Connect with us

National

2SLGBTQIA+ group bullies small Canadian town for rejecting ‘pride flag’

Published

14 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Jonathon Van Maren

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.

An Ontario Human Rights Tribunal fined the small Ontario town of Emo (population 1,200) $15,000 for refusing to fly the “pride flag” four years ago in June 2020. Borderland Pride, a small LGBT activist, sued the town and Emo Mayor Harold McQuaker — 10 grand will have to be forked over by the township, and five grand by McQuaker himself. In short, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal decided that elected officials have a legal obligation to express support for an ideological movement regardless of what their constituents think of that fact.

As I noted earlier, the worst part is not even the forced cash payouts — it is the fact that both the mayor and the chief administrative officer of the Emo municipality were ordered to complete a “Human Rights 101” course “offered” by the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal within 30 days. In other words, the mayor and CAO are being forced to take a re-education class so that the next time the LGBT activists show up and demand something (and there’s always a next time), they’ll know their job is to do what they are told.

As Ontario adjudicator Karen Dawson wrote in her decision: “I find that $15,000 is an appropriate level of compensation for Borderland Pride’s injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect.” Having seen a few “Pride” celebrations, I’d say that the primary damages to “dignity” and “self-respect” are done by the LGBT activists themselves — but it is extraordinary that the adjudicator didn’t even bother to pretend that she wasn’t penalizing the mayor and small town of Emo for hurting the feelings of LGBT activists.

The fact that small towns are being targeted by LGBT activists isn’t an accident by the way. It is part of a strategy. I know of small towns in the prairies where LGBT activists demanded a “Pride” parade and then drove in participants from larger cities to make sure there were enough people for a parade. They like to force their agenda on small towns in rural areas in particular because they want to confront those who do not share their beliefs — and they know they have the power to do so. Here is how this grift generally unfolds.

  1. LGBT activists insist that everybody fly the LGBT flag to overtly announce support for their ideology.
  2. Some institutions decline to fly this flag for reasons ranging from religious to community unity.
  3. LGBT activists then characterize this refusal to pro-actively show support for their agenda as a “backlash.” Canadian media obediently characterizes it as such. LGBT activists are now “victims” of their targets’ refusal to participate in the narrative they themselves have created.

Which is precisely how the CBC covered this story by the way. The headline should have been “Small town mayor ordered to take re-education camp after declining to fly LGBT flag on government property” or “Small town bullied by LGBT activists.” It was: “Ontario Human Rights Tribunal fines Emo Township for refusing Pride proclamation.” Notice the wording: The aggression, this headline implies, comes from those “refusing Pride proclamation” rather than those demanding a “Pride” proclamation. That wording is no accident.

LGBT activists are good at this game. Most municipalities choose to fold without protest when the rainbow mafia makes its demands — “nice little township you have there, it’d be a shame if we smeared it in the national press.” If you think I’m exaggerating, take a moment to skim-read Borderland Pride’s “Open Letter” of April 5, 2024 (all bolded sections theirs). I am including this letter in its entirely to highlight their tactics:

Dear Mayor and Council:

Re:  Final Settlement Proposal

In June, our complaint about your bigoted and discriminatory decision to refuse to recognize Pride Month in 2020 will proceed to a full hearing on its merits before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. The hearing is scheduled for 5 days. Our legal team will be ready.

Our proceeding at the Tribunal is based in case law that has been settled in Ontario for 30 years. We cautioned you about this at the outset of this saga in May 2020 – after you made your ill-advised decision and we asked you to reconsider. In other words: you face an uphill battle in this hearing, and are likely going to lose and be ordered to pay significant compensation to us and the other complainants for violating the Human Rights Code.

Even if you do win (which is a very remote possibility, and one we would likely seek judicial review of), you cannot recover your legal costs at the Tribunal. We imagine that your lawyers have already told you this. It is unclear why you are not heeding that advice, especially after losing your motion to have our claim against the individual council members dismissed.

Emo taxpayers must understand that you have now spent tens of thousands of dollars of their money on exorbitant legal fees to defend the homophobia and transphobia of Harold McQuaker, Harrold Boven, and Warren Toles. Despite those significant expenditures, it is unclear what has been paid for given the very limited material that has been served on us to-date. All of this is an inexcusable and foolish waste of taxpayer money at a time when your council is also hiking taxes and cutting local services.

