 |
| Mayor Dianne Haskett reaches
for her husband, Jacek Kotowicz, as they leave the courthouse. Morris Lamont / The
London Free Press |
VOICE CRACKING, LONDON'S MAYOR TESTIFIES SHE HAD A PROCLAMATION
POLICY BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T WANT TO THRUST HER SPIRITUAL CONVICTIONS ON THE CITY.
Free Press Reporter
London Mayor Dianne Haskett says she formulated what has become a controversial five-point proclamation policy in an effort to spare the city from her religious beliefs.
An anticipated proclamation request for a pro-life rally set the policy in motion, she said Thursday, but it was later used to deny a 1995 proclamation request from a local gay group.
VIOLATION
A teary Haskett told a human rights tribunal that granting the proclamation would not only violate her policy, but her religious beliefs as well.
"At the very worst, (it would be) turning my back on God and I can't do that. The day I turn my back on God is the day I lose my authority as the mayor of London," she said, her voice cracking.
For the first time in the two-year-old conflict, Haskett shed light on why she denied a Pride weekend proclamation request from the Homophile Association of London Ontario (HALO).
COMPLAINT
In 1995, Richard Hudler, then president of HALO, complained to the Ontario human rights commission that Haskett discriminated against gays with her refusal. Whether that was discrimination will be decided by the tribunal.
Before a packed courtroom gallery of curious spectators and three city councillors, Haskett, a self-described evangelical Christian, broke down twice into tears while she explained she couldn't separate religious convictions from civic duty, so she devised a policy to remain silent on the two issues she couldn't support: abortion and gay rights.
"I felt I shouldn't be compelled to force my personal spiritual convictions on the city of London," Haskett said, explaining why she needed a policy.
RESTRICTION
Her policy restricts her from issuing proclamations dealing with abortion, sexuality, illegal activities, controversial issues and topics that would incite hatred.
Haskett said the policy was in the works before HALO announced it would ask for a proclamation, contradicting earlier testimony by former city clerk Ken Sadler that the policy came after the group made known its intentions.
But Haskett admitted the policy -- which she had been planning for a year and a half -- wasn't committed to paper until after HALO announced it would seek a proclamation.
FOUR OPTIONS
There were four options to dealing with HALO's request, she said: Refer it to council, stop issuing proclamations, grant it as requested, or apply a "fair, reasonable and equitable" policy.
She said she couldn't morally issue the proclamation and it would have reflected badly on her leadership abilities to refer it to council or quit issuing proclamations.
Haskett has said in the past she refused the HALO proclamation because it violated the sexuality component of her policy. In her testimony Thursday, she added that it would be seen as her endorsement of gay lifestyle, which she says she can't support.
NO DOUBT
"This whole pride week or pride weekend is all one integral part of the movement and I can't support that. . . Clearly the public would view it, and views it, based on the calls we've received, as support for a lifestyle. I don't think there's any doubt about that . . ."
Under cross-examination, the complainant's lawyer, Leslie Reaume, tested Haskett on how she would apply her policy to different scenarios.
Would she grant a proclamation for a group that wouldn't hire gays? Yes. Blacks? No. Women? No. Disabled? No.
Proclamations for a homosexual educators' group, a group for elderly gays, disabled gays or gay victims of violence?
No, Haskett replied, since those groups all focus on the sexual element of their clients' lives.
FOUR HOURS
After four hours of testimony split almost equally between-examination-in-chief and cross examination, Haskett stepped off the stand.
After hearing her full testimony, Hudler said he was glad to finally hear Haskett's rationalization, but "it was still very hurtful to hear it."
He said he's no less convinced Haskett discriminated against gays, adding he was surprised she admitted her religious beliefs influenced her decision.
Pat Shanaghan, co-chairperson of the '97 Pride committee, said he was particularly hurt by how Haskett insinuated gay sex was a main activity at the Pride weekend.
She also brushed off the negative effects her refusal had on the gay community, he said.
LETTERS
People only had to look briefly at local letters to the editor to see how it fuelled the community's intolerance, "and she still didn't feel compelled to say discrimination (against gays) is wrong," he said.
The tribunal wraps up today via conference call with George Rust D'Eye, a municipal law expert, testifying.
Adjudicator Mary Anne McKellar will reserve her decision.