On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Publisher: In-Sight Publishing

Publisher Founding: March 1, 2014

Web Domain: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com

Location: Fort Langley, Township of Langley, British Columbia, Canada

Journal: In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal

Journal Founding: August 2, 2012

Frequency: Three (3) Times Per Year

Review Status: Non-Peer-Reviewed

Access: Electronic/Digital & Open Access

Fees: None (Free)

Volume Numbering: 13

Issue Numbering: 1

Section: A

Theme Type: Idea

Theme Premise: “Outliers and Outsiders”

Theme Part: 32

Formal Sub-Theme: Politics in Canada

Individual Publication Date: November 22, 2024

Issue Publication Date: January 1, 2025

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Word Count: 2,217

Image Credits: Photo by James Wheeler on Unsplash.

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN): 2369-6885

Please see the footnotes, bibliography, and citations, after the publication.*

Abstract

Amrit Birring, president of the Freedom Party of BC, discusses his political focus on improving education standards, curbing drug use in schools, and opposing SOGI 123, which he sees as harmful to students. 

Keywords: accountability in government, activism in legislature, BC healthcare challenges, COVID control measures, education system improvement, SOGI 123 curriculum removal, transparency in public policy.

On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: We are here with Amrit Birring, Leader of the Freedom Party of BC. What inspired you to make this party your focus for political action?

Amrit Birring: I have some background from 2021, when I ran for federal MP elections. In 2022, I also ran for city mayor, founding a city party. In 2023, we formed a provincial party, the Freedom Party of BC, which began a year and a half ago.

The primary reason for forming the party is that Canada, BC, and our city face significant challenges. The education system is underperforming, the healthcare system is breaking down, and housing affordability is a crisis. Additionally, inflation is widespread. Much of this results from the incompetence of successive governments, leading to a constant deterioration of conditions. As of now, the situation has reached a critical point.

Observing all of this, I felt compelled to enter politics for the country’s and our children’s future. Although my family has no political background, these pressing issues led me here.

Jacobsen: You have three top priorities: curbing drug use in schools, improving academic standards in K-12 education, and addressing the shortage of doctors, nurses, engineers, and tradespeople. Do you have a particular rank order for these priorities, or do you see them as a package to tackle together?

Birring: These priorities form a comprehensive package to improve our society. Our long-term vision is to strengthen our foundation, which is the education system. With strong academic standards, we avoid perpetuating these problems in the long run.

In addition to education, there’s the issue of SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) being taught in schools. Parents overwhelmingly oppose this, yet the government insists on keeping it. Our party has made this a significant issue, as it unites parents. The government tends to divide and conquer, but this issue affects all parents equally. We’ve engaged with the Surrey School Board and the BC Ministry of Education and held protests at elementary schools. The more we investigate, the clearer it becomes that this agenda is being pushed by forces beyond the government, which acts more like a puppet. It seems that undemocratic forces are controlling our democracy.

We are determined to remove this from schools as our first victory, making it our priority. It’s about children’s curriculum and resisting the forces trying to impose their will on us. Achieving this would be a huge moral victory.

Jacobsen: Let’s discuss the three other priorities, including parties we align with and those we disagree with. Did you mention raising K-12 academic standards?

Birring: Academic standards are crucial because, with them, our children will be competitive and able to fill the many jobs we have in the country. But SOGI impacts students immediately. If they experience gender confusion, it weakens their personality, and nothing else will work effectively.

Jacobsen: What objections do other parties raise in response to your concerns?

Birring: In a debate I participated in against the BC NDP, they claimed SOGI 123 is a teaching resource introduced due to historical injustices to the LGBTQ community, aiming to promote inclusion. They argue it’s age-appropriate, and teachers use discretion in deciding what to teach. However, we disagree with all of these points.

Firstly, the claim that education is inclusive is misleading. By including the small LGBTQ population, they have excluded over 99% of parents from the decision-making process. The curriculum published in schools covers academic subjects like math and science, not this. Teaching this content without parental consent is unacceptable.

Secondly, the claim that it’s age-appropriate is false. There are objectionable books in school libraries showing explicit content, like depictions of oral sex between boys or girls in bed together. There’s no record of which teacher shows what to which child. We are expected to trust teachers, but we can’t. Special LGBTQ teachers have been hired to deliver this content, and their funding is tied to increasing the number of children who identify as LGBTQ.

We’ve heard from many concerned parents and students, even though they don’t publicly speak out. For instance, Sullivan Heights Secondary School in Surrey has 18 students who identify as furry, which refers to students who identify as animals like cats and dogs.

