Showing posts with label justice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label justice. Show all posts

Sunday, May 19, 2024

Go Deep: The Systematic Failure of Ontario Social Policy. Louis Shalako.

In a kind of social horror, Louis goes deep on social policy, or so it is called...















Louis Shalako


The systematic failure of social policy in the Province of Ontario is no accident. 

That's because things are caused to happen.

It’s more than systemic, a pretty good word all on its own. It’s a little more deliberate than that. Systemic refers to those funny little provisions, built into the system, which sometimes makes some things difficult, and other things impossible. The so-called Catch-22, a wonderful story by Joseph Heller.

Systematic, means it is a bit of a lesson in applied cruelty, and this by a democratically-elected government, of whatever ideological stripe. It isn’t exactly enlightened, but it does stem from a kind of self-interest of the taxpayer kind. To claim it is a big conspiracy is to mistake its organization, for it has none. It is smugness, writ large; and its inevitable results, where the rich complain about the cost of housing, and bitch and whine about the costs of homelessness, all in one and the same breath. This situation did not come about overnight.

Our system of food banks and homeless shelters goes back at least forty years, by some accounts, although such things have always existed, in one form or another, probably since the dawn of time itself. There was a big recession, and remember when interest rates went just plain ludicrous—this would be the early to mid-eighties. When the old man went to re-mortgage the family home, the rate was over eighteen percent—and my father, a divorced parent, was scared shitless, too.

That was all so long ago.

More recently, it was Conservative Premier Mike Harris of Ontario and his ‘common sense revolution’, that struck the first and the worst blow, insofar as the present crisis of homelessness and affordability is concerned. We will talk about the impacts of ‘mental health and addictions’ some other time, although I am sure I will get to it someday.

It was in 1995, when the Province of Ontario, with the conservatives elected by a strong majority, gutted social assistance payments by twenty percent. Where the rate for a single adult had been $663.00 per month, it was reduced to $520.00 per month. Using an online ‘inflation calculator’, inflation has taken what would have cost $100.00 in 1995, up to $183.26 in mid-May of 2024. If we multiply that by 5.2, the figure would be $916.30 per month, and yet the current rate is only $733.00 per month. Welfare payments have not kept up with the rate of inflation, and in fact our current, Progressive Conservative government here in Ontario, did not give any raises to folks on disability, for the first five years of their mandate. They have not given one single raise to folks who are unfortunate enough to find themselves on ‘welfare’, social assistance.

Ah, but if we take a figure of $183.00 and multiply that by 6.63, the figure now becomes $1,215.01 per month. It’s still not a lot of money, what with the average cost of a one-bedroom apartment all across the province being much higher than that, but it would, under some circumstances, have given people a fighting chance, of at least keeping a roof over their heads. It is also true that if more people had simply been able to keep the roof they already had, over their heads, the average price of rent in this province would actually be lower—that is because, while the province does have rent controls, on buildings of a certain age, there is no rent control when a unit becomes vacant. The landlord now has the right to charge what could be called ‘market rate’, which is a fine term, useful enough, but only if we accept that things might have been different—if only the Province of Ontario had any kind of effective, or even just rational, social policy.

You're welcome to check the math.

If they had raised the rates, more people would have kept their homes—and if you, had moved within the last five or six years, into any apartment in this province, your rent would have been lower—

Ah, but you prefer to cut off your noses to spite your faces, because the ideology trumps truth, and logic, and utility, every fucking time with some of you people.

Some years later, in an interview, Mike Harris was asked about the common-sense revolution. He considered it his ‘legacy’, that within a fairly short time, unemployment went down, and had stayed down. Yet he made no mention, that it was the economy, (stupid), and not regressive social policy that had made that happen. I ought to know.

I have lived through every recession of the last fifty or sixty-plus years, although as an infant, I could hardly have been aware of such things. As an adult, it is much more up close and personal. When I was on welfare, however briefly, I was paying $450.00 per month in rent. Knock that welfare check down to $520.00 per month, and I had seventy dollars per month, for food, clothing, personal needs including soap, toothpaste, dish-soap, and quite frankly, hobbies, entertainment, were out the door. So was any hope of ‘bettering myself’ with training or education, anything that was not provided by the system. Training a guy with a broken back to become a mason’s helper, slugging 100-lb. concrete blocks, mixing mortar and wheeling that around in a wheelbarrow is simply not appropriate, and is simply not going to work—yet sending him to college or university, in order to train him, (or her), in something more appropriate, something that might actually be a viable career, was never in the cards.

