“My immediate reaction is that it is so incredibly disappointing that they’re continuing to use trans and non-binary youth as a scapegoat.”
Fran Forsberg wants to know why Saskatchewan Party Leader Scott Moe’s first order of business if re-elected premier would be to bring in a policy on change rooms in schools.
“Why is this an issue?” she asked on Friday morning from Saskatoon. “Surely there are other things.”
Moe announced that such a policy would be priority No. 1 for his party in response to a recent complaint that “biological males” changed for gym class with girls at an elementary school in southeast Saskatchewan.
“It’s setting people up for discrimination; it puts those kids at risk,” she said. “I cannot tell you how many kids that I talk to, especially now, that don’t have safe places at home.”
“The answer is to accommodate that student by providing a safe space for them to change,” his statement began. “This is not all that different from individualized washrooms we see in schools where anyone can use them.
“There’s a common-sense solution here and we would encourage (school) divisions to act on that. However, if they don’t, a re-elected Saskatchewan Party government will.”
As the identities of students who used the change room became known online, Moe said “The identity of individual minors should never be a part of any political debate.”
When asked how the policy would be enforced and whether it would follow the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, a communications person with the party said “the policy has not yet been developed.”
Forsberg believes the uncertainty around what the policy would look like and what it means for students does raise concerns. As for students potentially using individualized washrooms to change, Forsberg said it could “put a target on that kid’s back. All of us should be using the washroom or the change room that we identify with.”
Speaking in Regina on Friday morning, NDP candidate Nicole Sarauer set the groundwork for what would be her party’s “first order of business.”
“People are worried about if they’re going to get doctors for their kids,” said Sarauer. “They’re worried about the sizes of their classrooms.”
As for Moe’s claim that children should never be part of a political debate, Sarauer said “I couldn’t agree with him more.”
“No leader, community or political or otherwise, should aide in any way in the outing or othering of children and Scott Moe should answer for yesterday,” she said.
When asked about the identities of the students’ parents, Sarauer said: “Unlike others, I’m not going to be outing any children.”
“My immediate reaction is that it is so incredibly disappointing that they’re continuing to use trans and non-binary youth as a scapegoat,” said Tait.
A major concern for Tait is what this policy would mean when there’s not a neutral space for children to change. Does it mean they have to go into a change room or bathroom that does not comport with their gender presentation?
This can lead to violence and discrimination, Tait said.
“Trans youth should absolutely feel safe in their schools, and the Sask. Party has been taking that away from them.”
What’s more, Tait made the point that there are “very few trans youth in our schools in Saskatchewan.” He’s concerned by the precedent that has been set, as one complaint was enough to elicit a policy commitment.
“I think it is very dangerous when we start going after marginalized communities and small communities,” he said. “They don’t have a large voice on a provincial level.”
Tait also doesn’t see how such a policy can be enforced in schools.
On Friday morning, UR Pride Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity issued a statement condemning Moe’s proposal as “authoritarian” — sounding the alarm that such a policy could open up children to encroachments on their constitutional rights.
“Scott Moe’s top priority should be protecting vulnerable youth — with proper funding for education, health care, and support for struggling families,” read UR Pride’s statement.
“This policy, if enacted, will make all women and girls less safe, and make all women and girls open to scrutiny and surveillance.”
