This debate is happening right now on CPAC.
As she got further into her remarks, though, it became clear that while she was speaking to the importance of the protection of transgendered and transsexual rights, she was simultaneously attempting to justify opposition to the bill by saying that enshrining rights in legislation is "symbolic," rather than direct social action. When I ask, however, has the Government of Canada—or even the Parliament of Canada —attempted to instigate direct social action in a case such as this?
The Question at Issue
The bill being debated right now, which was proposed by Mr. Randall Garrison M.P. ( Esquimalt—Juan-de-Fuca ), would extend the protections of the Canada Human Rights Act to transgender and transsexual Canadians. Currently, trans rights are not explicitly mentioned in Canadian human rights legislation. Gender identity and gender expression would be added to the Act.
Members of the Conservative Party of Canada have been quick to dub this the "bathroom bill," and have raised outrageous accusations that non-discrimination on the basis of gender identity and expression would be harmful to children, and that it would open the door for criminals to prey on children in public washrooms. The Conservatives' statements in respect of this bill have suggested that transgender and transsexual Canadians are not to be trusted.
(The debate is continuing on CPAC; I will link to the Hansard as soon as it has been uploaded.)
( Bill C-279 )