Western Standard - August 14, 2026


When the police knock on your door, grab your phone and record


Episode Stats


Length

26 minutes

Words per minute

138.64

Word count

3,666

Sentence count

128

Harmful content

Toxicity

7

sentences flagged

Hate speech

8

sentences flagged


Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Good evening, Western Standard viewers, and welcome to Hannaford, a weekly politics show
00:00:20.400 of the Western Standard. It is Thursday, August the 14th. I'm joined today by John Carpe,
00:00:26.720 president of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms. He founded the Justice Center in 2010
00:00:32.640 to focus on defending Canadians' constitutional freedoms, especially charter rights through
00:00:38.000 litigation and education. And he has been a fearless advocate for free speech rights in
00:00:45.920 all of his career as a constitutional lawyer. We had an interesting incident the other day,
00:00:52.800 A story that the Western Standard reported in which the Edmonton police were checking on people who made non-criminal hate speech remarks.
00:01:07.340 The sort of thing that you might, you know, read a story and put a comment on, send them all back.
00:01:12.280 You know, it's not against the law, but it's probably a little insensitive.
00:01:17.420 But at any rate, it's not against the law.
00:01:19.680 So, John, welcome to the show. Tell us about what seems like a very English approach to non-hate crimes.
00:01:32.960 The English approach hits the nail on the head.
00:01:36.320 Before I dive into the Edmonton police, I will say that they started around the year 2000.
00:01:42.680 The police started recording non-crime hate incidents.
00:01:48.900 And what started out, you know, with good intentions, it was to, I guess, stop the spread of hate in society, I guess, use the law or law enforcement to get people to be nicer to each other.
00:02:03.460 Almost all laws have good intentions, but it got to the point where just last year, thousands of people, 25 years later, we've got thousands and thousands of British people who've had the police knocking on their door because they sent an anti-immigration tweet.
00:02:26.680 We've got people spending time in jail.
00:02:28.840 In March of 2026, so roughly half a year ago, they've now formally abandoned.
00:02:35.700 At least they've announced that they're abandoning.
00:02:37.460 I don't know what's happening in practice.
00:02:38.800 But after 25 years of non-crime hate incidents, the United Kingdom is backing away from that model at the same time that we seem to be embarking on it here in Canada.
00:02:51.760 So what's the crime here?
00:02:55.300 you're talking about a non-crime hate incident why do the police trouble themselves with non-crimes
00:03:03.280 well this is the big problem that i see with the edmonton police and apparently there are police
00:03:09.100 forces all over canada anecdotally that are saying uh if you have a non-hate uh a crime if
00:03:17.080 there's a racial slur if there's an offensive joke if there's a you know you people should go
00:03:22.500 back to where you came from or all of the worst drivers on the road, you know, belong to this or
00:03:28.260 that racial or ethnic group, that those types of comments should be reported to police. The big 0.88
00:03:33.700 problem with that is that police already have limited resources to do law enforcement in relation
00:03:41.100 to actual crimes. I hear anecdotally that if your car is stolen or you come back to your home to
00:03:46.720 find it broken into and family heirloom jewelry taken away, the home is ransacked, that your car
00:03:54.420 is vandalized. Police practically shrug their shoulders. You can fill out a report, but they
00:04:00.220 don't have the resources to investigate, to go looking after this. So they're already shorthanded
00:04:05.700 in relation to real crimes. So if you have a speech that is offensive, hurtful, unkind, ugly,
00:04:17.300 false, that is not criminal, police should not be inviting people to report any non-crimes simply by
00:04:26.340 virtue of the fact that their resources are limited and they don't have enough resources as it is now
00:04:31.220 to to fight actual crimes well again i i think the question is still if it's not a crime and
00:04:41.380 they're short-staffed anyway why do they do this i think it's the woke neo-marxist ideology of
00:04:50.260 equity diversity inclusion that has infiltrated uh canadian culture canadian institutions the
00:04:56.740 police, the crown prosecutors, the judiciary, the universities, certainly the government-funded media,
00:05:03.780 and this woke neo-Marxist ideology of equity, diversity, inclusion basically says that society
00:05:11.620 is in a state of war, oppressors versus oppressed, and the oppressors are men and straight people
