One parent just wrote to CPAL, to let us know she wrote the following to the Student and Family Support Office‘s portal on May 21, 2026, and received the response that follows it, below. (Note she is speaking as an individual, only, and CPAL welcomes a diversity of views expressed in good faith.)

To Whom it Concerns:

I am a TVDSB parent/taxpayer/community member. It has come to my attention that multiple schools are flying, on external flagpoles, one of the current versions of the Pride “Progress” flag, with at least some parents and other community members not being informed of reasons why or for how long this will continue. (For instance, I have observed this at <name of school 1>, <name of school 2>, and <name of school 3>.)

This external flag flying, is despite TVDSB’s Procedure 2033a section 5 (”Display of Exterior Flags”), which states in part:

“5.0 Display of Exterior Flags
5.1 With the approval of the Director of Education or designate, a principal may fly another flag at their school in accordance with this Procedure, for a specified period
...
5.2.3 School principals are responsible for communicating to their school communities the reason for displaying a flag and the duration of the display.”

For instance, none of my <spouse>, <child(ren)> at <name of child(ren)’s school>, or myself, have received reasons why this external flag is being flown at <child(ren)’s school>, or been informed for how long this will last, despite it starting last week (cf. s. 5.2.3, TVDSB Procedure 2033a). Note I subscribe to school emails and newsletters, TVDSB emails, and <what may be school-specific> notifications, and have read the sign outside <name of child(ren)’s school>, so if any had provided reasons or duration as above, I would know. I object to TVDSB not following its own rules in this way. (Note that because it has not, in my view, I can logically have no confidence that reporting ‘up the chain of command’ rather than immediately to this office, would yield any result.)

I wish to also register my objection, on other grounds.

I object to the flying of any flag other than the Canadian and Ontario flags anytime during the school year, given our schools are supposed to treat all students equally, and foster unity/not foster dis-unity, for instance based on sexual orientation (with heterosexuals, for instance, not represented on the Pride “Progress” flag). It is in my view not even appropriate to fly a flag concerning any sexuality, at children’s schools (with students as young as 4 years old, for instance, at <name of school 2>).

Minister Calandra has stated that Catholic school boards have the right to not fly these flags, as these schools are denominational: Presumably, he is thus arguing that a religion’s values might conflict with some of the values of these flags (e.g., https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/pride-flag-catholic-ban-paul-calandra-9.7198003?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar). Perhaps one such value, is that one can be born into the wrong body, which has been argued to be both a tenet represented by the Pride “Progress” flag, and as an *ideological* belief, rather than scientific fact (e.g., by a British MP: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/progress-flag-is-a-symbol-of-ideology-not-gay-pride-0wkrhr3gq). The Minister’s stance in any case, in my view, argues for Pride “Progress” flags as being ideological (see also, for instance: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/progress-flag-is-a-symbol-of-ideology-not-gay-pride-0wkrhr3gq, and https://nypost.com/2022/06/18/some-lgbtq-members-upset-with-progress-banner-replacing-rainbow/). Thus, I argue on the ground that public schools must be ideologically neutral, against the flying of these flags.

I also object on free speech grounds to any forced celebration (or any compelled speech or expression) of any event, movement, or ideology: Just as I stand against any forced participation in religious celebration (including of my own religion/creed) at a secular school, I stand against being forced to show respect to any flag flown immediately alongside our Canadian or Ontario flags, as this one is now at multiple TVDSB schools. (How can children and the community show reverence to the Canadian or Ontario flags, flown immediately adjacent to the Pride “Progress” flag, without also showing reverence to the latter, even if they would prefer not to?)

I trust you will communicate this objection to your superior and to the TVDSB Director of Education. I look forward to your response including whether or not you have, and when.

Sincerely;

Melanie MacEacheron

***

Pride Flag…

Inbox

Monday, May 25, 9:58 AM ...

to me, <school Principal>, <school Vice Principal>, <Administrative Assistant>

Dear ...,

Thank you for your message and for sharing your perspective.

The flying of the Pride flag is a Thames Valley District School Board system direction. It is in place at every school across the system and will continue. The flag is raised to recognize the International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia (IDAHOBIT) and remains in place through Pride Month.

<a portion of the email regarding a separate issue>

Sincerely,

...

Paul

Paul Sydor (he/him/his)

Superintendent of Student Achievement

Thames Valley District School Board

1250 Dundas Street

London, Ontario N5W 5P2

<email address redacted>

519-452-2000 x <extension redacted>

Thames Valley is hiring! Visit our website and follow us on LinkedIn to find teaching, administration and support staff career opportunities. Experience more today at TVDSB! tvdsb.ca/jobs

Schools:

<school 1>, <school X>, <school Y>, and <school 3> Families of Schools

Portfolios:

Student Success

Guidance

Virtual Learning

Instructional Information Technology

...

Clearly, from now on, TVDSB, at every school-- elementary and secondary-- without notice or reasons why, plans to fly the Pride “Progress” Flag, for one and a half months each school year, up most recently from one month per school year (in turn, up from one day each school year-- and previously no day of the year). Of course, there are many days around the world that mark non-heterosexual, non-trans-identifying identities: If IDAHOBIT is marked with an exterior flag (for two weeks), what is to stop TVDSB from simply flying the Pride “Progress” flag from the earliest such day in the school year, then keeping it up to mark all the others in the school year, too?

If you care:

1. Write and call now the Family Support Office (at https://forms.tvdsb.ca/Student-and-Family-Support-Office, (519) 452-2000 Ext.20222)—to share your views; and

2. Vote for trustees who will represent your values, on October 26, 2026.

CPAL should not be the one breaking this news: a responsible school board, should be, and should explain why its own Procedure 2033a s. 5, was not followed.

--CPAL

Share

TVDSB is aware that many parents oppose the promotion of any ideology, or compelled speech (including compelled celebration), within schools. Perhaps they realized we would be ready for June 1st (the start of the entire month set aside by TVDSB, for the past three years to celebrate “Pride Month”), and thus hoisted flags early this year. Some might argue that TVDSB is simply “marking” IDAHOBIT Day (International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia, and Biphobia: see our sub-stack here for more information). However, given that they have told no one they are doing so, and “IDAHOBIT Day” is not well known, how could they possibly be “marking” it by hoisting a Pride “Progress” flag, two days before the occasion occurs?

We are concerned that parents who object to any ideological flag--or any flag other than the Canadian or Ontario flags-- being flown, will be vilified as insensitive to discrimination against such people. But the Pride “Progress” flag is the only flag other than the Canadian flag flown outside these schools: objecting to any ideology in children’s secular schools is not the same as an objection to the one ideology that TVDSB uniquely flies a flag for.

TVDSB’s Procedure 2033a states in part:

... 5.0 Display of Exterior Flags
5.1 With the approval of the Director of Education or designate, a principal may fly another flag at their school in accordance with this Procedure, for a specified period

...

5.2.3 School principals are responsible for communicating to their school communities the reason for displaying a flag and the duration of the display.

...

Note that “School principals are responsible for communicating to their school communities the reason for displaying a flag and the duration of the display”. At least two of our parents’ Principals did not-- did yours? (A quick tour of your child’s school might reveal even more flags inside than out. One of our parents saw no flags other than the Canadian flag in his/her children’s school in September, when many parents were invited in: This week, this parent happened to enter the school to see no Canadian flag, two Pride “Progress” flags, and one Trans flag.)

If you do not agree with this, note you can call and write to the new Student and Family Support Office today or as soon as possible. And you can share this story. If that office is flooded with calls and emails, Minister Calandra may listen. (You can find the form to complete to communicate with TVDSB’s Family Support Office-- to which we are supposed to send queries now that the TVDSB has been placed under supervision-- here https://forms.tvdsb.ca/Student-and-Family-Support-Office; their phone number is 519-452-2000 x 20222.) Despite the name of this office, note that all local taxpayers fund the TVDSB unless they have opted to fund a different school board, and the form does not require you to state that you are a parent.

Sample Phone Script:

Hello, My name is ___. I am a TVDSB parent/taxpayer/community member. It has come to my attention that multiple schools are flying a Pride “Progress” flag, or were last week, with at least some parents and other community members not being informed of reasons why or how long this will continue. This is despite TVDSB’s Procedure 2033a section 5. I wish to state my objection. (I object to the flying of any flag other than the Canadian and Ontario flags, anytime during the school year.) I trust you will make a record of my objection and communicate it to your superior or to the TVDSB Director of Education.

Sample Email:

To Whom it Concerns:

I am a TVDSB parent/taxpayer/community member. It has come to my attention that multiple schools are flying a Pride “Progress” flag or were last week, with at least some parents and other community members not being informed of reasons why or how long this will continue. This is despite TVDSB’s Procedure 2033a section 5. I wish to register my objection. (optionally: I object to the flying of any flag other than the Canadian and Ontario flags, anytime during the school year.) I trust you will communicate this objection to your superior or to the TVDSB Director of Education.

Sincerely;

...

Sample Exemption Letter

If you want to exempt your child from any ideological teaching or forced celebration of Pride Month, which may conflict with family beliefs-- or is simply something you do not want your child forced to participate in while at a secular school, on free speech grounds -- here is a letter that another parent successfully used, which you are welcome to modify:

Dear [Principal’s Name],

I am a parent of a child in your TVDSB school, [Name of School]. I am writing in reference to the TVDSB email with the subject line “Pride Month in Thames Valley,” dated 30 May 2023.

According to that email, Pride Month commenced three years ago on June 1st (2023). TVDSB, in that email, stated an exemption to these activities can be granted for religious or creed-based accommodations:

“... Students, parents and guardians requesting a religious or creed-based accommodation, in relation to specific curriculum expectations, are invited to speak to the administrator of the school. ...”

