Sudbury Pride barring police from participating in events, issues apology to 2SLGBTQ community
While there is a need for increased security, Pride parade organizers in Sudbury have apologized for past police participation in their parade.
Amid a need for increased security at Pride events across Canada, a recent decision by the Sudbury Pride organization is prohibiting police from participating in an official capacity.
Many members of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community say they have been experiencing heightened intolerance and hatred in recent years while also having a complicated relationship with police.
Uniformed officers not welcome
Because of that, the Fierté Sudbury Pride organization recently apologized to its community members about its past choices, including allowing police participation in previous events, in a statement on social media.
Fierte Sudbury Pride issues apology to 2SLGBTQ community
Fierte Sudbury Pride issues apology to 2SLGBTQ community. (Supplied)
Among the concrete steps organizers are taking is not permitting police in uniform to participate in any Pride events.
No police in Pride Sudbury events
Police officers barred from wearing uniforms at Sudbury Pride events. (Fierte Sudbury Pride)
'We have to say, 'What can we do differently to make sure everyone is kept safe and what do police do that might keep some people safe and not others,' Groom said.
'How can we backfill that? What does that actually look like? What we know is that by having people who are visible, who are present, who are observing spaces, that will really change the dynamic in a way that often police don't.'
Aspen Groom, chair of Fierte Sudbury Pride
Aspen Groom, chair of Fierte Sudbury Pride, speaks to CTV News outside police headquarters and Pride crosswalk. June 12, 2025 (Angela Gemmill/CTV Northern Ontario)
Officers who want to participate may do so while not in uniform.
Committed to rebuilding trust
Although faded since it was painted last year, the Chair of Fierté Sudbury Pride calls the rainbow-coloured 'Progress Pride Crosswalk' downtown a 'compromise.'
Sudbury police headquarters located near faded Pride crosswalk
Sudbury police headquarters located near faded Pride crosswalk on Minto Street downtown. June 12, 2025 (Angela Gemmill/CTV Northern Ontario)
It is on Minto Street close to city hall, yet steps away from headquarters for Greater Sudbury Police.
'There's elements there that we have to be mindful of and also just know that we have to do our best within the constraints that we have,' said Aspen Groom, Sudbury Pride chairperson.
Greater Sudbury Police Service said it respects the group's decision and is committed to listening, learning and taking steps to build trust with marginalized communities.
"We respect the right of organizers to create spaces where community members feel safe and supported," Sudbury police said in a statement about the situation.
"We recognize that historical and ongoing harms have shaped the complex relationship between 2SLGBTQIA+ communities and policing. We do not take these concerns lightly. We are committed to listening, learning, and taking meaningful steps to build trust with marginalized communities, including those who have not always felt heard or protected."
Sudbury police statement on Pride decision
Sudbury police statement on Pride decision to exclude uniformed officers. June 12, 2025 (Greater Sudbury Police Service)
Police said they remain committed to equity, inclusion, and human rights, both within the organization and within the community.
'We will continue working alongside members of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community year-round -- through outreach, education, and collaboration -- to foster safety, dignity, and belonging for all,' police added.
'Our hope is that through continued dialogue and understanding, we can build stronger, more inclusive relationships and find a path forward together. We wish Fierté Sudbury Pride safe and successful events."
Changes to Pride march
In order for the local Pride festival to hold a march without police involvement, Groom said they're planning for the event to travel along the sidewalk with plenty of volunteer marshals who will have training in de-escalation and community care.
According to Groom, Fierté Sudbury Pride will be applying for the new permanent federal funding announced earlier this week in Ottawa meant to support security needs for Pride festivals across Canada.
The total of $1.5 million is to help cover costs for safety and insurance planning.
During the national flag-raising ceremony on June 10, Prime Minister Mark Carney called Pride 'a promise.'
'It's a promise to every couple who wants to show affection, to be able to hold hands in public without looking over their shoulders,' Carney told the crowd.
'It's a promise to every Canadian that they will be respected; that their rights will be protected. That you will be safe in your own community and proud in your own skin.'
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney speaks at launch of 2025 Pride Season
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney speaks at launch of 2025 Pride Season. June 10, 2025 (CPAC)
During the event, the co-chair of the Canadian Pride Caucus said he looks forward to a day when there isn't hatred towards others who are different.