Specifically, this is playing out while your council is soliciting public donations to keep the lights on at its public library, including accepting handouts from the local food bank. You’ve also hemorrhaged taxpayer money to pay for other discrimination around the council table — such as the six-figure pay equity sum owing after it was determined that you had been underpaying women on your staff for decades. And if Mr. McQuaker’s comments around the community are to be believed, that isn’t even the only workplace settlement you have had to cough up lately.

One would think that a small municipality with a small tax base that finds itself in a hole like this would stop digging. But here we are, on the eve of Emo being added to the list of homophobic towns in publicly reported Tribunal decisions, and you are still scratching your heads wondering why the municipality can’t entice new medical professionals to live and work there. It is breathtaking that you have not connected the dots between your defence of anti-2SLGBTQIA+ bigotry and its damage to the public image of your community. Your untenable legal position is simply worsening your municipality’s other challenges.

We sympathize with the hard-working members of the community who are watching this car accident in slow motion. That’s why, despite that you have rebuffed all prior efforts to settle on reasonable terms, we want to offer a final off-ramp from this impending national public relations tire fire for your council and community. We are even willing to pitch in to support the municipality in its time of need.

Here’s our proposal:

  1. You will agree to the settlement terms extended to you by our legal counsel at Cambridge LLP in March 2022, including the published apology, financial compensation (reduced from what we will seek from the Tribunal), diversity and inclusion training for council, and a commitment to adopt Pride proclamations in the future without stripping out their 2SLGBTQIA+-affirming language.
  2. 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.
  3. Borderland Pride will, before the end of 2024, host its next charitable drag event in Emo, the proceeds of which will support the Emo Public Library. The municipality will provide facilities for this event at no charge.

This is a good deal. You should take it. The alternative is to continue to waste taxpayer money fighting a losing battle in defence of bigotry and hate. That path will be embarrassing for your municipality and council, not to mention all of those with ties to your community and who expect better from its leadership.

Look at it this way: can you really demand that your voters pay more in taxes and offer up donations to support basic municipal services while also refusing an offer that could generate revenue and end your litigation bills? If this crusade of yours isn’t really about your prejudice and contempt for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community, we look forward to your acceptance of our terms, which can be transmitted to our legal counsel at Cambridge LLP.

This offer remains open until May 3, 2024.

Sincerely,

BORDERLAND PRIDE

Douglas W. Judson (he/him)

Co-Chair/Director

Notice here, that not giving in to LGBT demands is portrayed as proactive aggression. Judson refers to the council declining to endorse his ideology as a “crusade,” when it is obvious to any clear-minded observer that the crusade is his. Additionally, Judson has a second trick up his sleeve — bring drag queens into the local library to read to kids, and we’ll even give you some of the money we extorted to pay for it! Again, this is smart strategy — but it should be recognized for what it is. The LGBT movement wants every small town in the country to overhaul its operations in line with their ideology. They know how to get what they want, too.

Featured Image

Jonathon’s writings have been translated into more than six languages and in addition to LifeSiteNews, has been published in the National PostNational ReviewFirst Things, The Federalist, The American Conservative, The Stream, the Jewish Independent, the Hamilton SpectatorReformed Perspective Magazine, and LifeNews, among others. He is a contributing editor to The European Conservative.

His insights have been featured on CTV, Global News, and the CBC, as well as over twenty radio stations. He regularly speaks on a variety of social issues at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions in Canada, the United States, and Europe.

He is the author of The Culture WarSeeing is Believing: Why Our Culture Must Face the Victims of AbortionPatriots: The Untold Story of Ireland’s Pro-Life MovementPrairie Lion: The Life and Times of Ted Byfield, and co-author of A Guide to Discussing Assisted Suicide with Blaise Alleyne.

Jonathon serves as the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

What an Effective All-of-Government Program Review Might Look Like

Published on

The Audit

 

 David Clinton

More than once in this space I’ve advocated for a comprehensive all-of-government review to find and eliminate waste and corruption. So it’s about time I set finger to keyboard and started mapping out how such a review might unfold.

Why is it just this moment in history that finds me so passionate about reviews?

Canada’s government spends more money than it receives. I know that’s hardly breaking news, but Ottawa’s reckless and frenzied race to max out every credit card in the known universe has driven the federal debt to $1.24 trillion. That’s 42.1 percent of GDP.¹

Among the biggest expenses? Employment growth in the federal civil service. Parliament employed 276,367 people in 2015 but by 2023 that had exploded to 370,368. That 94,001 increase amounts to a jump of 34 percent. For context, Canada’s overall population during that time increased by just 12 percent.

