 Explore this site
homelessness a view from our perspectivepoverty is the main cause of homelessness health homelessness is synonymous with disease and premature death addiction is rampant among the homeless as they strive to find comfort and escape actions Rallies, protests, symposiums public forums and training sessions the Recession Relief Coalition recommends. economics what it costs us & what it will cost to fix society how we think, feel & act towards homelessness internet the internet is our best hope to take back control from the power brokers videos by Ronzig about homelessness & related issues news Ronzig in the news media coverage of related events & issues politics how the government is addressing the situation & related issues war Canada's role in promoting Imperialism speaking Ronzig will speak to your group about social issues, art or photography portfolio Ronzig's portfolio site photoArt is a selection of my art organized by subject best is a random selection of my best work that can be viewed as a slide show events where Ronzig will participate or has an interest new content recently added to this site contact Ronzig & links to related sites and other sites where Ronzig appears. home back to home page. |
Digital photoArt by Ronzig depicting people in poverty and homeless situations plus commentary on the political climate of homelessness, poverty, addiction and other important issues. You can comment on content seen on this page by going to the bottom of thepage. Every page on the site will have a comment section at the bottom. 
Canada is in a state of disintegration. Our society is plagued with poverty, homelessness, addiction and unemployment. The middle class is rapidly disappearing and poverty in the midst of unprecedented riches is expanding exponentially while a select elite grow fat off the suffering of the rest of us. Our electoral system is archaic and before any of the aforementioned problems will ever be addressed we need to regain control of our government. The first step in doing this is to introduce a proportional electoral system which will more accurately reflect the will of the people.
On Monday afternoon, we sent the email below to Fair Vote Canada supporters. We’re delighted that more than 1,000 people signed in just the first 24 hours. We hope you will sign too. Let’s make sure our voices are heard! This is Not Democracy – Silence is Not an Option! Sign the Declaration of Voters’ Rights Are you fed up with voting in federal elections where seven million of us cast ballots that elect no one? Are you tired of Parliaments that don’t represent the people of Canada? Are you angry that a party can win a majority of seats even when 60% of us vote against them? You’re not alone. Several weeks ago, Fair Vote Canada held a press conference at Parliament to launch the Declaration of Voters’ Rights (see the article, photos and video on our website). This document is not a petition. It’s not a request. It’s a people’s declaration. Canadian voters have a fundamental right to equal votes, fair election results and legitimate majority rule. Between now and the next election, we intend to circulate the Declaration as widely as possible. How many signers can we get? How loud will our voices be? That depends on you and other citizens. At our press conference, the first three signers were Nathalie Des Rosiers, General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association; Ed Broadbent, former NDP leader; and Dr. John Trent, former secretary-general of the International Political Science Association. Many others have since joined them. And now we need you. Please sign the Declaration of Voters’ Rights today and forward it to your friends. Yours for a democratic Canada, Bronwen Bruch President Fair Vote Canada
Fair Vote Canada 
BILL
C-304
An Act to ensure secure, adequate, accessible and affordable housing for Canadians Whereas the provision of and access to adequate housing is a fundamental human right according to paragraph 25(1) of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Whereas, in
1976, Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, a legally binding treaty committing realizing all economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to adequate housing; Whereas the enjoyment of other human rights, such as those to privacy, to respect for the home, to freedom of movement, to freedom from discrimination, to environmental health, to security of the person, to freedom of association and to equality before the law, are indivisible from and indispensable to the realization of the right to adequate housing; Whereas are more than adequate to ensure that every woman, child
and man residing in secure, adequate, accessible and affordable housing as part of a standard of living that will provide healthy physical, intellectual, emotional, spiritual and social development and a good quality of life; Whereas improved housing conditions are best achieved through co-operative partnerships of government and civil society and the meaningful involvement of local communities; And whereas
the Parliament of wishes to ensure the establishment of national goals and programs that seek to improve the quality of life for all Canadians as a basic right; Now, therefore, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows: SHORT TITLE 1. This Act may be cited as the Secure, Adequate, Accessible and Affordable Housing You can download the complete act in English and French below
Two opposing points of view Ron Newton why did you post a silly story about our PM on the donut issue??? that is partasan garbage I'd expect from the other parties just to poke at our PM, because they have nothing REAL on him..I left a comment Ron. Ronzig Unlike you Ron, I am not blinded by political dogma. I take personal offence to Harper boycotting a critical symposium and walking out of the following UN meeting for a photo op. It's disgusting. Ron Newton REALLY. and you support the Iranian president on his stance of dubbing WW@ and th holocaust as a myth??? WW2 I cant blame Harper for not wanting to be in the same room as that piece of shit Ronzig What in the world are you talking about? That has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion. Ron Newton On the news they said Harper didn’t go because of the Iranian president Ronzig I find it difficult be be in the same world with a piece of shit like Harper. Ron Newton I feel the same about that TRAITER Jack Layton Plus, Harper has other people that are assigned to show up for those meetings. PM doesn’t have to show up thats why they have a cabinet of designated people who do these things Ron Newton the news clearly said that Harper doesn’t
support Ronzig The message is quite clear. By sending a lackey rather than attending in person and placing more importance on a photo op in a donut shop he sends a clear message to the world on where he stands. Ron Newton he didn’t send a message. Now your sounding like Iggy Ronzig Stick to one subject at a time. Ron Newton iggy was the first to comment on this issue Ronzig If you don't call his irresponsible actions a message, what do you call them? Ron Newton how is it irresponsible? Can they not propose something on this issue when the recession is over? recession Ronzig Getting his picture taken eating a fucking donut instead of attending an important meeting of world leaders is absolutely irresponsible. Ron Newton lol Okay that is your opinion, they only made this comments because they want the power (other parties) when they have something real; on our pm I'll consider it listenable Ronzig When the recession is over there will be other excuses. Ron Newton anything to discredit our Pm Ronzig Harper doesn't need anyone to help discredit him. He does a fine job all by himself. Ron Newton no there won’t. Did you know the reason
why Harper cant do much is simply because he doesn’t have full power? Layton
voted down 79 times ideas the Cons had that would help I'll fully judge Harper when he has a full majority. I’ll be the first to admit to you if he does wrong Ronzig The only thing
that keeps him from completely selling Ron Newton Really? You think a carbon tax introduced by the Liberals will help? Over spending will help? Liberals are the only other party that will win beside the Cons. start fearing if Harper loses Ron Newton Did you know it was the liberals who clawed back pensions back in the 90s? Did you know that they paid off the debt by stealing money from EI (53 billion to be exact) Liberals are a party I don’t want in power, NDP will never win I was a fool to support Chrétien Ronzig Taxes need to be increased and the structure reconfigured to exempt all people living below the poverty lin and radically increased fore ever person earning in excess of 1/2 million. Ron Newton that I might agree on-half million earners Ron Newton cant you see what will happen if Iggy wins?? He’ll blame everything on the Cons. up our taxes, increase the GST. and the poor will suffer even more Ronzig Chrétien was nothing but Trudeau's bagman. He should never have been elected, but if you condemn the Liberals for the historical failures, you need to be fair and look at the pathetic history of the Conservative too. Ron Newton My point is the Liberals steal our money that is for a rainy day, piss away our surpluses and then say.” you know what we have to raise taxes to cover this" Ronzig Got to go. Nice chatting. I haven't seen the Conservative da a single thing to correct the robbing of the EI fund in all their years in power. They are just as guilty. They have had ample opportunity to take steps to correct the situation.  Politics, ideology in EI reforms Toronto Star Thomas Walkom At one level, it is an example of crass pandering. By doing anything to help the unemployed, Harper increased the odds that Jack Layton's NDP – already gun-shy about a fall election – would prop up his minority government. What makes Layton's
predicament particularly difficult is that the Prime Minister's proposed
temporary reforms are aimed at jobless These are the people who will gain from Harper's proposal – which would extend by between five and 20 weeks the benefit period for relatively well-paid, older workers who find themselves out of a job. It should go over particularly well in two ridings that the Conservatives now hold but that the New Democrats lust after – Oshawa and the Windsor-area seat of Essex. In last year's election, the NDP lost Oshawa by just 3,200 votes. So that's the practical politics. The ideological barb lies in the Conservative insistence on distinguishing between the deserving and undeserving jobless. Under the proposed reform, the deserving jobless are, first of all, those who make more and therefore have paid more into the employment insurance scheme. Those who earn less than about $13,000 a year wouldn't qualify for these extended benefits. Second, young workers and others who are relative newcomers to the labour force also wouldn't qualify. Only those who have been paying into EI for seven years out of 10 would. Third, anyone who's had the nerve to collect EI in the past may be out of luck. Jobless people who received more than 35 weeks of regular EI benefits in total during the past five years won't be eligible for the extra help. Fourth, the whole scheme would expire in the fall of 2011. These criteria are designed not just to save money (although they will do that) but to make a point. Employment insurance has always been complex – linking benefit levels to criteria such as income, length of time in the paid workforce and regional unemployment levels. In the 1990s, Still, there was a kind of equal-opportunity element to those nasty Liberal reforms. The Liberals weren't trying to make a moral point; they just wanted the money. The strand of conservatism that Harper represents, however, sees unemployment as an individual moral failing. To such conservatives, anyone with gumption who loses his job will simply get another. Those with the most gumption will become billionaires. Purists of this ilk would have no EI program at all. But if one must exist, they argue, it should be as limited as possible and – like society in general – biased toward those with more. Hence this week's proposed reforms. A jobless, part-time doughnut shop employee may need extra benefits as much as a jobless auto worker. But in the universe of Harper conservatism, need has nothing to do with it. The question is: who pays? Those who pay more deserve more. They are just getting back what was always rightfully theirs. Those who pay less? They should be thankful they get any help at all. Thomas Walkom's column appears Wednesday and Saturday.  An all-candidates meeting set for Sept. 10