'Some of us dream of the day when the acronym 2SLGBTQIA+ will be replaced by these simple four letters L-O-V-E,' said Canadian Senator Rene Cormier.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Post
an hour ago
- National Post
Why a 'love story' with Mark Carney is François Legault's only hope
OTTAWA — Quebec Premier François Legault was on fire last weekend. Article content The man who is clearly and unequivocally the most unpopular premier in Canada, according to the latest Angus Reid poll, stood before the future of his party, the members of the youth wing of the Coalition Avenir Québec, smiling and ready to fight. Article content 'I want to fight more than ever! For a third term, to finish the job!' he roared. 'I need you to continue building Quebec for future generations,' he added. Article content But the polls suggest that the fight seems lost for Legault, known for years as the country's most beloved premier. And for the man who has made a punching bag of the federal Liberal government, it's a cruel twist of fate that Prime Minister Mark Carney may be the only person who can save the Quebec premier. Article content Article content With nearly a year to go until the election, the man who won one of the largest majorities in Quebec's history, with 90 out of 125 seats, is facing a massacre. According to the latest Angus Reid report, only a quarter of Quebecers approve of his performance. In March 2020, at the start of the pandemic, his approval rating was 77 per cent. Article content 'Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the CAQ wins zero seat in next year's election,' said a CAQ insider that was granted anonymity to speak more freely out of fear of repercussions. Article content The man behind the poll aggregator Philippe J. Fournier, is almost convinced that if there were an election today, the CAQ would not have party status. Article content Article content 'Currently, Mr. Legault is in a situation that is similar or even perhaps a little worse than (then prime minister) Justin Trudeau in December,' he told National Post. Article content Article content His government has faced numerous controversies over the past two and a half years. Right now, he is being hit on all fronts for his government mismanagement in the health, energy, transport and finances files. Article content The public, it seems, has simply had enough of this government and no longer trusts it. Article content Legault sees things differently and presents himself as the nationalist and economic candidate. But the road ahead isn't smooth. Article content On the one hand, the separatist Parti Québécois has comfortably taken the lead and is garnering all the attention with a leader who remains perfectly clear about his intentions during the first mandate of a PQ government. Yes, this is a referendum on Quebec independence. Article content With a popular leader leading the way among francophones, with a similar margin to that of federal Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre a year ago, the PQ has now brought the separatists back home after a decade of desertion.
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
Letters to the editor, June 14: ‘American tourists … without exception they expressed sorrow and embarrassment at their President's behaviour toward Canadians'
Re 'It's time to rein in Canada's runaway Crown corporations' (Opinion, June 7): While there is a 5-per-cent share for the CBC's English television, there is also the 23.4-per-cent share for French television, 14.6 per cent for English radio and 24.8 per cent for French radio. Last year, 65 per cent of Canadians used at least one of the CBC's services in a typical month. Forty years ago, the CBC's parliamentary appropriation was about $1.09-billion. Last year, it was $1.44-billion. When adjusted for inflation, that's a 50-per-cent cut. During the same period, Canada's population has grown by 54 per cent. Not exactly a 'runaway corporation.' The CBC has lost audience share in part because of fragmentation caused by digital platforms. This is most pronounced on English television, where the CBC competes with U.S. programming. It would be naive not to expect consequences from the dramatic reductions in the CBC's grant. The CBC is not perfect. Let's make it better, not rein it in. Tony Manera Former president, CBC; Ottawa Re 'Canada's national archives need more than just a facelift' (Opinion, June 7): Contributor Charlotte Gray has done us the important service of revealing the impoverished state of our national collection of historical documents at Library and Archives Canada. At this time of national reckoning and rediscovery, Canadians need knowledge of their country more than ever, especially since Canadian history has almost vanished from school curricula. Mark Carney's ambitious plans for rebuilding Canada should include new resources for this vital institution to do its job. Roy MacSkimming Perth, Ont. Re 'The Hockey Canada trial shows how we need to be talking to young men' (Opinion, June 7): The toxic behaviours of many men is disturbing. Whether a result of cultural norms, familiar influences, online activities or patriarchy, I'm uncertain. But I'm certain that calling out noxious behaviours and using laws to enforce aggrieved acts should coincide with educated discussions about fair treatment for all. Men, including young men, should know better. Gregory Enright Hamilton Many years ago, in my late 20s, I was on a bus in Vancouver, sitting in the back half along with a group of young men. They were high-school-aged and talking loudly and performatively. I don't recall the details, but it had toxic male overtones that made me uncomfortable. I wondered how they could talk like that right in front of me. Eventually another man, probably around 40 years old, went and sat with them. He spoke quietly with them for the rest of the ride. I don't know what he said, but they quieted down and