Category: The Conversation – Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By John Potvin, Professor, Art and Design History, Concordia University

Despite the hyperbolic and fleeting tendencies of the fashion industry, few designers have had the impact of Giorgio Armani, who has died in Milan at the age of 91.

The new look and attitude the designer offered 50 years ago is today largely taken for granted and, at first glance, seems rather unassuming. But from the outset, Armani’s focus and determination was to provide his customers with an easier way of dressing that was at once practical, sophisticated and thoughtful, yet unpretentious, powerful and subtle.

His suits required little effort on the part of the wearer, whose individuality and identity were meant to shine rather than being overwhelmed by his clothes. His approach to tailoring coincided with the growing awareness of health and fitness in the 1970s and 1980s.

Armani’s body-conscious approach soon garnered attention in Hollywood, and he was asked to provide the wardrobe for Richard Gere in the now cult-classic 1980 film American Gigolo.

Humble beginnings

Born in 1934 in the small northern Italian town of Piacenza, Armani was originally destined to be a country family doctor. Before founding his own fashion house in 1975 relatively late in life, at the age of 41, Armani began in the fashion industry as a window dresser for the Milanese department store La Rinascente.

In 1961, he was hired by stylist and businessman Nino Cerruti to work in the Cerruti family’s textile factory. This new and fertile environment proved seminal to Armani’s future in textile development and would determine his own aesthetic formula.

While working at Cerruti, designing for the firm’s Hitman menswear collection, Armani proverbially and literally took the stuffing out of traditional Italian tailoring, offering men a modern attitude and a novel, less rigid way of moving and living in their jackets and suits.

Quickly, and throughout his 50-year career, the now iconic multi-purpose Armani jacket provided men and women alike armour as much as comfort and support for the body underneath.

Encouraged by his romantic and business partner Sergio Galeotti, an architect who remained Armani’s business partner until his untimely death in 1984, Armani officially founded his own fashion house in July 1975.

He quickly changed the vocabulary of both menswear and womenswear: he incorporated and adapted textiles traditionally reserved for men’s tailoring for his womenswear collections while at the same time softening the fabrics and silhouettes of his menswear. Women appeared stronger, independent, resilient and ready to take on the workplace of the 1980s, while the Armani man was less aggressive and instead attractive and glamourous.

Conquering Hollywood

For American Gigolo, Armani sidestepped vulgarity and provided the lead character with a fluid and unstructured swagger and sex appeal.

Hollywood was immediately hooked. Armani had been enamoured by the classic era of cinema as a child and the star quality of actors like Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant, Geta Garbo and Marlene Dietrich, so he was keenly aware of the value and cultural potential of not only dressing actors in films, but also saw the red carpet as what was, until then, an untapped resource.

---

Read more:
Oscars 2024: How a dress goes from haute couture design to red carpet

---

Armani soon had a major impact on red carpet dressing, so much so that industry bible Women’s Wear Daily dubbed the 1990 Oscars the “Armani Awards.”

This red carpet transformation was the result of Armani’s love of cinema and his business acumen as much it was his collaboration with Wanda McDaniel, an American whom he recruited in 1988, the same year he opened his first boutique in Beverly Hills.

As a social columnist and well connected to Hollywood’s elite, McDaniel was hired as a special liaison to Armani’s increasing film industry clientele. Their collaboration was a force to be reckoned with in the industry.

Armani’s personal abode

Fuelled by a steadfast drive, the personal and professional was indistinguishable for Armani, so much so that the designer’s palazzo at 21 via Borgonuovo in the heart of Milan served as both his home as well as the theatre where he staged his men’s and women’s runway collections from 1984 until 2000.

The space provided a personal and intimate invitation to more than just fashion shows, but a lifestyle empire in the making.

In addition to co-curating a 25-year retrospective exhibition at the Guggenheim Museum in New York, the year 2000 also saw the designer transform the brand’s DNA into a global lifestyle proposition that today encompasses hotels, spas, Michelin Star-awarded restaurants, makeup, jewellery, home furnishings and chocolates, among other items.

From the unstructured jacket that’s worn with ease to the social media frenzy garnered by red carpets, Armani’s imprint can be seen in every corner of the fashion industry and around the globe. His impact and legacy will be felt for decades to come.

John Potvin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Fashion icon Giorgio Armani’s impact and legacy will be felt for decades to come – https://theconversation.com/fashion-icon-giorgio-armanis-impact-and-legacy-will-be-felt-for-decades-to-come-264653

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Bethany Hastie, Assistant Professor, Law, University of British Columbia

The federal government’s recent use of Section 107 of the Canadian Labour Code to end the Air Canada flight attendant strike is a troubling development for Canadian workers and unions.

On Aug. 16, less than 12 hours after more than 10,000 Air Canada flight attendants walked off the job, the federal jobs minister intervened.

Patty Hajdu invoked Section 107 to order the attendants back to work, and directed their union and Air Canada to binding arbitration — a process in which a neutral third party decides on the terms of a collective agreement after considering each party’s position.

Section 107 provides the jobs minister with the general power to “maintain or secure industrial peace” and to direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB), which adjudicates workplace disputes, to also take similar actions.

Since June 2024, the federal government has used Section 107 four other times to interfere with striking workers at West Jet, the CN and CPKC railways, the British Columbia and Québec ports and Canada Post.

The ability to strike is the most powerful tool workers have when collectively bargaining with their employers. When the government intervenes and pre-emptively ends a strike, it undermines the legal purpose and use of strikes in Canadian labour law. It also likely violates workers’ constitutional right to strike under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The purpose of strikes in Canadian labour law

In defending its use of Section 107, the federal government has repeatedly argued its intervention is necessary because the parties were at an impasse. This undermines the very purpose of a strike.

Under Canadian labour law, workers can only strike during collective bargaining with their employer and when certain conditions have been met. Strikes are intended to move collective bargaining forward when the parties reach an impasse in negotiations. They work by exerting economic pressure on an employer and incentivizing them to return to the bargaining table and reach an agreement.

Often, as during last year’s Air Canada pilots labour dispute illustrates, the threat of a strike alone is enough to spur the parties to reach an agreement.

