Local politics. Local government. Municipal politicians and other sundry commentary.
Monday, February 12, 2024
The Budget
Tuesday, October 31, 2023
Encampment Update
Earlier this year I wrote about a legal case pertaining to homeless encampments.
Justice M.J. Valente of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice had ruled that the Region of Waterloo couldn’t evict people living in tents from a vacant lot the Region owns. https://whenthemayorsmiles.blogspot.com/2023/03/encampment-precedent.html
At the time I understood that the ruling was precedent setting and would impact other municipalities. It seems I was overly optimistic.
According to the Advocacy Centre for Tenants of Ontario (ACTO) municipalities are responding to the needs of their residents in different ways.
Some are using enforcement and displacement as a last resort.
And some are taking a different approach. Take Cambridge, for example.
They are “focusing on clearing and forcibly removing residents, resulting in people being displaced with nowhere else to go,” claims ACTO, an Ontario specialty legal clinic.
"Some of these people were evicted three times in a matter of two months,” Ashley Schuitema, staff lawyer at Waterloo Region Community Legal Services (WRCLS) told Cambridge Today’s Joe McGinty. https://www.cambridgetoday.ca/local-news/legal-action-in-the-cards-after-cambridge-encampment-evictions-7652134
Up North, Sault Ste Marie looked at other City’s bylaws and figured they could amend theirs. Just in time for winter they decided to protect their parks. The only Council opposition came from Ward 3’s Angela Caputo according to CBC News.
"I think it's imperative that we shift our attention to creating and advocating for a system to end homelessness rather than enacting laws to try and police our way out of it," said Ms. Caputo. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/social-services-legal-challenge-poverty-issues-1.6952421
Some cities like Kingston are in court where the arguments revolve around how much housing is available. There is always lots of debate on such numbers.
Let’s get real here. It is obvious to anyone that rental rates and availability are beyond the means of increasing numbers of people in the province.
Municipalities are spending taxpayers’ dollars on fighting our fellow citizens in courts. The Hamilton Spectator reported today that lawyers representing Hamilton tried to recover court costs from those without housing who are in an ongoing human rights battle with the city. Instead, Justice James Ramsay ruled the City should pay costs of $5,000.
The last word today goes to ACTO:
“The Charter dictates that unless and until encampment residents are provided with truly accessible accommodation, evictions should not occur. Moreover, encampment residents deserve to be consulted and involved when municipalities are attempting to find solutions for them.”
Wednesday, May 04, 2022
Deserving
(I'm hoping that the 2022 Ontario election campaign looks at the issue of poverty. Here is a story I wrote on poverty in Ontario. I made it up but it could be true. This story won the 2021 Norfolk County’s Laureate award for fiction. It will take you about 18 minutes to read. )
-----------
“You need to tell them where the bodies are buried.”
“Ontario’s treatment of the poor goes back to the 18th century and is built on the whole idea that there are two types of poor people - deserving poor and the non-deserving poor,” she lectured.
“The first piece of legislation important for you to understand,” Fleming continued, “is the Constitution Act of 1791.”
.
Meanwhile the Mayor lay sprawled inelegantly on the floor.
Members of the public and those Clarovista bureaucrats assembled for the meeting sat in stunned silence.
to house people who required food, shelter, or care in order to survive.
Some in the community had called for an inquest but the authorities decided against one as fire deaths were fairly common at the time and there were complications as there was some confusion as to the location of the remains of the deceased brothers.
How did one become an inmate at the Clarovista Poorhouse, Williams wondered.
They chatted some more. After Dr Fleming hung up Williams was left with an uneasy feeling as he returned to his reading.
Who’s over there?
Harold and Joseph
And no one cares.
And this mayor scarecrow thingy is pointing off further into the woods. Do you understand any of it? What is the story here?”
Wednesday, January 05, 2022
Social Assistance Rates and the Ontario Election
Social assistance rates should have some relation to the real cost of living but almost never have.
(See http://whenthemayorsmiles.blogspot.com/2020_10_19_archive.html)
Rates in 1993 under the Bob Rae NDP government were set at a level that arguably reflected the real cost of living. They don’t now.
With a provincial election coming up in June it is interesting to speculate on what the major parties will offer on the policy front re social assistance rates. (Note: We are talking about what is politically possible not what is right.)