from Sue-Ann Levy of the Progressive
Conservatives, Eric Hoskins of the Liberals, Julian
Heller of the New Democratic Party, Chris Chopik of the Green Party and other
candidates will be given the opportunity to present & debate. If the popular vote swings away from the
Conservatives in favour of the NDP in this safe Conservative riding it will
send a strong message to both the Conservatives and the Liberals that we want a
new direction in A video message about the importance of this by-election Suggested Questions for the All Candidates
Meeting Housing: Since it is inconceivable that assisted housing
will ever begin to approach the need for housing relief in Increasing the minimum wage and standardizing it between
full time and part time employment to ensure that the working poor have the
ability to pay market rent for a standard of housing that provides healthy,
functional, safe and secure lodging? Increases to OW and ODSP housing benefit levels to ensure
that recipients have the ability to pay market rent for a standard of housing
that provides healthy, functional, safe and secure lodging? A provincial rental property standards act that would force
landlords including organizations such as Metro Toronto Housing Authority to
maintain their rental properties at a level that provides healthy, functional,
safe and secure lodging? Income Security:
Given that the recession has greatly increased unemployment levels in the
province and given that the recovery is projected to be a jobless one, what
measures are you proposing to cope with the anticipated huge increase in the
permanently unemployed: such as: Increased financial support for volunteerism? Meaningful retraining programs to assist the citizens of Meaningful reductions in tuitions at institutions of higher
education to allow Requiring employers to provide full employment benefits to
part time, casual and contract workers? Increasing minimum wage levels and standardizing them between
full time, casual and part time employment to ensure that Increasing social assistance benefits to a level that will
ensure that Economy: If
it is true that the healthiest economy will result in any jurisdiction if the
work force is trained to a world class standard, what measures are you prepared
to support to assist the Ontario
population to reach a world class criterion such as: Radically reducing or eliminating all tuition levels in
every secondary education facility to eliminate denial of access to education
based on economic means? Eliminating the student loans program and replacing it with a grants program that would be recovered through taxation as higher levels of employment are achieved? It is further understood that small business is the core employer in our economy. What measures are you proposing to decrease the burden of government on the independent entrepreneur to decrease the abominable failure rate of start up enterprises? What measures will you support to halt the current practice
of employers seeking to thwart the mandated employment benefits to full time
employees by filling full time positions with casual, part time and contract
workers?  Politics is in the air Just had some people from elections make sure you vote
Conservative Ron..this will weaken the tax hungry Liberals we have right now.
Might not be party of choice, but it will give the Liberals a minority
government and the other parties can get rid of the HST. Voting NDP at this
time just weakens the Conservatives to bring down the Liberals, as much as you
hate them..you want Dalton Mcdumbass to still have majority or minority? I know
I want his party to become a minority, choose wisely sir. right...vote
Conservative if you want to be poorer than you are already! So i guess you want
Liberals in power? you like the HST? the health premium that was imposed on us?
voting NDP would only take the votes away from the Conservatives-hence-Liberals
will still have a majority..but I guess you like the imposed taxes by Dalton
Mcdumbass right.(rhetorical) And if you take at good look at the programs
created by Conservatives, there far better then what the Liberals have done to
us..NDP isn't going to win shit, so why waste the vote? taking the latter is
much better. EVEN if you dont support the Conservatives, at least voting them
will make the Liberals a minority. The Cons can't even
see the need for a federal anti-poverty I personally can't
see any difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives except the
Conservatives are more honest in their anti people rhetoric. The Liberals try
to pretend they give a shit while doing the same things to stomp the poor into
the ground as the Conservatives. I'll be out campaigning for the NDP in this
by-election and in the upcoming federal election. If we can't elect a social
democratic party the only hope we have of thwarting the elitist policies of
both the major parties is to give the NDP a strong voice in a minority
government. I'm hoping they will form the official opposition at least. that works for me It amazes me how
much people really don't know about politics, First off you cant compare Harper
to Harris...one is FEDERAL the other is PROVINCIAL. Harris came into power when
we had a really bad recession, he admits to all the cuts he had to make.he took
the heat for it. I understand and it frustrated me as well, Harper is facing
his first recession. Harper has wiped out the majority of the debt that Trudeau
created for Just because Harris
was provincial and Harris is federal, does not mean there are no comparisons.
To the contrary. Harris was a right wing reactionary Conservative leader who is
now in disgrace. With the upcoming Federal election, Harper will be too. It is
so good to hear that the national debt has been practically eliminated under
Harper. I heard it first here. LOL If he wanted to actually do something about
the debt, he would have fixed the tax system so that corporations and the elite
would pay a share proportionate to the excessive incomes they enjoy. if you think Harris
isn't lurking at the federal level, you're the naive one. harris was a bully,
and so is harper. look at the almost illegal lengths he goes to 'destroy'
opponents and con canadians with multi million dollar smear campaigns. he can't
stand on his politics alone. when he's about to be legally toppled, he simply
sends everyone home for an early vacation in the midst of economic disaster. a
con is a con is a con. harris and harper are two peas of a pod. give me a
decent conservative who cares more about people than profit, and i'll consider
it. Cheryl: Harper shut
down parliament because of the coalition, you want the Bloc Party to run 1. He prorogued
parliament to stop the opposition parties, that formed a coalition, from an
attempt to overthrow his newly elected government. Though supporters of
opposition parties may see this as a cowardly act, I see it as the best thing
he could have done, otherwise 6. He has done the
same in from I don't have time
to go into all of this right now, but I will say that it is not up to the
people to prove that he is unfit to govern; it is up to Harper to prove that he
is fit and he certainly has NOT even made an attempt to do that. His idea of
getting tough on crime will turn out to be a plan to stomp on the homeless and
poor of the country. He'd love to reinstate the death penalty and make it a
capital offence to be poor. A sure fire way to end poverty in So if Harper is
such a disgrace to Canada start proving it now, I STILL haven't seen even one
example of importance on how he is so bad for our country. BTW Ron..their is a
great difference between Federal and Provincial governing. But were not talking
about the prime minister going up for election...its Provincial this time, so
ALL of you people go right ahead and vote in NDP..because Sat at you don't have time
to go into it?, what can you possibly say...? Then make sure if anyone is going
to bash a party or leader, make sure they have valid points and facts rather
then opinion. your concentration is more on the poor then anything else, so
either way your going to support the NDP. regardless even if they don't win,
which makes no sense to me whatsoever. But I guess you prefer Dalton McDumbass
to reign power right? I'm curious as to 'why' Conservatives are so bad, instead
of opinions give facts. Take 20 mins out of your time and explain in an email,
politics is my passion..feed me something you feel I can learn or benefit from,
and I'll respond back. Part of the excitement of debate between us. Don't worry
Ron, I wont disrespect your views or points.. The sentiment of
Canadians speaks for itself. How much more proof do you need? Most of us DON'T
want him there. He was about to be demcratically defeated when he
"porogued" parliament. So he rules because the alternative was worse?
Is that your logic? Ronzig The con
candidate for cheryl: and why
dont you want him in power..have valid reasons? or do you always follow
everyone else? My only reason is
against Harper, not the Conservatives--Harper tried to eliminate campaign
financial reform, cutting finanical aid to support political parties so only a
party with corporate sponsorship would have access to the kind of money needed
to campaign; Which means essentially, only the Conservatives would be able to
campain, and would win by sheer attrition. I always say--Right and left all
want the same things, we just have different views on how to achieve it. But I
will never vote Con while Harper is in charge. Sorry, Ron. Not against
Conservative values, (while I did not vote for Harris, I support SOME of the
things He did in office) and in most cases, I do not hold the reactionary fear
that any Conservative in power is the end of 2 hours ago ·
Delete Also, on a lesser
note, a major platform of his last couple of campaigns was senate reform. He
railed against the Liberal-controlled senate for years, and as far as I know,
most of his loyal supporters still ardently believe in senate reform. One of
his campaign promises was that he would never appoint an unelected person to
the senate. Suddenly and without explanation, he is giving plum jobs to
everybody who ever carried his golf clubs. OK folks I’m feeling
a little better this morning. I’ve been sick for a couple of days, so sorry I
haven’t been able to join in before now. This discussion began around a
by-election for the provincial MPP for (to avoid confusion,
I’ll use From the top: On the provincial
level, I do not write the
NDP off at all. I am in favour of a minority government at both levels with the
NDP as the official opposition. Newton is correct in assuming the NDP has
little chance of actually forming a government but with them as the opposition
in a minority government, the social infrastructure will be protected and
enhanced, Both of the major parties have become interchangeable in their
attempts to decimate support programs to the less fortunate in our society and
this is unacceptable. Historically, If I’m not mistaken,
the Although this
discussion began because of an upcoming provincial by-election, it is appropriate
that it progressed into the federal realm, particularly since we can expect a
federal election in October. On the federal level,
Cheryl mentions Harper’s almost illegal activities. Unfortunately he has
crossed the line and has progressed to truly illegal activities when he refused
to repatriate a Canadian citizen and went so far as to appeal a court order to
do so. Legally if he feels that she is undesirable, the means exist to remove her
from Cheryl also reminds us
that Harper prorogued the government to avoid losing his power to govern.
