A mayor in Ontario, Canada, faced significant consequences after refusing to comply with a fine imposed by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. The fine stemmed from a ruling that he and the township of Emo had discriminated against an LGBTQ group. 

The incident began in 2020 when Borderland Pride, an LGBTQ organization, petitioned the township of Emo to declare June as Pride Month and to fly an LGBTQ2 flag. Emo did not have an official flagpole, and the group’s request also included a draft proclamation affirming the importance of Pride as a sign of community support and inclusion for LGBTQ2 individuals.

The township council, led by Mayor Harold McQuaker, voted against the request in a 3-2 decision. The mayor, who was 77 at the time, made a controversial comment during the council meeting, remarking that there was no flag for “the other side of the coin… for straight people.” This comment was considered discriminatory by the tribunal.

As a result, the Human Rights Tribunal found McQuaker and the township in violation of the Ontario Human Rights Code. The tribunal ruled that the denial of the request to proclaim June as Pride Month and the mayor’s remarks violated the rights of LGBTQ2 individuals. In addition to the $10,000 fine imposed on the township, McQuaker was ordered to take a “Human Rights 101” course and pay a $5,000 fine to Borderland Pride.

McQuaker, however, publicly refused to pay the fine, calling the tribunal’s decision “extortion.” His refusal led Borderland Pride to seek legal action. The group took steps to garnish McQuaker’s personal bank account in order to collect the fine. In a statement, Borderland Pride emphasized that McQuaker had made it clear through his public comments that he did not respect the tribunal’s ruling. As a result, the group moved quickly to enforce the payment through garnishment.

Borderland Pride also mocked McQuaker on social media for his refusal to comply with the tribunal’s orders. On their Facebook page, the group posted a sarcastic message, suggesting that garnishing the mayor’s bank account was more satisfying than other experiences. 

The case highlights the ongoing tensions in some parts of Canada regarding the recognition and support of LGBTQ rights, particularly in smaller communities. Despite the mayor’s refusal to comply, the tribunal’s decision sends a strong message about the importance of respecting human rights and supporting the LGBTQ2 community.

The controversy also sheds light on the broader debate over the display of LGBTQ symbols, such as the rainbow flag, in public spaces. While many communities across Canada embrace Pride Month and the LGBTQ community, some, like Emo, have resisted such measures. This case is a reminder of the challenges faced by LGBTQ advocacy groups and the legal avenues available to them to ensure their rights are upheld. 

McQuaker did not respond to requests for comment, and the situation remains a source of contention in the township. The outcome of the case could have wider implications for how human rights issues are handled at the municipal level in Canada.