Rupert Hotel Fire - 32 Years Ago

Thursday December 23rd marks the thirty-second anniversary of the Rupert Hotel fire and the loss of ten lives.

The Rupert was located at 182 Parliament Street close to Queen Street East. Once an upscale hotel, the Rupert, while licensed, was overcrowded and badly maintained.

A plaque erected at the site notes that the fire "sparked action by municipal and provincial governments and community organizations to improve conditions in rooming houses."

It did, for a time. In the years following the tragedy, about 500 units of Toronto housing were created or upgraded to meet or exceed the already existing standards. Not long after the plaque was installed, though, the funding that supported the upgrades and advocacy ended.

What has happened since then?

Not much.

Since amalgamation Toronto has had two rules on rooming houses. They are legal in the old City of Toronto and in parts of Etobicoke and East York. Being legal means they are subject to all kinds of regulations.

But in Scarborough, North York and York, rooming houses are strictly illegal. Those living illegally in these parts of Toronto can be evicted.

City staff say there are about 1,000 rooming houses in the city. According to a recent article in Now Magazine there are likely many more.

“Legalizing them across the city would protect vulnerable tenants and create a housing solution that can be put into place now, without large investments in infrastructure.”*

There were fires at 69 illegal rooming houses in the Toronto area between 2013 and 2017 according to the Fire Marshal. At a meeting in October 2021 as City Council delayed once again taking action on licensing, it was reported that there have been 16 fatal rooming housing fires in Toronto between 2010 and 2020 and 14 fatalities were in unlicensed rooming houses.

All that is needed is political will to create and sustain more safe affordable housing.

*Jin Huh, Douglas Kwan, and Sean Meagher @nowtoronto October 4, 2021

-------------------------- 

Rupert Hotel December 1989 

Gordon was sorry 
but it was tough keeping warm 
and he’d had some to drink 
so setting fire to those papers 
on the floor in the middle 
of his second-floor room 
made some kind of sense. 

At the Rupert Hotel, 
a three-storey brick walk up 
in a licensed city rooming house 
off Queen Street East 
at Parliament 
those with few options 
and few dollars could exist, 
in a way. 

Gordon’s warming fire soon leapt out of control 
flames and choking smoke filling the corridors. 
As the fire gained full possession of the hallways 
that license pinned to the wall 
wasn’t worth the paper 
it was printed on 
as far as the protection it afforded 
those 31 tenants 
at the Rupert 
that wintry December night. 

A sprinkler system might have helped; 
could have halted the fire’s progress. 
And the tenants could have taken some action 
if the alarm system had been operable 
or if fire extinguishers 
stored in the basement were reachable. 

Seventeen long minutes passed 
before someone called 911. 
When firefighters arrived 
the whole building was enveloped. 
Flames leapt out of top floor windows. 
Fearless firefighters using ladders forced their way 
into the searing heat of the second floor. 

Later a witness called it 
“A Vision out of Hell.” 
As the fire raged people screamed, 
cried out for friends. 
It took six hours and eighteen crews 
to subdue the blaze. 
Thankfully, some tenants were saved 
and many escaped. 

For days crews chopped through ice 
and sifted through debris to locate bodies. 
They found nine men 
and a woman who had returned to the building 
to help a friend. 
Donna Marie Cann died, 
as the others had 
from heavy smoke inhalation. 

Soon an inquest was held. 
Recommendations were made 
new rules created 
regulations established 
housing planned. 

After a while all was forgotten. 
Rules and regulations lapsed, 
were ignored or opposed 
and the programs ended. 

In the city today austerity policies 
compel people to rent rooms 
in perilous and dangerous buildings. 
Many flee the downtown 
to illegal suburban homes 
where life is cheaper. 

Bob Wood, 2020

Some Grey Cup Memories #2

Several years ago, I was asked to do a couple of stories related to the 100th Grey Cup. TSN had commissioned a series of eight documentaries on the Grey Cup and to my delight I was asked to write on the 1972 Cup and specifically one of the heroes of that game, Chuck Ealey.  This Sunday’s Grey Cup is the first one played in Hamilton with the Tiger Cats playing since that 1972 game. So it seemed somewhat appropriate  to print a lightly edited version of my earlier story.  Here it is.

-----

The 1972 Grey Cup held Dec. 3 at Hamilton’s Ivor Wynne Stadium was decided by a last-second field goal. The Hamilton Tiger Cats won an exciting match 13-10 over the Saskatchewan Roughriders. Rookie quarterback Chuck Ealey was the star of that game and most of that season for the Cats.

The game represented much more than the typical east-west Cup contest and this is why: Ealey shouldn’t have been in a position to earn the game’s MVP award, because in a just world he would have been quarterbacking in the National Football League.

Bowl victories and an undefeated college record (35-0) at the University of Toledo weren’t enough to get Ealey drafted by an NFL team. Prior to the draft, his agent sent a “well-thought-out, professional, not harsh” letter to all NFL teams, Ealey recalls.

The essence of the letter went like this:

“The only position I’m interested in playing is quarterback. Thank you for your consideration.”

He wanted to play QB because clearly, that was the position where he excelled. But an Afro-American had no chance to compete for a quarterback position in the NFL of the seventies. There were no takers among NFL general managers. 