00:05:19.380 and light-skinned people and the victims of oppression are women and dark-skinned people 0.92
00:05:25.380 and lgbtq people and so we're in a state of war this ideology is what gets the groups an
00:05:33.300 institution like the edmonton police to put on its website uh send us non-criminal you know
00:05:41.780 send us report speech that that you find offensive that is not criminal and by the
00:05:48.820 the way, the Edmonton police and every other police force in Canada, they do have a responsibility to
00:05:53.460 enforce the criminal code hate speech provisions. So if somebody said that a certain identifiable
00:06:00.300 group, you know, based on their religion or race, that they should all be massacred, we're advocating 0.98
00:06:06.420 for genocide, we're saying that these people are, you know, horrible. When you have willful 1.00
00:06:12.160 promotion of hatred police have a right and an obligation to investigate okay the problem here
00:06:19.200 they're not saying report hate speech and then define hate speech and make it clear what it is
00:06:25.280 they're saying just deport uh report to us racial slurs and you know offensive jokes and what are
00:06:33.360 they going to do about it it's not illegal well they keep the information on file which is creepy
00:06:40.240 and it lays the foundation for becoming more aggressive in the future because in the united
00:06:46.640 kingdom starting in the year 2000 the you they were not the police were not immediately at that
00:06:53.280 point arresting people and locking people up over there or threatening people over their
00:06:59.360 tweets on social media but over time that's where it led to and so what the edmonton police are
00:07:05.520 doing right now and other police forces that lays the foundation for moving towards a place where
00:07:12.160 you have police knocking on your door because they don't like what you said about canada's
00:07:17.600 immigration policy so to be clear if you if a person makes a comment about canada's immigration
00:07:25.520 policy that somebody reports as being hateful but non-criminal the police knock on the door they
00:07:33.440 then what? First thing you do when you've got police knocking on your door is take out your
00:07:39.760 cell phone and hit the record button or have a family member record the interaction. That's very
00:07:44.640 important so that you don't become a victim of bullying and intimidation just in case there's
00:07:49.760 a bad police officer that's going to bully you, threaten you and intimidate you over what you've
00:07:56.240 said. So first response, turn on your cell phone and start recording the incident. And then listen
00:08:04.140 to what the officer has to say. And you can say, look, am I being charged with criminal hate speech
00:08:10.260 under section 319 of the criminal code? And if the answer is no, you say, okay, what do you want?
00:08:16.820 What are you doing here? And if the policeman was to say, well, you know, we're just concerned about,
00:08:22.160 you know, what you said on Twitter yesterday, say, you know what, I don't want to continue the
00:08:29.440 conversation. You can leave now. Police have no business knocking on your door unless there's a
00:08:36.000 crime or they're investigating a crime. They can knock on your door and ask you for information
00:08:41.760 to help solve a crime. But if they're there to intimidate you over what you've said,
00:08:46.800 then no but record it record the incident okay but be polite of course absolutely okay
00:09:00.160 so it is an exercise in intimidation when people use their free speech rights and to be clear there
00:09:06.640 are limits to free speech but they are nowhere near as narrow as what the woke crowd would like
00:09:14.080 you to believe. Certainly, telling an ethnic joke is not in the barred zone. Now, surely
00:09:31.360 the government of Alberta has some influence in this. Daniel Smith, hearing about this incident,
00:09:40.480 which just came out about 10 days ago, has directed the Alberta police to focus on violent crime
00:09:47.760 rather than non-criminal hate speech. From a constitutional standpoint, how significant is that?
00:09:55.800 Does she have any power here? Well, legally, the Edmonton police reports to the city of Edmonton,
00:10:02.780 But they are also under the supervision of the Solicitor General, also the Justice Minister.
00:10:12.260 So on a province-wide basis, the Solicitor General can formulate policy and can provide policy guidance.
00:10:24.420 He shouldn't be in the business of, he should never be, neither the Premier nor anybody in Cabinet should be micromanaging
00:10:30.040 and telling the police to go after so-and-so and not go after so-and-so.
00:10:33.800 So there's not to be any interference whatsoever with the actual daily law enforcement
