Category Archives: Comment

Also the Fault of Progressives: Trump, Leitch, and the Age of Division

Posted on by
Reply

gbmw-laid-off-aricle-pic

We are all, quite rightly, appalled by the way Donald Trump has behaved. His xenophobic, sexist, misogynist,  racist, daily diatribes are in embarrassment to the Party of Lincoln. But while we are all feeling morally superior and content in our enlightenment, I am troubled by how we progressives helped to create the environment for this kind of viral hatred to grow.

We progressives are great a supporting causes like #YesAllWomen, #BringBackOurGirls, #IceBucketChallenge, #IndyRef, #BlackLivesMatter, #LoveWins . All of these are critical issues in our world and all of them very worthy of our attention but there is a problem. Who are we progressives ignoring?

There is the bias we show in the causes we champion and the people we don’t. In the case of the dog whistle politics of a Kellie Leitch or Donald Trump, the cause we did not pay attention to was the plight of the blue-collar worker and those who were ejected in to an uncertain future from the economic disaster of 2008. So many lost their jobs ,or were made redundant by changes in technology on the factory floor, that there became a huge group of people who were left behind. And while clever pundits and economists speak of creative destruction, in the real world millions lost the dignity of work in the middleclass.

The result? Men and women, many of whom had achievied  a middle-class lifewere thrown into a  long humiliating nightmare of uncertainty. Manufacturing jobs were devastated and never came back because those industries either moved to cheaper labour markets, Caterpillar did this here in London, or innovated through technology and so need radically fewer workers in plants. Also retraining programs were inadequate at best and callous at worst. A worker would rarely, especially in the US, get the training they needed to work in advanced manufacturing and would often be forced into programs that were irrelevant to the current job market. Also it was brutally tough for a 50 year old man or woman to retrain in the computer focused workd of advanced manufacturing.

So the dignity and stability of work, which is so critical to having a stable life, became a memory for millions across north America who instead found themselves in precarious work and precarious lives. They were, and are, a growing  group who are rightfully angry and rightfully feeling ignored. Into this vacuum come Kellie Leitch and Donald trump who provide easy targets for the anger and frustration. So it is any wonder that we have the environment that spawns a Donald Trump or Kellie Leitch? No progressive movement I’ve seen is advocating for this group  and so they support those who, through lies and misdirection, provide them with a target for their anger. Immigrants, political correctness, elites, women, international bankers and the list goes on and on. It is so easy for Trump or Leitch to pretend to be one of them while givig them targets for their anger that further thier callous ends. Meanwhile we in the progressive ranks shake our heads and tut in superiority. Racism, sexism, and prejudice are always unacceptable. But it should be equally unacceptable for so many millions to be left behind and become the targets for politicallu opportune predators like Trump and Leitch to pretend to use our friends and neighbours so callously.

Perhaps we need a new hashtag that lasts for more than a weekend. Perhaps we need a hashtag that says we will stand with those being ignored. Perhaps we should do more than a hashtag and actually send messages through the corridors of power and say we will not ignore our friends and neighbours any longer. We won’t stand for the denigration of the dignity of work and the humiliation of families that are left behind. That would be a proud achievement for the progressive movement. I doubt it will happen but it would be a proud moment. #nooneleftbehind

Generosity of Spirit

Posted on by
Reply

loonie

There is a kind of whirligig tempo to the last week that surrounds us with sandblasted acceleration that everyone, me included, is thinking about. Of course it is our Canadian federal election i’m talking about. My social media feeds are filled with prognostications of who won the debate, who will win the election, what the foibles of each party and leader are, that in the end leave us feeling more than a little weary. But there were some issues that have been occupying my mind that I hoped would be addressed.

During the debates there was only one leader who brought up the social issues we face. Try to guess her name. Go on, I know you can figure it out. That’s right, Elizabeth May was the person to say what about poverty? What about health care? What about inequality? That was good to hear, even if for only a few very brief moments, as I’ve been thinking a lot about it in the last week. The rest acknowledged it as an after thought perhaps. I’m not blaming the other participants but rather pointing out an important missing space in the national conversation; much like Elizabeth May will be a missing space in the conversation enforced by the ridiculous “rules“ of the upcoming debates.

This, by the way, is not an endorsement of Ms. May. No. Rather it is to point something out something that I feel needs some closer examination. Her missing, as much as the important issues of social wellbeing are to the national conversation, needs some looking at. What does it say about the bastions of journalism if we can’t talk about the issues that leave many of our fellow Canadians further and further behind? What does it say about them if we ignore a key person and a raft of key issues on the cutting room floor? What does it say about us?