The swiftness with which the government has intervened — for example, less than 17 hours into the CN/CPKC strike and less than 12 hours into the most recent Air Canada strike — undercuts the ability of those strikes to achieve their purpose of moving past deadlocks.

Government intervention also creates an expectation for employers. Air Canada, for instance, asked for federal intervention due to an impasse several days before the flight attendants’ strike began. Such requests undermine the purpose of strikes and, in turn, the collective bargaining process itself.

The recent Air Canada dispute also demonstrates the effectiveness of strikes when government interference is no longer an option. Once it was clear to Air Canada that the flight attendants would continue to strike despite the government ordering them back to work, they were able to reach a tentative agreement with the union within 48 hours.

Intervention not justified

The federal government has repeatedly pointed to economic hardship as justification for using Section 107. Harm to the economy was cited as a basis to order the CN/CPKC railway workers back-to-work last summer, and again when the federal government intervened in labour disputes at the Montréal, Québec and Vancouver ports in November 2024.

Most recently, Hajdu defended sending Air Canada flight attendants back to work because “the potential for immediate negative impact on Canadians and our economy is simply too great.”

---

Read more:
Air Canada flight attendant ‘unlawful’ strike exposes major fault lines in Canadian labour law

---

Yet economic hardship is not a justifiable basis for removing workers’ right to strike. Canadian labour law recognizes that only workers who provide essential services may be prohibited from striking — where withdrawal or interruption of services would cause a serious and immediate threat to public safety or security, such as police officers or fire fighters.

Notably, both the Montréal port workers and the CN/CPKC railway workers have been subject to attempts by their employers to have their work designated as essential. However, the CIRB declined to make such a designation in either case.

The constitutional right to strike

The government’s use of Section 107 is likely unconstitutional. Since the right to strike was recognized as protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in a 2015 Supreme Court of Canada decision, laws that remove workers’ ability to strike risk violating the guarantee of freedom of association.

Restrictions on the right to strike may sometimes be justified under Section 1 of the Charter, which allows for reasonable limits on Charter rights and freedoms where the government can show the limit is justifiable, such as in the case of essential service workers.

However, the government’s use of Section 107 so far — swiftly, and with reference to economic hardship as the primary reason for doing so — seems unlikely to be justified.

The importance of the constitutional right to strike has already stymied the federal government’s use of Section 107. In the West Jet mechanics labour dispute, it was determined by the CIRB that the government’s order for binding arbitration had not suspended the mechanics’ constitutional right to strike, which allowed them to proceed with their planned strike.

In all subsequent orders, the federal government has avoided this outcome by specifically ordering the end of the strike.

The significance of a constitutionally protected right to strike was underscored during the recent Air Canada dispute when flight attendants and their union defied the government’s back-to-work order, risking jail time and hefty fines by continuing to strike.

Troubling development for labour rights

The Canadian government’s willingness to intervene in labour disputes, and the manner in which it has done so, undermines the collective bargaining process central to Canadian labour law and industrial relations.

The constitutionality of the government’s actions will soon be ruled on by the courts. Unions representing the port workers, the railroad workers and the Air Canada flight attendants have all filed constitutional challenges against the government’s use of Section 107.

However, a final decision by the courts could still be years away. In the meantime, workers and unions in major federal sectors will remain vulnerable to government intervention, and — as in the recent Air Canada dispute — may have to risk fines and jail time to assert their constitutional right to strike.

Bethany Hastie receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. She is a member of the BC Employment Standards Coalition.

Keegan Nicol does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The federal government’s repeated use of back-to-work powers undermines Canadian workers’ right to strike – https://theconversation.com/the-federal-governments-repeated-use-of-back-to-work-powers-undermines-canadian-workers-right-to-strike-263605

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Nargess Kayhani, Associate professor of Economics, Mount Saint Vincent University

Trade disputes between the United States and Canada are nothing new. They date back as far as the late 19th century.

What began as two neighbouring countries seeking to expand their markets and assert economic sovereignty has evolved into a broad range of conflicts.

These historical trade disputes have included accusations of unfair subsidies, protectionist tariffs, and, more recently, concerns over national security, fentanyl and border security.

Softwood lumber, one of the most important items on the list of Canadian exports to the U.S., has been consistently under attack by different American administrations. The disputes go back to as early as 1980s and are still one of the major sources of trade interruptions between the two countries.

Other important areas of trade disputes are agricultural products, namely dairy, beef and grain as well as steel and aluminum, auto and aerospace industries.

---

Read more:
Boycotting U.S. products allows Canadians to take a rare political stand in their daily lives

---

Trump’s tariffs

Earlier in 2025, the U.S. administration under President Donald Trump even violated the existing Canada-U.S.Mexico Trade Agreement (CUSMA) by imposing tariffs on products that were supposed to be exempt under the provisions of the deal.

This action has had negative economic effects on both the U.S. and Canada. In the words of Tiff Macklem, governor of the Bank of Canada, “restoring open trade is important for jobs, growth and price stability in Canada.”

South of the border, the tariffs imposed on Canadian products are likely raising costs for American consumers and businesses, though calculating the precise increase is complex because manufacturing components cross the Canada-U.S. border many times.

Carney’s move

Though some might call it weakness, Prime Minister Mark Carney’s recent move to lift the retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods covered under CUSMA, while retaining tariffs on auto, steel and aluminum, is arguably a wise strategy.

The end goal is to minimize economic damage to Canada. According to Carney, this tariff removal on about 85 per cent of Canada-U.S. trade is consistent with the commitment under CUSMA.

Furthermore, such alignment with the U.S. could create a guarantee for the continuation of trade and security talks currently ongoing between the two countries.

Some argue that such a strategic decision will benefit Canadian consumers by making imports cheaper, reducing inflationary pressure on the Canadian economy and giving Canadians a sense of relief knowing that a trade deal will be achieved.

While the statistics don’t explicitly link the removal of Canadian retaliatory tariffs with the downward pressure on inflation or boosting Canadian consumption, it is generally accepted that lower prices for imported goods increase purchasing power.

Alternate trade relationships

Is Carney buying time? Does he have a long-term plan for Canada and the direction of trade?