John Stapleton, a respected public policy guru, looks at the issue in https://openpolicyontario.com/16-2-in-22-a-social-assistance-litmus-for-2022/
There has been one small increase of 1.5% to Ontario Works (OW) since the Ford government was elected in 2018. Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) had a single 1.5% increase as well that was, in fact, a rollback of a promised 3% boost.
Stapleton takes those 1993 fairer rates and calculates that OW and ODSP would have to be raised 67% to get back to those levels. Politically that is a non-starter.
In the 1995 election poverty denier Mike Harris succeeded in portraying single mothers receiving assistance as some sort of boogie monsters ripping off the oppressed taxpayers of Ontario
One of Harris’ first acts as premier was to cut social assistance rates by 21.6%.
Stapleton takes 1995 as a starting point, builds in the 16.2% inflation that has occurred since then and comes up with new rates.
“… the OW single rate would climb by 16.2% from $733 a month to $852 a month… a similar 16.2% increase to ODSP (would) take the single rate from $1,169 to $1,359 a month.”
It is doable. The Ford government is spending less on this file. Since the beginning of the pandemic in April 2020, the number of social assistance beneficiaries has fallen by 15% or over 146,000 beneficiaries.
I’ve written to MPP (see below) and hope you will too. We should expect a commitment from all provincial parties to do something about the injustice of inadequate social assistance rates.
Toby Barrett
MPP Haldimand Norfolk
Dear Mr. Barrett,
Re: Raising Social Assistance Rates for Individuals
Nearly a year ago (January 26, 2021) I wrote to you about the need to raise social assistance rates.
Other than acknowledgement that my letter was received, I have not received a reply from you.
For social assistance recipients the situation has worsened over the past year.
Rates are the same and continue to be well below poverty levels. Canada’s Consumer Price Index has risen 4.4% the highest rate since 2003.
Meanwhile your government has made no meaningful investments or taken any action on programs or policies that would improve income security for low-income Ontarians.
In terms or digital access, the government seems to believe that building infrastructure is all that is needed. While you have pledged $2 billion in broadband infrastructure, no money has been provided to assist low-income Ontarians pay for Canada’s high internet and data costs. Now, Tribunals in Ontario are moving to a digital-first approach. Investing in subsidizing internet costs for people on social assistance and all low income Ontarians is essential for both access to caseworkers and access to justice.
It is imperative that social assistance rates be raised to reflect the real cost of living in Ontario.
Your attention to this matter is appreciated. I look forward to your response.
Bob Wood
Tuesday, March 09, 2021
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
Tuesday, February 16, 2021
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.
Sunday, December 06, 2020
Sunday, May 17, 2020
Contracting out employment services in Ford’s Ontario
Prototype service mangers were revealed in February for Hamilton-Niagara, Peel and Muskoka.
Employment services for social assistance recipients will now be integrated into a new regional level of bureaucracy called Service System Managers.
The government seems confident that lessons learned from the prototypes should shine a light forward for province–wide changes by 2022.
![]() |
| Premier Ford - May find this file more Complicated than License Plates |
But, dare I say, this is a much more complicated file than the recent “Open for Business Invisible-at-Night” car license plate roll-out.
Questions and Concerns
These changes are needed, the government says, because an Auditor General’s report said key Employment Ontario programs were not effective. In that context, handing over more responsibility to Employment Ontario is a curious step.
Let’s look at Hamilton where the service manager will be an American non-profit company. Fedcap promises “to spread the power of possible.” Hopefully, what’s spread won’t run afoul of authorities like in New York and New Jersey where in 2018 the Labor Department determined that Fedcap stiffed 443 employees out of nearly $3,000,000 of legally required pay and benefits.
An understanding of and a respect for employment laws ought to be a given for those running employment programs. Knowledge of the local labour market is too and Fedcap lacks that knowledge.
In Peel Region, WCG, a Canadian subsidiary of a multi-national corporation based in Australia, will be the manager. Presumably, they’ll have more Canadian knowledge than Fedcap since they have been operating similar programs in British Columbia and Alberta for some time.
They’re a private company though. And that’s a concern since the three prototype organizations (Fleming College is the Muskoka manager) will be paid according to how many social assistance recipients they connect to jobs.