What is interesting is that disability and welfare are always divided up into ‘shelter’ and ‘personal needs’ portions. The minute you lose your housing, you no longer ‘need’ that shelter portion, although the Province, so I have been told, does provide a meagre $100.00 per month ‘homelessness benefit’. Yes, you heard me right. Now you’re supposed to live on the street, feed yourself, stay off the dope and somehow, over the course of several years, without getting robbed and beaten for your money, to somehow save first and last month’s rent for an apartment you can’t afford in the first place, also bearing in mind after all of this you are sort of unlikely to do well in any sort of credit check—right???

The so-called homeless benefit mostly goes to the rich, in the form of reduced taxes.

Affordable, geared-to-income housing would appear to be a desirable thing, a ‘social good’ in every sense. Yet the County of Lambton appears to be totally incompetent to build any such thing in any appreciable numbers. When confronted by a looming crisis, the council voted unanimously to fund a five-year study. This was a cop-out by any other name, and of course the ultimate results of that study were a study in pure shamelessness.

The rich are your friends...

They’ve been spewing out this pap smear for years, and yet they haven’t succeeded in doing one damned thing about it.

Neither city council, or county council, have ever said one word about the levels of social assistance, federal and provincial disability pensions, levels of Old Age Security, Canada Pension Plan, or any other federal or provincial benefits for low-income Canadians. It’s almost like they’re afraid someone might do something about it—

If you look at the image, you will see that MillDon, recently split off from Steeves & Rozema, is charging three percent if a tenant shows up at head office to pay their rent by debit or credit card. Considering that a one bedroom unit is going for an easy $1,500.00 per month, this equates with $45.00, per month, for the privilege, of paying your rent. That is $540.00 per year, for someone just to pay the rent.

With a lack of affordable housing for working Canadians, we end up with a captive audience of renters. There is nowhere else to go. What are they going to do, especially as there is still a fair percentage of unbanked individuals, and they have to live somewhere. It’s a lot like the family doctor—so many of us simply don’t have one. Why would someone not have a bank account? There are a hundred reasons: garnished wages, child support or alimony in arrears, overdrafts, accounts frozen or sealed, unpaid fines, overdraft maxed out, service charges built up and no funds to pay—the usual sins of poverty, ladies and gentlemen, this is how folks end up taking their cheques to a payday lender, and end up hooked on that peculiar and rather predatory service.

$45.00/month, just for the privilege of paying the rent.
***

The landlord lies awake at night, wondering if they even have the nerve to try that with automatic bank payments; which don’t cost them a single damned cent. The simplest of software will tell you who has paid, and who hasn’t.

In one local development, affordable, geared-to-income development of over fifty units, a very small number of people wanted garden plots, and their wish was granted. Funny thing is, the landlord, in this case the County of Lambton, squawked about water usage, and therefore, imposed a hundred-dollar per month water surcharge, regardless of whether a household was using the vegetable plots or not. One wonders how many tomatoes one would have to grow to make it worth it to the individual user, or whether they had such plots the next year, or what the County actually did with the estimated $5,400.00 per month they gouged out of our most vulnerable citizens, (half of them dying of cancer), with that little stunt…

What I thought was interesting, was when tenants, all of whom are low income, many on disability or other benefits, had to pay for their own hot water tanks, installation and monthly fees. This is of course, over and above the one-third of income that the so-called rent is supposedly set at. One wonders what happens when a ‘client’ is evicted—where do we go from here, right.

This particular development is sort of high-end for subsidized housing, and yet the county has been unable to build anything like it since. We have, over the last ten years or so, ‘approved’ something like 2,400 housing units, many described as ‘affordable’, in Sarnia-Lambton. Some would even say 3,500, but some of those have been acknowledged to be dead in the water—which is at least honest, and one would hope that some other property developer will take that over and maybe do something—anything, with it.