00:10:40.140 and against whom charges will be laid or not, et cetera.
00:10:45.820 But as a matter of policy, the province does have jurisdiction over policing
00:10:51.360 And the province can order the police to refrain from recording non-criminal incidents of any kind, or more narrowly, they can tell the police you're not to spend resources on recruiting, asking for people to report non-criminal hate speech.
00:11:18.520 They shouldn't be asking for it, right?
00:11:19.900 They can't control what comes in the door, okay?
00:11:22.280 The police would probably still receive, there would be people that would file complaints and say, you know, this joke I heard at the party last night, I think it's criminal hate speech.
00:11:31.740 The police can't control what comes in the door, and they might have to look at it and go, well, no, it was a terrible joke, but it doesn't qualify as criminal hate speech.
00:11:42.320 But what police should not be doing is actively seeking out
00:11:45.620 and asking members of the public to report non-crimes
00:11:49.500 because it's a poor use of resources.
00:11:51.820 That's the bottom line.
00:11:53.460 So, yeah, I guess my question is the relationship
00:11:56.000 between the police officers engaged in this activity
00:11:59.780 and the federal government,
00:12:01.700 because between the two of them stands a police commission.
00:12:04.780 I mean, I think all the cities which have their own municipal police forces
00:12:09.120 will have a police commission to supervise the day-to-day operations as the police force enforces
00:12:18.060 the criminal code and other legislation that it's called upon to do. So when the premier of a
00:12:25.980 province, I mean, it happens to be Danielle, but just in general terms, when the premier of a
00:12:30.360 province says, we need to crack down on drunken driving, I would take that as an expectation that
00:12:38.220 police would want to crack down on drunk driving whatever the police commission says but here we
00:12:45.660 have a situation where the under the cover i must assume of the police commission in edmonton
00:12:53.980 the edmonton police services is looking for these examples of non-criminal hate speech
00:13:00.540 does the attorney general's office get involved here does it matter that the premier says
00:13:08.220 cut it out well margaret thatcher once said never underestimate the power of making a statement as
00:13:17.180 to what is going to transpire now that's not a law but it's it's an interesting point i mean
00:13:24.220 often when when a premier or prime minister federally or the mayor of a city when they
00:13:30.220 announce what their view is and what they would like to see done. It carries a political and moral
00:13:41.020 and psychological impact. And so the very fact that the premier has said this, you know,
00:13:47.740 premier's comments, whoever the premier is, whatever the province, they're not easily ignored.
00:13:54.460 And so there is a certainly a political and psychological impact to it, which which is very positive positive.
00:14:02.060 Now, in terms of the legislation, I have not had an opportunity to look at the Police Act, but the Police Act does empower the province to set general policy.
00:14:09.460 policy. We've heard this some time ago where it was said that the confiscation of private property,
00:14:18.260 namely the firearms owned by law-abiding people, I believe there's an announcement that the
00:14:26.580 Alberta police in Alberta would not be spending a lot of time on that. So there is that provincial
00:14:35.540 control over policing policy. All right. Well, critics will say, John,
00:14:42.180 that Smith's position gives cover to genuine bigotry. How do you respond to that argument
00:14:49.540 that de-emphasizes hate speech complaints that may endanger vulnerable groups?
00:14:56.500 It's a reasonable thing to ask. You know, hate is an emotion,
00:15:02.820 and it's entirely subjective what somebody views as hateful or not. I'll give you an example that
00:15:11.620 will resonate with a lot of people, something we've heard a lot in the last two years or so,
00:15:15.620 is the slogan, from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. Now, some people hear
00:15:20.500 that and they say it's hateful, anti-Semitic, genocidal, it wants to drive the Jews into the 0.97
00:15:26.980 sea and destroy the state of Israel. Other people say, no, no, no, it's just a political slogan, 0.82
00:15:32.500 it's about freedom, it's about justice, human rights for Palestinians. You know, there is an
00:15:36.980 example, is that a hateful slogan? Yes or no? That really is a subjective assessment. And so the
00:15:45.200 moment that you have hate speech on the books as a crime, as we do in Canada, you've got a political
00:15:53.320 aspect to it, where politically vocal and politically powerful, influential minority,
