Alberta Premier Danielle Smith on Saturday said her government will never bring in masking mandates into school during pandemics ever again..And Smith says her government is looking at a Thursday Court of King's Bench ruling that said the mandates brought in under for premier Jason Keney were "unreasonable."."Our government will not permit any further masking mandates of children in Alberta’s K-12 education system. The detrimental effects of masking on the mental health, development and education of children in classroom settings is well understood, and we must turn the page on what has been an extremely difficult time for children, along with their parents and teachers," said Smith in a statement.."I have directed our Justice minister to assess whether an appeal of Thursday’s Kings Bench Court decision is appropriate, and have instructed our government’s ministers of Justice, Health and Education to alert me to any legislative or regulatory changes that may be necessary to reaffirm or clarify our government’s full authority with respect to this and other health and education matters.".On Thursday, an Alberta Court of King's Bench justice issued a ruling on the case concerning the Government of Alberta’s decision to lift mask mandates in schools, finding it "was made for improper purposes" and "unreasonable.".During the COVID-19 pandemic, Alberta's government decided to block school boards from imposing their own mask mandates and then eventually lifted the restrictions which outraged some parents..The case was filed against Alberta's government by the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) and a group of parents. .Justice G.S. Dunlop wrote in the decision that Alberta's Chief Medical Officer of Health Dr. Deena Hinshaw's decision to remove a masking order in Alberta schools was not her own and rather a decision from the former Kenney government..The case states Education Minister Adriana LaGrange overstepped her authority when she ordered Alberta school boards could not impose their own mask mandates. ."While Minister LaGrange's statement on its face appears to prohibit school boards from imposing mask mandates, it does not do so because the minister can only do that through a regulation, and the statement was not a regulation," Dunlop said..Dunlop did not agree with the applicants' suggestion their Charter rights had been violated.."The applicants have failed to prove a Charter breach because the evidence before me does not establish the applicant children, or any other children, are at increased risk of severe outcomes or complications from COVID-19.".Five children were applicants in the case and each child was represented in the litigation by a parent. Four of the parents filed affidavits. Each of the parents’ affidavits includes either what the parent was told by their child’s physicians regarding their child’s vulnerability to COVID-19, or the parent’s understanding of their child’s vulnerability, without reference to advice from a physician..The Crown argued this is "inadmissible hearsay."."I find the parents’ understanding on this point is relevant to the Charter aspects of this action and admissible on that basis. The children’s physicians’ advice is not admissible for its truth because those physicians have not provided affidavits and consequently the Crown had no opportunity to question them on their qualifications and their opinions," Dunlop said.."The parents’ understanding, where is it not attributed to a physician, is expert opinion evidence from a person who is not qualified to provide expert opinion evidence. Consequently, there is no evidence before me that any of the children are at heightened risk of severe complications should they contract COVID-19, although there is evidence their parents understand that to be the case.".Dunlop explained the parents' originating application sought an order quashing and setting aside Dr. Hinshaw’s order. ."That aspect of this application is moot now because Dr. Hinshaw rescinded the order herself," Dunlop said.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith on Saturday said her government will never bring in masking mandates into school during pandemics ever again..And Smith says her government is looking at a Thursday Court of King's Bench ruling that said the mandates brought in under for premier Jason Keney were "unreasonable."."Our government will not permit any further masking mandates of children in Alberta’s K-12 education system. The detrimental effects of masking on the mental health, development and education of children in classroom settings is well understood, and we must turn the page on what has been an extremely difficult time for children, along with their parents and teachers," said Smith in a statement.."I have directed our Justice minister to assess whether an appeal of Thursday’s Kings Bench Court decision is appropriate, and have instructed our government’s ministers of Justice, Health and Education to alert me to any legislative or regulatory changes that may be necessary to reaffirm or clarify our government’s full authority with respect to this and other health and education matters.".On Thursday, an Alberta Court of King's Bench justice issued a ruling on the case concerning the Government of Alberta’s decision to lift mask mandates in schools, finding it "was made for improper purposes" and "unreasonable.".During the COVID-19 pandemic, Alberta's government decided to block school boards from imposing their own mask mandates and then eventually lifted the restrictions which outraged some parents..The case was filed against Alberta's government by the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) and a group of parents. .Justice G.S. Dunlop wrote in the decision that Alberta's Chief Medical Officer of Health Dr. Deena Hinshaw's decision to remove a masking order in Alberta schools was not her own and rather a decision from the former Kenney government..The case states Education Minister Adriana LaGrange overstepped her authority when she ordered Alberta school boards could not impose their own mask mandates. ."While Minister LaGrange's statement on its face appears to prohibit school boards from imposing mask mandates, it does not do so because the minister can only do that through a regulation, and the statement was not a regulation," Dunlop said..Dunlop did not agree with the applicants' suggestion their Charter rights had been violated.."The applicants have failed to prove a Charter breach because the evidence before me does not establish the applicant children, or any other children, are at increased risk of severe outcomes or complications from COVID-19.".Five children were applicants in the case and each child was represented in the litigation by a parent. Four of the parents filed affidavits. Each of the parents’ affidavits includes either what the parent was told by their child’s physicians regarding their child’s vulnerability to COVID-19, or the parent’s understanding of their child’s vulnerability, without reference to advice from a physician..The Crown argued this is "inadmissible hearsay."."I find the parents’ understanding on this point is relevant to the Charter aspects of this action and admissible on that basis. The children’s physicians’ advice is not admissible for its truth because those physicians have not provided affidavits and consequently the Crown had no opportunity to question them on their qualifications and their opinions," Dunlop said.."The parents’ understanding, where is it not attributed to a physician, is expert opinion evidence from a person who is not qualified to provide expert opinion evidence. Consequently, there is no evidence before me that any of the children are at heightened risk of severe complications should they contract COVID-19, although there is evidence their parents understand that to be the case.".Dunlop explained the parents' originating application sought an order quashing and setting aside Dr. Hinshaw’s order. ."That aspect of this application is moot now because Dr. Hinshaw rescinded the order herself," Dunlop said.
