7.2.6 The Restructuring of Traditional Educational Institutions due to COVID-19 Measures

Introduction

Historically, most stakeholders in education were motivated to fulfil their teaching responsibilities within the pedagogical framework and curriculum outcomes required to meet societal needs. More recently, the focus of student learning moved toward global interconnections and the need to ensure citizens from all walks of life acquired sufficient knowledge to meaningfully participate in globally aligned industry. For the most part, being introduced to integrated and interconnected global communities was not a hindrance. Student needs were primarily met, and learning opportunities that empower and educate students were fulfilled. In essence, student achievement and critical thinking accompanied by related buzz words was the goal. That is, until COVID-19.

When COVID-19 came along, global aspirations were shut down. Barriers to the world as we knew it were imposed. A new set of boundaries were erected, with COVID mandates leading to new societal norms. This included learning institutions as well. Depending on where one lived and the type of school one attended, the governing mandates for education became vastly different. In-person class learning was abruptly stopped and replaced almost as quickly with online or distance learning, or some form of hybrid instruction.

In the beginning, mandates were temporary, such as the two weeks to flatten the curve. Over time, more permanent lockdowns and restrictions were legislated by authorities. Consequently, students in the K–12 system had their social circles curtailed. Recreational parks were closed. Family gatherings were restricted, and students of all ages (as a demographic within a broader societal construct) were seriously disadvantaged.

At the post-secondary level, students faced similar consequences. Higher education took a sudden U-turn from scholarly inquiry, research, and investigation (under the umbrella of academic freedom) into a mandated environment of conformity, intolerance, and discrimination.

Accordingly, universities abandoned the foundation of learning for the betterment of society—in favour of institutional compliance, whereby senior management, boards of governors, and university presidents responded favourably and with vigour to government dictates. Ivory towers (widely accepted as the think tanks within society) mimicked layers of government bureaucracy, submitting to ever-changing whims of health authorities. To say the least, the results were destructive. Instead of the arts, humanities, and social sciences playing a formative role in shaping public policy, society as we knew it was under siege.

Certainly, the damage to education—and, by extension, the social fabric—was massive. Serious gaps in student development, academic rigour, relationship-building, and curriculum outcomes were sidestepped, eclipsing the prevailing COVID narrative into every aspect of instruction, administration, and student interactions. Teachers, staff, and students alike felt the burden of repeated COVID messaging—hand sanitizers, social distancing, curtailed speech—all the while, the continued introduction of even more nonsensical protocols.

In the aftermath, the Canadian public has seemingly ventured into territory for which we are ill prepared to understand. Some suggest the playbook is George Orwell‘s 1984. Others claim the attack on Western democratic ideals is much worse. Regardless of where one stands on COVID itself, there are outstanding questions requiring meaningful answers. For example, how did an educated free and democratic nation get here and where is society going?

Herein, you will hear witnesses testify of the real harms caused in the education sector over the last three years: the disparity, the derogatory and very public shaming, the humiliating treatment by colleagues, the increasing polarization at every juncture, job losses, the human casualties, and the outright rejection of constitutionally protected rights and freedoms. You will hear from parents whose lives have been tragically changed forever. And teachers forbidden to do what they loved to do—instilling knowledge and confidence in our youth. And one strong lady, who in spite of her personal circumstances, tried to educate others on the harms to children.

Each testimony is a real-life story representative of thousands—perhaps hundreds of thousands—of citizens who witnessed firsthand the moral turpitude by culpable people with no authority or jurisdiction to govern but who did so anyway. Clearly, boundaries were broken. The question is whether society is worse off now than we were pre-COVID.

Analysis of Witness Testimony

What was the intention of the COVID-19 measures undertaken by the governments? In many ways, the Milgram experiment could be rightly considered a microcosm of COVID measures, except that COVID was unveiled on a global scale. Nevertheless, the mandates appear to have little to do with COVID. In fact, as many witnesses allude, an era of uncertainty was ushered in, and the very institutions established to protect citizens failed miserably. In this context, Orwell‘s repressive doublespeak comes to mind, where truth and facts are replaced with negationism.