“There was an overall stigma in the NFL at that time that African Americans were not to be playing quarterback,” recalled Ealey. 

And so, Ealey, the quarterback, moved on.

This story isn’t unique, of course.

I talked with Charles Officer who directed the movie Stone Thrower.* Officer, had considered doing a “bigger picture” that would have looked at other Afro-American quarterbacks who came up here to play. Standouts like Warren Moon, Condredge Holloway, Damon Allen and Bernie Custis all had to come north for their opportunity.

In 1951, Custis, a star quarterback at Syracuse University, was drafted sixth overall by the Cleveland Browns. But the Browns had no intention of letting him play the pivot position so let him go to Hamilton. Custis became the first Afro-American regular starting quarterback in North America. Earning all-star recognition in ’51, he was moved to halfback the next season.

“It’s the same story,” says Officer. “Bernie Custis coming up here and then getting switched over. He had to come here for a reason.”

Officer, an Afro-Canadian actor, writer, director and former semi-pro hockey player, believed that by documenting Ealey’s journey he could tell the bigger story of what was going on in American society in the seventies.

Jael and Chuck on the way to
Portsmouth Ohio

Meanwhile, Jael Richardson, Chuck’s daughter, has been on a journey of her own, recounted in her 2012 book, similarly called The Stone Thrower: A Daughter's Lessons, a Father's Life.** Richardson was born after her father’s football career had ended. As an adult, she would go to Ohio with her Dad.

“When we went back to Toledo, people would start screaming ‘Oh there’s Chuck Ealey’ and ask for autographs,” Jael’s father recalls. “She’d go, so who are you? What did you do?”

Ealey acknowledges that he “never shared a lot of story of how I got here.”

It is hard today to appreciate fully the barriers Chuck Ealey faced growing up poor in the racially divided city of Portsmouth, Ohio, a typical American small town. Portsmouth was the kind of a place that valued football players but didn’t let black children swim in their public pools.  Located on the Ohio River and bordering Kentucky, the city was a significant pass-through point on the route of the Underground Railroad and the opportunity for freedom in Canada for fugitive slaves.

Ealey remembers the prejudices that held him and others back and contrasts that with the freedom “to do things a lot differently” that he found when he arrived in Hamilton. 

“There were none of the issues that socially held you back or that seemed to hold you back in the States,” he stated. And so, Ealey was able to continue with his winning ways that memorable rookie season, 1972, in Hamilton, all the way to the Grey Cup win.

Director Officer documents how Ealey, denied the opportunity to play quarterback in his native land, essentially followed that same path that slaves had taken to get to Canada. 

Charles Officer, Director
The Stone Thrower

As Officer told me of his movie:

“It is a significant African American story that has everything to do about being Canadian.”

-------------------------------------------------------------

*You can find Officer’s movie these days on youtube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmL1EvtQy3E

**The Stone Thrower – A Daughter’s Lessons. A Father’s Life. A Memoir is available at https://www.dundurn.com/books_/t22117/a9781771022057-the-stone-thrower

 

The Stone Thrower an illustrated children’s book by Jael Ealey Richardson was published in  2016.

https://houseofanansi.com/products/the-stone-thrower

Some Grey Cup Memories #1

My hometown team is in the Grey Cup this year.

As a kid, when I first became interested in the Canadian Football League, I thought the Hamilton Tiger Cats were in the “Annual Classic” every year.   

That was because from my earliest memory of the CFL they were.  I’m pretty sure the first game I watched was the ‘57 affair- the first of three where the Cats tangled with the Winnipeg Blue Bombers.  Cats took this one but the Bombers won the next two.

This seven year old watched the Ti-Cat victory from my grandparents’ home, as my parents were out at a Grey Cup party.  Weren’t all parents out at a Grey Cup parties in those days?

Of course, the Tiger Cats weren’t, in fact, in the game every year missing out with a feeble 4-10 record in 1960. They returned in 1961, though, where they lost to Winnipeg again.  Strangely, perhaps, I remember less of this one than the Eastern Final conference played over two games in the lead up to the championship.  (Memory is assisted with my well-thumbed copy of Football Today and Yesterday penned by Tony Allan, former Sports Editor of the Winnipeg Tribune.)   

Bernie Faloney #92

In front of a record crowd of 33,161 fans at the Canadian Exhibition, my team had been badly beaten in the first game by the hated Argos.  In those days, the Eastern Championship was decided in a two game total point home and home series.  The Cats needed to overcome this 18-point deficit in the second match.  They had actually done that by the third quarter.

But then, with one minute to go the Argos tied it up.  Hamilton was stuck deep in its own end.  Bernie Faloney (a first round draft choice of the San Francisco 49ers who had come to Canada for better pay) was intercepted.

“All the Argos had to do was boot the ball to the dead-line, which was in with easy range for a kicker like Dave Mann –and it is was in the bag,” wrote Allen. 

Instead, the Argos chose to kill time and actually lost fifteen yards.

Mann, who had a punting average of 48 yards that season, then put the ball into the end zone.  It was returned by Ti-Cats kicker Don Sutherin.  Mann kicked it back and Bernie Faloney had the ball in his hands.  

“This time Faloney brought it out to safety and then with illegal blocks being thrown all over the place (blocks on punts were illegal in those days) raced the length of the field with it,” wrote Allen in 1962.