Therefore, today I am seeking a religious or creed-based accommodation for my child, [Child’s Name]. The board’s email did not specify what programs or activities were planned for Pride Month, and the board has not (yet) sent out such an email this year. For this reason, I would like my child to be exempt from any and all activities, events, and curricula related to Pride Month, including any based on TVDSB’s 2023 Pride Month curricular training materials (at https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTPQWq8dm3Q_IZzoKGyCZKbW6o6dFfVL-ZGt_w2x23zOvkKNAaegeYztUkfOHI25EKUukyXuD0hEeKH/pub), that may be observed at your school.

Sincerely,

...

(Are you concerned that you may be asked for your faith, if any, if you request a “religious or creed-based accommodation”? Note that one parent reports that the TVDSB recently accepted a belief system other than a religion as a “creed”. And note that Classical Liberalism, which is not a religion, holds free speech to be an inviolable right.) Need more information? See a news article on the above Pride Month Curriculum teacher training materials (obtained only via FOI application, here: https://tnc.news/2024/06/27/ontario-school-board-white-supremacy-racism/).

Feel free to leave a note in the Comments below with your own beliefs on this matter or your experience registering an objection to the new Family Support Office.

--CPAL

We welcome discussion of multiple viewpoints in good faith in this sub-stack. We provide information rather than advice.

Share

This event is not open to all students equally.

Instead, it is explicitly targeted to “female-identifying students in grades 7 to 12.”

That wording matters. And parents deserve clarity.

📩 The Original TVDSB Memo

Below is the exact message sent to families:

From: TVDSB Communications
Date: March 30, 2026
Subject: OYAP and Build a Dream Career Discovery Expo

Dear Families,

The Ontario Youth Apprenticeship Program (OYAP) and Build a Dream are proud to present the Career Discovery Expo.

This free event is directed towards female-identifying students in grades 7 to 12 along with their parents or caregivers.

Members of the Thames Valley District School Board (TVDSB) Pathways Team will be onsite to answer questions and provide information about Specialist High Skills Majors (SHSM), the Ontario Youth Apprenticeship Program (OYAP), Cooperative Education (Co-op) and technology opportunities.

Participants will also have the opportunity to:

• Meet top local and regional employers

• Take part in hands-on, interactive activities

• Hear inspiring stories from women working in a wide range of careers

• Explore pathways in skilled trades, technology, and other high-demand sectors

• Enjoy prizes, swag, snacks and light refreshments, and a fun photo booth experience

Event Details

• Date: April 8, 2026

• Time: 5:00 to 8:00 p.m.

• Location: J-AAR Expo Centre - 845 Florence Street, London

• Free admission (advanced registration required)

Register now for the opportunity to explore exciting career paths.

Thank you,
Thames Valley District School Board

⚖️ Why This Raises Concerns

At first glance, this may appear to be a standard career event. But there are several issues parents should be asking about:

1. Exclusion Based on Identity

This is a publicly funded school board event — yet it is not equally accessible to all students.

• What message does this send to boys?

• Why are taxpayer-funded opportunities being restricted?

2. “Female-Identifying” — Not Just Female

This is not simply a girls-focused event.

The wording “female-identifying” introduces gender identity ideology into what should be a neutral career program.

Parents should be asking:

• Why is gender identity being embedded into career programming?

• Who approved this language?

• Are students being encouraged to adopt identity labels to participate?

3. Potential Impact on Vulnerable Students

When access to opportunities is tied to identity labels, it can create subtle pressure—especially for younger students.

• Does this create incentives for students to question or shift identity in order to belong?

• Are safeguards in place to ensure students are not influenced or confused?

These are not abstract concerns. They are real questions about how messaging affects developing children.

4. Lack of Transparency

There is no explanation provided to parents about:

• Why this event is restricted

• Why inclusive language is framed this way

• Whether alternative events exist for all students

Transparency matters—especially in publicly funded education.

📞 What Parents Can Do

If you’re concerned, now is the time to speak up.

Contact the Thames Valley District School Board and ask clear, direct questions:

• Why is this event restricted to “female-identifying” students?

• Are equivalent opportunities being offered to all students?

• What policies support the use of gender identity language in career programming?

• Who approved this initiative?

You can also contact your local school and trustees to request clarification.

🧭 The Bigger Picture

Career exploration should be about skills, interests, and opportunity — not identity categories.

When publicly funded institutions begin dividing access along ideological lines, it is entirely appropriate for parents to ask:

👉 Who is this really serving?
👉 And who is being left out?

📢 Share This

If this concerns you, share this article with other parents, community members, and educators.

Awareness is the first step toward accountability.

Share

Education Minister Paul Calandra has recently taken encouraging steps in that direction. Members of CPAL (Concerned Parents Association of London and Area) attended his address to the Macdonald Cartier Club in London earlier this month and were heartened by his emphasis on restoring discipline, accountability, and meaningful learning.

Below is the letter CPAL has formally sent to Minister Calandra — expressing appreciation for the shift in tone while making clear that parents are watching closely and expect continued, concrete action.

Letter from CPAL to Minister Paul Calandra

Subject: Gratitude for Your Leadership — and Continued Work Needed to Restore Ontario’s Classrooms

Dear Minister Calandra,

On behalf of the Concerned Parents Association of London and Area (CPAL), we wish to extend our sincere thanks for your leadership and commitment to restoring focus, accountability, and excellence in Ontario’s education system. Several of our members attended your remarks at the Macdonald Cartier Club in London and deeply appreciated the clarity and conviction you brought to the discussion, as well as the opportunity to speak with you directly.

Your clear stand on strengthening behavioural standards, reducing school violence, and returning schools to their primary mission of education has inspired real hope among parents. We especially value your efforts to introduce greater transparency and ensure decision‑making always keeps students and families at the forefront.

We are also grateful to see meaningful progress already being made—through stronger financial oversight of school boards, the redirection of funds to classroom resources, and your clear commitment to returning the curriculum to the basics that equip students for real success. These actions demonstrate that reform is not just being promised but delivered.

At the same time, there remains much work to do. Ideological and political agendas continue to permeate Ontario classrooms, often at the expense of learning, respect for parents, and students’ emotional wellbeing. These influences have taken years to entrench and will require sustained attention to uproot. We strongly encourage you to keep pressing forward with firmness and courage—ensuring Ontario schools remain focused on education, character, and objective knowledge rather than social engineering.

As you continue your reforms, we urge you to protect parental rights and transparency in every aspect of school life. Parents must be fully informed and empowered to make decisions about the moral, sexual, and ideological content their children are exposed to during the school day. CPAL has been developing specific recommendations and principles for these areas, which we hope to share with your office in due course to contribute constructively to the ongoing discussion.

Your commitment to letting “parents parent, teachers teach, and kids be kids” captures exactly what Ontario families have been yearning for. We thank you for listening, for acting decisively, and for standing firm in the face of pressure.

CPAL stands ready to support you, should you enact the changes you have outlined toward a safe, transparent, and genuinely student‑focused education system.

With respect and appreciation,
Concerned Parents Association of London and Area (CPAL)

Where CPAL Believes More Work Is Needed

While we commend progress, CPAL recognizes that Ontario’s classrooms still lack the clarity and consistency families deserve. Policies must now deliver visible results.

We believe additional focus is needed in these key areas:

• Respect for Parental Authority: Schools must not engage in discussions or surveys of sexual or gender identity with children without active parental opt‑in. Parents must be told immediately if a child displays signs of Gender Dysphoria. Teachers are not qualified to provide mental health interventions that are potentially iatrogenic, such as “social transition,” especially behind parents’ backs.

• Protection of Freedom of Belief and Expression: No student, teacher, or parent should be punished for respectfully holding or expressing lawful, fact‑based views.

• Age‑Appropriate Curriculum: Instruction on sexual or gender topics must be limited to appropriate contexts, with parental opt‑in and balanced perspectives that reflect biological and philosophical realities.

• Safety and Privacy: Every school should provide sex‑based facilities and fair athletic categories for girls, in sport and intimate spaces like washrooms, along with single‑use spaces available to any student who prefers them.

• Equality and Non‑Discrimination: Schools must never divide or privilege students based on traits such as race or religion. Every child deserves dignity and opportunity as an individual.

• Transparency and Accountability: Policies that affect students’ lives must be public, clearly explained, and enforceable. Parents need to know what rules govern their children’s education.

A Call to Ontario Parents

Minister Calandra’s words have created cautious optimism—but they must translate into action. The only way forward is for parents to keep speaking up.

Here’s how you can help:

1. Email Minister Calandra — at minister.edu@ontario.ca or his office at paul.calandra@pc.ola.org — to thank him for taking steps to refocus schools on education and safety.

2. Encourage his continued resolve. Let his office know that parents expect meaningful follow‑through to remove ideology from schools and protect parental rights.

3. Share this Substack post. Help other parents stay informed and engaged.

Ontario’s schools can—and must—return to being places of truth, learning, and human dignity. With persistence and unity, parents can help make it happen.

For updates, detailed policy recommendations, and to connect with other concerned families, follow CPAL here on Substack and watch for our upcoming website launch.

Something quietly remarkable is happening inside at least one high school of the Thames Valley District School Board (TVDSB).

According to a credible report from a concerned parent, at least one high school in the district is not allowing students to enter changerooms for the opposite sex. At a time when publicly available TVDSB guidelines had explicitly instructed staff to allow students into washrooms and changerooms based on “gender identity,” this represents a subtle but significant course correction — one that prioritizes student safety and privacy above ideology.

Here’s the striking part: those controversial “Guidelines for Inclusive Learning Cultures: Supporting Trans and Gender Diverse Students and Staff” — a 2018 TVDSB document — were recently removed without notice from the school board’s website.
No public acknowledgment. No retraction. No updated replacement policy.
They simply vanished.

That document, which we have reviewed, explicitly stated that “a school should never disclose a student’s gender diversity or trans status to parents without the student’s explicit prior consent,” and that “students have the right to enter a washroom or change room that corresponds to their gender identity, regardless of their assigned sex at birth.”

In practice, this meant teachers were expected to permit boys in girls’ changerooms — and to conceal this fact from parents. Many families had no idea that such rules even existed.

So when local gym teachers quietly declined to mix sexes in changerooms, and kept the spaces sex-specific for privacy and safety reasons, it was an act of integrity that stands out in an era where bureaucratic compliance often trumps common sense.