As witnesses attested, valuing one another as human beings was no longer the embraced societal underpinning. And the consequence that evolved was that power for the sake of power became the overarching and multi-layered system where contrary voices were shut down. Citizens‘ consciences and convictions were systematically manipulated or rejected, by the stroke of a pen, not only by governments and health authorities responsible for COVID dictates but also non-rational intolerance for our neighbours became equally entrenched in academic workspaces.

At first the events seemed isolated. But over time, a bullying mindset accelerated within communities. Authoritarian and judgmental attitudes became prevalent. Ironically, in hindsight, we perceive it to have been a very odd conception of power that emerged. People with even limited power to control others felt self-justified approval to abuse and harass our colleagues and peers.

In a logical world, where unjustified fear and threats against citizens would never be tolerated, the idea of individuals seeking power over others would be suspect. But it happened. Thus, has society become transactional? Is every interaction with others no longer privy to compassion?

The trickle-down effect meant individuals seeking empowerment and control over others in their own small corner of the world could rationalize their aggressive behaviours because of the even higher state hierarchical powers ordering blind compliance imposed upon them.

Rule-making authority then, as Prof. Bruce Pardy testified, is not emanating from legislatures passing statutes whose purposes are for the good of society but, rather, delegating rule-making authority to administrators, regulators, boards of governors, and corporate entities. The consequential ramifications, as witnessed throughout COVID, is that “individual autonomy must yield to the expertise and authority of officials acting in the name of public welfare.“ As also stated, when officials are given the authority to override individual autonomy, bad things inevitably happen.

From an education perspective, values of kindness and empathy should have determined the treatment of all stakeholders within congregant settings, and most particularly those environments where relational bonds are forged. Why? Because when education is successful, both teachers and students learn because their spirit and willingness to serve others is prioritized.

Instead, these scholarly, well-learned individuals operating in various capacities within educational institutions caved to the whims of bureaucrats acting outside the democratic models exampled in public policy literature. By virtue of their academic achievements alone, these officeholders should have recognized that governments have always been poor proxies when it comes to acting in the best interests of the populace. Further, as testified to as well, when governments try to achieve more complex goals with detailed data, it tends to choke on its own ineptitude. In other words, the idea that governments could handle any pandemic should have raised red flags throughout academia. The very basic understanding that infighting among bureaucracies increases immensely as the totalitarian goals of making all that is private a part of the public realm should have caused concerns.

Still, there is yet another boundary that has been damaged. That is, our moral God-given rights and freedoms were not just stretched, to determine at what point citizens would object to further demands, but broken. Not just entangled for a short period of time but ripped apart, leaving the social fabric worse off than before. The sheer number of perplexing issues that emerged, including how quickly universities and colleges took hold of discretionary powers and implemented institutional mandates and lockdowns on campus—even while health authorities were still only recommending cautionary practices—should have shocked the populace. The fact that some refused to lift mandates after health authorities did should be equally concerning.

And then there was censorship. The experiences of Mr. Marazzo are a prime example. Mr. Marazzo worked as a combat engineer for 25 years. He holds a bachelor‘s degree in software and a master‘s degree in business administration. He was teaching a College when the pandemic hit. Just prior to the start of the school year in 2021, the dean of the college sent out an email threatening termination if the faculty were not vaccinated. Mr. Marazzo responded by sending legal information to approximately 200 employees. Almost immediately his colleagues proceeded to publicly shame him by flooding his inbox, while ignoring the contents of his email. Shortly after, he received a termination letter. At the time of his testimony, he was living off his savings.

