.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
Hundreds of Montrealers gathered outside SPVM Station 21 on Saturday afternoon (October 24) after reports that two officers at the downtown station were suspended with pay over alleged humiliating acts toward unhoused and racialized people. According to reporting first detailed by La Presse and confirmed by the SPVM, one officer is alleged to have urinated on people experiencing homelessness while in uniform — in some cases while they were sleeping — and filmed the acts over roughly 18 months on duty. A second officer is alleged to have posed for photos that appeared to mock a suspect placed in a humiliating position during an arrest. Both remain under internal investigation. Montreal Mayor Soraya Martinez Ferrada described the allegations as “extremely serious” and said they undermine the dignity every person deserves. Quebec’s Domestic Security Minister has since ordered independent probes by the BEI and the police ethics commissioner into the urination claims. Protesters marched through the eastern edge of downtown, chanting “Police everywhere, justice nowhere.” Speakers called for greater accountability, criticized paid suspensions as insufficient, and raised longstanding concerns about how police interact with unhoused communities. Police used tear gas and pepper spray during the demonstration. Four people were arrested (three for alleged assaults on officers, one for obstruction), and a 66-year-old bystander was injured by a projectile. These developments come months after a separate SPVM Station 39 (Montreal-Nord) scandal that led to the disbanding of a patrol unit amid allegations of racism and misconduct. Neither officer in the Station 21 case has been found guilty; investigations continue. Accountability requires transparency and real consequences — not just suspensions with pay. What are your thoughts on how cities should handle officers facing credible allegations like these
new government In BC get this wants to get rid of the BC human rights tribunal so you have no civil or human rights for discrimination - the grand lodge of the BC and yukon voted them in NOT us to better control all us with force and stupidity
« Why are people acting like the sky is falling because the conservatives won? Just give them a chance! »
I would LOVE to be pleasantly surprised by this newly-elected conservative government, but here is my novel on SOME of the reasons why I believe their party is going to be horribly destructive to our province over the next few years.
Skim the headlines, read the ones that call out to you, and engage WITH RESPECT please. If you can’t do that, keep scrolling.
They tried—and will likely re-attempt—to repeal the BC human rights code.
In early 2026, Tara Armstrong introduced a bill to repeal the BC human rights code, which 37 MLAs (34 of whom were conservatives, the others independent or OneBC) voted in favour of. No NDP, Green, or Centre BC MLAs voted in favour of it.
This is extremely consequential for women and minorities (race, gender, sexual orientation, place of origin, religion, physical ability, etc). While the Charter of Human Rights protects against discrimination in the public sector, the BC human rights code fills in necessary gaps in the private sector. This is not “privileging” these minorities, it is an effort to give them the same opportunities for education, housing, livelihood, etc that are afforded to more socially dominant groups.
Repealing the BCHRC means that employers, banks, property owners, etc will be allowed to discriminate against these currently-protected groups for invalid reasons.
Ironically, their own people (ahem, Apollo Chung) seem to have no trouble filing discrimination cases with the BC human rights tribunal when it suits them, but they want to take that away that right. Go figure.
Repealing DRIPA
This one is a big boogeyman issue because many people are afraid that their property rights are at risk. Which is understandable when you consider that Richmond property owners received a very alarmist letter from the city, saying that aboriginal title may invalidate their fee simple ownership.
The truth: not only does the recognition of aboriginal title NOT threaten private property ownership, but Cowichan FN and the BC government have repeatedly emphasized that private landowners are not the target; they are not seeking to seize land or dispossess people of their homes or property.
So what ARE they seeking? Cowichan FN are going to be in negotiations for the transfer of crown, city, and port authority land. Regarding the private land within that territory, they will be negotiating with the BC government on compensation. This is VERY DIFFERENT from “they’re taking our land”. That’s not what’s happening. Very little, if anything, will change in the lives of these property owners; perhaps they will be paying their property taxes to Cowichan FN instead of Richmond, or something like that. But banks are not denying loans for those properties, nobody is seizing land. That is false.
