In her thought-provoking op-ed, Karine Coen-Sanchez (School of Sociological and Anthropological Studies), award-winning researcher and equity advocate, unpacks the bill from a systemic equity lens. While the bill’s language centers on support and accountability, it may ultimately reinforce exclusion and silence underrepresented voices, particularly within academic institutions.
Here are some of the key concerns she raises:
Excessive ministerial power: The bill grants sweeping authority to the Minister of Colleges and Universities, which could be used to suppress academic freedom and silence dissenting perspectives — especially on politically sensitive topics.
Anti-racism policies with weak foundations: While the intention to fight hate and racism is commendable, the lack of a clear anti-racist framework risks making these policies performative or even counterproductive.
The danger of "polite racism": Karine highlights the prevalence of "polite racism" — subtle, normalized biases and microaggressions that appear in so-called inclusive environments. These systemic barriers often go unaddressed and create unequal standards in both academia and the workplace.
Mental health gaps: The bill fails to account for the unique mental health challenges faced by students from marginalized backgrounds, leaving critical gaps in the support systems they rely on.
Learning from the Past
Drawing on examples from across Canada, Coen-Sanchez reminds us that intent is not enough. Whether it's Ontario’s Employment Equity Act, B.C.'s anti-racism strategies in education, or Quebec’s equity policies, the absence of meaningful consultation and measurable accountability has limited the effectiveness of many well-meaning initiatives.
From Critique to Collective Action
Coen-Sanchez calls for more than criticism — she urges community leaders, educators, and policymakers to engage in inclusive policy development rooted in lived experiences and real data. For her, progress lies in co-creating frameworks that reflect the realities of those most affected by systemic exclusion.
"We need to keep asking the hard questions: How will Bill 166 actually address racial bias? What mechanisms are in place to dismantle polite racism in our institutions?"
A Call for Inclusive Reform
Bill 166 has the potential to move the needle — or to become yet another missed opportunity. The difference will lie in our collective ability to listen, collaborate, and act. Without an intersectional lens and an honest commitment to tackling deep-rooted inequities, this reform may fail the very people it claims to support.
Want the full breakdown? Read Karine Coen-Sanchez’s original article for a bold and brilliant analysis on the implications of Bill 166.