LGBTQ+ pride: a mayor discriminated, a court rules

The Township of Emo, in northwestern Ontario, and its mayor, Harold McQuaker, must pay a total of $15,000 to the organization Borderland Pride for discriminating in a vote regarding the recognition of Pride Month in 2020 and a raising of the rainbow flag.

This is the decision rendered by Ontario Human Rights Tribunal adjudicator Karen Dawson, more than four years after the complaint was filed by Borderland Pride.

More precisely, the Township must pay $10,000 to the organization, and the mayor must pay $5,000.

The arbitrator affirms that the words of the mayor, who said thatthere is no flag for heterosexual peoplewere at first glance disrespectful of the request for Borderland Pride.

I believe this remark was humiliating and denigrating to the 2SLGBTQ+ community.

Ms. Dawson added that given that the mayor’s negative vote was discriminatory, she believes that the vote as a whole was also discriminatory, hence the $10,000 compensation that must be paid by the Township.

Mayor McQuaker and the current general manager of the Township must also complete the online training Human Rights 101 and share the proof with Borderland Pride no later than 30 days after the Court’s decision.

Partial victory for the applicants

In the complaint filed with the Human Rights Tribunal, Borderland PrideDouglas Judson, Kathryn Shoemaker et Northern Ontario Pride Network requested total compensation of $45,000.

The arbitrator, however, dismissed the complaint against city councilors Harrold Boven and Warren Toles because Borderland Pride was unable to demonstrate that their vote was motivated by discriminatory reasons.

Both councilors expressed non-discriminatory reasons for their negative voteswrote the arbitrator in his decision.

Both wanted to delay the vote until a policy on flags and proclamations was put in place.

Ms. Dawson also rejected requests from Douglas Judson, Kathryn Shoemaker and the organization Northern Ontario Pride Network.

She considers that there was no service relationship between these applicants and the Canton, because the request for proclamation and raising of the flag had only been made in the name of Borderland Pride.

The Tribunal is therefore not authorized to examine the application as filed by the three other applicantsshe specifies.