Although this action was legal, it certainly was undemocratic to thwart the
wishes of the majority of Canadians in a move to cling to power. 1. 2. I agree with 3. Also I can not argue with 4. Regarding the stimulus bill, I’m quite certain
that all Canadians support the need to give the economy a boost. The
disagreement with the Harper plan is how to proceed. Instead of bailouts and
incentives to the ultra rich elite, a more appropriate approach would be to fix
Employment Insurance so that people who paid into the program can receive the
support that they deserve and to create a national poverty reduction program
that would increase income levels of people living on fixed incomes from pensions,
disability support and welfare. These people need the money to survive and
would spend it thereby keeping it circulating in the economy rather than using
it to supplement growing off shore bank accounts that do nothing to help the
economy. Also, strong support for the green energy industry would create many
new employment opportunities and move 5. Infrastructure improvements are not merely
important; they are essential and long overdue. I wonder why it takes an
economic downturn for governments of all stripes to pay attention to the
problem of an aging and inadequate infrastructure base. 6. Ditto. 7. Becoming Bush’s toady and proxy in American
Imperialist war is nothing to brag about. It is our greatest shame. I can’t see
how Harper has accomplished any meaningful improvements to Canada/US relations
other than that. We have for the most part bee friendly neighbours with our
American cousins and I see no justification for claiming that Harper has done
anything unique in that area. 8. Harper is an expert on the creation of
flattering news releases, but his refusal to support Kyoto and his declaration
that Canada does not need a national poverty reduction strategy speak to how
out of step he is with the rest of the world. Furthermore, his boycott of both
Premiere’s conferences on these topics speaks to how out of touch he is with
the mood of the Canadian public at large. 9. I readily agree that a reduction in such a
regressive taxation as the GST is a good move. It should be eliminated as it
places a huge burden on the ultra poor. 10. Getting tough on crime is always a last resort
strategy of a failing leader who would like to criminalize opposition to his
reactionary leadership. Back to the
provincial level, Ron Newton, my friend, you asked me to take 20 minutes
to reply, but I could never give the topic justice in that amount of time. This
reply has taken over 2 hours to write. Hope it is helpful. Cheryl Smith and Ted Heeley thanks
for your contributions. This by-election is
a great run up to the impending federal election and I think this discussion
ahs brought forward several crucial issues which should be addressed in these
politically heated times. I dont agree with a lot you have written on your site, but of course I
cant write a reaction to what you wrote on that site. is suppose to do? they would totalling disagree with Liberals and NDP
unless it is all for If my memory serves me, I believe Harper said something to the effect
that we would not be affected by a recession. Even stating that recession would
not be so bad proves that as an economist he is incompetent and if he said it
knowing that it was a falsehood in order to prevent panic, he is also a cynical
liar who believes that it is better to keep Canadians in blind ignorance of the
facts because we are too stupid to be able to handle the truth. Either way we
do not need such an incompetent liar as our leader. you'd be somewhat
reactionary too if your income was suddenly cut by 40% and you faced policemen
with guns at the welfare office and scorn and loathing from your fellow
citizens. i see many similarities between harris and harper, and huddack for
that matter. The woman in
question is a Canadian citizen, carrying a Canadian passport and all your
belligerence does nothing to change the fact that Harper is attempting to keep
her out of the country without due process in a court of law. This action is
indicative of a banana republic dictator, not the leader of a democratic
society and clearly shows that he is not worth of leading our country. Ron: Harper said
that because And what is so
threatening about Huddack??? Because he's a Con? I need more information that
I'm not aware of to strike down a leader, not assumptions or opinion. Ron: show me the
article, I'll read it and reply. I find it laughable
that anyone could put Harper forward as a serious choice for the job of
protector of the poor. As I mentioned on my website where this whole
conversation is recorded including my lengthy response to earlier comments, he
declared to the world that Ron N: This could be a learning experience for all of us and help the
con campaign. find out what hudak's provincial poverty strategy intentions are,
where he stands on this, and all related issues, like minimum wage. What does
he believe about poverty, about the poor? Here is your chance to conform
someone. the cons are thick with muck. they need to rpove they are not in PROVE TO US IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN I speak for the poor who joined me in the welfare offices, who were
heavy with the stigma of shame and fear, police officers glaring at you. You have
no idea my friend, what it means to be poor. that was after they cut our rates by almost 40% You're making some good points Cheryl. Too many poeple ignore the
devastating psychological effect that extreme poverty has on good people who
deserve better. Cheryl: I grew up poor, I had a 17 yr old mother and a 20 yr old father.
I know whats its like not to have an xmas tree or gifts underneath it, never
assume you know about someone unless you actually know them. It seems to me all
you care about is the poor, and what kind of handouts you receive. You still
havent proved anything to me regarding on '... Read morewhy' the Conservatives
are so bad, and if you want to mention about past leaders-Lets bring up
Rae...what party was he in??? NDP-and you trust them? I have a belief that
every leader should be given the benefit of the doubt. Dont compare Harris to
Huddack..there two different people, and I'm sure the Cons will do a much
better job then what the Liberals have been doing. Dalton McDumbass gave us a
50 billion dollar debt..Harper gave us a 50 billion dollar debt..who's the bad
leader? The cons have said they are going to get rid of HST..this tax will hurt
the poor, during the election listen to what he has to say-then judge him. Ron N, you write yourself into a corner when you speak of Bob Rae, for
that defeats any argument you could put forward for a new Conservative leader
and how long did Rae stay with the NDP? Your argument against the NDP because
of the Rae experience works even better with Harris who was much worse and much
more recent. We'll forget Rae's inept governance long before we forget Harris'
cruel gutting of the social safety net. On the same track, Harper is doing a
fine job of ensuring that the Conservatives linger in opposition for years to
come. You mention a 50 billion dollar debt under Harper. Better check your
terms. Possibly deficit, not debt. and he did this the good old fashioned way,
by ensuring that expenditures that should be federal were downloaded to the
provinces. The bottom line is as Cheryl stated, it is not a requirement that those
who vote prove the reasons for their choices. It is the requirement of those
who seek election to prove that they are fit to govern. As a spokesperson for
the Conservatives, you have not given good reason to vote for them, but have
tried to give reasons why we should not vote for the others. Not very promising
my friend. that's the con way...just shoot everybody till you're the only one left
standing. Harper has a tougher opponent with Innatief. Bar room bullying will
not hold. Hudak, 41, is a right-of-centre politician who is expected to take the
party on a different path than John Tory's centrist-conservative vision. The
trained economist wants to restore The PC plan would protect homeowners by: Tim Hudak's leadership campaign sent out an email this morning outlining
some policy announced yesterday at the Economic Club of Canada: So if the Cons slash business taxes, and property taxes, get rid of the
HST it will create a lot more money for the province. Meaning more jobs which creates
more available taxes then in turn it can be focused on the less fortunate.
Makes sense to me, having Dalton McDumbass and his band of Fiberals are just
going to widen the gap between the poor and the rich..this is all common sense.
Why compare a past leader to present leader?? So I suppose we can compare Iggy
with Trudeau?Broadbent with As I see it, each and every one of these proposals are designed to
increase the gap between the upper classes and the poor. Tax breaks and the
rest of these proposals do absolutely nothing to alleviate the suffering of the
poor and are merely ploys to con the middle class into voting for a more
fragmented society where the poor get left further and further behind. The
danger in this philosophy is that as the gap increases so does the animosity
between the classes and the danger of a violent insurgence is very real. This
platform will certainly be attractive the haves of the population. It will be
my responsibility to mobilize the have not segment in opposition. 
Me. What we need most urgently is a more equitable taxation system. A system where NO PERSON LIVING BELOW THE POVERTY LINE IS TAXED AT ALL and where people earning exorbitant incomes are held responsible for contributing a far greater portion of their incomes to taxation. And get rid of ALL the loopholes that allow the rich to avoid paying their fair share. Ron. You cant totally say that Ron, if that was the case the people wo earn higher incomes would just move south. Me. Not likely. The
American society is in greater trouble than our own. Ron. Also I don't
think it's exactly fair to say that a person below poverty line shouldn't pay
any taxes, nor should the rich be penalized for being rich. You must understand
why employers pay lower wages...because of immigrants that come into this
country and are willing to work for a smaller wage. Don’t get me wrong, i
respect hard working immigrants. And as for 'loop
holes' I suppose your referring to RRSPs? When i think of all the advantages
the rich have towards taxes, it is fair. First of all they pay a hell of a lot
more taxes then the average person; second of all they also pay luxury taxes on
more expensive things. they pay higher taxes on property taxes. Me.
Are you saying that in a country as rich as Canada it is just to tax
people who can't afford to pay rent and buy food for their kids and are living
in abject poverty doing important work that is absolutely necessary in our
society to keep things going? I have to vehemently oppose that stance. It
doesn't matter whether they were born here or immigrated,
citizens and permanent residents of Ron.