Given that the average weekly earnings for individuals employed in federal government public administration was $1,779 in 2023, just covering salaries for those extra 94,001 workers cost us $8.7 billion through that year.

But workers cost us much more than just their salaries. There are pension and CPP contributions, EI premiums, health and dental benefits, and indirect costs like office accommodations and training. All that could easily add another $50,000 per employee. Multiply that by all the new hires, and the total cost of those extra 94,001 workers has ballooned to $13.4 billion. That would be nearly a quarter of the deficit from the 2024 $61.9 billion fall update.² (Chrystia Freeland may not have been the one to officially announce that number, but she and her boss were the ones who got us there.)

Of course using a lottery to select, say, two out of every five bureaucrats for firing won’t give us the result we’re after. We want to improve government, not cripple it. (Although, to be completely honest, I find the idea of random mass firings way more attractive than I should.)

A successful review will identify programs that aren’t delivering cost-effective value to the people of Canada. Some of those programs will need changes and others should disappear altogether. For some, appropriate next-steps will come to light only through full audits.

But success will also require creating an organizational culture that earns the respect and buy-in of department insiders, stakeholders, and the general public.

The rest of this post will present some foundational principles that can make all that attainable. I should note that this post was greatly enhanced from input using the invaluable experience of a number of The Audit subscribers.


Use Transparent and Well-Defined Goals

Consensus should always be the ideal, but clarity is non-negotiable. Program advocates must be prepared to convincingly explain what they’re trying to achieve, including setting clear metrics for success and failure. Saving taxpayer funds to avoid economic catastrophe is obviously a primary goal. But more effective governance and more professional service delivery also rank pretty high.

Questions to ask and answer before, during, and after review operations:

  • Does the program under review fall within the constitutional and operational scope of the federal government?
  • Is there overlap with other programs or other levels of government?
  • Are the original policy goals that inspired the program still relevant?
  • Is the program in its current form the most effective and economical way of achieving those goals?
  • Are the changes you’re proposing sustainable or will they sink back into the swamp and disappear as soon as no one’s looking?

Perhaps the most important goal of them all should be getting the job done in our lifetimes. We’ve all seen commissions, working groups, and subcommittees that drag on through multiple years and millions of dollars. You don’t want to make dumb mistakes, but that doesn’t mean you can’t adopt new tools or methodologies (like Agile) to speed things up.

Share

Transparency is a fundamental requirement for public and institutional buy-in. That means publishing program goals and processes along with regular updates. It also means being responsive to reasonable requests for information. Fortunately, someone (Al Gore?) invented the internet, so it should be possible to throw together an interactive browser-based dashboard that keeps the rest of us in the loop and allows for feedback.

Over the years, I’ve personally built nice(ish) websites in minutes, even sites that use pipelines for dynamically pulling data from third-party sources. This isn’t rocket science – especially when you’re not dealing with sensitive private data.

Be Non-Partisan

Going to war against the complexity, toxic politics, incompetence, institutional inertia, NIMBY-ism, and sheer scope of government waste is not for the faint of heart. But setting yourself up as the Righteous Redeemer of only 40 percent of Canadians will make things infinitely more difficult.

Key project positions have to be filled by the most capable individuals from anywhere on the political spectrum. And proposals for cuts should rise above political gamesmanship. It may be unreasonable to expect friendly cross-the-aisle collaboration, but the value of the eventual results should be so self-evident that they’re impossible to oppose in good faith.

Frankly, if you’d ask me, any government that managed to miraculously rise above partisan silliness and genuinely put the country’s needs first would probably guarantee itself reelection for a generation.

Be Efficient

Don’t reinvent the wheel. If internal or external departmental audits already exist, then incorporate their findings. Similarly, make use of any existing best-practice policies, standards, and guidance from bodies like the Office of the Comptroller General and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat.

It’ll be important to know who really controls the levers of power within government. So make sure you’ve got members of key insider organizations like the Privy Council Office and the Committee of Senior Officials on speed dial.

Also, incorporate forward-thinking elements into new programs by including sunset clauses, real-time monitoring, and ongoing mini reviews. To keep things moving fast, implement promising auditing and analysis ideas early as pilot programs. If they work, great. Expand. If they don’t work, bury ‘em. No harm done.

