Peterborough city council has endorsed a tourism growth strategy for the city for the next four years, despite concerns from some councillors about the city’s in-house service model and the lack of a completed economic development strategy and municipal cultural plan.

At its general committee meeting on Monday night (June 8), councillors considered a joint report from finance and corporate support services commissioner Richard Freymond and community services commissioner Sheldon Laidman that recommended council endorse the strategy, entitled “Discover Peterborough: Tourism Growth Strategy,” which would guide the city’s tourism service delivery and activities from 2026 to 2030.

The City of Peterborough began delivering economic development and tourism services in-house in January 2025, after Peterborough & The Kawarthas Economic Development dissolved at the end of 2024 following a decision by the City and County of Peterborough to not renew their tri-party funding agreement with the not-for-profit corporation, which had delivered economic development and tourism services on behalf of both municipalities for 25 years.

City’s first tourism strategy to guide Peterborough Tourism for next four years

At Monday night’s meeting, commissioner Laidman provided an overview of the 56-page strategy, noting it is the city’s first tourism strategy and that it will help inform development of annual workplans for Peterborough Tourism, the city’s tourism services and destination marketing program which is led by recreation, parks and cultural services director Rob MacAulay and strategic communications and Service Peterborough director Brendan Wedley.

Laidman’s introduction was followed by a presentation by Trevor Jonas Benson, managing partner of Bannikin Travel & Tourism, which the city hired as a consultant to develop the strategy.

After Benson’s presentation, councillor Joy Lachica noted that the city’s economic development and tourism services are under two different commissioners and asked Benson if the tourism strategy had been integrated with economic development, calling the two “inseparable.”

Benson said that the strategy should align with the city’s economic development strategy as well as its new municipal cultural, both of which are “coming to fruition.”

Calling the strategy “modern and current and representative of the culture here,” councillor Alex Bierk asked Benson whether the strategy had specific investments, programs, policy changes to strengthen sectors and whether it could help the city encourage development of modern hotel facilities. Benson said specific actions arising from the strategy would depend on how the city uses revenue from the municipal accommodation tax (MAT) to implement the strategy.

“There would be a direct dovetail with economic development,” Benson said.

Councillor Keith Riel called the strategy “very boilerplate” and questioned the value of the public consultations, which involved just over 500 Peterborough residents, with Benson replying that the responses were of high quality.

After councillor Gary Baldwin asked him whether the strategy considered the impacts of a potential events centre and Alto high-speed rail, Benson said that neither was within the scope of the strategy.

Councillor Kevin Duguay, who said he was pleased with the strategy, asked a similar question with respect to the new visitor centre on the Trent-Severn Waterway, and also about opportunities to showcase Peterborough, while councillor Joy Lachica asked about the Rainbow designation mentioned in the strategy.

In his second question, councillor Bierk asked about whether there were any recommendations in the strategy that would increase funding capacity for artists, arts organizations, or cultural producers.

Benson referred to two actions in the strategy, one to “provide stable, multi-year funding and practical support to arts and cultural organizations as informed by the Municipal Cultural Plan,” and the other to “collaborate with community organizations to support and grow inclusive and diverse cultural celebrations and community events that reflect the diversity of Peterborough.”

Councillor Bierk raises concerns about city’s in-house service model

Councillors then debated the report, with councillor Riel commenting that “Tourism is an economic driver,” before asking the city’s director of economic development Darryl Julott “What is the projected economic return on every dollar invested?”

“I don’t have that number handy,” Julott replied, noting that it changes frequently. “I can absolutely look at providing that.”

After Riel asked Julott how success would be measured and reported to council, he deferred the question to MacAulay as he is implementing the strategy. MacAulay said the city will be completing an economic impact study of Peterborough Musicfest in 2026 as an example of return on investment, as well as the Telus Cup for the fall and the CANCAST fishing show for next year.

“We’ve had an economic development director for almost a year and I haven’t seen any presentation to council on economic development,” Riel said. “I believe that tourism is economic development.”

After councillor Don Vassiliadis asked how the MAT revenue of $850,000 is being allocated across marketing, events, and infrastructure, commissioner Laidman said it is spent generally on tourism-related activities.