No I would never say what you just implied, I just don't think that
because someone is under poverty line shouldn't pay any taxes. Plus I know that
people in lower tax brackets get additional help from the government. Such as
child tax credit(formally baby bonus), there is universal child tax credit to
children under 6, there are daycare programs families can apply too, there entitled to gst credit,
they can claim a portion of their rental costs. and there is more programs to
mention (not enough room). The biggest problem is the fact that rent control
was taken away from Me.
I guess Ron the real issue is not how a person achieves an standard of
living. The issue is the injustice of the distribution of wealth in this
country Be it from wages, government programs or tax relief, something must be
done to relieve the suffering of the poorest in our society. The fact remains
that there is no excuse for our society forcing people
to live in poverty amid vast riches. My taxation suggestions are just one
possible solution. A liveable minimum wage would also work if coupled with
increases in social assistance ane EI benefits. If we approach the issue fro
the wages end of the pole, the problem of employers avoiding providing mandated
benefits by filling full time positions with several part time people or by
contracting the work rather than hiring employees needs to be addressed. Not
only does a part time employee fall into a lower minimum wage category, but he
is denied the benefits that law requires an employer to pay a full time
employer. These loopholes need to be closed. There should be only ONE
minimum wage. Anything else is a contradiction in terms. And ALL employees and
contract workers should be covered by legally mandated benefits. Also, your
mention of reinstating rent controls troubles me. There are two reasons. First,
rent controls result in declining maintenance of buildings and ALWAYS
precipitate declining construction of new rental buildings creating drastic
shortages in the rental market. Ron. No no Ron that
isn't true, i remember back when i was 18yrs old they had rent control, it was
great. And there are laws in which landlords have to keep apartments up to
par-problem is people are afraid to say anything. LOL..you know how many times
I have fought with the rental company that runs my building? Personally..I'm a
pitbull to rights. You could see my name in politics
in the near future, right now I'm absorbing every level of life from rich down
to poor..people opinions,there needs, concerns..plus i want to volunteer for a
friend who's thinking of running for city council. You'd be surprised on how
well it works for rent control. Me.
I was a landlord during those years with Ron. Wow..sorry to hear that. But don't they have laws today that say they can add the cost of what you described in the above and apply it to yearly rent increase? (after they submit an application) Me. Furthermore, property standards by-laws are a joke. Every slum landlord on the city ignores them and they are NOT enforced. All rent controls accomplishes is to turn honest landlords into slum landlords because the revenue to maintain the buildings just is NOT there. Those laws were always there, but the Commissioners who approve rent increases disallowed a large proportion of the expenses that had to be done and were already spent, leaving a negative income after actual expenses. Ron. Oh I know about slum landlords, there's one in the building across from where I live. I have called the city numerous times about the health issues this building has and they only came out a few times.small fine-it's paid-then i have to repeat the cycle. Maybe we should have a Premier with balls that can implicate all of our concerns..problem is..Dalton McDumbass and his band of Fiberals kept getting elected. Me. Well look at the
options. Ron. Well biggest problem I see is nobody gets their ass to the voting stations, let's see what a full majority Harper gov can bring us..I'm happy so far..but a lot of the time i hold my breath Me. The problem with politics in the day and age of polster is they no longer can be relied upn to vote according to their principles. We can't vote for a politician based on his ideals any more since they all will vote the opposite of their stated beliefs if they think it will get them elected next time around. Ron. Yeah I see that alot..but not with this Prime Minister. he has promised a lot..has delivered, some he cant because of minority gov Me. That's why I like
debating with you Ron. You and I are exact opposites in how we perceive
politics. I at present am strongly opposed to Harper and the policies of the
right. At present I support the NDP, but that changes with the times. If in the
future , we Canadians swing too far to the left, I'll go back to supporting the
Conservatives or Liberals. I am not interested in
dogma. My concern is with the quality of our society as awhole and I vote for a
fair and equitable balance in our society. Right now that balance is out of
whack to the Right, so I support the Left. When it was out of balance to the
Left I supported the Right. Ron.
I enjoy debates with you also..but I cant trust Ron. That’s something we both agree on :) Me. But let's face
it, the Block will NEVER take Ron. But they cant
threaten a referendum..Dion authored a law so they cant..will be hard for them
to change it. And if they do..let them go. (I hate to break up Me. What do you think, should I apply for a job at U of T as a professor in political science? Ron. Sure why not, I will even sign up for a class..just dont give me a bad grad because of the partism against each other-lol Me. I see you point,
but the fact remains that if Ron. You think we'd
lose the eastern seaboard? mmmm I dont think Me. We wouldn't be
able to keep them. Too much geographic separation and we really couldn't hdeal
with crossing borders to get from one part of Is Obama just another cynical opportunist? I try to give Obama the benefit of the doubt when I say his
ideals are in the right place even if he balks at doing the right thing. I have
said from day 1 that we can't trust Obama to be the miracle worker everyone
thought he would be. How can he possibly make significant change when he and
every major politician are bought and paid for? It costs $100million just to
run for the  A grafitti portrait of a native homeless boy, now deceased.
Public hearings for
recommendations to improve Bill 152 These public hearings before
the standing committee responsible for drafting the new Poverty Reduction Act
are designed to allow stakeholders to make recommendations for improvements to
the existing proposal before it is passed into law. Yesterday several organizations,
including The Social Planning Network, The Wellesley Institute and 25 in 5
Network for Poverty Reduction offered their recommendations. A common thread
through most of these presentations was the concern that by only addressing the
problem of poverty amongst children while doing nothing for single adults in
particular, the act excludes the majority of people suffering from poverty from
any assistance. This creates a situation where the government can do nothing
for the majority of those in need while appearing to be concerned with poverty
by singling out a small segment that will be popular for assistance. The
speakers were strongly proposing a universal plan that should be inclusive of
all people suffering from poverty. Let us hope that the government abandons its’
attempt to divide us and amends Bill 152 to make poverty reduction universal for
all Ontarians.  Poverty effects us all. Any solution that doesn't address it universally is a sham. About Bill 152: The Poverty
Reduction Act, 2009 By the Income Security Advocacy
Centre Public hearings at April 20 @ On This legislation is very
significant because it acknowledges that poverty is not inevitable and that
government can and should create policy to reduce poverty. But it has been
criticized for a variety of shortcomings. Bill 152 is not yet law, so
there is still time to fix the problems. The Bill passed first reading
in the legislature on March 25 and has been sent to the Standing Committee on
Social Affairs for review. The Standing Committee will hold two days of
hearings in The hearings will take place
on April 20 and 21 and will only be held in To make an oral presentation
on Bill 152, you must register with the Clerk of the Standing Committee on
Social Affairs by The Clerk is Katch Koch, who
can be reached at 416-325-3526 or e-mail: katch_koch@ontla.ola.org To make a written submission,
simply send the submission to the Clerk by To help groups prepare, the 25
in 5 Network for Poverty Reduction is consulting with lawyers familiar with the
legislative process and human rights law, and people who have worked on similar
poverty reduction legislation in If you are considering making
a presentation, you may want to use 25 in 5's recommendations as a basis for
your own work. Information about 25 in 5's recommendations will be available at
www.25in5.ca by April 17. The letter notifying the
public about the Standing Committee's hearings is pasted below: Bill 152 – Poverty Reduction
Act, 2009 Projet de loi 152 – Loi de
2009 sur la réduction de la pauvreté The Standing Committee on
Social Policy will meet to consider Bill 152, An Act respecting a long-term
strategy to reduce poverty in The Committee intends to hold
public hearings in Interested people who wish to
be considered to make an oral presentation on Bill 152 should contact the
Committee Clerk by Those who do not wish to make
an oral presentation but wish to comment on the Bill may send written
submissions to the Committee Clerk at the address below by An electronic version of the
Bill is available on the Legislative Assembly website at: www.ontla.on.ca. Shafiq Qaadri,
MPP Katch Koch Chair / Président
Clerk / Greffier Room 1405, Whitney Block /
Bureau 1405, édifice Whitney Queen’s Park, Telephone / Téléphone:
(416) 325-3526 Facsimile / Télécopieur:
(416) 325-3505 TTY / ATS : (416)
325-3538 Collect calls will be
accepted. / Nous acceptons les appels à frais virés. Ces renseignements sont
disponibles en français sur demande.  We must eliminate the need for this type of shelter My submission to the public hearings for Bill 152: The Poverty Reduction Act 2009 To: Katch Koch Clerk
of the Standing Committee on Social Affairs And to: Premier McGuinty Bill 152 is a prime example of
the government’s ongoing policy of too little too late when it comes to
unprecedented poverty and homelessness in one of the wealthiest societies ever
to exist on this planet. This bill does absolutely nothing to address the growing
numbers of social assistance recipients who are being forced into homelessness
because the rental allowance portion of their benefits is inadequate to cover
rental costs for even the worst slum dwelling situations. As the current
economic meltdown continues to spread and the ranks of the unemployed expand
exponentially, we face a desperate situation where thousands of families and
single people will face eviction once their EI coverage expires and they are
forced to rely upon Ontario Works or Ontario Disability Support Program income.
