World Refugee Day: Prolonged refugee separation is harming families — and Canada’s economy

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Christina Clark-Kazak, Professor, Public and International Affairs, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

As World Refugee Day approaches on June 20, advocates and health experts are calling on the Canadian government to urgently address prolonged family separation for refugees. With wait times for family reunification now averaging more than four years, critics say the delays are causing irreparable harm to refugee families and imposing long-term costs on the health-care system and the Canadian economy.

The significant health, social and economic costs of prolonged family separation merit urgent action. These costs are borne by refugees and their families as well as municipal, provincial and federal governments.

People seeking refugee protection whose claims are accepted in Canada receive protected person status and are allowed to apply for permanent residence. They are permitted to include dependent children and spouses who are outside Canada on their permanent residence applications.

While accepted refugees and their family members are legally eligible for permanent residence in Canada, they must be admitted under the immigration levels for Protected Persons in Canada and Dependants Abroad. Because the number of people applying under these levels exceeds the number of spaces available, family separation currently lasts 50 months.

In 2024, the government of Canada announced major reductions in immigration levels starting in 2025. These reductions will further delay family reunification, prolonging refugees’ bureaucratic limbo.

Mental and physical health costs

Studies document the several mental health consequences of the separation of children from their parent(s), and of spouses from their partner. These challenges intensify as the duration of the separation increases.

Medical associations around the world say family separation is a traumatic event that can cause developmental regression and higher rates of unexplained illness in children.

This trauma may stem from the sense of abandonment that children experience while being separated from their parents. In one study from 2005, an interviewee said:

“It was hard at first … .The children thought that I had abandoned them. They considered me a traitor.”

Despite the time and efforts invested in long-distance relationships, family breakdown may result from prolonged family separation, necessitating counselling or child protection services.

These mental health consequences not only have human costs. They also represent a financial burden for the Canadian government through the Interim Federal Health Care (IFHC) Program. After protected people transition away from IFHC, provincial and territorial governments pay for health costs associated with family separation.

Some children may also require school-based interventions, mental health services and counselling, the costs of which are also borne by provincial governments.

Economic costs

Protected people separated from their families also pay to maintain two households: one in Canada and one overseas. In a 2019 study, a refugee said that “sending remittances was more expensive than if they lived together in Canada.”

Remittances not only represent a financial challenge to refugee families, they also result in indirect economic losses to Canada as funds leave the country instead of being invested in Canada.

Research shows that family separation also inhibits integration. The inability to find affordable child care in a single-parent household, for example, limits the ability to learn official languages, participate in community groups and find work opportunities.

For example, one woman from Afghanistan who had been waiting more than six years for reunification with her husband told researchers:

“In night I sometimes cannot sleep and I just walk and walk around the lobby of my apartment building. […] I can no longer take care of my children when they’re missing all the time their father. They need their father. Even sometimes my family asking ‘where is he?’ and other kids at my children’s schools are asking.”

This stress caused severe mental and physical health issues for this woman and her family, further limiting her ability to work.

These integration challenges mean fewer people can work to their full capacity, limiting participation in the Canadian economy. Delayed economic integration due to family separation results in lower tax revenues for all levels of the Canadian government.

Family unity provides refugees with the necessary support to manage the stresses of resettlement. Family reunification increases flexibility to adjust to a new country and culture without additional challenges.

As refugees and their families integrate, Canada benefits. They find work, pay taxes and contribute to their communities.

An easy administrative fix

The United Nations declared June 20 to be World Refugee Day almost 25 years ago. Although it’s just one day, it reminds us to honour refugees from around the world.

It is a good time for the Canadian government to work towards issuing temporary visas to eligible family members, allowing them to live in Canada while they await permanent residence.

The right to family unity is protected by international law. Canada’s reputation as a leader in refugee protection is at risk if family reunification continues to be delayed.

The social, health and economic costs of family separation are both inhumane and unnecessary.

Chloé Bissonnette, undergraduate student in Conflict Studies and Human Rights at the University of Ottawa, contributed to this article.

The Conversation

Christina Clark-Kazak receives funding from the Social Sciences Humanities and Research Council (SSHRC).

ref. World Refugee Day: Prolonged refugee separation is harming families — and Canada’s economy – https://theconversation.com/world-refugee-day-prolonged-refugee-separation-is-harming-families-and-canadas-economy-258441

Pride, pages and performance: Why drag story time matters more than ever

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Phillip Joy, Assistant Professor, Applied Human Nutrition, Mount Saint Vincent University

June is Pride month. It is a time for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, Two-Spirit, intersex and other sexuality- and gender-diverse (LGBTQ+) communities to come together to celebrate identities, build communities and advocate for justice and equality.

This year’s pride carries added weight. As American legal scholar Luke Boso writes, “fear has taken hold in private, interpersonal, and public reactions,” following the rhetoric and policies promoted by United States President Donald Trump.

His current term has been marked by a growing push to erase LGBTQ+ identities and limit queer expression in public life. Within this month of Pride, the Trump administration is planning to rename the USNS Harvey Milk naval ship, named after the late civil rights leader Harvey Milk.

The implications of such actions, however, aren’t limited to the U.S. Similar patterns of anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric have been documented across democratic countries, where drag events and other expressions of queer visibility have become flashpoints for harassment as far-right groups try to build support and spread anti-LGBTQ+ views.

But with fear also comes hope. Even as events like drag story times have become targets of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and protests, communities continue to organize, resist and affirm their right to public joy and visibility.

Our research, recently funded by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, explores drag story times with the hope to learn more about how drag story time leaders select books, and how these events can foster best practices in literacy and inclusive education.




Read more:
5 things to know about Drag Queen Story Time


Drag story time as educational event

Drag story times are more than just community events. They are creative, educational spaces often held in public venues such as libraries, schools or community centres. Typically led by a drag performer, these sessions invite children, along with parents, caregivers and educators, to enjoy storybooks that highlight themes like acceptance, self-expression, diversity and joy.

Reading aloud with children serves as an avenue for the development of language and literacy. Young children can engage with vocabulary, content and ideas to construct meaning through texts that they may not, yet, have the skills to read on their own.

At their core, drag story time events offer opportunities for child-centred literacy practices, such as dialogue and interactions throughout the “read aloud,” to encourage children to consider ideas and connect them as the story moves along.

Reading aloud to children is a powerful way to nurture emotional, social and cognitive growth. Stories offer children what literacy scholars call mirrors (reflective ways to see themselves), windows (into understanding others) and “sliding glass doors,” — vantages for imagining new perspectives. When children encounter characters and families who reflect a range of lived experiences, it opens the door to conversations about empathy, acceptance and identity.

What books are being read?

A recent content analysis, by information sciences researcher Sarah Barriage and colleagues of 103 picture books read during drag story times in the U.S. found that few explicitly featured LGBTQ+ identities.

The lead characters were predominantly white, cisgender, heterosexual and able-bodied, with only seven per cent of books featuring trans, non-binary or intersex leads, and another seven per cent portraying same-sex or undefined relationships. While this represents an increase in LGBTQ+ representation compared to other studies of story time books and classroom libraries, the overall percentage remains low.