When Vassiliadis asked if the city was going to increase the four per cent MAT rate and if a report would come to council to recommend an increase, Laidman said a report would be coming forward in the fall.

“We are in anticipation of not only increasing the rate but also expanding the scope of the short-term accommodations it applies to,” Laidman said.

In his remarks, councillor Bierk expressed concern about the city’s organization of economic development and tourism services.

“I understand that staff are completely sold on this idea on how tourism and economic development is structured, where the municipal cultural plan plays in, but it’s really strange to me, the conversation, how it’s gone so far with some of the questions,” Bierk said. “There’s been some long expanses of silence and staff looking at each other, unsure of who to answer what.”

“Commissioner Laidman started off with the presentation and started off to kick us off — he’s in community services — but then Richard Freymond’s name is on the report. We’re tagging in Darryl Julott, so if it’s confusing to me as a councillor, I think it’s going to be greatly confusing to the public as to where this strategy applies, who to go to, what division is responsible.”

“We’re also asking questions about how tourism is benefiting the economy, but we’re being given sort of vague answers … I think we should have some hard numbers because we’re going to be asked, from this (strategy), to invest in certain areas.”

Bierk also expressed concerns that the strategy doesn’t indicate how the city will support the arts organizations that create visitor experiences or the downtown, such as strengthening downtown businesses, animation, streetscapes, public spaces, and cultural programming.

“That, in my view, is the central weakness of the report,” he said. “It is very strong on vision and language and values, but it’s weak on implementation, funding commitments, and measurable outcomes.”

MacAulay said he would provide council with a list of actions that support the downtown.

Bierk then asked for details on how much the city is spending to deliver tourism services and where the money is going.

“Since tourism services were brought in-house, how much has been spent on consultants, staffing, branding, strategy, development, and administration compared to direct investments into festivals, arts organizations, and other visitor experiences?” he asked.

Commissioner Laidman replied that approximately half of the MAT revenue has gone towards operations “to ensure tourism as a strategy is implemented with all our partner agencies, organizations, and groups,” with the other half going to destination marketing.

“I think there’s an example that was sent around to council of probably at least 100 events and opportunities that have been supported already, but those types of events require infrastructure in terms of the operation, the staffing of the visitor centres that are being provided to pursue those opportunities, to provide supports to the events,” Laidman said.

“There’s various levels of events and supports that are being provided to each event that’s supported. Some are fully operated by the city, such as Canada Day, some are provisionally supported in terms of providing supports, like public works supports, recreation staff helping their event go on, and then there’s others that we’re just directly providing funding to.”

Responding to Laidman’s comments, councillor Bierk said “That’s always been the case.”

“We’ve always managed arenas, we’ve always helped with events, we’ve always helped with parades. If this was a different position where it was still a third party and this tourism wasn’t in-house, I think these would be fair questions to ask. But it seems like they’re getting lost in the fog now that we’ve had this in-house.”

“It’s becoming definitely less clear for me as a councillor to figure how much we’re spending on new staff, how much we’ve spent on the consultants thus far, and what that looks like in terms of the money that’s actually going into the downtown, the money that’s actually going into the arts organization’s hands, the money that’s actually going to support independent businesses.”

“This is where the report falls apart, because the report emphasizes all those things. We’ve always supported those things in a way as a city, of course we have, especially through community services, but it’s becoming a little gray for me to understand how we’re supporting them any differently by bringing tourism in-house, and it’s becoming very gray to understand how they would be supported any differently from this tourism strategy.”

Councillor Lachica: ‘We have a structural issue here, and it’s going to lead to further confusion’

For her part, councillor Lachica raised concerns about considering a tourism strategy outside of the context of an economic development strategy.

“This tourism strategy is happening before we have created our economic development strategic plan,” she said. “How can we do this in isolation from each other? How can we not have our director of economic development informing and help guide and managing and overseeing the subdivision — under the umbrella of economic development — of tourism?”

After she asked city CAO Jasbir Raina whether the city’s economic development director would have oversight of tourism services, Raina said the current model was approved by council and he is waiting for the results of the city’s services review before deciding whether tourism should be segmented or under one umbrella.

Lachica noted that, while councillors receive an update on economic development under infrastructure planning and growth management, “it’s isolated from any information on tourism, which is under another portfolio and commissioner Freymond.”