If the government fails to correct this situation by raising the rental portion
of these programs to a level that will allow people to pay market rent for
decent housing, we face a social disaster beyond precedence. It is admirable that the
government intends to take measures to reduce the suffering of families
affected by the economic situation, but it is deplorable that the needs of
single persons have been completely ignored. It is time to correct this
measure by imposing a tax on extreme wealth that would fund a redistribution of
funds to ensure that no family or single person residing in Thank you for considering my
comments. Yours truly Ronald Craven M4P 2X9 416 820-6036 See my website about poverty
and homelessness at…  Making the best of a bad situation It
just isn’t fair This
sure does not please me. Why is our Government so generous? Do
not apply for your old age pension...Apply to be a refugee! It is
interesting that the federal Government provides a single refugee with a
monthly allowance of $1,890.00 and each can get an additional $580.00
in social assistance for a total of $2,470.00. This
compares very well to a single pensioner who, after contributing as
refugees! can
get the refugees cut back to $1,012.00 and the pensioners up to
$2,470.00, so they can enjoy the money they were forced to submit to I received this
shocking information from a friend and wonder why our government treats refugees so well when a
homeless single person can only receive about $300.00 per month in social
assistance. There must be an explanation why a newcomer to our country is
entitled to EIGHT
TIMES as much financial assistance as someone who was born here.
Could it be that our political leaders wish to be viewed by the international
community as humanitarian people while at the same time remaining as cynical as
ever to the suffering they sponsor here in Canada?  People all over the world have to live with the daily threat that the guns will destoy everything they cherish. The Ontario budget doesn’t meet the criteria of The Poverty Reduction Act, 2009 In the explanatory not below, the Poverty Reduction Act gives 3 criteria that the government is required to address, (a) a specific poverty reduction target; (b) initiatives designed to improve the economic and social conditions of persons and families living in poverty; and (c) indicators that are linked to the determinants of poverty to measure the success of the strategy. Part (b) has not been adequately addressed. When we study the wording of this phrase we realize that it appears to mean that the government should take steps to improve the social and economic conditions of all persons living in poverty, but in reality they only need to take steps to improve the conditions of 2 or more persons and that loophole has been utilized in the proposed budget. This budget targets children to the exclusion of all the rest of the people who are suffering in poverty. This cynical disregard for the suffering of the majority of people living in poverty including the physically and mentally handicapped, seniors and people living on social assistance who have no children is simply not acceptable. We must demand an equitable poverty reduction plan that includes every Ontarian living in poverty, without exception. Nothing less will do. The act states in section 1, “Importance of all Ontarians” 1. That there is untapped potential in Ontario’s population that needs to be drawn upon by building and establishing supports for, and eliminating barriers to, full participation by all people in Ontario’s economy and society. By ignoring the majority of Ontarians living in poverty in the proposed budget, the government has indicated that it intends of continue with the policies that have created unprecedented numbers of people living below the poverty line, in particular, those who are homeless. As Employment Insurance payments run out for the many thousands of Ontarians who have and will soon loose their jobs due to the current economic meltdown, many, many thousands more will join the ranks of those living in poverty and thousands of these will end up homeless unless the situation is addresses NOW. We require measures to ensure that a minimum wage earner is enabled to live above the poverty line and that those receiving social assistance, whether it be Ontario Works, ODSP or Seniors benefits will no longer live in extreme poverty. It states in section 5, “Respect” 5. That all people in Where is this respect when the government chooses to ignore the majority of Ontarians living in poverty and make no attempts whatsoever to improve their lot? EXPLANATORY NOTE The Poverty Reduction Act, 2009 requires the Government of Ontario to maintain the long-term poverty reduction strategy setout in Breaking the Cycle — Ontario’s Poverty Reduction Strategy, published on December 4, 2008, or another long-term poverty reduction strategy that is guided by the vision of a province where every person has the opportunity to achieve his full potential and contribute to and participate in a prosperous and healthy Ontario. Every new or modified long-term poverty reduction strategy is to be based on the principles set out in the Bill and include, (a) a specific poverty reduction target; (b) initiatives designed to improve the economic and social conditions of persons and families living in poverty; and (c) indicators that are linked to the determinants of poverty to measure the success of the strategy. The Government of Ontario is required to establish a specific poverty reduction target at least every five years. The Minister is required, commencing at the end of 2009, to prepare, and subsequently publish on a Government website, an annual report on the Government’s long-term poverty reduction strategy, including activities to support the strategy and avail-able information relating to the indicators set out in the strategy. The Minister is required to regularly consult with such key stakeholders, other levels of government, members of the private, public and non-profit sectors and individuals, including those living in poverty, as the Minister considers advisable with respect to the Government’s long-term poverty reduction strategy. At least every five years, the Government of Ontario must re-view the long-term poverty reduction strategy then in effect. The Minister is required to inform the public of the review, solicit the views of the public and carry out consultations. As a result of each review, the Government is to issue a new long-term poverty reduction strategy. Here is a copy of The Poverty Reduction Act, 2009, the government's poverty reduction strategy and the poverty report
 A typical home in Toronto's wealthy Rosedale neighbourhood. Remember Rachel Corrie Rachel Corrie was a rare and wonderful person who cared enough about what’s right and what isn’t to put her life on the line in the belief that no human being could be so evil as to cross that line. Unfortunately an Israeli bulldozer operator who was demolishing Palestinian homes didn’t agree. She was murdered, crushed by a bulldozer as she tried to protect a family’s home. http://www.rachelcorriefoundation.org/ is a website dedicated to furthering her efforts. http://www.rachelcorrie.org/ is a memorial site describing her life and continuing her efforts. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3JI-axaRF4 will take you to a live interview with Rachel Corrie in United Nations Condemns Canadian Housing Policy On The lead editorial in the Non-governmental groups should incorporate Miloon’s preliminary observations into our work leading up to the next federal budget. While Miloon has completed the first stage of his fact-finding mission to Miloon has asked for any additional information – statistics, stories, recommendations for action – that non-governmental groups want to pass along. Please stay tuned for details. Here’s the Star piece: A 3-point strategy for better housing Canadians really didn't need a United Nations envoy to tour the country and announce that But the visit last week by Miloon Kothari , the UN's special rapporteur on adequate housing, did shine a spotlight on the shocking lack of affordable housing options in a country as rich as Canada. Successive federal and provincial governments have pledged to address the problem, but all have fallen far short of meeting the growing demand for reasonably priced housing for low-income families and individuals. What is lacking is a co-ordinated federal-provincial housing strategy, in effect a national plan that would ensure every Canadian has a decent place to call home. Such a blueprint must take a three-pronged approach: new construction of affordable homes, rent subsidies and renovation of existing homes. The three areas need to be tackled together, not in isolation or in any prescribed order. Rather, a holistic approach is best suited to addressing the problem. As a key leg of the three-pronged strategy, it is imperative that Miloon Kothari, Special Rapporteur for the United Nations, speaking in  Miloon Kothari, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to housing, speaks in Toronto Councilor Barbara Hall spoke to the audience. UN Housing Envoy
Sounds Alarm The Wellesley
Institute has concluded that Canada has received
both a sharp reprimand and a strong call to action from Miloon Kothari,
the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate Housing. In his
preliminary observations at the end of his fact-finding mission to Canada,
which Wellesley helped organize, Mr. Kothari said he is
“disturbed” by the lack of adequate housing in such a wealthy country. After
visiting Canadian Housing & Renewal Association
Executive Director Sharon Chisholm told Housing Again that Mr. Kothari
has “sounded an alarm” and she hopes the decision makers in “ Mr. Kothari has reminded Canadians and Canadian governments
that “we cannot be complacent, that our lot can get worse without timely but
considered and smart interventions like sustainable program funding.” Chisholm
said. After witnessing the “situation on the street,” the Special
Envoy concluded that Mr. Kothari expressed concerns about the three federal
housing initiatives that are set to expire in 2008 — the Affordable Housing
Initiative, Affordable Housing Trusts and Residential Rehabilitation Assistance
Program — and urged the government to include a five- to-ten year renewal in a
national housing strategy, he said during a press conference in Mr. Kothari also called for large-scale building of social
housing units, targeted funding for marginalized groups, including women and
Aboriginal people, and rent regulation laws. All of his observations and
recommendations mirror those that have been made in the past by housing
advocates in Mr. Kothari’s preliminary observations
are the first stage towards completing a major review of Canada’s compliance
with its international housing rights obligations. While in the
country, he paid particular attention to four issues—homelessness, women and
adequate housing, indigenous peoples’ adequate housing and the effects on
housing of mega-events like the upcoming 2010 Olympic Games in The For further information on the mandate and work of the
Special Rapporteur on adequate housing, consult the website of the Office
of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.  Parliament's reaction 39th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION EDITED HANSARD • NUMBER 008 Oral Questions Housing Mr. Bill Siksay ( Mr. Speaker, when it comes to housing, the
government is going in the wrong direction. “Very disturbing”, “devastating impact”,
“national crisis” were words used by the UN special envoy on adequate housing, describing the
housing situation in had a world famous housing program,
summarily abandoned, he confirmed, by past Liberal governments. Given a $14 billion surplus, given federal
housing trust funds, and given the crisis, when will the government take real action on
affordable housing and homelessness? Hon. Monte Solberg (Minister of Human
Resources and Social Development, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the government is very
concerned about the plight of people who do not have a roof over their heads. That is why we put
in place a housing trust that will provide homes for tens of thousands of people over the next
few years. We have put in place the homelessness
partnering strategy, which has been heralded by many groups across this country. It is a
community based initiative that is designed to prevent homelessness and put a roof over the heads
of people who are struggling and who have been left behind so they can get the help they
need. Mr. Bill Siksay ( Mr. Speaker, reports today note the waiting
list for affordable housing in 3,000 families. Some 70,000 wait in emergency beds are in peril due to funding
shortfalls. housing promises. In We need action today to build homes, not
just shelters. We need action today, so families do not have to choose between rent or
electricity. When will the government announce a national housing strategy that actually builds
homes? Hon. Monte Solberg (Minister of Human
Resources and Social Development, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the member does not have a
monopoly on concern on this issue. We are very concerned about it which is why one of the
first things we did, as a government, was put in place a $1.4 billion housing trust which is
designed to create thousands and thousands of homes for Canadians. We have also moved in concert with the
Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to create an on reserve market based
housing fund which will provide homes for 25,000 aboriginals on reserve. We are acting, whereas the member who is
concerned about this obviously is simply flapping his gums. We are getting something done. My interpretation of this exchange is that
the present government is satisfied with its band aid solutions to a growing
crisis in housing. They are content to maintain the status quo in this
situation and refuse to address it with a meaningful approach. IT’S TIME WE,
THE PEOPLE OF  You'd think with all these structures they'd be able to find a place for our homeless people to live in dignity. My submission to The United
Nations 1) Homelessness is
NOT a problem, it’s a political agenda. 2) Economic slavery
is the primary cause of homelessness. We are governed by people who owe their
jobs to campaign funding from the upper classes. No wonder they refuse to
protect poor people who are FORCED to work long hours for wages that are not
sufficient to provide food and shelter for their families. 3) Subsidized
housing & rent geared to income has created two classes of poverty. Those
with government funded housing can live reasonably well and are the fortunate
ones. Those without, live a daily existence on the edge of homelessness and
have to spend money which should go to food on rent. They can not afford both.
