Inaction by Woolwich council to further promote diversity could harm 2SLGBTQ+ community, expert says

Woolwich council's inaction to further promote diversity and inclusion this week — following comments by a councillor about a rainbow crosswalk — could cause more harm to the 2SLGBTQ+ community, said Adam Davies, co-chair of the Anti-Oppression Rainbow Research Lab at the University of Guelph. 

A notice of motion was brought forward by Coun. Patrick Merlihan at Monday's committee of the whole meeting, which sought to make diversity, equity and inclusion training a must for its employees. There was an opportunity to pass the notice of motion then, but it garnered no support as is.

Davies, who is part of the 2SLGBTQ+ community, said that the lack of immediate action could have consequences.

"We know that representation is important and visibility is important, but there has to be systemic change," said Davies.

"And so I see in this [motion] an effort to start to address that, and I also feel that in the failure to support such a [motion], it actually puts a risk of harming the 2SLGBTQIA community even further, or seeming dismissive of the concerns," they added.

The motion would've also seen a diversity, equity and inclusion committee created by early next year, and guarantee one or more rainbow crosswalks — or something similar — in the township by Pride 2023.

During an Aug. 22 council meeting, Coun. Murray Martin had objected to the idea of a rainbow crosswalk being installed in Elmira, Ont. He claimed the rainbow is being used to "promote a lifestyle" and that using the rainbow — which has religious significance for Martin — isn't "proper."

"Those types of comments need to be addressed openly right away and acknowledged for what they are, which is violence," Davies said. 

Martin had later apologized for the comments, but Merlihan brought the motion forward, in part, as a response to what was said. 

Despite being a notice of motion, Jeff Smith, the township's director of corporate services, said that action could've been taken on Monday. 

"My opinion to council was that if a member of council had moved the motion and there was a seconder, it would have been my advice to council that it could have been voted on and passed," Smith said in an emailed statement. 

If that would have happened, the notice of motion would've gone to council for an official, rubber-stamp of approval, he said.

Coun. Scott McMillan said that he "[supported] a lot of the spirit" of what's in the motion, but wanted it to be directed to staff because it'd be a "safer process" and he wanted input from marginalized groups.

"We haven't done the work to connect with impacted communities to allow them to guide this process," McMillan said at the committee meeting this week.