Councillor Ch'ng, in answer to your question as to where can they go after breakfast, how about going to work? This should be the goal. Everyone has something to offer. Everyone needs a purpose. We are entering perilous times and this calls for some serious reflection on what we want our city and society to look like. Mindless tokenism just will not cut it. Years ago the term inconvenient truth was bandied about, mostly regarding climate change. This term now has an additional application. What is it about current policy that allows so many to fall so far? Certainly not lack of funds as it seems the more that is being spent the deeper the pit. Why are so many healing yet no one seems to be getting better? Have we inadvertently monetized/incentivized victimhood to the point that getting well means getting poorer? Tough questions requiring an adult conversation that needs to extend well beyond the boundaries of this city.Leaders need to lead and it best get started soon.
It is my understanding that there are upwards of twenty organizations currently receiving funding to deal with the homeless/encampment issue. I suggest cutting this part of their budgets and assigning it to the stated price tag. There is way too much being spent on things that do not work. Assuming that spending more in itself creates progress, is folly at best. There is a story in one of the Toronto papers that outlines how 74 million dollars has been given to an organization that self-identifies as indigenous. One would think that at least some of those funds could be better spent helping Thunder Bay deal with the encampment issue.
This type of issue has become so commonplace that it hardly registers. This is the real tragedy. Normalising that which isn't undermines the whole concept of normal. It is not right to harass, it is not right to steal, it is not right to loiter and it is not right to excuse this type of aberrant behaviour. The lack of push back by those who have been entrusted to take care of the public interest is disgusting. What they profess to be understanding is nothing more than cowardice. It would be shameful if there still was such a thing. We deserve better.
We are going to prioritize those most at risks...well okay if that is the plan. However would it not make some sense to prioritize those that are actually in or seeking treatment? Is this going to be determined by some type of point system and, if so, what is it? If not, what is the criteria and how are they weighted. The detail is important and I am hoping that the city has not agreed to fund a plan that really isn't. Providing shelter is essential but it is not the end but rather a means to an end which is getting people back on their feet and becoming responsible and valued members of society.
When something is free, there will never be enough. Something for nothing is demeaning and does the exact opposite of what it is intended to do. Hopefully any subsequent review of this program will look at results instead of intentions.
Condolences to all. I do wish the update had come from the Thunder Bay Police Services as opposed to NAN. Something is amiss when Grand Chief Fiddler is able to inform before our police services.
If ever there was a case in point, this is it. What an indictment of the current process. At some point common sense and decency need to be applied. If we have gotten to the time when good people have to cower due to the protections offered to miscreants, then all is lost. Enough is enough, the powers that be either have to step up and do something or else move aside. The fragile relationship between the governed and those who govern is becoming even more frayed and unless something changes soon, will sever. If it ever gets to the point that the citizenry believes that cowardice is masquerading as caring then it will get ugly; and just maybe, that is what we need.
There is something to be said for the human rights approach however why the silence on its corollary, the corresponding responsibilities. Rights do not exist in a vacuum. Following the law and contributing to a greater good are part of the package. People need a sense of worth and normalizing their predicament does nothing for this.
Regarding the statement that we are in a housing crisis, again, what does this really mean?There are currently a number of houses for sale in the 250k range. Mortgage rates are falling. Maybe the problem is more easily addressed if we say there is an employment problem and plan accordingly. Getting people to work and contribute should be the ultimate goal. I think, somehow, this is getting lost.
There was a recent article in one of the national papers citing the difficulty our armed forces are having regarding recruitment. There seems to be a possible match here. I will not solve the problem but it would certainly make it smaller.
Maybe give some thought to advising your client to not to kill someone. This ongoing offloading of "mitigating factors" is wearing a bit thin. Commit the crime, suffer the consequence.
Using your logic that mistakenly equates tax rates with taxes paid, one would be better off in Toronto as their tax rate is the lowest. Too bad about the million dollar price tag for the house. I am not sure why you choose to purposely mislead as it completely undermines your credibility and weakens your somewhat valid point regarding the need for the city to get its fiscal house in order.
There is also the inconvenient truth that Thunder Bay is not large enough to provide ongoing support to single purpose buildings of this size. Earlier news articles cited difficulties with the cost of maintaining the Thunder Bay Museum and the Sports Hall of Fame. Wings devoted to each of these could have been incorporated into the design. A pavilion housing the carousel that has been described as a work of art, could also have been included. While not addressing the issue of increased labor/building costs, such inclusive planning does insure increased foot traffic and reduced maintenance costs overall. Too many silos and many with a "friends of" designation. Thunder Bay itself seems to be very lonely.
Just out of curiosity, the city must have looked at this example, did they ever explain their decision to not use this model? There must be a backstory.
If we are going to talk about moral obligation then that should extend to a number of other governments as well. Where do these people come from? Have funds been made available for them and if so, to whom? Maybe this money should follow them to Thunder Bay. It would seem to be the moral thing to do.
Absolutely! There should be a jobs/skills/employment component to all social programming. The goal should be to return people to self sufficiency. The longer this is ignored, the more difficult achieving it becomes. The premise must be that everyone has something to contribute and there is a personal responsibility to do so. In those cases where this is impossible, then providing the necessary support can be provided. Creating/normalizing a permanent underclass must be avoided.
'What would happen if we did not have a climate action specialist? Nothing against the individual but I do not see what difference it makes. Time for a major re-think of what the city's priorities are and how the staff is aligned.
Rights are not absolute. They are subject to reasonable limits. There is the right to free speech but that does not confer the right to shout "fire" in a crowded theater when there is no fire. There is so much talk of rights but so little of the corresponding responsibilities: to obey the law; to respect other peoples rights and freedoms and the list goes on. We are getting to a point when a growing number of people are concluding that the system in place no longer represents their interests. The social contract between those that govern and the governed is becoming increasingly frayed. This will not end well unless there is a complete rethink. The narrative that seemingly assigns vice to virtue and virtue to vice needs to be put under some scrutiny and rewritten as necessary.