Those witnesses who had chosen not to comply were ostracized. Ms. Repo, for example, experienced this personally when she attempted to go about her day-to-day life after receiving a devastating terminal medical diagnosis. Her legitimate mask exemption was never honoured. At times, she was told by hospital staff that her mask, which caused breathing problems, needed to be repositioned. The only glimmer of hope was an oncologist who, for a brief moment, behaved compassionately by giving her a hug. At every other juncture—whether the orders to comply with masking came from a transit driver, restaurant server, or radio host—she was a target of hostile verbal abuse, to the point where she constantly worried whether her attackers would come to her home.

Although Ms. Repo was not an educator by profession, she was concerned about those with breathing or hearing issues and, similarly, the long-term effects of masking on children—so much so that she made a presentation on these harms to the City of Saskatoon, which was essentially ignored.

Yet Ms. Hunter, an early childhood teacher with over 20 years of experience, confirmed Ms. Repo‘s masking concerns. Ms. Hunter stated the impacts of masking included difficulty breathing, hypoxia, high levels of carbon dioxide, increased heart rate, and high systolic blood pressure. Clinical symptoms of mask wearing include headaches, fatigue, shortness of breath, skin conditions, psychological effects, cognitive difficulties, and dizziness. High levels of CO2 reduce blood pH, which may lead to long-term complications such as cancer, diabetes, dental issues, and neurological disorders. A person wearing a mask is not supposed to touch it, or the mask is considered contaminated and must be thrown away.

Other concerns include bonding and attachment, particularly if the adults nursing or bottle-feeding an infant are masked. Eye contact and voice recognition (especially a mother‘s or father‘s voice, or that of other family members) are foundational for socioemotional growth, including passive and active communication. Young children, such as those in preschool settings and daycares, learn communication through imitation and therefore need to see people‘s facial expressions to understand the nuances of human communication.

Ms. Garrett‘s focus was teaching English as a second language to refugees and newcomers. Earlier in her life, she had suffered a vaccination injury, so when COVID vaccinations came along, she decided against taking any more. When in-person classes resumed, the school administrators forced her to get an antigen test to enter the building, even when there was no one else there. She said students who were not double-vaccinated were no longer allowed to attend. Also, as an aside, she mentioned bimonthly staff meetings were all about promoting the COVID agenda. She pointed to the Nuremberg trials and the lessons we all should have learned from history. She was not the only educator to experience these behaviours.

Ms. Barreda, a grade 7 teacher at an Aboriginal reserve, similarly chose not to get the vaccine. Her employment contract was terminated, and her daughter was forced to leave the school. She filed a human rights complaint, but it was denied. Online learning led her daughter to feel isolated and depressed. When Ms. Barreda reached out to the band council for answers, her questions were ignored. She said she tried to follow the science, but it only led to money—not science.

Medical reasons were also a concern for Ms. Careen. A teaching assistant in Newfoundland, she described what it was like to be diagnosed with Guillain-Barré syndrome, and not be vaccinated. As a result of her decision, she was placed on an unpaid leave of absence. She was further denied employment insurance benefits. The lack of her income in the family caused severe financial stress. She said all of her attempts to be heard were ignored.

Another teacher, Ms. Murray, was teaching a grade 1–2 class at a private school when COVID mandates were announced. She had received a legitimate mask exemption from her family doctor, which she said was initially honoured by school administrators. At some point, the work environment changed, becoming more hostile. School faculty meetings became more focused on how to police COVID protocols rather than education standards. She indicated teaching had become much more fear-based.

Ms. Murray observed how the rules had affected children. Students experienced developmental delays, including loss of tone of speech, smell, and taste. To compensate for the delayed development, she had to continually seek innovative ways to introduce the rules without the threat of fear.

Because she was not vaccinated, Ms. Murray‘s lesson plans had to be given to a substitute teacher. As time went on, she was eventually informed that the only way she could return to the classroom was if she wore a microclimate helmet. She eventually had to leave. The emotional stress in the work environment led to Ms. Murray seeking a psychotherapist for support.

