HOUSINGAGAIN-L Housing Again Bulletin No. 21

[Catherine Nasmith <cnasmith@sympatico.ca>]

HOUSING AGAIN - Bulletin Number 21
October 16, 2000

A twice-monthly electronic bulletin published on what people are doing
to put housing back on the public agenda in Ontario, across Canada and
around the world. Our web site is http://www.housingagain.web.net
* * * * * * * * * *
In this bulletin:

1. Housing and Tenant Reform Bills Creep in on Cat’s Paws
        Social Housing Reform Bill (128)
        But That ain’t all: Red Tape Reduction? Bill 119
2. Interview with Ann Mulvale on Housing in Ontario 
3. Visit our site

* * * * * * * * *
1. HOUSING AND TENANT REFORM BILLS CREEP IN ON CAT’S PAWS

From what you read and hear in the news, hardly a creature is stirring
at the Ontario legislature, not even a mouse. That’s what Conservatives
want you to think as they begin to rush not just one, but two crucial,
revolutionary pieces of legislation through the house. In addition to
the long awaited Bill 128--the ‘downloading’ bill—is Bill 119, the Red
Tape Reduction Act.

Thursday afternoon, Tony Clement, Minister of Municipal Affairs and
Housing tabled Bill 128, the Social Housing Reform Bill: 130 pages of a
highly technical nature, with particularly complicated financial
clauses. 

"I was shocked," Liberal Housing Critic David Caplan said in an
interview Friday. "Such a major piece of legislation and there was no
ministerial statement when it was tabled! That says a lot! They’ll try
to get it through as quietly and quickly as possible.
"For sure, it’s bad news for anyone who cares about housing in Ontario."

Not until the end of Friday afternoon did the government reveal that
debate on Bill 128 will start Monday afternoon. This means the bill will
be available in print by then, leaving virtually no time for study.
Debate is scheduled to continue Tuesday afternoon and evening, and
resume Wednesday evening at which point time allocation, or closure, is
expected. At the time of writing only Housing Critics had been given the
legislation, and it was not yet posted on the net.

Caplan said that for such an important matter, this is a much shorter
debate than normal. It’s not only in the legislature that discussion is
being limited. ONPHA and the Ontario Co-op Housing Federation, the two
main stakeholders, will not be consulted until next Friday, after the debate.

When asked about public hearings, a lowly clerk in the Housing
Minister’s office returned a call saying that the Minister Clement had
requested them but it depended on the House Leader, Norman Sterling.
Requests for information to Mr. Sterling have either remained
unanswered, or met with the response that it depends on the desire of
the Minister for Municipal Affairs. 

In the legislature, as the Downloading Bill was tabled, Mr. Caplan went
through the usual ploys to get the Minister to say something about the
bill, but, also as usual, the Conservative majority kept things under
control and the Minister only made a few general remarks. 

"Essentially it’s a framework with very little detail," says Caplan.
"That will only come later as the regulations are made. 
"And what is the government hiding? They have $100 million in reserve
for repairing housing stock and that’s just a pittance compared to what
is required. 

"What about the unallocated money in the federal provincial deal? Will
the government use that to bring the Ontario Housing stock up to
scratch? The Minister says the municipalities won’t have to pay to
improve the stock because it’s in good order, but the provincial
assessment is based on a 1998 survey of only 10% of the units."

In fact, the Minister knows better. Caplan obtained a secret cabinet
position paper saying that if the province didn’t do ‘proper due
diligence" to the housing stock, it would be a terrible burden on the 
municipalities.
 
"The Minister ignored that advice," said the Liberal critic. "It’s
analogous to the roads and bridges transfer. Over time it will hit
everybody in the pocket book."

"I expect that Clement will have to compromise on this eventually
because the burden is more than the municipalities, the providers and
the residents can bear. But I really fear the municipalities will be
left holding the bag."

Within all the complexities, and with little time to analyze details,
Caplan sees three main issues:

First, expect huge property tax hikes over the next five or ten years,
perhaps even after Harris and Clement are gone. One aspect that was
immediately clear is some regulations will be provincial, such as
occupancy standards; but surprisingly, in others local standards will
override provincial standards.

