A Northern Ontario mayor who was fined for voting against flying a Pride flag at his town hall says he will not be bullied into paying the $5,000 penalty.
Nor will Mayor Harold McQuaker be taking LGBTQ training as he has been ordered to by the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC).
And, McQuaker, insisted he won’t cave to demands that he must host a Drag Time story hour in the local library, either.
Canada may be a free country in some places. But not in Emo Township — 380 kilometres west of Thunder Bay on the Canada-U.S. border. In this township, defying LGBTQ demands can not only land you a stiff fine, but also an order to attend a re-education camp, too.
This story which has had coverage in the United States and Europe is happening in Premier Doug Ford’s Ontario where they can’t seem to keep repeat gunman from being let out on bail but they can throw the book at a soon-to-be 77-year-old rural mayor of a tiny village.
“I utterly refuse to pay the $5,000 because that’s extortion,” McQuaker told The Toronto Sun Monday.
Recommended Videos
Whether Emo, located across from Minnesota, pays its $10,000 fine from the Ontario Human Right’s Commission will be decided Tuesday.
“I have a lot of respect for our four councillors,” said the mayor. “We have a special meeting of council, and they will decide that and what to do next. Either pay the fine or appeal it?”
Their choices are simple: Either buckle and bend to the pressure being brought on them by the OHRC and a local Pride group or tell them to go pound salt.
“The Township shall pay to Borderland Pride the sum of $10,000 as compensation for infringement of the Code,” said OHRC Commissioner Karen Dawson in her Nov. 20 ruling. “Mayor McQuaker shall pay to Borderland Pride the sum of $5,000 as compensation for infringement of the Code.”
She added “Mayor McQuaker and the Township’s current CAO shall complete the OHRC eLearning Module, titled Human Rights 101, and provide proof of completion of same to Borderland Pride within 30 days of the date of this decision.”
It sounds like a prison sentence — only tougher than most criminals ever receive. It also shows when the motion was brought to council in 2020 to fly a Pride flag for Pride month, it was not a request but a demand, punishable by fine should council not play ball.
This council voted 3-2 not to fly the Pride flag, resulting in a wild, expensive ride.
“Mayor McQuaker’s remark . . . that there was no flag for the ‘other side of the coin … for straight people’ was on its face dismissive of Borderland Pride’s flag request and demonstrated a lack of understanding of the importance to Borderland Pride and other members of the LGBTQ2 community of the Pride flag,” ruled Dawson. “I find this remark was demeaning and disparaging of the LGBTQ2 community of which Borderland Pride is a member and therefore constituted discrimination under the Code.”
The problem, said McQuaker, was he felt he was just saying something factual.
“I don’t hate anybody,” he said. “We just don’t have a flagpole at our town hall.”
And there are only 1,400 residents in what is not a progressive hotbed.
Borderland Pride, however, called not granting the motion a “bigoted and discriminatory decision.”
An open letter from the group’s co-chair and director, Douglas W. Judson, asked council to publish an “apology,” have “diversity and inclusion training for council, and a commitment to adopt Pride proclamations in the future without stripping out their 2SLGBTQIA+-affirming language.”
Recommended video
The letter also suggests “Borderland Pride will donate one-third of the financial compensation paid to us by the municipality directly to the Emo Public Library, on the condition that it host a drag story time event, free to all to attend, on a date of our choosing this year.”
Gay rights are important, no question. But forcing a drag story show in a village like this seems too strong a vendetta given the size of the venerable township. It should not be forced to be progressive like Church St. in Toronto.
There must be a better way to handle this than to beat this nice mayor and beautiful place up.
Time will tell what the council decides.
On Tuesday, council members will either acquiesce to these demands in the interest of having this not cost their taxpayers anymore money in legal fees or choose to fight against this mean-spirited, over-the-stop and unnecessary woke madness.
But McQuaker, a small construction business owner for 50 years who grew up there, has already decided for himself what he will do.
“The council will decide on the fine levied to it,” he said, adding he does have the deciding vote.
But on his levy, “I will not pay the $5,000 I have been fined and will not take the training.”
Saying “I did not do anything wrong,” McQuaker countered “if anybody needs training it’s the LGBTQ2+ to quit pushing their weight around and make demands that people can’t live with.”
He also wanted to get on the record that he finds the reaction over the top and mean spirited and doesn’t accept labelling he’s a bigot, either.