“I think that we have a structural issue here, and it’s going to lead to further confusion unless we solidify the fact that, even though monies are being generated through the MAT tax and various things from different parts of our budget towards economic development, we need to have a clear structural hierarchy and an understanding of how staffing will be executing the items that are going to be actionable here.”

“I feel that it’s premature to be endorsing a tourism strategy without a municipal cultural plan, that needs to emphasize all aspects of culture and the arts and sports and everything that is essential, and before we have an economic development strategy.”

Motion to defer strategy until the fall defeated

Lachica then put forward a motion to defer endorsing the tourism strategy until the city’s economic development strategy and municipal cultural plan have been completed.

Laidman said that ideally the tourism strategy and the economic development strategy would be completed at the same time, but noted council approved the model for in-house tourism which is being delivered by MAT tax and not taxpayer dollars. In response to a question from Mayor Leal, Laidman said the municipal cultural plan would be completed in the fall and Julott said the economic development strategy would also be completed in the fall.

Councillor Lachica’s deferral motion lost 5-5, with her and councillors Dave Haacke, Bierk, Riel, and Mayor Leal voting in favour and councillors Vassiliadis, Beamer, Parnell, Duguay, and Baldwin voting against. Councillor Matt Crowley was not present at the meeting.

Debating the main motion, Mayor Leal spoke about being “on the road” for the last three weeks to talk about the benefit of an events centre for downtown Peterborough, noting that an event centre could be adapted to accommodate conventions, something that only Kingston and Ottawa in east-central Ontario can currently do.

“We know that downtown Peterborough has our highest-value assessment, and we do know that ancillary activities that will be associated with a new events centre will pay handsome dividends for our downtown area,” Leal said, adding that “It wouldn’t surprise me” if the proponents who responded to the request for quotations for the events centre will include hotel or hotels as part of their vision.

Council voted 9-1 in support of receiving the tourism strategy and endorsing its recommendations, with only councillor Riel voting against it.

Items endorsed by general committee will be considered by council for final approval next Monday (June 15), when registered delegations will be heard.

Council meetings are streamed live at www.peterborough.ca.

Over the concerns of some councillors about the rushed process and the potential risk to taxpayers, Peterborough city council has endorsed a motion to reduce development charges in the city by 50 per cent in the hopes of getting a share of $8.8 billion in federal and provincial funding over the next 10 years intended to increase housing by making it more affordable.

At the end of council’s general committee meeting on Monday night (June 8), Mayor Jeff Leal introduced a lengthy motion under “other business” that proposed the reduction in development charges, which the city levies against new development as a primary source of funding for growth-related capital expenditures, as part of the city’s application to the Ontario government’s new Development Charge Reduction Program (DCRP).

After reading out the 466-word motion, the mayor said the city has has “conversations over the last number of weeks with both the province of Ontario and the government of Canada” and that the motion would be a “bold step” in meeting the city’s housing commitments.

“We need to do everything to pursue the goal that we have for the province of Ontario to build 4,700 new units by the year 2031,” Leal said. “Tonight with this motion to make the deadlines of the government of Ontario, it will allow us to pursue this target in a great and significant way by reducing development charges over the next period of time.”

New provincial program rewards municipalities with funding for reducing development charges

Back in March, Premier Doug Ford and Prime Minister Mark Carney signed the Canada-Ontario Partnership to Build, which includes $8.8 billion in federal and provincial funding over 10 years for Ontario municipalities that reduce and maintain low development charges, as well as a harmonized sales tax (HST) rebate, with the intent of reducing the cost of new homes.

On June 1, the Ontario government opened applications for the DCRP, with a June 19 deadline to coincide with the HST rebate. Municipalities that reduce development charges for all residential types by 30 to 50 per cent or greater, and maintain the reductions for at least three years, would qualify for funding under the program. Municipalities would be expected to contribute a minimum of 10 per cent of project costs.

The province will assess municipal applications based on the percentage of the development charge reduction, the percentage of the municipality’s financial contribution, and the number of homes projected to be built as a result of the reduced development charges.