Last weekend I was celebrating my birthday and was at a local grocery store to pick up a few supplies with my family. We parked and while traversing the parking lot a man, sitting on the curb, asked if I had any spare change. I did and gave it to him. I went inside to get him a bottle of water as it was hot, returned, and gave it to him. I was just walking away and he asked “Hey, you a Habs fan?” I have been a Habs fan since I first moved to Canada, Lefleur being my hero, and told him so. He said, ”Knew it the moment I saw you. Hold on a sec I’ve got something for you.” He digs in his bag and comes out with a loonie celebrating the Canadiens. I told him i couldn’t take his money but he insisted and I accepted it with the generosity of spirit in which it was given. True generosity on my birthday from a man who did not seem to have the means to spare much. But he did and he shared what he had with me. I thanked him, shook his hand, and went on my way.

That moment has stayed with me all week as the election increased its tempo to a fevered pitch. He had very little but wanted to share something with me. A little generosity in a parking lot from someone who didn’t know me but wanted to share what he had. Within the context of our national, provincial, and local conversations his act seems to be a one-way proposition

given how little he had and how much so many of us have. In terms of the elections, this man and the many more like him are at best a postscript for the choosing of those who will represent us.

And on social media I see more and more pronounced judgements by many who look down upon anyone who is using our inadequate safety net; saying that they’re tired of these people and their unwillingness to work. So easy to say these things, so easy to throw a judgement out in public, so easy to click “Like.” Not so easy to look deeper and understand these problems, to see their complexity, and to try to then do something meaningful about it. Much easier to cast a judgement and move on to the next item on your Facebook feed.

in the end perhaps we can take a lesson from the man in the parking lot and his generosity of spirit. Perhaps those of us with the means, and the willingness to use our vote and voice can perhaps try to raise our own generosity of spirit to match this man’s. Perhaps with this we could filing some important gaps in the conversation going on right now. Perhaps this is an opportunity to do something a little different and change the focus. After all, it takes such little generosity on our part and provides such important opportunities for those in need.

When Jimmy Kimmel Cried

Posted on by
Reply

There has been much outrage and outrageousness over the brutal killing of Cecil the Lion, including the very authentic moment when late night host Jimmy Kimmel was visibly moved over how the animal was killed. My social media feeds for the last four days have been overwhelmed by a deluge of posts on the lion including calls for the perpetrator of the killing, a Minnesota Dentist, to be hunted himself. Yesterday morning, between the time when I was eating breakfast and listening to the radio while driving to work, I noticed something that left me a little troubled.

First was this story posted on my Facebook feed, “International report confirms: 2014 was Earth’s warmest year on record“ and then came, “Canada offers up to $8.3M in fight against ISIS” with this line in particular leaving me shaken, “Naked women are sold at market like cattle, with manuals on how to sell slaves and deal with them.”  Then this came up, “France deploys riot police at Calais as migrants try to rush Channel Tunnel” where Prime Minister Cameron of Great Britain has offered to send dogs and chain link fence to deal with the issue of the economically displaced. And then there was “Verdict in Mohamed Fahmy retrial postponed until August” about a Canadian journalist who is still being held in Egypt. Or “Attacker stabs six people during Israel gay pride parade” about an ultra-orthodox man recently released from prison who had stabbed people at a parade five years previously and did the same thing again.  All of this I read in the space of the hour when I eat my breakfast and when I get to work.

While the issue of Cecil the Lion and the way this animal was butchered is tragic, I was struck by the lack of comparative attention to these other stories involving the lives of people around the world. I mean women and children being sold at sex slave markets with instruction manuals should create some outrage one would think, or the fact that thousands of economically displaced people from Libya to Afghanistan are trying to jump on to moving trains and trucks, where five have died, in order to get to Great Britain because they want a better life, should cause some attention on Facebook or Twitter, no? Or the fact that our planet seems to be on a collision course for radically higher sea levels and rapid weather change that would affect millions should at least create some stir? But no. The story of Cecil the Lion not only consumed social media but was in heavy circulation on our radios and tv sets and North America was focused on that.

How did this happen? How did we end up so focused on the case of this lion and not on at least some of the stories, or thousands like them, above? Have we become so disconnected from the plight of our brothers and sisters on our planet that what happens to them doesn’t even register anymore? Have we been reduced to veering wildly from Cecil to cat videos to the billions of inspirational videos that we cannot even see through the noise to what is happening around us? Or have we become so overwhelmed with the complexity of our economies and environments, combined with the distraction of the small screen, that we can’t even begin to grasp how to look at and deal with these very human issues?

I don’t believe that most people “just don’t care” or that Gen Y is “self involved and lazy” or that Baby Boomers are ”all about their own money and power” or that the poor should “be able to pick themselves up by their own bootstraps” or any of the thousands of easy one-line responses to issues and problems that are deeply complex and are woven through our communities and planet. No, I believe that people are essentially good and that our fellow humans will go out of their way to help those who need it.