“I am a husband to my wife for 51 years, father of two, a grandfather of seven and a great grandfather of one,” he said. “I consider myself a very reasonable person and a good leader for our community and I would have a lot of support if there was an election.”
Saying while some people are OK being pushed around by “unfair” demands, McQuaker said he is not one of those people.
“Absolutely not,” he said. “I will not be extorted.”
This is a Q and A with Borderland Pride co-chair and director Douglas W. Judson on his side of this debate:
Toronto Sun: Are there other examples of discrimination toward Pride events or the LGBTQ2+ community in Emo, other than the flag issue?
Judson: “Despite what some outlets have reported, this case is not about the “flag issue.” The case before the tribunal centred on our request for a resolution proclaiming Pride Month in 2020, which the municipality had previously done for us and for other causes for several years. While some of the municipalities in our region have flag poles for special occasion flags, others do not. For that reason, we include in our requested resolution the option to simply “display” a flag somewhere — such as in a window or on a counter in the municipal office. In any event, it is factually incorrect that the municipality has no flag pole that could be used for this purpose. They simply do not have one at the municipal office itself. This issue is a distraction.
“The reality is that the actions of the council in 2020 fomented hateful and discriminatory attitudes in the community. The evidence of the three members of council who opposed the Pride resolution in 2020 was that they were acting per the wishes of their constituents. In fact, each of them attached the same exhibit material to their witness statement in support of this assertion, which consisted of vile, homophobic commentary, including from the Mayor’s family members. I am attaching that document.
“Dr. Saewyc’s expert evidence, which was accepted by the tribunal, speaks to the permission structure that political leaders create when they engage in discriminatory statements or actions. I gave evidence to the tribunal of vandalism and other hate crimes that had taken place in the community following council’s decision, including the destruction of flags and signage in support of Pride that year.”
Toronto Sun: “Does Borderland Pride feel it’s important or necessary that the mayor take training or pay a fine or is there some consideration that an elderly man’s world view may not align with today’s more progressive practices?
Judson: “Mayor McQuaker’s role requires that he represent everyone in the community, including 2SLGBTQIA+ people. The Municipal Act, 2001, actually requires that the mayor ‘participate in and foster activities that enhance the economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality and its residents.’ Part of showing this kind of community leadership is to set the tone for civil debate and to demonstrate a willingness to learn and adapt one’s perspective on issues that, for various reasons, they may have more limited understanding of. It seems obvious enough that the mayor does not have many ties to the queer community. We hope that the training that was ordered by the tribunal will assist him in his leadership role moving forward.”
Toronto Sun: “It says in your open letter, there was a request for Emo to hold a drag story time event in their library. Is there demand for such an event there or was that more as a educational opportunity or perhaps punitive?”
Judson: “The April 2024 letter was a settlement offer. This has been widely misconstrued in existing media reporting. It was apparent at the time this offer was made that the municipality was looking to raise funds for its public library. We offered to settle the case for a nominal sum and donate a portion of those funds back to the library. The drag story event was an attempt at moving past the misunderstandings in the issues and demonstrating that queer culture and inclusive programming, like drag story time events, are a positive contribution to the community.
“It must be understood that it was obvious from May 2020 when this started that the municipality was vulnerable in this litigation. The case law from Hamilton and London in 1995 and 1997 — almost 30 years ago — is abundantly clear and was decided on the exact same factual backdrop. We pointed this out to the Emo council, in May 2020, when we asked them to reconsider their initial refusal to make a Pride proclamation. The offer of a donation to their library and a drag story time event was to settle the matter before they incurred the further cost of a two-week tribunal hearing.
“It must be understood that cost recovery is not possible at the tribunal, like it might be in a civil proceeding. Even if the municipality had won, it was never going to recover those expenses. So far, they have refused to reveal how much they spent to defend their homophobic and discriminatory decision. We currently have an appeal before the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario relating to this refusal to provide that information.”
Recommended Videos
Whether Emo, located across from Minnesota, pays its $10,000 fine from the Ontario Human Right’s Commission will be decided Tuesday.
“I have a lot of respect for our four councillors,” said the mayor. “We have a special meeting of council, and they will decide that and what to do next. Either pay the fine or appeal it?”
Their choices are simple: Either buckle and bend to the pressure being brought on them by the OHRC and a local Pride group or tell them to go pound salt.