“Housing-enabling projects would be prioritized with consideration for the number of homes enabled by the project,” states a provincial media release. “Municipalities are strongly encouraged to be as ambitious as possible in their (development charge) rate reductions to secure as much funding as possible for their communities.”

Of the 444 municipalities in Ontario, those that currently levy development charges — over 200 urban municipalities — would be eligible to apply to DCRP.

The City of Peterborough’s development charges for residential units currently range from $42,555 to $68,604 per unit, depending on the type of unit, plus area-specific charges. In 2025, the city earned $6.5 million in revenue from development charges.

Councillors question process behind last-minute motion

With respect to the mayor’s motion, after councillors Dave Haacke and Kevin Duguay spoke in support of it, councillor Alex Bierk asked councillor Andrew Beamer, as chair of general committee, whether the mayor’s motion was a reconsideration of a council decision.

Bierk said council had earlier approved development charge rates and was now being asked to reduce them, also noting that council’s new procedure by-law prohibits motions to reconsider a council decision from being introduced under other business.

Beamer ruled that the motion was not a reconsideration, but told Bierk that it would need to have a two-thirds majority vote as an item under other business, as it would if it were a reconsideration.

“I don’t know if I feel comfortable even voting on this,” Bierk said in response. “When we’ve when we’ve discussed the idea of raising or lowering development charges, we’ve looked at the comparator data of other municipalities. Those have been lengthy conversations that we’ve had at this council that have been substantiated through a lot of data by consultants that we paid to do the work to provide us that data.”

“This council has made decisions on 18-storey buildings and the selling point against the negative impact for those decisions in the arguments around the table has been ‘Look at the development charges we’re going to get. Look at how much revenue the city is going to receive in development charges by approving these projects.’ I’m unclear in reading this motion on the fly which projects would be benefited through this cut rate, which wouldn’t, which we’ve already received development charges for … and all these questions just lead me as a councillor to want to have more time to consider this.”

“I’m wondering why — if as the mayor stated that there’s been long conversations with the province and the government of Canada about this government program that was forthcoming — why it wasn’t put in a report from staff so that we could consider this, so that the public could could consider this, in the way that we always do? … I’m all for taking bold steps, I just don’t want to step into a hundred foot hole.”

Councillor Joy Lachica echoed Bierk’s concerns, pointing out that council had passed the development charges by-law that is in effect from January 1 to December 31 of this year and that previous motions to modify an approved by-law have been ruled as motions to reconsider. She said the mayor’s motion should have come forward as an agenda item and that councillors should have had the opportunity to review it in advance.

She asked finance and corporate commissioner Richard Freymond whether proceeding with the motion was a “wise move,” and Freymond said that this was the first opportunity to bring it forward to council given that staff — despite the earlier senior-level conversations between the city and the provincial and federal governments — only received the DCRP guidelines on June 1.

Freymond added that, given the province’s June 19 deadline, “I will not have another opportunity to bring it back.” He said staff have not yet confirmed specific projects that would benefit from the DCRP.

Councillor Lesley Parnell said she didn’t consider the motion to be a reconsideration because it was a new government program. She spoke in support of the motion, asking “Can we afford not to do it?” and adding “We have to take the step” due to the lack of shovel-ready projects. She said the DCRP will be a “fantastic kickstart for affordability, for anybody who wants to buy a house.”

She said that, although the province should have given municipalities a lot more time to consider it and conduct analysis, “This is an opportunity that we cannot pass up.”

Taxpayers could be on the hook if city’s funding application is unsuccessful

In his comments, councillor Keith Riel noted there are 400 municipalities in Ontario and the province’s largest municipalities including Toronto would probably “eat up” most of the $8.8 billion for the program. He asked staff what would happen to those municipalities that don’t receive funding.

In responding to the question, Freymond explained the DCRP is not available to all 444 municipalities in Ontario, but is “tailored to the urban municipalities.”

“The councillor is quite correct, though, to be concerned — there is risk,” Freymond added. “There is no guarantee that if council reduces the rates tonight by 50 per cent. that we will ultimately get rewarded through infrastructure funding. That is not guaranteed, so there is a risk here. But there will be definitely, in my opinion as I said a moment ago, a cost if we do not do this.”

Riel asked Freymond if city taxpayers would be on the hook for lost development charge revenues if the city’s application to DCRP is not successful.