The findings of this study, while based on a small sample size, suggest that contrary to popular perception, drag story times, while featuring drag artists leading read-aloud sessions, are not consistently grounded in explicitly LGBTQ+ narratives.

Rather, the books may be story-time favourites, (such as selections from Mo Williams’ Pigeon series), or texts that tend to promote broadly inclusive and affirming messages of individuality, confidence, empathy, inclusion and imagination (such as Todd Parr’s It’s Okay to Be Different).

Books representing range of experiences

This gap highlights the importance of thoughtfully selecting books that reflect a wider range of experiences, including LGBTQ+ main characters and stories. When children are shown diverse characters and stories, they begin to understand the world from multiple perspectives.

Researchers with expertise in children’s early literacy recommend that books for interactive read-alouds with children should reflect both the children’s communities and communities different from their own. Such books can spark meaningful conversations, encourage critical thinking and help cultivate empathy and respect for difference. This prepares young readers for life in a multicultural society and helps build a more inclusive and compassionate world view.

Euphoria: being gender-aligned, authentic

Apart from the specific book content shared with children at drag story time, these events provide opportunities for children and families to engage with diverse gender and sexuality expressions in a safe, inclusive setting with their caregivers. Such exposure does not cause confusion in children, but rather supports healthy development by fostering empathy, self-awareness and acceptance.

This may come from or be expressed through the euphoria or joy that comes from feeling aligned and authentic in your gender. The idea of “gender euphoria” comes from within the trans community as a way to push back against the narrow narrative that trans lives are defined only by dysphoria, trauma or discomfort.

Instead, gender euphoria highlights the positive side that come with expressing or affirming one’s gender identity. It can look different for everyone, from a quiet sense of contentment to a powerful feeling of joy.

A smiling person with outstretched and raised hands in a multicoloured dress with what looks like a paper teacup on their head.
Communities affirm their right to public joy and visibility. Drag Queen Barbada de Barbades, who has led story times, seen in Montréal.
(Jennifer Ricard/Wikimedia), CC BY

Queer joy

Queer joy is also a feature of drag story time, and is more than just feeling good. it is about living fully, even in the face of adversity. It is an act of resistance to a world that often tells queer and trans people they should not exist. Children still die because of hateful anti-LGTBQ+ speech.

Together, gender euphoria and queer joy remind us that LGBTQ+ lives can be full of strength, creativity, connection and celebration.

When children see diversity reflective in creative, positive and affirming ways, such as through stories, role models and community engagement, they are more likely to feel a sense of belonging and develop confidence in expressing their own identities. In this way, drag story times contribute meaningfully to both individual well-being and broader efforts towards inclusion.

Best literacy and inclusion practices

As part of our research, we plan to attend drag story times to learn more about current practices in Nova Scotia. At the national level, we will talk with performers about their experiences, practices, support and training needs and their goals and motivations.

Then we’ll co-host a workshop with performers and educators to share knowledge and build skills that combine the artistry of drag with best practices in literacy and inclusive education.

Drag story times can be a healthy and supportive way for children to develop their sense of gender and sexuality identity, both within themselves and others.

The Conversation

Phillip Joy receives funding from The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

Andrea Fraser receives funding from The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

Conor Barker receives funding from the Social Studies and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

ref. Pride, pages and performance: Why drag story time matters more than ever – https://theconversation.com/pride-pages-and-performance-why-drag-story-time-matters-more-than-ever-258508

4 reasons to be concerned about Bill C-4’s threats to Canadian privacy and sovereignty

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sara Bannerman, Professor and Canada Research Chair in Communication Policy and Governance, McMaster University

In Canada, federal political parties are not governed by basic standards of federal privacy law. If passed, Bill C-4, also known as the Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act, would also make provincial and territorial privacy laws inapplicable to federal political parties, with no adequate federal law in place.

Federal legislation in the form of the Privacy Act and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act sets out privacy standards for government and business, based on the fair information principles that provide for the collection, use and disclosure of Canadians’ personal information.

At the moment, these laws don’t apply to political parties. Some provinces — especially British Columbia — have implemented laws that do. In May 2024, the B.C. Supreme Court upheld the provincial Information Commissioner’s ruling that B.C.’s privacy legislation applies to federal political parties. That decision is currently under appeal.

Bill C-4 would undermine those B.C. rights. It would make inapplicable to federal parties the standard privacy rights that apply in other business and government contexts— such as the right to consent to the collection, use and disclosure of personal information — and to access and correct personal information held by organizations.

Why should we be concerned about Bill C-4’s erasure of these privacy protections for Canadians? There are four reasons:

1. Threats to Canada’s sovereignty

In light of threats to Canadian sovereignty by United States President Donald Trump, the Canadian government and Canadian politicians must rethink their approach to digital sovereignty.

Until now, Canadian parties and governments have been content to use American platforms, data companies and datified campaign tactics. Bill C-4 would leave federal parties free to do more of the same. This is the opposite of what’s needed.

The politics that resulted in Trump being elected twice to the Oval Office was spurred in part by the datafied campaigning of Cambridge Analytica in 2016 and Elon Musk in 2024. These politics are driven by micro-targeted and arguably manipulative political campaigns.

Do Canadians want Canada to go in the same direction?




Read more:
How political party data collection may turn off voters


A building with two surveillance cameras.
Are political parties spying and experimenting on Canadians via personal data collection?
(Unsplash/Arthur Mazi), FAL

2. Threats to Canada’s future

Bill C-4 would undermine one of the mechanisms that makes Canada a society: collective political decisions.

Datified campaigning and the collection of personal information by political parties change the nature of democracy. Rather than appealing to political values or visions of what voters may want in the future or as a society — critically important at this historical and troubling moment in history — datified campaigning operates by experimenting on unwitting individual citizens who are alone on their phones and computers. It operates by testing their isolated opinions and unvarnished behaviours.

For example, a political campaign might do what’s known as A/B testing of ads, which explores whether ad A or ad B is more successful by issuing two different versions of an ad to determine which one gets more clicks, shares, petition signatures, donations or other measurable behaviour. With this knowledge, a campaign or party can manipulate the ads through multiple versions to get the desired behaviour and result. They also learn about ad audiences for future targeting.




Read more:
A/B testing: how offline businesses are learning from Google to improve profits


In other words, political parties engaging in this tactic aren’t engaging with Canadians — they’re experimenting on them to see what type of messages, or even what colour schemes or visuals, appeal most. This can be used to shape the campaign or just the determine the style of follow-up messaging to particular users.

University researchers, to name just one example, are bound by strict ethical protocols and approvals, including the principle that participants should consent to the collection of personal information, and to participation in experiments and studies. Political parties have no such standards, despite the high stakes — the very future of democracy and society.

Most citizens think of elections as being about deliberation and collectively deciding what kind of society they want to live in and what kind of future they want to have together as they decide how to cast their ballots.

But with datified campaigning, citizens may not be aware of the political significance of their online actions. Their data trail might cause them to be included, or excluded, from a party’s future campaigning and door-knocking, for example. The process isn’t deliberative, thoughtful or collective.