It’s either inadequate nourishment or homelessness. It is naïve to think that
the failed policy of building so called affordable housing will ever come close
to solving the homelessness issue. No government can afford to build enough
housing units to ever make a difference. 4) We don’t need to
build affordable housing; we need to afford the existing housing. There
presently exists more than enough vacant housing to accommodate all of the
homeless people. The problem is that people on social assistance or working at
minimum wage do not have enough income to pay reasonable market rents. Our
government has made war on the poor by failing to ensure a reasonable income
for either of these groups. A livable minimum wage and reasonable social
assistance rates would eliminate most homelessness. If government would give
landlords a tax break for setting aside a portion of their housing units to
rent at the rate provided for by ODSP or Ontario Works, we could eliminate most
of the homelessness caused by affordability problems immediately. 5) Addictions along
with physical and mental disabilities are major contributing factors in
homelessness and next to economic slavery, are the most significant causes of
homelessness. It is unconscionable that in the richest society that has ever
existed on Earth, we still condemn sick people from these groups to
homelessness and an early death. Any politician who says we can not afford to
give these people proper care and a safe home is an outright liar. 6) There will
always be a few people who choose to remain homeless, but if we give most
homeless people a reasonable alternative, they will pounce on the opportunity
and homelessness will be almost completely eradicated. 7) It is incredible
that a multi billion dollar industry has been instituted to deal with
homelessness when allowing people a livable income would eliminate its need at
a fraction of the cost. 8) Police
harassment, illegal tactics and brutality towards homeless people NEED TO CEASE
IMMEDIATLEY. I could site several examples of police brutality, but the most
outrageous is one where two police officers threw a friend of mine off a
railway overpass in an attempt to kill him. He lived, but sustained multiple
fractures to both of his legs. I watched as two police officers soused my squat
and ALL MY WORLDLY POSSESSIONS in gasoline and set them on fire. We need a
civilian watchdog to handle complaints about police. When I lodged a formal
complaint, there was NO MEANINGFUL INVESTIGATION. Neither I nor a second
eyewitness were ever interviewed. Every homeless person knows there is no sense
in complaining about these events. Nothing is ever done except often there is
severe police retaliation. 9) Homelessness in
most underdeveloped countries is also a matter of economic slavery and
political agenda. The difference is that there, a third element exacerbates the
situation. Many of these countries rely on economic and material aid from the
developed nations. Not nearly enough aid is forthcoming and corrupt political
leaders and bureaucrats siphon off most of the cream so that little actually
reaches the intended recipients. Add piracy to the mix and it’s easy to see why
millions of people world wide continue to wander homeless and starving to
death. 10) In spite of the
lip service and band-aid solutions being offered up, homelessness and
starvation continue to increase throughout the developed and undeveloped world
at an alarming rate. Will it take violent worldwide uprisings by these
desperate victims of social greed and avarice to facilitate meaningful action?
If so, beware, for the time is rapidly approaching.  I presented a document on the topic to Mr. Kothari The Results as reported by the
Wellesley Institute Canada has received both a sharp reprimand
and a strong call to action in the preliminary observations of the United
Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate Housing, Miloon Kothari ,
in his preliminary observations at the end of his fact-finding mission to
Canada (October 22, 2007). The preliminary observations are the first
stage towards completing a major review on Mr. Kothari visited five Canadian cities
and several Aboriginal communities during his mission from October 9 to 22. He
met with senior government officials, representatives of non-governmental
organizations and people who are directly experiencing “Everything I witnessed on this mission
confirms the deep and devastating impact of this national crisis on the lives
of women, youth, children and men,” said Mr. Kothari. “ Mr. Kothari’s preliminary observations are
a devastating indictment of almost two decades of funding cuts by governments
in “ Along with his preliminary
observations, Mr. Kothari has made a series of recommendations to the federal
government, including: - a comprehensive national housing
strategy, coordinated with the provinces and territories; - a “large-scale” building of social
housing units; - an immediate extension of the federal
government’s affordable housing programs, which are due to expire at the end of
fiscal 2008; - immediate steps to fully recognize
international economic, social and cultural rights in all Canadian domestic
laws; as part of a national housing strategy, specific initiatives directed at
groups forced onto the margins, including women, Aboriginal people, elders,
youth, members of racialized communities, immigrants and others; - an immediate extension of the federal
housing renovation program that is due to expire at the end of fiscal 2008; - a comprehensive fix for the subsidy
erosion faced by s.95 housing co-operatives; funding and resources to ensure
that all Canadians have access to potable water and proper sanitation; - an immediate extension of the federal
homelessness program, which is due to expire in fiscal 2008; - a consistent framework of tenant
protection and rent regulation laws across the country that meet the standards
set by international housing rights laws; - additional housing allowances as part of
a national housing strategy; - inclusive zoning and planning practices
across the country; - a comprehensive and properly-funded
poverty reduction strategy at the federal level, and with provinces and
territories; measures to address the urgent, short-term and long-term needs of
women; - progressive legislation to address
violence against women; - creation, funding and implementation of
programs and policies to support women in the area of housing and domestic
violence; - funding and resources to a national
Aboriginal housing strategy, on and off-reserve, that ensures that Aboriginal
housing and services are under Aboriginal control; - a moratorium on oil and extractive
activities at Lubicon until a settlement is reached with the Lubicon Lake
Nation; - specific targets and strategies, and
independent monitoring, of the Vancouver Olympics; - funding and programs to sustain
non-governmental organizations over time; - the development of proper statistics and
indicators for homelessness and housing insecurity. Over the next four months, Mr. Kothari will
continue to monitor the activities of the federal, provincial and territorial
governments, and will work with non-governmental organizations in * * * Michael
Shapcott, Senior Fellow The
Wellesley Institute Tel. -
416-972-1010, x231 Fax -
416-921-7228 www.wellesleyinstitute.com  An angry sky for Toronto the not so good.  The abandoned Canada Malting building at the foot of Bathurst St. Maybe they could convert it into batchelor apartments for homeless people.
When Fools Run the Asylum Jack Layton, leader of the Federal New Democratic Party, tells the story of a homeless man who froze to death near his downtown home. The city immediately responded to ensure that never again would a homeless person die in that shelter. You might ask, “What did they do?” “Did they add heaters to the shelter?” The answer is no, they removed the shelter, thereby forcing TTC passengers to wait for their ride exposed to the elements and removing what little comfort was available to the homeless in the area. Who knows where they will go now to freeze to death? Not to that shelter obviously. The same twisted philosophy applies to the order that the city made to outreach workers, forbidding them to give sleeping bags or warm clothing to homeless people on the grounds that it will enable them to remain homeless. Better to let them freeze to death I guess. When the only alternative offered to sleeping on the streets
is to sleep in shelters that are disease ridden, over crowded, vermin infested
and downright dangerous, it would seem to me that enabling people with no
viable alternative to survive on the streets is the minimum that our leaders
should attempt.  Jack Layton, leader of the Federal NDP Party
I'm Perplexed What troubles me, what I
can’t understand is the fact that we have built a society that is simply
barbarous and yet almost every person I meet within that society seems to be a
caring, compassionate and intelligent human being. How can this be? As individuals,
people are wonderful and yet when looked upon as a society they take on
dreadful characteristics. Economic slavery is encouraged and those who rebel
against it are outcast and looked upon as lesser creatures, vermin if you will.
