Alberta Independence, if you want to get the books or talk to our personalities there, including myself or four of them, we'll see you there.