3. Secret personal data collection

Political parties collect highly personal data about Canadians without their knowledge or consent. Most Canadians are not aware of the extent of the collection by political parties and the range of data they collect, which can include political views, ethnicity, income, religion or online activities, social media IDs, observations of door-knockers and more.

If asked, most Canadians would not consent to the range of data collection by parties.

4. Data can be dangerous in the wrong hands

Some governments can and do use data to punish individuals politically and criminally, sometimes without the protection of the rule of law.

Breaches and misuses of data, cybersecurity experts say, are no longer a question of “if,” but “when.”

Worse, what would happen if the wall between political parties and politicians or government broke down and the personal information collected by parties became available to governments? What if the data were used for political purposes, such as for vetting people for political appointments or government benefits? What if it were used against civil servants?

What if it were to be used at the border, or passed to other governments? What if it were passed to and used by authoritarian governments to harass and punish citizens?

What if it was passed to tech companies and further to data brokers?

OpenMedia recently revealed that Canadians’ data is being passed to the many different data companies political parties use. That data is not necessarily housed in Canada or by Canadian companies.

If provincial law is undermined, there are few protections against any of these problems.

Strengthening democracy

Bill C-4 would erase the possibility of provincial and territorial privacy laws being applied to federal political parties, with virtually nothing remaining. Privacy protection promotes confidence and engagement with democratic processes — particularly online. Erasing privacy protections threatens this confidence and engagement.

The current approach of federal political parties in terms of datified campaigning and privacy law is entirely wrong for this political moment, dangerous to Canadians and dangerous to democracy. Reforms should instead ensure federal political parties must adhere to the same standards as businesses and all levels of government.

Data privacy is important everywhere, but particularly so for political parties, campaigns and democratic engagement. It is important at all times — particularly now.

The Conversation

Sara Bannerman receives funding from the Canada Research Chairs program, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, and McMaster University. She has previously received funding from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner’s Contributions Program and the Digital Ecosystem Research Challenge.

ref. 4 reasons to be concerned about Bill C-4’s threats to Canadian privacy and sovereignty – https://theconversation.com/4-reasons-to-be-concerned-about-bill-c-4s-threats-to-canadian-privacy-and-sovereignty-259331

Appeals court ruling grants Donald Trump broad powers to deploy troops to American cities

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jack L. Rozdilsky, Associate Professor of Disaster and Emergency Management, York University, Canada

Residents of Los Angeles will need to get used to federally controlled National Guard troops operating on their streets. Due to a ruling from an appeals court on June 19, United States President Donald Trump now has broad authority to deploy military forces in American cities.

This is a troubling development. All presidents have held in their grasp extraordinary powers to deploy military troops domestically. But Trump stands apart with his apparent keen interest in manufacturing false emergencies to exploit extraordinary power.

An 1878 law called the Posse Comitatus Act restricts using the military for domestic law enforcement. The broader principle being challenged by Trump’s actions in L.A. is the norm of the military not being allowed to interfere in the affairs of civilian governance.

Injunctions and appeals

Five months into Trump’s presidency, L.A. has been targeted for aggressive immigration enforcement. In their pluralistic city where dozens of languages and nationalities peacefully co-exist, some Angelenos believe the city is experiencing an attack on its most essential social fabric.

On June 7, Trump acted under United States Code Title 10 provisions to take over command and control of California’s National Guard. Federalized military forces were deployed.

The objective was to counter what Trump argued was a form of rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States. In fact, these “rebellions” were largely peaceful protests in downtown L.A.

On June 9, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted an injunction restraining the president’s use of military force in L.A. The court order supported Gov. Gavin Newsom’s contention that Trump overstepped his authority.

On June 19, a decision from a panel of judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned the injunction.

What this means at the moment is that Trump does not have to return control of the troops to Newsom. California has options to continue litigation by asking the Federal Appeals Court to rehear the matter, or perhaps directly asking the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene.

Moving toward authoritarianism

Trump’s June 7 memorandum facilitating his move to overrule Newsom’s authority and seize control of 2,000 National Guard troops was based on the president defining his own so-called emergency.

He claimed incidents of violence and disorder following aggressive immigration enforcement amounted to a form of rebellion against the U.S.

As Trump flexes his emergency power might, his second term has been called the 911 presidency. He has used extraordinary emergency powers at a pace well beyond his predecessors, pressing the limits to address his administration’s supposed sense of serious perils overtaking the nation.

Issues arise when the level of actual danger locally is not at all representative of what the president suggests is a full-scale national emergency. For example, demonstrations over immigration raids occupied only a tiny parcel of real estate in L.A.’s huge metropolitan area. A Los Angeles-based rebellion against the U.S. was not occurring.

As dissent over aggressive immigration enforcement actions grew, localized clashes with law enforcement did occur. Mutual aid surged into Los Angeles, where neighbouring California law enforcement agencies acted to assist one another. The law enforcement challenges never rose to the level of the governor of California requesting additional federal support.

Shortly after the federal government took over the California National Guard, Newsom said the move was purposefully inflammatory.

In addition to declaring dubious emergencies to amass power, stoking violence is a characteristic of authoritarian rulers. Creating fear, division and feelings of insecurity can lead to community crises. Trump did not need to wait for a crisis; it seems he simply invented one.

No guardrails

The expression “out of kilter” comes to mind as Trump inches closer to invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807. If so, the situation will look quite similar in practice to what is happening now in Los Angeles.

Five years ago, Trump flirted with invoking the Insurrection Act during Black Lives Matter unrest in Washington, D.C., in and around Lafayette Park.

As recent L.A. protests intensified, Trump stated: “We’re going to have troops everywhere.”

Currently, there are few guardrails in place to prevent a rogue president from misusing the military in domestic civilian affairs. Trump has been coy about whether he would tap into the greater powers available to him under the Insurrection Act.

Real emergencies presenting existential threats to America do persist. Nuclear proliferation, climate change and pandemics need serious leaders. But politically exploiting last-resort emergency laws designed to provide options to deal with genuine existential threats — not to weaponize them against protesters demonstrating against public policy — is absurd.

The Conversation

Jack L. Rozdilsky receives support for research communication and public scholarship from York University. He also has received research support from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

ref. Appeals court ruling grants Donald Trump broad powers to deploy troops to American cities – https://theconversation.com/appeals-court-ruling-grants-donald-trump-broad-powers-to-deploy-troops-to-american-cities-258894

AI is consuming more power than the grid can handle — nuclear might be the answer

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Goran Calic, Associate Profesor of Strategy and Entrepreneurship Leadership Chair, McMaster University

New partnerships are forming between tech companies and power operators — ones that could reshape decades of misconceptions about nuclear energy.

Last year, Meta (Facebook’s parent company) put out a call for nuclear proposals, Google agreed to buy new nuclear reactors from Kairos Power, Amazon partnered with Energy Northwest and Dominion Energy to develop nuclear energy and Microsoft committed to a 20-year deal to restart Unit 1 of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant.

At the centre of these partnerships is artificial intelligence’s voracious appetite for electricity. One Google search uses about as much electricity as turning on a household light for 17 seconds. Asking a Generative AI model like ChatGPT a single question is equivalent to leaving that light on for 20 minutes.




