Recapping the Toronto Centre by-election debate
EDITORIAL / During elections, politicians have an aura of vulnerability, even neediness
Marcus McCann / Toronto / Thursday, January 28, 2010
Share |

I’m sitting at a particleboard conference table. Three hundred or more queers and politicos have my back.

And by “have my back,” I mean they literally are sitting behind me in the gymlike meeting space of the 519 Community Centre. To my left is a very pregnant Jennifer Fodden, director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Trans Youth Line. To my right is Jane Farrow, an urban activist and righteous dyke, rocking Harry Potter glasses and a Blackberry.

In front of us, five candidates in the Feb 4 Toronto Centre provincial by-election are scanning the room, practically squirting adrenaline from their eyeballs.

It feels good. In between elections, politicians often seem distant, whipped by their caucus, overwhelmed by the issues and too busy to make our concerns their priority.

But not during elections. It’s like watching a tough lover go soft — during elections, politicians have an aura of vulnerability, even neediness. The whole scene is tender, sweet and a little bipolar. And I’m watching it unfold in real time, an activist panelist ready to put their feet to the fire.

My questions — on the theme of neighbourhoods — are a flop. I’ve thoughtfully hinted at some ways the province can help the Church-Wellesley neighbourhood maintain its queerness, things like infrastructure, tourism and liquor licensing. But mostly they want to talk about business taxes. A nice try, but still a dodge. A couple of times I have to stop them to bring them back to the question of preserving the character of Church-Wellesley.

The best I could get from the candidates was that probably, on balance, Toronto needs a supervised injection service like Insite. No one, not even Cathy Crowe (a street nurse running under the NDP ticket) would say if it should be built in Toronto Centre. There was no indication that any of them would spend much time on the issue if elected.

Liberal candidate Glen Murray refused to denounce legislation introduced by one of his colleagues that makes landlords responsible for tenants’ bad behaviour. Murray proposed going one better, reminding us that he championed legislation in Manitoba that made it easier to repossess the property of problem landlords.

It’s sweet to see public figures wanting to talk about their feelings, but this is the time to elicit promises.

Well, we got one or two commitments at any rate.

In hour two, Le-Ann Dolan from the AIDS Committee of Toronto corners them. She gives a chilling account of the province’s aggressive pursuit of criminal charges for HIV non-disclosure. In Ontario, poz folks increasingly can be charged with assault and attempted murder when they hook up with a negative partner.

The candidates chime in one at a time — including Murray for the Libs, Crowe for the NDP and lawyer Pamela Taylor for the Conservatives. They will fight this trend, they each say.

Dolan presses. Do they support the UK model? There, the equivalent of the attorney general handed down conditions that must be met before someone goes to court (including malicious intent and actual transmission). They’re called prosecutorial guidelines.

For the first 20 years of the movement, AIDS activists argued that HIV transmission does not belong in the courts. So far, that battle has not gone well. Dolan’s question, therefore, capitulated before it was even asked, because she didn’t demand an end to the criminalization of HIV altogether.

She told me she thinks that ship has sailed. I think her position (widely held in the AIDS establishment) is defeatist, but here’s where we agree: prosecutorial guidelines are the best we can hope for from the province. Clarification of the law can come only from the feds or the Supreme Court.

The candidates all agree to pressure the province’s attorney general to hand down prosecutorial guidelines. Murray hints that we could do more. It was rather dim as far as highlights go, but it was the most important promise of the night.

Xtra livestreamed the debate online. Watch the replay:


Watch live streaming video from xtraonline at livestream.com


Share |


Reader Comments

These reader comments are posted directly. No editorial review is made prior to posting. Readers may contact the moderator with any complaints or concerns, and these will be reviewed within two business days.

