logo
2 opposition MPPs have created a plan to solve Ontario's homelessness crisis in 10 years. Could it work?

2 opposition MPPs have created a plan to solve Ontario's homelessness crisis in 10 years. Could it work?

CBC01-06-2025
A Green and Liberal MPP have worked together to develop a plan they say could fix the Ontario housing crisis in 10 years.
Kitchener Centre MPP Aislinn Clancy and Etobicoke-Lakeshore MPP Lee Fairclough are co-sponsoring a private member's bill that they say creates a housing-first plan. Experts CBC News spoke to say while not perfect, if passed, the bill would take important steps to really addressing the homelessness crisis being felt in municipalities across Ontario.
Bill 28, Homelessness Ends with Housing Act includes the creation of a portable housing benefit, setting up an advisory committee of people with expertise and collecting data on supportive housing to make sure the province is meeting its targets.
"Every Ontarian deserves a stable, safe, affordable place to live, and this new legislation offers a solution and a clear path rooted in evidence, compassion and a commitment to housing as a human right," Clancy said in a news conference on Tuesday.
Fairclough says the causes of homelessness need to be addressed to find real solutions.
"We have the data, we have the road maps and as this bill references, housing first is a proven policy to end chronic homelessness," Fairclough said.
Kelly Welch, who is from Waterloo region and has been precariously housed, said at times she only had $20 in her pocket. That meant she had to find ways to navigate the system on her own and she feels like that experience could be invaluable to the government.
"I support this bill and sharing that lived experience because we do come up with solutions," she said at the news conference.
"I would like to lift up the lived experience of others and to share those because everyone deserves a home and having safe, secure housing was that first step to building my life."
Kitchener Centre MPP co-sponsors bill to address homelessness
5 days ago
Duration 4:13
Ontario Greens deputy leader and Kitchener Centre MPP Aislinn Clancy is co-sponsoring a private member's bill aimed at addressing the homelessness crisis in Ontario. The bill proposes a plan to eliminate homelessness in Ontario within 10 years by using an evidence-based, housing-first approach. People from Waterloo region joined Clancy for the press conference at Queen's Park on Tuesday.
Growing number of people experiencing homelessness
A report released by the Association of Municipalities of Ontario in January 2025 said more than 80,000 Ontarians were known to be homeless in 2024, a 25 per cent increase over 2022.
"Ontario is at a tipping point in its homelessness crisis," the report warned, noting without "significant intervention" the number of people who are homeless in the province could triple by 2035.
It noted 25 per cent of those experiencing homelessness were children and youth, while Indigenous people were disproportionately affected, with 45 per cent of people experiencing chronic homelessness in northern communities identifying as Indigenous.
"In northern Ontario, known homelessness has risen by an estimated 204 per cent since 2016, growing from 1,771 people to 5,377 people in 2024," the report said.
Meanwhile, Ontario's cities have reported an increasing number of refugees and asylum seekers who need help to find stable housing.
"The growing pressures of Ontario's homelessness crisis are felt most acutely at the local level. Municipal governments are tasked with responding to immediate needs while trying to deal with infrastructure gaps that limit their ability to address long-term solutions," the report said.
"Communities are deeply affected, with individuals and families enduring the trauma of homelessness and neighbourhoods saying that long-term homelessness and people living outdoors are unacceptable, demanding urgent action from governments."
Housing first works: Expert
The concept of "housing first" is a major part of the private member's bill from Clancy and Fairclough and it means people should be given housing as a first step to helping them with other issues.
Carolyn Whitzman, an adjunct professor and senior housing researcher at the University of Toronto, says she says it's always great when politicians understand that providing housing "is the only proven way to end homelessness."
"I would hope that this understanding transcends politics, because it will take a generation to end homelessness and co-ordinated action from all levels of government, most of all provinces," she told CBC News in an email.
She pointed to Finland, which has implemented a housing-first approach and aims to end homelessness completely by 2027.
Maritt Kirst is an associate professor in the community psychology program at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo and also the co-director of the Centre for Community Research, Learning, and Action and the director of Community Mental Health Research Interest Group.
She says she commended the MPPs for including the housing-first approach into their bill.
"While the largest research trial of housing first was conducted in Canada in 2008 to 2013 — the At Home/Chez Soi Project — and contributed significant amounts of evidence on the success of the housing-first program, Canada lags behind in implementing this approach compared to other countries," she said in an email.
Kirst said another important part of the private member's bill is developing an advisory committee of people with lived experience.
"It is critical to include the voices of people with lived experience in the development of any policy initiative in order to accurately reflect the needs of the population and what works for them," Kirst said.
"The enactment of a bill such as this would support a much needed shift away from governments' heavy reliance on Band-Aid solutions like emergency shelters and approaches that criminalize people experiencing homelessness, towards effective solutions to end homelessness in Ontario."
Some people 'stuck' being homeless
Kaite Burkholder Harris, the executive director of the Alliance to End Homelessness Ottawa and co-chair of the Ontario Alliance to End Homelessness, says she also appreciates the focus on housing first and it is a reachable goal.
"If we were to properly resource and actually build boatloads of non-profit housing, I think that we could see it seriously change in a relatively short period of time," she said in an interview.
She said the current path the province is on will not solve the homelessness crisis in the next decade. Burkholder Harris says with Bill 6 — the Safer Municipalities Act which is currently in the committee stage and which would create harsher penalties if someone were caught using drugs or alcohol in a tent and for trespassing infractions — the province is "criminalizing the experience of being homeless."
Burkholder Harris says there's also a misconception everyone who is homeless has complex needs but she says some people simply just need a place to live.
"Some people who are very unwell, they do need a certain type of housing," she said.
"Many people are waking up and going to work in the morning … and they have a minimum wage job and they can't afford rent," she said, noting if someone falls behind in their rent and gets evicted, it can take time for them to save up again to afford first and last month rent in their area.
"But those folks, if they get stuck in being homeless, they are going to develop more complex needs," she said.
Data collection needed to develop a strategy
Dawn Parker is a professor in the school of planning at the University of Waterloo and says her first impression of the private member's bill is that would take an important step in gathering much needed data about what is happening in the province.
"Politically, this is not a strategy to end homelessness. I don't think a real strategy to end homelessness has any chance of passing the legislature at this point during this government," Parker said.
"What really this bill proposes is to start tracking, seriously start tracking data, on homelessness and housing for those who've been homeless or who fall back into homelessness. Beyond that, it asks the province to develop a strategy."
Parker says the Green party and NDP in Ontario and nationally have put forward practical solutions to tackle different aspects of housing and why it's become unaffordable, including building non-profit housing on public lands, implementing vacant home taxes and using inclusionary zoning, which require private developers to include a certain percentage of affordable units within new, multi-unit housing developments.
None of the advice is new, she says, noting she started talking to media about missing middle housing nearly a decade ago.
"Housing experts have been saying the same things over and over and over and over again for years on end," Parker said. "We keep giving the same advice. It's up to the province when and how they take up that advice."
Parker says she hopes the current Ontario government really considers what is in the Liberal-Green private member's bill because really, what it's recommending is getting more information to make better decisions.
"This is a quite benign bill that mainly calls for consistent reporting and data tracking. I would hope that it could pass," she said.
"If it doesn't happen, why not? Why is there a fear of information? We should all value and support efforts to bring data and daylight to the problems that we face, so we're all talking from the same information and about the same things."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