It’s a popular term in schools now. So, it’s not just about males identifying as females or vice versa. Students can identify as anything, even objects. In this case, those 18 students identify as animals. There’s no way to justify whose inclusion this is for or whose safety it’s for. It just doesn’t make sense. We don’t buy into what the government is claiming. It’s just a cover to push this harmful agenda.

Jacobsen: You also have objections to COVID policies and climate change. Can you explain that in more detail?

Birring: Yes, let’s start with COVID. It was a lung virus, but there was a global agenda to control the population once it hit. They used lockdowns, mask mandates, and social distancing to create fear. Then, they linked our basic privileges to a digital ID. Without it, you couldn’t go to the gym or fly. These IDs were tied to COVID-19 vaccinations.

This entire operation seemed pre-planned, and they broke many established rules. For example, in medicine, you can’t force treatment on anyone. Still, they effectively force people by linking basic rights to vaccinations. They now claim they never forced anyone, but tying travel and other freedoms to the vaccine is coercion.

From a medical perspective, the restrictions didn’t make sense either. For a lung virus, the best treatment is breathing fresh air, yet they lock people inside and force masks. Trusted medicines like Ivermectin were banned, and any doctor who opposed the narrative had their licenses revoked. They silenced dissent on social media unless it aligned with the government’s stance, and the constant media propaganda pushed daily case numbers to spread fear.

Jacobsen: Nowhere during the pandemic did the government scare people like this before. They created fear to make people psychologically ready for forced vaccinations, lockdowns, masks, and digital IDs, which control their lives. Can you expand on that?

Birring: Yes, exactly. It violated medical principles and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Ironically, people didn’t start dying in large numbers until after the vaccines arrived, especially older individuals locked down in nursing homes. Vaccines typically take 8-10 years to develop. Still, this one was ready in just eight months, and every country managed to create the same vaccine. That doesn’t usually happen.

This vaccine uses mRNA technology, which is different from traditional vaccines. A typical vaccine introduces a small dose of the virus to help the body create antibodies. But this was a new technology. Normally, vaccine companies are held liable for side effects, but governments gave them exemptions. There was even an exemption for 60 years, preventing the release of side effect data. Still, public backlash forced them to release it. So, from many perspectives, it looks like a giant fraud.

I checked Statistics Canada’s data, and there’s a flat line when you compare the number of deaths from 2015 to 2022. This means the number of deaths was the same before, during, and after COVID-19. They claim it killed many people, but their data do not support that. What happened is that older people, who typically die from lung disease or flu, died with COVID instead, which is just another viral infection.

Another consequence of the COVID lockdowns was the disruption of global supply chains. This caused permanent supply shortages, leading to inflation that we still see today. This was another deliberate outcome of the pandemic, as the global supply network will never return to full capacity, keeping inflation permanent. It was all part of the larger agenda.

One type of inflation is caused by printing more money, which increasing interest rates can control. But there’s another type of inflation caused by a shortage of supply. When supply is limited, and demand remains, prices drive up permanently. This leads to financial pain and makes people poorer. 

Jacobsen: Can you elaborate on how COVID measures contributed to this?

Birring: During COVID, many small businesses, which already operated on tight margins, were forced to shut down permanently. Even businesses open for generations, like family-owned restaurants, couldn’t survive. What replaced them? Big corporations like Walmart and Costco. This is another example of power shifting from the people to large corporations.

We believe COVID was used as an agenda to control society and oppose the government’s actions during that time. That’s why we don’t believe in the government’s narrative.

Jacobsen: When you present these views in debates or on social media, how do people generally respond within the British Columbia political space?

Birring: When a new party with strong views emerges, established powers try to make them invisible. In our case, we’ve been excluded from forums. For example, the Surrey Board of Trade organized a debate, but we weren’t invited despite being a Surrey-based party. There’s an effort to refrain from engaging with us.

I had one opportunity to debate at Kwantlen Polytechnic University with an NDP candidate. Though they didn’t ask about COVID-19, we did discuss climate change. People are often shocked initially because they’ve bought into the government’s narrative. But when I explain things, most people agree with our perspective. Even in personal conversations, people often admit that they felt coerced during the pandemic, though the official narrative still dominates.

When it comes to SOGI, the same pattern applies. No one dared to speak out against it until we started organizing anti-SOGI rallies and calling it out openly.