The Wall of Silence

Despite numerous inquiries from parents and independent journalists, the TVDSB has yet to clarify who originally approved or now administers these gender policies.
The 2018 document emerged from an internal “equity” initiative inspired by Ontario Human Rights Commission guidance — but was never meaningfully debated publicly or approved by elected trustees with full transparency.

Parents were not consulted.
Teachers were handed ideological directives dressed in legal language, and were told to obey them — even when those directives directly contradicted the Education Act’s provision for parental involvement.

One parent, whose identity CPAL is protecting, described the experience as “surreal”:

“It was like finding out there’s a hidden layer of rules that override normal ethics and common decency. Parents are treated as potential threats instead of partners.”

Global Contrast: Girls Elsewhere Fight for Toilets

The irony is almost unbearable.
Around the world, groups such as Plan International raise awareness that a lack of sex-specific bathrooms for girls in developing countries leads to devastating educational setbacks. Girls drop out of school when they reach puberty if they lack private, safe washrooms.

This NGO builds girls-only toilets to protect young women from harassment and assault — preserving dignity and ensuring equal education.

And yet, here in prosperous Ontario, bureaucrats are doing the opposite: eroding those same protections under the banner of “inclusion.” We once built boundaries to protect girls; now, institutions dismantle them to appear progressive.

It’s a tragic inversion of moral logic.

The Human Rights Machinery at Work

The deeper issue is structural.
Over several decades, unelected “human rights” commissions and tribunals have rewritten social norms through policy and possibility of sometimes enormous fines, transforming moral questions into administrative edicts.

Their interpretations of “gender identity” now override not only biological sex but thousands of years of history, worldwide, in which parents hold primary authority over their children’s moral and physical welfare.

This bureaucratic creep operates below the radar of democracy, converting ideology into policy and compelling teachers under threat of professional discipline to act against their own consciences.

The Thames Valley guidelines perfectly illustrate this: an institutional document adopting the tone of moral certainty while leaving no space for reasoned debate.

A Teacher’s Quiet Courage

In that context, one gym teacher’s choice to keep changerooms separated by sex is not a minor administrative decision — it is a quiet act of moral courage.
These teachers did not hold press conferences or defy the system publicly. They simply did what thousands of educators know is right but are afraid to do: protect children’s privacy and safety from ideological intrusion.

That’s how real reform starts — not with slogans, but with individuals who quietly refuse to go along.

Epilogue: Hope in Civility

It is now unmistakable that parents and teachers across Ontario are awakening to what has been unfolding behind institutional walls. While bureaucracies speak in platitudes about “inclusion,” common-sense educators are rediscovering the foundations of human decency — respect for privacy, biological reality, and family rights.

A culture cannot maintain freedom if it abandons truth, nor can it maintain equality if it erases distinction.
Sanity will return only when those within the system find the courage to resist it from the inside.

And that resistance has quietly begun.

Share

Editor’s Note:
Certain identifying details have been withheld to protect the privacy and employment of sources involved. CPAL has verified key elements of this report against publicly available TVDSB documentation, including the 2018 “Guidelines for Inclusive Learning Cultures” circulated internally before being quietly removed from the board’s website.

If you are a teacher, parent, or student with additional firsthand information, contact CPAL confidentially at admin@cpal.info.

In Mirabelli v. Bonta, the Court ruled that California’s “gender transition regime” violated both the Free Exercise Clause and the Due Process Clause — reaffirming a truth that has been self‑evident since time immemorial:

Parents, not the state, are the primary protectors of a child’s best interests.

The Court’s language was unambiguous. Teachers cannot be compelled to deceive parents. Bureaucrats cannot wedge themselves between a child and their family. And the state cannot “shut parents out of decisions concerning their child’s mental health.”

⚖️ Why This Matters — Even in Canada

At first glance, Americans might seem to be fighting a different battle. But what played out in California is already playing out across Canadian school boards — including here in Ontario.
Policies in multiple districts instruct teachers to withhold information if a child identifies as another gender at school. Parents, in many cases, would never be told.

That is precisely the model the U.S. Supreme Court just struck down.

This ruling sends a message that reverberates far beyond American borders: government institutions cannot secretly reshape a child’s identity and call it “protection.” It’s a moral and constitutional line in the sand.

For members of CPAL (Concerned Parents Association of London and Area), this decision is not foreign news — it’s a warning and a roadmap.

• A warning, because our own schools are experimenting with the same secrecy.

• A roadmap, because it shows that transparency, conscience, and parental authority can prevail when parents stand together.

Canadian law, under Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, already affirms the right to life, liberty, and security of the person — principles that encompass parental care and moral guidance. The logic of Mirabelli v. Bonta reinforces this: any state that hides life‑altering interventions from parents violates both law and nature.

🧭 A Turning Tide

California built a wall of secrecy between parents and children. The U.S. Supreme Court just took a sledgehammer to it.

Now it’s up to us to make sure our educators, trustees, and ministries in Canada hear the same message: parents have the non‑negotiable right to know what their children are being taught, guided toward, or treated for. Period.

Let this landmark ruling ignite every parent who has felt marginalized or dismissed by opaque school policies.

Transparency is not a privilege — it’s a constitutional imperative.

👉 Read the Thomas More Society’s announcement here: Thomas More Society Press Release
👉 Share within your networks: Let every Canadian parent know — the wall of secrecy is cracking.

Share

Our constitutional rights to free expression, conscience, and democratic debate are now subject to the approval of unelected commissioners policing citizens’ beliefs.

This is not hyperbole.
This is happening.

⚖️ The Barry Neufeld Case: A Chilling Warning to All Canadians

When former school board trustee Barry Neufeld criticized the SOGI 123 curriculum—a controversial gender ideology program introduced into British Columbia schools—he did not commit hate speech. He expressed a viewpoint shared by countless parents across the country who believe that schools should not be socially engineering children’s identities.

For speaking those truths, a tribunal ordered him to pay $750,000 to LGBTQ teachers for “discrimination.”
No due process. No democratic oversight.
Just bureaucratic punishment for dissent.

If a lifelong educator can be financially destroyed for expressing concerns about what children are taught, what does that mean for parents, journalists, or elected officials?

🚨 Human Rights Tribunals Are Not Protecting Rights—They’re Abolishing Them

The Neufeld case exposes a structural rot. The tribunals have drifted from defending individuals from genuine harms to defending ideas from scrutiny.

Here’s what’s happening:

• Suppression of Free Speech: Criticizing government-approved ideologies is now treated as hate speech. Debate is replaced with enforcement.

• Expansion of “Discrimination”: Bureaucrats have redefined discrimination from action (denying service/employment) to thoughtcrime (voicing forbidden opinions).

• Erosion of Democracy: Elected representatives and ordinary citizens can be silenced or punished for expressing moral, scientific, or religious disagreements with state orthodoxy.

• Selective Justice: These tribunals protect certain ideologies and groups at the expense of others, fracturing the very foundation of universal human rights.

This isn’t equality.
It’s ideological prosecution.

🛑 Enough Is Enough: Abolish the Human Rights Tribunals

The Free Speech Union (FSU Canada) has launched a petition to abolish human rights tribunals in Canada. This is not a symbolic gesture—it’s a practical demand for legislative courage.

We call on Parliament and provincial legislatures to either abolish these tribunals outright or reform them so dramatically that they can never again serve as instruments for punishing lawful expression.

These unelected bodies must never have the power to bankrupt citizens for their opinions.

If you believe in restoring a Canada where debate is free, truth can be spoken, and our children can be taught without coercion, then we urge you—sign the petition now.

👉 Sign the Petition Here

It takes less than two minutes, but it will send a powerful message:
Canadians will no longer accept bureaucratic tyranny disguised as “human rights.”

🧭Our Duty as Parents and Citizens

The Concerned Parents Association of London & Area (CPAL) was founded to defend truth, biological reality, and the natural rights of parents in education. We have watched, with alarm, the steady replacement of reasoned debate with enforced ideology in our schools, institutions, and tribunals.

If we stay silent, the cost will be borne by our children—not just in curriculum, but in the breakdown of the very principles that built this country.

Freedom of speech is not a partisan issue. It’s a Canadian issue.
It’s the foundation on which everything else stands.

📣 Take Action

1. Sign the Petition: Click here to add your name.

2. Share this Article: Post it across your networks, email lists, and community forums.

   Share

3. Speak Out: Write to your MP and MPP. Ask where they stand on defending free expression.

This event, hosted by the Macdonald Cartier Club, offers a rare and important opportunity to hear directly from the Minister — and more importantly, to ask questions and raise concerns about the direction of education policy in Ontario.

For parents who are worried about transparency, curriculum content, student wellbeing, parental rights, and accountability at both the ministry and school board level, this is a moment that matters.

Why This Matters for Parents

Decisions made at Queen’s Park directly affect what happens in our classrooms, how policies are implemented by school boards, and how much voice parents truly have in their children’s education. Too often, families feel shut out of these conversations.

This event allows parents to:

• Hear directly from the Minister of Education

• Ask informed, respectful questions

• Engage in policy discussions beyond press releases and talking points

• Demonstrate that parents are paying attention and showing up

CPAL strongly believes that parental engagement must extend beyond emails and social media. Being present — asking questions face-to-face — is one of the most effective ways to make concerns visible.

Event Details

• Date: Friday, February 27, 2026

• Location: Ramada Inn, 817 Exeter Road, London

• Format: Lunch meeting with remarks and Q&A

• Registration: Required (paid lunch; students may register for a free lunch)

Attendees are encouraged to submit questions in advance when registering and to arrive prepared.

👉 Register here:
https://www.macdonaldcartier.com/february_27th_2026_meeting_w_hon_paul_calandra

A Call to CPAL Readers

If you have concerns about:

• The role of ideology in classrooms

• Transparency and accountability in education policy

• The balance between student wellbeing and parental rights

• The growing disconnect between families and decision-makers

…this is an opportunity to speak up in a constructive, direct way.