“The Township shall pay to Borderland Pride the sum of $10,000 as compensation for infringement of the Code,” said OHRC Commissioner Karen Dawson in her Nov. 20 ruling. “Mayor McQuaker shall pay to Borderland Pride the sum of $5,000 as compensation for infringement of the Code.”
She added “Mayor McQuaker and the Township’s current CAO shall complete the OHRC eLearning Module, titled Human Rights 101, and provide proof of completion of same to Borderland Pride within 30 days of the date of this decision.”
It sounds like a prison sentence — only tougher than most criminals ever receive. It also shows when the motion was brought to council in 2020 to fly a Pride flag for Pride month, it was not a request but a demand, punishable by fine should council not play ball.
This council voted 3-2 not to fly the Pride flag, resulting in a wild, expensive ride.
“Mayor McQuaker’s remark . . . that there was no flag for the ‘other side of the coin … for straight people’ was on its face dismissive of Borderland Pride’s flag request and demonstrated a lack of understanding of the importance to Borderland Pride and other members of the LGBTQ2 community of the Pride flag,” ruled Dawson. “I find this remark was demeaning and disparaging of the LGBTQ2 community of which Borderland Pride is a member and therefore constituted discrimination under the Code.”
The problem, said McQuaker, was he felt he was just saying something factual.
“I don’t hate anybody,” he said. “We just don’t have a flagpole at our town hall.”
And there are only 1,400 residents in what is not a progressive hotbed.
Borderland Pride, however, called not granting the motion a “bigoted and discriminatory decision.”
An open letter from the group’s co-chair and director, Douglas W. Judson, asked council to publish an “apology,” have “diversity and inclusion training for council, and a commitment to adopt Pride proclamations in the future without stripping out their 2SLGBTQIA+-affirming language.”
Recommended video
The letter also suggests “Borderland Pride will donate one-third of the financial compensation paid to us by the municipality directly to the Emo Public Library, on the condition that it host a drag story time event, free to all to attend, on a date of our choosing this year.”
Gay rights are important, no question. But forcing a drag story show in a village like this seems too strong a vendetta given the size of the venerable township. It should not be forced to be progressive like Church St. in Toronto.
There must be a better way to handle this than to beat this nice mayor and beautiful place up.
Time will tell what the council decides.
On Tuesday, council members will either acquiesce to these demands in the interest of having this not cost their taxpayers anymore money in legal fees or choose to fight against this mean-spirited, over-the-stop and unnecessary woke madness.
But McQuaker, a small construction business owner for 50 years who grew up there, has already decided for himself what he will do.
“The council will decide on the fine levied to it,” he said, adding he does have the deciding vote.
But on his levy, “I will not pay the $5,000 I have been fined and will not take the training.”
Saying “I did not do anything wrong,” McQuaker countered “if anybody needs training it’s the LGBTQ2+ to quit pushing their weight around and make demands that people can’t live with.”
He also wanted to get on the record that he finds the reaction over the top and mean spirited and doesn’t accept labelling he’s a bigot, either.
“I am a husband to my wife for 51 years, father of two, a grandfather of seven and a great grandfather of one,” he said. “I consider myself a very reasonable person and a good leader for our community and I would have a lot of support if there was an election.”
Saying while some people are OK being pushed around by “unfair” demands, McQuaker said he is not one of those people.
“Absolutely not,” he said. “I will not be extorted.”
This is a Q and A with Borderland Pride co-chair and director Douglas W. Judson on his side of this debate:
Toronto Sun: Are there other examples of discrimination toward Pride events or the LGBTQ2+ community in Emo, other than the flag issue?
Judson: “Despite what some outlets have reported, this case is not about the “flag issue.” The case before the tribunal centred on our request for a resolution proclaiming Pride Month in 2020, which the municipality had previously done for us and for other causes for several years. While some of the municipalities in our region have flag poles for special occasion flags, others do not. For that reason, we include in our requested resolution the option to simply “display” a flag somewhere — such as in a window or on a counter in the municipal office. In any event, it is factually incorrect that the municipality has no flag pole that could be used for this purpose. They simply do not have one at the municipal office itself. This issue is a distraction.
“The reality is that the actions of the council in 2020 fomented hateful and discriminatory attitudes in the community. The evidence of the three members of council who opposed the Pride resolution in 2020 was that they were acting per the wishes of their constituents. In fact, each of them attached the same exhibit material to their witness statement in support of this assertion, which consisted of vile, homophobic commentary, including from the Mayor’s family members. I am attaching that document.