At this point, my family was startled as our neighbour, in excitement and inebriation, ran out of his house and discharged his shotgun.  Such behaviour was not a regular occurrence in the evolving suburban, semi-rural Burlington of 1961.

It  was all sorted out, at the game, that is.  Faloney’s run didn’t count. The Ti-Cats prevailed in overtime.  You can imagine that the Grey Cup was a bit of an anti-climax for me this year. 

Ian Sunter kicks game
winning field goal
in 1972 Grey Cup

The 1972 game in Hamilton (Ti-Cats 13 - Saskatchewan 10) was the most memorable from my perspective.  I was at this one. One of the game’s stars, Ti-Cat QB Chuck Ealey was 22 that year as was your blogger.  

My keen interest, however,  waned after this game partly as a result of an unnerving incident when my, then, young girlfriend (now, long suffering, wife of nearly forty-six years) and I were leaving Ivor Wynne  Stadium.  A bottle,  hurled irresponsibly from the north stands struck and injured someone on the street quite close to us.  From then on, football spectating seemed like less fun.

I was “back” again in 1989 though.  Tony Champion had a terrific game in the Hamilton’s 43-40 loss to the Green Riders.  You’ll remember this  catch.                                      https://www.facebook.com/watch/?                                                                             v=627010781143924

I had a minor involvement in the post-game “near victory” parade.  At the time, I was working in a small feminist oriented social service agency in downtown Hamilton.  I was the only male staff on duty the day of the parade.  Earlier, my female colleagues had been clear about their lack of interest in the game in particular and North American professional sports more generally. 

The parade  was being marshalled  a short block from our office when I returned from visiting a client at his home.   My  K-car was stuck behind the last float - Tony Champion’s open convertible.  I followed slowly,  immediately behind the Champion car.  

As the end of the motorcade passed in front of the office,  I was surprised to see my previously disinterested colleagues lined up at the window.  Pretending to be part of the parade, I waved, as heroes do.  They laughed.

No Grey Cup Party this year for this parent.  I’ll be potatoing on the couch,  witnessing a certain Ti-Cat victory while sharing the experience with my Twitter friends.

Sarah's Journey is Back

Simcoe writer David Beasley has produced many well-researched books of fiction and of non-fiction.

An early work, A Hamilton Romance, took a critical look at Canadian society as it was in 1945.

Beasley “discovered” Canada’s first great novelist Major John Richardson in The Canadian Don Quixote: the Life and Works of Major John Richardson. 

He took on the role of his ancestor Richard Beasley, first settler in Hamilton Ontario, in From Bloody Beginnings.

Beasley even delved into the crime fiction genre in three books wherein a library detective who carries a gun chases down a missing stamp collection and  kidnappers while finding his way through the shadowy world of big city politics.

I have read a fair number of David’s works.

Sarah’s Journey, soon to be re- released, is probably my favourite.

It is the story of Sarah Lewis,  born a slave In Virginia.  Sarah found her way to freedom to Upper Canada in 1822 where her children make their way among Simcoe’s growing black community made up of escaped slaves and prominent 19th century Simconians.

Here is some information on the book signing and release coming up soon in Simcoe.

                                                 ----------

                           SARAH’ S JOURNEY IS BACK 

                                    Price: $25.00 Cdn. & US 

                         Sponsored by Firefly and Fox Books 

                                Thursday December 9th 

                                8.30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. 

                                     Sabor Espresso,     

                            11 Norfolk Street North, Simcoe ON.,  

                            (Next door to Firefly and Fox) 

                                             ----------

More on David Beasley at http://www.davuspublishing.com/EN/about.php

CPP Investments Should Divest from Fossil Fuels

Lately I have become involved in a senior’s climate action group called SCAN! https://seniorsforclimateactionnow.org/

We are building a seniors’ group that is democratic, accountable, equitable and participatory. 

SCAN! believes we need decisive action to:

*rapidly drive down carbon emissions and eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels and petrochemicals;

*support those whose jobs have been destroyed by the climate crisis and those whose jobs are  threatened by dramatically reducing carbon emissions;

*begin to restore the ecological damage caused by economic growth; and

*transition from an economy:

        -of accumulation to an economy of sustainability

-of extraction to an economy of stewardship

        -of exploitation and inequality to an economy of fairness. 

One of the initiatives SCAN has undertaken is in the area of Pension Divestment.  Here is a piece that the Chair of our Pension Divestment Working Group penned for the Toronto Star. https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2021/10/04/seniors-are-calling-on-cpp-investments-to-divest-from-fossil-fuels.html

Recently, I wrote to John Graham, President and CEO of CPP Investments.  CPP Investments is a global investment management organisation that invests the assets of the Canada Pension Plan.  Incredibly, they have actually been increasing investments in fossil fuels, especially the tar sands fuelling the climate crisis! CPP Investments should be showing leadership by investing heavily in renewable energy. 

A copy of my letter is below.  

Please consider sending a similar letter.

