Western Standard - August 03, 2025


HANNAFORD： Raped by the system


Episode Stats

Length

23 minutes

Words per Minute

135.40662

Word Count

3,132

Sentence Count

174

Misogynist Sentences

12

Hate Speech Sentences

9


Summary

In the upside down world of woke Canadian politics, where nothing makes sense and appearance is always more important than reality, this week we re talking about the incredible practice of the Liberal government of Canada to jail men who say they re women in women s jails.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Good evening, Western Standard viewers, and welcome to Hannaford, a weekly politics show.
00:00:21.780 It is Thursday, July the 31st. In the upside-down world of woke Canadian politics, where nothing
00:00:28.240 makes sense and appearance is always more important than reality. I thought I'd seen everything in 50
00:00:33.920 years of journalism and government service, but this week we're talking about the incredible
00:00:38.660 practice of the Liberal government of Canada to jail men who say they're women in women's jails.
00:00:46.040 The women are pushing back. No surprise there. There's an organization, Cause Bar, which is leading
00:00:53.080 the charge on that. And with me today is their lawyer, Chris Fleury. Mr. Fleury, welcome to the
00:00:58.780 show. Great. Thanks for having me, Nigel. I'm glad you're here. Mr. Fleury, you're legal counsel for
00:01:04.460 Cause Bar, the women fighting this. You're with Charter Advocates, and I think the case is being
00:01:09.780 funded by the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms. Lay it out for us.
00:01:16.280 Yes. Thank you, Nigel, again, for having me. So this is a case challenging what is the government's
00:01:25.320 policy of placing male inmates, trans-identified male inmates, male-to-female trans inmates, into
00:01:34.460 female institutions. This is a practice that fundamentally changed in 2017, following the
00:01:42.560 passage of what was called Bill C-16. So Bill C-16 amended the Canadian human rights legislation.
00:01:52.000 It also, following that, there were amendments to Correctional Services Canada's governing legislation,
00:01:58.240 which essentially protected trans persons from discrimination within the penitentiary system.
00:02:06.020 So after that, the government of Canada changed their policy. And up until that point, what were called
00:02:14.580 preoperative trans individuals could not be placed into a female institution. So following basically the
00:02:23.260 amendment of their, it's called a commissioner's directive, essentially their policy, the inmates
00:02:30.100 will be placed presumptively according to their gender of their choice, the gender to which they
00:02:36.100 identify, unless there are overriding health and safety concerns. And I think what you might find
00:02:41.800 interesting is that prior to 17, the government of Canada opposed the placement of these individuals
00:02:49.700 into female institutions, including in court cases. So there's a court case from the early 2000s called
00:02:56.780 Kavanaugh, where a male to female trans inmate wanted to be placed in a female institution, they were denied,
00:03:05.340 this person brought a human rights claim. And the government of Canada opposed that. And they opposed
00:03:13.740 it in court, and they brought expert evidence, which essentially said, the risks presented by the transfer of
00:03:20.940 these individuals are just far too high. And that case went in the government of Canada's favour. The person was
00:03:29.500 denied the transfer. Ultimately, after the case, they did complete the surgery and were transferred. But the point
00:03:37.980 is that the government of Canada actually agreed in part with what we're arguing in this lawsuit, right up until 2017, and the
00:03:46.700 passage of this legislation.
00:03:51.020 Different party and different outlook, right?
00:03:53.180 That's right.
00:03:55.260 Yes. That Kavanaugh case that you just described, did you say that was 2003, 2004?
00:04:01.100 It was in that range. I don't have it in front of me. I know it was before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal,
00:04:07.580 and then it went to the federal court as well, which upheld the tribunal's decision.
00:04:11.740 So, okay, so 20 years ago, we, you know, it was a bit of a struggle, but somehow or other, we got it right.
00:04:19.980 Let me just put it to you. If some Nancy boy wants to go and do his term among the girls, is that a big deal?
00:04:30.140 There's, and this is perhaps what people might be missing, because the penitentiary system is,
00:04:37.580 I would say, largely misunderstood by the Canadian population, that it's just not something that
00:04:42.780 many people ever have exposure to. So one thing that people might not know is that,
00:04:48.140 first of all, in addition to being convicted of a criminal offense, most female inmates
00:04:55.340 are themselves victims. So they're disproportionately, wildly disproportionately likely to have been the victim
00:05:02.300 of physical or sexual violence at the hands of men. And that's who we are placing, who the government
00:05:08.300 of Canada is placing male inmates into. That's the population that is being exposed to this.