“Dr. Saewyc’s expert evidence, which was accepted by the tribunal, speaks to the permission structure that political leaders create when they engage in discriminatory statements or actions. I gave evidence to the tribunal of vandalism and other hate crimes that had taken place in the community following council’s decision, including the destruction of flags and signage in support of Pride that year.”
Toronto Sun: “Does Borderland Pride feel it’s important or necessary that the mayor take training or pay a fine or is there some consideration that an elderly man’s world view may not align with today’s more progressive practices?
Judson: “Mayor McQuaker’s role requires that he represent everyone in the community, including 2SLGBTQIA+ people. The Municipal Act, 2001, actually requires that the mayor ‘participate in and foster activities that enhance the economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality and its residents.’ Part of showing this kind of community leadership is to set the tone for civil debate and to demonstrate a willingness to learn and adapt one’s perspective on issues that, for various reasons, they may have more limited understanding of. It seems obvious enough that the mayor does not have many ties to the queer community. We hope that the training that was ordered by the tribunal will assist him in his leadership role moving forward.”
Toronto Sun: “It says in your open letter, there was a request for Emo to hold a drag story time event in their library. Is there demand for such an event there or was that more as a educational opportunity or perhaps punitive?”
Judson: “The April 2024 letter was a settlement offer. This has been widely misconstrued in existing media reporting. It was apparent at the time this offer was made that the municipality was looking to raise funds for its public library. We offered to settle the case for a nominal sum and donate a portion of those funds back to the library. The drag story event was an attempt at moving past the misunderstandings in the issues and demonstrating that queer culture and inclusive programming, like drag story time events, are a positive contribution to the community.
“It must be understood that it was obvious from May 2020 when this started that the municipality was vulnerable in this litigation. The case law from Hamilton and London in 1995 and 1997 — almost 30 years ago — is abundantly clear and was decided on the exact same factual backdrop. We pointed this out to the Emo council, in May 2020, when we asked them to reconsider their initial refusal to make a Pride proclamation. The offer of a donation to their library and a drag story time event was to settle the matter before they incurred the further cost of a two-week tribunal hearing.
“It must be understood that cost recovery is not possible at the tribunal, like it might be in a civil proceeding. Even if the municipality had won, it was never going to recover those expenses. So far, they have refused to reveal how much they spent to defend their homophobic and discriminatory decision. We currently have an appeal before the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario relating to this refusal to provide that information.”
This council voted 3-2 not to fly the Pride flag, resulting in a wild, expensive ride.
“Mayor McQuaker’s remark . . . that there was no flag for the ‘other side of the coin … for straight people’ was on its face dismissive of Borderland Pride’s flag request and demonstrated a lack of understanding of the importance to Borderland Pride and other members of the LGBTQ2 community of the Pride flag,” ruled Dawson. “I find this remark was demeaning and disparaging of the LGBTQ2 community of which Borderland Pride is a member and therefore constituted discrimination under the Code.”
The problem, said McQuaker, was he felt he was just saying something factual.
“I don’t hate anybody,” he said. “We just don’t have a flagpole at our town hall.”
And there are only 1,400 residents in what is not a progressive hotbed.
Borderland Pride, however, called not granting the motion a “bigoted and discriminatory decision.”
An open letter from the group’s co-chair and director, Douglas W. Judson, asked council to publish an “apology,” have “diversity and inclusion training for council, and a commitment to adopt Pride proclamations in the future without stripping out their 2SLGBTQIA+-affirming language.”
Recommended video
The letter also suggests “Borderland Pride will donate one-third of the financial compensation paid to us by the municipality directly to the Emo Public Library, on the condition that it host a drag story time event, free to all to attend, on a date of our choosing this year.”
Gay rights are important, no question. But forcing a drag story show in a village like this seems too strong a vendetta given the size of the venerable township. It should not be forced to be progressive like Church St. in Toronto.
There must be a better way to handle this than to beat this nice mayor and beautiful place up.
Time will tell what the council decides.
On Tuesday, council members will either acquiesce to these demands in the interest of having this not cost their taxpayers anymore money in legal fees or choose to fight against this mean-spirited, over-the-stop and unnecessary woke madness.
But McQuaker, a small construction business owner for 50 years who grew up there, has already decided for himself what he will do.
“The council will decide on the fine levied to it,” he said, adding he does have the deciding vote.
