An advocate for the creation of a Social Assistance Rates Board caught up with me following my last post.
Hamilton poverty lawyer Craig Foye of McQuesten Legal notes that the new strategy is “is to try to convince the Government to introduce the proposed legislation as a government bill.”
A Private Member’s Bill that Foye and others had worked on had received first reading in June 2007 but died on the order paper when the government adjourned.
What is a Social Assistance Review Board?
This Board would produce an annual report that would propose social assistance rates that take into account the real cost of living in Ontario.
A recommended monthly basic needs rate would enable recipients to obtain nutritious food baskets, cover basic telephone and transportation costs, purchase personal need items and carry out modifications to rental units to accommodate disabilities and more.
The committee would be made up of six to nine members who’d have “expertise in poverty research.” At least two members would have experience with receiving social assistance and two members would possess expertise regarding the cost of living for persons with disabilities.
Next Steps
Foye hopes that groups and individuals will support the legislation by contacting their MPP and participating in the provincial poverty reduction consultations.
“It is important to tell the government that evidence-based social assistance rates must be part of any poverty reduction strategy,” Foye asserts.
Craig is working with researchers to project the economic/financial impacts on the Hamilton economy that would result from an increase in social assistance rates to subsistence levels.
This will be a useful number. In 1995 Halton Region staff estimated that social assistance costs took $12 – 14 million dollars out of the Burlington economy.
I’m not aware of any accounting done by government on the impact these cuts had on real people.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Consultation - McGuinty Syle
The provincial government created Metrolinx to come up with a plan to address the transportation crisis across the GTAH.
Some think it is moving too slowly. However, they have put out five green and two white papers and encouraged public comment. Opportunities for consultation with regular folks are ongoing. I participated in one of these last weekend. And that is a story for another day.
Today’s story though is about non-consultation. OK, the limited consultation process that is being orchestrated by that same Liberal government as they ”tackle the issue of poverty.”
The lead tackler Minister Deb Matthews is doing a series of invitation only events across the province. The first one was in Peterborough. The road show hits Hamilton on May 12th.
Community Concerns
In Peterborough local politicians expressed concern over the lack of openness. They offered Matthews the opportunity to attend an open public meeting. She declined.
The invitation only event was staked out by protestors. According to the Peterborough Examiner there was some scuffling with police.
While there was unhappiness outside it seems that there were good vibes in this closed-door meeting. The Minister appears to be genuinely interested in issues facing people living in poverty.
Government Seeks to Avoid Embarrassment
But it is quite clear, from the government’s perspective, why the consultation must be so heavily orchestrated.
We could mention the fact that the Liberals promised a different kind of government from the Harris/Eves Conservatives they replaced. That would involve open consultation. We could also mention the 2003 promises to build 20,000 new affordable housing units or to give low-income tenants real protection by creating rent controls. Didn’t happen.
You could be sure that open consultation would be embarrassing to a government that hasn’t lived up to its promises. We’d hear about these unfilled promises. We’d hear more too, like how the government cut many of Ontario’s poorest people off the special needs diet allowance.
How about Something Concrete Now
I must admit that, although I can be critical of the lack of open consultation, another part of me just wants the government to get on and do something about poverty.
It is not that hard. You see people live in poverty cause they don’t have enough money.
Up until 1995 we had a social assistance system that was close to providing basic necessities to people who had fallen on hard times. Harris and his cronies changed all when they slashed assistance rates by nearly 22%. Since then there have been only two small increases to these rates - both from the McGuinty government.
A private members bill that would create a Social Assistance Rates Board died when the government adjourned prior to last year’s election. This Board would ensure an appropriate adjustment to these rates would occur each year.
This would seem only fair. It should be easy to put in place and it would make a difference.
Some think it is moving too slowly. However, they have put out five green and two white papers and encouraged public comment. Opportunities for consultation with regular folks are ongoing. I participated in one of these last weekend. And that is a story for another day.
Today’s story though is about non-consultation. OK, the limited consultation process that is being orchestrated by that same Liberal government as they ”tackle the issue of poverty.”