Thanks,

Bob Wood

-----------------------------

John Graham, President and CEO 
and Heather Munro-Blum, Chairperson, Board of Directors
CPP Investments
One Queen Street East, Suite 2500
Toronto, ON, M5C 2W5
contact@cppib.com

Dear Mr. Graham and Ms. Munro-Blum,

I am a senior and a beneficiary of the Canada Pension Plan. As I have grown older, I’ve experienced the growing strength of climate change. I am concerned with the force and severity of the weather we now experience. I am devastated at the destruction of our forests and wildlife from forest fires. I am horrified at so many needless, climate-related deaths. I have become increasingly aware of how marginalized and Indigenous communities are disproportionally affected. I worry about the world my loved ones will inherit.

A recent report from United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change makes it clear that we must keep fossil fuels in the ground and move quickly to clean, renewable energy. This same body warned us all in 2018 that “limiting global warming to 1.5⁰C would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society.” Three years later, but with still little action from the world’s leaders on the climate crisis, the head of the UN has declared that humanity is in a Code Red situation. 

I am very concerned at what I have learned about CPP Investments’ fossil fuel holdings:

• nearly 20 per cent of its Canadian holdings in Alberta, in fossil fuels;

• extensive holdings in U.S. fracking companies;

• coal investments in China, in spite of Canada’s international campaign to transition from coal;

• a major offshore natural gas investment in Ireland.

But most distressing is that that CPP Investments has actually been increasing investments in fossil fuels, especially the tar sands. You are fuelling the climate crisis! You should be showing leadership by investing heavily in renewable energy.

As someone who has contributed to the CPP I am, effectively, a shareholder. My children are contributors and are therefore future beneficiaries. We insist that our money be used to help solve the climate crisis, not contribute to it.

I try to make environmentally and socially aware decisions, whether about purchases, or household energy conservation, for example. I therefore want to ensure the investments that fund my retirement don’t further endanger our children, future generations, and our planet.

As you are responsible for the largest pension fund in Canada, you must ensure that the CPP is funded in keeping with a 1.5⁰C degree of warming. It is imperative that you not make new investments in fossil fuels and that you divest from existing ones by 2025. You must invest ambitiously in renewable energy – which is extremely profitable – and other climate solutions. You must respect the sovereignty of Indigenous people and invest in a just transition for energy workers and their communities. You must stop betting on dubious technologies like carbon capture and storage.

Finally, in keeping with your biannual public meeting’s emphasis on transparency, I want improved disclosure, so that contributors and beneficiaries can see how you invest our money. 

I look forward to your response.

Bob Wood

Copy: divestmentproject@seniorsforclimateactionnow.org

Rupert Hotel December 1989*

In light of Toronto City Council further delaying making necessary reforms to rooming house regulations I've updated my poem Rupert Hotel December 1989*.  To learn more see John Michael McGrath's piece at https://www.tvo.org/article/why-does-toronto-exist-and-what-is-it-for

 

         Gordon was sorry
        but it was tough keeping warm
and he’d had some to drink
so setting fire to those papers
on the floor in the middle
of his second-floor room
made some kind of sense.

thestar.com

At the Rupert Hotel,
a three-storey brick walk up
in a licensed city rooming house
off Queen Street East
at Parliament
those with few options
and few dollars could exist,
in a way.

Gordon’s warming fire soon leapt out of control
flames and choking smoke filling the corridors.
        As the fire gained full possession of the hallways
that license pinned to the wall
wasn’t worth the paper
it was printed on
as far as the protection it afforded
those 31 tenants
at the Rupert
that wintry December night.

A sprinkler system might have helped;
could have halted the fire’s progress.
And the tenants could have taken some action
if the alarm system had been operable
or if fire extinguishers 
stored in the basement were reachable.

Seventeen long minutes passed 
before someone called 911.
When firefighters arrived 
the whole building was enveloped.
Flames leapt out of top floor windows.
Fearless firefighters using ladders forced their way
into the searing heat of the second floor.

Later a witness called it
“A Vision out of Hell.”
As the fire raged people screamed, 
cried out for friends.
It took six hours and eighteen crews 
to subdue the blaze.
Thankfully, some tenants were saved 
and many escaped.

For days crews chopped through ice 
and sifted through debris to locate bodies.
They found nine men
and a woman who had returned to the building 
to help a friend.
Donna Marie Cann died, 
as the others had
from heavy smoke inhalation.

Soon an inquest was held.
Recommendations were made
new rules created
regulations established
housing planned.

After a while all was forgotten.
Rules and regulations lapsed,
were ignored or opposed
and the programs ended.

In the city today austerity policies
compel people to rent rooms
in perilous and dangerous buildings.
Many flee the downtown
to illegal suburban homes
where life is cheaper.

*There were fires at 69 illegal rooming houses in the Toronto area between 2013 and 2017 according to the Fire Marshal. At a meeting in October 2012 as City Council delayed once again taking action on licensing, it was reported that there have been 16 fatal rooming housing fires in Toronto between 2010 and 2020 and 14 fatalities were in unlicensed rooming houses. 

Not Much Has Changed

(This story was originally published June 07, 2010 on the Hamilton Spectator Poverty Project - No Excuse https://poverty.thespec.com/page/2/ 

A "SHIFT" TO SIDEWALKS FROM SOCIAL SERVICES

The Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund (OMPF) assists municipalities with their social program costs. Recently OMPF reconciled the 2008 allocations against real expenditures and costs and as a result many municipalities received more money. Hamilton got about $3.1 million dollars; the Region of Niagara got $2.1 million.