CPAL encourages our readers to attend, to listen carefully, and to ask thoughtful questions on behalf of families across Ontario. Showing up matters — and this is one way parents can make their voices heard where it counts.

Share

The outcome has left many parents confused and disappointed. Some have interpreted the failure as a rejection of parental authority or a reluctance to address growing concerns around how children experiencing gender distress are being treated.

That interpretation, while understandable, does not fully reflect what happened.

The policy did not fail because the underlying concern was dismissed. It failed because the wording created confusion, legal ambiguity, and vulnerability to public misinterpretation. In today’s political climate, those factors matter as much as — and sometimes more than — intent.

The Intent Was Clear

The policy submission sought to affirm several principles that resonate with many parents:

• that children should not be rushed into irreversible medical or surgical interventions

• that parents should be able to access non-medical, exploratory talk therapy for children experiencing gender-related distress

• that parents and licensed therapists should not fear criminal consequences for prioritizing psychological support over medical pathways

These concerns are widely shared among families who want compassionate, cautious, evidence-based care for children.

However, intent alone does not carry a policy through the final vote.

How Policies Reach the Convention Floor — and Why This Matters

To understand what happened, it helps to briefly explain how policy proposals move through the Conservative Party’s process.

Policy ideas do not appear at convention fully formed or imposed from above. They move through several stages:

1. Local riding associations (EDAs) submit policy ideas through the party’s policy platform (often referred to as the “Idea Lab”).

2. These ideas are reviewed, debated, and voted on at local and regional levels.

3. Proposals that receive sufficient support advance to policy workshops at convention, where delegates debate and vote on them.

4. Only policies that pass the workshop stage proceed to plenary, the final decision-making session.

5. At plenary, a policy must achieve a double majority — both:

   • a majority of all delegates voting, and

   • a majority of provincial and territorial delegations

Failing either threshold means the policy does not pass.

In this case, the policy advanced through earlier stages and received support in initial voting, but ultimately failed to meet the double-majority requirement at plenary.

This distinction matters. It shows that the concern itself was not dismissed — rather, the final wording could not carry the necessary level of confidence and clarity across the full convention.

Where the Wording Went Wrong

The proposed amendment included the following language:

“We believe that parents have the right to arrange for body-affirming talk therapy for their gender-confused child, and we oppose the federal ‘Conversion Therapy Ban’ which criminalizes parents for doing so.”

While well-intentioned, this wording introduced several serious problems.

A Legally Defined and Highly Charged Term

“Conversion therapy” is not a casual phrase in Canada. It is a defined term in the Criminal Code following federal legislation passed in 2021.

By explicitly opposing the “conversion therapy ban,” the policy appeared — whether fairly or not — to be challenging existing criminal law. That alone created uncertainty among delegates who might otherwise support parental rights and therapeutic caution.

Once that uncertainty was introduced, attention shifted away from children and families and toward legal and reputational risk.

Blurring Distinct Concepts

The wording unintentionally collapsed two very different things into a single sentence:

• exploratory, non-medical talk therapy for children, and

• practices captured under the Criminal Code definition of “conversion therapy”

These are not the same — but the policy language did not clearly distinguish them.

As a result, nuance was lost, and the proposal became vulnerable to misunderstanding both inside and outside the convention hall.

Framing the Issue Defensively

Effective policy language clearly states what is being supported, not only what is being opposed.

By centering the policy on opposition to a federal ban, rather than affirming parental authority, child protection, and evidence-based therapeutic care, the submission became harder to defend and easier to mischaracterize.

Why Public Perception Still Matters

Even within a party convention, policies do not exist in a vacuum.

Delegates are aware that:

• policy language will be read and excerpted outside the convention

• context is often stripped away

• ambiguous wording can overshadow legitimate concerns

In this case, the language made it far too easy for the policy to be interpreted in ways that did not reflect its actual intent. That reality influenced the outcome.

What the Vote Does Not Mean

It is important to be clear about what this result does not represent.

It was not a rejection of:

• parental rights

• talk therapy

• protecting children from premature medicalization

• the need for careful, evidence-based approaches to gender-related distress

Rather, it reflected an understanding that imprecise language can undermine serious policy goals, particularly on sensitive issues involving children and mental health.

What a Policy Vote at Convention Actually Does — and What It Doesn’t

It is also important for members and observers to understand what a policy vote at convention represents in practice.

A policy that passes at convention does not automatically become legislation. Convention policies serve as guidance to the party leader, particularly heading into an election, and may inform what is argued for during a campaign and later pursued through legislation if and where it makes sense.

Conversely, the rejection of a poorly worded new policy does not reverse existing positions, nor does it prevent a leader from acting on an issue.

In this context, the outcome of this particular vote is largely meaningless beyond internal policy mechanics, except to those already opposed to the Conservative Party or its leader.

Importantly, Pierre Poilievre has already made his position clear on the core concerns parents are raising.

He has publicly stated his opposition to:

• the use of puberty blockers for people under 18, and

• the participation of biological males in women’s sports, change rooms, and bathrooms

These positions are on record:

• Radio-Canada:
  https://ici.radio-canada.ca/rci/en/news/2051032/poilievre-says-biological-males-should-be-banned-from-womens-sports-change-rooms-and-bathrooms

• Video statement:
  

These statements matter far more than the failure of a narrowly worded policy amendment at convention.

Where Responsibility Ultimately Lies

It is also important to acknowledge a difficult but necessary reality.

Many of the strongest criticisms following this outcome are coming from individuals who were not involved in the policy process, are not active in their local riding association, and did not attend convention as voting delegates.

Policy outcomes at a national convention are not determined by commentary after the fact. They are determined by:

• who participates in policy development at the local level

• who engages as proposals move through review stages

• and who ultimately shows up as a delegate and votes

If this issue truly matters — and for many families it does — engagement cannot begin and end with frustration once a vote has already taken place.

Policy is shaped by those who participate.

Engagement Is Not Optional

The process may be imperfect, but it is the mechanism available.

Parents and concerned citizens who want to see better policy outcomes must be willing to:

• engage with their local EDA

• contribute to policy drafting early, when language can still be refined

• and attend convention prepared to vote and defend ideas

Strong policies do not pass on intent alone. They pass because enough people are present, prepared, and involved.

What a Convention-Ready Policy Could Look Like

One of the clearest lessons from this experience is that policy language must be short, precise, and resilient.

A convention-ready policy expressing the same concerns could read as follows:

Parental Authority and Therapeutic Care for Children

We believe that children should be protected from premature medical or surgical interventions.

We support therapeutic approaches guided by caution, evidence, and the child’s long-term well-being.

We oppose policies that restrict access to psychological and exploratory therapeutic care.

We reject policies that expose parents or licensed mental health professionals to criminal liability for providing such care.

We believe psychological exploration should be prioritized over medical intervention for children experiencing gender-related distress.

The Broader Lesson

This episode highlights a broader truth: policy language matters — enormously.

As conversations continue around children’s mental health, parental rights, and medical decision-making, progress will depend not only on shared values, but on precision, clarity, and foresight.

Parents deserve thoughtful, carefully drafted policy — not confusion created by ambiguous wording.

The lesson here is not that these concerns lack support — it is that they must be expressed with clarity, discipline, and foresight. When it comes to protecting children, words matter.

Share

While details will continue to evolve, the direction is clear. The new guidance moves away from a heavy reliance on refined grains and sugar‑dense carbohydrates and places stronger emphasis on whole, nutrient‑dense foods — including quality proteins, healthy fats, fruits, vegetables, and minimally processed options.

This matters — especially for children.

Share

Why This Is Significant for Families and Schools

For years, parents have raised concerns about food policies that appear disconnected from real‑world health outcomes. Childhood obesity, insulin resistance, food sensitivities, behavioural challenges, and metabolic disorders have all increased — despite strict adherence to official dietary advice.

Many families have already adjusted at home:

• Reducing ultra‑processed foods

• Limiting added sugars

• Prioritizing protein and whole foods

• Questioning whether “low‑fat” truly equals “healthy”

The updated U.S. model reflects what parents, clinicians, and researchers have been observing for years: not all calories are equal, and not all foods affect the body the same way.

Canada Is Still Lagging Behind

Canada’s food guide underwent changes in recent years, but it continues to rely heavily on broad categories and messaging that leave important questions unanswered — particularly around:

• Ultra‑processed foods

• Sugar consumption

• Metabolic health

• The role of protein and fats in growing children

School nutrition policies and cafeteria programs often remain anchored to outdated frameworks, with limited flexibility for families who prioritize whole‑food or lower‑sugar approaches.

If the United States — often slower to shift institutional guidance — is now re‑evaluating its foundational nutrition model, Canada should be paying close attention.

This Is a Parental Rights Issue

Food guidance does not exist in a vacuum. What governments endorse influences:

• School meal standards

• Educational materials

• Public health messaging

• Social pressure placed on families

Parents deserve transparency, evidence‑based guidance, and the freedom to make informed choices for their children without being undermined by outdated institutional policies.

Nutrition is not ideological. It is biological.

A Call for Canadian Leadership

CPAL believes it is time for Canadian policymakers, school boards, and public health agencies to:

• Review emerging international nutrition guidance honestly

• Re‑evaluate school food standards using current metabolic science

• Engage parents as partners — not obstacles — in children’s health

Children’s long‑term health should never be sacrificed to institutional inertia.

If our neighbours are willing to update decades‑old assumptions, Canada should not be content to lag behind.

Our kids deserve better — and parents have every right to demand it.

On January 7, 2026, the London Free Press published an investigative article by journalist Heather Rivers Davey detailing the removal of more than 10,000 books from the library at H.B. Beal Secondary School.

According to the reporting, the removal process began in January 2025 and reduced Beal’s library collection from approximately 18,000 books to about 8,300. Documentation obtained by the Free Press estimates the value of the removed books at $193,000.

The books removed were not limited to outdated or damaged materials. The reporting confirms that they included Canadian and world history texts, military history (including Canada’s role in the World Wars), Holocaust literature such as The Diary of Anne Frank, Canadian regimental histories, reference materials, and classic works of fiction commonly taught in schools.

