Discover Narcity
Get the latest and greatest stories every day in your inbox.
Suburban Montreal mayor pleads guilty, faces $30,000 fine after anti-Palestine posts
Mayor faces $30,000 fine over Palestine comments
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Graeme Roy
The mayor of a Montreal suburb pleaded guilty to a professional ethics breach and faces a $30,000 fine over comments he made about Palestine.
Hampstead Mayor Jeremy Levi entered his plea on Thursday after a complaint to the Quebec order of professional accountants.
The complaint accuses Levi of making comments that undermine the reputation of the profession.
The complaint cites over 20 social media posts by Levi between January 2024 and February 2025 about Palestine and pro-Palestinian activists.
The disciplinary council recommended the fine and a mandatory training.
The Town of Hampstead and Levi's lawyer both declined to comment about the ruling.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 23, 2025.
By Marieke Glorieux-Stryckman | Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Keep reading
Show less
Calgary flood survivor to testify in Canada’s first youth-led federal climate trial
The 15 plaintiffs say Canada’s fossil fuel policies threaten their constitutional rights.
Sadie Vipond was 7 when her grandmother woke her in the middle of the night, and they fled their home. Outside, Calgary was in the midst of its largest flood in more than a century. They went to a friend’s place on higher ground as surging waters cut short the school year. At the city’s zoo, water rose high enough for a hippo to swim out of its enclosure — a memory that stays with her 13 years later.
Next week, she will testify in Canada’s first federal youth-led climate trial — a lawsuit she joined at 13. She’s one of 15 young Canadian plaintiffs in La Rose v. His Majesty the King, which will run for four weeks in Vancouver.
The plaintiffs from seven provinces, the Northwest Territories and Yukon were all between the ages of 10 and 19 when the case began. They are arguing that Canada is putting young people’s health, safety and futures at risk by supporting fossil fuel development while repeatedly missing its emissions targets. They want the court to require the government to develop and carry out a climate recovery plan that protects their constitutional rights.
“This was a way to share my voice, to influence our governments without having the ability to vote,” Vipond said.
The case is reaching the trial stage after seven years of legal motions and appeals, including federal efforts to have it dismissed. Many plaintiffs were barely teenagers when they joined and have grown into adulthood waiting for their day in court.
Now, they have more to lose. Some have taken outdoor jobs, where staying inside to escape wildfire smoke can mean going unpaid. East Coast plaintiffs, who had never experienced wildfire smoke when the case began, now encounter it regularly, said Andrea Rodgers, deputy director of US strategy at Our Children’s Trust, which supports the case.
One plaintiff has since become a mother and will testify during the trial’s first week. “Now, it’s not just about protecting her rights and her future,” Rodgers said. “It’s about ensuring that her son can grow up and thrive in a healthy environment.”
A generation coming of age in a changing climate
Extreme heat and wildfire smoke have limited Vipond’s ability to bike to school and exercise outdoors. Now a third-year environmental sciences student at the University of British Columbia, she said her studies have helped her recognize changes around her — from increasingly dangerous snow conditions to pine beetles destroying an entire hillside.
“A lot of people think that climate change is like a long, slow evolution of changes,” Vipond said. “However, we’re really seeing it from year to year at this point.”
Vipond’s experience reflects a broader reality for young people coming of age as climate change dictates how they imagine and plan their lives. A study published in 2023 found that nearly two in five Canadians aged 16 to 25 said climate change made them hesitant to have children.
That concern also shows up in their politics. In July, a poll found that one in four respondents aged 18 to 34 ranked climate change and the environment among their top three issues, compared with 16 per cent of those older than 55.
The climate risks extend across their lives. At 1.5 C of warming, over half of children born in 2020 would face unprecedented lifetime heatwave exposure, compared with 16 per cent of those born in 1960, a global study projected in 2025.
Rodgers has spent 15 years representing young people in US climate cases, including Juliana v. United States. Its 21 young plaintiffs spent nearly a decade arguing that federal energy policies violated their constitutional rights. The case never reached trial after an appeals court ruled that judges lacked the power to order and oversee the climate recovery plan the plaintiffs sought. She hopes Canada will deliver what those young Americans were denied.
The Canadian trial will also test how international law informs that duty. In July 2025, the International Court of Justice affirmed that governments must protect the climate system to safeguard human rights. Rodgers said the Canadian court could use that advisory opinion to help justify an order requiring climate action, and set an example for courts in other countries.
“Canada really has a choice,” Rodgers said. “Do they want to follow in the path of the United States or forge their own path, one that protects the rights of their own children?”
Vipond joined the lawsuit out of fear for her own future. As she heads to court next week, she said she now feels responsible for speaking for other children too young to vote and generations yet to be born.
People have asked whether she and the other plaintiffs would receive money if they win. She tells them they are seeking accountability rather than a payout.
“Hope is really hard to hold on to sometimes,” Vipond said. “But we’re all fighting to keep it.”
Sonal Gupta / Local Journalism Initiative / Canada's National Observer.
Copyright 2026, Canada's National Observer. All rights reserved.
Sonal Gupta, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Canada's National Observer.
Keep reading
Show less
Calgary flood survivor to testify in Canada’s first youth-led federal climate trial
The 15 plaintiffs say Canada’s fossil fuel policies threaten their constitutional rights.
Sadie Vipond was 7 when her grandmother woke her in the middle of the night, and they fled their home. Outside, Calgary was in the midst of its largest flood in more than a century. They went to a friend’s place on higher ground as surging waters cut short the school year. At the city’s zoo, water rose high enough for a hippo to swim out of its enclosure — a memory that stays with her 13 years later.