I became aware of this today when reading a bulletin from CATCH (Citizens at City Hall). CATCH is a volunteer community group that encourages civic participation in Hamilton. The CATCH story focused on the fact that Hamilton councillors were all going to be getting about $250,000 each to spend in their wards on sidewalk repairs. "In a shift from normal practice," they apparently decided not to follow the usual priority setting process for allocating funds. 

This is indeed a shift but it is an election year and you'll see more shifts and other silliness before October 25.

The CATCH story went on to note that $3.1 million of the $3.6 million fund being divvied up by the councillors came from the OMPF reconciliation dollars. 

But shouldn't that money be going back into social services? That suggestion was rejected by council.

I mentioned Niagara. It took its monies and put $600,000 into Emergency Medical Services and the remaining $1.5 million into an account to offset the Community Services net deficit. That makes sense; seems logical.   

Up in Thunder Bay, the city got $1.3 million back. Government member Michael Gravelle, the MPP for Thunder Bay-Superior North, was "absolutely delighted about this additional funding for social programs and other services."

Hamilton politicians seem to be marching to a different drummer here. Or am I missing something?

Paul Martin and the Common Sense Gang

I recall standing with a one-term Ontario New Democratic MPP on Pine Street in Burlington.  It is a beautiful spring day in 1995.  A newly built non-profit housing project, Wellington Terrace, was celebrating its grand opening.  Balloons, refreshments and there is a ribbon is ready to be cut. 

“You know if we aren’t reelected there will be no more places like this built,” he told me.

No more built, I thought.  While I was sympathetic to his perspective, the view seemed more self-serving hyperbole than realistic forecast.

But the MPP was right. You know the story. 

Following World War II the federal government jumped into the housing field in a big way. Polices were slanted towards home ownership. While social housing and creation of rental housing weren’t high priorities, there were some initiatives.

Major cuts to government funding for social housing began in 1984. The Brian Mulroney government slashed national affordable housing spending by almost $2 billion. In 1993, Mulroney’s successor, Kim Campbell, cancelled all new funding for affordable housing.

Then things worsened with Paul Martin’s 1995 budget. 

Paul Martin

On February 27 that year, Martin put on his budget boots and kicked responsibility for social housing down to the provinces.  He cancelled all spending on new social housing projects. The Finance Minister hung his hat on many of the popular clichés of the day calling for “hard choices” and “real change,” “smaller and smarter government,” bucking the status quo and “simple common sense.” 

The rhetoric mattered not at all to those who were struggling to find housing that was safe and affordable. What really mattered, as we have discovered, was that Canada now had no housing strategy; the only developed country without such a plan. 

Back to that spring day in 1995:  As I enjoyed the opening of one of the last non-profit housing communities built in Ontario, we were just months away from more cuts from the new Mike Harris government.  Their idea of common sense (in fact, they called it a revolution) included the cancellation of 17,000 units of co-op and non-profit housing that had been approved but not completed.

A Preventable Crisis

I recall standing with a one-term Ontario New Democratic MPP on Pine Street in Burlington.  It is a beautiful spring day in 1995.  A newly built non-profit housing project, Wellington Terrace, was celebrating its grand opening.  Balloons, refreshments and there is a ribbon is ready to be cut. 

“You know if we aren’t reelected there will be no more places like this built,” he told me.

No more built, I thought.  While I was sympathetic to his perspective, the view seemed more self-serving hyperbole than realistic forecast.

But the MPP was right. You know the story. 

Following World War II the federal government jumped into the housing field in a big way. Polices were slanted towards home ownership. While social housing and creation of rental housing weren’t high priorities, there were some initiatives.

Major cuts to government funding for social housing began in 1984. The Brian Mulroney government slashed national affordable housing spending by almost $2 billion. In 1993, Mulroney’s successor, Kim Campbell, cancelled all new funding for affordable housing.

Then things worsened with Paul Martin’s 1995 budget. 

On February 27 that year, Martin put on his budget boots and kicked responsibility for social housing down to the provinces.  He cancelled all spending on new social housing projects. The Finance Minister hung his hat on many of the popular clichés of the day calling for “hard choices” and “real change,” “smaller and smarter government,” bucking the status quo and “simple common sense.” 

The rhetoric mattered not at all to those who were struggling to find housing that was safe and affordable. What really mattered, as we have discovered, was that Canada now had no housing strategy; the only developed country without such a plan. 

Back to that spring day in 1995:  As I enjoyed the opening of one of the last non-profit housing communities built in Ontario, we were just months away from more cuts from the new Mike Harris government.  Their idea of common sense (in fact, they called it a revolution) included the cancellation of 17,000 units of co-op and non-profit housing that had been approved but not completed.

New Book

Recently I flashed back to that day in 1995 while reading Denise Davy’s book Her Name was Margaret - Life and Death on the Streets.

Margaret Jacobson died after falling and hitting her head in a Mr. Sub, where she'd gone to keep warm.  She was 51. 

The author gained access to nearly 900 pages of Margaret Jacobson’s medical records going back to the sixties.  Davy is able to show the impacts of deinstitutionalization quite well by doing this. I knew a few specifics about the impacts of this process/policy of discharging people into the community but had never seen it all laid out like this as she has done by using the medical records of one individual.

Her Name was Margaret is a difficult read because it is a reminder of how we lack political will to solve a solvable problem. As the author writes: “If society is judged by the way it treats its most vulnerable, then the way Margaret was treated shows how we have failed.”