The lead tackler Minister Deb Matthews is doing a series of invitation only events across the province. The first one was in Peterborough. The road show hits Hamilton on May 12th.
Community Concerns
In Peterborough local politicians expressed concern over the lack of openness. They offered Matthews the opportunity to attend an open public meeting. She declined.
The invitation only event was staked out by protestors. According to the Peterborough Examiner there was some scuffling with police.
While there was unhappiness outside it seems that there were good vibes in this closed-door meeting. The Minister appears to be genuinely interested in issues facing people living in poverty.
Government Seeks to Avoid Embarrassment
But it is quite clear, from the government’s perspective, why the consultation must be so heavily orchestrated.
We could mention the fact that the Liberals promised a different kind of government from the Harris/Eves Conservatives they replaced. That would involve open consultation. We could also mention the 2003 promises to build 20,000 new affordable housing units or to give low-income tenants real protection by creating rent controls. Didn’t happen.
You could be sure that open consultation would be embarrassing to a government that hasn’t lived up to its promises. We’d hear about these unfilled promises. We’d hear more too, like how the government cut many of Ontario’s poorest people off the special needs diet allowance.
How about Something Concrete Now
I must admit that, although I can be critical of the lack of open consultation, another part of me just wants the government to get on and do something about poverty.
It is not that hard. You see people live in poverty cause they don’t have enough money.
Up until 1995 we had a social assistance system that was close to providing basic necessities to people who had fallen on hard times. Harris and his cronies changed all when they slashed assistance rates by nearly 22%. Since then there have been only two small increases to these rates - both from the McGuinty government.
A private members bill that would create a Social Assistance Rates Board died when the government adjourned prior to last year’s election. This Board would ensure an appropriate adjustment to these rates would occur each year.
This would seem only fair. It should be easy to put in place and it would make a difference.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
“Rent Bank Runs out of Money”
What’s this have to do with city politics, you ask?
A lot, I say. But it shouldn’t.
In the 2003 provincial election campaign Dalton "The Promiser" McGuinty’s said that he wouldn’t raise taxes. He was going to roll back highway 407 tolls and cancel P-3 hospitals. He wasn’t going to allow building on the Oak Ridges Moraine.
All these promises were broken … and more.
He actually did keep some - well, one that I can think of - and that was to create a provincial rent bank program. Good for him.
Ontario Rent Bank Program
The program, which rolled out within months of the election, provides money so that low-income tenants may apply to receive financial assistance to address short-term rent arrears. This small program was passed over to 42 service managers (municipalities ) to run which kept the provincial government somewhat immune to any criticism. (In some cases the municipalities contracted with agencies to actually operate the program.) Most of these local programs provide grants, but some operate by providing interest free loans.
According to today's Toronto Star the future of this program is in doubt.
The Future of Rent Banks
Up until last year I had many years direct involvement with housing emergency loan programs and with this particular program as well.
The province created an administrative nightmare for those operating rent banks. Fortunately, however, rent banks do help those they are intended to help - people with serious housing emergencies.
The whole concept is rather a stopgap approach to the serious issue of poverty. A parallel could be drawn with food banks. In 1983 the first was created in Edmonton as a temporary measure. Food banks are still with us. Here is hoping they will go away. Rent banks too.
In the meantime, while I hope that monies are made available to assist those with housing emergencies; the fact is the government can’t be let off the hook in addressing the big picture issue here:
Many of our fellow citizens do not have enough income to find and maintain adequate housing.
And that is something the province must take responsibility for and leadership on. Local government can be involved but the province must lead.
Rent banks do help but they are a very small part of the solution.
A lot, I say. But it shouldn’t.
In the 2003 provincial election campaign Dalton "The Promiser" McGuinty’s said that he wouldn’t raise taxes. He was going to roll back highway 407 tolls and cancel P-3 hospitals. He wasn’t going to allow building on the Oak Ridges Moraine.
All these promises were broken … and more.
He actually did keep some - well, one that I can think of - and that was to create a provincial rent bank program. Good for him.
