What to do About Inhuman Treatment of our Neighbours

July 29, 2022

Deep moral questions assail us all. The story of the good Samaritan and what Christ said about who is our neighbour is as good a guide to what to think and do about these truly troubling situations which drown our lives.

Our neighbour in the story is a man who has been beaten by thieves  and left by the side of the road and needs help. Several good folk pass by him and the Samaritan alone stops and helps. Surely we have to be active in our concern for those who society has beaten up.


Recently for me it is the Indigenous women who for years, as a racialized group, have undergone forced sterilization. First, they were overrepresented when the eugenics movement argued for sterilization of unfit or mentally defective women to enhance the creation of a more desirable white society. This led to legalized sterilization in BC (1933) following Alberta (1928). These acts and the federal Sexual Sterilization Act of 1928 led to the sterilizations, both compulsory and optional of nearly 3000 individuals until these acts were terminated in the early 1970’s. Professor Karen Stote told the Senate committee about coerced sterilization of Indigenous women in federally operated “Indian hospitals” as well. Her research reveals that approximately 1,150 Indigenous women had been sterilized in these hospitals over a 10-year period up until the early 1970s.


 The senate committee has been studying the disgusting practice since 2019. The committee learned that it persists despite legislative changes and significant media attention. The committee learned that cases of forced or coerced sterilization continued to be reported as recently as 2018. Its current prevalence is underreported and underestimated. The committee ‘s report states that this “horrific practice” disproportionately affects vulnerable and marginalized groups including Indigenous women, black and racialized women and people with disabilities. Their report  says there is no sign that  doctors face consequences for acts of coerced sterilization. This could change if a specific criminal offence is created. While forced sterilization could fall under the category of assault in the Criminal Code, the committee said it wants it codified as a crime in law through the passage of its Bill S-250, which would make it an offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Indeed, there is no reason the government should not see this Bill through.


Clearly this is a historic wrong that can be righted with a simple solution. Unless there is public pressure, which all of us can apply through our MP’s, I fear it is likely to disappear with more study. 


Let’s look at the historic enslavement and gruesome slave trade of Africans to the Americas which I would argue still is a current moral issue which affects deeply a wider slice of Canada’s population than we would like to admit. At the height of the transatlantic trade which saw up to 600 chained captured Africans stacked in rows on three levels of ships barely able to move on a three-month crossing where up to a third died of dysentery and other disease. Three million blacks were shipped to the Americas this way to be sold like chattel to work in the plantations in the southern United States and the West Indies. 


We can’t comfort ourselves by saying this in a problem that bedevils only the US.  We did have slavery in British North America and New France before it was abolished in 1834 in Britain and its colonies. The same belief was accepted that blacks were subhuman and hence were property. 


Aside from hundreds of black and Indigenous slaves in New France, around 3,000 black enslaved men, women, and children were brought into British North America largely by loyalists after the US revolutionary war. By the 1790s, the number of enslaved black people in the Maritimes (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island) ranged from 1,200 to 2,000. There were about 300 in Lower Canada (Québec), and between 500 and 700 in Upper Canada (Ontario). So there will still be descendants of this group as there will be from the underground railroad which flourished in the 1850s and 1860s when British North America became a popular refuge for slaves fleeing the horrors of plantation life in the American South. In all 30,000 slaves fled to Canada.


Unlike the open armed welcome offered Caucasian refugees, evident now with Ukrainians, sympathy for freed slaves in the Maritimes and those arriving later by the underground railroad in central Canada  uncovered very racist attitudes among white colonists in Upper Canada. For every meeting favouring freed slaves there was another demanding an end to black immigration. Some citizens even demanded slaves be sent back. "... let (them)... be free in their own country; let us not countenance their further introduction among us; in a word, let the people of the United States bear the burden of their sins," wrote one colonist.


Freed slaves who had been shipped from New York to the Maritimes following the revolutionary war’s end in 1783, as a reward for their loyalty to Britain in the war found little support and open sometimes violent racism from white loyalists who got better land and supplies.


