This year, New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs took a stand. In changing a school policy to require schools to talk to a student’s parents before recognizing a student’s claim of a new gender identity, he was the first Canadian premier in years to stand against modern gender identity theory and in favour of parental rights. He has staked the leadership of his party and the province on this issue. So far, he remains standing. But will he remain standing after the next provincial election?

Higgs’ Stand

In May 2023, Higgs’ government changed Policy 713, which laid out the province’s policy on sexual orientation and gender identity matters in public schools. It made three substantial changes:

  1. Students under the age of 16 had to get their parents’ permission to change their name on official school documentation. Students who were unwilling to talk to their parents about a change in their gender identity would be referred to a professional (e.g. a social worker) to help them speak to their parents about their transition.
  2. Wording that allowed students to participate in extracurricular activities “consistent with their gender identity” was dropped, presumably to give schools greater leeway to limit participation in extracurricular activities based on biological sex.
  3. It mandated that every school must have a private universal changing area and washroom and refrain from making all public washrooms gender neutral.

The first change in particular – requiring students under the age of 16 to get parental consent for a name change in school – is a big win for the principle that parents have the responsibility to raise and educate their children. Before this change, students could – and did – socially transition at school (e.g. change their name, use new pronouns, or dress as the opposite sex) but keep this transition hidden from their parents at home. Premier Higgs had specifically mentioned the skyrocketing rates of rapid onset gender dysphoria as a justification for the policy. (Rapid onset gender dysphoria refers to when someone, typically a teenage girl, suddenly identifies as transgender after never giving any prior indication that they were struggling with gender confusion.)

Recent survey data suggests that Higgs’ changes are in line with popular opinion. Forty-three percent of Canadians believe that parents should be informed and give their consent for a school to recognize their child’s new name, pronouns, or gender identity. A further 35% agree that parents should at least be notified of these changes. A mere 14% of Canadians think that children should be able to identify however they want without their parents knowing or consenting.

And yet, there is a debate on whether taking a stand in favour of parental rights and against modern gender identity theory is a winning strategy politically. Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe obviously thinks it is. This past fall, his government followed New Brunswick’s lead and went a step further by passing a parental bill of rights in education, with Premier Moe stating, “I believe the leading experts in children’s upbringing are their parents.”

Other commentators suggest that this isn’t a politically winsome issue, citing Manitoba’s recent election results. In that race, former Premier Heather Stefanson campaigned in Manitoba’s October election on a promise to review and update the province’s policies around parental involvement in their children’s education, but lost her re-election bid.

And some other governments are sitting squarely on the fence on this issue. Ontario Minister of Education Stephen Lecce restated that the government of Ontario recognized that parents should be involved in the education of their children. Since then, the Ontario government has been silent on the issue. The Alberta United Conservative Party voted in favour of adopting Higgs’ school policy at their last convention. However, Premier Danielle Smith would not commit to implementing the policy.

Higgs’ Opposition

Premier Higgs has staked the leadership of his party on this issue. In the summer of 2023, he held a comfortable majority government, holding 29 of the 49 seats in the New Brunswick legislature. The change to Policy 713, however, angered many of his fellow Progressive Conservative MLAs and fractured his caucus, leading to “endless meetings” on the topic. Things came to a head when six of his cabinet ministers and two more backbench MLAs failed to show up for their House duty to protest their leader’s handling of the issue, giving the Progressive Conservatives only 20 votes in the legislature and the opposition party 20 votes as well (the Speaker of the House normally does not vote). Two of his cabinet ministers resigned their posts but remained within the caucus. If disgruntled MLAs were to vote with the opposition parties on a confidence vote, the Higgs government could collapse.

Furthermore, a majority of the Progressive Conservative riding association presidents attempted to trigger a leadership race to replace Higgs as leader of their party. That effort failed, albeit narrowly. At the same time, the New Brunswick Children and Youth Advocate released a report reviewing the changes to Policy 713, and strongly opined against the policy changes.

Higgs’ Future

Faced with this precarious situation, Higgs threatened to call a snap election prior to the next scheduled election in October 2024 as a way to force his caucus to fall in line. Such a snap election could be viewed as a referendum on his changes to Policy 713 with the possibility that some of his dissident MLAs would be replaced by MLAs who support his position on parental rights. Higgs even went so far as to hire a campaign manager and to deck out a new campaign bus with his likeness and campaign slogan emblazoned on the side.

