Lawyers for the Alberta government denied that the February 2022 decision to end school mask mandates was politically motivated, saying it followed appropriate processes and public-health advice.
Thursday’s submissions came as part of a two-day hearing for an application filed on behalf of the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) and the families of five immunocompromised children.
Their lawyers, Sharon Roberts and Orlagh O’Kelly, argued Wednesday that pulling the plug on masking in schools was partly aimed at tempering protests during what Premier Jason Kenney, in separate public comments, called a “combustible” time. The Coutts border blockade was then stretching into its 11th day despite political condemnation and warnings of arrests.
Roberts and O’Kelly said the decision saw chief medical officer of health Dr. Deena Hinshaw improperly yield her authority to a government cabinet committee.
Zimmerman argued it’s a “giant leap” to call the decision inappropriate because of political statements made by elected officials.
“(The government) is making a policy decision, and Dr. Hinshaw is putting in place a medical order,” he said.
Documents released last month as part of the court case show a PowerPoint prepared by Hinshaw for the cabinet committee offered three options for different paths to ease restrictions.
The option they chose originally set a tentative March 1 date to end the school mask mandate, but cabinet committee minutes show that by the time the meeting was done, that changed to Feb. 14.
“Dr Hinshaw maintained decisive control and she maintained decisive involvement.”
Education Minister Adriana LaGrange also said in a letter to school boards on Feb. 8, the same day as the announcement of the path to lifting restrictions, that they wouldn’t be “empowered” to impose their own mask requirements.
Health Minister Jason Copping’s press secretary has previously denied the cabinet committee overrode health recommendations, and said the government stands by its decision.
The application at issue this week also argues that stopping the mask requirement for schools violated the charter rights of immunocompromised school-aged children at higher risk of poor outcomes if they contract COVID.
By February 2022, COVID vaccines were also widely available, including for children older than five.
O’Kelly responded that the reasons for lifting the mask requirement are still inadequate.
“We heard, ‘Kids need to be kids,’ … that’s the justification. There was nothing else. Our concerns remain that the government’s message seems to be: ‘There’s nothing to see here and you should just trust us.’ ”
The applicants in the case aren’t seeking to have mask mandates restored, but court could find that the government has failed in a legal duty, among other legal remedies.
Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Grant Dunlop reserved his decision, but it could be ready as early as next week.