Over 3,000 freed black refugees who had been loyal to Britain during the war of 1812 were shipped to Nova Scotia from the US. They were settled in an area near Halifax. The sad story of the black community  Africville on the outskirts of Halifax goes back to 1848. For over 150 years hundreds of families lived there and built a thriving, close‐knit community. There were stores, a school, a post office and the Seaview United Baptist Church, which was Africville’s spiritual and social centre.


The community was denied normal city services and in 1964 the city decided to relocate its residents, claiming this would improve their living conditions but in fact dispersing the community forced many into becoming wards of the state. The last home was destroyed in 1970 and the many who had no title to their property were granted only $500. An apology for razing the community was finally given by the city and a settlement helped pay for a new Seaview church. But this brutal treatment of blacks in Nova Scotia remains a dark memory for hundreds of black Nova Scotians and their descendants. 


We should also consider that until after World War II Canada was a markedly racist nation which affected the lives of the thousands of black people already here. In the early 20th century American segregation and Jim Crow laws and European colonial rule which controlled most of the world’s non-white population affected Canadian attitudes. Blacks were stereotyped as lazy, sexually overactive and genetically inferior. Immigration policies excluded non-European people. This affected immigration from the Caribbean which almost ceased after a small influx of black West Indians were admitted to mine in Cape Breton. After World War I many moved to Montreal and Toronto and became railway porters, bellhops and maids.


Blatant discriminatory practices against blacks were commonplace until the late ‘40’s in restaurants, theatres, on public transportation, public recreational facilities and in housing. Canada had no civil rights movement to fight these practices relying on the brave campaigns mounted by black individuals and organizations. 


Finally in 1962 the federal government ended racial discrimination as a feature of the immigration system. This led to a major increase in immigrants from the West Indies resulting in greatly increased numbers of blacks in major cities. In 20 years, the black population has doubled in size, going from 573,860 persons in 1996 to 1,198,540 persons in 2016. Ethnic diversity numbers from the 2021 census will be available in October and will doubtless show a big increase in the black population. Remember that West Indian sugar plantations were infamous for the most brutal treatment of slave workers. Rebellion or misbehaviour was punished at times by whipping to death.


We are a more open and tolerant society today but black discrimination is still fought against by advocates who have been more active than ever in attacking the systemic racism that still exists. More visible campaigns mirrored the Black Lives Matter movement in the US. 


Discriminatory treatment by our justice system remains a flashpoint. Amnesty International paints a bleak picture tying this form of racism to historical attitudes and policies: “The way that racism is institutionalized in the justice system, as well as in broader society, is connected to Canada’s long, sordid legacy of perpetrating anti-black racism throughout history with enslavement, exclusionary immigration, and more.” One does not have to look far for examples: That black people accounted for 7.2% of federal offenders in 2018/2019 while comprising 3.5% of Canada's population is a clear demonstration of how our justice system treats blacks. A recent study showed in Toronto that black people are nearly four times more likely to be arrested by police for drug possession compared to their representation in the general population according to arrest data from 2015-2021. A similar situation was found in Ottawa where black people were nearly three times more likely to be arrested for drug possession than their representation in the city’s population.   


Then there is the highly controversial issue of police street checks of suspicious individuals, checking identity when no crime is suspected, or “carding”. This became a major media and political issue in Toronto largely fed by a Toronto Star investigation which found that between 2008 and 2012, 1.8 million contact cards were filled out by the Toronto Police Service, involving more than a million individuals, and almost one-quarter of the individuals documented were black. The practice was abolished in Ontario in 2017. But the legal system still shows marked racist tendencies. Amnesty International again: “The 2020 Ontario Human Rights Commission interim report on anti-black racism in policing states that ‘black people in Toronto are up to 20 times more likely to be shot dead by police than white people.’ If you’re black in Halifax, you are six times more likely to be carded by police, compared to white counterparts. In Vancouver statistics currently show that in 2017, 5 % of street checks involved black individuals, who make up only 1 % of the city’s population. Ottawa is no different, where black drivers are stopped 2.3 times more than the dominant population.”


