B-019: Bathroom Safety Act, 1675

[Alfonso Velez]

Madam Speaker,

We really must keep our bathrooms safe--from the tyranny of the National-Liberal Alliance. This bill is an affront on countless levels and is fundamentally unconstitutional and would be stricken down by even the most conservative of courts in a heartbeat. 

Before I highlight the obvious Constitutional breach that this National-Liberal Alliance bill would introduce, let me first address the "merits" of the bill--and I use that term quite loosely. This bill is designed to discriminate against our transgendered and non-binary citizens to appease the hardcore social conservatives in the N-LA--of which the Honourable Member who introduced this bill so openly subscribes to. 

Let's take the argument for a moment about how we want people to feel "safe" and "comfortable" in bathrooms and treat it as the valid concern of this bill. Of course it isn't, but just for argument--let's take that as granted. How would the Honourable Gentleman feel if Lisa, the Chief Operating Officer of Velez Industries who is transgendered, appeared in his restroom? Would he feel unsafe? I doubt it. Would he feel uncomfortable given that Lisa has fully transitioned and is as feminine as you Madam Speaker? He might--but I can tell you what concerns me far more than the Honourable Gentleman's pearl-clutching social conservative sensibilities--she would feel uncomfortable forced to use the bathroom of a gender she is not.

This is the fundamental paradox to me of the social conservatives bathroom battles--they force people who aren't a gender and who often don't appear outwardly as the gender that they had at birth to use restrooms and, if adopted, would not just make the public they claim to protect feel awkward, but would profoundly discomfort our citizens in the transgender community. That is the point, one supposes, but it must be said for the more rational among us to recognize. 

Now let's turn to the most obvious reason that this bill must be voted down even if Honourable Members here aren't supportive of the rights of the transgender and non-binary community: it's blatantly unconstitutional. The National Liberal Alliance has proposed a bill that plainly violates Article 83 of the Constitution which states that:

Article 83. No person may be discriminated against or privileged on the basis of sex, gender, sexual orientation, sexual identity, race, language, origin, parentage, creed, faith, or nobility. Measures for the advancement of persons are admissible to remedy past discrimination.

This bill inherently discriminates on the basis of sex/gender, sexual orientation, and sexual identity. Therefore, it violates Article 83 of the Constitution. Thank goodness, Madam Speaker, that this Parliament had the foresight at the beginning of this session to codify this Article into the Constitution. Because of this foresight, even if this Parliament were to adopt this bill, it would be stricken down by the Courts. Therefore, I encourage Parliament to do not just the right thing, but the Constitutional thing in opposing this terribly contemplated bill.