Ms. Geml also testified as to the hardships she and her family experienced when she was unable to wear a mask. Beyond the fearmongering in the community, the family was also restricted from attending funerals or hospitals. Her daughter experienced additional harassment. She was subject to teachers calling the unvaccinated “murderers.” She was banned from school activities and friends′ homes. The school principal told her she was lucky kids like her were able to attend school. Ms. Geml said her daughter often came home from school in tears.

She questioned how society had reached the point where we have become so cold and cruel to people. Ms. Geml was not alone.

Ms. Travis, a mother of six, could not watch her son play sports. Her children missed dental appointments. The father of her newborn could not be part of the new-baby experience because of his vaccination status. She lost her employment between pregnancies, resulting in severe financial hardship. Ms. Travis said she would like to see more accountability and transparency at all levels of government because it is we, the people, who pay the bills.

Students with special needs did not fare any better. As teacher Ms. Burns testified, she found it difficult to watch children with behavioural needs and severe learning disabilities respond to COVID protocols. Masks, in particular, led to students‘ difficulty in breathing. She saw the children become emotionless because they were not able to express themselves. As well, some children worried about contracting and spreading COVID. There were arguments among teachers and students when the students‘ parents were not in favour of masking.

Ms. Burns had a medical accommodation declined by her employer. She offered to submit to daily testing to maintain her teaching position but was denied. She was placed on unpaid leave. As a result, she is no longer a rule follower. The family has had to move from the community. She has lost friends. The mental health of her family has been impacted. She is troubled to have been categorized as a misogynist and racist due to her personal medical choices.

Ms. Howland‘s testimony corroborates Ms. Burns‘ experiences. Ms. Howland is an educational assistant, working with special education students with Down‘s syndrome, ADHD, and other learning disabilities. She could not speak freely about her adverse reaction to the vaccine. Her professional life has been negatively impacted, as she now struggles with background noise. She currently works primarily on literacy with students, but her hearing loss has greatly affected her ability to perform her job.

Mr. McDougall was passionate about children. He had worked for 13 years in childcare settings. His son was born the very day the pandemic was announced. In April 2020, the daycare was closed to the children. He spent time helping with groundskeeping and facility maintenance projects within the community. He said everything changed sharply in October, when cohorts were formed. At this time, the children were separated into groups. Mask mandates followed. Mr. McDougall took great exception to masking, not just for himself but for the children too.

He had been working with an autistic child for years. Before COVID, the staff were very excited about the child‘s progress with his peers; he had reached a relatively normal level of functioning. Once the masks came in, he regressed. In fact, he became very aggressive and violent toward staff. Mr. McDougall said facial recognition difficulties were an issue. He said he could not stand seeing what was happening to special needs children. Eventually, he left his position.

Families with special needs children experienced difficulties as well. Ms. Smith had a 28-year-old son with minor special needs and a 24-year-old daughter with Down‘s syndrome. Pre-COVID, her daughter attended a full-day program for disabled adults. The routine of the program was very important to her daughter. Because her daughter underwent heart surgery at 10-weeks-old, her mental and emotional states were impacted more than the average child‘s. When the program was closed due to lockdowns, Ms. Smith observed signs of depression in her daughter. Although the day program has since resumed, her daughter was still affected, fearing the program could be cancelled again.

Ms. Tabak shared the story of her son Kyle. He had an accident that left him with a brain injury. By 2020, Kyle was living on his own and working. He decided to return to school, but his cognitive issues remained a challenge. He was required to complete a lengthy and very personal questionnaire with a psychiatrist to continue with online learning.

When Ms. Tabak and Kyle went to his appointment, the psychiatrist was not there. This did not help her son‘s wellbeing. Kyle was told to go through telehealth. Throughout COVID, he bought into the narrative. He became fearful, and he reduced his work hours. One day Kyle called to say he had no groceries. Even so, Ms. Tabak said the last conversation with Kyle went well.

