February 9, 2008
PhotoTO: Housing Not War
A protest outside the Toronto office of Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty Thursday drew attention to the housing crisis in Canada, demanding that resources spent on military action in Afghanistan be diverted to provide an additional 1% of the federal budget for social housing.
When the organizers tried to present a letter of protest to Flaherty's office they were refused entry to the building, stopped at the door by security while police waited inside.
Speakers at the rally included author Linda McQuaig (above) and High Park MP Peggy Nash (below).
All Photos by Miles Storey
|
Advertisement: Torontoist Continues Below!
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
That first picture is heartbreaking. Miles, thank you for highlighting the issue of poverty and affordable housing.
I am constantly shocked by the way our governments address affordable housing. Several years ago the federal, provincial and territorial governments agreed to spend an additional $2 billion on housing, with $1 billion coming from the feds and the other billion from the provinces and territories. While a few provinces and territories did increase funding for housing, most did not. Even more shocking, however, Ontario had pledged to increase housing spending by approx. $350 million as part of that agreement. Instead, it cut housing spending by approx. $725 million. Of course, our provincial government isn't funding the war, but this is emblematic of the attitude of governments in this country towards affordable housing, and poverty in general. Sadly, unlike many other developed nations, Canada has no national housing strategy. If the federal government were to, at the very least, set out some sort of directive to the provinces regarding affordable and social housing, we could start moving in the right direction. But alas, Harper and his gang are too busy fighting a war half a world away, lowering taxes instead of funding social programs, and trying to create an American-style justice system. They deserve to be shamed every single day.
They deserve much more than shaming.
what came first the palace or the shack
My guess is the reason billions hasn't been spent on subsidizing housing for people is that the majority of Canadians don't see it as a huge issue - and in fact may disagree with premise of large-scale subsidization of shelters.
Thought I'd point that out.
tdotg: If that's the case then the majority of Canadians are complicit in each and every homeless death.
I'm not addressing you personally; your comments suggest you don't hold to the beliefs you're writing about, but rather touching on the other side of the issue. However, I'd be curious to hear arguments against subsidized housing, because I haven't ever heard a compelling or compassionate one. How does one justify not helping those that have the least of any of us?
When one has a home, a steady address, it is so much easier for the other elements of survival (job, money, food, etc.) to fall into place.
rek: I was trying my best to be diplomatic. I held back quite a bit with my 'shame' statement.
I can't claim to know the intricacies of the housing debate in Canada but I do know that they're talking about more than shelters here. Shelters, and the lack of places to advance to, are part of the problem and social housing goes way beyond that, it's not just about the homeless, it's about keeping people in housing.
I do think tdotg may be correct that this isn't an issue the majority of Canadians empathize with, even if they recognize the need there is a big helping of 'nimbyism'.
I have photographed and gotten to know some of Toronto's homeless over the past few years, and I know for them it's not as simple as providing people with a place to go. Many stay away from places like Seaton House; one man I know recently lost a leg to diabetes and has gone back out on the street rather than stay there, missing his rehabilitation. Education about the issues and options are undoubtedly needed at all levels.
I'm curious how an ad for John McCain found it's way on a post about putting money towards housing instead of war.
To see people standing up for the homeless and against the war and then to see an ad for McCain was funny, if not sad.
I sure as hell don't want him to be president, and I have a feeling you (Canada) won't want him either, unless you want more of the same from the US.
I agree with earlier posts that our governments in the west, the supposedly richest and most advanced countries in the world, should be more than ashamed about our homeless/poverty situation.
I'd much rather my tax dollars go to helping people than littering a country with cluster bombs that blow up women and children.
mark0:
I think that social housing is an important part of keeping social order in a society - the reality is there will always be people who need help getting housing.
However, I think it's more complex than simply "build more housing." There are a number of factors that can influence someone's need for social housing, including:
- Health conditions (people who are unable to work should be given priority)
- Employment (If a person/family was to move to Alberta they could find work relatively easily - well paying work which would support their own housing)
- Housing costs (Toronto is one of the most expensive housing markets in Canada. Have people considered other, more affordable markets? Any of the cities in Southern Ontario have much lower housing costs)
It's a fine line between "we absolutely need to build more housing for group XYZ" and "we'd like to build more housing to alleviate poverty for groups 123, though that group could well move to other Canadian locations to find lower-cost housing or better job opportunities"
And I will add, there will likely be a counter-argument that says "why should people have to move away from their home? That's wrong!"
To which I would respond: If I found myself without work or swimming in debt, I would either move somewhere cheaper or go to a place where I could get a better job opportunity. Because I am not looking for society or the government to pay for anything I rightfully should be doing myself.
I think my view is similar to the majority of hard-working, taxpaying Canadians. This group is likely a similar group of people to those who are skeptical about social housing.
Tdotg, you might want to go ahead and read this. It seems to refute your assertion that people will find work, in Alberta, which would support their own housing.
Alberta Advantage Chiseled Away
(re: the ad––it was, like all Google ads, automatically inserted based on the words used on this page, not one we chose to put on.)
There's a housing shortage in Alberta despite the many, well-paying jobs. A lot of people are swimming in oil-sands money and sleeping in vans. There has been no housing boom to accompany the economic boom.
Also, tdotg, I never suggested that housing is a straightforward, black-and-white issue. I know it's complex. I've spoken to both housing advocates and homeless individuals and have gotten many sides of the story. The bottom line is, there is nowhere the poor can go that doesn't present the risk of continued poverty. There are homeless everywhere, even the wealthiest corners of Canada.
And you know what? It may not be a simple issue, but "build more housing" is the right idea. Housing represents the ability to pull oneself out of poverty (without relying AS MUCH on social programs, but they are still needed). An employer needs an address and often, a phone number for employees. This is why one needs a home.
A further point: If you're swimming in debt or in the grips of poverty, how are you going to afford to move to somewhere with better job prospects? Sneaking onto freight trains? Hitchhiking? It's far from comfortable or desirable, especially when the weather's nasty. How can someone swimming in debt afford to keep a car, plus gas, or even a bus ticket. As you said that the housing issue if complex, so is being able to "move somewhere cheaper or go to a place where I could get a better job opportunity". Moving apartments is also difficult. If you're swimming in debt, you probably have bad credit. When applying for an apartment, there is often a credit check involved. Landlords won't rent an apartment to someone who won't be able to pay for it.
Building housing isn't the only thing that needs to be done, but it is the best place to start. So at the VERY LEAST, we should be increasing spending on housing, not drastically cutting it like the Ontario government has. (On a side not, McGuinty will probably say that it was the Harris/Eves governments, but McG's had four years to do something about it.)