Read more:
AI is bad for the environment, and the problem is bigger than energy consumption


Having GenAI generate an image can draw about 6,250 times more electricity, roughly the energy of fully charging a smartphone, or enough to keep the same light bulb on for 87 consecutive days.

The hundreds of millions of people now using AI have effectively added the equivalent of millions of new homes to the power grid. And demand is only growing. The challenge for tech companies is that few sources of electricity are well-suited to AI.

The grid wasn’t ready for AI

AI requires vast amounts of computational power running around the clock, often housed in energy-intensive data centres.

Renewable energy sources such as solar and wind provide intermittent energy, meaning they don’t guarantee the constant power supply these data centres require. These centres must be online 24/7, even when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing.

Fossil fuels can run continuously, but they carry their own risks. They have significant environmental impacts. Fuel prices can be unpredictable, as exemplified by the gas price spikes due to the war in Ukraine, and the long-term availability of fossil fuels is uncertain.

Major tech companies like Google, Amazon and Microsoft say they are committed to eliminating CO2 emissions, making fossil fuels a poor long-term fit for them.

This has pushed nuclear energy back into the conversation. Nuclear energy is a good fit because it provides electricity around the clock, maximizing the use of expensive data centres. It’s also clean, allowing tech companies to meet their low CO2 commitments. Lastly, nuclear energy has very low fuel costs, which allows tech companies to plan their costs far into the future.

However, nuclear energy has its own set of problems that have historically been hard to solve — problems that tech companies may now be uniquely positioned to overcome.

Is nuclear energy making a comeback?

Nuclear power has long been considered too costly and too slow to build. The estimated cost of a 1.1 gigawatt nuclear power facility is about US$7.77 billion, but can run higher. The recently completed Vogtle Units 3 and 4 in the state of Georgia, for example, cost US$36.8 billion combined.

Historically, nuclear energy projects have been hard to justify because of their high upfront costs. Like solar and wind power, nuclear energy has relatively low operating costs once a plant is up and running. The key difference is scale: unlike solar panels, which can be installed on individual rooftops, the kind of nuclear reactors tech companies require can’t be built small.

Yet this cost is now more palatable when compared to the expense of AI data centres, which are both more costly and entirely useless without electricity. The first phase of OpenAI and SoftBank’s Stargate AI project will cost US$100 billion and could be entirely powered by a single nuclear plant.

Nuclear power plants also take a long time to build. A 1.1 gigawatt reactor takes, on average, 7.5 years in the U.S. and 6.3 years globally. Projects with such long timelines require confidence in long-term electricity demand, something traditional utilities struggle to predict.

To solve the problem of long-range forecasting, tech companies are incentivizing power providers by guaranteeing they’ll purchase electricity far into the future.

These companies are also literally and financially moving closer to nuclear power, either by acquiring nuclear energy companies or locating their data centres next to nuclear power plants.

Destigmatizing nuclear energy

One of the biggest challenges facing nuclear energy is the perception that it’s dangerous and dirty. Per gigawatt-hour of electricity, nuclear produces only six tonnes of CO2. In comparison, coal produces 970, natural gas 720 and hydropower 24. Nuclear even has lower emissions than wind and solar, which produce 11 and 53 tonnes of CO2, respectively.

Nuclear energy is also among the safest energy sources. Per gigawatt-hour, it causes 820 times fewer deaths than coal, 43 times fewer than hydropower and roughly the same as wind and solar.

Still, nuclear energy remains stigmatized, largely because of persistent misconceptions and outdated beliefs about nuclear waste and disasters. For instance, while many public concerns remain about nuclear waste, existing storage solutions have been used safely for decades and are supported by a strong track record and scientific consensus.

Similarly, while the Fukushima disaster in Japan displaced thousands of people and was extremely costly (total costs of the disaster are expected at about US$188 billion), not a single person died of radiation exposure after the accident, a United Nations Scientific Committee of 80 international experts found.




Read more:
With nuclear power on the rise, reducing conspiracies and increasing public education is key


For decades, there was little effort to correct public perceptions about nuclear fears because it wasn’t seen as necessary or profitable. Coal, gas and renewables were sufficient to meet the demand required of them. But that’s now changing.

With AI’s energy needs soaring, Big Tech has classified nuclear energy as green and the World Bank has agreed to lift its longstanding ban on financing nuclear projects.

Big Tech’s billion-dollar bet on nuclear

The world has long lived with two nuclear dilemmas. The first is that, despite being one the safest and cleanest form of energy, nuclear was perceived as one the most dangerous and dirtiest.

The second is that upgrading the power grid requires large-scale investments, yet money had been funnelled into small, distributed sources like solar and wind, or dirty ones like coal and natural gas.

Now tech companies are making hundred-billion-dollar strategic bets that they can solve both nuclear dilemmas. They are betting that nuclear can offer the kind of steady, clean power their AI ambitions require.

This could be an unexpected positive consequence of AI: the revitalization of one of the safest and cleanest energy sources available to humankind.

Michael Tadrous, an undergraduate student and research assistant at the DeGroote School of Business at McMaster University, co-authored this article.

The Conversation

Goran Calic 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. AI is consuming more power than the grid can handle — nuclear might be the answer – https://theconversation.com/ai-is-consuming-more-power-than-the-grid-can-handle-nuclear-might-be-the-answer-258677

The Learning Refuge: How women-led community efforts help refugees resettle in Cyprus

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Suzan Ilcan, Professor of Sociology & University Research Chair, University of Waterloo

A grassroots organization in Paphos, Cyprus, is bringing women together to address the needs of refugees in the city. (Shutterstock)

Since 2015, the Republic of Cyprus (ROC) has seen a steady rise in migrant arrivals and asylum applications, primarily from people from Middle Eastern and African countries like Syria, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Cameroon.

But many asylum-seekers face significant challenges. Refugees formally in the asylum system are often denied residency permits, which means they face persistent insecurity, poverty and isolation

These conditions are compounded by restrictive and limited services for asylum-seekers. This deepens the precarity and exclusion refugees face within a political and economic system that treats them more like economic burdens than as human beings with rights who need help.

In response to these institutional failures, citizens, volunteers and refugees themselves have begun to build grassroots networks of care and solidarity in the ROC and beyond to support refugee communities.

In 2022 and 2023, we conducted interviews with women volunteers and refugees affiliated with The Learning Refuge, a civil society organization in the city of Paphos in southwest Cyprus that cultivates dialogue and collaboration among these two diverse groups.

Women-led initiatives

Many displaced people first arrive on the island of Cyprus through the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). However, the absence of a functioning asylum system or international legal protections leaves them in limbo.

With no viable path to status in the TRNC, most cross the Green Line that bifurcates Cyprus into the ROC, where European Union asylum frameworks exist but remain limited in practice.

Women-led community-building is often a response to the negative effects of inadequate state support and humanitarian aid for refugees. In Cyprus, this situation leaves many refugees without access to sufficient food, satisfactory health care, accommodation, employment, clothing and language training. In this current environment, refugees are increasingly experiencing insecure and fragile situations, especially women.