However, Kyle called 911. Sadly, when the emergency responders arrived, he was already deceased. Kyle had written apology letters to both the RCMP and EMS. He had also written an apology to each of his family members, explaining his anxiety and depression. Ms. Tabak said the family was able to donate Kyle‘s organs so that potential transplant patients waiting for organs could be helped.

Kyle was not the only young person who did not know where to turn. The day before her 20th birthday, Danielle Galvin also took her own life. She was a second-year student at a Canadian University. Earlier that same week, two other students also died by suicide. They all would have been in grade 12 when the lockdown measures were first put in place.

Danielle‘s mother, Ms. Galvin, recalled the deadline for Ontario students to accept offers to attend university. Once an offer was accepted, all other offers on the table were rescinded. The University of Guelph said it would keep its residence open. This was a major factor in Danielle choosing Guelph over Western. Two days later, the University of Guelph reneged on its promise, throwing thousands of students‘ plans into chaos.

Ms. Galvin, along with other parents, contacted school administrators. They were informed that the Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph health unit had conducted an inspection and, therefore, would only allow a few students into residence. The university did eventually allow foreign students into residence. Ms. Galvin was informed by the Minister of Colleges and Universities that the ministry does not interfere in the operations of colleges or universities.

Further, the University of Guelph administration did not mandate professors to deliver virtual lectures. In Danielle‘s case, this meant four out of five professors in her first-year class did not deliver a single lecture. In November 2020, Danielle attempted suicide but was found by a friend. Ms. Galvin and Danielle‘s sister rushed to the hospital, but neither was permitted entry. The doctor said this was because Danielle was 18-years-old and was considered an adult.

By Christmas 2020, the provincial government advised people to isolate in bubbles, so Ms. Galvin and her two daughters spent Christmas together, without extended family. During the winter of 2021, Danielle had moved into a townhouse. Ms. Galvin observed the Ontario government was still allowing regional health units to dictate mandates, so the rules differed across the province. At the university, the campus police patrolled the grounds constantly looking for students who were violating the rules. Danielle and four of her friends were issued $880 fines.

To attend school in September, students were required to be vaccinated. Ms. Galvin and her two daughters were vaccinated. In-person classes were resuming, but as Ms. Galvin pointed out, Danielle‘s mental health had greatly deteriorated. In January 2022, the province was locked down again for two weeks, despite all the students being vaccinated. Ms. Galvin implored the University administration, the MPP, and the Ministry of Colleges and Universities to allow the students back into schools.

She cited research from the Canadian Paediatric Society warning that the risks to students were far greater if they were not allowed back into school. On January 17, 2022, the University of Guelph called a snow day, even though students were learning virtually. It was this same week that Grace died by suicide. A few days later, and still waiting to start post-secondary school, Sayuri died by suicide. A few days after that, Danielle died by suicide. None of these young women knew each other, but they were all so despondent after almost two years of punishing lockdowns and restrictions that greatly disrupted their lives. Ms. Galvin believes that these academic and social disruptions were a major contributing factor in the breakdown of their mental health and eventual suicides.

Other concerns came to light. Witness Gary Bredeson, an Alberta resident, had three adult children attending post-secondary schools when COVID hit. He said the boys had become quite sick following Christmas break. By March 2020, post-secondary schools in British Columbia had moved to online. He became concerned over the difficulties of the boys completing online courses in the basement. Mr. Bredeson said the increased costs for a lower level of instruction, plus the cumulative social effects of being shut out of the social fabric, weighed heavily on the family.

In another example, Mr. Paquette studied medicine at Sherbrooke University prior to obtaining a bachelor‘s degree in elementary and preschool teaching. He communicated regularly with pediatricians, public health physicians, and others. In his opinion, the pediatricians had either been silenced or had chosen to remain silent. He said the notice from the Association des Pédiatres du Québec (APQ) at the start of the 2021 school year was ignored by public health and the government, which collectively chose not to publicly defend the precautionary principle for children. Mr. Paquette concluded the COVID measures were disproportionate and detrimental to children‘s development. In Québec, he said the data was misused, creating instead an unwarranted fear that led to the populace accepting the measures.

