|
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
ROYAL
BANK OFFICIALLY CONFIRMS ITS POLICY OF DISCRIMINATION
A number of
pro-family/life organizations, which includes REAL Women of Canada,
Campaign Life Coalition Quebec, The Christian Heritage Party and
a French-speaking Protestant Church in Montreal, joined together
to form a committee called the "No Committee 2006," in
opposition to the lobbying efforts of homosexual organizations in
Montreal to have the Gay Games, now scheduled to take place in July,
2006, in that city. The "No Committee" registered its
name with the Quebec government and began to receive donations.
However, when
Mr. Daniel Cormier, the pastor at the church which was a part of
the "No Committee," applied last June to open a bank account
at a Montreal branch of the Royal Bank on behalf of the Committee,
the bank refused to open an account. (See Reality, July/August,
2001, "Royal Bank Discriminates Against Pro-life/family Organizations,
p. 5.)
The bank refused
its services claiming that the "No Committee 2006," in
objecting to the Gay Games, and to the promotion of homosexuality,
contravened the Charter of Rights and the federal Human Rights Act,
which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
It is noted, however, that the Charter also protects a Canadian's
right to freedom of conscience, expression, and opinion - the latter
of which is the real basis of and fundamental to this case.
Further, a
Quebec-based homosexual/lesbian organization, the Quebec Lesbian
and Gay Coordinating Council, filed a complaint with the Quebec
Human Rights Commission again Mr. Cormier and the "No Committee."
However, on November 2, 2001, the Quebec Human Rights Commission
released its unanimous decision in regard to the complaint, stating
that Mr. Cormier and the Committee had not discriminated against
the homosexual organization and dismissed the complaint.
Shareholders
Propose A Resolution at Royal Bank's Annual Meeting
Two Toronto
area businessmen, Dr. Patrick Redmond and Mr. Cyril Fleming, who
have shares in the Royal Bank, concerned about the Royal Bank's
precedent-setting policy in regard to the "No Committee,"
proposed a resolution at the bank's Annual Meeting held in Toronto
on February 22, 2002.
The resolution
stated that since the Royal Bank was a for-profit institution providing
services to the public, and since many homosexual political and
social demands were controversial and divisive and on which there
was no public consensus, the Royal Bank should henceforth establish
a policy to provide financial services to individuals and groups,
regardless of their religious, political and ideological views.
Royal Bank
Attempts to Conciliate
A week prior
to the bank's Annual Meeting, senior officials at the bank requested
a meeting with the shareholders who were proposing this resolution,
in an attempt to have them withdraw it. In return, it was proposed
that the bank President and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. G.M. Dixon,
would give a statement at the opening of the Annual Meeting, that
the bank would not, in future, refuse accounts on the basis of political,
social or ideological views, providing these views did not contravene
the Charter of Rights.
However, the
bank proposed that it would continue to stand by its precedent setting
decision to refuse an account to the "No Committee" because
the latter had discriminated against homosexuals, supposedly contrary
to the federal Human Rights Act. This position was taken by the
bank, despite the Quebec Human Rights Commission decision that the
"No Committee" had not been guilty of discrimination!
As a consequence
of the fact that the bank intended to continue its policy to refuse
an account with the "No Committee," the two shareholders
did not accept that proposal, as it would have required them to
concede that the bank was correct in its policy of refusing accounts
to any corporation, church (such as the Catholic and Evangelical
Christian churches), and the Muslim, Hindu, Sikh and Conservative
Jewish congregations, as well as individual Canadians who are opposed
to the promotion of homosexuality, or have religious, political
or ideological views with which the bank disagrees.
Consequently,
the resolution was placed on the floor at the annual meeting on
February 22, 2002, for a vote.
The Royal Bank
had obviously advised homosexual activists of the pending resolution
as homosexual spokespersons were in attendance at the meeting, including
the homosexual activist provincial Member of Parliament, Mr. George
Smitherman, who forcefully argued that the "No Committee 2006,"
was a discriminatory organization since it opposed homosexuality
and the bank was right in the denial of its services. The Chief
Legal Counsel for the Royal Bank also spoke to the motion stating
that since sexual orientation is protected in the federal Human
Rights Act, the bank was required to refuse services to anyone opposing
homosexuality.
This was indeed
a bizarre conclusion because the Legal Counsel knew or should have
known that the federal Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination
against homosexuality (sexual orientation) in four areas: employment,
accommodation, services and membership in associations. There is
nothing in the Act which prohibits anyone from having an opinion
against homosexuality. In short, the actions of the "No Committee"
could not and did not contravene the Human Rights Act.
There were
approximately 300 in attendance at the annual meeting and the resolution
was defeated mainly by way of the proxy votes (approximately 275,000,000
votes were cast). Most of the proxy votes were held by the President
and Chief Operating Officer, Mr. G.M. Nixon. The decision of the
Royal Bank, therefore, was contrary to common sense, to the facts
and the law. One can only speculate why it chose to give this surprise
blanket support for homosexuals - denying ordinary Canadians their
own opinion on the issue, should they wish to use the bank's services.
The result
of this vote is that in future, anyone who opposes the promotion
of homosexuality may be refused services in the Royal Bank. The
latter bank has truly now becomes officially the bank for homosexuals
in Canada.
Conclusion
Anyone who
cares about this issue and has an account with the Royal Bank should
perhaps consider switching his/her account to a bank that does not
have a similar policy. If you choose to do so, please let your bank
manager know why you are closing your account and send a copy of
your letter to:
Mr. Gordon
M. Nixon, President
and Chief Operating Officer
Royal Bank of Canada
200 Bay St., South Tower
Toronto, Ontario M5J 2J5
Tel: (416) 974-4464
Fax: (416) 974-7403
The homosexual
lobby group has tightened its hold on the public debate on this
highly controversial issue. The politically correct Royal Bank has
fallen right into line with its dictates. The homosexuals will continue
unless we stop them. One way of stopping them is to let the Royal
Bank know that its services are no longer required.
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
|