Up next: What will CAP recommend to Pride Toronto?
NEWS / Common threads from public meetings about festival's future
Andrea Houston / Toronto / Friday, January 28, 2011
Share |

The announcement of big deficits. The resignation of its executive director. An acrimonious GM.

It's been a long week for the folks at Pride Toronto (PT). So what's next?

The Community Advisory Panel (CAP) will present its recommendations to the Pride Toronto (PT) board of directors on Feb 8, and it is widely expected to precipitate big changes at PT.

Pride Coalition for Free Speech (PCFS) member Ashleigh Ingle says the group has watched the CAP consultation process closely and hears a clear, resounding message from the gay, lesbian, bi and trans communities.

“What we saw at the public consultations was pretty unambiguous,” she says. “We heard, ‘Get your house in order and don’t isolate the community.’"

On Jan 22, the PCFS met to talk about about the CAP process in advance of PT’s Jan 27 general meeting.

“A fundamental message for us is the board must not be willing to sell out our community,” says Ingle. “The saddest part for us last year, last Pride, is we really saw the board of directors abandon what we see to be the roots of Pride. They chose to side with corporate and government sponsors over the community.”

CAP, comprising nine people and chaired by Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto pastor Brent Hawkes, is billed as an “independent panel," unelected but charged with consulting with the community on the future of the festival and reporting back to PT.

The panel held five general public meetings in December. It also held about 30 private targeted consultations, collected about 1,600 surveys and scrolled through pages of Facebook messages. The CAP report and recommendations will be presented at a public meeting on or about Feb 14.

Brent Hawkes, chair of the Community Advisory Panel.
(Andrea Houston)
At the meetings, a handful of attendees suggested PT consider hosting two Pride parades as a way to satisfy the division between those who want a broadly inclusive parade and those who want to limit the attendance of controversial groups. But many of the attendees laughed off that suggestion. At the Gladstone Hotel on Dec 4, PT board member and PCFS member Roy Mitchell joked that there should perhaps be “six parades, one for every colour of the rainbow flag.”

Ingle says a CAP recommendation for two or more Pride organizations would not reflect what CAP heard during the consultation process.

“PCFS feels recommending PT host two Prides would be an abject failure on the part of CAP,” she says. “There can be a number of different events hosted by a number of different people at Pride, but that’s very different from a call to move political messages out of the main parade. If that is part of CAP, we see that as censorship.”

PCFS's Kim Koyama adds that PT should always be prepared to defend free expression.

On Jan 21, Hawkes told Xtra the PT board will hear CAP’s recommendations before they are released to the public. Ingle says this is a bad decision.

“I think it's very important PT and the community receive this report at the same time,” she says.

“Giving the board a chance to make changes is clearly a problem. If they are there to represent the community, I don’t see why we all shouldn’t get the report at the same time.”

*

THREE COMMON THREADS FROM THE COMMUNITY ADVISORY PANEL'S PUBLIC MEETINGS:



The Corporatization of Pride

CAP heard over and over again that PT management ought to fight against city hall and corporations and not against the gay community.

At the trans panel on Dec 9, Savannah Garmon echoed the sentiment.

"We all oppose the 'bigger is better' mentality. That’s diluting the message of Pride."

So, if it comes down to a choice between funding with strings attached, PCFS says the board should take a pass on the cash.

"Pride can not let corporate sponsors dictate who can participate and who can't," says Koyama. "Funding can't be contingent on certain conditions."

Structure and governance


Participants expressed worry about the financial situation at PT. Organizers need to bring PT to a place where its financials are in order and decisions are made in full view of the public and the roots of Pride remain intact, says Ingle. Going forward, the organization should be managed by those who value the interests of the entire community.

To do this, Ingle says PT needs to overhaul its entire structure. She hopes to hear a recommendation that will lead the board to a place where they will never again need a CAP-like body.

Accountability

At the racialized forum on Dec 14, Akim Adé Larcher of the Black, Trans, Lesbian and Gay Coalition, said the source of PT’s problems is the highest levels of its leadership.

“If we want to fix anything, they have to accept that they need to resign,” said Larcher. “They have to understand that they have sufficiently damaged this community. They have to resign because it’s the right thing to do.”

The CAP recommendations should be followed by an election for a new board, Ingle says.

“If anyone feels they are unjustly kicked off, they can make that argument and go through a reelection process.”