Post-secondary students did not have a voice either, as evidenced by Ms. Vossen. An in-house graphic designer, she had one course remaining to graduate. In August 2021, she was notified that all students attending classes in person required a COVID vaccination. She did not believe it affected her because her course was online. Later, the course was dropped.

She expressed concern to the president of the College, stating, “On behalf of a group of concerned students, I would like to see the data.“ The College retracted the mandate, and she requested an in-person meeting, which was denied. Soon after, she opened an Instagram account called Students Against Mandates, using her graphic design background. She received thousands of messages from students across Canada. Many contained stories of their own personal experiences with employers, administrators, and school authorities.

Ms. Vossen said the response from the freedom community was very positive. However, she had a hit article written against her. She was called an “alt-right extremist“ and a “Nazi.“ The article brought her family into it. She observed threats and rude comments on Reddit, Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. All of her previous friends cancelled her.

With her educational status in limbo, Ms. Vossen had no intention of returning to an institution that discriminated against her. The positive was the strong support system she received from so many others facing similar predicaments. She said, “Throughout history, we have seen that ‘doing it for the greater good‘ leads to nowhere good.“

Mr. McCurdy, an elementary school teacher in Ontario for more than two decades, brought a broader perspective. He said schools were in lockdown for 28 weeks. He discussed the challenges of remote learning within the context of students who did not have access. He pointed to attendance in his own grade 7–8 classes, which dropped to 50–60 per cent of pre-COVID numbers.

He indicated the expectations for students to pass was very low. For those students who did attend and participate, the quality of learning he was able to deliver was drastically diminished. Students lost all their extracurricular activities and opportunities to socialize, which are critical aspects of school and childhood development. In terms of the learning environment, Mr. McCurdy recalled seeing fellow teachers yelling at children to put on their masks. During mandates, children were not allowed to talk to each other while eating. He also noted that since the pandemic, it was very common to have multiple staff off on any given day.

The consequences of COVID policies and measures were already evident in the system. There were immense deficits in children‘s learning skills, resiliency, coping skills, problem solving, and confidence levels. He admitted many more children were further behind academically, with some lacking basic reading and writing skills. There was also a much higher prevalence of conflict and violence in schools.

He said he spent more time giving extra help to students than ever before. School attendance had not returned to normal. His other concern stemmed from the move to replace staff with individuals who were not equipped to cope with the increase in aggression and mental health issues. He said replacing educational assistants with paid volunteers to help with children created safety issues.

He was also disappointed that no one at the school board or provincial level acknowledged the negative effects from lockdowns. He believed a cost–benefit analysis of these policies should have been done. He further believed the analysis must include public input and consultations, because we as a society should be working to protect our children. He called the potential damage we have done, “mind-blowing.”

Mr. Studin, the chair of the Worldwide Commission to Educate All Kids (Post-Pandemic) and president of the Institute for 21st Century Questions, raised similar concerns. He coined the term “third-bucket kids″ for the students who are neither in physical nor virtual school and are now receiving no schooling whatsoever. Mr. Studin believed most Canadians assumed that all children who were not in physical school had transitioned to virtual learning. This was not the case.

He also said many children did not have the physical or financial resources, such as Internet access, to complete virtual learning. Others did not have in-home support that could have alleviated language barriers, learning disabilities, and unsafe or abusive situations.

Mr. Studin admitted the initial school closures in early 2020 could be called a policy mistake and possibly even be forgiven. However, school closures after this time were policy crimes. He said any intelligent society should have understood there would be massive—indeed, catastrophic—consequences to closing schools for so long, leading to great destabilization when these same children become adults.