Black History month is over and black students everywhere are becoming more familiar with continuing legacy of slavery which is still affecting their lives, and is present in the continuing and lingering negative attitudes of Canada’s privileged white class. There is much to be done to finally erase all traces of that legacy, in our justice system especially and in the hearts of the white population. Many blacks feel figuratively speaking they are beaten up and in the ditch waiting for a real hand up. All Canadians must work harder to understand the worth and respect this population deserves.     


The story of slavery in the US and Canada is a long sad one that has been masterfully told in the Book of Negroes by Canadian Lawrence Hill.   The book is a rich powerful and distressing education on the truth of the slave experience in the 1700’s while exposing the themes of racism, sexism, mental health, trauma, and loss. It is personalized as the story of one young girl who is captured in Africa, transported, and works on a plantation, then is taken to New York where she works for the British and becomes one of the thousands of Blacks resettled in Nova Scotia. She ends up as a witness in the British House of Commons in the debate over ending the slave trade. We owe it to the millions of our black brothers and sisters in this country whose ancestors lived those experiences to at least read it and try and understand the depth of this historic wrong.   

Patrick Gossage Insider Political Views

By Patrick Gossage April 14, 2026
In contrast to US inaction after almost weekly mass killings, it took one horrible shooting rampage at the Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal, in 1980, to start the drive for public policy changes around gun control. But years delays between the mass shooting outrage and actual policy to rid the country of assault rifles doomed the eventual gun buyback program. The polytechnique horror was huge news in our relatively massacre-free nation. That December day, 25-year-old Marc Lépine stalked the hallways and classrooms of the École Polytechnique de Montréal with a semi-automatic rifle and murdered 14 women and injured another 13 people before killing himself. A year later, the Coalition for Gun Control was formed to push for stricter gun laws, led by survivors of the Montreal massacre. Later that year, the federal government passed Bill C-17, which imposed safety training and a mandatory waiting period to get a firearms licence-- not an effective means of controlling automatic rifles. Much later, in1996, Parliament passed the Firearms Act, Bill C-68, driven in part by a push for stricter gun laws following the Montreal massacre. The act created a national firearms registry and imposed new rules for obtaining a gun licence, including background checks. The former Conservative government, under prime minister Stephen Harper, abolished the long-gun registry, which it said placed an unnecessary burden on law-abiding gun owners. Quebec subsequently created its own provincial registry to replace it. It took another horrific killing nine years later in Nova Scotia to force Ottawa to take real action on miliary-style guns. On April 18 and 19, 2020, 51-year-old Gabriel Wortman committed multiple shootings and set fires at 16 locations, killing 22 people before he was killed by the RCMP. On May 1, 2020, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, following through on a 2019 campaign promise, announced an immediate ban on some 1,500 makes and models of assault weapons.. The Canadian government sought to follow New Zealand's lead when at the same time it announced the ban it promised a plan to force gun owners to surrender military-style firearms. But while New Zealand acted quickly, in 2019, Ottawa only launched a long awaited buyback program in 2026. In contrast, the government of then New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda announced its firearms buyback program shortly after a white supremacist killed 51 people at two mosques in Christchurch in March, 2019. In order to move quickly, New Zealand set up mobile units where firearm owners could get refunds in exchange for their firearms. They worked hard to get co-operation from gun owners. Meanwhile, here, the firearms industry and individual gun owners vigorously opposed the project, and it was delayed for years. The program was finally initiated this year with little of the sense of urgency it could have had right after the Nova Scotia killings. It has not been going well. In April, the federal public safety minister's office said more than 67,000 assault-style firearms have been declared by 37,869 firearm owners across Canada. That's just under half of the 136,000 firearms the government had budgeted for when it set aside aside $248.6 million for the program. The precise number of banned firearms in Canada is unknown due to the end of the long-gun registry in 2012. There are other deeper problems. Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba have indicated they will not assist with the program, meaning police are not co-operating as in New Zealand. Conservative MPs and firearm owners say the buyback is a wasteful exercise that targets law-abiding citizens. The original gun-control advocacy group, PolySeSouvient, blames “weak political leadership” for what it calls “poor participation” in the compensation program. It looks like Ottawa - to put it mildly - has blown the opportunity to really reduce the number of people-killing guns in this country.