Margaret was a child with great potential who developed mental health issues as a teen.  She had the misfortune of entering into the Ontario mental health system when the new idea of deinstitutionalization was the order of the day. Eventually, 80% of psychiatric hospital beds in Ontario were closed.  The thinking was that people with mental health issues could be better served in the community. However, without appropriate supports available in the community the idea was doomed to failure. 

 Margaret and many others were discharged to rundown unregulated boarding houses (later called second level lodging homes and more recently known as residential care facilities).  She bounced around in this world for 23 years.  Her health did not improve.

Through this, Margaret’s parents were of no help. In a letter, her father put her problems down to her “unwillingness to be delivered from the bondage of Satan….”

Denise Day winds up her book with reasons to hope that things can improve.  She cites various successful Housing First programs running in Canada and around the world.

‘Housing First’ is a recovery-oriented approach to ending homelessness that centers on quickly moving people experiencing homelessness into independent and permanent housing and then providing additional supports and services as needed.   That is how the Homeless Hub, part of a research institute devoted to homelessness in Canada, defines Housing First.

While working with people experiencing homelessness some thirty years ago, we didn’t have this rather wordy rationale for our work. I seem to recall something more like “if people just have stable. safe and affordable housing they will better able to cope with life’s challenges.”    It just makes sense.

Denise Davy asks if Margaret would have responded to those kinds of Housing First programs if they had been available to her. Her answer is yes.

This brings me back to that opening of Wellington Terrace in Burlington more than 25 years ago – the same year that Margaret Jacobson died on the streets of Hamilton.  

Wellington Terrace functions today offering 126 units of housing for older adults. Forty of those units offer some level of support.

That is the kind of support that could have helped Margaret and others.  It was needed then and is needed now but its availability has been greatly reduced by governments’ badly thought out policy and funding decisions.

As Davy says, “The mess that exists today was entirely man-made and preventable.” 

Her Name Was Margaret: Life and Death on the Streets by Denise Davy, Wolsak & Wynn, 2021, 300 pages.

"Truly Troubling"

Back in the day when I was a municipal councillor there was no such thing as an Integrity Commissioner.

Now, according to the Municipal Act, municipalities must have such a person.

That individual is expected to report to Council in an independent manner on a number of local government functions.  For example, they will look at the application of the code of conduct for Council and local Board members and the application of any procedures, rules and policies governing the ethical behaviour of members of council and of local boards.  There are other functions set out in the Act. 

The concept of promoting transparency and ensuring codes of conduct are adhered to is a good one.   There are detractors of course. Cost is an issue.  But that is beyond the scope of this brief post.  

Let’s take a quick look at the 2020 Annual Report of the Integrity Commissioner for the Corporation of Norfolk authored by John Mascarin.

The report  can be found beginning at page 31 at https://www.norfolkcounty.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/CIC-Agenda-April-13-1.pdf

Here are some highlights.

Complaints

Three complaints were examined in 2020. 

1. It was alleged that Mayor Chopp offended the Code and the County’s Procedural By-law when she displayed a cartoon image of a fecal sandwich in a meeting with provincial staff.  The Commissioner found “when considered in context, however crude and juvenile the display of the cartoon may have been in a formal meeting it did not amount to a breach of the Code.”  We trust that this wasn’t a lunch meeting.

2. A second complaint grew out of the first one.  That complaint “related to the improper disclosure of the identity of the complainant on the part of the Mayor.”  A Norfolk County bylaw is clear.  The Integrity Commissioner shall identify all complainants to the individual who is subject of the complaint and require that the subject maintain the identity of the complainant as confidential. (See Section 14.6 of By-law 2018-33) Mayor Chopp contended that the Commissioner was the one who had breached confidentiality. The Commissioner “concluded otherwise” and determined it was the Mayor who had breached. 

3. This complaint alleged that the Mayor Chopp contravened three provisions of the Code of Conduct in interactions with members of the public in Port Dover on May 2nd.  The Commissioner concluded she hadn’t.

Inquiries

The report summarized  inquiries received over the last year.  They fell into three areas.  People were concerned about that fecal sandwich cartoon and the Mayor’s public square haircut stunt but most importantly, in my view, were concerns regarding the dysfunction of Council. 

Haircut Protest - Photo from blogTO.com

The Commissioner called this situation “truly troubling.”  

Council Relations

The November 17, 2020 Council meeting is cited. Many will recall that the attempted addition of the topic of Council Relations to the Agenda prompted the mayor to make allegations of a witch-hunt, axe and replace the Deputy Mayor, and exit the building in the midst of the meeting.

In an understatement the Commissioner wrote that  “the acrimony between members of Council was never more apparent than at this meeting.” And if you thought that was bad the Commissioner noted that “we have been advised that the level of discord has not abated in 2021.”

Should the average Norfolker care if Council members get along?

For sure.

The report notes: 

• The lack of team unity.

• The “dread” some feel about attending meetings of Council and committee.

• The adversarial and hostile atmosphere both inside and outside the Council Chambers.

• That Council operates in a debilitated state but also in a selectively secretive manner with a “complete disregard for the Code of Conduct, Council and staff policies, and policies that are put in place to protect members of the public.”