While the prime minister is seemingly trying to keep negotiations productive in the lead-up to CUSMA’s renegotiation in 2026, his government has also started negotiating with many other countries (especially in Europe) to secure more reliable trading partners.

In June 2025, Carney said:

“We will need to dramatically reduce our reliance on the United States. We will need to pivot our trade relationships elsewhere.”

These echo similar comments he’s made over the past several months, including these remarks:

“Our old relationship with the United States, a relationship based on steadily increasing integration, is over. The system of open global trade anchored by the United States — a system that Canada has relied on since the Second World War, a system that, while not perfect, has helped deliver prosperity for our country for decades — is over.”

An unpredictable U.S.

By offering tariff relief on non-strategic goods while retaining protections for key sectors of the Canadian economy — steel, aluminum and automobiles — Carney isn’t surrendering. As an economist, I believe he’s being strategic.

Canadians should keep in mind that the federal government is not dealing with a reasonable American administration under Trump. It is predictably unpredictable.

Managing relations with such a partner is a profound challenge in diplomacy, simply because negotiators cannot rely on the U.S. government acting in good faith and adhering to the provisions of existing trade deals.

To effectively handle this situation, the Canadian government must have a plan that integrates strategy, patience and psychological insight. It should also have multiple back-up plans in case there is a sudden shift in U.S. trade policy and action. I argue that what Carney has done so far is an astute tactical manoeuvre.

Nargess Kayhani does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Mark Carney lifted some tariffs against the U.S. Was that a wise tactical move, or a bad blunder? – https://theconversation.com/mark-carney-lifted-some-tariffs-against-the-u-s-was-that-a-wise-tactical-move-or-a-bad-blunder-264177

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Wendy Morgado Gamero, PhD candidate in Biology, McGill University

As climate change and human activity threaten freshwater ecosystems like lakes and rivers, it’s more important than ever to know how the species who inhabit them are being impacted. But traditional methods of monitoring species, such as catching animals, are challenging to implement and can miss rapid changes.

What if we could track life without capturing or directly observing individual animals? It turns out we can, by reading the DNA and RNA they leave behind in the water.

Every living thing leaves tiny traces in their environment — skin cells, waste or microscopic fragments we cannot see. These fragments carry genetic material unique to each species on Earth.

So, when scientists sample one bottle of water, a few grams of soil, or even filter the air, they are actually collecting what’s called environmental DNA (eDNA) or RNA (eRNA), which can tell us which species are (or have been) present in an area.

Recent studies have demonstrated that eRNA, previously considered too unstable for field use, can be reliably detected in freshwater ecosystems.

Our research

DNA molecules take time to completely disappear in the aquatic environment. That means eDNA might come from organisms living there now — or from ones that disappeared weeks ago.

However, RNA breaks down quickly. That fragility turns out to be an advantage: it gives us a snapshot of what’s alive and active in the moment, offering a powerful new way of tracking living organisms in real time.

At McGill University’s Gault Nature Reserve, researchers use the Large Experimental Array of Ponds (LEAP): 96 cattle-tank “ponds,” each holding about 1,000 litres of water drawn from nearby Lake Hertel. Known as mesocosms, they allow the researchers to test how freshwater communities respond to rapid changes in their environment like pH and temperature.

A mesocosm is a human-made outdoor tank that mimics a real freshwater ecosystem — big enough to include microbes, plankton and natural water, yet controlled so scientists can test isolated factors and repeat experiments. You can think of them as giant outdoor aquariums for science.

In our study, we worked with the large mesocosms at LEAP. We added a solution containing only DNA and RNA of water fleas (Daphnia pulex), a common freshwater organism absent from Lake Hertel, to the water mesocosm without the fleas themselves.

This allowed us to track how eDNA and eRNA behave across time once they enter the water. We subsequently transferred 10 per cent of the water volume into the next mesocosms, until reaching a dilution of 10,000 times of the eDNA and eRNA solution. We collected water samples starting right after we added the solution to the first tanks and continued for 24 days, nine times in total.

We used digital PCR to measure how DNA and RNA concentrations changed over time, a highly sensitive technology that can detect very low concentrations of genetic material. This method was also widely used during the COVID-19 pandemic to track the virus in wastewater. By applying it to our freshwater samples, we could precisely quantify how quickly DNA and RNA faded, and compare their persistence under the same conditions.

We also tested differences among RNA types: messenger RNA (mRNA), which carries short-lived instructions that tell cells how to make proteins, and ribosomal RNA (rRNA), which forms part of the cell’s protein-making machinery and is more stable.

What we found in the water

We discovered that RNA degraded much faster than DNA once it was released into the water. Interestingly, we observed differences among RNA types: mRNA degraded faster than rRNA.

Still, we were able to detect both DNA and RNA even after the water had been diluted 10,000 times across the mesocosms. This demonstrates that, even though RNA breaks down quickly, sensitive tools like digital PCR can still detect it, showing its potential for tracking active life in freshwater systems.

Our study demonstrates that environmental RNA — a molecule that disappears soon after an organism dies — can reveal recent biological activity in real time.

In particular, mRNA, the most fragile RNA, can provide a better snapshot of active life in aquatic systems. This provides scientists and environmental managers with a faster means of detecting changes and taking action to protect freshwater ecosystems.

What eRNA can tell us next

Environmental RNA could reveal not only which species are currently alive, but also their health status or even their life stage. For example, one study demonstrated that changes in gene activity resulting from heat stress can be detected in mRNA from the water, providing information about the health of organisms in ecosystems.

Another study found that eRNA can distinguish between tadpoles and adult amphibians, making it possible to track life stages in the wild without needing to catch animals.

These findings suggest that eRNA could become a powerful, non-invasive tool for biodiversity monitoring. With further research, environmental RNA could help us not only track life in freshwater ecosystems, but also reveal how species are adapting in a rapidly changing world.

This study was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Discovery Grant, the Genome Canada BIOSCAN–Canada initiative through the 2020 Large-Scale Applied Research Project Competition (Genomic Solutions for Natural Resources and the Environment), and the Government of Canada’s New Frontiers in Research Fund (NFRF).