In Cyprus, as in many other countries, a variety of community-building efforts are important responses to limited or restricted state support and humanitarian aid for refugees.

Women-led efforts offer opportunities to deliver educational activities and establish networks, and to help improve the welfare and social protection of refugee women, however imperfectly.

These and other similar efforts highlight how women refugees and volunteers can mobilize to foster dialogue and collaboration.

The Learning Refuge

Founded in 2015, The Learning Refuge began as community meetings in a city park. The organization then used space from a nearby music venue to conduct support activities, and later, established itself in a dedicated building.

Organizations like The Learning Refuge emerged to address the limited state support and humanitarian assistance services available to refugees.

a sign reading Learning Refuge next to a doorway
The Learning Refuge cultivates dialogue and collaboration among a diverse group of community volunteers.
(Suzan Ilcan)

As Syrian families began arriving in Paphos in 2015, local mothers started working with Syrian children, assisting them with homework, providing skills-training opportunities and language classes.

The Learning Refuge cultivates dialogue and collaboration among a diverse group of community volunteers, including schoolteachers, artists, musicians, local residents, refugees and other migrants.

With the aid of 20 volunteers, the loosely organized groups provide women refugees with material support and resources to enhance collective activities, including art and music projects, while also engaging in educational and friendship activities.

While modest in scale, the organization has formed partnerships with local and international organizations, including Caritas Cyprus, UNHCR-Cyprus and the Cyprus Refugee Council to extend its outreach to various refugee groups.

The organization has also launched creative initiatives aimed at cultivating additional inclusive civic spaces. One such effort, “Moms and Babies Day,” was developed in response to the rising number of single mothers from Africa arriving on the island. These women often face poverty and isolation, and struggle with language barriers.

These efforts highlight how grassroots responses — especially those led by women — can offer partial but vital educational and emotional support to refugees struggling to find their footing in a new country.

Negotiated belonging

Through participation in The Learning Refuge, refugee women in Paphos engage in a dynamic process of negotiated belonging, navigating challenges like language barriers, gendered isolation, domestic violence and poverty while contributing to broader community-building efforts.

For example, Maryam, a Syrian woman and mother of three, told us how The Learning Refuge helped her children establish friendships and learn Greek. She also highlighted that it helped her form close ties with volunteers and other Syrian women living in Cyprus, and find paid work in the city.

The volunteers and women refugees participating in The Learning Refuge’s activities emphasized not only their capacity to develop new forms of belonging and solidarity; they also help reshape communal knowledge and generate supportive spaces for women from various backgrounds.

Our research shows that women-led community-building is an effective, though short-term, response to insufficient state support and humanitarian aid systems that leave many refugees in precarious situations.

In varying degrees, these efforts offer women and their families spaces to learn and cultivate new relationships, and foster collective projects and better visions of resettlement and refuge.

The Conversation

Suzan Ilcan receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Council of Canada.

Seçil Daǧtaș receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

ref. The Learning Refuge: How women-led community efforts help refugees resettle in Cyprus – https://theconversation.com/the-learning-refuge-how-women-led-community-efforts-help-refugees-resettle-in-cyprus-252682

Alberta youth have the right to school library books that reflect their lives, including sexuality

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jamie Anderson, PhD Candidate, Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has expressed fondness for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, most recently wagering a a friendly public bet on the NHL hockey playoffs. In 2023, she said she wanted Albertans to enjoy some of the same freedoms available to citizens in certain American states, including Florida.

Her government’s latest proposal aims to take more than a page from DeSantis’s playbook, setting its sights on how Florida has targeted school library books, effectively purging and banning many.

Alberta Education Minister Demetrios Nicolaides recently announced the province will move ahead to develop provincial standards “to ensure the age-appropriateness of materials available to students in school libraries.” This followed a public engagement survey related to what he said were concerns about “sexually explicit” books in Edmonton and Calgary schools.

The province says the survey results show “strong support” for a school library policy, even while the majority of respondents don’t want the government setting standards for school library books.

This marks the Alberta government’s latest effort to restrict the rights of 2SLGBTQIA+ children and youth.

New proposed school library standards

Like Florida’s statute on K-12 instructional materials, Alberta’s proposal centres on age-appropriateness and increasing parental choice in learning materials.

Despite claiming a need for new standards, Nicolaides has acknowledged there are already mechanisms in place in Alberta’s school jurisdictions for parents to challenge materials. Many school boards already have policies governing school library materials.

Additionally, librarians are trained professionals who follow established practices around organizing materials that reflect developmental appropriateness.

Florida school book purges

Florida’s statute, framed by DeSantis as empowering parents to object to obscene material, has targeted 2,700 books. More than 700 were removed from libraries in 2023-24.




Read more:
Ron DeSantis shows how ‘ugly freedoms’ are being used to fuel authoritarianism


Confusion and a climate of fear caused by the bill has led Florida teachers and librarians to self-censor. Florida’s Department of Education urged districts to “err on the side of caution” to avoid potential felony charges.

Such fear and surveillance lead to unnecessary restrictions on students’ rights.

Targeting 2SLGBTQIA+ books

Nicolaides has emphasized that developing the new standards in Alberta is not a question of “banning certain books,” and has acknowledged he does not have that authority.

However, as PEN Canada notes, the implications of the proposed policies raise alarm bells, with the government’s actions “paving the way to a new era of government-sponsored book banning.” Singling out books has the same effect as a ban, according to the CEO of the St. Albert Public Library.

By labelling four books as inappropriate — three of which include 2SLGBTQIA+ authors and themes — Nicolaides suggests these books don’t belong in K-12 schools. One of the books, the graphic novel Flamer, has won several awards, including the Lambda Literary Award for LGBTQ Young Adult Literature in 2021.

PEN America interview with Mike Curato, author of ‘Flamer.’

The education minister refuted the idea that singling out the books is anti-queer or anti-trans, and did so in an inflammatory manner, characterizing concern as being about protecting children from seeing porn, child molestation and other sexual content.

Nicolaides also said the proposed policy is focused on sexual content, so themes and depictions of graphic violence are “probably not” an issue.

Rolling back trans, queer rights

Alberta has already rolled back the rights of trans and non-binary children and youth to use different pronouns, access gender-affirming care and participate in sports.

Queer and trans identities are also absent from all subjects in the K-12 program of studies, including recently updated K-6 curriculum. New sexual health resource guidelines prohibit the use of learning materials that primarily and explicitly address sexual orientation or gender identity unless they have been vetted and approved by Alberta Education (except for use in religion classes).

Survey amplifies moral panic

Through specific communication tactics, the minister’s public engagement works to exacerbate moral panics about sexuality as a threat to childhood innocence. This influences broader messages about 2SLGBTQIA+ inclusion.

The government-created survey shared illustrations and text excerpts on their own, without context or consideration of their narrative purpose in each book. Although the excerpts flagged by the minister make up between 0.1 to two per cent of the total page count in each book, the books as a whole are labelled “extremely graphic.”

In a media appearance, Nicolaides stated the books in question were available to “elementary-aged” students. This is misleading because K-9 schools include junior high students.