Next week, she will testify in Canada’s first federal youth-led climate trial — a lawsuit she joined at 13. She’s one of 15 young Canadian plaintiffs in La Rose v. His Majesty the King, which will run for four weeks in Vancouver.
The plaintiffs from seven provinces, the Northwest Territories and Yukon were all between the ages of 10 and 19 when the case began. They are arguing that Canada is putting young people’s health, safety and futures at risk by supporting fossil fuel development while repeatedly missing its emissions targets. They want the court to require the government to develop and carry out a climate recovery plan that protects their constitutional rights.
“This was a way to share my voice, to influence our governments without having the ability to vote,” Vipond said.
The case is reaching the trial stage after seven years of legal motions and appeals, including federal efforts to have it dismissed. Many plaintiffs were barely teenagers when they joined and have grown into adulthood waiting for their day in court.
Now, they have more to lose. Some have taken outdoor jobs, where staying inside to escape wildfire smoke can mean going unpaid. East Coast plaintiffs, who had never experienced wildfire smoke when the case began, now encounter it regularly, said Andrea Rodgers, deputy director of US strategy at Our Children’s Trust, which supports the case.
One plaintiff has since become a mother and will testify during the trial’s first week. “Now, it’s not just about protecting her rights and her future,” Rodgers said. “It’s about ensuring that her son can grow up and thrive in a healthy environment.”
A generation coming of age in a changing climate
Extreme heat and wildfire smoke have limited Vipond’s ability to bike to school and exercise outdoors. Now a third-year environmental sciences student at the University of British Columbia, she said her studies have helped her recognize changes around her — from increasingly dangerous snow conditions to pine beetles destroying an entire hillside.
“A lot of people think that climate change is like a long, slow evolution of changes,” Vipond said. “However, we’re really seeing it from year to year at this point.”
Vipond’s experience reflects a broader reality for young people coming of age as climate change dictates how they imagine and plan their lives. A study published in 2023 found that nearly two in five Canadians aged 16 to 25 said climate change made them hesitant to have children.
That concern also shows up in their politics. In July, a poll found that one in four respondents aged 18 to 34 ranked climate change and the environment among their top three issues, compared with 16 per cent of those older than 55.
The climate risks extend across their lives. At 1.5 C of warming, over half of children born in 2020 would face unprecedented lifetime heatwave exposure, compared with 16 per cent of those born in 1960, a global study projected in 2025.
Rodgers has spent 15 years representing young people in US climate cases, including Juliana v. United States. Its 21 young plaintiffs spent nearly a decade arguing that federal energy policies violated their constitutional rights. The case never reached trial after an appeals court ruled that judges lacked the power to order and oversee the climate recovery plan the plaintiffs sought. She hopes Canada will deliver what those young Americans were denied.
The Canadian trial will also test how international law informs that duty. In July 2025, the International Court of Justice affirmed that governments must protect the climate system to safeguard human rights. Rodgers said the Canadian court could use that advisory opinion to help justify an order requiring climate action, and set an example for courts in other countries.
“Canada really has a choice,” Rodgers said. “Do they want to follow in the path of the United States or forge their own path, one that protects the rights of their own children?”
Vipond joined the lawsuit out of fear for her own future. As she heads to court next week, she said she now feels responsible for speaking for other children too young to vote and generations yet to be born.
People have asked whether she and the other plaintiffs would receive money if they win. She tells them they are seeking accountability rather than a payout.
“Hope is really hard to hold on to sometimes,” Vipond said. “But we’re all fighting to keep it.”
Sonal Gupta / Local Journalism Initiative / Canada's National Observer.
Copyright 2026, Canada's National Observer. All rights reserved.
Sonal Gupta, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Canada's National Observer.
Keep reading
Show less
Le départ volontaire d'Éloïse et Charles d'OD suscite des réactions surprenantes
L'émission d'OD Chez Nous du dimanche 1er novembre était très attendue par le public de la téléréalité. On prévoyait une élimination double et le départ d'Éloïse et Charles d'OD, tant attendu, a créé des réactions mitigées chez les fans.
Le « leader » et la « tricheuse » ont quitté le jeu de leur plein gré, quand Éloïse a réalisé au souper d'élimination avec Jay Du Temple que sa situation était plus grave qu'elle ne l'anticipait. Charles a suivi sa blonde; c'est donc trois candidats qui ont quitté l'aventure, Luis Maxime étant également éliminé.
Trois départs en une soirée, c'était beaucoup d'émotions pour les participants d'Occupation Double, ainsi que pour les auditeurs québécois.
La sélection de l'éditeur : Jay Du Temple fait réagir le public avec un commentaire sur la tricherie d'Éloïse à OD
En général, les gens sont heureux de voir le couple partir.
Mais aussi, plusieurs personnes souhaitent bon courage au couple et les remercient d'avoir donné au public un aussi bon show cette année.
[image 5fa0187a1db2cc338d0996ce]
[image 5fa0180d1db2cc338d0996c6]
Il y en a même qui pensent que l'émission sera moins croustillante après leur départ.
D'autres se sont prononcés sur les commentaires haineux que Charles et Éloïse reçoivent.
Deux anciennes candidates d'OD Afrique du Sud, Claudie et Camille, ont expliqué dans leurs storys Instagram du 1er novembre que ces commentaires méchants avaient de gros impacts et pouvaient affecter la santé mentale des candidats les recevant.
Elles demandent aux gens de cesser les messages haineux.
On peut aussi lire une grande quantité de commentaires félicitant Jay Du Temple et la production d'Occupation Double pour la façon dont ils ont géré la situation d'Éloïse.