Orianne Tournayre does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How environmental RNA can give us a real-time picture of freshwater biodiversity – https://theconversation.com/how-environmental-rna-can-give-us-a-real-time-picture-of-freshwater-biodiversity-263713

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sarah Morales, Associate Dean Indigenous & Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Victoria

The British Columbia Supreme Court’s recent decision in Cowichan Tribes v. Canada has attracted a lot of headlines, with some suggesting it signals the end of private property.

The Quw’utsun Nation sought Declarations of Aboriginal title to Tl’uqtinus, their traditional village on the south arm of the Fraser River and surrounding lands, and of their right to fish for food in the south arm of the Fraser.

The judgment certainly deserves careful consideration, but not because it puts individual homes and businesses at risk. That isn’t what the court found, nor was it asked to.

It deserves attention because it calls on governments — and all of us — to honestly confront the unlawful foundations of B.C.’s land system and turn our minds to meaningful remedies.

In her ruling, Justice Barbara Young held that the Crown lacked lawful authority to grant fee simple titles over Cowichan lands in what is today part of the city of Richmond. In her words:

“The Crown grants of fee simple interest in the Cowichan Title Lands, and the Crown vesting of the soil and freehold interest in certain highway lands in the Cowichan Title Lands, unjustifiably infringe the Cowichan’s Aboriginal title.”

The plaintiffs did not ask the court to invalidate the title deeds of homeowners and businesses, and the ruling does not do that. Instead, the Quw’utsun Nation sought accountability from the Crown: the return of provincially and municipally held lands and long-term solutions about all the wrongfully granted titles.

This distinction matters if we are interested in finding solutions about how to live well together, and not just in stirring up controversy.

We tend to view private property as a sacrosanct, never-changing principle. But property rights are legal constructs — never absolute and always evolving. Just as property law has been reshaped to reflect human rights and environmental protections, it must also evolve to address colonial injustices and dispossession.

An unresolved history of land theft

For the Quw’utsun Nation, the court’s decision fits into a broader context of land dispossession. While this case concerns part of its territory along the Fraser River, most Quw’utsun territory is on southern Vancouver Island, where the infamous E&N Railway grants transferred vast areas into private hands without consent, treaty or compensation.

That land grab remains the central obstacle in more than 30 years of ongoing negotiations between the Hul’quimi’num Treaty Group, which represents three of the plaintiff First Nations, as well as the Lyackson and Ts’uubaa-asatx Nations, and the Crown.

In fact, initial colonial incursions into Quw’utsun territory on Vancouver Island were timed such that many members were at Tl’uqtinus when the first governor of British Columbia, James Douglas, arrived with settlers. His promises of compensation were never honoured.

B.C. led Canada in incorporating the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples into law in 2019. Yet now the province has chosen to adopt an adversarial approach, viewing the case as a threat to private property, and will appeal the B.C. Supreme Court decision.

Appeals will only prolong an already painful process. Instead, the government could choose to focus on legal creativity and innovative solutions over endless court battles. On Haida Gwaii, shared governance agreements preserve the respective authorities of the Haida Nation and the Crown and reflect both legal traditions.

In 2021, the B.C. Supreme Court concluded the Blueberry River First Nation’s treaty rights had been infringed upon by the impacts of industrial developments in its traditional territory. The province chose not to appeal, instead pledging to work with Blueberry River First Nation to collaboratively address the impacts of resource development.

In New Zealand, the landmark Treaty of Waitangi settlements likewise embed Māori authority into land-use governance while respecting shared interests in lands and resources.

While not perfect, these examples all demonstrate how a serious engagement with Indigenous law and authority can lead to better and more equitable solutions for everyone.

Quw’utsun law offers tools for shared governance, managing overlapping rights in ways that respect both Indigenous and Crown institutions. For Quw’utsun Mustimuhw (Cowichan Peoples), territoriality is not marked by rigid boundaries but by relationships of reciprocity, kinship and shared use.

This flexible, place-based orientation provides a foundation for governance that can accommodate overlapping interests while maintaining respect and accountability inter-societally and across legal systems.

An invitation to restore good relations

As Chief Cindy Daniels of Cowichan Tribes stated:

“The court’s declaration is important to reconciliation and to correct the historical injustice that was done to us. We will not pursue this with malice and we will conduct ourselves with one mind, one head and one spirit for our culture and community, and for the generations to come.”

Drawing on this principle could replace adversarial conflict with constructive nation-to-nation dialogue. But truth must come first.

Society cannot look away, even when past wrongs are difficult to repair — such as with homes and businesses on unlawfully granted land.

Acknowledging harm does not mean ignoring the interests of current owners, but it does require honesty about the history of how that land was acquired and creativity in finding remedies. Shying away from truth because it is uncomfortable only fuels greater uncertainty and conflict for all parties in the long run.

The Cowichan decision reminds us that reconciliation demands confronting the colonial foundations of Canada’s property system. Governments must accept responsibility rather than hide behind litigation.

Commentators and the public should resist alarmist rhetoric and instead engage with the deeper questions this ruling raises: how to repair relationships, return what can be returned and reshape institutions to reflect renewed relations.

The way we own and manage property and land in Canada is not working: housing inequality is rising, forest fires rage across the country and biodiversity loss has reached emergency levels.

The court’s decision is a chance for a new beginning grounded in an honest reckoning about how property rights were created, and how they can be reshaped to justly and honestly improve how we live together on these lands.

In our view, it is an invitation to imagine and enact transformative change for generations to come.

Sarah Morales is Coast Salish and a member of Cowichan Tribes. Over the past 20 years she has worked with Cowichan Tribes, and other Quw’utsun Nations, on projects related to child and family services, governance and law revitalization. She receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council or Canada.

Estair Van Wagner receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. The B.C. Supreme Court’s recognition of Cowichan title is an invitation to enact transformative change – https://theconversation.com/the-b-c-supreme-courts-recognition-of-cowichan-title-is-an-invitation-to-enact-transformative-change-263596

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Taylor Morphett, Assistant Professor, English, University of Northern British Columbia

As another school year returns, large language models (LLMs) present difficult questions around learning, thinking, plagiarism and authorship for educators.

