Passed in December but not yet in force, the law bars regulators from mandating EDI training
The Law Society of Alberta has eliminated its equity, diversity, and inclusion committee for 2026 in an effort to comply with the province’s so-called “Peterson law,” which bars professional regulators from giving individuals “adverse or preferential” treatment to achieve EDI goals.
LSA spokesperson Colin Brandt confirmed the development to Canadian Lawyer this week, stating that the regulator’s benchers opted not to re-establish its EDI committee “as a result of the Regulated Professions Neutrality Act.” Benchers review and approve committees annually, and the committees run for approximately one year, starting in late February.
Brandt added that other “permissible initiatives will be advanced through the other strategic committees” instead, but did not share what those initiatives would be when asked.
The Regulated Professions Neutrality Act (RPNA) received Royal Assent in December and applies to all professional regulators in the province, including those overseeing lawyers, health professionals, architects, engineers, and tradespeople.
Introduced the previous month, the legislation was dubbed the “Peterson law” by Premier Danielle Smith, in reference to psychologist and media personality Jordan Peterson. In 2022, Ontario’s regulatory body for psychologists had ordered Peterson to complete continuing education after it received numerous complaints about “degrading, demeaning, and unprofessional comments” he made on Joe Rogan’s podcast.
Peterson asked an Ontario court to review the order. However, the court dismissed his application, finding that while regulated professionals have the right to freedom of expression under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, they must also comply with the rules of their regulatory body, which may limit their expression.
The province said the RPNA aims to ensure that regulated professionals can freely express themselves and are entitled to fair treatment by regulators. The law has several components. In direct response to the Peterson case, the law bars regulators from disciplining professionals for “expressive” conduct that occurs when they are off-duty, unless it involves threats of physical violence, certain sexual misconduct, misconduct involving professional boundaries, misuse of the professional’s position, or conduct for which the professional has been criminally convicted.
The law also bans regulators from making training mandatory unless it relates to “professional competence or ethical standards.” Compulsory cultural competency, unconscious bias, or EDI training is not allowed.
Regulators will additionally no longer be permitted to “arbitrarily” assign value or blame, or give people “adverse or preferential treatment” to achieve EDI goals based on factors like race and gender.
The provincial government is currently determining when the RPNA will take effect.
Jon Rossall, senior counsel at McLennan Ross LLP, told Canadian Lawyer on Wednesday that he was puzzled by the LSA’s decision to eliminate its EDI committee. He pointed to the committee’s mandate, which was to examine EDI issues, including those related to retention in private practice; to consider the LSA’s response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s call for legal regulators to ensure that lawyers receive cultural competency training; and to develop recommendations to benchers for addressing EDI barriers.
The mandate is no longer available on the LSA’s website as of Wednesday.
“It’s all examining and considering and developing recommendations and then reporting to the benchers,” Rossall says of the committee’s mandate. “Nothing very threatening. Nothing in there that forces any regulatory body or authority to make decisions based on those principles.
“I’m a little shocked, to tell you the truth, that the law society would take such a dramatic response by simply disbanding the committee,” he adds.
However, Koren Lightning, an Edmonton-based lawyer, says she isn’t surprised, though the development stands in stark contrast to the Law Society of Ontario’s recent decision to require licensees to take an Indigenous cultural training course.
Lightning previously served as the LSA’s first liaison for Indigenous initiatives, helping the regulator respond to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s call to action by organizing conferences and training opportunities, as well as revamping a program for Indigenous students. “Part of that work was basically breaking ground within the law society so that we could have things like mandatory cultural competency [training] for lawyers, but also so that the law society could have a vision and a plan for reconciliation,” Lightning says.
“I know how proud people were [of] the work that we did in Alberta around reconciliation,” she says. “It’s just disappointing that this is the result.”
Rossall says the LSA’s Indigenous cultural competency training, which has been mandatory since 2021 and which he believes is important, aligns squarely with the type of mandatory training barred by the RPNA, unlike the law society’s EDI committee.
The course, known as The Path, has survived multiple challenges, including a 2023 referendum and a lawsuit challenging the LSA’s authority to mandate the course.
Brandt, the LSA spokesperson, did not respond to questions about whether the LSA will continue requiring licensees to take the Indigenous cultural competency training course or why the regulator believes that its EDI committee would not align with the RPNA.
