Last week’s announcement fulfilled a Liberal promise to lift the ban on gay blood donations, but it was also designed to drive a further wedge inside the Conservative Party, especially as it related to leadership front-runner Pierre Poilievre.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 2, 2022.

OTTAWA—Full equality moved one step closer in Canada last week when the federal government finally lifted the ban on gay blood donations.

While the announcement was made by the prime minister, several gay colleagues were there to back him up.

The Liberals had promised to remove the ban when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was first elected back in 2015. Because the ban had not been lifted, a discrimination case was slowly making its way through the courts that might have provoked a judicial overturning of the prohibition.

That case claimed that the federal government had no right to impose a ban via Health Canada because the Canadian Blood Services Agency was an independent body. As such, it enjoyed an arm’s length position which meant it should not be subject to federal government interference.

In the case of the Trudeau announcement, the prime minister defended the lengthy delay in delivering on the promise by saying the government needed to fund scientific research to affirm the political promise.

But there is no doubt the announcement was political in nature. The ban removal will cover all Canadians except for those who live in Quebec. Quebec gay donors will still be prohibited but the prime minister said he was confident that Héma-Québec would likely decide to move in the same direction.

Cabinet ministers Seamus O’Regan and Randy Boissonnault and Liberal MP Rob Oliphant were among those commenting on the decision.

Boissonnault is the first openly gay Member of Parliament from Alberta, and he eked out a narrow victory against Conservative incumbent James Cumming in a downtown Edmonton riding.

Unlike some Conservative colleagues, Cumming voted against a Tory party’s motion to ban abortion and voted in favour of criminalizing conversion therapy so both men shared similar views.

In the last election, even in British Columbia, social Conservatives were defeated in almost every urban centre. The defeat of those members stalled the momentum of the Conservative party and left the door open for the Liberals to win another, albeit minority, election.

Last week’s announcement fulfilled a Liberal promise but it was also designed to drive a further wedge inside the Conservative Party, especially as it related to leadership front-runner Pierre Poilievre.

Poilievre is no friend of the gay community. One of his first actions as a Member of Parliament was to oppose public health-care funding for people who are undergoing gender reassignment. Poilievre wanted to defund surgery for transgender individuals seeking to change their sex. He went so far as to falsely claim that the reassignment medical procedure does not require surgery.

Back in 2008, Poilievre was the youngest Member of Parliament. In more recent times, he has been focused more on pocketbook issues as an appeal to the young. The bitcoin and blockchain references that he sprinkles in his speeches are designed to appeal to young people even as they miff economists and traditional bankers.

But those same young people are also in favour of non-binary and transgender decision-making.

Poilievre’s colleague in the race, Leslyn Lewis, is recruiting more social conservatives who will be pushing their anti-abortion and pro-conversion perspectives in public policy.

For Poilievre to be embraced by the mainstream, he needs to go mainstream. That involves repudiating positions he has taken in the past that discriminate against the LGBTQ community.

Like any other Canadian, a gay or lesbian voter does not necessarily make their electoral decision strictly on a single issue, even if it affects their own sexuality.

They, too, are interested in tax policy, social issues, and many other elements of governance that are assessed during an election by every voter.

But in a multi-party system, a voter shift of three or four per cent can actually change the face of government.

So, when a health announcement on blood is made, it is just as much a move for the next election as it was for the past one.

Fulfilling the promise on ending gay blood bans was important for the Liberals. With the New Democrats involved in a governance agreement, the Grits believe they have a chance to court a larger swath on the left in the next election.

But in several years of government, enemies are made, and the sunny ways of 2015 have given way to clouds on the Trudeau horizon.

In the next race, it will be crucial to solidify minority votes because Tories will bleed votes from disgruntled former Liberals on the right who fear the fiscal bottom line.

Every LGBTQ vote will count.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

In Canada’s case, the unanimous view of Parliament sends a message to the world that trying to educate someone into a change in their sexual preference just does not work.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 6, 2021.

Canada’s conversion therapy ban was a stellar political moment for Parliament.

As members from all sides of the House of Commons came together with hugs and handshakes, it showed how politics can actually provoke real change.

The unanimous consent made the decision even sweeter. It also sends an important message to the world that Canada will not brook homophobia or gay bashing.

In the same week, the Court of Appeal in Botswana, in a unanimous decision, outlawed the criminalization of consensual same-sex activities.

In a stern rebuke to political leaders who still want to criminalize gay sex, the court of appeal judge president said, “Those (criminal code) sections have outlived their usefulness and serve only to incentivize law enforcement agents to become keyhole peepers and intruders into the private space of citizens.”

Prior to the Court of Appeal ruling, same-sex intercourse could result in a seven-year prison term in Botswana.

Government officials have not yet decided on appeal but in its presentation to court, the state claimed that the penal code outlawing gay sex was still the prevailing choice in Botswana.

In Canada’s case, the unanimous view of Parliament sends a message to the world that trying to educate someone into a change in their sexual preference just does not work.

The unanimity of the vote was great news for Conservative leader Erin O’Toole who saw his recent electoral hopes dashed when his party was deemed too right wing to govern.

Unanimity took most observers by surprise since, in the last Parliament, 62 Conservatives had voted against a similar ban, claiming the language was too vague.

This time, Justice Minister David Lametti said he clarified the language, and the motion for unanimous consent was introduced by Conservative Rob Moore.

The Conservative leader’s spokesperson backed the support by saying O’Toole “has long been an ally to the LGBTQ community and will continue to support efforts to ban conversion therapy.”