New approaches to assignments and assessment are required. Student papers that use LLM technology require additional labour on many fronts. Professors have expressed frustration, worry and anxiety.

As an assistant professor of English whose research has focused on the histories of writing and how it’s taught, I have been involved in many discussions at institutions of higher learning about this topic.

The immediate issue of LLMs in the classroom points to a larger reality. For too long, instructors and universities have been treating students’ writing difficulties as a deficiency in the mind — instead of confronting the truth that writing, as a technology for thinking, is cognitively demanding.

Writing is a technology that helps us understand our own ideas better. Where people are involved in thinking and invention — including at universities — it needs to be taught in that spirit.

Why consider AI output ‘writing?’

Given what LLM technology actually does and does not do, why do we even consider it writing — as in, “they used an LLM to write their assignment?”

LLM technology creates — at best — a facsimile of a textual object, meaning that based on its training on existing texts, it can create output that resembles a “text.”

When generated for the purpose of a university assignment, it resembles the standard academic English that has ruled the academy (historical and present-day institutions of higher learning including colleges, technical schools and universities) and has been endowed with a special relationship to truth.

I’ve seen anger and frustration expressed towards the student who uses LLM output in their writing process or submitted work. The reason seems to be that it undermines that special relationship to truth that academic writing has long held.

The artificial output reveals that academic writing is not an “absolute.” Rather, the LLM shows us how academic writing is a social construction. But academia at large has long resisted acknowledging this.

Historical and social concerns

Using standard academic writing is a choice. It is a style of writing that has been invisible within academia, thought to be the default and “correct.”

Many of the problems and questions that arise with LLM technology in relation to writing are really historical and social concerns that get to the very heart of what we understand writing to be.

As I continue to discover in my research, writing in the context of the English-speaking academy since the 19th century has been taught within two distinct streams: literary and technical communication. Both of these streams flourished within the larger context of the British Empire because both are adept strategies for maintaining the status quo.

The combination of the veneration of canonical British literature and the instruction of a utilitarian language that acts as a “neutral” communication tool (one that is not at all neutral), and a standard one, serves to create an understanding of writing that over-prioritizes the finished text.

---

Read more:
‘It don’t be like that now’ — the English history of African American English

---

Writing and context

Still today, what is technically “correct” is seen as “good” writing, while “good” writing has come to be represented as the product of a strong mind. This, of course, implies “bad writing” is the product of a mind not as able, or even suited for post-secondary study. Scholars in writing studies have pointed to academia’s focus on correctness and how ways of teaching academic writing can perpetuate inequities, including those related to colonialism and racism.

“Correctness” in writing is, as writing scholars have long discussed, subjective and contextual. For example, “ill c u l8r” would work as a perfectly fine text message in 2008. In another setting — including texting today with QWERTY-keyboard equipped phones — it would seem “off” or even incomprehensible.

When a student’s ability to write academically is taken to represent their intelligence, we should not be surprised when some use LLMs.

---

Read more:
Students cheating with generative AI reflects a revenue-driven post-secondary sector

---

Revisiting the final product

Because LLM technology can mimic standard academic writing, it becomes the perfect context through which to address how we think about the final product of writing. The truth is, if university instructors are only interested in a “correct” piece of writing, it sort of makes sense for a computer to do it.

However, if we are interested in a way of teaching that supports students’ inquiry and thought as they interrogate the often oppressive systems they find themselves in, we need to broaden our understanding of writing beyond the confines of a “correct” standard academic English.

It is important that educators begin to see our students’ writing as part of a social situation which requires clarity on their end, yes, but also our listening.

Without reconsidering how western institutions have positioned writing, instructors risk educating a generation of students who are alienated from their own ability to think and create new knowledge, perspectives and understandings because of an over-reliance on LLMs. Western institutions will create students alienated from themselves and the potentialities of their ideas.

---

Read more:
How a first-year university writing course for Indigenous students fostered skills and belonging

---

Re-think what writing is

Part of re-thinking what writing is means allowing students to submit work in process, providing for feedback from instructors on ungraded drafts of assignments and developing scaffolding assignments that reveal the process behind writing.

It also means teaching students a new approach to writing that draws attention to the power structures implicated in the instruction of writing and embraces invention — a rhetorical concept under-utilized within the western academy. “Invention” implies many considerations, including around audience, relationships and circumstances.

Writing experts need to be brought into AI-policy creation and the implications of this field’s research must be considered by a wider audience. If LLMs are implemented in universities without careful consultation with writing experts, I fear we will soon find that all that can be written is the status quo of received ideas.

It’s time for us to reconsider writing in universities or risk our students losing access to their own writing. The study of writing is uniquely situated to help our institutions navigate these urgent questions.

Taylor Morphett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. What are the key purposes of human writing? How we name AI-generated text confuses things – https://theconversation.com/what-are-the-key-purposes-of-human-writing-how-we-name-ai-generated-text-confuses-things-261899

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Marianne A. Larsen, Professor Emerita, Faculty of Education, Western University

Elected school boards across Canada are increasingly threatened. Ontario Education Minister Paul Callandra recently said he is open to eliminating elected trustees altogether. This would would follow the lead of Nova Scotia and Québec, where they have already been abolished.

As a temporary measure, Ontario has taken over the role of elected trustees in five boards by appointing supervisors to oversee their finances and operations.

I’m an educational historian who has studied the comparative history of teaching and development of educational systems and an elected school board trustee for the Thames Valley District School Board (TVDSB), which the province recently put under supervision following an investigation of the TVDSB’s financial affairs.

I cannot comment here on the specifics of the TVDSB or any other school board.

The province says it put the TVDSB and other four boards under supervision to address growing deficits, strengthen accountability and, in the case of the other four boards, to restore financial stability.

However, researcher Joel Westheimer, professor of democracy and education, writes that Ontario is the latest province to “have signalled its intent to eliminate or weaken” elected school boards and put decision-making more firmly with the ministry.

“In reality,” he writes, “it’s a power-grab — and another step toward centralizing authority in order to sideline communities, parents and students.”

Based on my historical research, this article examines the broader history of provincial governments extending their control over democratically elected school boards.

