The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - September 20, 2025


Carney Liberals attack Alberta and Quebec Sovereignty (NotWithStanding Fight)


Episode Stats


Length

12 minutes

Words per minute

160.63687

Word count

2,075

Sentence count

86

Harmful content

Misogyny

5

sentences flagged

Hate speech

1

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

The Supreme Court of Canada is hearing a case about the use of the Notwithstanding Clause in relation to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In this episode, Wyatt Claypool talks about the implications of the Supreme Court hearing the case and what it could mean for Canada. He also talks about Alberta's anti-transgender laws and how they may be a violation of the Charter.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Hey guys, Wyatt Claypool here. We have a big issue going on right now in Canada that may have the power to unite Alberta and Quebec, and that is the Mark Carney Liberal government trying to go after provinces' use of the Notwithstanding Clause Section 33 of the Charter.
00:00:21.160 This effectively allows for provinces to say, I don't really care that a court is saying that we're somehow violating the Charter in another way. We are going to have this law basically go forward anyways, and we'll have to renew it every four years because it's technically violative in some way.
00:00:39.340 Section 33 of the Charter has been very useful in Canada considering how liberal the judges across the country are.
00:00:48.160 So oftentimes, you will pass a law that's not actually violating the Charter, but a court will say it is, and so then you have to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause in order to just have the law still be implemented anyways.
00:01:01.420 And so now, the Liberal government is going after the use of Section 33 and trying to create more rules around whether or not you can use it or not, and now we have Liberals also coping really hard in the aftermath as Conservatives point out that they are doing exactly what they're trying to do.
00:01:21.380 But before we get into it today, guys, I just want to remind you, if you like the show, make sure to leave a like on this video, subscribe to the channel if you are not yet a subscriber, and leave a comment on what you think about all this.
00:01:34.640 Now, here is the current Canadian Attorney General, somehow it is Sean Frazier, and he put out this press release the other day on what he and his office are doing in front of the Supreme Court.
00:01:47.940 Sean Frazier says, please see my statement on Canada's intervention before the Supreme Court.
00:01:55.280 And it says, today, the Honorable Sean Frazier, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, issued the following statement regarding Canada's intervention before the Supreme Court of Canada.
00:02:07.100 Quote, as Attorney General of Canada, I have filed a factum with the Supreme Court of Canada,
00:02:13.280 outlining Canada's position on constitutional issues raised by the use of the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:02:20.220 The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a pillar of our democracy and a reflection of our shared values.
00:02:26.780 It guarantees fundamental freedoms, including freedom of thought, belief, expression, religion, and association.
00:02:32.360 Except when the Liberals don't like your religion, your association, or your beliefs.
00:02:36.900 Quote, it also guarantees equality before the law and the right to life, liberty, and the security of the person.
00:02:44.860 The Charter protects these rights for everyone in Canada, and they are at the heart of our democratic society.
00:02:52.700 This case is about more than the immediate issues before the court.
00:02:56.800 The Supreme Court's decision will shape how both federal and provincial governments may use Notwithstanding Clause for years to come.
00:03:03.800 As the court considers this case, Canadians can count on the government of Canada to defend their constitution,
00:03:10.640 respect their rights and freedoms, and stand up for the Charter that protects them.
00:03:15.660 Now, basically what they're trying to do is, in some case in front of the Supreme Court,
00:03:21.220 they're saying, okay, the Supreme Court may rule that something is against the Charter,
00:03:26.260 but that, like, the province is still going to use the Notwithstanding Clause in order to just get around it.
00:03:34.100 But now the Supreme Court must say whether or not the way that you implement the Notwithstanding Clause
00:03:40.060 can be regulated by the court based on arbitrary things like,
00:03:44.520 oh, you knew something was already going to be violated of the Charter,
00:03:48.420 ergo, you can't use the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:03:50.760 You can only use it if something happens to violate the Charter, but you just didn't know it going into it.
00:03:57.940 And now you have all these people posting extremely stupid stuff like this that involves the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:04:06.120 We have Dwayne Bratt here, a policy professor at the University of Calgary,
00:04:11.060 reacting to a story where the Alberta government is passing three laws about transgender people.
00:04:18.960 And the article headline from the CBC says,
00:04:22.380 Alberta looks to use Notwithstanding Clause on its three transgender laws.
00:04:27.600 And Dwayne Bratt says, the Alberta government knows that this is anti-trans legislation,