In a social media post, the minister’s press secretary said “these problematic books were found in and around books like Goldilocks,” suggesting targeted books are alongside children’s storybooks. But the image he shared showed Flamer near the graphic novel Goldilocks: Wanted Dead or Alive, aimed at middle-grade readers aged nine to 12 years old.

Survey respondents

The survey reported 77,395 responses by demographics, including parents, teachers, school administrators, librarians and other interested Albertans.

Forty-nine per cent of parents of school-aged children were not at all or not very supportive of the creation of government guidelines, compared to 44 per cent of the same demographic who were somewhat or very supportive (eight per cent were unsure). Across each other demographic, most respondents expressed that they didn’t support the creation of new government standards. But the ministry plans to move ahead anyway.

Socially conservative lobby

The Investigative Journalism Foundation reports two conservative activist groups have taken credit for giving the Alberta government names of books believed to be inappropriate.

Parental rights groups and far-right activists have long asserted that 2SLGBTQIA+ inclusion in schools “indoctrinates” and sexualizes children.

We’re concerned the Alberta government may be reinforcing this message to manufacture a greater public consensus in support of wider policies against 2SLGBTQIA+ rights.

Since at least 2023, United Conservative Party (UCP) members have embraced socially conservative “parental rights” rhetoric and supported motions for purging school libraries and mandating parent approval of changes to kids’ names and pronouns.

Traditionalist ‘parental rights’

Far-right activist groups like Take Back Alberta have shaped the UCP government’s policies alongside special interest groups like Action4Canada and Parents for Choice in Education.

A common thread among such groups is parental authority over one’s own children framed in traditionalist or hetero-normative terms. Significant mobilizing has happened against the inclusion of sexual orientations and gender identities in school curricula, trans-inclusive health care, drag shows, conversion therapy bans and more.




Read more:
Pride, pages and performance: Why drag story time matters more than ever


Queer and trans identities are viewed as a social contagion threatening to change anyone exposed to them, and efforts for inclusion are labelled “gender ideology.”

These misconceptions, combined with political and religious biases, frame queerness and transness as “adult topics” that will confuse or harm children. However, research confirms ignoring these topics is of far greater concern when children may already experience discrimination about their gender expression by the age of five.

Earlier learning about diverse forms of gender expression and relationships can reduce victimization, and prevent young children from becoming perpetrators of, or bystanders to, anti-2SLGBTQIA+ harassment and violence.




Read more:
‘Parental rights’ lobby puts trans and queer kids at risk


The United Nations recognizes that governments need to resist political pressure “based on child protection arguments to block access to information on [2SLGBTQIA+] issues, or to provide negatively biased information.”

Access to self-selected literature is important for all students, and can be a lifeline for 2SLGBTQIA+ students who don’t see themselves in the curriculum.

If Alberta Education will not prepare students for the world they live in — where we queer and trans people exist, flourish and are loved — then students should be able to seek out stories that reflect that world. It’s a matter of protecting their freedom of expression.

The Conversation

Jamie Anderson has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the University of Calgary.

Tonya D. Callaghan receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Killam Trusts.

Caitlin Campbell and Nicole Richard 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. Alberta youth have the right to school library books that reflect their lives, including sexuality – https://theconversation.com/alberta-youth-have-the-right-to-school-library-books-that-reflect-their-lives-including-sexuality-258265

Indigenous engagement is essential for small modular nuclear reactor projects

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Rhea Desai, Post Doctoral Fellow, Department of Biology, McMaster University

Urban Indigenous gathering for community well-being, showing the importance of interconnectedness in Indigenous Communities in Hamilton, Ont. in August 2021. This way of being must be reflected in nuclear projects to better work alongside Indigenous Peoples. (Michelle Webb)

With climate change-fuelled natural disasters becoming more frequent and devastating for communities around the world, the need for cleaner energy solutions is more urgent than ever.

When it comes to transitioning away from fossil fuels, much of the focus tends to be on solar, wind or hydroelectricity. However, small modular reactors (SMRs) are an emerging technology showing promise globally.

SMRs are a specific type of nuclear reactor that, as the name suggests, are small in energy output and modular in their manufacturing. Provinces like New Brunswick, Alberta and Saskatchewan have made progress on strategic plans to make SMRs part of their provincial climate action plans.

Unlike traditional nuclear reactors that generally produce more than 1,000 megawatts of electricity, SMRs are designed to produce as low as five megawatts. The modularity of such reactors allows for manufacturing off-site and installation at the desired location. This can decrease construction time, manufacturing costs and certain environmental costs associated with building on site.

This means SMRs are more feasible for many off-grid communities that lack reliable access to electricity, many of which are Indigenous. In 2023, the Canada Energy regulator said there were 178 remote Indigenous and northern communities not connected to the North American electricity grid and natural gas infrastructure.

In an effort to shift reliability from carbon-emitting resources to nuclear power, SMRs provide an exciting alternative, but implementation needs effective engagement with Indigenous communities to flourish.

a graphic outlining how many megawatts of power a large, small and micro nuclear reactor can generate.
Small modular reactors (SMRs) could be relatively feasible way to generate power for many off-grid communities.
(A. Vargas/IAEA)

Engaging Indigenous communities

Much of Canada’s electricity is already generated from low-carbon emission sources. However, there are still areas in northern Canada that are reliant on diesel, and therefore SMR plans are often aimed at providing electricity to these communities.

While on paper, this might sound like the perfect solution, there’s a lot to consider about SMR siting from an environmental perspective in these remote communities. These considerations include but are not limited to potential locations, source term, refuelling and waste management.

As research continues into the engineering and science behind SMR technology, meaningful community engagement with Indigenous communities is also required.

Thoughtfully considered and integrated consultations are necessary to ensure projects respect treaties, land rights and the surrounding environment. Consultation is needed to understand the needs and goals of the community for creating an energy transition plan.

In addition, incorporating traditional ecological knowledge in environmental risk assessments is vital. Ultimately, projects designed alongside Indigenous communities should strive for Indigenous sovereignty over growing infrastructure.

Why community engagement is important

Indigenous communities continue to face challenges as a result of colonization. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s (TRC) seventh Call to Action highlights the need to eliminate educational and employment disparity between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadians.

A direct way to address in terms of Canada’s nuclear landscape is to train members of those communities in technical roles related to the planning, deployment and sustained use of a nuclear facility. Specifically, training today’s Indigenous youth so they can fulfil these roles in their future careers.

The TRC’s Call to Action 92 calls on Canada’s corporate sector to engage in meaningful consultation, respectful relationship-building and equitable access to training and education opportunities that will contribute to long-term benefits from any economic development projects.

Through understanding the need for this relationship-building, there is a lot that western practices can learn from adopting Indigenous ways of knowing. Indigenous people have a long history of sustainable practices in their culture and traditions, and although western science now consider sustainable practices, it is not deeply woven into community and industrial initiatives.

As nuclear projects advance in Canada, it’s vital to respect Indigenous knowledge through weaving with western science. Projects can adopt a Two-Eyed seeing approach. This refers to viewing a problem with one eye using an Indigenous knowledge perspective and the other with a western knowledge lens. There is much to learn from understanding the philosophy behind Indigenous ways of knowing that can be applied to protect the environment.