The removals were carried out under a Thames Valley District School Board initiative titled Inclusive Library Collection Revitalization Project. While the board document states that the goal was to ensure collections are culturally responsive and up to date, no detailed public explanation has been provided outlining how individual titles were assessed or why historically significant and widely taught works were removed.

The school’s longtime teacher-librarian, Larry Farquharson, publicly raised concerns about the scope and outcome of the removals. Following disciplinary action, he ultimately resigned after 25 years in the role.

For many parents, this reporting raises serious questions about transparency, oversight, and decision-making in school libraries. Over the years, parents have asked boards to apply age-appropriate standards to explicit material — not to remove history, literature, or reference works from student access. The scale and nature of the Beal removals deserve public explanation.

We encourage parents to read the full London Free Press article here:
👉 London high school library’s 10,000-book cull sparks censorship debate (Jan. 7, 2026)

Call to Action: Make Your Voice Heard

Parents have the right to ask questions and to express concern when major decisions affecting student access to educational material are made without transparency.

If you are concerned about what happened at Beal Secondary School, consider respectfully emailing:

• Thames Valley District School Board

• The Ministry-appointed supervisor overseeing the board

• Ontario Ministry of Education, copying the Minister of Education

Suggested points to raise:

• Request clarity on the criteria used for large-scale book removals

• Ask whether similar processes are occurring at other schools

• Seek assurance that historical, literary, and reference materials are not being removed without proper oversight

• Ask how parental input is incorporated into library decisions

Parents do not need to agree on everything to agree on this:
decisions of this magnitude should not happen quietly.

CPAL will continue to monitor this issue and share verified information as it becomes available.

Update: A Parent Responds Directly to the Minister of Education

Since the publication of our original post, CPAL has been hearing from parents and community members who are deeply troubled by what occurred at Beal Secondary School.

Below is an email sent directly to Ontario Minister of Education Paul Calandra by a concerned parent. It is shared with permission, as written, to reflect the depth of frustration many are feeling.

Dear Minister Calandra:

Please find out who purged the classics and innocent kids’ books (communist-China style) at the TVDSB and make them pay significant replacement value.

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/board-trustees-say-mass-removal-of-beal-library-books-was-never-disclosed

Looking at the list of culled books, I’m about as angry as a taxpayer/educator can be.

“…culled included books about Shakespeare and other authors and artists, residential schools, teen suicide, addiction, religion, bullying, family violence and child abuse, as well as books about sexuality.”

“Fictional works included Harry Potter novels, Anne of Green Gables, Lord of the Flies, Wuthering Heights, The Kite Runner, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings and The Colour Purple, among others.”

This was a crime, and if the perp cannot be found a new strict policy must be put in place in Ontario schools: All orders of significance need a clearly-printed NAME and signature before anyone complies, and questionable orders like these must first be queried by staff.

Harry Potter? Sure, the activists despise J.K. Rowling and she stands up for women’s rights!

I look forward to your making many changes to the power-mad TVDSB bureaucracy. Yet another disgrace.

Sincerely,
(A concerned parent)

CPAL will continue to share verified updates and parent responses as this issue develops. Parents have every right to express concern when decisions of this magnitude affect access to history, literature, and educational resources — especially when those decisions were not disclosed in advance.

Additional Reporting

Further context on the Beal Secondary School library removals has also been published by Larry Farquharson, the former teacher-librarian at Beal whose resignation followed the book removal process.

Farquharson writes under the Substack title Rant Against the Machine, where he has now published Part Three of his ongoing series examining the events surrounding the library cull, including issues of disclosure, accountability, and governance.

Readers who wish to review his writing directly can find the article here:
👉 Accountability Checked Out – Part Three

Update Jan-11-2026: Another Parent Writes to the Minister of Education

Since the publication of this article, CPAL has continued to hear from parents who are deeply disturbed by the double standard revealed in the Beal Secondary School library removals.

Below is an excerpted letter sent directly to Ontario’s Minister of Education, Paul Calandra, by another concerned parent. It is shared with permission and reflects concerns that many families have raised over several years — namely, that repeated warnings about age-inappropriate material in school libraries were ignored, while thousands of educational books were removed without transparency or consultation.

The parent also raises concern that, even after the removal of more than 10,000 books, at least one title long flagged by parents for explicit content remains available to students.

The letter is shared as written, to illustrate the seriousness and persistence of parental concern: (Links added in the letter below by CPAL for context)

Dear Minister Calandra,

I am writing to you not just with concern, but with profound anger and frustration over what has occurred at H.B. Beal Secondary School under the Thames Valley District School Board.

For years, parents across Ontario — including many in Thames Valley — have repeatedly raised documented concerns about highly explicit, age-inappropriate material being made available to minors through school libraries. These concerns were not abstract. They involved books containing graphic adult themes, illustrated depictions of sexual activity unsuitable for children, and material that explicitly directs minors to seek out explicit content online.

Despite these concerns being raised respectfully, persistently, and with evidence, nothing happened.

No removals.
No meaningful review.
No urgency.
No accountability.

Yet we now know that, beginning in January 2025, more than 10,000 books were removed from the library at H.B. Beal Secondary School — including history texts, Holocaust literature, Canadian military history, reference works, and classic novels — without public disclosure, without parental consultation, and without transparent review criteria.

This contrast is deeply disturbing.

What makes this situation even more alarming is that even after this unprecedented mass removal, the Beal library reportedly still contains a book titled Let’s Talk About It by Erika Moen and Matthew Nolan. Parents have identified specific pages in this book that include:

• Messaging encouraging minors to research adult sexual interests online

• Illustrated depictions of explicit sexual activity, presented in a graphic-novel format that appears intentionally accessible to youth

Parents have raised concerns about this title for years.

This raises serious questions about how the Board defines “harm,” what standards are being applied, and why material that many parents and educators consider clearly inappropriate for minors remains available — while foundational educational resources were removed en masse.

It is widely recognized that early exposure to explicit sexual material can be harmful to children’s development. Parents reasonably expect school boards to err on the side of protecting minors, not exposing them to adult content presented in a youth-friendly format.

I am therefore asking plainly:
Who is responsible for approving and retaining this material in school libraries, and under what criteria was it deemed suitable for minors?

When parents raised concerns about material that many Canadians would reasonably consider developmentally inappropriate for children — and in some cases potentially unlawful if distributed outside a controlled educational context — no action was taken.

But when the board acted on its own initiative, it did so swiftly, quietly, and at massive scale, eliminating an estimated $193,000 worth of educational material and driving the school’s longtime teacher-librarian to resign after speaking out.

Parents were never asking for censorship.
They were asking for age-appropriate safeguards — the same principle used to classify films, television, and digital media. Those requests were ignored.

I respectfully urge your office to intervene and ensure:

• A full review of how and why this mass removal was authorized

• Clear, province-wide standards for age-appropriate library materials

• Accountability for decisions made without disclosure or oversight

• Immediate review of explicit adult material currently accessible to minors

Parents should not have to fight for basic safeguards while watching history and literature disappear overnight.

This situation has severely damaged trust. It demands your attention.

I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

— A concerned parent

CPAL will continue to share verified updates, parent correspondence, and additional reporting as this issue develops. Parents have every right to ask how decisions about library content are made, why longstanding concerns were dismissed, and what standards are being applied to material accessible to minors.

Transparency and accountability are not optional when it comes to education.

As we close out 2025, we want to reflect on the incredible work this community has accomplished together. What began as a handful of concerned parents has grown into a network capable of influencing provincial conversations, supporting policy reform, and ensuring that the voices of families are no longer dismissed in Ontario schools.

CPAL is dedicated to ensuring that the Thames Valley District and the London District Catholic School Board schools, provide a positive and effective learning environment for all children, to hold trustees-- or anyone who replaces them-- accountable, and to keep politics and ideology out of our schools.

Below are highlights of what CPAL achieved over the past year — achievements made possible only because parents refused to stay silent.

1. National and International Coverage

CPAL and one of its substack articles, were featured in a national media article (republished internationally) — a sign that what is happening in London and surrounding areas reflects a broader movement of parents pushing back against ideology in schools.

2. Province-Wide Mailing to All School Board Directors, regarding gender “social transition” in schools, sometimes without parental knowledge

CPAL supported mailing in June, to every Ontario school board Director by name, a brief review of “social transition” as discussed in the Cass Review, and of it comprising a “form of psychosocial treatment ... (that) might be characterized as iatrogenic” (quoting Zucker, 2019). Each mailing also included a quote from TVDSB’s own (attached) “Guideline for Inclusive Learning Culture: Supporting Trans and Gender Diverse Students & Staff [revised 2018]”: Note that policy (attached: see pp. 6-7) is no longer on TVDSB’s website, and has not been for months, to our best knowledge.

3. Building Relationships with Local Government and Others!

We engaged councillors, trustees, and ministry officials with professionalism and persistence — ensuring they could no longer claim they “didn’t know” what was happening in their schools. We support good teaching and administration whenever and wherever we find it. We believe most teachers want to be there for kids’ learning: not to indoctrinate kids.

4. Hundreds of Articles and Videos Re-Shared Across Social Media

Through X (@CPALInfo) and our Substack, CPAL amplified high-quality research, expert interviews, policy analyses, and testimonies from parents and detransitioners. This year saw a dramatic increase in reach and engagement.

5. Persistent Letter-Writing Campaigns on Parental Rights and Religious/Creed-based Freedom

Previously, numerous letters were patiently forwarded up the ‘chain of command’, asking that TVDSB not merely claim (in s. 2, TVDSB Procedure 2022a) to publish “information about the procedure for requesting an accommodation for religious or creed-based needs” in “Student handbooks, parent newsletters, and board and school websites”, but for TVDSB to actually publish such procedure information (in those locations)-- which TVDSB has not (on its website, or in any of these ways, in our [grand]children’s schools: check your children’s schools’ or board websites, student handbooks, parent newsletters, for yourself). We found out the board requires-- or at least did from one parent-- for a nexus or similar, between creed/religion and the learning material at school a parent wants his/her child exempted from, to be shown, before such a request would be considered-- one apparent “procedure” that could have been published by the board to parents, now published here by CPAL.