A new report by the Maytree Foundation cites research from Australia. Down under private companies running similar programs had difficulties meeting placement targets that their funding was dependent on. The companies responded by focussing efforts on helping those clients who had better chances of finding employment.
That raises more questions.
Does this government understand the system it wants to reform? Are there actually jobs out there to place people in?
The job market has changed significantly in the last 25 years since a previous Conservative government applied their dogmatic Common Sense ideology to these matters.
The old economy featured decent jobs requiring routine skills for which many people were qualified. But today about a quarter of new jobs in Ontario are considered non-standard (temporary, part-time, on-call and self-employed work) and not within reach of many.
And what about the people on social assistance? They are staying on assistance longer because of significant systemic and individual barriers that experts say require a range of service and supports.
To be fair, the government seems to recognize this need. They’ve indicated that a wrap-around supports model will focus on “life stabilization” for people who would not immediately benefit from employment and training services.
Typically, with this government details are vague.
This employment services transformation “prioritizes the needs of employers at the expense of social assistance recipients.” That’s what policy experts at the Income Security Advocacy Centre (ISAC) say.
I’m afraid they’re right.
This story originally appeared in the March 5th edition of Canadian Dimension https://canadiandimension.com/articles/author/bob-wood
Canadian Dimension is the longest-standing voice of the left in Canada.
Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Basic Income Pilot Cancelled One Year Ago Today
That’s Minister Lisa MacLeod (right) speaking on July 31, 2018 while axing Ontario’s Basic Income Pilot Project (BI).
I’d picked it up on a live stream feed shortly after 2:00 p.m. In less than five minutes Basic Income was done.
BI was a three-year pilot intended to test this idea: Can appropriate financial support programs be delivered efficiently while improving health, employment, and housing outcomes?
The concept of Basic Income goes back at least 500 hundred years. A basic income program ran in Dauphin Manitoba from 1974-79. When the Ontario pilot was set up in 2017 it was one of the largest in the world. It has been attracting international attention.
How could the government know that the Pilot was not doing what it is intended to do before any data had been collected, the Minister was asked?
“Here’s the situation," said the Minister dodging the question. “We have seen the program isn’t doing what it is supposed to do.”
What about the recipients?
We will end it “ethically,” the Minister boasted.
That’s the Minister’s story. A narrative that fits her government’s agenda but is out of sync with the stories of BI recipients.
Hearing from participants we learn that BI gave them the opportunity to plan their lives. Prior to the pilot project, poverty and the restrictive bureaucratic rules that came with it precluded having a life plan.
Participants are fighting back by putting their stories out there.
Jesse Golem is leading the way. She is a photographer, a writer and a Basic Income recipient. When the program was cancelled, she “needed to do something” so she created a photo series called Humans of Basic Income (@HumansBasic) as a way to tell the stories of those who had been participating in the project.
Some snapshots from the photos:
I can finally buy Christmas Presents for my Children
It has given me a Chance to Recover My Future
Now I have the Dignity to go back to School
Helps me Stay Healthy
I Felt Human Again
I’m a late convert to BI. I’d always thought that we should live in a society where everyone has decent housing; where people are able to earn an adequate income and, if for whatever reason, they aren’t able to provide for themselves, there will be a safety net that takes care of them.
But I was naive. Others have been too. Why do we trust these in-the-dark politicians who can’t countenance pilot projects, especially other people’s pilot projects? So, when the government changed…well, we should have seen it coming. That is what happened with Mincome in Manitoba nearly forty years ago.
We’ve got no data but the stories tell us that such programs have value; changing lives in ways that decision makers can’t or won’t understand.
Let’s keep getting their stories out there.
Saturday, May 12, 2018
More from Doug Ford
As a “provincial” politician he was expelled from the legislature five times - not just for the day but for good - until the voters sent him back.
Mackenzie was a nasty man, at least when it came to calling political opponents names.
And yet it was Mackenzie's strong belief that information should be available to the people. He put considerable effort into this by publishing written documents and transcripts of debates in the Colonial Advocate and at public gatherings so that people could discuss and form their own opinions on issues.
I wonder what he would have made of today’s eight second sound bites and twitter politics.