00:05:16.300 Well, let's talk about the male inmates a little bit, Mr. Fleury. They, you know, I'd probably use what
00:05:21.740 many people would consider an offensive term in characterizing them as effeminate, but are they?
00:05:28.140 Well, this is, and that's sort of where I was going, Nigel, is that there are fundamental,
00:05:37.260 it's not just about physical differences necessarily between men and women, although
00:05:41.260 obviously those are present. There are profound psychological differences between men and women
00:05:47.580 that actually lead to them committing different types of crimes, them finding themselves,
00:05:57.100 them being essentially behaving differently in the carceral context. So for example, men are much more
00:06:06.860 likely to have been convicted of a serious violent crime. They're much more likely to be found guilty
00:06:12.140 or to be designated as a dangerous offender. They're much more likely to essentially be aggressive
00:06:18.620 and act aggressively within the prison system. And that's the population that is being transferred.
00:06:27.020 We're not talking about the average male, the average woman, the average trans person. That's not who
00:06:32.620 we're talking about in this case. We're talking about, as a starting point, individuals who have been
00:06:38.220 sentenced to a penitentiary term, meaning more than two years in custody. So they must have,
00:06:44.700 by definition, committed a serious violent crime and have a lengthy criminal record in most cases,
00:06:51.660 or both, in order to even find themselves in that situation. And I mean, there are statistics about
00:06:59.820 this that the government of Canada has produced. Actually, here's another one that I missed is that
00:07:05.260 men are much more likely to be sex offenders and convicted of a sexual offense than women are.
00:07:12.300 And not only are men disproportionately likely to have been found guilty of a
00:07:16.940 sexual offense in relation to women, the rate of sexual offenders among this population that is
00:07:23.580 seeking transfer is just disproportionately high. We're talking 40 to 50 percent are convicted sex
00:07:30.780 offenders, and those are the individuals who are seeking transfer into a women's prison.
00:07:39.100 So really, we're talking about putting the wolves in among the sheep. Now, I can't imagine that even
00:07:47.660 our corrective system would actually have them sharing cells. How are things organized in the prisons
00:07:54.220 to keep the obvious from happening?
00:07:59.500 It, the short answer is that it varies. There are, just like in a male institution,
00:08:05.980 a female institution will have different security designations. So you'll have a minimal,
00:08:11.820 a medium and a maximum security. In the maximum security, you will get individual cells. In some cases,
00:08:19.500 trans persons are housed there. There are community living units within the female institution.
00:08:27.100 Those do involve sharing what are essentially like cottages and being in a community living
00:08:34.220 situation, if I can call it that, sharing kitchens and bathrooms and this sort of thing with the inmates.
00:08:40.780 I hope you're going to tell me that those community living facilities are not available to somebody
00:08:49.820 who's claiming to be a woman, but has actually been convicted of raping women.
00:08:54.860 No, they, there's nothing precluding them from being housed in there, and we have certainly heard
00:09:01.500 from inmates to confirm that they are being housed in that sort of situation.
00:09:06.300 Well, how are things working out?
00:09:10.060 We have heard, the stories have been awful. I'm not going to go into a tremendous amount of detail,
00:09:17.340 because it is still before the courts, and some of this evidence hasn't come out yet. But in
00:09:23.500 general terms, we've certainly heard about physical assaults happening, sexual assaults, harassment,
00:09:32.220 abuse, certainly psychological impacts on the part of the women who are again, you can imagine someone
00:09:40.940 who has been the victim of a physical or sexual assault then being confined in close quarters with
00:09:50.060 essentially a man, the impact that that might have on someone. And in the context of the carceral
00:09:57.740 system, it's about punishment, but it's also about rehabilitation. And part of our argument in this
00:10:04.140 lawsuit is that the placement of males within female institutions, not only does it present these
00:10:12.620 sorts of harms of physical and psychological harms, but it also impacts their prospects at rehabilitation.
00:10:19.660 So it's extremely, extremely concerning. Mr. Fleury, how many trans men are presently incarcerated in
00:10:29.340 Canadian jails and within women's institutions? We don't know exactly, unfortunately. There's no
00:10:37.820 publicly available statistics to tell us this. The percentage of female inmates in and of itself is
00:10:48.220 actually very, very low. They're a small portion of the overall incarcerated population. It's mostly men
00:10:56.460 in federal institutions. But the transfer of even, so it's in that context that the transfer of even a
00:11:04.140 small number, a handful of individuals can have a disproportionate impact. Unfortunately, I can't say