Freymond said that, if the city’s application is successful, he expects the city would receive more revenue through infrastructure funding than it would lose from development charges. However, he confirmed that if the city’s application is unsuccessful, growth-related infrastructure not covered by development charges “would be funded by the taxpayer.”

Freymond’s comment reflects a statement in his April 13 report to general committee on the 2025 annual report for the city’s development charge reserve funds, which noted that the city’s capital commitments exceed the $30.3 million balance in the reserves by a factor of five.

“Given the challenging economic climate for developers, staff have contemplated the reduction of development charges in the city’s growth areas to stimulate residential development,” the report reads. “Given the city has already incurred the outlay of cash required to build the infrastructure to enable the growth to occur and done so under the premise that the monies would be collected from the development community at a future time, reducing the development charges requires the taxpayer to fund the reserve shortfalls.”

Riel asked why there couldn’t have been a special general committee meeting to consider the motion, especially given the potential risk to the taxypayer. Freymond said councillors will have an opportunity to finalize their decision on the motion at council’s regular meeting next Monday (June 15).

In speaking in support of his motion, Mayor Leal said there have been telephone conversations “over the past couple of weeks” with the provincial and federal goverments “to make sure that the City of Peterborough was well-positioned to take advantage of this program.”

“There’s about 250 to 275 urban municipalities in Ontario that are in competition for the $8.8 billion,” the mayor said. “It’s crucial for our infrastructure planning that we take this opportunity to acquire what is our fair share of this $8.8 billion.”

“While we haven’t identified projects yet, I’ll give you a project just off the top of my head that I think would be a candidate for this. This would be the Cold Springs secondary planned area that we’ve identified as our Alto train site,” Leal said. “We do know that (Ontario’s Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Rob Flack) will be arriving in Peterborough on July the 9th, and I want to make sure that, prior to his visit, we put the City of Peterborough in the best possible light for infrastructure funding from the province of Ontario.”

Motion passes after council rejects deferral for a special meeting

Councillor Lachica made a motion to defer the mayor’s motion until council could hold a special general committee meeting prior to the regular council meeting on June 15 so that councillors could get some answers, especially given the risk to taxpayers that Freymond mentioned.

“I feel like when we have news of something, even if it’s imminent and it’s just happened, please share it with council so that we can absorb and reflect, and so that we all have the information at the same time,” Lachica said. “I find it really frustrating when there is a lack of transparency about new information. We need a few days to absorb this.”

Speaking in support of Lachica’s motion, councillor Bierk point out the provincial government will make shovel-ready projects a priority and that the municipality would need to contribute at least 10 per cent of project costs. After Freymond said that that a minimum municipal contribution is standard for cost-shared projects, Bierk replied that the funding would be prioritized for municipalities that can contribute more than 10 per cent.

Councillor Gary Baldwin suggested that, rather than having a separate meeting, councillors could send questions to Freymond while city staff are working through the issues, and Freymond could send a memo to councillors in advance of the June 15 council meeting to address the questions.

After some further debate, councillors voted 3-7 against Lachica motion to defer, with her and councillors Bierk and Riel voting in favour and Mayor Leal and councillors Don Vassiliadis, Beamer, Haacke, Parnell, Duguay, and Baldwin voting against. Councillor Matt Crowley was absent from the meeting.

Councillors then voted on the mayor’s motion, which passed carried 8-2 with councillors Lachica and Bierk voting against it.

Items endorsed by general committee will be considered by council for final approval next Monday (June 15), when registered delegations will be heard.

Council meetings are streamed live at www.peterborough.ca.

Peterborough-Nogojiwanong Pride has announced the theme for Pride Week 2026 is “Woven Together.”

On June 2, Peterborough Pride posted on their Facebook page that, following contributions from the community, the theme had been chosen to represent connections within the 2SLGBTQIA community.

While June is Pride Month, Peterborough’s annual Pride Week celebration takes place in September, with this year’s celebration set for Friday, September 18, to Sunday, September 27.

‘It is the unity and connection of each thread that gives us strength and visibility’

Peterborough Pride’s website details the reasoning behind this year’s theme, highlighting inclusion, intersectionality, and resilience and describing how each individual and their unique experience is a thread that contributes to the tapestry of the 2SLGBTQIA community.