Ontario Rent Bank Program
The program, which rolled out within months of the election, provides money so that low-income tenants may apply to receive financial assistance to address short-term rent arrears. This small program was passed over to 42 service managers (municipalities ) to run which kept the provincial government somewhat immune to any criticism. (In some cases the municipalities contracted with agencies to actually operate the program.) Most of these local programs provide grants, but some operate by providing interest free loans.
According to today's Toronto Star the future of this program is in doubt.
The Future of Rent Banks
Up until last year I had many years direct involvement with housing emergency loan programs and with this particular program as well.
The province created an administrative nightmare for those operating rent banks. Fortunately, however, rent banks do help those they are intended to help - people with serious housing emergencies.
The whole concept is rather a stopgap approach to the serious issue of poverty. A parallel could be drawn with food banks. In 1983 the first was created in Edmonton as a temporary measure. Food banks are still with us. Here is hoping they will go away. Rent banks too.
In the meantime, while I hope that monies are made available to assist those with housing emergencies; the fact is the government can’t be let off the hook in addressing the big picture issue here:
Many of our fellow citizens do not have enough income to find and maintain adequate housing.
And that is something the province must take responsibility for and leadership on. Local government can be involved but the province must lead.
Rent banks do help but they are a very small part of the solution.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
YOUR BLOGGER GOOFS
There was an error in my last posting.
I said that a Burlington Transit bus - Route #2 Brant North - had an average weekday boarding rate of 11 riders per hour. That number was wrong. In fact, 21.5 people board the #2 buses every hour on a weekday.
While your blogger was never much good at math, the ability to offer sincere apologies is considered to be a strength.
So, I am truly sorry.
I imagine that many of you loyal readers use insights gained from this blog at various cocktail parties around town. We can only imagine because we don’t go to these cocktail parties. In fact, we don’t get invited to these parties.
However, as compensation for any embarrassment that you may have suffered here are nine more or lessinteresting facts that you can insert into any conversation about Burlington Transit at a cocktail party, in a bar, when talking to a loved one or over the backyard fence.
Burlington Transit (BT) by the Numbers
480 Number of hours BT runs each day
8639 Average daily boardings
17.9 Average boardings per hour
1/3 According to Ward 3 Councillor John Taylor the average # of riders per hour on BT buses.
12 Number of main BT routes
8 Number of routes carrying more than 10 people per/hr
70 grams of carbon dioxide emitted per kilometer by a bus carrying 18 passengers
220 grams of carbon dioxide emitted per km. by an automobile carrying one person (sourceSIKA, Swedish Institute for Transport and Communications Analysis, 2006)
25.5, 21.9 21.5 Weekday boardings per hour for #1 Fairview Plains, #10 New Maple, #2 Brant routes
I said that a Burlington Transit bus - Route #2 Brant North - had an average weekday boarding rate of 11 riders per hour. That number was wrong. In fact, 21.5 people board the #2 buses every hour on a weekday.
While your blogger was never much good at math, the ability to offer sincere apologies is considered to be a strength.
So, I am truly sorry.
I imagine that many of you loyal readers use insights gained from this blog at various cocktail parties around town. We can only imagine because we don’t go to these cocktail parties. In fact, we don’t get invited to these parties.
However, as compensation for any embarrassment that you may have suffered here are nine more or lessinteresting facts that you can insert into any conversation about Burlington Transit at a cocktail party, in a bar, when talking to a loved one or over the backyard fence.
Burlington Transit (BT) by the Numbers
480 Number of hours BT runs each day
8639 Average daily boardings
17.9 Average boardings per hour
1/3 According to Ward 3 Councillor John Taylor the average # of riders per hour on BT buses.
12 Number of main BT routes
8 Number of routes carrying more than 10 people per/hr
70 grams of carbon dioxide emitted per kilometer by a bus carrying 18 passengers
220 grams of carbon dioxide emitted per km. by an automobile carrying one person (sourceSIKA, Swedish Institute for Transport and Communications Analysis, 2006)
25.5, 21.9 21.5 Weekday boardings per hour for #1 Fairview Plains, #10 New Maple, #2 Brant routes
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
STILL RIDING THOSE TWENTY THREE YEAR OLD BUSES
I spoke at Burlington Council on April 7th. After hearing again - from one councillor anyway - that our buses are riding around empty - I thought I should really get my facts straight.