00:11:10.620 exactly how many that is at the moment. Okay. And how many women's jails are affected by this?
00:11:19.500 There's six across Canada. So there's five, what we would usually think of as a penitentiary,
00:11:28.460 five located across Canada, as well as a, what's called a healing lodge, which I believe is in
00:11:34.060 Saskatchewan, which is also impacted by this. So in terms of scale, this is not a huge problem,
00:11:44.780 but in terms of principle, it seems to me as an editorialist, and I'm not putting words in your
00:11:51.020 mouth, but it seems utter folly, as well as deeply evil to put the, as I say, the wolves in among the
00:11:58.460 sheep. I cannot imagine who came up with this idea, but who actually, when you follow the trail of
00:12:08.620 command from the prison warden through the, up through the bureaucracy to the Department of Justice,
00:12:15.340 and ultimately the federal cabinet, where does the responsibility for this decision rest?
00:12:23.900 It seems, I have difficulty answering that question. The Bill C-16, as I imagined, or sorry,
00:12:32.700 as I mentioned earlier, was passed by the federal government of the time that was under Justin Trudeau
00:12:40.300 and his cabinet. Justin Trudeau certainly did make public statements prior to that. He was asked directly
00:12:48.540 about the transfer of men into women's prisons, and he did say, this was, I believe, immediately prior to
00:12:57.100 the changing of the directive. He did say that that was something that they were considering. So it certainly,
00:13:06.220 it seems to go right to the top, I would say, in terms of Justin Trudeau and his federal cabinet.
00:13:12.220 Well, certainly, every member of parliament who voted for that legislation, most of whom obviously
00:13:19.740 would have been liberals, has some responsibility for it. But it just seems, it's one of those things,
00:13:29.740 say, how can such a stupid situation come about, especially when you have referred to an earlier
00:13:36.140 precedent, where the courts have looked at it and decided, no, it's not a good idea. And then the
00:13:44.060 government comes along and changes it. Now, this case that you are now engaged upon, does it have the
00:13:52.860 capacity to actually reverse the effects of that 2017 legislation that made all this possible?
00:14:02.060 So what precisely we're asking for in this case is a declaration that this particular, it's called
00:14:12.220 a Commissioner's Directive, Commissioner's Directive 100, is in violation of female inmates'
00:14:19.580 constitutional rights. Their right to life, liberty, security of persons, Section 7 of the Charter.
00:14:26.220 Their right under Section 12 to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. And their equality rights
00:14:33.020 under Section 15 of the Charter. So we're asking the court to declare that this particular policy
00:14:39.580 is in contravention of their rights. And then ultimately, once we've done that, then the
00:14:47.180 legislation will have to be amended. And in the amendment, it would presumably put an end to this
00:14:57.100 practice. I mean, I can't see how you would amend it otherwise. That's me speaking. Am I correct on that?
00:15:04.700 There are. I would say it would be open to the federal government to attempt to bring the policy
00:15:17.100 back into line to where it was prior to 2017, which was post-operative trans inmates. I don't want to get
00:15:27.980 too graphic, but essentially they've had the surgery cutting off their bits. And those individuals could
00:15:37.580 be transferred prior to 17 on a case-by-case basis. It would be open to the federal government to
00:15:43.820 attempt to bring the legislation back to that state. We would oppose that. We would say
00:15:49.500 it's certainly, there are serious risks that are present there. It's not just about the presence or
00:15:56.860 lack of genitalia. It's about physical and psychological danger that's created by men
00:16:03.980 in women's prisons. And that's not necessarily alleviated just by a surgery.
00:16:10.860 Mr. Fleury, let's just talk about, I think there was a particular case involving a
00:16:17.020 young man, I think this may be in BC, I'm sure you're familiar with it,
00:16:20.620 that raped a baby and then ended up in a prison where there were mothers with their babies. Can you
00:16:28.700 just talk about that case a little bit and how it illustrates the dilemma we're dealing with here?
00:16:35.340 I've heard the story. I'm not particularly familiar with it. What I will say is that it shows the problem
00:16:45.660 with the system as it is. That there is, as I said, a presumption that individuals will be placed in a
00:16:54.300 penitentiary according to their chosen gender. And that can only be overridden on the basis of proven
00:17:02.380 health and safety concerns. So essentially, a proven risk. And it's a pretty high bar
00:17:08.060 uh, to, to prove that. And in this case, uh, notwithstanding that, as you mentioned,
00:17:14.380 there are convictions for serious offenses involving women and children. Uh, they, um,
00:17:20.540 the government of Canada presumably, uh, did an assessment, uh, and did not believe that there was a,
