What you need to know about Toronto's controversial 'bubble zone' debate
Toronto councillors are set to debate a proposal that would see 20-metre protest 'bubble zones' around vulnerable institutions like schools and places of worship. But as CBC's Clara Pasieka explains, some critics worry the bylaw would infringe on people's rights.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
13 minutes ago
- CTV News
Ontario to make Ring of Fire a special economic zone ‘as quickly as possible': Ford
Protesters chant and wave flags during a demonstration outside the Ontario Legislature at Queen's Park in Toronto, Monday, June 2, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Cole Burston TORONTO — Ontario intends to designate the mineral-rich Ring of Fire as a so-called special economic zone 'as quickly as possible,' Premier Doug Ford said Thursday. Ford said he and several ministers will consult all summer with First Nations about the new law that allows the Ontario government to suspend provincial and municipal rules before making the designation. 'We need to start moving on that,' Ford said of the designation for the Ring of Fire. Last week, Indigenous Affairs Minister Greg Rickford and Energy and Mines Minister Stephen Lecce said they would hold off on making the area a special economic zone until they had consulted with all affect First Nations. The law seeks to speed up the building of large projects, particularly mines. Ford's government has committed $1 billion to develop the Ring of Fire. Three First Nations have signed various agreements with the province to help build roads to the region, as well as develop the area where it connects to the provincial highway system. However, First Nations across Ontario have risen up to protest the province's new law, livid about what what they describe as the government's audacity to strip away any law it sees fit for any project at any time. They say it tramples their treaty rights and ignores their concerns. The First Nations want to be part of development, including mines, but want to be equal partners with the province on the legislative side. They have warned Ford repeatedly that they will take the fight to the courts and to the land. Blockades of highways, railways and mines are on the table this summer, numerous First Nations said. 'This is a once in a generation opportunity for our First Nations communities and I understand some may disagree, but I'll tell you, a lot of them agree,' Ford said. Tensions have been high at the provincial legislature over the past few weeks because of the opposition to the bill. Dozens of First Nations members flew from the far north to Queen's Park to watch the province pass Bill 5, the Protect Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act, on Wednesday. Security booted about a dozen of them from the legislature's chambers for raining jeers down upon the politicians as they passed the bill into law. NDP legislator Sol Mamakwa, the representative for Kiiwetinoong where the Ring of Fire is located, was also kicked out earlier this week for saying Ford was 'telling untruths' to First Nations about his government's plans for the Ring of Fire. There is plenty of opposition to the new law in addition to First Nations' concerns. Critics also say the bill guts protections for endangered and threatened species. The legislature rose for its annual summer break and will not return until Oct. 20. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 5, 2025.
CTV News
32 minutes ago
- CTV News
Canada's sweeping border bill ‘an attack' on asylum seekers' rights, says human rights group
While the Canadian government says its proposed Bill C-2 will improve the immigration and asylum system, a human rights group is calling some of the measures 'an attack' on refugees' right to seek asylum. Amnesty International Canada said in a press release Thursday that the bill, if passed, would make it 'virtually impossible' for the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) to review refugee claims from most people entering Canada via the United States. Moreover, Amnesty International Canada says the bill would prevent people who have been in Canada for more than a year from seeking refugee status. People facing harm, including persecution and torture, in their countries could be 'unfairly denied' refugee protection by Canada, it added. Ketty Nivyabandi, secretary general of Amnesty International Canada's English-speaking section, said seeking asylum is a human right. 'With Bill C-2, the Canadian government threatens to chip away at that right, making it harder for people seeking safety and freedom to file an asylum claim and have it assessed fairly,' Nivyabandi said in a statement Thursday. 'This attack on the right to seek asylum will severely diminish Canada's international standing when it comes to protecting human rights.' Referring to the measures affecting immigrants and asylum seekers, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) said in a press release Tuesday that Bill C-2, or the Strong Borders Act, would address what it called growing migration pressures by making the immigration and asylum systems stronger, efficient and more flexible. A separate news release Tuesday from Public Safety Canada said the changes will improve the 'integrity and fairness of our immigration system while protecting Canadians' privacy and Charter rights.' The federal government says it will also work with American border and law enforcement agencies to strengthen the border and combat organized crime. While the bill is 'less explicit' than the Trump administration's rhetoric in linking immigration and asylum seekers to crime and drug trafficking, human rights lawyer Julia Sande said the proposed measures are 'concerning.' 'We don't agree that it makes the system more efficient, and we're also concerned about the linking of asylum seekers ... to things like fentanyl and guns at the border, like asylum seekers have nothing to do with border safety,' Sande, a human rights law and policy campaigner with Amnesty International Canada in Toronto, said in a video interview with on Thursday. 