Share |


Reader Comments


 
Censor the Sponsor?
CAP advised the following: "Pride can not let corporate sponsors dictate who can participate and who can't," says Koyama. "Funding can't be contingent on certain conditions." ------------------------------------- You cannot expect Corporations to get invovled and blindly had over money without some governance and guidance. It's the price of doing business. If Pride Toronto or Pride in any other City does not want to run itself like a business then rely on public support via donations and handouts. Do not seek Corporate Sponsorship if you do not like the terms they seek. It's business at the end of the day. We complained in the past that Corporations never supported or accepted the LBTTQ Community. Now that they support us we want to go back and tell them " We like your money, however we don't like your opinion or your restrictions". Queen communities cannot have their cake and eat it too. Clearly... as Toronto Pride lost 400K
Gary, Ottawa ON
01/28/11 2:02 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Noting, Gary...
...that we now know that Pride revenues were, in fact, up. Problem was that, because of mismanagement, expenses were way, way, way up.
Rick, London Ontario
01/28/11 7:31 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
The legacy of the Hawkes panel
The Brent Hawkes panel is going to give Xtra and other QuAIA supporters everything they want. But, Hawkes will leave a lot people out in the cold, including gay Jewish people and other gay people who support Israel, people who think QuAIA's singling-out of gay-friendly Israel for condemnation at Pride is a form of anti-Semitism or is unfair (especially given the extreme homophobia of Israel's Muslim enemies) and people who think that QuAIA should not be allowed to hijack the gay rights agenda of Pride with divisive, poisonous Mideast politics and hateful chanting. That will be the legacy of the Hawkes panel.
Joe, Toronto Ontario
01/28/11 8:39 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
I'm an ATHEIST and
this Hawkes guy is an offense to my intellect. I think the legacy of the "Hawkes panel" is the superstitious and primitive religious stupidity of our generation of homo's.
tim, toronto on
01/28/11 8:48 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
No, we want sponsorships, don't we?
Am I reading this correctly? Ashleigh Ingle says, "They chose to side with corporate and government sponsors over the community.” Ashleigh, most gay people want corporate and government sponsorship. I get a sinking feeling when I read comments like this. How do people like this get to speak in public on Pride? Aren't there any ordinary common sense people involved in this?
Jim, Toronto Ontario
01/29/11 5:02 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
End Pride
Toronto should become the first post-gay city to pull the plug and END PRIDE. Create a queered committee of gendertrans people to create a publicity message to the world that Toronto Pride is OVER. And simply stop all effort, all committe, all media, all everything. If any individual or small groups want to do something related to what once was about homosexuality or if all of the post-gay queered and trans groups want to show the world their message about the trans Diaspora of the Zimstren, then do so as grass roots, no money, no media, no general public, no tourist board, small localized groups. There. It is DONE. The first post-gay END OF PRIDE in the world. Toronto -- you've come a long way, baby. From Gay to Queer to OVER. Bravim.
Committee of One to End Pride, toronto ON
01/29/11 1:05 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
no, jim, you didn't read it correctly
Jim, It's pretty obvious that you're grasping at straws here. Nowhere in this article did anyone state there should be no sponsors involved in Pride. Where do you even get this from? They reference putting corporate and government interest ABOVE the community... this is different than having no sponsors.
janet, Toronto Ontario
01/30/11 11:10 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
No, it's not different
I'm sorry, Janet, but you seem to be a little confused (despite your denials). Sponsorships are pretty important financially and they certainly trump the political shenanigans of extremists who don't really care about Pride. This is also taken directly from the article: "So, if it comes down to a choice between funding with strings attached, PCFS says the board should take a pass on the cash." and this "Pride can not let corporate sponsors dictate who can participate and who can't," says Koyama. "Funding can't be contingent on certain conditions." How else is one to interpret this? It's obvious that the political hacks that have sunk their teeth into this issue are going to give up on government and corporate sponsorships (and the entire Jewish community and anyone else who isn't extremely left wing) for the sake of QAIA, a marginal group promoted mainly by two extremely left wing people who have nothing to do with either Israel or Palestine. Another distressing point in the article: apparently the idea of two Prides (surely the only sensible solution) is being rejected out of hand. So is the solution going to be to exclude the Jewish community and anyone who feels polarized by this political dogfcuk? I'm getting a sinking feeling about all this.
Jim, Toronto Ontario
01/30/11 6:28 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
No, it's not different
I want Pride to be depoliticized. This latest fiasco shows that there are two problems. First, it needs to be put into the hands of corporate types who know how to put on good parties. Second, the left-wing hacks who are so damn desperate to take it over and turn into a reply of the G20 need to back off. Let me add that Tim and Elle should not be let within 500 metres of any Pride meeting. It would help if Xtra actually took a neutral position on these issues. It's disconcerting having to read the news in a media outlet that is so biased. (I'm not talking about the writer of this article though.) Pride was dealt a death blow by this QuAIA fiasco. You've lost the Jews. And many "regular" types are getting alarmed. It's disturbing to read about this. By the time this mess is over, the only people left at Pride will be Tim and Elle, marching alone with no one to hiss at. I also think it's time for the 95% of the gay community that consists of ordinary gay men to take their Pride back away. It used to be a great party for all gay people. Look what you've done to it. Shame on you.