00:16:00.880 like the LGBTQ community. They're going to give, I'll give you a practical example. You've got two
00:16:07.020 cases in Alberta, supposedly the freest province in Canada. We've got a human rights commission
00:16:13.300 that is prosecuting a lady for saying that the crosswalk in her town should remain black and 0.91
00:16:21.860 white as public property, should not be replaced with a rainbow crosswalk because that is a
00:16:26.980 controversial political symbol.
00:16:29.320 She now is facing human rights proceedings
00:16:32.320 over what she said.
00:16:33.520 She didn't discriminate against anybody.
00:16:35.200 She just stated her opinion 1.00
00:16:36.760 that she doesn't want a rainbow crosswalk in her town.
00:16:40.840 Another lady said publicly
00:16:43.040 that a so-called family friendly drag queen show
00:16:48.600 is by definition not family friendly
00:16:50.840 because a drag queen show isn't family friendly.
00:16:53.900 She's facing a human rights complaint
00:16:56.980 The Justice Centre is providing lawyers for both ladies.
00:17:00.420 This is what happens when you try to outlaw speech.
00:17:06.140 It immediately becomes very political.
00:17:09.300 And if you're part of a favoured minority, then you get protection.
00:17:13.760 But if you're not part of a favoured minority, you don't get protection.
00:17:16.840 And that's, yeah, that's the problem.
00:17:19.500 Well, John, the Justice Centre has litigated a number of free speech cases.
00:17:23.360 just think for a minute which recent Canadian examples for you best illustrate the risk
00:17:30.600 of expanding hate beyond the criminal threshold. I mean, what you're just talking about,
00:17:35.180 there was a human rights commission, that's a whole different animal. But
00:17:38.420 when we're talking about the police looking at non-criminal hate speech, well, what are the
00:17:46.640 risks of expanding hate beyond the criminal threshold we are acting for a citizens group
00:17:53.660 in New Brunswick that was handing out flyers against the policy of keeping parents in the dark
00:18:02.760 about what's going on with their own kids at school when it comes to promoting transgender
00:18:07.760 ideology to children so citizens distributed flyers the flyers said that parents have a
00:18:14.540 to know what's going on with your own kids and we shouldn't be promoting transgender ideology
00:18:20.060 on children so the there's human rights complaint there the justice center is providing lawyers
00:18:25.980 uh there's a case in british columbia very new felt a former school board trustee from the city
00:18:31.980 of chilliwack 750 000 that he has to pay to some lgbtq teachers why because he said that it's not
00:18:40.460 good to promote transgender ideology against children now this is not in neither case it's
00:18:45.820 not hate speech criminally but it's that same mentality that you know you're saying something 0.89
00:18:51.100 is really offensive because you're transphobic supposedly so we're going to go after you with
00:18:57.100 the force of the state and try to silence you and that's not a free country no so i think that
00:19:06.300 alberta maybe have a little different view of things certainly the premier does so looking ahead
00:19:14.860 john what legal or policy changes would you like to see in alberta to put clearer guardrails around
00:19:23.820 around non-criminal speech investigations is there anything that we can do to just
00:19:29.180 keep the old free speech ethic pure and alive repeal section three from the alberta human
00:19:35.020 Rights Act and your problem is solved. Section 3 prohibits discriminatory signs. Now, that's
00:19:43.600 already, if that refers only to, you know, a landlord can't, you know, put up a sign saying 0.99
00:19:51.460 I don't want any Jews or blacks or whatever as tenants. But that's already covered by all the 0.99
00:19:58.160 other sections of the acts. What's happening now is that the two different, the two ladies that
00:20:04.700 or representing in the two different human rights complaints
00:20:09.240 is section three that is enabling
00:20:12.280 these political prosecutions against these two women
00:20:15.640 simply for expressing their opinions.
00:20:17.980 And so we should scrap section three
00:20:20.980 and all of the rest of the human rights code
00:20:23.360 that prohibits discrimination in goods and services,
00:20:26.660 restaurants and renting out apartments
00:20:28.680 and hiring and firing and promotion,
00:20:31.280 All of those human rights provisions will stay on the books, but repeal Section 3, and you no longer have a threat to our free speech in Alberta.
00:20:43.360 John, when I was growing up, and I suspect that when you were a much younger man, the common consensus was that everybody had a right to their own opinion and within certain very wide limits to express it.
