Sask. Government Says Regina Public School Policy Prompted Parental Rights Bill

Sask. Government Says Regina Public School Policy Prompted Parental Rights Bill
People attend competing rallies over Saskatchewan's pronoun bill outside the legislature in Regina on Oct. 10, 2023. (The Canadian Press/Heywood Yu)
Chandra Philip
10/18/2023
Updated:
10/18/2023
0:00
The Saskatchewan government says a Regina Public School policy that left parents in the dark about their child’s use of gender pronouns at school prompted its move to introduce the Parental Rights Bill. 
Bill 137 was introduced in the Saskatchewan Legislature on Oct. 12, and MLAs are in the middle of an extending debate over the policy, which would require schools to seek parental consent if students under 16 years wanted to change their gender pronouns or identity. 
Education Minister Jeremy Cockrill said that one of the reasons the government brought the bill forward was a policy in Regina Public Schools that says students must consent before a school can reveal a change in gender identity. 
“When you have one school division that comes forward and is explicitly excluding parents in reporting discussions involving their children, when we talk about the impetus for Bill 137, that really was the impetus,” Mr. Cockrill was quoted by media as saying.
Premier Scott Moe also told the Legislature the policy prompted his government to move on the issue. 
“It wasn’t until one school division actually changed their policy explicitly to not inform the parents when it comes to a pronoun change, a name change, or a gender-identity classification change. That’s when the government moved forward with respect to this policy,” he said on Oct. 16.
The policy at Regina schools was released in June 2022, and was developed with consultation of parents, students, and staff, a spokesperson for the division told The Epoch Times in an email. 
Following significant consultation in 2019 with employees, parents, students and experts, Regina Public Schools administration began work on an Administrative Procedure to guide the school division and everyone that works and learns in it,” Terry Lazarou said in the email.
The policy, dubbed Administrative Procedure #353, states: “Division staff will respect confidentiality and privacy and not disclose sexual orientation, gender identity, and/or gender expression of students unless the student has given permission or there is an impending safety concern.”
Mr. Lazarou confirmed the school division’s position and said the school division uses the provincial Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter to guide its actions. 
This Administrative Procedure asserts that students have a legal right to be safe and protected in schools and it makes reference to The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, 2018 and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” he said. “This procedure is in accordance with our elected Regina Board of Education Policies.”
Mr. Lazarou also said the division has not received any complaints about the policy. 
“The school division has never had a complaint or criticism of how the school division promotes student safety and protection in schools from any of the families of more than 26,000 students,” he said. 
The Epoch Times reached out to Mr. Cockrill’s office but did not hear back by publication time. 

Legal Challenge

The Saskatchewan government announced its intention to bring in the pronoun policy on Aug. 22. They were challenged in court by UR Pride Center for Sexuality and Gender Diversity, an LGBT peer support group. 
The Court of Kings Bench of Saskatchewan granted an injunction on Sept. 28 that would prevent the policy from being enacted by schools in the province until a court ruling was issued. 
However, Mr. Moe opted to use the notwithstanding clause in the Charter that allows the government to push forward legislation regardless of court litigation. 
Mr. Cockrill told reporters on Oct. 16 that the government wanted parents to have more say in their children’s education. 
“We believe that parents have an important role to play in those conversations, and so when they’re excluded, explicitly or implicitly, then that’s something that we need to correct.”