Ontario Government (Conservative majority), 2025-29

[Jarnhamar]

which reply simply substantiates what I wrote. They aren't worth taking a stand. Sometimes I am ashamed of calling myself a Canadian.

I get what you're saying but Canada does enough for non-citizens.


Foreign migrant living illegally in Canada eligible for Ontario welfare, tribunal rules

https://archive.is/VGLgl

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Does any country tax it's citizens and then send that money as aid to Canada?

 

[brihard]

I get what you're saying but Canada does enough for non-citizens.


Foreign migrant living illegally in Canada eligible for Ontario welfare, tribunal rules

https://archive.is/VGLgl

Looks like a case of a bad set of rules being applied correctly as written due to a gap between the respective responsibilities of two levels of government. Presumably the system assumed that a removal order would be in place in such circumstances. The government of Ontario could quite easily amend the legislation or regulations to require that provincial welfare program only be provided to those with lawful residency in Canada. I’m sure this has been thought of before, so I wonder what informed the policy decision that let to that not being required.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Looks like a case of a bad set of rules being applied correctly as written due to a gap between the respective responsibilities of two levels of government. Presumably the system assumed that a removal order would be in place in such circumstances. The government of Ontario could quite easily amend the legislation or regulations to require that provincial welfare program only be provided to those with lawful residency in Canada. I’m sure this has been thought of before, so I wonder what informed the policy decision that let to that not being required.

Right. At the end of the day someone in our country illegally can claim welfare. That money has to come from somewhere, Canadians shouldn't feel guilty Carney is prioritizing trade relationships over Trudeau style posturing.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Right. At the end of the day someone in our country illegally can claim welfare. That money has to come from somewhere, Canadians shouldn't feel guilty Carney is prioritizing trade relationships over Trudeau style posturing.

Lots of 'legal' Canadians already commit welfare fraud.

Not to say that's awesome, but it's an issue across the board and has been since the system was invented...

 

[Jarnhamar]

Lots of 'legal' Canadians already commit welfare fraud.

Not to say that's awesome, but it's an issue across the board and has been since the system was invented...

Ideally enough Canadians demand we inprove our rules to curtail this kind of stuff.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Lots of 'legal' Canadians already commit welfare fraud.

Not to say that's awesome, but it's an issue across the board and has been since the system was invented...

That's not a reason or excuse though. The current situation is virtue signalling at taxpayer expense.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Ideally enough Canadians demand we inprove our rules to curtail this kind of stuff.

Like voting in a more fiscally responsible government ...

 

[brihard]

Lots of 'legal' Canadians already commit welfare fraud.

Not to say that's awesome, but it's an issue across the board and has been since the system was invented...

Just to nitpick, the guy in the article didn’t commit welfare fraud. With regards to the provincial welfare benefits in Ontario, he actually appears to have done everything right and followed the proper legal process. He worked for years until he lost his job.

Obviously his legal status in Canada is a separate issue, but that’s on a different level of government.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Just to nitpick, the guy in the article didn’t commit welfare fraud. With regards to the provincial welfare benefits in Ontario, he actually appears to have done everything right and followed the proper legal process. He worked for years until he lost his job.

Obviously his legal status in Canada is a separate issue, but that’s on a different level of government.

You got me curious. If he applied for welfare when he wasn't entitled to do so would that be attempting to commit welfare fraud?

His student visa ran out in 2001 and he worked cash jobs under the table for 22 years - assuming he didn't file income tax. He shouldn't be eligible.


The Ontario works case officer seems to have purposefully ignored the fact the guy was in Canada illegally and tried to circumvent it being flagged - another example of wokeness in action.

Makes you wonder how many other under the table things they've done. he should lose his job for trying to game the system IMO.

 

[brihard]

You got me curious. If he applied for welfare when he wasn't entitled to do so would that be attempting to commit welfare fraud?

His student visa ran out in 2001 and he worked cash jobs under the table for 22 years - assuming he didn't file income tax. He shouldn't be eligible.


The Ontario works case officer seems to have purposefully ignored the fact the guy was in Canada illegally and tried to circumvent it being flagged - another example of wokeness in action.

Makes you wonder how many other under the table things they've done. he should lose his job for trying to game the system IMO.

Shrug I don’t know enough about how Ontario Works… works… to say. But given a court ruled he was in fact eligible I have to take that at face value.

 

[lenaitch]

You got me curious. If he applied for welfare when he wasn't entitled to do so would that be attempting to commit welfare fraud?

His student visa ran out in 2001 and he worked cash jobs under the table for 22 years - assuming he didn't file income tax. He shouldn't be eligible.


The Ontario works case officer seems to have purposefully ignored the fact the guy was in Canada illegally and tried to circumvent it being flagged - another example of wokeness in action.

Makes you wonder how many other under the table things they've done. he should lose his job for trying to game the system IMO.

I can't open the link anymore but from what I recall reading it last night, the legislation identified three classes of non-citizenship or residency that were ineligible to receive social assistance, and that the applicant was not one of them, so was therefore eligible. The legislation apparently does not broadly make citizenship or residency a condition of eligibility.

The tribunal interpreted the law as written.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I can't open the link anymore but from what I recall reading it last night, the legislation identified three classes of non-citizenship or residency that were ineligible to receive social assistance, and that the applicant was not one of them, so was therefore eligible. The legislation apparently does not broadly make citizenship or residency a condition of eligibility.

The tribunal interpreted the law as written.