New U.S. visa integrity fee to affect some travellers including from Canada
New U.S. visa integrity fee to affect some travellers including from Canada

CTV News

time6 minutes ago

  • CTV News

New U.S. visa integrity fee to affect some travellers including from Canada

A Duty Free sign is shown at the Canada-U.S. border crossing in Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, Que., on April 10, 2025. (Graham Hughes / The Canadian Press) Some people travelling to the United States from countries including Canada will have to pay a 'visa integrity fee' of US$250, but an immigration lawyer says most Canadian citizens won't be affected. 'This one won't hit Canadian citizens too hard, and they can continue to enter the United States as usual,' Rosanna Berardi, managing partner of Berardi Immigration Law, in Buffalo, N.Y., said in a video interview with on Monday, noting Canadian citizens generally just need their passport to enter the U.S. 'Ninety-nine per cent of Canadian citizens are visa exempt. ... Those individuals will not have to pay the new visa integrity fee, unless they are investors or fiancés of U.S. citizens.' The visa integrity fee will apply to Canadian permanent residents entering the U.S. both by land and air who are not American citizens or who were not born from Visa Waiver Program countries, Berardi added. People who have a valid Electronic System for Travel Authorization through the Visa Waiver Program can stay in the United States for tourism or business for up to 90 days without a visa, according to the U.S. government's website. The fee is part of the Trump administration's spending legislation called the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' which became law on July 4. The U.S. government didn't state when the fee would go into effect. The US$250 fee would be for the current federal fiscal year, the act states. It may be adjusted annually for inflation and won't be waived or reduced, according to the act. Visitors to the U.S. may be reimbursed for the fee after their non-immigrant visa expires under certain conditions, the act states. For instance, people may get their money back if they followed all conditions under the visa, such as not accepting unauthorized employment. When asked for more details about the new fee on Monday, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security wrote in an email: 'President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill provides the necessary policies and resources to restore integrity in our nation's immigration system. The visa integrity fee requires cross-agency coordination before implementation.' A U.S. State Department spokesperson wrote in an email to on Monday that the fee is part of the Trump administration's efforts to help strengthen immigration enforcement, deter visa overstays and fund border security. 'We will provide more information regarding the implementation and impact of the law for the Department of State as soon as practicable,' a spokesperson wrote. 'All updates will be posted to our visa information page at Global Affairs Canada didn't immediately respond to request for comment and more information.