Unanimous voting from the New Democrats and the Bloc Quebecois was expected but no one thought the Conservatives would band together en masse in favour of the legislation.

Because of unanimity, individual votes were not required. That may prove problematic for the Tories.

Leadership candidate Lesyln Lewis came third in the leadership that chose O’Toole. She ran in support of conversion therapy.

As a new Member of Parliament, Lewis was shunned by O’Toole in shadow cabinet because of her anti-vaccine views.

The leader must believe he can withstand internal forces against conversion therapy.

The vote marginalized social conservatives in the caucus, as O’Toole stood down any internal opposition.

And that puts pressure right back on the Liberal government of prime minister Justin Trudeau.

The Liberals have been very successful in differentiating themselves from the Conservatives in the last several elections.

The Tory leadership went to O’Toole largely on the strength of social conservatism.

Otherwise, Peter MacKay would have been the winner. But MacKay’s reference to the “stinking albatross” of social conservatism weighing the party down effectively cost him the leadership.

His observation was right, but his timing was all wrong as O’Toole was able to enlist the second ballot support of all those social conservatives, he is now trying to dissociate himself from.

Last week’s unanimous vote means that no individuals will have their votes recorded when it comes to the conversion ban status.

But that may not prevent internal Conservative infighting between the leader and the social conservatives in his caucus.

By laying out a strong case to support the conversion therapy ban and supporting it with real numbers in the House of Commons, O’Toole is definitely moving away from the stigma which has hurt his party in the last couple of elections.

But politics is a long game, and it may not be so simple for the Conservative leader when private members’ bills on issues like abortion come up for debate in the House.

With the anti-abortion movement gaining steam in the United States, their Canadian counterparts will be emboldened. And the only party that carries their brief, albeit briefly, is the Conservative Party.

Members who have been absent from last week’s conversion therapy voice vote will not stand down when it comes to restrictions on abortion.

O’Toole has managed to move his party closer to the centre with last week’s unanimous vote. But whether he can keep the rest of his caucus there is the larger question.

If he can, that spells trouble for Liberals. The one thing standing between O’Toole and government is the moderate middle.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By SHEILA COPPS

First published on Monday, April 9, 2018 in The Hill Times.

OTTAWA—Toronto Pride should be ashamed.

Last week’s misguided decision to deny the Toronto Police Service official participation in the country’s largest gay pride celebration is a blot on Canada’s reputation as an open and inclusive country.

It simply repeats the same kind of prejudice that forced thousands of gays and lesbians into the closet years ago.

It also sends the message that the current crop of Toronto Pride organizers have little understanding of the struggles that the community went through when it was criminally against the law simply to love a person of the same sex.

When members of Toronto Pride and a half dozen other related associations signed an open letter to explain their decision, they claimed it was in part motivated by the loss of seven community members to murder at the hands of accused serial killer Bruce McArthur.

The letter stated: “It is an incredibly complex and difficult time. The arrest of Bruce McArthur, the alleged serial killer, has added a new poignancy and a new pain to the fears that sit at the heart of anyone who lives a life of difference.”

“At the end of June, we will come together as we have for decades and we will be seen. We will rally and rise, but it will be with heavy hearts as we have not yet begun to grapple with our anger, shock, and grief.”

Of course members of the LGBTQ community and others are horrified and saddened by the discovery of multiple undetected killings over several decades. It reverberates through the whole city and the country to see such horrific crimes undetected for decades. There are many unanswered questions as to how and why a killer could move freely in the community, undetected for years.

But it was also the diligent work of the Toronto police force that ultimately uncovered the evidence to bring the cases to trial and offer closure to families whose loved ones had been missing for years.

Indeed, continuing prejudice directed toward the LGBTQ community today is what forces some members to live a double life. Keeping people out of the parade merely serves to remarginalize them.

Isolating one group of people from celebrating the joy of Pride is simply reverting to the same kind of behaviour that kept many people in the closet for years.

The decision is a slap in the face to thousands of law enforcement officials who are courageous enough to march openly in a police environment which is still rife with machismo and homophobia.

There are places around the world where police would never march and where people would be beaten by them for marching. That used to be Canada too.

Some of us are old enough to remember the bath house raids when police armed with crowbars and sledgehammers arrested 250 men in four bathhouses across Toronto.

The attack galvanized the community and is considered by historians to be a catalyst in the gay rights movement in Canada. That was in 1981.

Pride Toronto executive director Olivia Nuamah acknowledged the history when she defended the ban by saying “Pride was born out of protest. It actually was born out of resistance to police.”

To link the bath house raids to today’s ban trivializes the tremendous progress that has been made in the past 39 years. Nuamah claimed she had hoped the force would have been included after a Pride-imposed ban last year but the horrific revelations of multiple murders of gay men prevented that from happening.

“That would have continued to be the case were it not for the kind of series of events that took place in the course of about eight months.”

The open letter claimed “This has severely shaken our community’s already often tenuous trust in the city’s law enforcement. We feel more vulnerable than ever.”

The group added that police and the community need to work together to regain trust and allow members of the LGBTQ community to feel safe.

“That will not be accomplished in one day. The relationship cannot be mended through a parade,” the letter said.

“Marching won’t contribute towards solving these issues—they are beyond the reach of symbolic gestures.”

But they make a mistake in minimizing the power of symbolic gestures.

Rosa Parks and Viola Desmond’s “symbolic gestures” spawned the civil rights movement in the United States and Canada.

Unfortunately, today’s Toronto Pride ban is damaging an inclusive celebration of diversity.

Pride is repeating the very history that it claims to abhor.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.