This thought ran through my head as I mused about the current provincial election in Ontario. Like Mackenzie, Conservative Leader Doug Ford is railing against the elites although arguably not the same elites who Mackenzie attacked in 1837. Perhaps if Mackenzie was still around he would adapt to the modern person’s idea of communicating by twitter. We thought we would try out this idea by putting out Doug Ford’s ideas in limerick form so they could fit into tweets.
Here they are with sources and but a few words of introduction.
Doug Ford’s favourite book is How to Win Friends and Influence People.
Dale Carnegie
Just read How to Win Friends and Influence People
It is a book that has certainly no equal
I’ve read it from back to front
and folks just let me be blunt
Genuine sincerity is the key to it all.
(Source John Filion -The Only Average Guy, p 33)
Power Politics
I wouldn’t have the slightest clue
If she walked by me, would you?
well good luck to @MargaretAtwood
I don’t know her, think I should?
I fight 4 the people, what’s she do?
(Source: John Filion -The Only Average Guy, p 177)
Subways, Subways, Subways
Folks we just represent the people & that’s it
We’re as grassroots as they come & you’ll have 2 admit
#FordNation stands up 2 the political elite
Gives quality service, finds ways 2 unseat
Unreachable leaders & build underground transit.
(Source: Ford Nation p 7, 271)
Lots of signs and big rallies for our base
Trump did it too but just in case
You thought it was his idea
Cause you read the lefty media
We put that winning formula in place
(Source: Doug Ford - Ford Nation: Two Brothers: One Vision p 110)
----------
Like many populists Doug Ford differentiates himself from regular politicians.
The Average Politician
He is blowing the smoke where the sun don’t shine
The average politician does it all the time.
In front of the people
They are always agreeable
People aren’t stupid they see this fake line.
(Source: City News October 13, 2016)
Monday, May 07, 2018
Doug Ford - In His Own Words (more or less)
Monday, July 24, 2017
A Taxing Time
Just about everyone has an opinion on taxes, right?
Take President Donald Trump. On paying taxes Donald apparently doesn’t. “That makes me smart," he said during a debate last year.
Others have funny ideas about tax avoidance. “Dear IRS, I am writing to cancel my subscription. Please remove my name from your mailing list.” (Snoopy - aka Charles Schulz)
I’m partial to Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.’s adage:
“Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society.”
In that context, most of us look for fairness in our tax systems. What exactly “fairness” is remains subject to debate. Indicators, though, should include simplicity, ability to pay and transparency.
That said, multi-residential property taxation in Hamilton fails the fairness test.
Today, there is a greater awareness by tenants that they pay taxes through their rent. Ten years ago, the Clinic and community partners reached out through the I am a Tenant and I Vote Campaign to bring this reality to public attention.
At the time, tenant advocate Tom Cooper noted that many tenants were unaware that they were, in fact, paying much higher taxes than those in single family homes.
Writing in Raise the Hammer (https://raisethehammer.org/article/577/tenants_and_taxes), Cooper used real property to property comparisons.
Tenant tax rates were, in some cases, “three times higher than the 'residential property tax rate' their neighbors in the bungalow down the street are levied,” maintained Cooper.
More recently, Don McLean, co-founder and coordinator of Citizens at City Hall (CATCH), told a tenant’s conference that the tax rate on multi-residential units in Hamilton continued to be set at 2.74 times the rate on single-family homes.
“Tenants are effectively paying 20% of their rent in the form of municipal taxes,” said McLean in March 2016.
It is a fact that Hamilton is the one of the leaders in the dubious category of taxing tenants unfairly. While cities like Toronto have set out to address the disparity, Hamilton has turned a blind eye.
Finally, the province has taken note of this injustice and last year announced a review of the property taxation of multi‐residential apartment buildings. In April, they told municipalities that property taxes for new multi-residential apartment buildings must be charged at a similar rate as other residential properties. It is thought that this will encourage developers to build more new purpose-built rental housing. This is a good thing.
Meanwhile, some municipalities like Hamilton have had a freeze put on any increases in the property tax burden for multi-residential apartment buildings. The freeze is in place while the issue is studied.
Let’s see what happens. Tenants have been waiting a long time for fairness.