Jim, Toronto Ontario
01/30/11 6:42 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Counter-Pride
Would someone with a bit of clout and talent please organize a well-funded and highly sponsored counter-Pride for gay men so that we can sidestep this mess? And make sure that hot guys of all ethnicities will feel welcome there. And make sure it has NO political message that isn't directly relevant to gay issues.
Jim, Toronto Ontario
01/30/11 6:54 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
no women, bi, queer or trans folks allowed !
But straight tourists are welcome.
gay separatist, toronto ontario
01/30/11 9:43 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
GET RID of STRAIGHTS --SMALLER PRIDE
Get rid of all the Straight people from PRIDE --organizing it and especially attending it. Then we could all do anything we want--all inclusively without judging other LGBT. It would make a smaller PRIDE, because half the audience of PRIDE are Straights. Smaller PRIDE would cost less. We would not have to beg to corporations for money and not need to care if they don't give it to us. We could use more volunteer donations of equipment and entertainment and work. We could probably do it for free if everyone gave their time and skills for free. We could do it for eachother. Problem solved :-)
Smaller PRIDE, Toronto Ont
01/31/11 1:45 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
The Sydney option
Or we could do what Sydney does. Put on an amazing parade to which everyone is welcome. However, to do that we'd have to do two things: (1) Actually have to develop a culture of fabulous marching troops, bands, cool floats, etc. Our Pride is great, but it is long and tedious. There's not enough entertainment in it. (2) Tone down the rhetoric. Or at least limit the rhetoric to gay issues. You can't have anti-Israel signs at an event that is meant to be welcoming to people of all ethnicities, including Jews. Our Pride is (rightly) very political, but the end result is a rather tedious parade. But I honestly don't think we can achieve this in Toronto. Sydney is a fun city filled with fun Australians. Toronto is getting the Pride that reflects it as a city. And it wouldn't surprise me if Pride goes down the toilet. It would reflect the reality that we're in the end a very divided city.
Jim, Toronto Ontario
02/02/11 2:28 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Not a problem
I used to be the sponsorship coordinator for PT and I can honestly say that sponsors have *no* voice in programming.They never asked for it, we never offered it. That idea is simply false. They might push us on more signage than we'd like, but that's it. The City of Toronto is in a completely different category, though. They are the ones who approve the permits to hold thhe parade (on city property), agree to police it for free, work with the TTC to reroute busses, etc. If they are no on board, Pride cannot happen, regardless whether they provide funds or not. And they *do* have the right to demand things from Pride before they issue those permits.
Chris M., Toronto ON
02/02/11 2:03 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
The best things in life are free...
Here's the ultimate - according to Councillor Krystan Wong-Tam she financed and owned the QUAIA website because according to her none of them had a credit card to pay for the site - so she stepped up for them. See http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/sueann_levy/2010/09/23/15457101.html So a group of people that apparently do not qualify for a credit card between them has decided Pride should not accept sponsorship funds if they can't pursue their (offensive and false) anti-Israel agenda at gay pride. Good luck with the new small angry 1981 no money Pride - it's been fun.
Charles L, Toronto ON
02/05/11 4:38 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Financing QuAIA
Oh Charlie L. your too much. so Krystan Wong-Tam likely paid $10 bucks for the initial registration (that was nice of her) Wordpress themes are free and site maintenance is easy, piece of cake. If you had bothered to do a whois you would find out Tim McCaskell owns the website. The rest of yor comment is just scurrilous nonsence.
michel, toronto on
02/05/11 5:43 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
No credit card holders in QuAIA?
michel, the above-referenced Toronto Sun column does indicate that Kristyn Wong-Tam provided the following written statement: “When I was asked by a QuAIA member to lend my credit card number so that they can register a domain name because no one has a credit card in the group, I said okay.” When I first read that statement during last year's municipal election campaign, I immediately assumed that she was not being upfront. After all, it's hard to believe that no one in QuAIA has a credit card. For example, some QuAIA supporters are university teachers and are shown in publicly-available government documents as making over $100,000 per year.
Steve, Toronto Ontario
02/05/11 6:27 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Financing QuAIA 2
Mote point Steve, the girls got spunk
michel, toronto on
02/06/11 12:40 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
It's not a moot point
michel, I don't think it's a moot point. I now know that when Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam makes a public statement, it may not be true. I now know not to trust her.
Steve, Toronto Ontario
02/06/11 9:27 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Looks like Wong-Tam is a liar
The line from Wong Tam that "because no one has a credit card in the group" doesn't sound plausible and makes it pretty clear that she looks like a liar. Not surprizing from a politician who's worried about her own skin and prestige more than telling the truth
Josie, Toronto Ont
02/10/11 10:53 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.