Local democracy rooted in elected boards

Local democracy rooted in elected school boards has a long history in Canada going back more than 200 years. Education legislation in Nova Scotia in 1811, New Brunswick and Ontario (formerly Upper Canada) in 1816, Prince Edward Island in 1825 and Newfoundland in 1836 established elected school boards even before a country called Canada, with federal and provincial governments, existed.

Much has changed in school boards across Canada over the last two centuries. The powers and responsibilities of elected school board trustees have been eroded considerably. Current moves to restrict the powers of school board trustees are a part of a longer history of broadening government control over local communities.

Familiarity with local conditions

In Canada, each province/territory has its own educational system with a ministry/department that oversees the organization, delivery and assessment of education, and each province is divided into school board districts.

Board members (trustees) who are familiar with local conditions are elected by supporters within each district to represent their community’s interests and provide a liaison between electors and their provincial government.

My research on teachers shows that in early 19th century settler-colonial pioneer settings in North America, schooling was closely integrated into local community life.

---

Read more:
Reckoning with the history of public schooling and settler colonialism

---

Early emigrants to Upper Canada valued education for their children and, as a result, a variety of small schools emerged in local communities. In response, the British colonial government passed the first Common School Act in 1816 that provided each of the 10 school districts with 6,000 pounds annually to establish schools where there were at least 20 pupils.

Empowering local communities

The 1816 act also stated that when a schoolhouse was built, local communities were empowered to elect three “fit and discreet persons” to serve as trustees to manage their school.

Trustees had the authority “to examine into the moral character and capacity of any person willing to become a Teacher of such Common School” and subsequently nominate and appoint teachers on behalf of the community.

Trustees not only had the power to hire, pay and remove teachers, but also “to make Rules and Regulations for the good government” of the school and notify the District Board of Education about the books used and general state of the local school. By 1841, trustees were authorized to tax local inhabitants to supplement the government grant.

---

Read more:
Black History: How racism in Ontario schools today is connected to a history of segregation

---

State-controlled educational systems

Around the world throughout the late 18th and 19th centuries, governments began the work of building state-funded, public educational systems. Building standardized, state-controlled educational systems took place gradually as legislation was enacted to construct systems to educate the poor and working classes who did not have access to formal schooling. In colonial societies like Canada, building public educational systems was a part of the process of building a country.

---

Read more:
Truth before reconciliation: 8 ways to identify and confront Residential School denialism

---

The reasons governments got into the business of providing free education to the general populace included fear of social unrest, rising crime rates and the belief that government control of education would help create an obedient and moral Christian population.

Schooling underwent a gradual shift of being largely in the hands of local communities to being more under government control. This was the beginning of long process, still ongoing today, of centralizing educational authority at the expense of local autonomy and community, and the work of school board trustees.

Second World War and onwards

As Canadian historian Bruce Curtis has argued, building the educational state in Ontario in the 19th century necessitated eroding the close relationship between locally elected school board trustees and their communities.

That process continued during the post-Second World War period, as the organization and structures of schools boards were reformed to deal with the expansion and increasing complexity of educational systems.

This resulted in the amalgamation of many school boards. In Ontario, there were thousands of elected local school boards in the mid-19th century. Following many stages of amalgamation, the most significant being in the mid-1990s, the province has only 72 district school boards.

Loss of the local

As a result of school boards increasing in size alongside population growth and shrinking in number, the role of school board trustees has diminished. A report by the Education Improvement Commission in 1997 concluded because of 1990s-era educational reforms in Ontario, each trustee would represent more constituents over a larger area. They would therefore need to devote significant time to pulling their communities together to overcome the loss of their local board in favour of a district board.

The power to raise funds through local taxation, to determine teacher’s pay and working conditions and to determine what is and is not taught in local schools are no longer responsibilities of local school board trustees.

The Ontario government now aims to pass Bill 33, the Supporting Children and Students Act, which would substantially expand the education minister’s ability to investigate a board’s conduct, give directions and assume a board’s powers if those directions aren’t followed.

These moves are about enhancing government control over school boards and, according to educational researcher Sachin Maharaj, “part of the government’s ongoing bid to assert its own vision of schooling.”

Navigators and representatives

Such power plays have negative consequences for local democratic voices, public accountability and transparency and for schools.

Educational history sheds light on the close relations between early 19th-century elected school board trustees and their local communities. Over the last two centuries, governments have increased the number of constituents trustees serve and centralized powers once held by trustees.

But this has led to the severing of relations between local communities and elected school board trustees, which is neither good for grassroots democracy, nor for our schools, our students and their families.

Marianne A. Larsen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Attacks on school boards threaten local democracy – https://theconversation.com/attacks-on-school-boards-threaten-local-democracy-261895

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Tim Kenyon, Professor, Faculty of Humanities, Brock University

In July 2025, the connection between United States President Donald Trump and his base of supporters was fractured by the announcement from the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI that no “Epstein list” exists.

That is, they say, there is no list of clients or participants identified by convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein prior to his death by apparent suicide in 2019. No further documents related to the Epstein case would be released.

This announcement angered and confused many among Trump’s core constituency, including prominent loyalists and influencers. Weeks later, alienation among his base continues.

---

Read more:
Trump’s Epstein problem is real: New poll shows many in his base disapprove of his handling of the files, and some supporters are having second thoughts about electing him

---

This is puzzling. But in part, it’s unsurprising. Trump’s support base includes the conspiracist “QAnon” believers who are convinced that Democratic Party politicians and donors run a hidden global ring of child sex abuse.

In QAnon circles, it has been practically an article of faith that the Epstein files would validate these accusations against liberal elites. Trump’s release of the files was keenly anticipated. Naturally they’re upset that he and his appointees have changed their tune.

Longtime friendship

Yet their dismay is surprising nonetheless. Trump’s extensive relationship with Epstein has been well known for years. His repeated well wishes for Epstein’s longtime associate, convicted collaborator Ghislaine Maxwell, were widely reported following her sentencing on child sexual trafficking charges.

His comments about “getting away with” walking into beauty pageants’ backstage areas among young women and underage girls wearing “no clothes” were made prominently, on the Howard Stern Show. His base somehow managed to believe Trump was a secret champion of minors against sexual exploitation in the face of his own boasts.