Indigenous knowledge varies across Canada and comes with different insights, but a commonality is the teaching that all living things are interconnected and must be respected and cared for. This perspective is necessary for the future of nuclear projects to ensure the environment is sustained to support the biodiversity of regions throughout Canada.

This informed approach of protecting the environment, together with an ecosystem approach that considers the uniqueness and interconectedness of each organism, will ultimately lead to improved nuclear policies and safety.

The actions that institutions and private industry take today to build strong relationships with Indigenous communities and work towards an increasingly sustainable future will support already resilient communities so they can see growth well beyond the deployment of SMRs. A path to a cleaner future is in reach, but only if we walk beside Indigenous leaders, knowledge holders, community members and, especially, youth.

The Conversation

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. Indigenous engagement is essential for small modular nuclear reactor projects – https://theconversation.com/indigenous-engagement-is-essential-for-small-modular-nuclear-reactor-projects-252134

Catholic school board’s regressive flag policy sets back reconciliation in a post-Papal visit Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Erenna Morrison, PhD Candidate, Curriculum and Pedagogy, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto

Following the release of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 94 Calls to Action in 2015, some Catholic school boards have made commitments to reconciliation in education. These boards include the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board (DPCDSB).

However, the DPCDSB — located in the Greater Toronto area — has also introduced a flag policy that raises serious questions about a commitment to the wider progress being made in welcoming all students and promoting reconciliation.

On Jan. 28, 2025 — following advocacy in different parts of Ontario and the country against the presence of the Pride flag — the board’s trustees voted in nine to one to add more restrictions to its flag policies. These restrictions stipulated that only flags representing Canada, the provinces, territories and the school board can be be displayed inside schools or other DPCDSB facilities.

Acts of erasure

The developments in Peel Region follow earlier policy changes to restrict the presence of the Pride flag and other flags at schools.

Advocates from the board defending flag restrictions have said that in Catholic schools, the icon of the cross is the only symbol that should be promoted and that this represents inclusion and acceptance of all.

However, members of the 2SLGBTQI+ community and opponents of restrictive flag policies argue that the Pride flag is needed to signal a welcoming environment. They say its removal is an act of erasure and that it calls into question how the board affirms the rights, dignity and visibility of 2SLGBTQI+ people and how it fosters their safety. The board says, and believes, its practices and policies comply with the Ontario human rights code, adding that supports are available for students who identify as 2SLGBTQI.

The erasure of the Pride flag has the simultaneous effect of banning other important flags, such as Every Child Matters flags, Indigenous Nation flags and MMIWG2S flags (drawing attention to ending violence, disappearance and murder of First Nations women, girls and two-spirit people).

In our analysis, this restrictive flag policy expresses colonial violence. We rely on the work of Sandra Styres, researcher of Iethi’nihsténha Ohwentsia’kékha (Land), Resurgence, Reconciliation and the Politics of Education, who examines how colonial violence is expressed in academic settings through “micro-aggressions, purposeful ignorance, structural racism, lateral violence, isolation” and also in “representations and spaces.”

Crucial time for righting relationships

Our concern is informed by our combined research and personal engagement focused around reconciliatory education in elementary Catholic schools (Erenna) and Anishinaabe Catholic expressions of self-determination in the Church (Noah). Erenna is a settler and Noah is a member of Michipicoten First Nation.

We are married writing partners who travelled to Québec City in July 2022 to witness the long-awaited penitential pilgrimage of the late Pope Francis. We left with an awareness that this is a critical time for the righting of relationships that have been severely fractured by a Church complicit in genocide.

The DPCDSB flag policy speaks to an unwillingness of many to sever emotional attachments to the white imperialism that preserves a western way of thinking, doing and being, in the name of faith.

When a major Catholic entity like the DPCDSB introduces policies that may cause harm, concerned people, regardless of creed, must pay attention to such injustices.

Revised flag policy

Delegate Melanie Cormier, representing the DPCSB’s Indigenous Education Network, shared a statement relaying that the board’s restrictive flag policy fails to acknowledge the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation whose traditional and treaty territory where the board resides. She states: “Your flag policy is in violation of our jurisdiction. To say that any of our flags can not be flown in our own territories is unacceptable.”

Brea Corbet, the only trustee with voting power who did not vote to restrict the Pride flag, told an earlier bylaw policies meeting: “When we remove rainbow flags and heritage flags, we are not protecting our Catholic identity; we are revealing institutional fragility. The Pride flag does not threaten Catholic education, policies of exclusion do.”

Three student trustees also opposed the restrictive policy, but their votes unfortunately aren’t counted. We argue this too speaks to the suppression of student voice within the board.

This fragility disproportionately threatens the safety of Indigenous, 2SLGBTQI+ and marginalized students and staff as they are overlooked and dismissed by the flag policy.




Read more:
New Brunswick’s LGBTQ+ safe schools debate makes false opponents of parents and teachers


Nurturing all students

Kanienʼkehá:ka (Mohawk) education professor Frank Deer speaks of educational programming “that is congruent with the identity of the local community.” This programming, he writes, must go beyond curricula to address the school environment as well. Student safety, inclusion and identity affirmation must be prioritized in all aspects of school life.

Jennifer Brant, a Kanienʼkehà:ka interdisciplinary scholar, speaks in depth about how silence during times like these equates to complicity in accepting injustices that are taking place within “the communities in which we live, the broader society and global communities.”

Inaction in response to this policy is negligent.

Detrimental ramifications may also extend to reconciliation efforts in religious spaces more generally. This regressive policy poses lingering questions about the longevity of Catholic schools if they fail to protect and nurture all students.

Impacts on reconciliation

The primary target of the DPCDSB’s sweeping flag policy is the 2SLGBTQI+ community. In addition, the flag ban attacks Indigenous sovereignty and Anishinaabek nationhood, perpetuating attitudes tied to the Doctrine of Discovery still present in the Catholic ethos.




Read more:
The Vatican just renounced a 500-year-old doctrine that justified colonial land theft … Now what? — Podcast


Flying the flags of First Nations (at their request) is not only a matter of inclusion, it is a matter of respect — respect for the land, the people and the treaties that connect us.

In denying this step towards relationality, this governing body of a Catholic school board sets back the Church’s reconciliation efforts riding on the momentum of the papal visit.




Read more:
Pope Francis showed in deeds and words he wanted to face the truth in Canada


The board’s ignorance of how this policy risks damaging relationships with students, families and staff at the board, as well as the broader public, partly reflects an indifference that Pope Francis warned Catholics about during his visit:

“I trust and pray that Christians and civil society in this land may grow in the ability to accept and respect the identity and the experience of the Indigenous Peoples. It is my hope that concrete ways can be found to make those peoples better known and esteemed, so that all may learn to walk together.”

Walking together in solidarity

As we write this piece, we can see through the window a local Toronto Catholic Distric School Board elementary school, where an Every Child Matters flag is flown alongside a Pride and Canadian flag.

Catholic education, despite its sordid history and contested perspectives about interpreting and practising Church doctrine, can be a tool to drive reconciliation.