I can not comprehend how the two views can coexist. I don’t believe I know
anyone who would hesitate to feed a starving person if he met one. Food and
comfort would be given freely and bounteously. Yet many thousands of people
starve to death daily in a world where there is more than enough to feed
everyone. How, how, how can this be? Is our political system
designed to reflect the lowest moral standard rather than strive to attain the
high ground? It seems so. Our politicians seem to court the meanest
characteristics in human nature rather than attempt to emulate the best in who
we are. I believe that this is a result of a change in the way politics are run
today. In the past, a politician would state his philosophical views and stand
for election based upon his personal convictions. He would associate himself
with a party that reflected these views in general terms and rise or fall
according to how many people felt the same way. Not anymore. Now we live in the
age of the pollster and no politician will ever honestly state his own opinion
on any subject. He will have a poll done and declare that his beliefs are the
beliefs of the majority result from the poll. It has become virtually
impossible to distinguish one major political party from the other since they
both strive to associate themselves with the results from the same polls. This
is dishonest and results in a system where all of our leaders are professional
liars. Is there any wonder that we live in a time when moral standards have all
but disappeared within our society even though they remain strong within most
individuals? If our leaders rule on the basis if lies, how can we expect
anything else? We have recently been
cheated. Our Governor General, an appointed position which is not subject to
democratic election has thwarted an attempt to oust an unpopular minority
government by a coalition of opposing parties. It seems to me that the time has
come to eliminate the position o Governor General altogether. I believe that we
will never attain honesty in government as long as power to govern remains in
the hands of the two largest parties. We are experiencing the growth of more
and more fringe parties who refreshingly stand upon their moral convictions
instead of living the lie of the polls. We need to support these small parties
with all of our ability and encourage an evolution in the way we are governed
towards a system where coalition governments become the standard. It may be a
more fractious form of government, but at least we will be governed once more
by honest men.  Mounted police in riot gear. Good News
 A scene from an OCAP protest and meal in front of City Hall This is a historic moment for It’s not often that politicians of divergent philosophies combine forces to a common cause. Not only is this an opportunity to face a universal threat by setting aside less pressing agendas and working together, but more so it is an opportunity to show the Canadian people that there are politicians in this country that are willing to work together for the common good of all Canadians by practicing true leadership. With any luck, they will see that working together in a coalition government will afford them far greater opportunity to further their causes than sitting as opposing members if minority parties. It is my hope that coalition governments will become the
norm in Don’t blow it people. We Canadians are counting on you. You can sign the petition in support of forming the coalition government at…  Toronto city hall The politicians at City Hall, those masters of cynicism and
hypocrisy will show you numbers of people housed by the Streets to Homes
Program as proof of the success of their policies and justification of their
ongoing program of closing shelters and detox centres and removing other vital
services to the homeless. They even have the nerve to forbid outreach workers
from distributing clothing or sleeping bags or other supplies to homeless
people on the grounds that it will only encourage homeless people to remain
homeless, but this policy does result in a reduction of homeless people in The answers to the first question are twofold. Revolving Door Homelessness. The housing that Streets to Homes is placing people in is in the most part substandard. By that I mean that it is far below the minimum standard required by city bylaws which are no longer enforced on slum landlords. There are rats, bedbugs, cockroaches, mice and other vermin infesting these places. Heating is inadequate and often non existent. There are roof leaks, plumbing leaks and wiring systems that are fire traps. There is seldom adequate hot water and often none at all. Often there are no cooking facilities and when there are so many people are forced to share them that the lack of cleanliness is a health hazard and food is stolen consistently from the refrigerators which often don’t work. When a complaint is lodged about these conditions, the authorities ignore it. And for this housing, the tenant has to hand over to the landlord, not only the full rental allotment of his social assistance allowance, but most of the money which is supposed to be used for food, hygienic products, clothing and transportation, leaving little or no remaining money to live on. Is there any wonder that they return to the streets? But you won’t hear that side of the so called success story of the Streets to Homes Program. Many of these places are far away from services or friends
as the newly housed people are uprooted from the neighbourhoods where they have
lived for many years and after paying the rent, there is no money left to allow
them to travel to services or friends. Isolation will soon force them to return
to the streets. Increasing numbers of marginally housed people falling into homelessness. The minimum wage and social assistance rates have remained virtually unchanged for so many years that inflation has decreased the buying power of people in these situations by such a drastic amount that each year, more and more people are loosing their housing due to unaffordability. The staggering increases in drug addiction, which is the most visible sign that there is something drastically wrong at the core of our present social system is driving ever increasing numbers of people into homelessness. In a society which measures a human being’s value exclusively in monetary terms rather than evaluating the standards that person sets for himself, is it any wonder that those who don’t measure up to the dollar value that is imposed turn in despair to the escape of drugs? We have exported most of our well paid industrial employment which allowed people to live with a modicum of human dignity and self reliance and expect them to give up that dignity and exist on social assistance or work in the so called service industry at minimum wage for places such as MacDonald s. Sure there are more jobs available, but the income level has dropped so far below the poverty line that a man who once provided well for his family is now forced to rely on charity at food banks to feed them and we begin to see a large number of whole families forced into homelessness. Yet the politicians tell their constituents who are wilfully
eager to accept the lie that the blame for the increasing numbers of homeless
people rests solely on them for being lazy addicts who deserve to die on the
streets. They tacitly encourage and approve of police tactics that include
harassment and brutality at such a level that it can not be otherwise. Such
police activity could not exist without the approval of city hall. As the
numbers of disaffected people in this, the richest society that has ever
existed on the planet continues to increase and as police and private citizen
harassment and brutality to homeless people escalates at an alarming rate anger grows in the homeless
community. The Americans know what it is like to have riots in the streets. I
fear that we are dangerously close ourselves.  The city opposes urban art I have seen some ugly paint jobs on houses around town. The city doesn’t dare order the homeowners to repaint. How dare they order business owners to paint over commissioned art works on their properties?NADJA SAYEJ The Globe and Mail Print Edition To Genoveva Silva, the painting on the wall of her Bloor
West music cafe is art, not graffiti. After all, the 57-year-old owner of the
Concord Cafe asked two artists and a group of their friends to paint the mural,
a blend of cartoons called Train of Thought, which covers the south and west
exterior walls of her building at As part of its effort to wipe out graffiti, Ms. Silva refuses. Last week she
sent a letter to the city objecting to the order, and she's vowing to protect
the painting on the grounds that commissioned artwork shouldn't be dismissed
as vandalism. "How do they [the city] determine what is art?" Ms. Silva asked.
"To me this is art. There is nothing offensive about it." ·Ms. Silva is not alone in her .plight. The city recently asked two other
businesses in the Bloor and Ossington area to remove commissioned murals. The
Long & McQuade music shop at 929
Bloor St, W. received the same notice as the Concord Cafe last month; a few'
weeks before that, tile city forced tile Guardian Pharmacy at 955 Bloor St. W.
to paint over its multicoloured mural. Deputy Mayor Joe Pantalone, the councilor for the area, admits that the
city's graffiti policies are subjective. "It's a judgment call," he says. "Some [paintings] are clear cut.” The difficulty in the case of the Concord Cafe and Long & McQuade is that the murals which were
painted by the same artists look like a blend of art and tagging. The Concord Cafe's mural, for instance, features a skyline crowned with a
colossal spray can as the CN Tower on the south wall and a long, zigzagging
tube that coils into the face of a man with a mustache on the west wall. "Part of the That ambiguity prompted a complaint to municipal licensing and standards,
said Joe Magalheas the department’s supervisor of investigations. He wouldn’t
say who complained.) But shop'
owners can also object, as Ms. Silva has. That's where politicians come in. Appeals land at community CO When Toronto's
licensing department receives a complaint, or a by law officer spots some spray-paint
on the wall of a shop, the city mails a letter asking the owner to remove the graffiti.