Council training and team building, agreed to some time ago,  have not happened yet.  It may be too late for the team of 2018-2022.  But when elections come around in October 2022 voters should expect answers from incumbents and contenders on how this will all be fixed. 

Worrying about “Backyard” Birds

Following is a little piece that I wrote last year before COVID hit and we had other things to worry about then birds in our backyards.   Here is hoping this year we will return to something approaching normalcy.

----------

Last year I had planned to sign up for the Great Backyard Bird Count. I just forgot to do it.  Next year I’ll sign up for sure although it presents some issues for me.

The Great Backyard Bird Count (GBBC) (https://www.birdscanada.org/bird-science/great-backyard-bird-count/) is billed as a free, fun, and easy event that engages bird watchers to count birds.  You can do this for as little as 15 minutes in your backyard or anywhere you want for that matter.  The Count is open to experts, beginners or non-experts like me. 

I wish my excuse for forgetting the GBBC last year was that I was busy. However, for the days in question mostly what I was doing was sitting at my keyboard, concocting excuses for not doing housework and looking out my windows at my bird feeders.  

(I’ve got eight feeders up right now. One family member says eight is too many.  A Port Rowan neighbour has fourteen, I point out, so you can’t really object to eight, right?)

But, back to my point here which is that I’ve been thinking and thinking and thinking some more about backyard birds; the context being that we run a small bed and breakfast and many of our guests are birders.  The contemplation of this conundrum is causing me considerable anxiety.

Do you know any birders? 

I’m generalizing here but birders are much like any other people who adopt an intense interest in a hobby. They are enthused, obsessed;  some even fanatical. 

The French novelist Honore de Balzac has said that,  “a hobby is a happy medium between a passion and a monomania.” 

Humour columnist Dave Barry wrote that hobbies of any kind are boring except to people who have the same hobby.

These insights are not lost on yours truly.  

And then there is the whole problem of what to call the hobby/obsession.

I realized that I wasn’t sensitive to this issue when watching the movie - The Big Year.  In that flick Steve Martin’s character (Stu) is insult put down by a professional for leaving work to go bird watching.  Stu took great umbrage.

“It’s called birding,” huffed Stu!! 

 Our home is located in great birding territory.  Indeed, it is a not so well known fact that more bird species have been seen in the Port Rowan/Long Point area than the much ballyhooed Point Peele vicinity. 

Issues

Carolina Wren seen IN our Backyard

Some have suggested that we ought to keep a list of all birds seen in our backyard. There are, however, a number of vexing issues that the development of such a list would present.

For example, to be counted does a bird actually have to touch down in our yard? That would be a fairly clear-cut definition to use.

But what if, say, one observes a “good” bird flying over one’s yard? We had an immature bald eagle fly past sometime back.   Now, to be frank, it is probably more accurate to say it was over the neighbour’s yard. But let’s face it, our list would be a superior one if I could add that bald eagle. So, I’m leaning to the backyard list inclusion criteria being “seen from my backyard.” That should make for a better quality list.

But here’s another worry. From my front yard I have a distant view of the Inner Harbour of Long Point Bay on Lake Erie and this will surely produce many shorebirds and an enhanced list. In fact, a few years ago on Easter Sunday we recorded a couple of white pelicans flapping and gliding over the Bay. Clearly, it will be more gratifying for my guests, then, if that backyard list captures anything that can be seen from the front yard as well.

White Pelicans seen FROM
our Backyard

 I’m certain the guests will be keen to contribute to the   list. In fact, repeat visitors (some do actually return)   could be encouraged to have their own personalized list.   Perhaps this will be an incentive to return.

 Do I anticipate problems? Well, I’m told that some   birders can be competitive and argumentative.  (Did I   mention that we took photos to document those white   pelicans?)  

 So, if there are disagreements on sightings will it fall to  the reluctant but affable host to resolve disputes?

 And will guests be trampling all over my much-in-need   of  landscaping front yard in an effort to maximize their  viewing range

And what about the neighbours?

Lots to think about....

Raising Social Assistance Rates

I just read an interesting policy paper from Open Policy Ontario.

Authored by John Stapleton and Yvonne Yuan the paper looks at the question of whether  higher social assistance rates lead to higher caseloads during recessions.

Well, they don’t.  

The authors conclude that when you take a look at unemployment data and minimum wage levels over time you’ll see that that higher social assistance benefit levels will not result in more people on social assistance. 

Stapleton and Yuan recommend immediate implementation of either: 

1. Raising the single Ontario Works assistance rate by 14.3% to $838 per month to equal 40% of full-time minimum wages along with parallel increases for other family sizes or 

2. Raising Ontario refundable tax credits by $1,365 per year so that all low-income single people can benefit from an increase in income. 

They also recommend that minimum wages be immediately increased to $15.00 per hour.

Read the report at https://openpolicyontario.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2021/03/culprits-20210219r-sacs.pdf

----------

Fast Facts

• There has been no increase in rates since 2018 a continuation of a gradual downward slide in the value of social assistance that began with a drastic cut in 1995.  
• According to the Ontario government, evidence shows that racially diverse, newcomer and low-income communities have been impacted more significantly by COVID-19 than others.
• The federal government’s response to the pandemic has identified $2,000 per month as a “basic income” for people who have lost their jobs. The current rates for single individuals on Ontario Works (OW) is $733 and for Ontario Disability Support program (ODSP) is $1,169.00 fall far below this “basic income.”. 
• The annual cost of poverty in Ontario is between $27.1 and $33 billion taking into account loss of tax revenue and increased expenses in the health and justice systems (Feed Ontario. The Cost of Poverty in Ontario 2019, p.4).  