'These are people who are fleeing persecution, torture, discrimination, violence, who are looking to Canada for safety and Canada is trying to slam the door on them, and so we're really concerned about this bill.' In response to concerns from critics and advocacy groups about some of the rules, Immigration Minister Lena Metlege Diab said the border bill has safeguards upholding civil rights and due process, The Canadian Press reported Wednesday. Affected asylum seekers would still have a chance to make their case through pre-removal risk assessments, she added. This safeguard would apply to those whose asylum claims are not referred to the IRB under the new rules, according to the IRCC. The process would still consider each individual's situation and may result in granting claimants refugee protection, the IRCC said in an email to on Thursday. The IRCC said the proposed measure builds upon recent changes made to 'deter irregular migration and strengthen border management.' Canada and the U.S. expanded the Safe Third Country Agreement in 2023, but the proposed rule won't affect the agreement, it added. But the pre-removal risk assessment would deny people seeking asylum a right to a hearing by the Immigration and Refugee Board, which assesses and makes decisions on asylum claims, and force them into a separate system where they are not guaranteed a hearing, Sande said. 'When you get a pre-removal risk assessment, you can't appeal the decision,' Sande said, adding that a federal court must judicially review the case instead, but there's already a lot of court delays and backlogs. Proposed measures 'a step backwards' Prof. Anna Triandafyllidou, Canada Excellence Research Chair in Migration and Integration at Toronto Metropolitan University, says the bill's proposed asylum measures would be 'a step backwards.' She's concerned about a proposed ineligibility rule affecting people who first landed in Canada after June 24, 2020. If these people make asylum claims more than one year since their arrival, their claims would not be referred to the IRB, according to a background document from the federal government. Triandafyllidou said the one-year cutoff date is 'totally arbitrary' and may be against international law. 'So by creating this one-year rule, we throw out the window all these people that might face persecution,' she said in a video interview with on Thursday. She gave an example of someone who comes from a country where identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning is illegal. If that individual later identifies as 2SLGBTQ+ and decides to file for asylum more than a year after landing in Canada, the person's claim wouldn't be heard by the refugee board under the proposed rule. Asylum claimants who enter Canada from the United States along the land border and make a claim after 14 days would not be referred to the IRB as well, according to the government's background document. 'This new ineligibility provision will protect Canada's asylum system against sudden increases in claims and deter people from using the asylum system to bypass regular immigration rules, including the (Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement),' according to the IRCC in an email to on Thursday. Canada's current asylum system already has 'good rules' that just need to be stronger and implemented more effectively, Triandafyllidou added. 'There is a concern of citizens and of the government that we have a big backlog of asylum applications and that our system needs to become more efficient and effective, but this will happen by strengthening our current system which is a good one,' she said. 'So instead of undoing our system to do away with the backlog, we need to provide more resources instead of border agents, more resources for our refugee board, so that they can truly distinguish the people who really need protection from the people who are abusing the system.' With files from The Canadian Press
National Post
38 minutes ago
- National Post
Jamie Sarkonak: Carney's border bill is bracing Canada for more Liberal neglect
Article content Now, India dominates the influx of foreigners to Canada, making up 27 per cent of new permanent residents in 2022, and 45 per cent of international students. It also comprises 22 per cent of temporary foreign workers. The downsides of this are wide-ranging, including the risk of cultural enclaves, as well as the proliferation of organized crime and exploitation thanks to the difficulty in tracing cross-border networks and investigating through language barriers. A country cap of, say 10 to 15 per cent — perhaps less, to make up for past years — wouldn't solve everything, but it would help. Article content The government's new open-minded approach to information sharing is another point of optimism — perhaps it could lead to better enforcement, and maybe, just maybe, greater ability for police to disclose the citizenship status of non-citizens charged with crimes. Canadians should have the right to know whether that 'Brampton man' charged with sexually assaulting a girl in a park was here by birthright, or was welcomed by an immigration system designed by politicians who are ultimately accountable to the public. Article content Article content As for the regulation of street drugs, Bill C-2 would also tighten our lax rules on ingredients — also called precursor chemicals — which have made this country a convenient staging ground for illicit manufacturing. It's about time. Article content Any optimism for this bill, however, can't be felt without doubt. Any provision that allows cabinet to make rules on a general subject remains vulnerable to not being acted upon at all, which means we may never see source-country limits. And regardless of a few more proposed restrictions on asylum, Carney's overall immigration plan is one that will largely maintain Trudeau-era intake numbers, leaving Canada an even more crowded place. Article content Also clouding the bill is a new regime for obtaining internet service provider information, which is loaded with a slew of privacy-infringing procedures, and its new border-security related powers at sea, whose purpose might be to simply count more of the coast guard's budget towards our NATO obligations. Article content One gets the impression that Carney is following in the footsteps of his British counterpart, Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who is now taking a supposed hatchet to immigration in response to the population shock that's been hitting the United Kingdom for at least a decade now. But there, both Reform and Conservative critics believe Starmer's plan doesn't match the scale of the problem. Article content In Canada, we seem to be in a similar spot. The left now admits that immigration needs limits, and those in charge are striking a tougher tone to match the concerns of the people. If deployed effectively, it could be a lot of help — but if Bill C-2 turns out to be a mostly aesthetic exercise, our ship is going to continue sinking. Article content