I’ve tried. I wrote to all members of Council on March 27th seeking clarification on “data” given by that same member of Council at a March 26th public meeting.
After the Council meeting I again sought clarification in writing from staff. No response yet, so nothing else to do, I guess, but get on the buses. Since they are apparently as empty as a city hall office between Christmas and New Years, I’m sure I’ll have no problem finding a seat.
Friday April 11
Hopping on yet another 23 year-old bus, #7005-85, (see previous posts) #2 Brant North bus departs the downtown terminal at 7:15 a.m.
The bus heads up Brant, meanders through north urban Burlington, over to Guelph Line, and then back on Cavendish to Upper Middle Road where it heads east. At MM Robinson the bus (which has now become the #3 Guelph Line South) turns right heading back down to the Lakeshore eventually to the Terminal.
In its one-hour circuit I’m joined by thirty-six (36) other riders. The nine passengers on the early part of the route are making connections to trains or other buses at the Fairview GO station. (Wonder when that new parking garage will be ready? Can’t ever really have enough parking spots?)
The bulk of the other passengers appear to be students heading to MMR, Rolling Meadows PS, or connections downtown.
After a full circuit I disembark, but the bus keeps running. In fact, the #2 Brant North leaves the terminal 48 times on any given weekday. The Brant South route does the same. The most recent statistics show 1,055 riders board over the course of the day - an average of 11 riders on each of the 96 runs – making the Councillor’s “one-third a rider per hour” projection about as accurate as George W. Bush’s pre-invasion assessment of Iraqi nuclear capabilities.
Other routes are similar and will be documented in an upcoming posting.
A Suburban Myth
It is a myth that empty buses ramble around our suburban streets.
In fact, a lot of people currently ride these buses. Many of these riders have no other choice in getting on with day to day living than to take the bus. Besides our environmental imperatives dictate that we must find ways to get drivers out of their cars and onto public transit.
The cost containment exercise the city has embarked on needs to keep this in mind.
(My presentation to Council is available by e-mailing me at timberline24@hotmail.com)
I’ve tried. I wrote to all members of Council on March 27th seeking clarification on “data” given by that same member of Council at a March 26th public meeting.
After the Council meeting I again sought clarification in writing from staff. No response yet, so nothing else to do, I guess, but get on the buses. Since they are apparently as empty as a city hall office between Christmas and New Years, I’m sure I’ll have no problem finding a seat.
Friday April 11
Hopping on yet another 23 year-old bus, #7005-85, (see previous posts) #2 Brant North bus departs the downtown terminal at 7:15 a.m.
The bus heads up Brant, meanders through north urban Burlington, over to Guelph Line, and then back on Cavendish to Upper Middle Road where it heads east. At MM Robinson the bus (which has now become the #3 Guelph Line South) turns right heading back down to the Lakeshore eventually to the Terminal.
In its one-hour circuit I’m joined by thirty-six (36) other riders. The nine passengers on the early part of the route are making connections to trains or other buses at the Fairview GO station. (Wonder when that new parking garage will be ready? Can’t ever really have enough parking spots?)
The bulk of the other passengers appear to be students heading to MMR, Rolling Meadows PS, or connections downtown.
After a full circuit I disembark, but the bus keeps running. In fact, the #2 Brant North leaves the terminal 48 times on any given weekday. The Brant South route does the same. The most recent statistics show 1,055 riders board over the course of the day - an average of 11 riders on each of the 96 runs – making the Councillor’s “one-third a rider per hour” projection about as accurate as George W. Bush’s pre-invasion assessment of Iraqi nuclear capabilities.
Other routes are similar and will be documented in an upcoming posting.
A Suburban Myth
It is a myth that empty buses ramble around our suburban streets.