His international colleagues do not understand how Canada failed so badly. He continued by saying, “We now understand that it is central to always keep schools open, not just for the wellbeing of children but for the proper functioning of the society.“

Mr. Allen concurred. He said lost educational opportunities will have long-term consequences. As a professor, he could speak to the lost opportunities at the university level. Low education equals lower wages, poorer health outcomes, and decreased life expectancies. If one calculates the value of lost lives, it swamps any benefits from the lockdowns. Factor in the increased family breakdowns, suicides, and supply-chain interruptions and, simply put, it was going to take a generation to find out the actual costs of COVID.

From a public policy perspective, Mr. Leis had stated that Canada is guided by the principles of classical liberalism, which have an extraordinary history related to the assumption that we are born free. Within this framework, we have governments to serve us, but these same governments are not above the law. Therefore, to lock down a society because of COVID is outrageous: the economic, social, educational, and health consequences of this are astronomical. He said we underestimated the reason we have a limited state. Mr. Leis reiterated that classical liberalism is foundational to Western society.

He said freedom of speech allows us to debate and get to the truth. It is also the cornerstone for our standard of living and technological advancement. If we have censorship and the imposition of the state telling us that facts are not facts or that the end justifies the means or that we must follow the science but not in the name of science, we do not have a future. He pointed to lessons that we need to learn.

First, debate is essential (like intellectual friction). It is amazing what we can learn from those who disagree with us. Second, as our society moves closer to authoritarianism, the logical fallacy of never attacking one‘s opponent personally has become more prevalent. Third, in a healthy society, the state undertakes the judicial function to ensure the rightful implementation of law. There are no arbitrary arrests. Therefore, for all these reasons and more, COVID was a policy disaster. But not only a policy disaster; rather, also one where civil society was utterly assaulted.

Indeed, tyranny is simply unfettered discretion, Mr. Leis said, and it is happening in public health and, by extension, our politicians. For the direction of this great nation to change, it will require more than the voices of a few. It is time to stand and proclaim, “No more.“ Or as Jordan B. Peterson put it, “We hurt the educational opportunities of children and failed to see that the reaction to a crisis can be worse than the crisis itself.“

Conversely, there was a very tiny win. At the University of Calgary, where there is a large Christian presence, lawyer James Kitchen successfully appealed the denial for religious accommodation for approximately 200 students. Initially, the accommodation requests were denied, with only a few students able to get one. He said the denials appeared to be completely arbitrary and that no one seemed to care about the law. After the appeal, all the requests were granted. He supposed, before COVID, there was some respect for the law. But Mr. Kitchen could only conclude that this was moral depravity, and perhaps fear, to the point of not being rational anymore.

As a whole, the personal and professional testimonies within, as excruciating as each might be, offer a glimmer of hope. That going forward, we will all come to recognize that the only real opposition to illegitimate institutional powers, bullying and coercion by unelected puppet masters, and fear-incited dictates and penalties, lockdowns, public shaming, and censorship is when Canadian citizens come together collectively and demand that the public service, mandated to serve the citizenry, actually does.

Recommendations

1. As publicly funded institutions, both universities and colleges must adhere to the law of neutrality before demanding compliance for policies that potentially may not be legally enforceable.

2. In all publicly funded institutions, whereby the mission includes scholarly inquiry and academic freedom as institutional tenets, there must be room for dissenting voices, debate, dialogue, and, most particularly, policy revisions when the evidence points to a change in the data and statistics that led to restrictive policies initially.

3. There must be a cost–benefit analysis of any policy that leads to school closures, and discussions must include the public and education stakeholders.

4. In the interest of academic freedom and integrity, post-secondary institutions and faculty should be able to ask pointed questions free from any fear of repercussions.

5. Investigate scientific findings that contradict the narrative, and provide internal grant funding to ensure the evidence relied upon by governments and health authorities is accurate.