Repealing DRIPA in a supposed effort to protect private property is political theatre, because it will not reverse the Cowichan Supreme Court decision, nor will it prevent future decisions like it being made. However, it pits us against Indigenous people, fuels animosity, and leads to a lot of rhetoric that dehumanizes Indigenous people.
Lack of environmental protections will cause massive economic harm now and for future generations
Many conservative voters vote blue claiming economic reasons, and believe that left-wing voters are stupid and don’t understand the economy, or else they believe that prioritizing the environment is evidence that we are out of touch with the struggles of working class people.
The truth is, we want economic growth too! We want prosperity too! We’re just not willing to do it AT ALL COSTS, because there are ways we can build our economy without relying on exploitation and unsustainable methods of extraction.
We believe that unsustainable methods are morally reprehensible because not only are they harming and displacing vulnerable populations NOW, but they are also stealing from future generations and creating a world that will be even harder for them than it is for us.
We want to expand the economy infusing methods and technologies that allow more people to make great money, that are more environmentally sustainable, and that don’t just allow a handful of billionaire pricks to buy their 4th yacht while the rest of us starve.
People on the left generally are not advocating for a sudden ban on fossil fuels or shutting down existing pipelines, but building more will lock us in for decades of unsustainable extraction, pollution, and we have better ways of building an economy around sustainable energy—if we were to invest the money our government is currently spending on the oil & gas industry and redirect more and more of that to renewable energy infrastructure.
Privatisation of healthcare
The BC healthcare system is not perfect—we need more medical professionals, more hospitals—hell, the emergency room in my town is only open until 8pm. We had no X-ray machine for months. Fuck yeah I want to see that change!
But privatization is the worst possible solution. In the US, it is not uncommon at all for people to pay 1000-2000+ PER MONTH on insurance, their deductible is $10-25k, and that means they might spend $50k out of pocket PER YEAR before they can even begin to benefit from their insurance.
And their wait times aren’t much better than Canada’s, especially for urgent medical needs.
The conservative costed plan that they released is literally economically infeasible. They simply cannot cut our taxes while also improving our services. MLA Tony Luck has even said that « health care is likely to take the brunt of the cuts ».
When private services are underfunded, it creates a void that can « conveniently » be filled by privatisation. Privatisation would be absolutely disastrous for anyone who is disabled, has chronic health issues, gets cancer, and almost all elderly people.
Cutting SOGI resources from schools
« Get the gay agenda out of schools and let kids be kids ». Usually some variation of this argument is used to justify cutting SOGI resources. SOGI resources are not sitting kids in a classroom and teaching them how to be gay, or positioning gender transition as a « cool option » for kids to choose.
SOGI provides resources for children who are ALREADY questioning their sexual orientation (which does not mean they’re thinking about sex—heterosexual don’t need to be thinking about sex to know they’re attracted to the opposite sex) or their gender expression that may not fit the norms. These resources are life-saving. They help prevent teenagers feeling so isolated and marginalized that they self-delete.
This imagined « pressure » to be trans is not happening. This imagined « permanently altering kids’ genitals » is not happening (except when parents of intersex babies get them surgeries to make their genitals more « normal », ironically enough).
SOGI programs are simply to help children and teens make sense of what they are already feeling so that they can sort through it, and come to the conclusions that feel most true to who they are.
Eliminating these programs is extremely detrimental to kids’ mental health and well-being.
Separatist rhetoric is not a deal-breaker for them
MLA David Williams shared a map of Canada as a US protectorate. The US has been actively threatening our sovereignty for 2 years, and ANYONE within the Canadian government who is not on Canada’s side, who does not believe Canadian sovereignty is a foundational, bare-minimum expectation of being a public servant, should not be allowed to be one.
General racist and misogynistic attitudes
I don’t believe people who have demonstrated racist or misogynistic attitudes should be making policy that impacts the people they see as less worthy of basic human dignity, nor should they be working for a political party at all.