In fact, a lot of people currently ride these buses. Many of these riders have no other choice in getting on with day to day living than to take the bus. Besides our environmental imperatives dictate that we must find ways to get drivers out of their cars and onto public transit.
The cost containment exercise the city has embarked on needs to keep this in mind.
(My presentation to Council is available by e-mailing me at timberline24@hotmail.com)
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Waiting for a Pardigm Shift?
Last December Gord Miller, Ontario’s Environmental Commissioner, released his annual report. Entitled Reconciling our Priorities, it called for a “paradigm shift” in how we do planning in Ontario.
For those of you not inclined to do much shifting or have simply forgotten what a paradigm shift is, well it is a pretty big deal - a change from one way of thinking to another, a revolution, a transformation. Ptolemy’s view that everything orbited around the earth changing to Copernicus revelation that we orbited the sun is a good example.
When the report came out I was going to comment on it. With nothing encouraging to say, I thought I give it a few months and wait for the “paradigm shifters” to wade in.
Today I did an internet search (reconciling our priorities and gord miller) and, to my surprise, found my Feb 16th posting (observing that the report was too depressing, so I wasn’t commenting) near the top of the hit list.
Miller has been travelling the province but I wonder if any real dialogue is occurring.
Some Excerpts from the Report
*The Provincial strategy to manage growth (the GGH) actually “reverses the sustainable development process.” (p 26)
*“The lack of progress to date in shifting away from a car culture calls into question the efficacy of GGH Plan ‘s density targets in promoting the hoped for mobility changes in the future.” (p 32)
*There is no effective regulatory protection for wetlands and the province has actually “retreated” from earlier prohibitions on development by “changing the definition of ‘“development.’” (p 39)
*Significant changes have occurred in land use policies which mean that aggregate extraction is considered an interim land use. (p 45)
(See the full report at http://www.eco.on.ca/english/newsrel/2007/annual/)
Conflicts Everywhere
We have significant conflicts all over the place.
Provincial policy as reflected in the 2005 Provincial Policy statements (PPS) says “preserving wetlands, woodlands and agricultural lands are priorities but it also asserts that the construction of highways, the removal of aggregates, and the building of pipelines for water supply are priorities.”
There is nothing in place to “reconcile these conflicting land uses.”
Miller goes on to say that municipalities are required to dedicate increasing resources to resolve these irreconcilable priorities. His analysis notes that planning processes are now “weighted in favour of extractive and destructive uses of the land over those that conserve natural or agricultural use.”
These processes have become “intellectually dishonest” because no upfront “a priori” discussion of the real need for any project can happen.
Waiting
I am waiting for that paradigm shift. Some think such shifts in thinking are advanced by agents of change. We wonder if any such agents are out there?
For those of you not inclined to do much shifting or have simply forgotten what a paradigm shift is, well it is a pretty big deal - a change from one way of thinking to another, a revolution, a transformation. Ptolemy’s view that everything orbited around the earth changing to Copernicus revelation that we orbited the sun is a good example.
When the report came out I was going to comment on it. With nothing encouraging to say, I thought I give it a few months and wait for the “paradigm shifters” to wade in.
Today I did an internet search (reconciling our priorities and gord miller) and, to my surprise, found my Feb 16th posting (observing that the report was too depressing, so I wasn’t commenting) near the top of the hit list.
Miller has been travelling the province but I wonder if any real dialogue is occurring.
Some Excerpts from the Report
*The Provincial strategy to manage growth (the GGH) actually “reverses the sustainable development process.” (p 26)
*“The lack of progress to date in shifting away from a car culture calls into question the efficacy of GGH Plan ‘s density targets in promoting the hoped for mobility changes in the future.” (p 32)
*There is no effective regulatory protection for wetlands and the province has actually “retreated” from earlier prohibitions on development by “changing the definition of ‘“development.’” (p 39)
*Significant changes have occurred in land use policies which mean that aggregate extraction is considered an interim land use. (p 45)
(See the full report at http://www.eco.on.ca/english/newsrel/2007/annual/)
Conflicts Everywhere
We have significant conflicts all over the place.