6. Publishing 44 Substack Articles — Reaching Over 300 Subscribers

Our substack has become a trusted resource for parents and journalists alike. With 44 deeply researched posts published this year, CPAL has helped explain policy changes, expose concerning classroom practices, and provide grounded, evidence-based commentary. Subscribe at cpal.substack.com

7. Exposing Race- and Religion-Limited Policies concerning children

Numerous letters, patiently forwarded up the ‘chain of command’ and now in Minister Calandra’s hands, protesting exclusion of children of some races or religions-- that is, providing benefits to children (and adults) of only some races and/or religions, where children of other races or religions are not invited (see e.g. second and third attached).

8. Alerting Parents to new Code of Conduct, and to 35 sudden Policy and Procedure Reviews at TVDSB

CPAL notified thousands of local parents about proposed changes to 35 Policies and Procedures, all proposed following the Minister of Education’s recent placing of TVDSB under Supervision, along with a new Code of Conduct affecting anyone on board property. These proposed Policies and Procedures could reshape the governance structure of the board. (Links to proposed procedures/policies and to Code of Conduct, in Substacks here, here, and here.)

9. Action regarding Intrusive and Ideological Student Surveys/parents needing to opt children out of these

Tireless sub-stack-writing (here and here) and letter-writing, advocating for removing from the TVDSB School Climate Survey of children, questions many find ideological and sexually-intrusive (e.g., whether the child identifies as “Two-Spirit, agender, gender fluid, gender queer, gender non-conforming, non-binary, pangender, questioning”, and the child’s sexual orientation).

Perhaps partly in response to our repeated requests for parents needing to opt children in to surveys, TVDSB, for the first time in our experience, asked parents to opt their highschoolers in to a survey [on drug use], rather than just administering it unless parents opted their children out.

Perhaps partly in response to parental protest, at least one TVDSB highschool, as of September, no longer surveys students at the start of each term, for preferred name and pronoun, or even in some cases (as sometimes happened: see fourth attachment, which students were told was not written by the teacher teaching the course in which it was administered, and which bears the phrase “Thames Valley DSB”) whether to reveal such preferred pronoun to the student’s parents.

10. Documenting Data-Privacy Risks After the LDCSB PowerSchool Breach

We warned parents that ideological and sexual-identity data collected from minors is vulnerable, especially in light of the recent breach of some London District Catholic School Board students’ data.

11. Supporting Symbolic Neutrality in Schools

At least one TVDSB high school, for the first time in three years, has flown only the Canadian flag on its main exterior flagpole this school year — and displayed no political or ideological flags inside its auditorium or main entryway. CPAL continues to advocate for viewpoint neutrality across all schools.

Why These Achievements Matter

Ontario school boards — and especially TVDSB — are in a period of profound transition. Policies once considered untouchable are now under Ministerial review. Long-standing ideological commitments are openly questioned. Teachers, trustees, and administrators are watching closely.

And they are watching because parents are speaking.

CPAL’s work over the past year shows what is possible when ordinary families act together with clarity, courage, and courtesy. Your letters, your attendance at meetings, your willingness to stay informed — all of it contributes to real change.

A Message for Those Feeling Nervous About Speaking Up

If the pace of change feels unsettling, or if you are concerned about reprisals at work or school, know this:

You are not alone.

CPAL exists to give voice to parents, grandparents, educators, and citizens who want schools to return to their core mission: teaching children well, not social engineering. We protect confidentiality. We respect conscience. And we believe that school boards must return to evidence-based education, academic excellence, and the fundamental principle that children belong first to their families — not the system. Thinking of joining us? Email admin@cpal.info.

As Ontario confronts decades of declining literacy and numeracy scores — documented again this year — our mission remains simple:

Let kids be kids.
Let parents parent.
Let schools teach.

Share

Your support allows us to keep tracking TVDSB policy changes, advocating at the provincial level, supporting whistleblowing teachers, and educating thousands of families across Ontario.

💛 Thinking of donating?

Your donations can be received by etransfer at our email: admin@cpal.info

We are deeply grateful for every one of you.

— Concerned Parents of London & Area (CPAL)

The Board has quietly posted eight Board Policies and nine Administrative Procedures as “Under Review by Administration.”
Seventeen governance documents—many of them foundational—are being reconsidered internally while trustees remain removed and governance authority rests entirely with the Ministry-appointed supervisor.

For those familiar with the pace of TVDSB policy work, this volume of concurrent revisions is unprecedented. In a typical year, only a small number of policies are reviewed. This raises important questions:

• Why are so many policies being opened at once?

• Why now, during a period without a functioning Board of Trustees?

• Why is every single one marked simply as “Under Review by Administration” with no timeline, no drafts posted, no call for public input, and no explanation of the scope of changes?

Parents must ask the difficult but necessary question:
Are these revisions being shaped solely through administrative authority—without the public consultation normally required under TVDSB’s own policy development process?

Why This Matters: These Are Not Minor Housekeeping Updates

Board Policies define the principles and commitments that govern a school system.

Administrative Procedures outline how those principles are carried out in practice—affecting everything from safety protocols, to trustee conduct, to fundraising, to how donations are accepted, to violence-in-the-workplace responses, to special education advisory committee membership.

In other words, policies and procedures are the operational DNA of the school board.
Revisions at this scale can reshape:

• school culture

• parental involvement

• decision-making authority

• financial oversight

• health and safety expectations

• equality of access to programs

• transparency around donations and fundraising

These changes can be sweeping—and permanent.

Yet at this moment, there are no trustees reviewing drafts, no committee discussions, and no two-month public input window, all of which are normally promised in the Board’s own policy-development framework.

TVDSB outlines that framework here:
➡️ TVDSB Policies & Procedures Overview

However, what is posted now reflects something very different.

The Full List: Policies and Procedures “Under Review by Administration”

You may view the complete listing on the TVDSB website:
➡️ TVDSB Policies and Procedures – Public Input Page

Below is the same information reproduced for ease of reference.

Board Policies Under Review

• Thames Valley District School Board Special Education Advisory Committee Membership Policy (New) – Under Review by Administration

• Governance Scope Policy (New) – Under Review by Administration

• Expense Reimbursement Trustee Policy (1005) – Under Review by Administration

• Fundraising Activities and Donations for School Projects, Enhancements, Equipment, and Programs Policy (1006) – Under Review by Administration

• Health and Safety Policy (2005) – Under Review by Administration

• Development and Management of Board Policies and Administrative Procedures Policy (2032) – Under Review by Administration

• Violence in the Workplace Policy (3011) – Under Review by Administration

• Acceptance of Donations, Gifts and Equipment Policy (4011) – Under Review by Administration

Administrative Procedures Under Review

• Expense Reimbursement Trustee Procedure (1005a) – Under Review by Administration

• Fundraising Activities and Donations for School Projects, Enhancements, Equipment, and Programs Procedure (1006a) – Under Review by Administration

• Fraud Prevention and Management Procedure (1008a) – Under Review by Administration

• Employee Expense Reimbursement Procedure (2003a) – Under Review by Administration

• Expense Reimbursement – Parent Involvement Committees (System and School) Procedure (2026a) – Under Review by Administration

• Development and Management of Board Policies and Administrative Procedures Procedure (2032a) – Under Review by Administration

• Violence in the Workplace Procedure (3011a) – Under Review by Administration

• Acceptance of Donations, Gifts and Equipment Procedure (4011a) – Under Review by Administration

Why the Sudden Silence on Public Consultation?

TVDSB is clear on how policies are supposed to be developed:

• An issue is identified.

• A draft is created.

• The draft is reviewed by the Policy Working Committee.

• The draft is posted publicly for input for approximately two months.

• Feedback is incorporated.

• Trustees debate and vote.

• The final version becomes official.

That process ensures accountability, transparency, and public participation.

But today, all seventeen documents are being reviewed entirely by administration, without any publicly visible stage of the process.

With trustees not currently exercising governance authority, parents must question whether these revisions may be finalized—or partially implemented—before the Board returns to democratic oversight.

This moment demands public vigilance.

A Call to Parents, Educators, and the Community

CPAL is inviting parents and concerned citizens to help restore the transparency missing from this process.

Here’s how you can participate:

1. Visit the TVDSB policy page and read the policies currently under review.

2. Select one or two to focus on.

3. Look up the existing versions posted online.

4. Note what stands out—gaps, potential risks, areas where parental rights might be weakened, or situations where administrative control may expand.

5. Share your findings in the comments of this Substack so we can collectively build a public record.

When public consultation is not offered, citizens must create their own informed oversight.

Our Schools Belong to the Public—Not to Unaccountable Administration

Policies should never be reshaped quietly or unilaterally, especially not in a period where elected trustees have been sidelined and parents are left without a clear voice.
Education is a public trust—and public trust requires transparency, consultation, and accountability.

CPAL will continue monitoring this process closely.
We urge every parent and community member to remain engaged, informed, and vocal.

If administration will not invite public scrutiny, then we will provide it.

Share

This new office is meant to give families a direct pathway to raise concerns, get answers, and ensure issues aren’t ignored or buried, especially on complex or contentious matters. It also sets clear timelines for responses and places oversight under the board’s Supervisor.

Parents deserve to know about this change — and to use it.

Please read the letter below and share it widely with other families across our community. The more parents who understand their rights and the new supports available, the stronger our advocacy becomes.

Share

Calandra’s discussion of the Near North District School Board is especially revealing. A fully funded, state-of-the-art JK–12 school, promised years ago, remains delayed and mired in confusion. According to the Minister, trustees and senior leaders resisted a Ministry investigation, withheld documents, and ignored basic fiduciary obligations. The Director of Education reportedly relocated his office to an unused school building and used corporate funds in questionable ways, while hiring at senior levels proceeded without proper competition or relevant qualifications. These are not clerical oversights; they are signals of an institution that has lost sight of duty and public trust.