Katy Merrifield, who was Lorne Doerkson’s campaign director, said « f*ck *slam ». MLA Kristina Loewen compared pandemic rules to the Holocaust—incredibly insulting to Jews (or anyone whose family or who they themselves have survived a genocide). Mike Hicks said « First nations have to be conquered »—how are First Nations supposed to have any trust for a party who openly says things like that? Aaron Gunn has made many residential school denialist comments. John Henderson brought a denialist book to municipal hall. Sheldon Clare said local politicians « need hanging ». Heather Maahs compared trans people to pedophiles.
How are anyone other than white, cis, straight men supposed to trust a government that clearly tolerates hate toward so many of their constituents?
Reminder: if you have counterpoints, that’s fine. If you have questions or don’t agree with my stated goals, that’s fine. But come with facts and grounded evidence or don’t come at all.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
BREAKING: TRUMP’S AMERICA! Teens dress up in Klan robes and walk down the street screaming “we hate n*****s!” at the top of their lungs in terrifying viral video from El Paso, Texas! The kids are NOT alright… This weekend, a shocking viral video from Texas showed that a group of young teens had dressed up in Ku Klux Klan robes and began wandering around the streets, screaming "One, two, three — bye n*****s” and “we HATE n*****s” at the top of their lungs. The kid filming calls them “the team,” indicating it could possibly be a local sports team being racist together. The NCAAP, the Mayor of El Paso, and Democratic Rep. Veronica Escobar rushed to condemn this behavior in the strongest possible way. “The KKK hood is not a costume. It is an international symbol of white supremacy, racial terror, systemic murder, and intimidation directed at Black Americans and marginalized communities. To parade around in such symbols within the Sun City — a vibrant, diverse community built on solidarity, resilience, and mutual respect — is an intolerable affront to every single resident of El Paso,” the NAACP said in a statement sent out to local media on Sunday, Oct. 25. This is what you get when you have a white supremacist president and a white supremacist government staffed by dead-eyed Nazi psychos, who were elected by white supremacists and instill this kind of horrifying racism into their kids. The KKK is not a meme, and all of these kids need to be identified and held accountable for this – as does everyone involved in building the kind of national atmosphere where this kind of shit is considered a joke.
BREAKING
The Supreme Court just barred immigration judges from pausing deportation cases. Immigrants waiting on visa petitions or protection claims can no longer have their cases set aside while they wait.
The Supreme Court's order on Tuesday was one sentence long. Unsigned. No explanation, and no noted dissents.
That pause is called administrative closure. Judges used it to set a deportation case aside while something else played out: a visa petition, an appeal of a criminal conviction, a crime victim seeking protection, a child who had been abused or abandoned. Past data shows most immigrants whose cases came back to court after a closure were ultimately allowed to stay.
Trump's first administration claimed judges had no authority to do it. Biden restored it with a rule in 2024.
On June 22, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued to kill that rule, claiming it let judges "effectively grant indefinite amnesty." Within hours, Trump's Justice Department, which runs the immigration courts, joined Texas in asking the judge to throw the rule out. It also asked him to forbid any similar rule in the future.
Reed O'Connor, the only federal judge in Wichita Falls, granted all of it the same day. Permanently. Nationwide.
America First Legal, the group Stephen Miller founded, co-filed the Texas lawsuit.
Baltimore, New Haven and Columbus, along with the immigrant legal aid group Centro Legal de la Raza, tried to step in and defend the rule since nobody else would. O'Connor said they had no standing and rejected the cities' argument that they'd lose taxpayers to deportation. The 5th Circuit refused to intervene.
At the Supreme Court, their lawyers called the deal "egregious collusion." They said the government announced it wouldn't defend the rule "and then colluded with the challenger from the moment that suit was filed."
Their attorney, Joshua Salzman of Democracy Forward, warned that if this stands, any agency can wipe out a rule it doesn't like just by refusing to defend it and immediately agreeing to a nationwide ruling against it.
Paxton and the Justice Department ran the same play last year. The DOJ sued Texas over in-state college tuition for undocumented students, Texas asked O'Connor to strike its own law down just hours later, and he did.
.png)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)