Now, it has become more acceptable, and even the Conservative Party of BC claims they will remove it. We continue our activism, normalizing the criticism of such policies. It’s a journey, and we’re still in the early stages. We’ll see what tricks Western interests play as we gain more traction. For now, their tactic is to make us invisible.

Jacobsen: This series is important because it serves as a subjective educational platform where I gather the views of politicians directly from their perspectives. While I acknowledge my biases, this series isn’t like a critical national news story where people are expected to push back. It’s more of an educational presentation of a candidate’s views. I appreciate you sharing your full perspective, especially given the challenges of entering a political space where established parties dominate. You may present ideas that some people find highly objectionable for various reasons, whether evidence-based or ideological. Where do you find the least pushback regarding your political positions? When you talk to people on the street and introduce yourself as the leader of the Freedom Party of BC, what issues resonate most with them?

Birring: People are most receptive to the removal of SOGI 123. BC has 93 seats for this election, but we’re fielding candidates in only five ridings. We only claim to solve some problems, as we expect to be in opposition. Our main focus is SOGI 123 because it affects all parents, and no one else is addressing it. While other parties discuss housing and healthcare, they offer no real solutions—just promises. In the ridings we’re contesting, around 90% of people support us in wanting SOGI 123 removed from schools, as it has no place there. However, about 10% of people believe it’s necessary for inclusion and don’t delve into the safety concerns—they trust the government’s narrative.

Jacobsen: We’re running out of time, so I’ll ask a final question. What do you hope to achieve with your political campaign, and do you have any closing thoughts?

Birring: We hope to send a few candidates to the legislature. Our role would be to present facts, figures, and realistic points on our constituents’ issues. The legislature’s discussions often need more relevance to people’s real concerns. They create issues to debate and pass bills. For example, sometimes, they broadcast parliamentary proceedings, but only few common people pay attention to what’s happening.

That’s because the business conducted in parliament often has nothing to do with the people it’s meant to serve. In theory, parliament exists for the people, but that’s different from how it currently operates. We plan to raise issues that genuinely affect people and conduct thorough research. As MLAs, we’ll have staff and time to investigate issues, ensuring transparency on where the money goes so the government can no longer deceive the public and is forced to do the right thing.

Our main goal is to bring activism to the legislature. Becoming an MLA isn’t the end—it’s a means to implement our ideas and expose government actions that benefit vested interests rather than the people. The ultimate objective is to make the government accountable to the public.

Democracy is a two-way street. Unless people participate, the government will cater to those who control and fund it. We must reclaim democracy by engaging with MLAs, asking critical questions, and holding them accountable for their promises. We want to empower people to think critically, probe deeper, and ensure that the government is more accountable in the long term and that our lives improve.

Jacobsen: Excellent. Amrit, thank you for your time and participation in the series today. I appreciate it.

Birring: Thanks, Scott. I hope you found it useful, and thanks for doing this.

Jacobsen: Take care.

Birring: Okay. Bye-bye.

Footnotes

None

Citations

American Medical Association (AMA 11th Edition): Jacobsen S. On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC. November 2024; 13(1). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/canada-politics-3

American Psychological Association (APA 7th Edition): Jacobsen, S. (2024, November 22). ‘On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC’. In-Sight Publishing. 13(1).

Brazilian National Standards (ABNT): JACOBSEN, S. On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC’. In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, Fort Langley, v. 13, n. 1, 2024.

Chicago/Turabian, Author-Date (17th Edition): Jacobsen, Scott. 2024. “On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC’.” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal 13, no. 1 (Winter). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/canada-politics-3.

Chicago/Turabian, Notes & Bibliography (17th Edition): Jacobsen, S. “On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC.” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal 13, no. 1 (November 2024). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/canada-politics-3.

Harvard: Jacobsen, S. (2024) ‘On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC’, In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, 13(1). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/canada-politics-3.

Harvard (Australian): Jacobsen, S 2024, ‘On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC’, In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, vol. 13, no. 1, http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/canada-politics-3.

Modern Language Association (MLA, 9th Edition): Jacobsen, Scott. “On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC.” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, vo.13, no. 1, 2024, http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/canada-politics-3.

Vancouver/ICMJE: Jacobsen S. On Politics in Canada 3: Amrit Birring, Freedom Party of BC [Internet]. 2024 Nov; 13(1). Available from: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/canada-politics-3.

License & Copyright

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. ©Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use or duplication of material without express permission from Scott Douglas Jacobsen strictly prohibited, excerpts and links must use full credit to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with direction to the original content.