Catholics cannot let a narrow vision overshadow Pope Francis’s pilgrimage and the global Church movement he, the Church’s bishops and Catholic lay people have participated in — via a global synod — to respond to the call to walk together in solidarity with Indigenous, 2SLGBTQI+ and other marginalized people.

Counter-narratives of hope and possibility

We wish to continue to hear counter-narratives of hope and possibility for Catholic education. We wish to see active changes that move the DPCDSB, as scholar Sheila Cote-Meek of the Teme-Augama Anishinabai, writes, “to a drastically different way of being, doing and working.”

As other Catholic boards in Ontario initiate flag debates of their own, we are left with the lingering question. What is the future of Catholic education if it’s not intended to support the physical, emotional, mental and spiritual well-being of all those entrusted to its care?

The Conversation

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. Catholic school board’s regressive flag policy sets back reconciliation in a post-Papal visit Canada – https://theconversation.com/catholic-school-boards-regressive-flag-policy-sets-back-reconciliation-in-a-post-papal-visit-canada-256765

Why corporations are backing away from supporting Pride this year

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Leah Hamilton, Professor in the Faculty of Business & Communication Studies, Mount Royal University

Prime Minister Mark Carney recently raised the Pride flag on Parliament Hill and lamented the growing anti-2SLGBTQIA+ sentiment in Canada. He also committed $1.5 million to make Pride festivals across the country safer.

This political support stands in sharp contrast to the many businesses that have reduced or ended their support for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community this Pride season.

Multinational corporations like Google, as well as Canadian-owned companies like Molson Coors, have divested from supporting festivals, while Target has scaled back its Pride merchandise due to threats against employees and large-scale conservative backlash.

The impact is already being felt. Pride Toronto is currently facing a $900,000 funding gap. Executive director Kojo Modeste recently told CBC News this corporate divestment appears to be linked to the larger backlash against diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.

Fear of punitive measures

In January, United States President Donald Trump issued an executive order to dismantle DEI initiatives in federal agencies and target private companies that support DEI measures. In the executive order, Trump’s administration called DEI measures and mandates “immoral discrimination programs.”

Spearheaded by journalist-cum-activist and Trump adviser Christopher Rufo, the attacks against so-called “woke” DEI programs are fuelled by the “culture wars” that pit equity and inclusion against merit and the free market.




Read more:
Here’s what ‘woke’ means and how to respond to it


Major private corporations, including IBM, quickly bent to the pressure of Trump’s anti-DEI orders by gutting their programs and shifting corporate donorship away from “woke” initiatives.

The pressure to comply with anti-DEI measures hasn’t ended with corporations. More recently, Trump has set his sights on the U.S. post-secondary system, freezing US$2.2 million in federal grants and US$60 million in contracts after Harvard University refused to comply with the administration’s demands related to its DEI programs.

In Canada, the rollback of DEI programs isn’t as loud, but it is happening. Michelle Grocholsky, the CEO of Empowered EDI in Toronto, told CBC News companies are reducing their budgets and cutting their staff. In the midst of job cuts in January 2025, the Alberta Investment Management Corporation removed their DEI staff.

Following in the footsteps of the U.S., Alberta’s United Conservative Party membership passed a resolution to eliminate DEI programs and training in the public service. The party has also indicated it will remove government funding from post-secondary institutions that continue to do DEI work.

Declining public support

In addition to the rollback of DEI programs, the ongoing corporate reductions in Pride support are taking place amid increasing anti-2SLGBTQIA+ sentiment.

A 2024 poll reported that, in Canada, support for 2SLGBTQIA+ visibility — like representation on screens and in sports — is lower than it was in 2021. Compared to previous years, Canadians also expressed less support for transgender rights, and this level of support was lower than the 26 other countries surveyed.

Not surprisingly, this declining public support for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community coincides with rising hate crimes targeting 2SLGBTQIA+ communities. In 2023, Statistics Canada reported a 69 per cent increase in hate crimes targeting sexual orientation.

Public attitudes don’t change in a vacuum. They are deeply influenced by hate movements, political rhetoric and the spread of misinformation and disinformation weaponized by politicians and leaders to dehumanize the 2SLGBTQIA+ community, particularly transgender people.

This dehumanization incites fear, violence and support for anti-2SLGBTQIA+ hate. It has coincided with companies silently withdrawing their support for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community.

Where we live, in Alberta, the provincial government has passed the most draconian anti-trans laws Canada has ever seen. As we (Corinne L. Mason and Leah Hamilton) have previously written, Premier Danielle Smith’s government has unveiled a suite of policies targeting transgender, intersex and gender diverse children and youth in Alberta, and the 2SLGBTQIA+ community more broadly.

In this environment of reduced public and political support, it’s not surprising to see companies backing away from the 2SLGBTQIA+ community.

Getting back to Pride’s roots

The fact that companies have quickly backed away from their support of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community — by halting production of Pride merchandise or reducing sponsorship in Pride festivals — illustrates the conditionality of their support.

Rather than beg big business to come back to the table, some members of the community are using this moment to reflect on how corporate “Love is Love” campaigns haven’t actually led to increased quality of life or justice for our communities.

While it has received less media coverage than calls to remove police from Pride and the presence of Boycott, Divest and Sanction movement at Pride festivals, the corporatization of Pride has long been subject of debate in the 2SLGBTQIA+ community.




Read more:
Queers and trans say no to police presence at Pride parade


Those against “rainbow capitalism” — the shallow and inauthentic use of Pride imagery in advertising — argue for a return to community-based and radical protest rather than settling for flag-waving bankers throwing beads from atop expensive floats.

Pride Month is rooted in protest and resistance against police violence and systemic oppression. It was led by Black trans women and can be traced back to the Stonewall Riots. Today, Pride still isn’t simply a party and parade.

Authentic ‘rainbow dollars’

In this sociopolitical climate of legislated DEI rollbacks and declining public support for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community, organizations that want to support the 2SLGBTQIA+ community should back up their messaging with meaningful actions and structural support.

Some organizations have shown a commitment to structural support for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community from its beginning, including the Northern Super League, the top-division professional women’s soccer league in Canada. The league openly and consistently amplifies and supports its 2SLGBTQIA+ players, coaches, staff and fans. Founded by Diana Matheson, an openly queer woman, the league is founded on inclusion as a core value.

When it comes to creating Pride merchandise, Social Made Local is a queer-owned Canadian apparel company in Saskatoon that focuses on gender-inclusive sizing, sustainability and community. They donate a portion of their sales to Canadian non-profits like Rainbow Railroad.

Companies that want to show their support can spend their rainbow dollars in good faith through actions that meaningfully support the 2SLGBTQIA+ community. This could include creating programs that support queer entrepreneurs, donating to legal funds that are fighting discriminatory legislation, and partnering with 2SLGBTQIA+ organizations to amplify their work.

The Conversation

Leah Hamilton receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Corinne L. Mason receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

Gini (Virginia) Weber 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. Why corporations are backing away from supporting Pride this year – https://theconversation.com/why-corporations-are-backing-away-from-supporting-pride-this-year-258770