But maybe we have become more myopic in what we react to and maybe that myopia leads us to not be able to understand our place in the larger context of humanity and our planet. And maybe the world comes at us so fast and in such a customized way that much of the world is filtered from our view even as it is happening right in our own backyard. And maybe, in writing this to myself and in recognizing my own small world view, we can lift our eyes a little higher to see over the horizon to see a wider view of our world and our place in it. Cecil is a part of that story but so are the millions of people from our own downtowns to the middle east and across the World. I hope you’ll remind me to lift my eyes as you remember to lift your own and consider the bigger picture and hope that Jimmy and the rest of us are as moved by these issues as we are by Cecil.

Who we are: My Sisters Place

Posted on by
Reply

When we are faced as a community with the vulnerabilities of homelessness, poverty, mental illness and addictions, we are brought face to face with our own capacity to take responsibility for our own actions and the actions of the communities in which we live. When we examine this a little further, we are also faced with the inequities of race and gender. If we have any hope of looking our children in the eye when we tell them we want to leave them a better world, we must face these issues.

Many things are better. Over the last 200 years the global poverty rate has diminished year over year, equality is enshrined into many country’s laws, and quality of life has improved in many places. However, we still have miles to go before we sleep. This week I was deeply shaken by the news that My Sisters’ Place would not receive ongoing funding from The City of London. 

Many have written to our City Council about this and the story has been covered in our local media but the story still bears repeating here. My Sisters’ Place is focused on services for women in our community who face issues of homelessness, addiction and mental illness. My Sisters’ Place is an environment where these women, who often have little reason to trust, can feel safe and begin to get the help they need when they need it. This last bit, the help they need when they need it, is a critical one. This meets the women where they are, when they need it, and with the respect and compassion they deserve. The Important thing is no one else in our community does this work through this critical gender lens.

Women’s Community House & The Sexual Assault Centre of London do critical, brilliant work and are strong partners with My Sisters’ Place, but My Sisters’ Place does something different. They help find housing and create stability for women on the street. Unfortunately the issue of reduced funding, a total of $116,000, from The City of London faced by My Sisters’ Place, speaks volumes to the growing unease we have in finding an end the issues of poverty, homelessness, and equality.

City programs allow non-profits to apply, guided by City of London staff, to a fund that meets a community need. The non-profit, in this case My Sisters’ Place, then creates the documentation and the reason they need this funding and what outcomes they will meet if successful. This is a very long and involved process that can often take months of work. What is important to understand is that My Sisters’ Place already receives funding through the Community Homelessness Prevention Initiative. My Sisters’ Place was denied funding, for which they had previously been successful, for the Housing First/Homelessness Prevention Strategy which is a part of the Federal Governments Homeless Partnering Strategy funding. 

The decision was made by a group of volunteers made up of representatives of the London Homeless Coalition Steering Committee, London Police Service, Middlesex London Health Unit, London Public Library, United Way of London and Middlesex, Service Canada and the City of London. The staff of My Sisters’ Place did not have an opportunity to make a presentation on the merits of their application to this panel or any opportunity to answer their concerns. Nor do we know how the application was presented or framed for the members of the committee. 

In terms of process then, we had City staff directing an organization regarding where and how to apply, guiding them through that process, the application presented to a committee without representation by My Sisters’ Place, and were notified that $116,000/year was no longer available to serve the women of My Sisters’ Place.

I have complete confidence that the volunteers on this committee acted in good faith and made a decision with the best information they had at the time. But the question remains is whether that information was enough to provide a context for this decision given My Sisters’ Place did not present nor have an opportunity to answer questions or concerns? Perhaps, but we do not know.

We cannot blame our City Council for this circumstance either as they had no part of this decision at all. I am aware that many members of Council have supported My Sisters’ Place in the past and believe in their work. There is an appeal process fro My Sisters Place but if it is to staff as opposed to council then we continue with the issues stated above.

In the end though, the circumstances of this decision are irrelevant.

What is relevant is that a community organization that supports the most vulnerable women in our community, and already raises funds to cover 70% of their operating costs, is now left with a serious and damaging hole in the work they do. The effect will not be closing the doors of My Sisters’ Place. The effect will be a reduction of services for these women who already have so little and face huge barriers.

What does this say about us? What does this say about London?

While I am excited by the work I do on city building, the plans our community has for rapid transit, The London Plan, and our Mayor’s call to make London the startup capital of Canada, we cannot, nor should we ever, create a future in which our most vulnerable are left behind to watch us fade from view while we move forward toward a brighter future. But a future without them?

The consequence of this decision does not represent the spirit of this community nor the very generous way it has continually stepped up and faced the issues of homelessness, addictions, and mental illness. Nor does it represent the belief our community has that Women are as valued as Men irrespective of circumstance. 