00:04:32.780 their anti-trans legislation that violates the Charter.
00:04:36.440 That is why it is preparing to use the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:04:40.420 It's like, well, no, it's not violative.
00:04:42.960 It's that there's liberal judges all over courts in Canada who think that if you prevent biological men from competing in women's sports,
00:04:53.800 that if you prevent children from transitioning, from medically transitioning,
00:04:59.640 that that is somehow a charter violation.
00:05:02.060 It really shouldn't be considered a charter violation at all.
00:05:05.080 And the Alberta government knows the courts will attempt to try and block legislation like this.
00:05:11.220 So it's pre-preparing the fact that it's going to use the Notwithstanding Clause if they try and block it.
00:05:17.580 We have here the Alberta Premier Danielle Smith reacting to what Sean Frazier had said,
00:05:23.920 with her saying,
00:05:25.180 The Notwithstanding Clause is integral to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
00:05:30.100 and is an unassailable provincial constitutional right.
00:05:33.840 While the Alberta government does not support the content of Quebec's Bill 21.
00:05:37.820 So the whole Notwithstanding Clause thing was about Bill 21 and about restricting religious symbols that they don't,
00:05:45.560 that are like any religious symbols.
00:05:47.640 So because they have these secular laws, just to give some context,
00:05:51.440 going back to Danielle Smith, she says,
00:05:53.200 Alberta's government does not support the content of Quebec's Bill 21.
00:05:58.240 We stand shoulder to shoulder with Quebec's constitutional right to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause
00:06:02.500 as its government deems right or deems fit.
00:06:07.520 We are extremely disappointed that the federal government would risk national unity
00:06:11.360 and a foundational principle of our constitution
00:06:14.380 by attempting to attack the use of the Notwithstanding Clause
00:06:17.640 by a sovereign provincial government in this matter
00:06:20.560 and request they withdraw their appeal to the Supreme Court immediately.
00:06:25.580 And a lot of people have now started gaslighting others
00:06:29.240 by claiming that, no, no, no, this is not actually an attack
00:06:33.540 on the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:06:35.760 My friend here, who's right about it,
00:06:37.960 and then I'm going to get to Andrew Coyne in a second,
00:06:40.020 my friend Brian Berguet here says, reacting to Sean Frazier,
00:06:45.500 so I was actually pretty open to Carney government so far
00:06:48.440 as I thought they were fixing many of the errors of Trudeau.
00:06:51.440 But asking the Supreme Court to basically abolish the Notwithstanding Clause is insane.
00:06:56.600 And in reaction, we have here Andrew Coyne saying to Brian,
00:07:00.880 they have not done anything of the kind, not even close.
00:07:05.320 They didn't even ask it to rein in the preemptive use of the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:07:09.660 Never seen such an overreaction.
00:07:12.800 What is he talking about?
00:07:14.600 It's literally in the text of Sean Frazier's statement
00:07:17.980 that it's saying that we need the court to come down on specifically
00:07:21.940 sort of speaking on how the Notwithstanding Clause can be used.
00:07:26.720 And looking, let's read it again just so we're not confused here.
00:07:30.000 However, it said in like the second sentence here,
00:07:36.360 it also guarantees, yeah, as Attorney General of Canada,
00:07:41.280 I filed a factum with the Supreme Court of Canada
00:07:43.820 outlining Canada's position on constitutional issues
00:07:47.000 raised by the use of the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:07:50.620 The whole point is that they're intervening based on their disagreement
00:07:53.980 with how the Notwithstanding Clause is being used.
00:07:57.040 They absolutely are seeking to have it modified,
00:08:00.740 that you can't invoke the Notwithstanding Clause on anything preemptively.
00:08:06.360 You can't, you can only, again,
00:08:08.300 all this kind of esoteric stuff about how you can only use it
00:08:11.620 if you didn't know that it was violating the law
00:08:14.200 or you were violating the charter.
00:08:16.680 And so you can only use it if the court deems
00:08:19.260 that you may have not known that your charter,
00:08:21.960 that it was violating it.
00:08:23.140 And it was only a borderline violation.
00:08:25.480 As soon as we start putting silly stipulations on it
00:08:28.340 that require me to go into the ridiculous head of a liberal judge 0.92
00:08:31.740 means that the Notwithstanding Clause no longer exists.
00:08:35.300 We also have here Anthony Koch reacting
00:08:38.500 to what the liberals are doing.
00:08:40.840 And he says,
00:08:41.780 And again, you have a guy who's supposedly a conservative
00:09:00.160 like Andrew Coyne coming out and saying,
00:09:02.500 God, the hysterics.
00:09:03.880 Conservatives are having an absolute meltdown over this.
00:09:07.060 And I find people like Andrew Coyne,
00:09:10.340 who used to call himself a conservative,
00:09:12.320 really, they just fight for the status quo.
00:09:15.600 They really don't care that,
00:09:18.140 they don't really care about the principle of the matter.
00:09:20.280 They simply nay say conservatives.
00:09:22.500 So even though conservatives are clearly right
00:09:25.220 for taking issue with what's going on
