Ontario's Bill 218 was passed across to the Standing Committee on Justice Policy on October 27, 2020

The Committee intends to hold public hearings in Toronto (via video conference) on Wednesday, November 4, 2020.

Interested people who wish to be considered to make an oral presentation on Bill 218 are required to register by 5:00 p.m. (EDT) on Friday, October 30, 2020.

Those who do not wish to make an oral presentation but wish to comment on the Bill may send a written submission by 7:00 p.m. (EST) on Wednesday, November 4, 2020.


To register or send a written submission, please visit the following link:

An electronic version of the Bill is available on the Legislative Assembly website at:

We encourage everyone to either sign up to make their voice heard or send a letter to the committe via the process listed in the OLA link above.

You are free to use our letter listed below as a template.


You may also wish to submitt your dissent in advance of the meeting to the indiviual committe members. We have included their emails below.

369 media





Without Prejudice.

Please be advised and on notice that it appears Attorney General, Doug Downey, is acting in bad faith with his introduction of amendments Bill 218, Supporting Ontario's Recovery and Municipal Elections Act, 2020.

Due to the lack of irrefutable evidence to support the COVID 19 declaration of emergency under section 7.0.1 of the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act (EMCPA), I actively dissent your Liability Protection proposal Bill 218, as an unjust, excessive and unreasonable abuse of authority, that is in gross negligence of constitutional rights.

Immunity from liability so long as an “honest effort” is made to carry out Public Health’s guidelines, deems Bill 218 a quid pro quo, implicating business owners in unconstitutional activity under the guise of “good faith”. This is a violation of Charter Rights and the Nuremberg Code.

As a result, Bill 218 violates men and women’s fundamental freedoms under Section 2. of the Charter - freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication, resulting in a violation of the compelled speech doctrine. As a reminder, this doctrine sets out the principle that the government cannot force an individual or group to support certain expressions.

Providing liability protection under Bill 218:

a) grants fraudulent abuses of power to business owners and employees to govern bodily autonomy and personal health choices that are in direct violation of sections 2, 7 and 15 of the Charter (specifically compulsory masking/life, liberty and security of person, social distancing/right of association and medical privacy violations/equality before and under the law).

b) Grossly infringes upon the rights of men and women to a fair legal process that holds businesses liable for disability discrimination, charter violations, medical malpractice and medical privacy violations. As per Section 24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances.

Under Bill 218, bereaved families, men and women who have been perpetrated by charter violations under government COVID 19 orders, lose their right to seek compensation for damages, making this Bill a violation of basic charter rights. To provide immunity from liability in exchange for following orders that violate human/charter rights is the definition of a bad actor acting in bad faith. Bill 218 is further muddied by the public endorsement of Steven Kee, Director of External Communications at the Insurance Bureau of Canada, as Bill 218 directly it interferes with subrogation rights.

I boldly reject these overreaches of power and do not consent to any further action being taken on this.

Failure to cease action on BILL 218 confirms recognition of malfeasance and bad faith and willingness to accept full commercial liability for any and all damages associated with these measures, for which future notices of claim may follow.

803 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All