A fall snap election didn’t materialize, however, as the Progressive Conservative MLAs who criticized Higgs’ change to the Policy 713 supported his government on other pieces of legislation throughout the fall legislative sitting. Higgs didn’t introduce many new pieces of legislation this fall and finished passing the other bills left over from the spring session, suggesting that Higgs is preparing to call a snap election in the spring. Currently, his Progressive Conservative Party is trailing in the polls but narrowly ahead in the seat projections, suggesting that the next election will be close. In a unique move, Higgs is soliciting campaign donations from not just New Brunswickers but Canadians across the country to support his re-election bid.

Higgs’ stand for parental rights and against modern gender theory drew Faytene Grasseschi, one of the leaders of the Christian political advocacy organization 4MyCanada to seek the Progressive Conservative nomination in one riding in the next New Brunswick election.

Regardless of when the next election is, it very well might be a referendum on parental rights and modern gender theory.

Canada’s Future

As such, the result of the next New Brunswick election could be a bellwether for if and how other provincial parties will wade into this issue. Saskatchewan’s Premier Moe is already championing this issue but Manitoba’s former Premier Stefanson lost an election running in favour of parental rights (albeit as a very small part of her campaign). Alberta and Ontario are sitting on the fence.

Who will break the deadlock? As of right now, it seems like the balance will tilt in favour of whichever side wins the next New Brunswick election. If the Progressive Conservatives under Higgs win on a platform that prominently champions parental rights and pushes back against modern gender theory, it could benefit parental rights in other provinces. If, however, they lose an election that is seen as a referendum on modern gender theory, then we may go back into an era where provincial governments of all stripes are unwilling to touch the issue.

In the last few years, the month of June and then the entire month of July have been designated “pride month” or even “pride season.” This celebration of same-sex sexual activity and transgender identities is one of the obvious signs that our country has increasingly abandoned a Christian view of gender and sexuality.

But this summer, we saw signs of hope.

Premier Blaine Higgs of New Brunswick took the first step. Earlier this year, his government changed Policy 713, which laid out the province’s policy on sexual orientation and gender identity matters in public schools. It made three substantial changes:

The first change in particular – requiring students under the age of 16 to get parental consent for their name change in the school – is a big win for the principle that parents have the responsibility to raise and educate their children. Before this change, it was common for students to socially transition at school (e.g. change their name, use new pronouns, or dress as the opposite sex) but keep this transition hidden from their parents at home. Premier Higgs had specifically mentioned the skyrocketing rates of rapid onset gender dysphoria as a justification for the policy. Rapid onset gender dysphoria refers to when someone, typically a teenage girl, very suddenly identifies as transgender.

A couple of months later, Saskatchewan followed suit, also requiring that parental consent for students under the age of 16 to change their pronouns, name, or gender identity in school. Premier Scott Moe took to social media to explain himself: “I’ve been asked what experts we consulted in creating the Parental Inclusion and Consent policy. I believe the leading experts in children’s upbringing are their parents.”

Manitoba Premier Heather Stefanson, in the midst of a provincial election, also is campaigning to review and update the province’s policies around parental involvement in their children’s education.

The Ontario Minister of Education Stephen Lecce also recently announced that the government of Ontario was also planning to change their school policies so that parents could be more involved in the education of their children.

While many media reports and LGBTQ2S+ groups have decried these changes, recent survey data suggests that these changes are in line with popular opinion. Forty-three percent of Canadians believe that parents should be informed and give their consent for a school to recognize their child’s new name, pronouns, or gender identity. A further 35% agree that parents should at least be notified of these changes. A mere 14% of Canadians think that children should be able to identify however they want without their parents knowing or consenting.

Why is this all important?

These developments are a long-awaited step away from governments’ unquestioning embrace of transgenderism and towards regaining parental control over education. Christians should celebrate these changes and either thank elected officials for making this change or petition their own provincial representatives to follow New Brunswick’s, Saskatchewan’s, and Ontario’s example.

Those who support a policy to keep a child’s gender identity secret from parents are saying, in effect: “We don’t trust parents to know what is best for their kids. The home isn’t the safest place for children to be. Lots of moms and dads are ignorant and abusive towards their children and so public school staff, rather than parents, should be entrusted with guiding children through such intimate matters.”