listened. I thanked him after we had gotten off the bus. It took awareness, concern, thoughtfulness, responsibility and perhaps some bravery to speak to the young men. I hope it made a lasting impression on them, as it did on me. Are there still men who would do that today? I hope so. Tuula Talvila Ottawa Re 'A river cruise with our American frenemies – what could go wrong?' (Opinion, June 7): I have had only positive encounters with American tourists. On my recent holiday to Milan and Lake Como, my identical twin sister and I met many Americans from a variety of states. Without exception they were friendly, kind and respectful. Without exception they expressed sorrow and embarrassment at their President's behaviour toward Canadians. Earlier in February, we had a similar experience on a two-week prepaid holiday to Florida. Without exception, Americans from all over approached us expressing their discomfort and regret with Donald Trump's actions. One family from Florida even invited us to join them for lunch. We reciprocated with polite gratitude, feeling proud and thankful that we live in such a wonderful country. Elaine Snider Toronto Our recent travel experience in the United States could not have been more different from this tale of woe. We have enjoyed an annual trip to a beach in North Carolina for more than 20 years. We did think twice about going this May, but had prepaid for our condo so off we went. Clearing U.S. customs at Toronto Pearson International Airport was efficient and ended with the agent saying, with a smile, 'Enjoy your trip.' When it came up naturally during interactions with North Carolinians, we did not disguise our citizenship. A typical, fairly illustrative interaction was with a woman in the grocery checkout line. When she heard our accents and we answered her question about where we were from, she said, 'Well, welcome, y'all. We are so glad you're here.' Martin Birt Uxbridge, Ont. We recently returned from a two-week cruise around the British Isles and along the Norwegian coast with about 900 other passengers, most of whom were American. The many U.S. travellers who we met over meals and other activities were uniformly gracious and apologetic regarding the actions of their President and his administration. We met none of the 'ugly Americans' as depicted. While we won't travel to the United States while the Trump crowd is in control, personal contacts with Americans abroad or here should not be discouraged. Richard Mosley Ottawa I had a similar experience on a transatlantic crossing during Donald Trump's first term. At dinner on the first night, an American next to me, on learning I was Canadian, started berating me on the evils of Canada's system of socialist health care. I replied with the usual statistics most Canadians know: health care per capita is much less costly in Canada than in the United States; health outcomes are significantly better on our side of the border; essentially every Canadian has coverage while millions of Americans are still uninsured. My neighbour pointedly ignored me for the rest of the meal. The following evening, he moved to another table. We met many sympathetic Americans on this and other trips. I guess we had bad luck in encountering a prototypical 'ugly American' this once. Sadly, there seem to be many more of them as we suffer through Mr. Trump's second term. Charles Magill Ottawa Re 'Bruce Flatt has some advice for investors: One day this will all be forgotten' (Report on Business, June 7): 'In the long run, we are all dead.' –John Maynard Keynes, 1923. Capitalism: Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. Paul Childs Edmonton Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
Liberals see a need for speed on major projects bill. Critics warn that's risky
Social Sharing Liberals are attempting to bulldoze their mega projects bill through Parliament, according to critics who say the legislation interferes with Indigenous rights, environmental protection and democracy itself. The government's One Canadian Economy Act is generating controversy inside and outside the House of Commons, with some arguing it confers king-like powers to rush projects deemed in the national interest to completion. The Liberals say the bill is intended to fast-track major projects as Canada faces the urgency of a disruptive Donald Trump presidency. "We have a trade war that is affecting sector after sector after sector. Canadian jobs are at risk. Canadians' livelihoods are at risk and, quite frankly, the prosperity of the country is at risk," said Tim Hodgson, the natural resources and energy minister, at a news conference Thursday. "We need to do things that we have not done in a long time, in time frames we have not done since the end of World War II." What's in the bill? The One Canadian Economy Act, or Bill C-5, will create a list of major nation-building projects. After a designated project is added to the list, the government will publish a document outlining all the conditions that builders must follow. A single designated minister — likely Dominic LeBlanc in this government — would be responsible for listing the projects and issuing the conditions document. "For far too long major projects, whether energy transmission lines, critical mineral developments, pipelines or clean technology projects, have been stalled by assessments, challenges and overlapping and duplicative regulations," said Leblanc on Friday during a procedural debate in the House Friday. What gets on the list? The prime minister has provided examples of projects that could be included on the list based on recommendations from Canada's premiers. Ports, mines, renewable energy and oil and gas pipelines could make the list, he said. The legislation offers the following criteria: Strengthening Canada's autonomy, resilience and security. Providing economic or other benefits to Canada. Having a high likelihood of successful execution. Advancing the interests of Indigenous Peoples. Contributing to clean growth and to meeting Canada's climate objectives. The legislation gives the government broad discretion to apply all or none of these criteria, which worries Conservatives who still seem generally supportive of the bill. "These concepts are broad enough that any interpretation or any argument could be made about each factor either way for each project," said Shannon Stubbs, the Conservative critic for energy and natural resources, during debate on the bill on Friday. 