Followup on two lesgay-rights stories from various points in Canada, neither terribly good news, I'm afraid; and notice of the cover story in the current *Macleans* First two items from the Toronto *Globe*and*Mail*, Friday 1994 05 06, adapted without permission 1 - DELWIN VRIEND RULING APPEALED The Alberta Government will appeal a court decision that would require that the province's rights code prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. Madam Justice Anne Russell of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench ruled last month that Delwyn Vriend thad been discriminated against when he was fired in January 1991 from his job as a lab instructor at Edmonton's King College after administrators discovered that he is gay. She said the province's rights code is inconsistent with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and must be changed. But Justice Minister Ken Rostad argued yesterday that the ruling was flawed. The Province's rights' code needn't mirror the federal law, he said. Judge Russell's ruing created a split within the Progressive Conservative caucus. Some members wanted the government to accept the decision, but the majority, led by MLAs from rural ridings, siad their constituents wanted an appeal. [parenthetic note: ??The province's code needn't mirror the federal law???? The Charter isn't just any old federal statute, it's in the Constitution, which explicitly states that it is supreme over other legislation -- but I guess I'm being picky here] 2 - RULING ON SPOUSAL BENEFITS REJECTED BY COURT Same sex spouses are not automatically entitled under the Ontario human rights code to inclulde their partners in their medical coverage, the Divisional Court has ruled, overturning a ruling by a board of inquiry. The one-man board, appointed by the Ontario Human Rights Commission, ruled last August that Ontario Blue Cross must extend medical benefits to the partner of Elizabeth Clinton, a nurse at York County Hospital, but the ruling was appealed by the insurance firm. Ms Clinton argued that the only difference between her partnership with Laurie Anne Mercer and a common-law relationship (where benefits would be extended) is that they are the same sex. The Divisional Court ruled that the board erred in concluding that Ms Clinton had been denied benefits on the basis of sexual orientation. The Court looked at human rights code definitons of "marital status" and "spouse". It did not hear Charter arguments because lawyers failed to provide adequate notice. The ruling will not override the precedent set in 1992 when another board ordered the Ontario government to extend family benefits to spouses in homosexual relationships with provincial employees. That ruling, in the case of Michael Leshner, invoked the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Alan Shefman, spokesman for the Ontario Human Rights Commission, said that the commission is considering an appeal. [note: the definition of "spouse" and "marital status" are among the things that would be changed in the proposed legislation to come before the Ontario Legislature in the next couple of weeks.] 3 - SVEND ROBINSON, GAY MP FOR BURNABY, COVER BOY ON *MACLEANS* STORY ON GAYS AND LESBIANS, AND OUR PROGRESS OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS Look for the current issue of *Macleans*, where there's good coverage of Fruit issues. Apparently in the story, Svend says that there are homosexual MPs in all parties except the Tories (who only have 2 sitting members). The Reform party, as one can imagine, are getting their knickers in a twist about THAT allegation. ========= Chris -- Chris Ambidge / ambidge@ecf.toronto.edu / ambidge@ecf.utoronto.ca chemical engineering / university of toronto 200 college st / toronto ON / M5S 1A4 // 416 978 3106