TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES

AND OTHER COMMITTEES

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999

COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD SERVICES COMMITTEE

REPORT No. 3

1 Federal-Provincial Social Union Discussions

APPENDIX "A"

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 3

OF THE COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD SERVICES

COMMITTEE

(from its meeting on February 11, 1999,

submitted by Councillor Chris Korwin-Kuczynski, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999

1

Federal-Provincial Social Union Discussions

(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

(City Council on March 2, 3 and 4, 1999, deferred consideration of this Clause to the next regular meeting of City Council to be held on April 13, 1999.)

--------

(Clause No. 2 of Report No. 2 of The Community and Neighbourhoods Services Committee)

The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee:

(1) recommends that the request for a public process for the consideration of the Social Union document by both the Canadian public and municipalities, either individually or through the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, be endorsed, in order that input can be provided before the finalization of the Social Union agreement is achieved; and that the Federal and Provincial Governments be so advised; and

(2) reports having requested the Federation of Canadian Municipalities to give consideration to the material submitted by the Canadians for a Real Social Union, and any other material on the Social Union, at its National Board of Directors meeting from March 3-6, 1999, in particular at its Social Infrastructure Committee; and requests the concurrence of Council in the action taken.

The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee reports, for the information of Council, having referred the communication (January 19, 1999) from the City Clerk, and the material received from the Canadians for a Real Social Union to the Chief Administrative Officer, with a request that he report thereon to Council, through the appropriate Committee, such report to include:

(i) the opportunities and/or challenges that the new Social Union document may present to the City of Toronto; and

(ii) recommendations with respect to the steps the City should be taking.

The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee submits the following communication (January 19, 1999) from the City Clerk:

The Council Strategy Committee for People Without Homes at its meeting of January 18, 1999, had before it the attached communication dated January 8, 1999, from Councillor Layton, Co-Chair, Advisory Committee on Homeless and Socially Isolated Persons, forwarding the noted motion, as approved at their meeting of December 18, 1998.

The Council Strategy Committee for People Without Homes adopted the following recommendation and transmits the same for your consideration:

"It is recommended that, in recognition of the fact that many of Canada's social problems, such as homelessness, are often most visible and impact most directly at the local level, the City of Toronto seek standing at the federal/provincial social union talks to ensure appropriate consideration of these and other related issues, and that other Cities be requested to also seek standing at the federal/provincial social union talks in partnership with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities."

(Communication dated January 8, 1998, addressed to the

Advisory Committee on Homeless and Socially Isolated Persons,

from Co-Chairs, Councillor Jack Layton and Ms. Alison Kemper)

At its December 18, 1998, meeting, the Advisory Committee on Homeless and Socially Isolated Persons heard from a representative of L.I.F.T. (Low Income Families Together) who reported on their presentation in November 1998 to the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Concern was raised at the U.N. Committee hearings regarding the information presented by provincial and federal levels of government as to their compliance and progress on a number of serious social problems identified in Canada's review five years before. Homelessness and child poverty were highlighted. As such, L.I.F.T. and other NGO representatives support and encourage the involvement of municipalities in representing the status and impact of these and other social issues.

The following motion was adopted by the Advisory Committee for referral to the Council Strategy Committee for People Without Homes:

"In recognition of the fact that many of Canada's social problems, such as homelessness, are often most visible and impact most directly at the local level, it is recommended that the City of Toronto seek standing at the federal/provincial social union talks to ensure appropriate consideration of these and other related issues."

The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee also submits the following communication (January 29, 1999) from Mr. John Sewell, on behalf of Canadians for a Real Social Union.

We believe the Social Union discussions between the federal and provincial governments are wrong in both process and substance, and should be abandoned.

The Social Union discussions concern responsibilities and obligations for basic government programs that all Canadian communities rely on, but these negotiations are carried on behind closed doors. The 1992 referendum on the Charlottetown Accord confirms that most Canadians do not support this kind of process.

Further, the negotiations are more about shedding responsibilities than about improving the way we meet social needs. The attempt to 'disentangle' responsibilities is a simplification - probably impossible to achieve in any useful manner - which refuses to recognise that most situations are complex and require people at different levels of government, with different skills, talents, responsibilities, and means, to work together. We are tired of governments squabbling with each other about who gets credit for what. The Canadian constitution states that we are entitled to 'peace, order, and good government', but most of the public sees little sign of good government.

The Social Union talks should be abandoned.

We believe governments should state their commitment to social responsibility and their desire to work together to significantly improve the social health of Canadians and our communities. Governments have a responsibility to ensure the social needs of all people living in Canada are met. This is not a call for 'big government', not a call for government to the left or to the right, but a call for responsible and responsive government at all levels - federal, provincial, and municipal.

We want a new process with the express objectives of producing the following outcomes:

(1) An end to poverty and hunger by income support programs and job strategies which each year reduce the number of people living in dire circumstances.

(2) Strong public health programs and the accessibility by everyone, regardless of income, to high quality health care in a timely fashion.

(3) Good housing that all households can reasonably afford.

(4) High quality and affordable public educational opportunities for everyone.

(5) High quality child care across Canada for all children.

(6) High quality immigrant and settlement programs and services.

(7) An inclusive society which enhances equity and equality, and assures a rich cultural life.

(8) An enhanced environment, and strong environmental protections.

Governments at all levels should commit themselves to work together to achieve these goals, and to take action to improve the social conditions year by year. The process employed should be open, transparent, inclusive, and timely. It should be led by government, and include forums for wide-ranging public discussion of the creation of a strong society and how governments can co-operate to achieve these objectives.

We recognize that Canada consists of several nations, and that different arrangements may be necessary for Aboriginal communities and for Quebec. We see this as evidence of Canada's unique strength in a divided world, not as a stumbling block to wide-spread agreement on the desired social outcomes.

We intend to take the following actions:

(1) To seek wide agreement on these criticisms of the Social Union discussions.

(2) To seek wide support for the statement of general social outcomes outlined above.

(3) To press all governments to agree they will abandon Social Union discussions, and instead commit to achieving the social outcomes that will create strong communities and a healthy society.

(4) To intervene in Social Union discussions if governments continue to engage in them.

(5) To encourage and help develop an open, transparent, inclusive, and timely process, led by government, with wide-ranging public discussion of the critical aspects of a strong society and how governments can co-operate to achieve these objectives.

--------

The following persons appeared before the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Mr. Ernie Lightman, Economist, Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, and Ms. Liz Rykert, on behalf of Canadians for a Real Social Union, and submitted a brief in regard thereto; and

- Councillor Jack Layton, Chair, Council Strategy Committee for People Without Homes.

(A list of the members of the Canadians for a Real Social Union, attached to the foregoing communication from Mr. Sewell, was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee for its meeting on February 11, 1999, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

Respectfully submitted,

CHRIS KORWIN-KUCZYNSKI

Chair

Toronto, February 11, 1999

(Report No. 3 of The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee was adopted, without amendment, by City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999.)