 
More messy fun democracy at All Cand Mtg?
A reasonable summary of the by election debate as seen from your point of view as one of the organizers (xtra is to be commended for) & as a questioner, which you did a good job at by being concise & impartial as opposed to some of the your fellow "expert" panelists). The politicos avoided most questions & were often evasive. But many questions by what were constantly called rather inexplicably "experts" (in what, being gay? surely you they meant "specialists" in some areas e.g journalism, AIDS, gay bashing) were rather long-winded and loaded. (eg, the AIDS criminalization questions). The usually format at the 519 for over 20 years is more open-a free for all of Q & A between the people & the candidates with opening & closing statements by candidates. This was often messy & rowdy but at least gave people in the audiience --the general public--a chance to directly cross-examine candidates. (This time that was limited to 20 minutes tacked on at the end.) It is great that all major candidates agreed that "prosecutorial discretion" be used on HIV criminal cases but it was at best a vague promise by potential back bench MPPS to ask the Minister in charge (the AG) to look into it. A rather feeble result as you suggest for over three hours of questioning (mostly by "experts.) Since Xtra and the 519 are sponsoring 2 more of these election meetings over the year, perhaps a variation of the old format is better. A panel of several community questioners (but no more than 3) and the rest--most of the meeting-- open to the candidates and the general public for a sometimes rowdy, sometime informative, freewheeling q and a session. This would have the virtue of at least being more entertaining (which you have to admit this by-election over-all was not--mostly tedious though earnest). Jane Farrow as a fair, good humoured and excellent moderat
james Dubro, toronto ontario
01/28/10 8:06 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
pt 2 of modest Election debate suggestion
moderator, but perhaps she might have used her powers to limit the long-winded questions and answers--something a future moderator might seriously consider so that the public--us everyday gays (not "expert" gays) can more of a chance to ask questions. And the whole event would then be more informative, engaging and maybe even fun and enjoyable. BTW many thanks to the 519 and xtra for organizing and promoting the All Candidates N=Meeting at such short notice (the snap by-election campaign called by the Liberals to get their celebrity candidate in fast ( a very engaging and nice ex Mayor of Winnipeg) is all of 4 weeks--election in a week already).
james Dubro, toronto Ontario
01/28/10 8:22 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Resisting criminalization of people with HIV
It’s too bad McCann feels the need to slag the “AIDS establishment” for its ostensibly “defeatist” position on criminal prosecutions for HIV transmission. The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that people with HIV may be criminally prosecuted if they don’t disclose their status before doing things that pose a “significant risk” of transmission. It’s troubling that that Court rejected the public health and human rights concerns we raised as interveners, as is the uncertainty about what this “significant risk” standard actually means. But it is now the stated law in Canada; we have to confront that reality. To that end, we are currently intervening in the first 4 appellate court proceedings since the Supreme Court’s decision, arguing that criminal charges are not justified where people use condoms or have an undetectable viral load. But preventing cases from coming to the courts in the first place is also important, especially as prosecutors seek convictions against people even for sex with condoms or oral sex. This is why we have called for guidelines for prosecutors that could nip at least some prosecutions in the bud. What does McCann propose to contain the criminal law? A campaign to get Parliament to override the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the “assault” provisions in the Criminal Code and preclude prosecutions against people with HIV? Can you imagine the tenor of that debate in the House of Commons? Does he think that the end result will be less criminalization of people living with HIV? Like it or not, the law is evolving through the decisions of prosecutors and courts; that needs to factor into our strategies. Useful ideas for how to resist the inappropriate use of criminal charges to deal with HIV exposure are welcome. Cheap shots from the sidelines are of little benefit to people with HIV or to the effort to avoid criminal injustice. Richard Elliott Executive Director Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network For more info, see www.a
Richard Elliott, Toronto Ontario
01/28/10 5:46 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Criminalization of HIV claim needs elucidation