Here is a link to a chart that illustrates how the buying power of social assistance rates has continued to sink over the years, because of minimal or no annual increases to match inflation. 

https://1drv.ms/w/s!AvRzOEPfSVfDvQTzDtVAYONTQ22W?e=LJGTc5

Ford Government Turning Its Back on People Living with Disabilities

 

Tuesday's Toronto Star has a story by Brendan Kennedy on delays at the Social Benefits Tribunal. (SBT) https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2021/02/12/delays-at-the-social-benefits-tribunal-have-tripled-leaving-odsp-claimants-in-extended-limbo.html

The SBT is an administrative tribunal that deals specifically with appeals regarding social assistance.  

The SBT hears appeals from people who have been turned down for the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP).  The law related to this program is called the Ontario Disability Support Program Act (1997). This program is designed to help people with disabilities who are in financial need pay for living expenses, like food and housing.

Why are the delays happening?

One reason is that the Doug Ford government has not been appointing new members to the SBT.  According to the story, there were 38 adjudicators when Ford won election in 2018.  There are only 26 now.

The real issue though is that the provincial government is trying to undermine the social assistance system.  They have no interest in supporting people living with disabilities.

For further evidence take a look at a recent piece in the Toronto Star written by Amira Elghawaby. https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2020/12/29/has-the-ford-government-cancelled-2021-for-ontarios-most-vulnerable.html

The story makes it clear that:

1. First-level decision by ministry staff to deny benefits is all about  protecting the public purse. 

2 But Ontario gives applicants right to evidence-based, independent review. 

3 The majority of appeals filed in 2020 have yet to get a scheduled date for a hearing.

4 The 80% success rate in appeals of ministry decisions is a critique of the original decision making not problems with the SBT.

The delays are bad enough but there is speculation that the SBT might be eliminated.

Read a recent letter from Laura Hunter and Michael Ollier, Co-Chairs of the Steering Committee on Social Assistance for Ontario Community Legal Clinic.  The letter is to the Attorney General of Ontario and the Minister of Children, Community & Social Services.  

“The right to an appeal process at the Tribunal is enshrined in legislation, and it is a vital one that needs to be preserved. Even in the best of application systems, it is only fair and reasonable to apply a check on the decision-making of Ministry staff.”  https://hamiltonjustice.ca/en/2020/12/10/alarmed-for-the-future-of-the-social-benefits-tribunal-and-appeals-process/

The Ontario government must preserve the important independent role of the Social Benefits Tribunal.  No one should be wrongly denied the benefits they need for their survival.

Getting Worse?

There is ongoing dialogue on social media focussing on Hamilton Ontario City Council and the performance of its members.  Today, long time City Hall observer Ryan McGreal notes "they're actually getting worse. More indifferent to suffering, more reactionary, more cynical, more shameless.”

I've  retired and moved away so it is hard for me to judge however, for what it is worth,  I offer this piece from my blog written nearly ten years ago, - May  2011.

Respect for Citizens Needed at Council Meeting 

May 25, 2011

Over the last ten years I’ve attended a couple of dozen meetings of Standing Committees of Hamilton City Council.

Usually I’ve been there to watch; occasionally I’ve been presenting. From time to time I‘ve gone home happy as the issue that had prompted my attendance had been resolved appropriately, from my perspective anyway.

But almost always I’ve headed out into the real world following these meetings out of sorts because of the lack of respect that Hamilton Council consistently shows for the public.

This lack of respect takes many forms.

First, meetings frequently start late, usually because of lack of quorum. Once I was there for a 9:30 meeting that was about to be postponed. Seconds short of 10:00 a Mountain Councillor raced into Chambers arriving just under the wire so the meeting could get started. (Not having a quorum within thirty minutes of the scheduled start means no meeting.) Let’s face it those who are there to present or listen have other responsibilities that need their time.

Second, Councillors, some more than others, feel the need to get up and leave the room a lot. To be fair it isn’t easy sitting for the hours that the job requires and some, OK most, of the dialogue is tedious but these pols knew what the job entailed when they put their names forward.

Third, and this is what really turns my crank, is the propensity some councillors have for talking with the media in the middle of meetings. Way back when we were toddlers we all learned that it was rude to talk when others are talking. And someone - staff, a member of the public or another Councillor - is always talking at a Committee meeting. In my experience most municipalities’ procedural by-laws cover such matters and committee chairs have the power to enforce.

 In this context I found Andrew Dreschel’s column in today’s Hamilton Spectator interesting.

Dreschel reports that Peggy Chapman from Mayor Bratina’s office wants to start “regulating interactions in the Council Chambers.” That would include, apparently, not allowing reporters to talk with councillors during proceedings and restricting councillors from talking privately with reporters during meetings. The columnist seems to think that the Mayor’s initiative may be more about “exercising control than good form.”

But if Dreschel and others took a look around they’d likely find that Hamilton is out of step with other cities who think that at the heart of good form is respect for citizens.