Provincial policy as reflected in the 2005 Provincial Policy statements (PPS) says “preserving wetlands, woodlands and agricultural lands are priorities but it also asserts that the construction of highways, the removal of aggregates, and the building of pipelines for water supply are priorities.”
There is nothing in place to “reconcile these conflicting land uses.”
Miller goes on to say that municipalities are required to dedicate increasing resources to resolve these irreconcilable priorities. His analysis notes that planning processes are now “weighted in favour of extractive and destructive uses of the land over those that conserve natural or agricultural use.”
These processes have become “intellectually dishonest” because no upfront “a priori” discussion of the real need for any project can happen.
Waiting
I am waiting for that paradigm shift. Some think such shifts in thinking are advanced by agents of change. We wonder if any such agents are out there?
Saturday, March 29, 2008
OLD BLOGGER, OLD BUS, SAME OLD STORY PART TWO
Ridership on Burlington Transit is up, particularly recently.
This won’t stop some members of Council from taking a knife to it.
“I won’t be swayed by a couple of good months,” Councillor John Taylor made clear at Community and Corporate Service Committee this past Wednesday.
Taylor thinks we may have to “look at a simplified system.”
Simplified? One can only imagine.
My mind flashed back some 15 years to an idea put forward by another councillor. That brainwave – and I’m not making this one up - was to take the buses back to the garage when they were empty. It would save money.
Presumably, potential riders waiting along abandoned routes could hail taxis or maybe just take the day off work.
I’m confident that the current cost containment exercise will come up with better ideas. But I worry.
Empty Buses?
Councillors and senior staff agonize over empty buses.
It is a fact that hard worker taxpayers, mostly men as I recall,
find time to phone city hall and complain about those empty buses observed, I am sure, while cruising around town as the sole occupant in their carbon spewing SUVs. No irony there, eh?
But the buses aren’t empty. Performance statistics show nearly 9,000 boardings every weekday.
Councillor Rick Goldring noted the number of people riding the buses is about the same as the number who frequent our libraries. No one is questioning the need for libraries. Transit ought to be the same.
Stay Tuned
The data we put forward at committee suggested Burlington is not putting the emphasis on transit that other communities have.
Councillors, not unreasonably, questioned this data and asked staff to look at the numbers.
Much of the discussion focused on the fact that our neighbouring town, Oakville, seemed to spend more dollars on transit and had better performance too.
There are challenges as Councillor Craven acknowledged but the future will see us “more dependent on transit.”
“We have to invest in our infrastructure.”
This won’t stop some members of Council from taking a knife to it.
“I won’t be swayed by a couple of good months,” Councillor John Taylor made clear at Community and Corporate Service Committee this past Wednesday.
Taylor thinks we may have to “look at a simplified system.”
Simplified? One can only imagine.
My mind flashed back some 15 years to an idea put forward by another councillor. That brainwave – and I’m not making this one up - was to take the buses back to the garage when they were empty. It would save money.
Presumably, potential riders waiting along abandoned routes could hail taxis or maybe just take the day off work.
I’m confident that the current cost containment exercise will come up with better ideas. But I worry.
Empty Buses?
Councillors and senior staff agonize over empty buses.
It is a fact that hard worker taxpayers, mostly men as I recall,
find time to phone city hall and complain about those empty buses observed, I am sure, while cruising around town as the sole occupant in their carbon spewing SUVs. No irony there, eh?
But the buses aren’t empty. Performance statistics show nearly 9,000 boardings every weekday.
Councillor Rick Goldring noted the number of people riding the buses is about the same as the number who frequent our libraries. No one is questioning the need for libraries. Transit ought to be the same.
Stay Tuned
The data we put forward at committee suggested Burlington is not putting the emphasis on transit that other communities have.
Councillors, not unreasonably, questioned this data and asked staff to look at the numbers.
Much of the discussion focused on the fact that our neighbouring town, Oakville, seemed to spend more dollars on transit and had better performance too.
There are challenges as Councillor Craven acknowledged but the future will see us “more dependent on transit.”
“We have to invest in our infrastructure.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)