“No thread is more important than the next,” the website reads. “It is the unity and connection of each thread that gives us strength and visibility.”

The theme also recognizes the importance of diversity and strength as 2SLGBTQIA rights continue to face attacks across the world

“When one part of our community is under attack, we all are. Transphobia, ableism, racism, sexism, homophobia, and hate are slowly cutting away at the threads of our tapestry.”

The Woven Together theme and its tapestry motifs are also inspired by, and in honour of, the AIDS Quilt. Considered the largest community arts project in the world, the 54-ton tapestry originated with American activist and author Cleve Jones in 1985.

Now under the stewardship of the National AIDS Memorial, the quilt displays memorial panels dedicated to over 110,000 individuals. Canada is one of more than 35 countries that also has an AIDS Memorial Quilt.

Pride Week theme honours the legacy of the AIDS Quilt

Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) was first recognized in the United States in 1981, with Canada reporting its first case in March 1982. A connection between Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and AIDS was recognized in 1982 in part due to reports of cases in blood transfusion recipients.

The AIDS crisis of the 1980s was closely connected to the gay liberation movement due to the disproportionate number of gay men affected by HIV/AIDS and the subsequent injustice faced by these men in the healthcare system.

“The creation of the original quilt brought the 2SLGBTQIA community together in remembrance, protest, and love,”, reads Peterborough Pride’s website. “Each square of the quilt is woven together to tell the story of a life and of those who refuse to let their story be forgotten

Further to this, Peterborough Pride states that the theme “recognizes how social determinants of health, including access to care, housing, and food security, impact the tapestry of our community and its well-being.”

Local supports for gender-diverse residents

Locally, trans and non-binary individuals have been identified by the Peterborough Community Health Centre (PCHC) as facing social, economic, and health inequalities. Members of the 2SLGBTQIA community are part of the PCHC’s priority population and the clinic provides gender-inclusive care and support through program such as the Trans ID Clinic.

The Trans ID Clinic is a free monthly service where individuals can receive guidance with navigating systems related to identification and documentation. The clinic occurs at the PCHC’s 360 George Street North location on the first Monday of the month.

“This welcoming and inclusive space provides guidance with legal name changes, gender marker updates, and updating government-issued ID,” said a spokesperson for the PCHC in an email to kawarthaNOW.

The PCHC said that individuals often face barriers related to identification and documentation when accessing healthcare, housing, employment and other important services. Programs such as the Trans ID Clinic help create a space where individuals can receive “practical assistance, information and guidance in a respectful environment.”

The Nogojiwanong Friendship Centre offers the program Creating Gender Diverse Communities, which provides one-on-one mentorship and culturally informed services for youth aged 16 or over.

Services include access to gender-affirming gear and traditional medicines to support 2SLGBTQIA youth, in particular those identifying as two-spirit or Indigiqueer. This program provides alternative well-being approaches that recognize the intersections of gender, well-being, and Indigeneity.

The Canadian Mental Health Association – Haliburton, Kawartha, Pine Ridge Branch (CMHA HKPR) operates a Trans Peer Outreach program which provides one-on-one consultation or group programming for young people aged 16 or older who identify as trans, non-binary, or are questioning their gender.

The outreach program, which is offered at no cost to trans and gender-diverse people, aims to improve well-being and quality of life through client-centred care. In their one-on-one consultation services, CMHA HKPR provides support navigating the healthcare system and identifies developing advocacy skills for accessing healthcare as a focus.

CMHA HKPR also offer a Trans Peer Family Outreach group for family members and other loved ones.

‘Governments continue to fall short regarding intersex rights’

Activist Nikki Lawrence, who is intersex, spoke to kawarthaNOW recently about her experiences accessing healthcare in Ontario. Lawrence said she had faced prejudice and witnessed ignorance regarding intersex people.

“Finding new doctors and finding doctors that want to actually work with me — it’s kind of hell,” said Lawrence.

She detailed past experiences of being dismissed and ignored by medical professionals and spoke about the need for more awareness and education on intersex not only in schools but beyond.