If the owner ignores the request, the city paints over the graffiti and
attaches the bill to the owner's' property taxes.' . But shop'
owners can also object, as Ms. Silva has. That's where politicians come in. Appeals land at community council, where councilors
vote on which murals win a reprieve. In the cases of
the Concord Cafe and Long & McQuade, Mr." Pantalone is
"optimistic we can sort something out. He's quick to point
out that the city is deluged with complaints about graffiti. “We’re getting complaints all the time,” he said. “If you
want a clean city we don’t want criminal acts of vandalism.” Every time Ms
Silva walks by her paintings, she is reminded of the artists who created them -
a pair who go by the pseudonym Buck and Phresha. Last October
the artists even held a seminar on mural making at the If the city
really wants to polish its image, it shouldn’t go after the likes of Buck and
Phresha, Ms Silva argues. “I see pollution from advertising,” she said. “That defaces the
neighbourhood, it’s horrible. I want a clean city.”  Attending a peace rally in Toronto THE ONTARIO LIBERALS AND ‘POVERTY REDUCTION’ This is a recent
report from OCAP. Don't let McGuinty's
lies fool you. He is still dedicated to the concept that poverty is a crime
that should not go unpunished. Are
they Trying or Lying? The
McGuinty Liberals have jumped onto the very overcrowded bandwagon of ‘Poverty Reduction’. They have set up a
process of highly selective consultation
to ‘define the problem’. Then, they tell us, they will ‘set targets’ to reduce poverty and implement
a package of reforms to that
effect. Implied in all this is an expectation that we should accept it as a good faith initiative. In
fact, we are expected to play along
and wait patiently for the eventual benefits that will, supposedly, flow from it. The first thing that needs to be said is
that an uncritical acceptance of
this undertaking would be an act of extraordinary naiveté. This is the second term for the Liberals and
everything they have done to date consolidates
the Harris Common Sense Revolution while smoothing over social divisions with token gestures. Perhaps we should just take a glimpse at how
the Liberals have dealt with
the poor over the last few years. They campaigned the first time they were elected on a platform that
included repealing the Safe Streets
Act that Harris used to set the cops on the homeless. To-day, that law is still in effect, being used on a
scale far greater than when
the Tories held power. In  Jack Layton of the NDP is the only politician who comes out to any of our events. He's the only one who cares. I'm Soooo Very Naive This is a record of a
digital dialogue between me and an unnamed member of the of the staff of David McGuinty, M.P., From: Ron. Craven [mailto:ronzig@rogers.com] Sent: From: "McGuinty, David - M.P." To:
Ron. Craven Sent: Thank you very much for your
email to Mr. McGuinty with your thoughts on this important matter. Please
forward your contact information (address and phone number) in the constituency
of Ottawa South, and I will ensure that Mr. McGuinty has the opportunity to
read your comments and responds accordingly. Sincerely, Office of David McGuinty, M.P., Very interesting reply Mr Office of, David McGuinty, M.P., Ottawa South
or is it Mr. No Name? Mr.
McGuinty is only interested in the opinions of Canadians if they live within
his riding. I thought that as a federal MP he was supposed to represent ALL
CANADIANS. How naive of me. I live in Have a wonderful day Ronzig I
couldn't agree more. Check it out.
I'm sure you've heard it said that Stephen Harper is a "strong leader". Well our first New Democrat TV ad has something to say about that. I suppose it takes a "strong leader" to ignore 5 million average Canadians who can't find a family doctor. But don't you think it's time for a new kind of strong? In this election, we're going to take the
fight to Harper. We're running straight out to defeat Conservatives starting
week 1.And we're going to elect Jack Layton - a
Prime Minister who'll bring about change that takes us forward.  A friendly outreach worker visits me at my shack More Lies and Political Shams from McGuinty's
Liberals. This
Just In From OCAP As you likely
know, the Provincial Liberals are currently touring the province with a consultation scam to make it
seem like they care about poor
people while they do nothing for us. We are going to go to the  Instead of trying to relieve the pain of poverty and homelessness, McGuinty prefers to send in the police to harass and destroy .  A typical scene of desolation and despair Homeless, this one armed friend still finds a reason to smile A Modern Definition For Democracy Strange that the most powerful religious
icon in the Western World, where the vast majority profess to be devout
Christians, is $$$$$$ They also profess to a commitment to
Democracy. Their definition of Democracy is… the biggest gang with the most guns. This philosophy is clearly evident in  Machines of death and destruction on display When wealth is controlled by a limited number of individuals
and corporations Capitalism becomes a form of government in that the powerful
take control of the economy and through it the political direction of a nation.
The Capitalists rule by proxy in a new form of Totalitarianism. Early in the last century, the world went to war against
fascism, a form of totalitarianism sponsored by Adolph Hitler and Benito Mussolini.
No sooner had we defeated them than the But think again. In order to fight the Cold War, the Hence the advent of Totalitarianism by proxy. It was quite simple to use the CIA to oust unsympathetic leaders and set up their own puppet dictators in authoritarian regimes around the world. First on Preferring to deal with a single all powerful leader as opposed to the uncertainty of Democratically elected leaders, The United States soon set up or supported coups for Moammar Kadafi to rule Libya, Idi Amin Dada to rule Uganda, Saddam Hussein to rule Iraq, Anastasio Somoza Garcia in Nicaragua and Ferdinand Emmanuel Edralín Marcos for the Philippines to name a few of their proxy dictators. Each of these was of course a total failure and many of the pet dogs came back to bite the master in the ass, but the power brokers got a better idea. Instead of supporting dictators, why not buy out democracy? It was really quite simple. Just make the cost of running for election far too expensive for honest citizens to be able to compete and then pay for the campaigns of every important candidate, thereby ensuring that the resultant leader who gets elected has been bought and paid for in advance. The result is a secret control over the country, “proxy authoritarianism”. We lost the Cold War by becoming the enemy. Definitions found in Wikipedia. Totalitarianism: the principle of complete and unrestricted power in
government. Authoritarianism: characterized by or favoring absolute obedience to
authority, as against individual freedom: an authoritarian regime. Of or pertaining to a governmental or political system,
principle, or practice in which individual freedom is held as completely
subordinate to the power or authority of the state, centered either in one
person or a small group that is not constitutionally accountable to the people. Totalitarianism: absolute control by the state or a governing branch of a
highly centralized institution. Fascism: a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism. A political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical
government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism) Capitalism: an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.  Sad that it could almost be
true The
NDP is proud to present the second in an occasional series of short stories
from distinguished storyteller, Massey Lecturer, Order of The other day, I was out
for a walk in one of our conservation areas and whom should I see standing in a
clearing but Stephen Harper and Stéphane Dion. I didn’t recognize them right
away because they were wearing coveralls and hard hats. Mr. Harper was looking
at a set of plans, and Mr. Dion was playing with a compass. I didn’t want to
interrupt them, but I was curious why the Prime Minister of Canada and the
leader of the opposition were in the woods. So, I went over to say hello. Well, you can’t believe how
friendly they were. They both shook my hand. Mr. Harper gave me a hard hat to
wear, and Mr. Dion asked me if I knew anything about Now, I’m not much of an
expert on anything, but I had read that I was even so bold as to
ask Mr. Harper if this was the case, but he said, no, that what Now, I was embarrassed to
admit that it had never occurred to me that the rich had any problems when it
came to housing, but Mr. Harper told me not to feel bad, that many people in As Mr. Harper was talking,
Mr. Dion ran over to an SUV that was parked at the edge of the forest and came
back with a large chart that showed the extent of the disparity between the
rich and the rest of our nation, and how rapidly that gap was growing. As this economic gulf
widens, Mr. Dion explained, animosities are sure to increase and the rich are
going to need government assistance in developing ways to avoid the clamour of
community and the unwarranted intrusions of neighbors who, at present, walk
past their houses all hours of the day and night. It was a serious problem,
Mr. Harper intimated, and he gave me a brochure that explained a new government
initiative called the E.G.A.D. Protocol for Housing Partnerships and Security
Alternatives. Well, you should have seen
that brochure. It was jammed full of colour photographs of houses and housing
developments that were going to be built under the E.G.A.D. Protocol, which,
Mr. Harper explained, stood for Enormous, Gated, Alarmed, and Defended. Every
Canadian would have the opportunity to buy a home that had any or all of the
four designations, though Mr. Harper indicated that the government probably
would only provide partial grants for “E” designated houses. In order to
participate fully in the program, he said, homeowners would have to purchase a
house that, at a minimum, had an “E.G” designation and was situated within a
secure compound. Now, I’d always thought
that providing housing grants for energy efficient homes and low-cost housing
was a good idea, but Mr. Harper said that such a move would be inappropriate
because energy-efficient houses reduced energy consumption and didn’t create
jobs, whereas homes built under the E.G.A.D. Protocol would increase
consumption and lead to a surge in employment, particularly in the area of
domestic staffing as well as landscape maintenance, tennis-court construction,
catering, and security services. Mr. Dion went on to explain
how E.G.A.D. communities could also function as designated environmental zones
encouraging the proliferation of decorative waterfalls, fountains, and swimming
pools as a complement to the wetlands that an E.G.A.D. development might
inadvertently displace. You could see that Mr.
Harper and Mr. Dion were quite excited about E.G.A.D. homes, and I was getting
a little emotional myself, especially when Mr. Dion opened the back of the SUV
to reveal a scale model of a typical E.G.A.D. community complete with a perimeter
Koi moat, a split-rail and wire-intrusion detection system, rococo bollards,
and interlocking, remote-controlled, stereo artillery batteries. Come back next year, said
Mr. Harper waving his hand at the trees, and you won’t recognize the place. I told him that I liked the
place just the way it was, but Mr. Harper assured me that the economy demanded
that we always forge ahead, that progress was our most important product. It was getting late, and I
figured I should get on with my walk. I gave the hard hat back to Mr. Harper
and left the brochure with Mr. Dion. Always best to recycle. I might have kept
it, but I was pretty sure that I wasn’t going to be able to afford an E.G.A.D.
home. Still, I did feel good that our government was resolute and committed in
its efforts to assist all Canadians and not just those who needed the help.  Native Canadian woman opposes Harper's senseless war and demands the funds be redirected to helping the poor All Rights Reserved No part of this page may be copied
without the express written consent of the author Ronzig  King's Landing, a condominium residence for the very wealthy who reside at Toronto's waterfront. All Rights Reserved No part of this page may be copied
without the express written consent of the author Ronzig |