Yup - since buddy wasn’t subject to a removal order when he applied, it seems to have been allowed.

 

[The Bread Guy]

... The Ontario works case officer seems to have purposefully ignored the fact the guy was in Canada illegally and tried to circumvent it being flagged - another example of wokeness in action ...

If his rules say the guy's ineligible only if he has a removal order, and he didn't, and the law doesn't say "must be a citizen of Canada or permanent resident," how do you know he knew he was illegal? And even if he knew, where in the rules as written say he couldn't get welfare? Looks like that's what the court jumped on. If the law/rules said "gotta be a citizen or permanent resident," and buddy says "yes," busted!

And keep in mind that that legislation came in under the Mike Harris Tories in Ontario, who could be accused of a number of things, but not of sneakily trying to leave a loophole allowing illegal residents to collect welfare. We'll see if the current Team Blue Ontario franchise does anything about that now that the courts have ruled on the letter of the law.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I can't open the link anymore but from what I recall reading it last night, the legislation identified three classes of non-citizenship or residency that were ineligible to receive social assistance, and that the applicant was not one of them, so was therefore eligible. The legislation apparently does not broadly make citizenship or residency a condition of eligibility.

The tribunal interpreted the law as written.

I foolishly missed that yeah.

Because there was no deportation order he's eligible to claim welfare. Another example of the corner we paint ourselves into. (some contradictions below)

If his rules say the guy's ineligible only if he has a removal order, and he didn't, and the law doesn't say "must be a citizen of Canada or permanent resident," how do you know he knew he was illegal? And even if he knew, where in the rules as written say he couldn't get welfare? Looks like that's what the court jumped on. If the law/rules said "gotta be a citizen or permanent resident," and buddy says "yes," busted!

I was wrong, yeah. The idea of people in Canada illegally collecting welfare set off my old man yells at cloud button.

I wonder if we'll read about one of these gentlemen being deported and successfully claiming welfare from outside of Canada.


Interesting how our laws work - found this on an Ontario government site:

Status in Canada
All applicants and recipients must provide documentation to verify their status in the country. Acceptable documentation must be visually verified in technology or kept on file (original or copy) (see Directive 2.1: Application process for a list of acceptable documentation).

Had the case worker did his job and checked, the applicant couldn't have provided documentation of status because he was here illegally for 25 years - but the tribunal found in his favour anyways.

Visitors

Visitors are people who are in Canada for a temporary purpose. A visitor may have a tourist visa, student visa or work permit/authorization or may be temporarily re-located from another country (e.g., a natural disaster has forced a community evacuation).

Visitors are not eligible for Ontario Works unless they have made a claim for refugee protection or applied for status as a permanent resident under the federal Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).

Again, doesn't seem like he should have qualified. Loophole being he could have just claimed asylum (realized after 30 years he was bisexual?) and he could have applied for welfare without complaint. Still comes back to the Ontario Works case worker trying to game the system.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I foolishly missed that yeah.

Because there was no deportation order he's eligible to claim welfare. Another example of the corner we paint ourselves into. (some contradictions below)





I was wrong, yeah. The idea of people in Canada illegally collecting welfare set off my old man yells at cloud button.

I wonder if we'll read about one of these gentlemen being deported and successfully claiming welfare from outside of Canada.


Interesting how our laws work - found this on an Ontario government site:



Had the case worker did his job and checked, the applicant couldn't have provided documentation of status because he was here illegally for 25 years - but the tribunal found in his favour anyways.



Again, doesn't seem like he should have qualified. Loophole being he could have just claimed asylum (realized after 30 years he was bisexual?) and he could have applied for welfare without complaint. Still comes back to the Ontario Works case worker trying to game the system.

Here's a key bit from the NP article:

After he applied for welfare benefits last fall, the administrator of the provincial social assistance program called Ontario Works denied the man’s application because of his lack of immigration status in Canada, despite program staff trying to avoid flagging his immigration problem.

An Ontario Works intake case officer had not conducted an immigration search to ascertain the man’s benefits eligibility, the tribunal found, “to avoid possibly jeopardizing the appellant’s situation in Canada.”

While it sounds like the front-liners may have recommended x, their bosses seem to have overruled them, so the staffer did, indeed, have his/her hand on the ball that was dropped - you might be right. As to "doing his job," the staffer's only way out would have been if when he did the intake, they were not forced/mandated to ask, so if the rule book said to look for a removal order, then the letter of the law was followed (hence the court decision), but yeah, ball dropped.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Mod note: Moved the "guy without legal residency status getting welfare court case" material here because it's pretty specifically discussing rules in Ontario. Carry on ....

Army.ca Staff

 

[Jarnhamar]

Here's a key bit from the NP article:

While it sounds like the front-liners may have recommended x, their bosses seem to have overruled them, so the staffer did, indeed, have his/her hand on the ball that was dropped - you might be right. As to "doing his job," the staffer's only way out would have been if when he did the intake, they were not forced/mandated to ask, so if the rule book said to look for a removal order, then the letter of the law was followed (hence the court decision), but yeah, ball dropped.

I find the bigger issue is that the tribunal specifically found the intake case officer didn't conduct an immigration search "to avoid possibly jeopardizing the appellant's situation in Canada." That's more than simply following the letter of the law. It wasn't an oversight but rather a deliberate decision not to verify immigration status. (Potentially woke no one is illegal stuff but we'll never know)

Having read then other policies I posted I strugle to how he could have qualified, seems like a technicality with due process.