The larger point is not confined to one board. The Minister has already placed four Ontario boards under supervision (including the TVDSB) and now warns that more will follow. Crucially, he says the problem is not simply financial mismanagement; even boards with surpluses can be unaccountable, opaque, or ideologically driven. Bill 33—now before the Legislature—would allow the province to intervene sooner and under broader conditions, ending the perverse requirement that a board be in deficit before the Ministry can act. It is a sober admission that our current governance model enables, rather than constrains, the kinds of failures parents keep encountering.

You can follow the progress of Bill 33 directly on the Legislative Assembly of Ontario’s website here. The Bill has already gone through several debates and appears to be moving forward, despite facing heavy criticism and organized opposition from activist groups within some school boards. Parents are encouraged to stay informed and watch how their elected representatives respond as this important legislation advances.

Beyond governance, the interview touches a nerve many families recognize. Teachers, who increasingly manage classrooms with multiple Individual Education Plans and scarce curricular clarity, are asking for focused, centralized resources that prioritize student achievement.

In the interview, Minister Calandra openly acknowledged that Ontario teachers have no clear curriculum to follow—a revelation that undermines the long-standing assurances given to parents by many boards. One parent shared that when she requested to preview books her children might be assigned in order to seek a possible religious or creed-based exemption, a TVDSB representative told her the curriculum was “publicly available anytime.” Yet if the Minister himself admits there is no defined curriculum, this claim cannot hold true. It exposes a system in which teachers are left with vast discretion, and parents are effectively shut out from knowing what their children are being taught or how course content is chosen.

Meanwhile, boards have drifted into social engineering and symbolic battles—cancelling Halloween, policing holiday greetings, installing identity-first programming—at the expense of unifying school culture and academic focus. Calandra’s message is plain: let teachers teach, let parents parent, let kids be kids, and restore curriculum guardrails that reduce the space for personal agendas to supplant core learning.

All of this lands against a troubling backdrop: declining performance in literacy and numeracy and growing inconsistency from school to school. Parents should not have to accept a lottery of outcomes determined by governance quirks, ideological fashions, or administrative turbulence. When the basics slip, everything else—equality, opportunity, civic cohesion—slips with them. That is why this moment should be treated as an education emergency.

For CPAL, the implications are clear. First, transparency and accountability must be non-negotiable. The Ministry’s willingness to intervene is welcome, but it treats symptoms unless the underlying structure changes. Second, Ontario needs real school choice. Public funds exist to educate children, not to prop up institutions that cannot—or will not—deliver. When boards fail to meet basic standards, parents should be able to direct their child’s share of education funding to schools that can, including a new, provincially authorized charter-school option. Charter schools, properly designed and accountable for results, can provide focused, mission-driven environments that meet local needs without the governance sprawl that now hampers responsiveness.

Third, curriculum must be tightened around essentials and supported with high-quality, classroom-ready materials. Teachers deserve clarity and tools; students deserve coherence and rigor; parents deserve confidence that school time is being spent on what most advances learning and character.

So what can families do now?

Start by watching the interview and sharing it widely. Then, speak with your MPP and Minister Calandra about Bill 33, school choice, and the need for urgent action on declining student outcomes. Ask, respectfully but directly, how your child’s school is prioritizing literacy and numeracy, what concrete supports teachers are receiving, and how the board is ensuring that classroom time remains focused on academics rather than politics.

Ontario’s education system can be repaired, but not by hoping the current structure will somehow fix itself. This is a moment for constructive pressure: from parents who expect better; from teachers who want to do their best work; and from policymakers willing to align authority with responsibility. If the public system cannot guarantee the fundamentals, the province must empower families to choose schools that will.

Watch the interview:

Share with your trustee, MPP, and school council.
Act now. The system won’t fix itself.

Share

📣 Take Action: Tell the Minister and Your MPP to Fix Ontario’s Education System

email to Minister Calandra and your MPP
To: paul.calandra@pc.ola.org

CC: [Insert your MPP’s email here]
Subject: Urgent Action Needed to Protect Student Learning and Restore Accountability in Ontario Education

Dear Minister Calandra,

I am writing as a concerned parent and taxpayer in Ontario following your recent interview with Ben Mulroney regarding the widespread dysfunction in our school boards and the downward trend in student achievement across the province.

Your remarks shone a light on deeply troubling governance failures—failures that are not isolated but systemic. The situation described in the Near North District School Board is alarming, and similar concerns appear to be surfacing in other school boards across Ontario. Families like mine are growing increasingly worried that the public education system has drifted away from its core mandate: providing every student with a safe, well-governed, academically focused learning environment.

While I appreciate your efforts to intervene at the board level, this moment calls for more than case-by-case oversight. We need bold, structural action to ensure this crisis does not continue repeating across boards and years. I respectfully ask you to consider the following steps:

1. Fast-track Bill 33 to enable timely intervention in boards that fail to uphold basic standards of fiscal management, transparency, and student-focused governance.

2. Adopt a “funding follows the student” model, allowing education funding to be directed by families to the school of their choice — whether public, charter, independent, or hybrid — ensuring children are not trapped in failing systems.

3. Declare a provincial education emergency in response to the ongoing decline in literacy and numeracy scores and commit to measurable, time-bound action to reverse this trend.

Parents, teachers, and students deserve an education system that sets children up for academic and personal success, not one that protects failing boards from accountability or prioritizes ideological battles over learning.

Ontario’s children cannot afford continued drift. I urge you to act quickly, decisively, and transparently in the interests of every student and family in this province.

Thank you for your leadership and for taking this issue seriously.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[Your City/Town]
[Optional: Your Phone Number]

The letter makes three simple asks:

1. Expedite Bill 33 and expand intervention powers to address board dysfunction.

2. Introduce a school-choice funding model where public money follows the student.

3. Treat declining literacy and numeracy scores as a provincial education emergency.

(Feel free to personalize the message before sending.)

This situation should serve as a warning bell for parents: what goes on “behind the scenes” in our public school boards matters. The handling of sensitive complaints, governance transparency, and proper mail/procedure protocols are foundational to trust in the system. We encourage parents to stay informed, ask questions at board meetings, and keep their eyes on how TVDSB responds in the weeks ahead.

This week we wanted to share a thought-provoking reflection from Jae Rang at A Human Approach that speaks directly to parents, teachers, and anyone guiding young people through today’s world. Below is her Aha Moment Monday published Oct. 6, 2025, part of a weekly reflection.

*“I believe society has robbed today’s youth of failure.

Each generation has had its own way of preparing kids for life. Baby boomers raised what became known as the ‘latchkey kids’—children who let themselves in after school, made their own snacks, and learned independence because both parents were working. Earlier generations emphasized grit, responsibility, and taking your lumps when life knocked you down. But over time, society softened. Participation ribbons made everyone a ‘winner,’ team learning ensured even the weakest students passed, and many well-meaning parents stepped in to smooth every bump—solving problems for their kids, blaming others when things went wrong, or giving too much without requiring effort in return.

But what happens when we remove the sting of failure? If children never learn to struggle, setbacks are avoided and disappointments are cushioned, are we also stealing the thrill of victory?

Aha! ~ Failure is a state of mind

Failure is not the opposite of success—it’s the teacher of it.

Struggle teaches resilience, setbacks spark creativity, and disappointments fuel resourcefulness. Each stumble forces us to think differently, to solve problems, and to build the kind of confidence that only comes from navigating obstacles on our own. Let them tie their own shoes, butter their own toast, look up the meaning of a big word, do their own budget and sell tickets for their hockey fundraiser themselves.

Of course, not all failures feel like a bouquet of roses. Some bite hard. But experiences contain polarities – yin and yang – so when we accept the outcome, search for the lesson, and release what we cannot control, those very hiccups become the stepping stones that strengthen us. Napoleon Hill refers to it as, ‘…how to fail successfully’.

And here’s the real brilliance: the faster and more frequently we allow our children to explore, discover, fail, and figure it out themselves, the faster they grow in creativity and confidence. After all, ease builds dependence, hardship builds strength.

My dad always said, “Anything worth having is worth working for.”

Ditch the bubble wrap and just go for it.”*

📖 Read the original full post here: Fall in Love with Failure on A Human Approach

Why We’re Sharing This with CPAL Readers

As parents, grandparents, and educators, we often wrestle with how to prepare kids for a world that isn’t always fair, kind, or easy. Jae’s words are a timely reminder that failure isn’t something to fear—it’s something to embrace as a teacher.

This could be a great discussion starter around the dinner table with older kids, or even in classrooms as a way to compare how different generations were raised. What lessons about failure and resilience did past generations learn—and how might those lessons still matter today?

At CPAL, we believe that encouraging children to build resilience and independence is one of the most important steps we can take to counterbalance the ideological noise in schools and society.

Join the Conversation

• Talk about this post with your family—what examples of “good failures” can you share?

• Teachers: could this be a meaningful discussion topic in your classroom?

• Share your thoughts with us in the comments below.

We want to thank Jae Rang for allowing us to share this inspirational writing with our readers and if you’d like more insights like this, follow more of her work at A Human Approach, and subscribe to her weekly Aha Moment Mondays.

Share

👉 Full list on the TVDSB site: Policies & Procedures

👉 Share your input here: TVDSB Public Input Page

📑 Board Policies Under Review

• Special Education Advisory Committee Membership (New)

• Governance Scope (New)

• Expense Reimbursement Trustee (1005)

• Fundraising Activities & Donations (1006)

• Health and Safety (2005)

• Development & Management of Board Policies (2032)

• Violence in the Workplace (3011)

• Acceptance of Donations, Gifts & Equipment (4011)

• Environmental Education & Sustainability (5002)

📋 Administrative Procedures Under Review

• Expense Reimbursement – Trustee Procedure (1005a)

• Fundraising Activities & Donations Procedure (1006a)

• Fraud Prevention & Management (1008a)

• Employee Expense Reimbursement (2003a)

• Expense Reimbursement – Parent Involvement Committees (2026a)

• Development & Management of Board Policies Procedure (2032a)

• Violence in the Workplace Procedure (3011a)

• Acceptance of Donations, Gifts & Equipment Procedure (4011a)

• Environmental Education & Sustainability (5002a)

🧐 Why This Matters

Policies and procedures set the framework for decision-making and accountability in our schools. Once approved, they guide how the Board governs, spends money, accepts donations, oversees safety, and even sets direction on environmental or fundraising initiatives.