Intersex is considered rare and, as such, intersex individuals make up only a small percentage of the 2SLGBTQIA community. Lawrence noted she had seen some healthcare providers promote themselves as inclusive, but in practice continue to cause harm to intersex and non-cisgender members of the 2SLGBTQIA community.

“Even though they have the flag, it doesn’t always mean they’re accepting,” said Lawrence.

Through her work with Egale Canada and Intersex Canada, Lawrence is working to rewrite best practices and policy recommendations regarding how intersex infants are treated in hospitals and by healthcare providers.

A 2025 report by Egale Canada said that “federal and provincial governments continue to fall short regarding intersex rights,” noting concerns about pervasive stigma, medicalization, and systemic exclusion.

Notably, Canada permits doctors to perform surgery on intersex infants to alter their external genitalia with the permission of the parents. Egale Canada refers to this practice as Intersex Genital Mutilation (IGM).

“I’m part of the group that is working to stop the killing or hurting of infants, like cutting off their genitals without the consent of the child,” said Lawrence.

For more information about Peterborough Pride and for upcoming events, visit www.peterboroughpride.ca. The group is currently seeking volunteers to help plan Pride Week.

The original version of this story has been updated to remove the word “intersexism” to describe intersex people, as the word refers to discrimination against intersex people.

Hours before the City of Peterborough’s new tourism strategy will be considered by city council, the city has announced that its new visitor centre will be located at the Peterborough Lift Lock, one of the city’s most iconic locations.

The new visitor centre will open year round as of Friday, June 26, serving as an information hub where both visitors and locals can find information about attractions, experiences, and local businesses in Peterborough.

Before the city assumed responsibility for tourism services from the now-defunct Peterborough & The Kawarthas Economic Development (PKED) in 2025, the visitor centre was located at PKED’s office at the Venture North building in downtown Peterborough. It was then moved to its current location at the box office inside the Peterborough Memorial Centre.

At its new location at 353 Hunter Street East in East City, at the base of the Lift Lock, the visitor centre will be able to welcome visitors arriving by boat, car, bike, or on foot. According to a media release from the city, the space has been designed with flexibility and accessibility in mind. It will be operated by Peterborough Tourism, the city’s tourism services and destination marketing program.

“This new Visitor Centre at the Lift Lock represents an exciting step forward in how we welcome people to Peterborough,” said Mayor Jeff Leal in the media release. “The Peterborough Lift Lock is one of our most iconic attractions and a celebrated National Historic Site of Canada. As the largest urban centre along the waterway, our connection to the water is central to both our community identity and visitor experience. This new space strengthens that connection and invites exploration year-round.”

The new location represents a collaboration between the city and Parks Canada, which operated the Peterborough Lift Lock Visitor Centre at the same location until it was closed in early 2020 due to the pandemic and never reopened.

“The Visitor Centre at the Lift Lock will once again be a welcoming, accessible hub where visitors and community members can come together, explore, and experience all that our vibrant region has to offer,” said Peterborough MPP Emma Harrison.

“By reopening the doors to more inclusive and engaging ways to discover the Trent-Severn Waterway, this initiative helps bring people closer to the stories, culture, and connections that make Peterborough so special. It’s also great to see the centre being run by people who know it best, bringing local knowledge and passion to the experience.”

In the release, the city states that programming will be developed in the coming months for the visitor centre “that celebrates the area’s culture, heritage, and natural environment, including Indigenous perspectives, with opportunities to amplify diverse voices and stories.”

Meanwhile, city council will be considering the city’s new tourism strategy at its general committee meeting on Monday night (June 8). The strategy, entitled “Discover Peterborough: Tourism Growth Strategy,” is intended to guide the city’s tourism service delivery and activities through to 2030.

The 56-page strategy was developed by Bannikin Travel & Tourism, following city council’s approval on February 3, 2025 of a $100,000 capital budget for a tourism strategic plan, using funds that were previously allocated to PKED.

While the tourism strategy was being developed, the city has proceeded with the implementation of tourism services under the banner of Peterborough Tourism. Activities to date include the development and launch of the Elevate Peterborough pilot project that supports local festivals and events, support for a variety of tourism-related festivals, events, and tournaments, creation and distribution of print materials and advertising campaigns, travel media hosting and major media promotion, a new website, and more.