AI-driven insights can probably speed up early steps of the review process. For instance, before you even book your first meeting with the dreaded Assistant Deputy Minister, feed the department’s program spending and outcomes data to an AI model and tell it to look for evidence-based inefficiencies and redundancy. The results can set the agenda for the conversation you eventually do have.

You can similarly build simple software models that search for optimal spending balances across the whole government. Complex multivariate calculations that once required weeks of hard math can now be done in seconds.

A friend who administrates a private high school recently tasked ChatGPT with calculating the optimal teaching calendar for the coming school year. After a few seconds, the perfect schedule showed up on-screen. The woman who, in previous years, had spent countless hours on the task, literally laughed with excitement. “What are you so happy about?” My friend asked. “This thing just took your job.”

Consult the Civil Service (and the public)

I know exactly what you’re thinking: is there a better way to destroy any process than burying it under endless rounds of public consultations (followed by years of report writing)? Trust me, I feel your pain.

But it’s 2025. Things can be different now. In fact, contrary to the way it might look to many good people inside the public sector, things can be a lot better.

This consultation would be 100 percent digital and its main stage need last no longer than 60 days. Here’s how it’ll go:

  • Build a website, make a lot of noise to attract attention, and invite all Canadians – with a particular focus on current and former civil servants.
  • Require login that includes a physical address and (perhaps) a government-issued ID. This will prevent interest groups from gaming the system.
  • Use AI tools to identify boilerplate cut-and-paste submissions and flag them for reduced relevance.
  • Encourage (but don’t require) participants to identify themselves by their background and employment to permit useful data segmentation. This will make it easier to identify expert submissions.
  • Provide ongoing full public access to all submissions. Private information would be redacted, of course. And whistle blowers could have specialized, extra-secure access.
  • Use traditional software analytics to flag especially interesting submissions and analyze all submissions using AI models to produce deeper summaries and analyses.
  • Publish ongoing overviews of the results.
  • [Other stuff…]
  • Pick out a nice suit/dress for your Order of Canada investiture ceremony.

There’s absolutely nothing revolutionary about any of this (except the Order of Canada bit). The City of Toronto has been doing most of it for years.

Share The Audit

1 Which is besides the “net financial worth debt load of provinces and territories ($347 billion) and local governments ($62 billion).
2 Besides the costs of internal staffing, we shouldn’t ignore government work done through external contracts. Federal contracts designated as “services” came to more than $20 billion in 2023.

Subscribe to The Audit.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

espionage

In 2025 Critical Political Choices Will Define Canada’s Future: Clement

Published on

Justin Trudeau had a Liberal Party fundraiser in Vancouver with a number of Chinese Nationals that included individuals in United Front groups with official ties to Beijing, along with former Liberal multiculturalism minister and prominent party fundraiser Raymond Chan. Numerous donations into Trudeau’s personal Montreal election riding flowed after this Vancouver dinner.

Many Canadian politicians have forged unhealthy relationships with China; Ottawa must renew its most important partnership with the United States, former senior Mountie Garry Clement writes.

As Canada looks ahead to 2025, it stands at a crucial juncture, facing both unprecedented challenges and emerging opportunities. The nation’s evolving relationship with China, ongoing concerns about money laundering, the upcoming federal election, and its delicate position in U.S.-Canada relations present an intricate web of issues that will shape the country’s future. How Canada navigates these issues in the next year will determine not only its global standing but also its domestic harmony.

The China Challenge

Since the era of Pierre Elliott Trudeau, many Canadian politicians have forged what we now recognize as unhealthy relationships with China, enabling the country to interfere in our electoral process at all levels of government. This has provided an opportunity for Triads and Chinese Communist Party sympathizers to infiltrate Canadian society and Canadian politics.

In the past decade, Canada’s relationship with China has been strained, primarily due to geopolitical tensions and human rights concerns, but this has not resulted in any meaningful restrictions being placed on China by Canada. In 2025, this relationship will remain a balancing act—Canada must tread carefully between maintaining diplomatic and trade ties with a rising global power while aligning with Western allies who increasingly view China as a strategic adversary. Canadian politicians will also need to understand and accept that United Front Groups existing in Chinese diaspora communities across Canada have been shown to be allied with the Chinese government.