I really wish Xtra would present us with a good discussion covering the range of opinions on the 'criminalization of HIV' argument. I feel as if we have been hectored, not informed, by those close to the issue. I'll admit to not being very savvy on it - which is kind of my point. The stuff in the mainstream press is alarmist and unhelpful. The stuff in the gay press tends to be, I'm sorry to say, shrill and doctrinaire. Much of what we encounter seems to have little more sophistication that a bumper-sticker level of sloganeering which assumes the state is out to lock up everyone with HIV who didn't disclose their entire sexual history before unzipping their fly. Some of the people convicted were shown to have acted with reckless disregard, but I'm willing to believe we didn't get the whole story in the MSM. The question that many people not in 'the community' (and some within for that matter) have is why should people with HIV/AIDS get a pass on actions that put others at risk? I don't want to memorize slogans as my talking points. I'd like to actually understand the issue better. A couple of years ago a lesbian couple turned me down as a sperm donor because I couldn't swear on my mother's life that I'd used condoms in every act of oral sex in the last quarter century. I told them they were in dreamland if that was their baseline - that I'd never met someone who used condoms for oral sex. So not everyone who is unclear about what constitutes acceptable risk comes from the homophobic right. If some of your own readership is shaking its collective heads in confusion, then maybe you've got some work to do to get us on board, or, at the very least, informed and articulate about these issues. If you've done this and I missed it, I apologize in advance. But perhaps you could run an updated report for those of us who don't see a homophobic conspiracy here.
Alex MacLean, Toronto ON
01/31/10 6:01 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Vote as your consciences dictate in byelect today
Today is election day for the Toronto centre by-election and I hope everyone eligible will go out and vote for the man or woman and Party of their choice and as their consciences dictate. And while it may be a factor that someone running (Glen M) is openly gay (in fact a gay hero and major LGBT human right figure) that for most of us I hope will not be the only factor in determining our vote in this election. After all, it is not the "gay seat" or the "Liberal seat" but the people's seat, and in a democracy, which we are, more or less, one votes for the best candidate overall considering a number of issues and factors. This being a by-election means of course that the government is not at stake and it is easier to vote one's conscience knowing that the government will not change or fall because of that--even if one is protesting some elements of provincial Liberal government policy. In any case everyone in the riding should vote if only to help sustain our fragile democracy. Every vote does count.
james Dubro, toronto ontario
02/04/10 8:23 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
When will people LEARN ?
Hey ! I have an idea. Why don't the voters of Toronto Centre get out and vote for the Liberal that's running ? That way, the Province can go further into debt. I mean, why would we need any money for things like healthcare, crime fighting, health & safety work standards enforcement, infrastructure repairs, transit, etc, etc. Lets blow as much money as we can on everything that Dalton and the other boys & girls at Queens Park thinks more important than my list previous. Cool. When will the people of this Province see the light ?
Jeff Taylor, Toronto Ontario
02/04/10 4:10 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Post Your Comment!
Your Name:
(required)


City/Town:
(required)


Province:
(required)




Email Address:
(required)



For verification purposes only. Not for publication, nor released to any mailing list. (Privacy statement)

Title of your comment:
(required)


Your Comment: (max. 2000 characters)
(required)
characters remaining

 Refresh
Enter the code shown on the left (case-sensitive):
(required)




   
Click here to read guidelines

Guidelines for reader comments

All submissions are reviewed by our editorial team. Comments are subject to editing for clarification, style and content. We reserve the right to refuse submissions.

Your comment must directly relate to the subject of the article.

Avoid confusing statements; express your thoughts clearly and succinctly so readers will understand your opinion. Do not post superficial comments, such as a phrase of just a few words.

Postings that include promotion of products, services or events will be
refused.

Your comment and name may also be published in a Xtra paper.

Publication of your comments on Xtra.ca or in an Xtra paper is not an endorsement of your views by Xtra.ca or Pink Triangle Press.

Please note that anything you write in your comment (for example: your name, city) may be indexed by search engines. If you are concerned about your privacy, consider using your first name or initials only.