There are a host of problems with that mentality, but let’s just point out two. First, nearly all parents know and love their children more than any teacher will. Second, God has given the primary responsibility and authority over children to parents because God designed children to be born to one man and one woman who are committed to each other in a loving relationship. Teachers, government bureaucrats, or even pastors don’t inherently have this authority or responsibility because children are not fundamentally entrusted to them. Our law even recognizes that teachers act on authority delegated by parents. Delegated authority, of course, can be revoked.

Tempering expectations

However, we should also fully understand how long a road is before us. For example, New Brunswick’s Policy 713 still states that:

New Brunswick and Saskatchewan have initiated these policy changes not so much because their cabinet ministers actually believe that a transgender identity is wrong. We can be thankful that they have taken a step towards recognizing the responsibilities that parents have in the lives of their children. But we should also encourage our political leaders and fellow citizens to consider the equally fundamental question of where our sexual and gender identity comes from. Are these identities received from God? Or are they up to individual choice?

A government budget tells us what their current priorities are. This year’s Federal budget shows multiple priorities for the government in the upcoming months. Among other details listed, the government includes a section which focuses on ‘Access to Sexual and Reproductive Health Care Information and Services.’ It’s not very long, but there are a number of items in this section that stand out. The government treats abortion (as a part of ‘sexual and reproductive health care’) as something which Canada needs to support wholeheartedly and provide unfettered access to. According to this section of the budget, the only problem with abortion is that it is too difficult for some people to access.

The government treats abortion (as a part of ‘sexual and reproductive health care’) as something which Canada needs to support wholeheartedly and provide unfettered access to.

First, it states that everyone deserves equal treatment in our health care system, specifically as relates to funding for, and access to, sexual and reproductive health care. While sexual and reproductive health care, according to the government, can include quality care for mothers and children, it also includes abortion. This year’s budget emphasizes abortion by singling out a private abortion clinic in New Brunswick (not funded Federally or Provincially) and states that the lack of funding for clinics like these puts access to sexual and reproductive health care at risk. It seems that everyone deserves equal treatment in the health care system, but there are certain ‘services’ that we should bend over backwards for.

Next, the Government says that it is committed to collaborating with provinces and territories to ensure access to a ‘full suite of reproductive and sexual health services’ in funding discussions, clarifying that this includes broadening access to abortion care. The primary funding from the Federal government to Provincial and Territorial governments is in the form of the Canada Health Transfer. This funding is conditional upon the provinces meeting the universality, comprehensiveness, and accessibility requirements of the Canada Health Act. Increasingly, the Federal government is seeking to tell provincial and territorial governments specifically what the funding should be used for – in this case, greater access to abortion, which they present as a ‘universal’ principle.

There are aspects of what the government defines as ‘sexual and reproductive health care’ that are important. No doubt, there should be good medical care for mothers and babies focused on saving life, not taking it. Let’s continue to present a biblical perspective to the government on the issue of abortion and sexual and reproductive health care. While we would advocate for an end to abortion, the government has gone the other direction entirely, having difficulty imagining that there are Canadians who believe abortion is wrong. There are different opinions than the prevailing political ideology and there are different options for women than increased access to abortion. Let’s encourage the government to recognize that their continual fixation on abortion is not our priority.

No Apologies – Bolstered by a last week’s 8-0 Supreme Court ruling giving the green light to political advertising on the sides of buses and transit vehicles across the country, the Fredericton Right to Life Association is pressuring Fredericton Transit for advertising space. [Continue reading this article here.]

National Post, Saturday, May 23, 2009: A New Brunswick court has ruled Dr. Henry Morgentaler can continue to sue the province for its refusal to pay for abortions at his clinic in Fredericton. The court has dismissed the provincial government’s appeal that Dr. Morgentaler, pictured, didn’t have standing to represent the women of New Brunswick, and ordered the province to pay him $5,000 for legal costs. [Click here to keep reading.]

Province refused to fund Morgentaler’s private abortion clinic with taxpayer monies

August 8, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Henry Morgentaler has been granted “public-interest standing” to proceed in his lawsuit against the Province of New Brunswick. “Standing” refers to the question of whether or not a plaintiff is sufficiently affected by a piece of legislation to justify his/her bringing forward a lawsuit against it. In 2003 Morgentaler launched his lawsuit over NB’s refusal to fund his private clinic located in Fredericton. Morgentaler alleges Regulation 84-20 of the Medical Services Payment Act violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canada Health Act.

(more…)