The role of bullshit

How could this new development somehow be worse for Trump than his own confessions?

One partial explanation centres on Trump’s use of what’s known as bullshit rhetoric as a weapon against political enemies. Bullshit in this context is a quasi-technical notion meaning, roughly, an indifference to truth or to the audience’s right to truth.

---

Read more:
Why Donald Trump is such a relentless bullshitter

---

Even most liars respect the truth enough to try and deceive people about it, but the bullshitter doesn’t much care either way. As my colleague Jennifer Saul and I have argued in our research, Trump’s brand of authoritarian speech is deliberate and explicit in its bullshit. It advertises its status in order to show contempt for one audience, typically as part of a performance of strength for another audience.

This helps explain why Trump’s relentless bullshitting never harmed his standing with his base in the past, and has even buoyed it. His supporters know he’s a bullshitter, but they recognize he isn’t bullshitting them. They are in on the joke, enjoying the spectacle as Trump performs his power over mutual enemies, including political opposition, news media and state institutions.

The new tension over the Epstein files reflects the extent to which some among Trump’s base perceive, perhaps for the first time, that they are now targets of his weaponized political bullshit rather than amused witnesses to it. And they don’t like it.

---

Read more:
Bullshit is everywhere. Here’s how to deal with it at work

---

Trump responds with more bullshit

In one striking example, news media have reported that, before the FBI/Department of Justice announcement, Trump was informed by Attorney General Pam Bondi that his name occurs repeatedly in the unreleased documents.

The significance or context of those occurrences is of course not known; other people who deny wrongdoing are also named in them. But after the existence of a list was denied, Trump responded to questioning about whether his name appears in the documents by claiming that the files were made up by former presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden and former FBI Director James Comey.

The assertion that the Epstein files are merely hoax documents cooked up by Obama, Biden and Comey is so outrageously false that it can’t be meant even as a serious deception. That makes Trump’s claim a bald-faced lie to many people.

Bald-faced lies count as bullshit, Saul and I argue, because they lack the deceptive intent of other lies. They are a kind of unconcealed bullshit that advertises the speaker’s impunity. For Trump, this sort of overt bullshit has been reserved for liberals and news reporters. This time his own supporters are in the line of fire.

Strongman politics

Trump’s base can’t be truly dismayed by the facts about his relationship with Epstein because they should have been upset long before now in terms of his own past confessions and well-known association with Epstein.

Instead, they seem to be irked they’ve been lumped in with their enemies in being recipients of Trump’s bullshit rather than onlookers to it. And if we focus on polarization and strongman politics, we can better understand Trump’s responses to the criticism from his base.

After all, Trump didn’t say these angry supporters have misunderstood the evidence. He said they were “pretty bad people,” likened them to “fake news” and said he didn’t want their support. He didn’t call them mistaken; he called them weaklings.

To some this might sound absurd or childish. To supporters of an authoritarian figure, being called weak is more serious than being accused of being wrong.

Tim Kenyon does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Donald Trump’s penchant for bullshit explains MAGA anger about the Epstein files – https://theconversation.com/donald-trumps-penchant-for-bullshit-explains-maga-anger-about-the-epstein-files-263983

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kristina K. Castaneto, Ph.D. Candidate in Social Psychology, Simon Fraser University

Picture this: One day while drinking your morning coffee, you are reminded of a friend from your past. You have not spoken to this person in some time, but you remember them fondly and wonder how they are doing. You pick up your phone and start typing a message to say “hello!” only to delete the message before hitting send. Has something like this ever happened to you? If so, you are not alone.

Past research in our lab found that up to 90 per cent of people report having an “old friend” — a friend they care about but with whom they have lost touch. And while most people say they would like to reconnect with an old friend, only about 30 per cent are willing to send a message, even with favourable circumstances, such as when the relationship did not end on bad terms, people think their friend wants to hear from them or people have their old friend’s contact information.

This reluctance to reach out to old friends is puzzling because a large body of research demonstrates that social relationships are a strong predictor of health and happiness. Indeed, having a larger and more diverse social network is associated with greater well-being.

Writing notes

So what makes it more likely for someone to reach out to an old friend?

In our new research, we investigated this question in two ways. First, we examined what people express in a “reaching out” note to an old friend, and whether some content can predict which notes are sent. For instance, are people more likely to send a note with a greater focus on the past, present or future?

To find out, we analyzed more than 850 reaching-out notes that we had collected in prior studies. Importantly, all participants wrote their note with a specific old friend in mind and were given the opportunity to send their note, but participants could choose to opt out. This allowed us to investigate whether notes that were sent included different types of content compared to the notes that were not sent.

Each note was coded on over 20 theoretically relevant dimensions such as the length of the note, emotion and the presence or absence of personal memories. Specifically, 12 of these dimensions were analyzed by a computer software called Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC) that can easily and objectively capture information like word count, time-orientation (past, present or future) and the amount of positive and negative emotion.

In addition, a team of trained human coders evaluated each note. The human coding team focused on 13 more subjective and complex topics which can sometimes be hard for computers to grasp, including whether the author shared specific memories involving their old friend or whether the author took responsibility for the fading friendship.

Revealing information

After all of this, we still weren’t able to predict which notes were more likely to be sent. But our substantial coding efforts revealed many interesting things about the content of reaching out notes. For instance, messages to old friends were often positive and focused on the present.

We used statistical regression analyses to look at the relationships between the various note features and reaching out behaviour — only six were statistically significant. However, these significant relationships were were small and inconsistent across our two participant samples.

This suggests that the content of a reaching-out note may not predict who chooses to send their message and who does not.

Who reaches out

With little insight gleaned from the content of the reaching-out notes, we pivoted our focus to ask: Who is most likely to reach out to an old friend?

To explore this question, we recruited 312 participants on campus and in public spaces around the city to complete a survey. The questionnaire began by asking participants to identify an old friend. This old friend was someone who the participants cared about but had not spoken to for a long time, who they believed would want to hear from them and someone for whom they had contact information.