By Patrick Gossage March 12, 2026
One of the major differences between these two men is that Carney understands the value of well-thought-out strategy, abundantly clear in his Davos speech, which laid out one for middle powers to deal with the end of a rules-based international order and the rise of hegemony. Trump's lack of strategic understanding is clear in his bumbling attempts to justify the billion-dollar-a-day Iran war. His overall tactic of “flooding the zone” – mounting a new initiative or major announcement every day, or even several times a day to ensure press and opposition can never catch up. This tactic has served him well – confusing the world and his would-be opponents into submission under a valley of activity and harsh opinions from the leader of the world. Contrast this approach to leadership from Carney. He is systematically building a nation less dependent on US trade by travelling the world building new alliances and trading partners. And in the scare of Australia giving substance to his idea of alliances with middle powers. All laid out in the Davos speech. It is instructive to appreciate how much Trump was irritated by the Davos speech. Carney got a standing ovation; Trump’s rambling lengthy diatribe did not. He won’t soon forget being so upstaged. He surely recognized an intellectual power he could never match. Carney is a realist and pragmatic when he stated recently “We take the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.” He is dealing with the world that is being reshaped by an irrational power-mad president, a world the powerful Stephen Miller said “that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world.” Does Carney sometimes err on the side of supporting Trump likely to ensure that critical talks on free trade and tariffs have some chance of finding a sympathetic ear? Yes; first he seemed to fully support Trump’s war with Iran. He later made his support more nuanced, saying Trump’s actions were against the rules-based international order. He now says we will not get involved unless a NATO ally is threatened. But generally, Carney is highly rational in contrast to Trump’s self-centered irrationality. Take Trump’s bizarre ill-informed letter to the Prime Minister of Norway, who had no role in deciding if he got the Nobel Peace Prize: “I no longer feel obligated to think purely of Peace (he subsequently engaged in an ever expanding war against Iran). He then reiterated his demand for “complete and Total Control, of Greenland. Thank you!”. His late-night rants, complete with caps, on social media show a mind out of control. Thay are dutifully reported on US news media and often astonish with their non sequiturs and nastiness. One of his more unpresidential quotes came as he fingered White House drapes: “I chose these myself. I always liked gold." The big question for Canadians who are more and more disillusioned with the antics of the President: could these two opposite ever sit down and do a deal that works for Canada. The two do text, and Carney has admitted that in private Trump does listen. But there is also evidence that the trade people in the White House do not like Canada, and as Trump has said, we owe our very existence to the US. And we are “difficult”. They have said that the current trade deal is not good for the US and could be trashed entirely and -deals with Mexico and Canada could be separate and the current trilateral deal may be dead.  Canada was at the brink of reducing the heavy sectoral tariffs on steel, aluminum, and lumber when Premier Ford’s unfortunate ads during the Rose Bowl that featured President Reagan speaking against the usefulness of Tariffs led To Trump suspending talks. They only recently resumed. So can our world-renowned businessman and banker hope to sit down with the unpredictable and unstable President and cut a deal? Some hope that if we extend talks, the President, weakened by the midterms, the bad economic fallout from an unpopular war, and the fragmentation of the MAGA movement may be easier to deal with. On the other hand he may badly need a “win,” bullying big concessions out of Canada and reaping so-cabled benefits from a weaker free trade deal. There is a scenario where Trump gets a black eye if Carney simply walks away with the conviction, perhaps easily shared with an increasingly nationalistic and confident Canada that “no deal is better than a bad deal.” In any case, what a decisive and challenging future we face with Canada at play. Can Carney win for Canada against his opposite by losing a deal?"
More Posts