00:17:27.340 um, a serious risk in that case of placing that inmate with, uh, with female offenders. And it is,
00:17:33.980 um, as you say, it's, it's ludicrous. It's, uh, the average person on the street,
00:17:38.620 it's just never going to understand, uh, why this is happening. And they're, they're right not to.
00:17:46.060 Tell us about your client, sir. Cause bar, who are they? And, and, um,
00:17:53.580 frankly, what are their chances?
00:17:56.540 So cause bar is the Canadian women's sex-based rights. Uh, they're a national nonprofit organization.
00:18:03.100 Um, they advocate across the country for, as the name suggests, uh, women's sex-based rights,
00:18:09.020 uh, in the context of, uh, prisons. Certainly they're, um, they've done a lot of advocacy work
00:18:15.020 there, but also in the context of, uh, bathrooms, uh, changing rooms, um, sports teams, uh, this sort
00:18:23.100 of thing, uh, venues where, uh, traditionally there's been a, a, a sex segregated environment
00:18:29.100 that now in, in 2025, we find these sorts of protections, uh, reversing. They're, um, they're
00:18:36.220 certainly, uh, um, advocating on behalf of women in, in that context broadly.
00:18:42.940 And, and so is it a new, new organization?
00:18:46.700 They are, uh, relatively new. I, I don't have it in front of me in terms of, uh, exactly when they
00:18:52.060 were founded. It's certainly been within the last decade or so. Um, but to be, uh, fair to them,
00:18:59.500 that these issues, uh, I don't recall them really existing a decade or so ago. So they're,
00:19:04.380 they're responding to these new sorts of issues that we find ourselves with.
00:19:08.460 Now are the, uh, the women, and I'm sure it is mainly women, are the women driving this
00:19:12.860 organization, former inmates themselves?
00:19:15.580 Uh, there is one, uh, one of their directors is a former inmate, um, and is, uh, how essentially
00:19:24.300 this case came to our attention is, is through her. Uh, the rest of the women are, uh, just
00:19:31.020 members of Canadian society, if I can put it that way, who are deeply concerned about these issues.
00:19:36.300 Well, bless their hearts for coming forward. Um, do they have a, you mentioned bathrooms and
00:19:42.140 I mean, that's pretty obvious. Have they had any successes in that area?
00:19:45.420 Uh, so my understanding is that this is the first, um, legal action that they've taken.
00:19:52.620 Uh, everything else has been, um, advocacy work that they're doing. Uh, so they hold protests,
00:19:59.260 they do, uh, conferences and speeches and, uh, this sort of thing.
00:20:03.100 Okay. And, uh, the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms, I think is fairly well known to,
00:20:09.340 to our, uh, readers and our viewers, but, uh, they are funding this defense.
00:20:18.140 Did they approach Colesbar or did Colesbar come to them?
00:20:23.180 This case, um, you know what, I, I can't recall offhand exactly how that happened. Um, I know that,
00:20:31.900 this is something that, uh, the particular director who I was talking about, who's been incarcerated,
00:20:37.020 uh, previously, uh, has certainly been thinking about for, uh, for quite some time.
00:20:43.580 Okay. We're rapidly, uh, getting to the running out of time here, but the, uh, you, you, uh, mentioned
00:20:49.980 Mr. Trudeau's personal opinions on the matter and the success of the legislation that followed in 2017.
00:21:00.620 Um, Mr. Trudeau obviously had a lot of, uh, ideas that Western standard viewers tend not to agree with.
00:21:09.980 And in fact, I think now that he is out of office, it's probably safe to say that, uh, a majority of
00:21:16.780 Canadians find these kinds of things utterly stupid. But what is the genesis of a, uh, of a philosophy
00:21:26.780 that could actually make the argument for putting men into women's jails with a straight face saying
00:21:35.100 that this was the fulfillment of the ultimate, uh, uh, rights of, uh, of human rights?
00:21:42.860 Where does that come from?
00:21:43.900 I, I, truly, Nigel, I, I wish I had a good answer for you on that one. Um, as I said, it's,
00:21:51.420 it's not something that we've, uh, seen, you know, uh, 10, 20 years ago. It appears to,
00:21:58.460 from my perspective, have, have come out of left field, uh, that I, again, I, I don't recall
00:22:03.740 anyone talking like this 10 or 20 years ago. And if you had have said something like this
00:22:08.700 to someone 10 or 20 years ago, I think 99% of the population would have said that's absolutely crazy.
00:22:15.260 Well, you know something, Mr. Fleury? I think that the number would have been higher than 99%
00:22:22.380 and that it still is. Wish you good luck and, uh, everything that a lawyer needs to make the case.
00:22:31.180 This is actually a symbolic case. If you can turn this one over, a lot of us will take tremendous
00:22:37.740 encouragement for reversing some of the folly and the stupidity that we have seen. So thank you for
00:22:44.220 joining us and, uh, I'm sure all Western Standard viewers join me in, and wishing you well with this
00:22:50.060 case. Thank you, Nigel. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for being with us. For the Western Standard,
00:22:57.020 I'm Nigel Hannaford.