00:20:58.100 I wonder if that is still a widely held view these days.
00:21:06.020 Do people actually care about free speech anymore?
00:21:10.520 We've probably had a cultural shift away from appreciation for free speech and the same
00:21:17.420 as if that's similar to we've moved away from a healthy appreciation of religious freedom,
00:21:24.740 of Association, Peaceful Assembly, Travel Movement, there were an awful lot of Canadians
00:21:29.720 who, you know, cheerfully and enthusiastically gave up their rights and freedoms in 2020
00:21:35.980 during the lockdowns.
00:21:38.040 Having said that, I think most Canadians still appreciate and cherish freedom of speech.
00:21:44.380 One of the challenges is that people don't understand that if you give the state, the
00:21:50.680 government the power to determine what is true or false and what you can and cannot say that that
00:21:55.640 will be used against you and what i mean is you have uh you have people saying we can't we can't
00:22:03.080 have uh hateful we can't have racist speech okay give you an example right people hear that and go
00:22:09.560 well i'm not a racist i'm against racism i don't see i don't say racist things so yeah let's have
00:22:15.240 a, let's pass a law against racist speech. Well, now you've got a problem because now the government
00:22:21.040 gets to decide what is or is not racist. And somebody could say, you know, we need fewer
00:22:25.480 immigrants in Canada, or we need to better screen immigrants. So we're only getting people who 1.00
00:22:31.380 love Canadian values. The government could say, well, that's racist. It isn't a racist statement,
00:22:37.960 but the government could say it is, and now you're in trouble. So there's a practical example. People
00:22:43.360 don't think it through. They think, well, you're just going to go after racist, sexist, homophobic, 0.55
00:22:49.340 transphobic speech, and I don't say any of those bad things myself. So you go ahead and you censor
00:22:56.120 those people. Well, if the government can shut up one group because they are now, you know,
00:23:02.960 politically weak or because they're unpopular, then government can shut up anybody else and
00:23:08.140 everybody else as well i guess that's one of the reasons when all the famous free speech cases
00:23:13.500 that you ever review uh you tend to sort of not like the guy who is charged very much
00:23:20.220 those difficult cases are where these things are determined so i so i i do wonder john
00:23:30.080 whether people care about it as much as uh we used to care about it days gone by that
00:23:37.700 They're happier with control and knowing where the limits are
00:23:43.320 and don't much care about that old saying attributed to Voltaire.
00:23:54.380 I didn't actually say it, but somebody else much later.
00:23:58.160 But, you know, I may not agree with your opinion,
00:24:00.360 but I will defend with my life your right to express it.
00:24:04.340 I don't think people think like that anymore, do they?
00:24:07.700 You have fewer people thinking that way. We have to remember, and don't get me wrong, I mean, free speech is in trouble in Canada, absolutely. And all of our rights and freedoms, many of them are under very aggressive assault because of this woke neo-Marxist ideology that we have to fight back against tooth and nail.
00:24:28.480 Well, peacefully, we fight back against it peacefully. We don't use violence, but we have to fight very hard against it.
00:24:36.820 We have to remember as well, though, we compared to other countries in the world today and compared to other time periods in history,
00:24:44.580 we Canadians in 2026 have an awful lot of free expression left over.
00:24:49.200 The fact that you and I are having this interview, the fact that people are freely criticizing the government and government policy,
00:24:56.560 The fact that there's this citizen pushback against police wasting resources on trying to keep track of non-criminal behavior, we have a lot of free speech left in Canada.
00:25:08.580 So as long as we continue to exercise it, then that is the key to preserving it.
00:25:14.480 Free speech is like a muscle.
00:25:15.760 If you don't exercise your muscles, they atrophy.
00:25:18.640 If we don't exercise our muscle of free speech, that muscle will also atrophy.
00:25:24.440 So that's the key point.
00:25:26.560 Okay, John, that's a good note to end it upon and a hopeful one at that.
00:25:30.960 So my compliments to you on the great work done by the Justice Center,
00:25:35.160 not only in this file but in so many others.
00:25:38.020 God bless. Keep doing it.
00:25:41.320 Will do. Thanks for having me on your show.
00:25:43.680 For the Western Standard, I'm Nigel Hannaford.
00:25:56.560 Thank you.