Ontario Majority Government 2022-2026 (?)

[Fishbone Jones]

As you like.



It sounds to me as if you are saying "that which cannot continue must stop". Something different needs to be done. Either Toronto makes itself more attractive working within its existing boundaries and existing rules, or it changes its boundaries, or its rules, or it becomes less attractive and people relocate. Incomers don't locate in the first place.

I think Toronto should become a city state and leave the rest of us alone.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

i believe my words were "investigate and address the issue preventing currently approved homes from being built" or words to that effect.

Stock and flow issue.
Stock tier 1 -> all land (in desired area)
Stock tier 2 -> land allowed for housing development
Stock tier 3 -> approved homes
Stock tier 4 -> livable homes

Currently, Stock 4 is critically low. Stock 3 has a major surplus. Stock 2 has been assessed as sufficient to meet decades of need. Flow from 2-3 is materially outpacing that of 3-4.

The government response has been to blame flow from 2-3 while unnecessarily boosting stock 2. It stinks to high heaven

Nothing stalls government action like 'investigate.'

There are lots of approved building permits out there. The developers though, are just sitting on them for financial reasons. They should be issued 'a use it or lose it' ultimatum.

 

[mariomike]

Something different needs to be done. Either Toronto makes itself more attractive working within its existing boundaries and existing rules, or it changes its boundaries, or its rules, or it becomes less attractive and people relocate. Incomers don't locate in the first place.

Regarding "Incomers."

It used to be different. There was a Residency Requirement.

But, OHRC said that was a no-no.

 

[lenaitch]

oes your interpretation require that the provinces acquiesce to federal novelty?

No clue what that means, and it's not just my interpretation. It's fairly clear in the Constitution Acts:

91 It shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate and House of Commons, to make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada, in relation to all Matters not coming within the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces . . .(partial)

The SCOC agreed in the 'carbon tax appeal'.

 

[Kirkhill]

No clue what that means, and it's not just my interpretation. It's fairly clear in the Constitution Acts:

91 It shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate and House of Commons, to make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada, in relation to all Matters not coming within the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces . . .(partial)

The SCOC agreed in the 'carbon tax appeal'.

I would note that that was not a universally popular decision.

 

[Blackadder1916]

I would note that that was not a universally popular decision.

Nothing is "universally" popular. Well, maybe . . . no, not that . . . maybe half the population would object . . .

universally
/ (ˌjuːnɪˈvɜːsəlɪ) /

---

adverb

1. everywhere or in every case; without exception: this principle applies universally

 

[Kirkhill]

Nothing is "universally" popular. Well, maybe . . . no, not that . . . maybe half the population would object . . .

It is universally accepted that there are exceptions.

 

[lenaitch]

Regarding "Incomers."

It used to be different. There was a Residency Requirement.

But, OHRC said that was a no-no.

You may well be right that it was a OHRC ruling that benchmarked Toronto. I was only very peripherally involved in the policy decisions of the day at the level of a provincial agency but my recollection was maintaining such a policy likely wouldn't survive a Charter Sec. 6 challenge ('mobility rights'). I'm not sure there has even been a decision that directly speaks to mandating where an employee can live (unless it is spelled out in an employment contract) but government legal decided that it wouldn't be worth the fight. Basically, so long as you show up to work on time, why should the employer care.

When I joined the Force, you had to live in your detachment area - period. Now, with 12 hour 2+2 shifts, members are travelling significant distances to do their shifts so they can live elsewhere. Fire services running 24-hour shift are the same.

 

[Eaglelord17]

You may well be right that it was a OHRC ruling that benchmarked Toronto. I was only very peripherally involved in the policy decisions of the day at the level of a provincial agency but my recollection was maintaining such a policy likely wouldn't survive a Charter Sec. 6 challenge ('mobility rights'). I'm not sure there has even been a decision that directly speaks to mandating where an employee can live (unless it is spelled out in an employment contract) but government legal decided that it wouldn't be worth the fight. Basically, so long as you show up to work on time, why should the employer care.

When I joined the Force, you had to live in your detachment area - period. Now, with 12 hour 2+2 shifts, members are travelling significant distances to do their shifts so they can live elsewhere. Fire services running 24-hour shift are the same.

A lot of shift workers are living that life. I am strongly considering buying a couple hundred acres in the country with or without a house and travelling in to work. To top it off where I live my commute would still be less than most people who commute to work in the GTA.

 

[mariomike]

You may well be right that it was a OHRC ruling that benchmarked Toronto.

Back then, applicants were required to be residents of Metro "at time of application".

Which goes back to what Kirkhill said,

Either Toronto makes itself more attractive working within its existing boundaries and existing rules, or it changes its boundaries, or its rules, or it becomes less attractive and people relocate. Incomers don't locate in the first place.

When I joined the Force, you had to live in your detachment area - period. Now, with 12 hour 2+2 shifts, members are travelling significant distances to do their shifts so they can live elsewhere. Fire services running 24-hour shift are the same.

I worked 12-hour shifts. But, what is a "2+2" schedule?