Let’s not hold our breath waiting.

And I have often wondered. When the Doug Ford government imagines affordable housing, just exactly what do they see in the privacy of their own heads.

I’ll bet it’s nice.

Government: building more castles faster.

***

In the fourteenth century, the Black Plague killed anywhere from one-third to one-half of the population. The cost of labour went up. The profits of the lords of the manors fell, due to vacant lands. They had trouble getting people to work for them. The result, in legal terms, was that efforts were made to bind the serf ever closer to the land—and the master.

Naturally, it didn’t really work, and when someone who had gone to work in London, and yet found themselves disabled, they had to return to their home parish just to get poor relief, which did exist in those days. Back then, the Church provided virtually all social services outside of the military and the courts. To see the state still relying on that in modern times pretty much says it all...

The sumptuary laws literally told people what they could and could not wear. In 1 Corinthians 7:20, it says; Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.

The ruling classes, of course, took it literally—or presented it literally, for they themselves, did not feel bound by it. Basically, do not quit your job and go looking for more money somewhere else. This was the original rentier class, and they meant business—even as they plundered France and held their captives for ransom, even as they built new castles with the money they had ‘earned’ by valor in battle. In their own eyes, the very paragons of virtue. But then, that’s what they always say.

***

With the aging of the population, and a falling birthrate, it is a similar situation. The cost of labour will go up, the number of hands will go down—and the upper crust of society will do all they can to continue to exploit the labouring classes. Not the least of which, is to just plain lie to us, and still expect us to like them for it. But this is why the federal government took a gamble on an increased level of immigration. This gamble will probably pay off in the long run, in the short term, it has indeed exacerbated the housing crisis. Or, as I like to call it, the income crisis. And I am not talking about the rich when I say that.

What would happen if we all just stood here and stared at the camera...

One aspect of all this is surveillance: at some point, the landlord put cameras outdoors, and then, they put cameras indoors, and then, some time later, put in more cameras, looking up and down the hallways. They call it security. It may actually provide some, assuming it’s not the landlord and renoviction we’re worried about. This is an effort to exercise their rights—in the future, tenants may be asked to sign an NDA, a non-disclosure agreement. If you prefer not to sign such an agreement, they might prefer not to offer you a lease. It’s their right. Not so much yours. It’s that simple. Odds are, you will sign it.

Oh, and when you do leave, and if you do open your mouth and speak about some negative experience, you have violated the NDA and you can be sued for ‘damages’ in a court of law.

It’s one more attempt to control.

 

 

END

 

Go deep: a theory of local journalism.

Okay. So, local radio reports on important local news stories. Whether it’s on the air or on the website, the stories are short and shallow. This is a feature of the medium, where the attention span is assumed to be about three minutes or less—accounting for the sort of music they play as well. In the local daily, stories range from very short, up to the average, roughly five or six hundred words, and a long story is maybe a thousand. In our local monthly, the same holds true, in that ‘genuine’ news coverage, biased as it might be, is no more than five or six hundred words, and the columnists, being mostly unpaid, about the same. It is true that the major news sources, the CBC for example, have the budget and the time to do investigative reporting, analysis, the regular panel of experts commenting on one major issue of the day. It struck me that in a media environment where the tendency is to go shallow, and devote the least portion of time and resources to news coverage, (the local market in other words) a person of some journalistic bent, someone with a few gut instincts, might go deep.

A bit of background. The Sarnia Journal won a Community Journalism Award for doing just that, going deep, in their series on homelessness and addictions in this community.

Yeah, but doesn’t that just prove what I am saying?

Go deep. It’s not like I have anything to lose, or anything better to do, while I await renoviction papers and a verdict of ‘mental-health addictions’, on the front page of those very same publications, when I finally am rammed through the cracks with a fine-toothed hatchet and end up living in a tent in Rainbow park, or maybe, if I’m lucky, in a van down by the river. Since I don’t work for them, I don’t have to play by their rules. I am a private citizen, not responsible to any other person or entity besides the law and the constitution, and I will say what I want, I will write what I want, and let the chips fall where they may. I do not have any advertisers. I do not rely on donations, corporate or otherwise. We're not selling Girl Scout Cookies here, ladies and gentlemen...

