HANNAFORD: Alberta’s school book ban isn’t a ban at all

A man spends years and a fortune in a seven-continent search for his wife’s killer. Finally, he corners the villain Frankenstein-style on a remote mountain top, and confronts him. Then all he says is, “You’ve got to start cutting this crap out.”And so it was this morning when the Government of Alberta offered supposedly clear guidelines to get sexually explicit material out of school libraries. It was underwhelming. This has been a huge issue for parents scandalized to learn earlier this year that outrageously explicit books depicting teenagers having sex with each other were discovered in school libraries. Worse, things that shouldn't even have been available to seniors were accessible to junior grades.Sadly, it emerged upon further examination that this was not a few school librarians so badgered by woke-ism that they had lost their powers of discernment. These books were there because some people went to a lot of trouble to put them there.As John Hilton O’Brien wrote recently in the Western Standard, “Activist groups — including teachers’ unions — encourage the formation of “Diversity, Equity, and Human Rights” committees. They even give grants to buy the books. There are also external groups that provide “resources” to Gay-Straight Alliance Clubs. No less a person than Alberta Senator Kristopher Wells has provided a book on how activist teachers can “build an inclusive library collection.”.HILTON O'BRIEN: Now's the time, speak up about sexualized books in schools.The government response was admittedly admirable at the start. When the story broke in May, a concerned Education Minister Demetrios Nicolaides moved fast and immediately authorized a public online consultation to which 80,000 people responded.And this morning, he directed that school authorities must not “select for inclusion in a school library or make available to any children or students in a school library, materials containing explicit sexual content.”.That sounds clear.But it isn't. For example, what is “explicit sexual content?” Well, that would be defined as “containing a detailed and clear depiction of a sexual act, e.g. masturbation, genital contact, penetration.” You would think the ministerial instruction means that can no longer be in the school library.But, there’s a big escape hatch for people in the school system who are keen that teenagers read ‘Flamer,’ or ‘Blankets:’ “The ministerial order does not apply to municipal libraries located within schools or materials selected for use by teachers as learning and teaching resources.”In Alberta, there are 55 municipal libraries located within schools.And teachers who are enticed by the subject matter can still teach it and make these books assigned reading. Something tells me, some will..As for non-explicit sexual content, that's defined as “a depiction of sexual acts that is not detailed or clear.”Pursuant to the ministerial announcement then, students in Grade 9 and below are no longer permitted to go to the library and look at the “school library materials containing non-explicit sexual content.”But older students can still look at it, if it is “developmentally appropriate.” That's defined as “appropriate for the age, grade and ability level and the cognitive, physical, emotional and intellectual development of the child or student.”.So, three points.1) Who's supposed to make the call when a child walks up to the desk and wants to, you know, look at the dirty books? It’ll be the poor old school librarian, who's now supposed to know psychology as well as the Dewey Decimal System. That doesn’t sound like much of a gate guard.2) The government says "all school boards must have publicly available policies that align with the new standards for selecting and managing library materials by January 1, 2026. School boards can either create new policies or update existing ones to meet these requirements."In other words, the government is not mandating a common approach at all. There will be multiple policies with overlapping stipulations and the details will be populated with devils.3) This stuff is rubbish, anyway. Why have any of it?Seriously, when are depictions of oral sex ever “developmentally appropriate?” Sadly, kids will find it for themselves on the internet if they’re so inclined. But keeping it in the library for any purpose or grade level implies an official endorsement.And by the way, what sort of a person offers to place pornography in schools at their own expense? .Yet, after all the huffing and the puffing, the public consultation and the drafting of a new ministerial order, the books that got parents riled up are still going to be there, including 'sexually explicit' material if teachers want to teach it and municipal libraries want to stock it.I have some sympathy with Minister Nicolaides. It would be hard to find anybody who knows him personally to say that he likes the idea of any of these books being available to Alberta students through Alberta schools. To at least limit access to the worst, is a win for him.However, the people who want to sexualize our children are a powerful lobby and couch their arguments in terms of the current buzzwords of diversity, equity and inclusion. Politicians in a representative democracy such as Alberta's know that in the end, they have to be sensible to alternative views.And thus, the whole exercise looks more for the purposes of being seen to be doing something, than actually doing it. What a pity. They say governments can't define morality but as smokers and vaccine-enthusiasts know, they in fact can, and do all the time. Just not this time.