 

[lenaitch]

I worked 12-hour shifts. But, what is a "2+2" schedule?

Sorry, I meant 4+4; four on, four off. I've never worked them and there are several variations in use by the OPP now. The point was, with long work periods, you get longer rest stretches, so it is more feasible to travel greater distances on fewer days. I am told some of the members share rented accommodations. With 8-hour shifts, you basically worked 5 out of 7 days so it didn't make sense. For a few years I drove into the city from Uxbridge and it was a pain in the butt and wallet. Here are some examples I pulled off the Internet.

Public Safety Scheduling Software | PowerTime

PowerTime is a personnel scheduling tool for law enforcement, EMS, fire, dispatch, and more. Start using PowerTime by PowerDMS for scheduling made easy.

www.planitpolice.com

 

[mariomike]

Sorry, I meant 4+4; four on, four off. I've never worked them and there are several variations in use by the OPP now. The point was, with long work periods, you get longer rest stretches, so it is more feasible to travel greater distances on fewer days. I am told some of the members share rented accommodations. With 8-hour shifts, you basically worked 5 out of 7 days so it didn't make sense. For a few years I drove into the city from Uxbridge and it was a pain in the butt and wallet. Here are some examples I pulled off the Internet.

Public Safety Scheduling Software | PowerTime

PowerTime is a personnel scheduling tool for law enforcement, EMS, fire, dispatch, and more. Start using PowerTime by PowerDMS for scheduling made easy.

www.planitpolice.com

I worked,

Mon, Tues, Weds, Thurs, Fri. 0700 - 1900

Weds, Thurs, Fri. 0700 - 1900

Mon, Tues. 0700 - 1900

Averaged out to 40 hours a week.

Didn't pay shift premium. But, was worth it.

Pretty hard to beat the 24-hour TFS tours.

 

[OldSolduer]

We have a similar but probably smaller issue here. The bedroom communities around Winnipeg are where a good many of the people commute. Every now and then a Winnipeger whines that "There should be a toll road" so these non Winnipegers "pay their share of infrastructure costs"

It has never been seriously considered.

 

[mariomike]

We have a similar but probably smaller issue here. The bedroom communities around Winnipeg are where a good many of the people commute. Every now and then a Winnipeger whines that "There should be a toll road" so these non Winnipegers "pay their share of infrastructure costs"

It has never been seriously considered.

Mayor Tory was going to put a toll on the Gardiner Expressway and The Don Valley Parkway / parking lot.

Queen's Park gave the green light. Then later said no dice.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I would think that if a city paid the whole bill for construction and upkeep of a road like the Gardiner, they could do as they wish. However, if they receive any provincial or federal funding for that road, they are SOL. A consensus is required.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Nothing stalls government action like 'investigate.'

There are lots of approved building permits out there. The developers though, are just sitting on them for financial reasons. They should be issued 'a use it or lose it' ultimatum.

That's part of it. There will be units not being built because developers legitimately don't have the capacity to up their throughput to match approvals, for various reasons-

• can't access enough skilled labour
• can't access enough building materials
• can't access enough capital

Then there are units not being built because developers are choosing not to build for, various reasons

• specific unbuilt units presold at staledated prices, do not want to fulfill/honour
• they're sitting in an oligopic market situation with multi-generational wealth plans and are perfectly willing to reap the price premium created by "barriers to supply" over decades as the land and prospective developments appreciate in value, to the point where they are restricting output.

 

[Remius]

This just gets dirtier…

Developers tried to sell Greenbelt properties amid ongoing government discussions, Ford says

Premier Doug Ford says his government is considering placing two properties back into the Ontario Greenbelt after it was discovered that developers quietly listed the land for sale while discussions were still ongoing.

toronto.ctvnews.ca

 

[IKnowNothing]

Impact of policies outside of the greenbelt controversy

Province's Building Faster Fund unlikely to have 'huge impact' in Wellington County: Warden

WELLINGTON COUNTY – The provincial government’s announcement of a $1.2 billion fund to help municipalities support the creation of new housing may have been the biggest news to come out of the 2023 Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) Conference, but Warden Andy Lennox doesn’t think...

www.wellingtonadvertiser.com

 

[suffolkowner]

This just gets dirtier…

Developers tried to sell Greenbelt properties amid ongoing government discussions, Ford says

Premier Doug Ford says his government is considering placing two properties back into the Ontario Greenbelt after it was discovered that developers quietly listed the land for sale while discussions were still ongoing.

toronto.ctvnews.ca

This is silly either the land belongs in the "greenbelt" or it doesnt. Instead we have Ford waking up on the wrong side of the bed and changing his mind like he changes his underwear. Why does anyone care if the current owners sell it to someone else? That new person can build on it or not

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

This is silly either the land belongs in the "greenbelt" or it doesnt. Instead we have Ford waking up on the wrong side of the bed and changing his mind like he changes his underwear. Why does anyone care if the current owners sell it to someone else? That new person can build on it or not

Because I believe it came with conditions of "shovels in ground", not to just flip it.