6. Post-secondary institutions should not be allowed to impose additional mandates or extend mandates beyond that imposed by the government regulators. During the COVID-19 pandemic, once the initial two-week to flatten the curve period had concluded, post-secondary institutions should have lifted all policy restrictions. Similarly, when the emergency orders were lifted, post-secondary COVID policies should also have been terminated.

7. Offer an array of learning platforms and alternative arrangements for academic study, including in-person classes, and online, distance, and hybrid options.

8. Ensure all students have an opportunity to reach their potential without discrimination or bias due to vaccination status.

9. Any faculty or staff member who suffered a job loss, was terminated, or was placed on unpaid leave and subsequently barred from campus should be immediately restored to good standing. Additionally, any negative or potentially stigmatizing comments regarding the employee‘s COVID stance should be removed forthwith from that employee‘s files. Pensions should be fully restored to pre-COVID status.

10. Post-secondary institutions should focus on student achievement and not the removal of students from programs for not being compliant with newly established vaccination policies. No student should lose academic standing or lose successfully completed academic credits for non-compliance to a policy.

11. Students in residence should have opportunities to socialize with other residents under the auspices of cohorts. Students should never be restricted to their rooms.

12. Reimburse students who paid for residence in good faith but because of a change in COVID policies combined with an individual‘s unvaccinated status, were forced to vacate the premises.

13. Accommodation in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms must be made. It is a constitutionally protected right for all persons. Therefore, faculty, staff, and students requesting accommodation should not only have their concerns heard but taken seriously when blanket COVID policies are initiated. This includes accepting medical, religious, and personal exemptions. It also means consideration for other circumstances, including personal choice, convictions, conscience, deeply held beliefs, or health risks (for example, previous adverse reaction to a vaccine).

14. Health policies should provide allowances for bodily autonomy and personal choices. Employees and contractors—including faculty members, staff, and students—should not be required to disclose their medical information to obtain an allowance.

15. Policies that lead to the segregation of a specific group of students is discriminatory. Therefore, any policy promoting segregation must be immediately removed.

16. Post-secondary institutions should have to provide justification in writing for responding to government mandates with inflexible approaches.

17. Any policy must be subject to revision when it becomes apparent that restrictions are not necessary. For example, there should be a mandatory review process every 30 days.

18. Meet with stakeholder groups—including faculty, staff, and students—who made different choices regarding vaccines and COVID policies.

19. Eliminate all policies and procedures that directly violate human rights legislation, including denial of a service or services.

20. Employment loss and/or disciplinary action (including unpaid leave) must follow the same human rights procedures for all faculty and staff. Vaccination status should not be a sufficient excuse or justification for applying union procedures differently.

21. A union‘s mission is to protect and defend the rights of staff and faculty across campus. The union does not have the right to arbitrarily deny unvaccinated staff and faculty the right to file a grievance and to have the grievance heard.

22. Employees with long-standing service should not suffer a loss of pension and other benefits because of personal health choices.

23. Third-bucket youth who were not educated during the pandemic need to be found and their circumstances addressed so they can be educated and subsequently prepared for the future.

24. Schools should not be closed for periods of time exceeding one week in duration.

25. Virtual schooling is not advantageous to youth experiencing learning disabilities, having
    language barriers, or living in an unsafe or abusive situation. These additional barriers
    to learning need to be taken into consideration.

26. Young, healthy people should not be shut out of schools for as long as they were. Studies as early as May 2020 showed that suicides, eating disorders, opioid deaths, and substance abuse were skyrocketing among young people. Students should have been allowed to go back to in-person learning with no more interruptions.

27. Special needs children and adults require additional guidance and direction. Therefore, one-size-fits-all blanket policies need to be reconsidered.

28. Public shaming and labelling of citizens by government officials contributes to lawlessness. Government officials and those in positions of authority need to be held to a higher standard. At the same time, governments should not be permitted to blatantly work against their populations.

29. Educators need to publicly defend the precautionary principle for all children and youth.