Maybe that’s why they want to get me out of my house, ladies and gentlemen—or am I just being paranoid.

(His instincts are killing him. – ed.)

The funny thing is, I have been very stable these past thirty fucking years on disability, and one can only wonder just what in the hell is the matter with you people.

Would you like to know the truth? You’ve probably guessed it already.

They—or maybe even we—in a collective sense, just don’t want to spend the money, unless it’s somebody else’s money—the very socialism they profess to despise, ladies and gentlemen.


#Louis

 

The Bank of Canada’s online inflation calculator.

A Three-Dollar Calculator Cuts Through an Endless Amount of Bullshit.

Catch-22. Joseph Heller.

Catch-22 available from Russian Website. Use at own risk.

Food banks arose to fight hunger:

The Interest Rate Crunch of the ‘80s.

If you can make any sense of this, please let us know.

Lambton’s housing pap smear.

Failure of the County.

Recommended reading.

The Hundred Years War, by Desmond Seward. 

English Society in the Later Middle Ages. Maurice Keen.


Also:

Check out How to Rob a Bank, an Inspector Gilles Maintenon Mystery, by Louis Shalako on iTunes.


Thank you for reading.



 

 


Sunday, April 23, 2017

An Open Letter Full of Questions for the Ontario Disability Support Program. Louis Shalako.






























Louis Shalako







Dear Angela Adam, ODSP;


Thank you for the recent decision on income support.

I have some questions. It’s important that I have this information in order to make proper business and employment decisions in the future. Depending on what the answers are, the information will be used to decide whether or not to ask for an internal review or, ultimately, to appeal the decision on income. I need this information quickly, as you guys always set a real short deadline for asking for an internal review or an appeal. It’s part of the ODSP shell-game, isn’t it?

It’s a bit troubling, the way ODSP staff simply ignore my questions. There’s no doubt I have a right to this information. To withhold that information is highly-suspect.

I use the Nikon camera for the publishing business. I use it for running the Go Wit Ventures blog, for which I get paid, and I also use it for self-promotion. I have asked the question before, and got no answer. Is the camera an allowable deduction?

The publishing business requires the internet and a phone. It is an absolute requirement. The same is true for publishing a blog and website for my clients. I need a phone just to get calls regarding part-time work making pizza dough. What portion of the phone and internet is an allowable deduction against income? And if the answer is ‘none’, why not?

My part-time job and both businesses require the internet and the phone. How did you apportion these costs against income from these endeavors? If I wasn’t working, if I wasn’t publishing, I don’t need the internet at all, and the phone would be for emergencies and two or three personal calls a week.

I bought an alarm clock so that I could go to work on time. I didn’t have one before—was that an allowable deduction from income? If I wasn’t working, I wouldn’t need one at all.

When I purchase a professional marketing image from Canstock to make a book cover, is that an allowable deduction from income?

When I buy paper, or stamps, for the business, is that an allowable deduction from income?

Was there any question or dispute regarding business/employment mileage? If so, you really need to tell me.

I asked, in writing, why did the previous social worker, Shanno Bolton, make me split off the businesses and go to two sets of books? Was this intended to help the client maximize their allowable deductions, or was it to help the ODSP maximize their claw-backs?

Another question that was ignored.

If I received a donation from someone who wanted to encourage my writing, would that be considered as 'income' by ODSP?

No one has questioned my right to work or to operate a business under the guidelines of the ODSP. Imagine the sheer frustration of being at the mercy of the ODSP bean-counters, and having absolutely no information at all, and yet I’m being told I have the right to appeal. This is all too typical of how ODSP treats clients. And it’s not just me—it’s all of us.

That, Angela, is simply unacceptable.



END

This letter will be hand-delivered to the ODSP in Sarnia on Monday, April 24, 2017.  The names of ODSP staffers are real. While the client has the right to privacy, public institutions such as the ODSP do not. They are 'accountable' to the people.

Louis has some books and stories on iTunes. Please take a moment and check them out.




Friday, April 14, 2017

Social Progress Versus the Ontario Disability Support Program. Louis Shalako.