So the municipalities still don’t really have their "say for pay."

Second, in an extraordinary attack on municipal control of their own
housing supply, municipalities are prevented from giving preference to
local inhabitants. So, if a ring of townships around a big city
established requirements for public housing that would force homeless
people to go elsewhere, they would be forced to leave home for bigger
centers like Toronto. This could have a domino effect from town to town
and city to city.

Caplan did not mince words: "I see this as ethnic cleansing of the poor.
What happens if an old person becomes widowed, loses everything and
doesn’t qualify for help in town? It’s the same sort of thing you see in
OntarioWorks with liens on people’s homes."

Third: municipalities can do nothing about building housing.

In this case, the provincial government’s intransigence baffles Caplan.
"There are lots of things the provincial government could do to let the
municipalities encourage housing construction that wouldn’t cost the
province a penny. They could pass Bill 83, my proposal to allow for
municipal bonuses—in land densities for example, but Bill 111 prevents that.
 
"In Who Does What? David Crombie told them not to download social
housing. This is just an exercise to make the provincial balance look better."

BUT THAT AIN’T ALL: RED TAPE REDUCTION?

Also tabled was Bill 119, proposing the Red Tape Reduction Act, which
already was on its second reading Wednesday, and still being debated,
but at lightning speed for a bill to amend seventy-five pieces of
legislation over fifteen ministries. 

Once more, Caplan is irate and frustrated. "It’s a bunch of nefarious
things in there. It’s an omnibus bill. I’m calling it a Trojan horse to
remove tenants’ rights." 

Like Bill 128’s cancellation of the thirty-five year housing
contracts—unprecedented in parliamentary history, Bill 119 changes the
definition of landlord which has existed in Common Law for centuries
under the guise of eliminating red tape. A whole class of tenants –such
as someone sharing a flat and paying rent to the other tenant—will no
longer be considered tenants so they have no rights. 

Subletting is also to change dramatically. It has been legal only to
charge up to the amount of the real rent when subletting, this bill will
cancel that limit. 

This little housekeeping bill also changes the Rental Housing Tribunal
operations. Adjudicators will be allowed to correct significant errors
to alter an application. David Caplan explained, "This will make it
easier to continue proceedings to evict a tenant."

Another fundamental change Caplan noted will allow ‘tribunal staff’,
which might be just an in-take clerk, to become default officers with
powers to deny tenants right to a hearing.

So, dropping their Labour Bill that was being debated, a carry over from
the last session, the Conservatives want to get Bill 128 and 119
processed faster than the speed of light before any significant public
questioning or debate can arise.

It could be another Megacity battle or, perhaps, the public is too worn
out after the years of struggle, but David Caplan certainly didn’t sound tired.

Rosario Marchese, the N.D.P. Housing Critic sounded fit for battle too.
He tabled a Bill on Wednesday to impose a rent freeze. When questioned
(before Bill 128 was introduced) about the apparent naiveté of this
move, he replied, 

"It is narrow, but it’s an attempt to make the Harris government look
unreasonable, to appeal to common sense and fairness. We’ve picked
little areas that would seem to the public so reasonable that it will
make the government look bad."

He was certainly on the mark about what the government had in store. "
My suspicion is that they believe the public is too confused to be
against them. They will use complicated technical jargon to confuse the
public to avoid posing a threat.
 
"If we can make this an issue in the up-coming municipal campaign, it
will make people realize what the Conservatives have done. 

"I think that a lot of people are into blaming mode, and so the
prevailing view about people in Ontario Housing units, for example, is
to blame the individual, rather than see a societal cause. That’s what
Harris relies on."

"Downloading ultimately makes you rely on property taxes for public
housing. That doesn’t work. Homeowners will object at every single
election. The money should come from general revenues."

"People need to pressure federal members too. In ’93 Martin proclaimed a
national role in housing and then he abandoned the paper and exited the
field," Marchese concluded.