00:09:26.960 with the Notwithstanding Clause,
00:09:28.700 they're wrong because I can see,
00:09:31.080 I can like very squint and see
00:09:33.100 how it doesn't technically attack the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:09:37.120 Here is another person I just want to talk about
00:09:39.400 in the context of Alberta.
00:09:41.000 This whole case was about Quebec,
00:09:42.580 but now people are shifting it to Alberta.
00:09:44.480 This is kind of in the same vein
00:09:46.300 as what Dwayne Bratt was saying.
00:09:48.160 We have Anna Murphy here,
00:09:50.420 who when you read her bio,
00:09:51.820 it says,
00:09:52.180 Proud Calgarian,
00:09:53.280 community-minded leader,
00:09:54.660 advocate for the 2SLGBTQIA+,
00:09:57.360 and women champion for equity, 0.79
00:09:59.960 diversity, and inclusion.
00:10:01.140 Oh my goodness.
00:10:02.820 So Anna Murphy here says,
00:10:04.280 the government of Alberta's decision
00:10:06.140 to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause
00:10:07.980 to override the Charter Rights and Freedoms
00:10:10.320 in order to force through legislation
00:10:13.540 that targets transgender Albertans 0.76
00:10:15.960 is unprecedented, dangerous,
00:10:17.960 and profoundly unjust.
00:10:19.560 This is an assault on the fundamental rights
00:10:21.480 and dignity of transgender people
00:10:23.400 by deliberately setting aside
00:10:24.940 constitutional protections.
00:10:26.600 The government is telling a group of individuals
00:10:28.960 that their equality,
00:10:30.900 their safety,
00:10:31.480 and their very existence
00:10:32.360 is negotiable.
00:10:34.000 The gravity of this moment
00:10:34.880 cannot be overstated.
00:10:36.240 The Notwithstanding Clause
00:10:37.180 was never intended to be a tool
00:10:38.880 for government to strip away
00:10:40.180 rights from vulnerable minorities.
00:10:42.260 To use it in this way
00:10:43.260 is to undermine
00:10:43.940 the very foundation of our democracy
00:10:46.020 and the promise of the Charter itself.
00:10:48.480 And it's like,
00:10:49.140 no,
00:10:49.900 that's not what's going on here at all.
00:10:51.820 You don't get to say
00:10:52.560 that certain people have super rights
00:10:54.120 where if you pass a law
00:10:55.560 that affects them in any way,
00:10:56.780 that they are now able to say
00:10:58.720 that you cannot use
00:10:59.600 the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:11:01.300 Now,
00:11:01.800 I would like
00:11:02.660 the Charter to be changed
00:11:04.160 to look more like
00:11:04.960 the American Constitution
00:11:05.960 so that we don't need
00:11:07.640 the Notwithstanding Clause
00:11:08.760 because the rules
00:11:10.300 are very clear.
00:11:11.880 But right now,
00:11:12.500 because of the flawed Charter
00:11:14.300 that Canada has,
00:11:15.560 we need the Notwithstanding Clause
00:11:17.220 to basically use
00:11:18.620 as a protection
00:11:19.380 against the federal government
00:11:20.660 and against ridiculous judges
00:11:22.820 who will just interpret the law
00:11:24.700 in a very liberal direction
00:11:26.600 whether it makes sense
00:11:27.860 within the Charter or not.
00:11:29.720 And again,
00:11:30.640 the laws in Alberta
00:11:32.560 are protecting children,
00:11:34.840 it's protecting women's sports, 1.00
00:11:36.880 women's rights,
00:11:37.620 women's spaces,
00:11:38.660 protecting women's prisons. 0.67
00:11:40.020 It's doing a lot of things
00:11:41.260 to prevent people
00:11:42.540 from basically abusing the system,
00:11:45.240 from saying that they identify
00:11:46.380 as a woman
00:11:46.900 and then a biological male
00:11:48.460 ends up winning
00:11:49.100 a bunch of female sports. 0.99
00:11:50.680 Or having a child
00:11:52.320 who's only 13,
00:11:53.480 14 years old
00:11:54.340 deciding to start
00:11:55.460 taking puberty blockers
00:11:56.960 and transitioning
00:11:57.840 in a way that's obviously
00:11:59.560 inappropriate to their age
00:12:01.140 because they don't fully understand
00:12:02.900 the ramifications
00:12:04.000 of their actions.
00:12:05.620 But this is a case
00:12:06.860 where they are absolutely,
00:12:08.120 you can tell
00:12:08.820 what the liberal government
00:12:10.240 is doing
00:12:10.720 because the activists
00:12:12.080 know what they're doing
00:12:13.000 and the activists know
00:12:14.220 that it's taking a hammer
00:12:15.300 to the Notwithstanding Clause
00:12:16.920 and they want that to happen.
00:12:19.840 But anyways,
00:12:20.820 if the liberals ever wanted
00:12:22.700 the Alberta government
00:12:24.040 or the Quebec government
00:12:24.980 to unite on something,
00:12:26.080 they found the perfect issue.
00:12:27.760 Go after provincial sovereignty
00:12:29.360 and you will push Alberta
00:12:30.640 and Quebec
00:12:31.120 very close together
00:12:32.600 and you will make
00:12:33.300 both of them
00:12:33.960 more conservative.
00:12:35.420 It's hard to make Alberta
00:12:36.340 more conservative
00:12:37.040 considering how conservative it is.
00:12:38.920 But in Quebec,
00:12:39.920 you're going to throw
00:12:40.640 five or six more seats
00:12:42.000 towards the conservatives
00:12:42.820 by doing something like this.
00:12:44.420 But anyways,
00:12:46.120 with that being said,
00:12:47.040 thank you guys for watching
00:12:47.980 this episode of the show
00:12:49.280 and, you know,
00:12:50.760 like, share, subscribe,
00:12:51.880 all that great stuff.
00:12:53.000 And I will see you guys
00:12:54.180 next time.