‘Professionals should never fear losing their licence or career because of a social media post, interview or personal opinion expressed on their own time’
Alberta is introducing sweeping new legislation designed to shield regulated professionals from discipline based on their personal beliefs and off-duty speech.
Bill 13, the Regulated Professions Neutrality Act, was introduced Nov. 20, 2025, and aims to prevent professional regulatory bodies from policing the personal expression of engineers, nurses, lawyers, teachers and other regulated professionals in the province.
The move follows a pattern of high-profile cases across Canada, says the government.
"High-profile cases across Canada — including the disciplinary proceedings against Dr. Jordan Peterson by the College of Psychologists of Ontario — demonstrate how regulatory bodies can extend their reach into personal expression rather than professional competence.”
Similar cases involving nurses, engineers and other professionals revealed a growing pattern, it says: “Individuals facing investigations, penalties or compulsory ideological training for off-duty expressive conduct."
In July, a Vancouver nurse filed two human rights complaints, alleging that both Vancouver Coastal Health (VCH) and the British Columbia College of Nurses & Midwives (BCCNM) discriminated against her because of her political beliefs.
Premier Danielle Smith framed the issue in stark terms: "Professionals should never fear losing their licence or career because of a social media post, an interview, or a personal opinion expressed on their own time.
“Alberta's government is restoring fairness and neutrality so regulators focus on competence and ethics, not policing beliefs. Every Albertan has the right to speak freely without ideological enforcement or intimidation, and this legislation makes that protection real."
What the legislation would change
If passed, the Act would prevent professional regulatory bodies from disciplining members for “expressive” off-duty conduct except in carefully defined circumstances. According to government, conduct is "expressive when it conveys or attempts to convey meaning, but this does not include physical violence or property damage."
The narrow exceptions include: threats of physical violence; misconduct involving professional boundaries; misuse of the professional's position as a member of their profession with the intent to harm an identifiable person; certain sexual misconduct; conduct for which the professional has been convicted of an offence."
More specifically, the Act identifies these seven circumstances where discipline would be permitted:
- threats of physical violence
- misuse of a professional's position with intent to harm an identifiable person
- expression for which the professional has been convicted of an offence
- misconduct related to professional boundaries involving a client, patient or student, or a close relative, guardian, or caregiver
- sexual misconduct in relation to a client, patient or student, or a minor or secondary school student
- intentional communication to a minor with improper sexual character or purpose
- communication of sexual images or videos intended for minors or on platforms not restricted to adults.
For these exceptions to apply, "other laws that govern how professionals are regulated must be updated," the government noted.
Establishing neutrality principles for regulators
A central pillar of the legislation creates enforceable neutrality requirements for regulators. The Act would establish "principles of neutrality that prohibit professional regulatory bodies from assigning value, blame or different treatment to individuals based on personally held views or political beliefs."
More comprehensively, regulators "would not be permitted to arbitrarily assign value or blame or give people preferential or adverse treatment to achieve diversity, equity and inclusion, based on: race, colour, ancestry, national or ethnic origin, religious belief, political belief, conscientious belief, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity," according to government materials.
While human resources is a self-regulated profession in provinces such as Saskatchewan, Ontario and Quebec, it is not self-regulated in Alberta though CPHR Alberta has made efforts in that regard.
How different professional groups would be affected
The legislation applies across Alberta's entire regulated professional landscape, though implementation varies by sector. For health professions, "proposed amendments to the Health Professions Act would authorize all 29-health profession regulatory colleges to discipline their members for behaviour that is expressive and occurs off-duty only if it falls under the exceptions in the act," according to government materials.
For teachers, "proposed amendments to the Education Act and related regulations would ensure student safety by allowing the Minister of Education to continue disciplining teachers and teacher leaders for behaviour that is expressive and occurs off-duty, provided it falls under the exceptions in the act."
For legal professionals, "proposed amendments would allow the Law Society of Alberta to discipline behaviour that is expressive and occurs off-duty only if it falls under the exceptions in the act."
Professions regulated through other acts—including engineers, accountants and others governed under the Professional Governance Act—would be subject to similar restrictions. "Amendments would allow professional regulatory organizations to discipline professionals for behaviour that is expressive and occurs off-duty only if it falls under the exceptions in the act," according to government materials.
For trades and other professionals not governed by specific legislation, "Bill 13 applies to other professions without any further changes. Regulators in these professions may not discipline members for any expressive conduct that occurs off-duty."
Curbing mandatory ‘ideological’ training
The legislation would also ban certain types of mandatory training, specifically targeting what it describes as “ideological” education. According to the government, the Act would "prevent regulators from making education or training mandatory unless it relates to professional competence and ethics.
“Regulators would not be permitted to make cultural competency, unconscious bias, or diversity, equity and inclusion education or training mandatory."
The restrictions extend further: "Education or training that addresses political, historical, social or cultural issues could only be required if it directly relates to a matter of professional competence or ethics, and otherwise meets the specific requirements of the Act."
Support from professionals across sectors
Amy Hamm, a registered nurse, spoke in support of the proposed legislation on the government website: "Do we really want to live in a country where our regulated professionals are discouraged from, and punished for, engaging with ideas and sharing their thoughts and views? We all suffer when we live in a climate of fear and self-censorship. The freedom to express ourselves and debate ideas is so critical to progress and democracy. We want regulated professionals who think, speak and engage – rather than stew in silence and fear."
Darren Richards, a lawyer and member of the Law Society of Alberta, emphasized the historical role of lawyers in defending freedoms as part of the government announcement: "I am encouraged that moving forward, lawyers will not be compelled to endorse political or ideological positions or engage in ideological education programs as a condition of practice."
Scott (Sheila) Cunningham, a professional engineer, also spoke positively about the development: "It is very important to me that Alberta's regulator of professional engineers is not allowed to restrict how I speak about my personal trans identity. I'm pleased that professionals in Alberta will have their right to free expression protected."