Louis got the big Magnum P.I. mustache going.


Louis Shalako

ODSP, the Ontario Disability Support Program, is the single most complained-about provincial ministry.

It falls under the aegis of the Ministry of Community and Social Services.

Yet there are some pretty obvious improvements that could be made quickly and effectively, changes which would go a long way towards improving the lives of the clients and making the program a lot more tolerable. There are times when it's not. There are times when it is intolerable. It’s really just a question of funding those improvements, isn’t it? Honestly, I know the government would love to do this—they just have to get it past those pesky taxpayers.

Right?

We all know I’m right, ladies and gentlemen.

For starters, people on ODSP can receive gifts. For a single person, this amounts to $7.000.00 per year. They can get a gift of seven grand dropped in their lap and it will not affect their monthly pension benefit one bit.

They won’t lose a penny, and they didn’t have to lift a finger to get that gift. Bearing in mind, not every client will ever receive such a gift, which in itself is one of life’s little unfairnesses—something the program simply can’t do anything about.

But here’s the real problem. People who go out and earn the exact same figure--$7,000.00 in a year, will be able to make up to $2,400.00 (by my interpretation of the guidelines) and the rest is subject to a fifty percent claw-back on earnings.

This has always been the big problem with the ODSP. It’s a pension for the disabled, who at the same time, have the right to work. I actually got this in writing from former Premier Dalton McGuinty. According to his letter, “…you have the right to fully participate in the life of the province.”

The difficulty is when we work, sometimes very hard, to improve ourselves, and our lives, and to raise our income—surely one key aspect to any plan to improve the quality of one’s life. Or anyone else’s—and this is another bit of a problem with the ODSP. We run smack into one big brick wall, ladies and gentlemen.

When staff are spending more time looking for ways to reduce costs, cutting back on someone’s benefits when they earn a few bucks, and they’re still well below the poverty line, when the social worker really ought to be looking out for the client. The worker should be looking to get that person every conceivable benefit that they might qualify for.

Surely social workers are not cops. They are not doctors, nurses, or psychiatrists. They are supposed to be social workers.

Their job, surely, is to help the client get the most out of the program. Their job is to help and assist the client to make their life better, or to rebuild it entirely in some cases.

The goal really should be to help people improve the quality of their lives. It is true that many clients simply won’t be able to make much of improved opportunities for employment, but then, not everyone is going to get a gift of $7,000.00 either.

And yet there are provisions for that in the guidelines.

There are two basic questions. How much would a reduction of the claw-back, and raising the allowable earnings limits actually cost the taxpayers?

How much does the government spend now, in trying to fairly administer a system which puts up some pretty obvious barriers and disincentives to work. Everyone from the top down knows very well that without any other employment, without any other sources of income, including gifts, the average single client of the ODSP is living thirty-five to forty percent below the poverty line.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, just isn’t fair.

Is it.

Here’s the thing: we know change is possible. This very government just raised the mileage allowance for medical and business travel from $0.18/kilometre up to $0.40/kilometre.

For someone who travels to another city for medical treatment, life just got a little easier.

The government actually squirts that money out in the form of electronic payments. For business or employment travel, there’s no outlay by the government, but it’s an allowable deduction from income. That sort of thing is important when someone is trying to develop, or take advantage of, employment or business opportunities.

After the Tories were booted, and we never got a single raise in ten or fifteen years, the Liberals began giving an annual raise—it’s not geared to the cost of living, but when I actually qualified, years ago, under the old Family Benefits Act or whatever, my freaking social worker told me in no uncertain terms, “You will never receive a raise in your entire life...”

I don’t know what to think after all these years, but at the time I wondered why she was mad at me!

It’s difficult to account for otherwise. The point is, taking note of inflation over many years, our pensions have been getting smaller and smaller from day one—and this government knows that too.

That’s because guys like me tell them—we tell them every chance we get. And I hope you will too, ladies and gentlemen.

The fact is, we could use your help. It might even make the difference—it might make a big difference.

As for the government, they could probably use a bit of help too—

...right about now.

Just think about that one for a minute.


Thank you for reading.


Hey. Before you go. Please check out my books and stories on Amazon.