Canada’s foreign policy decisions will likely be influenced by developments in China’s global ambitions, particularly in areas such as the Belt and Road Initiative, the Taiwan issue, and its growing military presence in the South China Sea. The country’s relationship with China is at a crossroads, with growing calls for Canada to take a firmer stance on human rights issues, such as the treatment of Uyghurs in Xinjiang and Hong Kong’s autonomy. On the other hand, China remains a vital trading partner, especially in the context of Canada’s resource exports. Notwithstanding this, Canada will have a decision to make and hopefully it leans towards protecting Canada’s sovereignty.

Canada must also be prepared to reassess its foreign policy posture as the global balance of power continues to shift. The 2025 federal election could provide a pivotal moment in shaping public opinion on China and its place in Canada’s future.

 We break international stories and this requires elite expertise, time and legal costs.

Money Laundering: An Ongoing Domestic and International Concern

Another pressing issue for Canada in 2025 is the continuing challenge of money laundering, particularly within its real estate and financial sectors. Internationally, Canada’s role in global financial markets means that it cannot afford to be complacent about illicit financial flows. Recent reports have highlighted how foreign actors, including from China, have used Canadian institutions to launder money and hide illicit funds.

The Cullen Commission highlighted that Canada has failed on so many fronts to ensure an effective and efficient legislative, enforcement, and prosecutorial regime existed for almost two decades, thereby making Canada an attractive venue for transnational organized crime groups. This has resulted in Canada having to prove that as a country we can combat money laundering if we want to shore up our failing international credibility. Failure to address these concerns will damage Canada’s reputation as a stable and transparent financial hub, while also complicating its relationships with other Western countries, including the United States. The government must intensify efforts to strengthen regulatory frameworks and enhance cross-border cooperation in financial crime prevention.

The Federal Election: A Fork in the Road

As 2025 approaches, Canada’s political landscape is increasingly polarized. The upcoming federal election promises to be a defining moment for the nation, as Canadians grapple with issues such as climate change, economic recovery post-COVID, affordability, and national unity. Without a doubt, I would argue the silent majority has been awakened and recognizes the past eight years of adopting a strong left-leaning stance has destroyed our reputation, thereby making us an easy target for President-elect Trump’s jibes and eventual pressure policies. The federal government will need to address voter concerns over Canada’s long-term economic health, our failed federal enforcement activity, and our weakened military.

At the same time, the political environment is also becoming more contentious, with rising populism and discontent in some regions. The election could see significant shifts in power, with both the Liberal and Conservative parties positioning themselves to address key issues such as national security, healthcare, and environmental sustainability. The outcome of this election will set the tone for how Canada navigates both domestic and international relations in the years to come.

U.S.-Canada Relations: A Symbiotic but Complex Partnership

Canada’s relationship with the United States remains the cornerstone of its foreign policy. As the world’s largest trading partner, the U.S. is integral to Canada’s economy. However, relations between the two countries are often fraught with tensions, from trade disputes to environmental policies. In 2025, this partnership will be tested further, particularly as both nations contend with the challenges of climate change, security concerns, and evolving trade agreements.

The U.S. presidential election in 2024 has already caused profound impacts on Canada’s policy decisions and political culture. While Canada and the U.S. share many common interests, the complexities of these issues—ranging from pipeline disputes to defense policy—will require sophisticated diplomacy to ensure the continued strength of this vital partnership.

Canada will also need to navigate the increasing pressure from the U.S. to align with its foreign policy stance, particularly in relation to China, Russia, and international trade agreements. While maintaining sovereignty is critical, Canada must ensure its policies do not continue to erode relations with its largest neighbor and closest ally.

A Year of Critical Decisions

Canada in 2025 faces a year of unprecedented decisions, with geopolitical tensions, financial integrity, and political stability all in play. The global stage is shifting, and Canada’s role within this changing landscape will depend on how effectively it addresses both internal challenges and external pressures. As the nation prepares for an important election and responds to global geopolitical shifts, it will need strong, visionary leadership to steer it through uncertain waters. Whether it is rethinking its relationship with China, confronting the realities of money laundering, or strengthening ties with the U.S., Canada’s future will depend on its ability to navigate this complex and interconnected world.

Ultimately, 2025 presents Canada with an opportunity to reassert its values, chart a clear course in the face of global uncertainty, and ensure that it remains a respected and influential player on the world stage.

Garry Clement consults with corporations on anti-money laundering, contributed to the Canadian academic text Dirty Money, and wrote Undercover, In the Shady World of Organized Crime and the RCMP

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Continue Reading

Trending

X