'Leap before you look' assessments Some academics are concerned about what happens if the bill's broad powers to speed up projects aren't used carefully. "That could be good for the economy if it is used wisely," said University of Ottawa law and economics professor Stewart Elgie. "But it could be bad for the environment if it is used poorly." For major infrastructure and development projects on the list, such as hydroelectric dams, ports and large-scale mines, the bill removes the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada's authority to limit them. But it does place limits on the minister's ability to fast-track cross-border pipelines and nuclear reactors. It states the minister cannot issue the approval document until both the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and the Canada Energy Regulator are "satisfied that issuing the document will not compromise the health or safety of persons." However, the bill suggests the power of all federal regulators and departments is constrained, as it states that every opinion and decision formed about a project once listed must be "in favour of permitting the project to be carried out in whole or in part." This creates what some academics are calling a "leap before you look" approach that turns the federal environmental review's informed decision-making "on its head." Henry VIII clauses Those same researchers also note that a legislative tool — Henry VIII clauses, named after the autocratic King Henry VIII of England — are tucked into the bill. WATCH | PM Mark Carney says 'more will be done' on energy: Carney says 'more will be done' on energy, but conversation isn't all about pipelines 17 days ago Duration 3:52 Asked by CBC's Power & Politics host David Cochrane about the separatist sentiment in Alberta, Prime Minister Mark Carney says his government is 'committed' to working with Canadians across the country. Proposed legislation grants the Carney government, or future governments, the authority to exempt pipelines, mines or other listed projects from any law or government regulation. Near the very end of the 18-page bill, it states that cabinet can exempt national-interest projects from not only environmental laws but also acts of Parliament. "The combined effect of Sections 21, 22 and 23 gives cabinet an unconstrained ability to make regulations that not only alter the application of other federal regulations … but also to alter the operation of virtually all laws duly passed by Parliament, including outright exemption," as noted in a post co-authored by University of Calgary law professors David Wright and Martin Olszynski. What about Indigenous rights? The proposed law commits to consulting with provincial and territorial governments, as well as Indigenous Peoples, before a project is listed and a conditions document is issued or altered. Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty on Thursday told reporters that the bill does not "do away with impact assessments" and there are "multiple points" where First Nations and other groups can bring forward their concerns. "The prime minister has been clear: these projects will be selected if the communities wish to participate," she said. Nevertheless, a national Indigenous group has raised concerns about a lack of consultation on the bill itself and what that could mean for the prospect of ongoing consultation. "Unfortunately, the government provided First Nations only seven days to respond to an outline of the bill and did not provide the full text (a consultative draft) in advance," the national chief of the Assembly of First Nations, Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak, said in a statement. Likely Conservative backing Conservatives have signalled that they are open to backing the bill, proposing some changes during the House of Commons debate. Stubbs said the party would like to see it go further and faster while calling for a repeal of regulations like the Trudeau-era law that banned the oil tankers from ports or marine installations along British Columbia's north coast. "Canadians deserve a government that backs them. Not a government that blocks them," Stubbs said. However, with C-5's broad powers to sidestep existing laws for approved projects, the tanker ban could be overriden without repealing anything. The Bloc Québécois has said the bill, in theory, could exempt a company building a major project from a range of laws, including the Labour Code, Criminal Code and language laws. The party is calling for more scrutiny of the bill. "How could we go forward with such a huge bill, with huge consequences for Quebec and Canada, without at least doing what we have been elected to do — and that means studying effectively this bill in committee," Bloc Leader Yves-François Blanchet said. Concerns over bad-faith use The Liberals intend to send the bill to committee for two days of study before hoping to get it passed on Friday. Green Party Leader Elizabeth May takes issue with what she calls an "abbreviated bulldozer time frame." At least one Liberal is calling for changes to the bill, which is supposed to terminate in five years. Vancouver MP Patrick Weiler wants the government to shorten the bill's five-year sunset clause, which he noted would go beyond Trump's term and "at least one more federal election." "We need to consider how this legislation could be used in bad faith by a future government," he said.