Michael Higgins: Locking Tamara Lich up for 7 years would be shameful retribution
Michael Higgins: Locking Tamara Lich up for 7 years would be shameful retribution

National Post

time6 minutes ago

  • National Post

Michael Higgins: Locking Tamara Lich up for 7 years would be shameful retribution

It is to be hoped that the judge in the case of Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, key organizers of the notorious Freedom Convoy, has more common sense and respect for justice than the prosecution which seems intent on nothing more than revenge and retribution. Article content Whatever one's view of the Freedom Convoy and its actions during a three-week period in early 2022, a prison sentence of seven years for Lich and eight years for Barber would throw the administration of justice into disrepute. Article content Article content Article content That the Crown is asking for these sentences is shameful and ignores some of the other issues in this country that is making Canadians doubt that the legal system is fair, balanced, impartial and beyond reproach. Article content Article content Most of the prosecution case has been demolished. Lich was facing six charges and Barber seven for a variety of accusations including mischief, intimidation, counselling others to break the law, obstructing police and counselling others to obstruct police. Article content At the end of a 45-day trial the organizers of the convoy were both found guilty of mischief and Barber was also found guilty of counselling others to disobey a judge's order to stop honking horns. Article content They were found not guilty of the majority of the charges and yet the Crown demands a penalty that is entirely unjustified. Article content This week they will be sentenced by Ontario Court Justice Heather Perkins-McVey but at the weekend Lich tweeted that the Crown was asking for seven years imprisonment for her and eight for Barber. Article content Article content Their fate will be decided three years and five months after they were first arrested. An old adage says justice delayed is justice denied. Article content Article content But it is interesting to note that in her April 3 judgement finding the pair guilty, the judge said she accepted that Lich and Barber came to Ottawa 'with the noblest of intentions to simply protest their wish for the government and Prime Minister (at the time) Trudeau to end COVID mandate.' Article content Further, 'The Crown agrees that the accused came to Ottawa to advance a noble cause and had the right to protest against COVID mandates, but argues they crossed the line with the means used to achieve their ends.' Article content The Freedom Convoy was certainly a nuisance. It caused inconvenience and hardship for citizens for some three weeks. The honking of horns was particularly annoying until stopped by a court order. Article content The judge said in her ruling, 'Persons testified that the noise from the truck horns made it difficult for downtown residents to sleep and focus on work. Others testified that the egress from their buildings was blocked or that because of the streets being blocked that it was difficult or impossible to get to work and appointments. Generally, the central core of the city came to a standstill. Article content 'The downtown residents who testified including persons and their families who lived in the downtown core, owners and employees of small businesses and other institutions such as churches suffered significant interferences in the use and enjoyment of their property and in their daily activities because of the protest.' Article content But the Freedom Convoy was not violent. Article content The line that Lich and Barber crossed is one written in sand, shifting, defined only after the fact by the courts and only after a contest between competing rights. Article content The judge said that there is a 'delicate balance between law enforcement concerns for public safety and order and individual rights and freedoms on the other.' Article content There was 'tension' between those rights, she said. Article content Judge Perkins-McVey quoted a judge in another case who said, 'in a free and democratic society such as Canada, we welcome and encourage people to hold demonstrations if such is necessary to exercise their right of freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and their right to freedom of association as guaranteed by section two of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Article content Article content 'However, society also expects demonstrators to exercise these rights to do so without violating the rights of others to move about freely or to engage in activities which they have a perfect legal right to do so.' Article content Here is the nub of the case. The judge had to balance the tension between Lich's and Barber's perfect right to protest with the rights of people to go about enjoying their daily lives. Article content 'At the heart of the competing interests in this case lies the question to what extent does the exercise of the right to protest protects those from criminal liability when the rights of other citizens to enjoy their property have been impacted by their actions. Even Charter-protected rights are not absolute,' said the judge. Article content The defence argued the pair were 'engaged in and encouraged a lawful and constitutionally protected peaceful protest.' Article content The judge has found them guilty, but clearly from her ruling there has been, and will be going forward, much more debate and cases involving protests and citizens' rights. Article content Article content Since October 7, 2023, Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, and other Canadian cities, have seen constant anti-Israel protests (along with demonstrations in support of the terror group Hamas) that have blocked streets, traffic, led to emergency vehicles being diverted, and caused much annoyance, nuisance, fear and alarm to citizens. Article content Yet they are continuing and more are planned. Article content Who decides that the rights of citizens have been impacted to such an extent that the protests are unlawful? The protesters won't do it. As is the case with protests, they push boundaries until they cross lines they don't see. Article content As for the citizens of Toronto, Montreal, et al, they aren't being listened to. Article content Regularly blocking intersections and causing distress to citizens in downtown Toronto for 21 months doesn't appear to be a crime. And yet honking horns and, yes, causing annoyance to the citizens of Ottawa for three weeks, is deemed worthy by the Crown of sending people to jail for seven and eight years. Article content

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store