So, we remain the only northern country without a national housing
policy. In Ontario, what policy there is lies in the hands of a
government that seems to view passing legislation as a cat and mouse
cartoon, not an issue of life and death.

2. INTERVIEW WITH ANN MULVALE 

"The housing crisis is like an abscess about to be lanced," says
Oakville mayor, Ann Mulvale in a phone interview the day before the
Social Housing Devolution Bill was tabled in the Ontario legislature.
"The problem has almost peaked. And people are seeing that this issue
affects us all. 

"I have to believe things are going to get better, or how could I get up
in the morning?"

The Mayor, who spent her first twenty years as an unhappy foster child,
may be a Tory and an optimist but she doesn’t sit back and wait for good
things to happen. As head of the Association of Municipalities of
Ontario, she disagrees with the province’s devolution of housing but
puts great stake in the A.M.O. Task Force influencing the disputatious
provincial bill.
 
"We’re talking about social housing in the good times now!" she says,
leaving unsaid what a depression would be like. "The federal and
provincial governments have benefited from the growing economy. Now that
they are able, they should be contributing to housing. Otherwise the
municipalities will have to raise property taxes, but property tax
payers can’t be the sole source of funding.
 
"The municipalities struggle to maintain what housing they have. How are
they to build more shelters using municipal taxes? Municipalities need a
substantial one-time grant to take over affordable housing. And then,
what about the municipalities that have no experience in housing?

"When I talked to Minister Clement I insisted that the transfer of money
from the feds to the cities must be absolutely transparent without the
province taking a handling fee. I do believe the province has been
listening and that the provincial Minister understands there are huge
waiting lists."

Mulvale thinks affordable housing could be increased, even within the
confines of the Harris rule. "If the Municipal Act would allow us to
sell municipal bonds, for example," she says, "we could raise money to
support housing. We could look at land use and allow greater density if
developers agree to build bachelor size apartments. They may be small
but they are better than camping in someone’s basement which is what
many seniors do now."

"People are waking up. They saw federal cuts in medical care and now
they are demanding it replaced. The provinces have been successful in
getting the feds back into medicine, why not housing? My own children
have friends—they are well off, with jobs. Even they are sleeping on
friends’ couches near where they have found work. The situation is even
putting Ottawa’s growing high tech business at risk because there’s
nowhere to live!"

As for the poor, the mayor sees economic growth beyond their reach.
"People without shelter can’t even shower to land a Tim Horton’s job."

Mulvale is Mayor of Oakville, known for its affluence, but despite
increased social housing, she says there must be about 1000 people
without proper shelter. She sees three different groups with different
needs: those needing geared to income housing; those with psychiatric
problems who have been de-institutionalized—both which are stable in
number; and the growing number of employed people without proper shelter.

Meanwhile their new Salvation Army Shelter is full every night, and
women-in-crisis who used to be given a place to live are now without
shelter. Again, ironically, the good economy causes problems. Houses
once rented because of a poor real estate market have been sold.

The Oakville Rotary is a mainstay in assisted housing with three
different existing projects, and money sent elsewhere for two more
shelters.  Most recently the municipality sold land to the Rotary for a
life-lease project on the grounds that profits will be re-invested in
geared-to-income housing. 

"The Rotary and other faith groups could only do what they did with
financial government help. We need a national housing policy."

As for children on the street, the Mayor can hardly believe her eyes.
"When I saw that add saying ‘How young do they have to be before we
give?’ I mailed a cheque. We have to look at alternatives for them; how
to house them in an acceptable way," insists the feisty Mayor. "Cut the
judging. We must see how to address the reality."

3. VISIT OUR SITE: FRESH NEWS RIGHT AWAY

Check out the "Alerts" section of the Housing Again web site for fresh
news posted right away. The section is updated daily and contains
important and interesting information. Point your browser to
http://www.housingagain.web.net then click on "alerts". Make sure to
check regularly for new information. If you have a news release or other
news, you can post it to the site by clicking on "post".   

- end -