Then, participants answered a number of questions about themselves, including items about their happiness, loneliness, personality, friendship satisfaction and friendship beliefs.

Near the end of the survey, we asked participants if they were willing to reach out to their old friend, and then we gave them two minutes to draft a short note to the friend they previously identified. After the two minutes had ended, we asked participants if they sent their message to their old friend.

Similar to past research, 34.2 per cent of participants chose to reach out. And while some of the personality dimensions and other variables predicted how willing participants said they would be to reach out to an old friend, only one variable — “friendship resiliency” — predicted whether people sent their message to their old friend.

The concept of friendship resiliency refers to the belief that friendships can remain even after long periods of low interaction and is now something we are studying in our lab.

Take the leap

If the thought of an old friend crosses your mind again, don’t get too caught up on crafting the perfect message — just reach out!

For example, you could reach out when a cafe is playing a song that you both used to enjoy or you see a meme that reminds you of them, or just to say a simple “Hey, it’s been too long! How are you?”

Our findings illustrate that reluctance to reach out to old friends is not experienced by one type of person, nor do reaching-out notes that are sent follow one type of script.

Hesitancy to reach out to an old friend is a common experience, suggesting that most people may be capable of reaching out if they are willing to take the leap to do so. Realizing this could encourage people to feel like they are capable of making the first move to reconnect.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Reluctance to reach out to old friends is a common experience, but reconnecting can pay off – https://theconversation.com/reluctance-to-reach-out-to-old-friends-is-a-common-experience-but-reconnecting-can-pay-off-263079

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Eden Hoffer, PhD Candidate, Faculty of Information and Media Studies & Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University

In Canada, having a gun in the home is one of the strongest predictors that intimate partner violence (IPV) will turn fatal.

Among intimate partner homicides, 62 per cent of cases involved shotguns and rifles, many of which were legally owned.

It’s clear that reforms to Canadian firearm laws are much needed. Victims of IPV are five times more likely to be killed in cases where a violent partner has access to a gun. Those numbers are even higher when the victim is a racialized woman or lives in a rural area.

---

Read more:
The latest mass shooting in Sault Ste. Marie highlights Ontario’s epidemic of gender-based violence

---

Bill C-21

Recognizing the lethal role firearms can play in IPV cases, the Canadian government has included specific measures in Bill C-21, its 2023 overhaul of firearm legislation, to expand restrictions and prohibitions related to IPV, family violence, gender-based violence and domestic violence.

These measures include “red flag” emergency prohibition orders, which allow courts to immediately remove firearms from anyone who may be a danger to themselves or others. Initial orders last up to 30 days, though courts can extend them if needed.

Additionally, since March 2025, officials known as chief firearms officers have been authorized to issue temporary licence suspensions for up to 30 days if an individual is considered a potential risk of harm, including in cases of domestic violence. During this suspension, they can keep their firearms, but cannot use, buy or import them.

While these amendments are a step in the right direction, they must be part of a broader, systemic shift in policy, practice and societal attitudes. Without comprehensive legislative and societal reforms to address IPV, the measures in Bill C-21 risk being little more than a bandage on a gaping wound.

Here are three reasons why Bill C-21’s firearm measures are necessary but will not be sufficient in ending the scourge of IPV:

1. IPV is already a crime

In Canada, IPV has long been criminalized under existing Criminal Code provisions, such as assault and assault with a weapon. Since the mid- to late 1980s, these offences have been primarily addressed through mandatory charging and “no-drop” prosecution policies, which aim to ensure IPV cases are pushed through the legal system — from charging to prosecution — so that perpetrators are brought to justice.

Nevertheless, IPV remains widespread in Canada, with police-reported incidents rising slightly in recent years and evidence indicating that criminalization alone has limited effectiveness in preventing abuse.

This suggests that simply adding new criminal consequences for IPV may have a little impact, because criminalization alone does not address the underlying causes or contributors to violence.

To truly tackle IPV, it must be recognized not only as a crime, but as a human rights violation, public health issue and deeply embedded societal problem.

2. IPV is significantly under-reported

It’s estimated about 80 per cent of spousal violence incidents in Canada are never reported to police.

This is often due to survivors’ fears of increased abuse from their partners if they report it, concerns about not being believed, awareness of the stigma IPV survivors often face, feelings of shame or a lack of trust in police.

As a result, many instances of IPV may never come to the attention of authorities, meaning the legal safeguards provided by Bill C-21 wouldn’t be triggered.

3. Other weapons will likely be used

Without broader reforms and supports, removing a perpetrator’s firearm or restricting access may not prevent fatal violence.

Proactive, systemic interventions that help survivors safely escape abuse before it escalates. Otherwise, even with firearm restrictions in place, perpetrators may obtain firearms illegally or resort to other lethal methods, such as strangulation, using blunt force or stabbing.

What to do?

Proactive policy and practice responses to IPV must reflect its severity and systemic nature, including the cyclical and escalating patterns that often characterize relationships marked by patterns of violence and control.

These reforms should include recognizing femicide as a distinct offence under the Criminal Code rather than treating it as murder or manslaughter.

Canada’s response should also be strengthened by formally acknowledging IPV as a national crisis, reflecting the urgency of the issue. Some provinces, such as Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, along with dozens of municipalities in Ontario, have taken the additional necessary step of declaring IPV an epidemic.

Additionally, survivors require trauma- and violence-informed supports, along with increased public awareness and sustained funding for critical services.

These include assistance navigating the legal system, access to safe and affordable housing, and financial support that enables survivors to leave abusive relationships before the violence escalates to a fatal level.

Crucially, policy reform and the creation of new policies in response to IPV must also address the heightened risk period following separation when women who have experienced IPV are especially vulnerable.

Research shows that women face a 75 per cent increase in violence when attempting to leave an abusive relationship — and remain at elevated risk for up to two years afterward.

This underscores the urgent need for long-term, adequately resourced social support systems that consistently prioritize survivor safety and well-being — not only at the point where violence may claim lives.

Eden Hoffer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. New gun law protections target domestic violence, but real prevention must start earlier – https://theconversation.com/new-gun-law-protections-target-domestic-violence-but-real-prevention-must-start-earlier-263390