For example:

• Special Education → Who gets a voice at the table for vulnerable students.

• Fundraising & Donations → What rules apply when parents raise money for equipment or programs.

• Environmental Education & Sustainability → How deeply TVDSB embeds certain ideologies into curriculum and operations.

• Governance & Trustee Expenses → How trustees operate and spend taxpayer dollars.

🗣 How the Process Works

1. A draft is written by TVDSB staff.

2. The Policy Working Committee reviews it.

3. Draft is posted publicly for 2 months of input.

4. It goes back to the Committee with community feedback.

5. If approved, it moves to a Board meeting for a final vote.

The Board says it wants open communication with parents and communities — but that only matters if parents actually speak up.

✍️ What You Can Do

• Review the policies that matter to you.

• Submit comments through the Public Input page

• Encourage other parents to take 5 minutes and do the same.

These reviews may seem technical, but they shape how our children experience school every day.

Share

One of our concerned parents recently shared the reading choices their child was offered at school. Here’s the list:

• Bad Cree (Jessica Johns)

• The Berry Pickers (Amanda Peters)

• The Break (Katherena Vermette)

• Daughters of the Deer (Danielle Daniel)

• Firekeeper’s Daughter (Angeline Boulley)

• Indian Horse (Richard Wagamese)

• Medicine Walk (Richard Wagamese)

• Monkey Beach (Eden Robinson)

• Moon of the Crusted Snow (Waubgeshig Rice)

• Son of a Trickster (Eden Robinson)

• Theory of Crows (David A. Robertson)

At first glance, it looks like a healthy variety of modern Canadian literature. But look closer, and you’ll see the irony: every single book is framed through the same DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) lens.

The Irony of “Diversity”

These lists are marketed as diverse. Students are told they’re being exposed to a wide range of voices and experiences. But in practice, there is no diversity at all.

• Every book revolves around the same themes: identity politics, colonial oppression, intergenerational trauma, systemic racism, reconciliation.

• Every author fits neatly into a DEI-approved category, offering only slight variations on the same ideological message.

• There are no classics. No lighthearted stories. No books about universal human struggles outside of identity and oppression.

This is not diversity — it’s uniformity dressed up in progressive language.

True diversity would mean giving students a genuine range of perspectives: Indigenous and non-Indigenous, contemporary and classic, political and apolitical, tragic and joyful, spiritual and secular. Instead, they’re being handed a narrow curriculum masquerading as inclusion.

Education or Indoctrination?

To be clear, the problem isn’t with the books themselves. Many of these authors are talented storytellers. The issue is that the selection is so one-sided that it transforms from education into indoctrination.

When students are only offered one lens through which to view literature — the DEI framework — they are not being educated. They are being conditioned.

Is this really about broadening students’ horizons, or narrowing them into a single worldview?

What True Diversity in Reading Looks Like

If schools truly valued diversity, students would encounter a breadth of themes and stories — not just identity and trauma. Books that celebrate:

• Friendship and loyalty

• Humour and joy

• Imagination and adventure

• Courage, morality, and resilience

• Respect for one’s own heritage and history

These themes speak to what it means to be human, not just to what it means to belong to a category.

Parents looking for alternatives might find this resource helpful:
👉 Non-Woke Children’s Books (Australia Unwrapped)

This kind of literature fosters healthy imaginations, grounded identities, and gratitude for the best aspects of our shared culture — instead of teaching children to despise their nation’s heritage.

Ten Non-Woke Alternatives for True Variety

1. The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien
   – A timeless adventure of courage, loyalty, and imagination. Explores universal human themes without political overlay.

2. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis
   – A classic story of sacrifice, friendship, and good versus evil. Teaches courage and hope through fantasy.

3. Anne of Green Gables by L.M. Montgomery
   – A celebration of imagination, humour, and belonging, rooted in Canada’s heritage.

4. Little House on the Prairie by Laura Ingalls Wilder
   – A frontier story about family, hard work, gratitude, and resilience. Anchors students in heritage rather than ideology.

5. Charlotte’s Web by E.B. White
   – A moving tale of friendship and loyalty, teaching children about life, sacrifice, and compassion.

6. Swiss Family Robinson by Johann David Wyss
   – Adventure, ingenuity, and survival — a celebration of family working together with faith and creativity.

7. The Wind in the Willows by Kenneth Grahame
   – A charming exploration of friendship, hospitality, and loyalty. Light-hearted and imaginative.

8. Treasure Island by Robert Louis Stevenson
   – A fast-paced classic of adventure, courage, and moral choices — teaching lessons through story, not ideology.

9. Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain
   – Humour, childhood mischief, and coming-of-age. Offers moral lessons while celebrating boyhood and adventure.

10. A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle
    – Science-fantasy that uplifts imagination, love, and courage against darkness. Inspires creativity without political indoctrination.

Why These Matter

These books:

• Encourage imagination, humour, and joy.

• Teach timeless virtues like courage, loyalty, sacrifice, and family.

• Connect students with their own cultural heritage and the broader human story.

• Offer true diversity of themes and voices — not just endless repetition of trauma and identity politics.

Questions We Must Ask

Parents are starting to notice the pattern. Book lists and curriculum choices consistently reflect the same ideology. That raises urgent questions:

• Why are our children not being given true diversity in their reading material?

• Who decides that “diversity” only means identity politics and not a spectrum of ideas?

• Why has ideological conformity replaced genuine literary variety?

What You Can Do

• Check your child’s book list. See what they’re actually being asked to read.

• Ask questions at school. Where are the classics? Where are the different perspectives? Why is every option on the list ideological?

• Share with us. If you’ve seen similar lists, send them our way. We need to build a clearer picture of how widespread this trend is.

Share

📩 If your child has been given a DEI-only reading list, reply to this article or email us. Parents need to compare notes and push back against the narrowing of education into propaganda.

On the surface, these changes are framed as promoting safety and inclusion. But look closer, and a different picture emerges: one that feels less like a partnership with families and more like a blueprint for silencing dissent, bypassing parents, and extending bureaucratic control.

What’s New in the Code of Conduct

TVDSB now lists “Unacceptable Behaviours that Impact Safety,” which apply not only to students, but also to all school community members—including parents and guardians. Among these rules:

• No “starting or joining in any form of bullying,” whether in person or online (including social media posts).

• No “starting or joining in hate propaganda or types of behaviour motivated by bias, prejudice or hate against a distinct group.”

• No “recording, taking or sharing non-consensual recordings or photos of members of the school community.”

At first glance, these sound like reasonable expectations. But the wording is so vague that it can be stretched to cover almost anything. Who defines what is “bullying”? Who decides what counts as “bias” or “hate”? In practice, it will be administrators—and their interpretation will be final.

Consequences for Parents and Community Members

Perhaps most disturbing, the Code doesn’t stop at student discipline. It explicitly extends to parents and community members.

The policy states that if a parent or guardian violates the Code, their actions will be “assessed by the principal for their impact on the learning environment.” If deemed disruptive to “safety or inclusivity,” the principal can invoke the TVDSB Access to Schools Procedure (4008h)—effectively barring parents from school property.

This is a seismic shift. Parents—once recognized as their child’s first advocates—are now treated as potential intruders who can be excluded at the discretion of a single administrator.

Why This Matters

1. Unclear authority – Parents were told the policy was created through “extensive input” from the community, yet many who are signed up for policy notifications never received any notice. If consultation didn’t happen transparently, what else is being hidden?

2. Weaponized vagueness – Undefined terms like “bullying,” “bias,” or “hate” give administrators unlimited discretion. This opens the door to punishing parents and students simply for expressing views that differ from TVDSB’s own ideology.

3. Erosion of parental rights – By extending discipline to adults and threatening school access, the Board undermines parents’ role as the primary authority in their children’s education.

4. Mental health capture – At the same time, students are encouraged to seek support from counsellors and social workers in the school, bypassing parents entirely. Families who challenge the system’s approach risk being sidelined as “unsafe” influences.

A Dystopian Shift in Our Schools

What’s unfolding is not just a policy change. It’s a cultural and structural shift that echoes dystopian patterns:

• Authority centralized: Trustees—who are supposed to represent families—are suspended until 2027. That leaves bureaucrats and principals unchecked.

• Parental access conditional: A parent’s right to enter their child’s school now depends on their alignment with the Board’s definition of “inclusivity.”

• Language as control: Broad, undefined terms ensure administrators can always find grounds for discipline if a parent or student questions the prevailing narrative.

This is how control expands—quietly, under the banner of “safety.” Parents are no longer partners but monitored outsiders. Children are no longer guided primarily by their families but by state-approved “caring adults.”

It doesn’t take much imagination to see where this road leads.

The Bigger Picture

TVDSB’s changes come while the Board is under Ministry supervision. With trustees stripped of their power until 2027, parents already lack representation at the table. Now, with this new Code of Conduct, administrators are consolidating even more authority, while families are pushed further to the margins.

The pattern is unmistakable: silence dissent, redefine safety, restrict parental access, and increase reliance on school-appointed professionals. It is the architecture of a system that feels less democratic and more authoritarian with each passing year.

What Parents Can Do

• Read the Code carefully: TVDSB Code of Conduct

• Ask hard questions: Under what legal authority can parents be barred from schools?

• Demand transparency: Why were parents not directly informed or consulted before these sweeping changes?

• Stay vocal and vigilant: Use respectful but firm language when challenging policies. Don’t allow vague definitions to silence legitimate concerns.

• Write to the Minister of Education: Share your concerns directly with Minister Paul Calandra, at minister.edu@ontario.ca

  ---