But on his levy, “I will not pay the $5,000 I have been fined and will not take the training.”
Saying “I did not do anything wrong,” McQuaker countered “if anybody needs training it’s the LGBTQ2+ to quit pushing their weight around and make demands that people can’t live with.”
He also wanted to get on the record that he finds the reaction over the top and mean spirited and doesn’t accept labelling he’s a bigot, either.
“I am a husband to my wife for 51 years, father of two, a grandfather of seven and a great grandfather of one,” he said. “I consider myself a very reasonable person and a good leader for our community and I would have a lot of support if there was an election.”
Saying while some people are OK being pushed around by “unfair” demands, McQuaker said he is not one of those people.
“Absolutely not,” he said. “I will not be extorted.”
This is a Q and A with Borderland Pride co-chair and director Douglas W. Judson on his side of this debate:
Toronto Sun: Are there other examples of discrimination toward Pride events or the LGBTQ2+ community in Emo, other than the flag issue?
Judson: “Despite what some outlets have reported, this case is not about the “flag issue.” The case before the tribunal centred on our request for a resolution proclaiming Pride Month in 2020, which the municipality had previously done for us and for other causes for several years. While some of the municipalities in our region have flag poles for special occasion flags, others do not. For that reason, we include in our requested resolution the option to simply “display” a flag somewhere — such as in a window or on a counter in the municipal office. In any event, it is factually incorrect that the municipality has no flag pole that could be used for this purpose. They simply do not have one at the municipal office itself. This issue is a distraction.
“The reality is that the actions of the council in 2020 fomented hateful and discriminatory attitudes in the community. The evidence of the three members of council who opposed the Pride resolution in 2020 was that they were acting per the wishes of their constituents. In fact, each of them attached the same exhibit material to their witness statement in support of this assertion, which consisted of vile, homophobic commentary, including from the Mayor’s family members. I am attaching that document.
“Dr. Saewyc’s expert evidence, which was accepted by the tribunal, speaks to the permission structure that political leaders create when they engage in discriminatory statements or actions. I gave evidence to the tribunal of vandalism and other hate crimes that had taken place in the community following council’s decision, including the destruction of flags and signage in support of Pride that year.”
Toronto Sun: “Does Borderland Pride feel it’s important or necessary that the mayor take training or pay a fine or is there some consideration that an elderly man’s world view may not align with today’s more progressive practices?
Judson: “Mayor McQuaker’s role requires that he represent everyone in the community, including 2SLGBTQIA+ people. The Municipal Act, 2001, actually requires that the mayor ‘participate in and foster activities that enhance the economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality and its residents.’ Part of showing this kind of community leadership is to set the tone for civil debate and to demonstrate a willingness to learn and adapt one’s perspective on issues that, for various reasons, they may have more limited understanding of. It seems obvious enough that the mayor does not have many ties to the queer community. We hope that the training that was ordered by the tribunal will assist him in his leadership role moving forward.”
Toronto Sun: “It says in your open letter, there was a request for Emo to hold a drag story time event in their library. Is there demand for such an event there or was that more as a educational opportunity or perhaps punitive?”
Judson: “The April 2024 letter was a settlement offer. This has been widely misconstrued in existing media reporting. It was apparent at the time this offer was made that the municipality was looking to raise funds for its public library. We offered to settle the case for a nominal sum and donate a portion of those funds back to the library. The drag story event was an attempt at moving past the misunderstandings in the issues and demonstrating that queer culture and inclusive programming, like drag story time events, are a positive contribution to the community.
“It must be understood that it was obvious from May 2020 when this started that the municipality was vulnerable in this litigation. The case law from Hamilton and London in 1995 and 1997 — almost 30 years ago — is abundantly clear and was decided on the exact same factual backdrop. We pointed this out to the Emo council, in May 2020, when we asked them to reconsider their initial refusal to make a Pride proclamation. The offer of a donation to their library and a drag story time event was to settle the matter before they incurred the further cost of a two-week tribunal hearing.
“It must be understood that cost recovery is not possible at the tribunal, like it might be in a civil proceeding. Even if the municipality had won, it was never going to recover those expenses. So far, they have refused to reveal how much they spent to defend their homophobic and discriminatory decision. We currently have an appeal before the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario relating to this refusal to provide that information.”
Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion. Please keep comments relevant and respectful. Comments may take up to an hour to appear on the site. You will receive an email if there is a reply to your comment, an update to a thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information.