If we want to leave a better world then we have to accept responsibility for that and act on our beliefs and not just mouth them. Ensuring that vulnerable women are served in London through the lens and uniqueness of gender is a part of that action. My Sisters’ Place then becomes a concrete example of our commitment to that belief and action. From this perspective, how can the City of London  not continue to fund My Sisters’ Place?

I am confident that the citizens of London will say that we must support these women and fund My Sisters’ Place. Because that’s who Londoners are. Not willing to leave the vulnerable behind.

Sensationalism, mental illness, and the London Free Press

Posted on by
3

It was with alarm that I became aware of an article by London Free Press reporter Jonathon Sher about Bethesda House, LHSC, and mental illness where Mr. Sher made some broad assumptions about not only those who have a mental illness, but about how we, as citizens of London should feel about them and the places where they are treated. The fact is that 1 in 5 of us has, or will have in the course of our lives, a mental illness. My personal  experience has been documented in other posts here, here, and here. I also have direct experience with advocating at all levels for the need for increased support for those with a mental illness.

Our own parliament defines mental health as:“Mental health is defined as the capacity to feel, think and act in ways that enhance one’s ability to enjoy life and deal with challenges.” 

Mental illness is defined by the Public Health Agency of Canada as: “Mental illnesses are characterized by alterations in thinking, mood or behaviour associated with significant distress and impaired functioning.”

The Canadian Psychiatric Association quite rightly points our the dangers of how we define mental illness saying, “Mental illness and mental disorder are not easy to define. Misunderstandings lead to misuse and abuse of the terms, reinforce myths, and even prevent people from getting help when it is really needed.

The media has shaped many of the ways we think of people with mental illness through movies and TV like Psycho, American and Dexter, watching the real-life drama of Charlie Sheen and Bi-Polar/Bi-winning, or the sensational news stories of murderous rampages. We often don’t think  of people with mental health issues as having a medical and treatable illness. Mental illness makes many people very uncomfortable and since it is an “invisible” illness, it’s hard for us to understand the circumstances of a person with a mental illness in the same way we might if a person had cancer or a serious physical disability.

In the article published by the Free Press, of which there are two versions (version one and version two), there is an implication that some possibly dangerous people will be moving into the recently acquired Bethesda House and that the public need to be informed. The title of the article on May 15th was “London Health Sciences Centre’s secret: Program for psychotic disorders could move to former Bethesda Centre” and it opened with the following sentence, “London’s largest hospital is considering moving a program for adolescents and young adults with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders into a residential neighbourhood.“ The headline and first sentence are written in a way as to sensationalize this issue by implying that LHSC intentionally kept the move a “secret” because they feared the community’s response. Mr. Sher is perpetuating a stereotype that people with mental illnesses should be feared.  

Emphasizing  this point at the end of the first sentence Sher says, “a possibility officials didn’t acknowledge until pressed repeatedly by The Free Press.”  So not only is a threat moving into residential neighbourhoods, but it’s being hidden by our local hospital. The article goes on to say, “London Health Sciences Centre announced Wednesday what appeared to be unambiguous good news for the London neighbourhood tucked behind the Children’s Museum .“ So now we not only is there danger and a cover up, but Mr. Sher has made sure to let us know that it will be close to a children’s play facility. All of this in the first 57 words of his article. 

The article goes on to to explain that at first it was supposed to be only an eating disorders program moving to Bethesda but, “It was only after The Free Press insisted on a response that the head of the hospital acknowledged Thursday that PEPP might be moved.” What is PEPP? PEPP stands for the Prevention and Early Intervention Program for Psychoses which, according to the website for the program is, “a community-focused mental health program which provides prompt assessment and comprehensive, phase-specific medical and psychosocial treatment for individuals experiencing their first episode of psychosis. The program is structured around a modified assertive case management model. The intensity of the treatment is guided by the patient’s needs, the family’s needs and the stage of illness.” This program is designed to provide an early intervention to help teens and young adults in preventing serious mental illness. I worry however that these young people may stay away after the way these articles have framed them as a potential danger. Young adults are self-conscious enough about how they are viewed and as a result of these articles they may never go to PEPP to get the help they need.

The article, with help from an anonymous source inside the PEPP program, goes on to say  “We all find it odd that our clinic (PEPP) was left off of the letter. I think residents in the area should know just what kind of clinic is moving into their area,” and further states “There’s such a stigma in mental health and not including PEPP on the announcement isn’t helping matters,” a staff member wrote in an e-mail to The Free Press.”   What is troubling here is the seemingly incongruous statements of “I think area residents should know just what kind of clinic is moving into the area” and then to discuss stigma “There’s such a stigma in mental health and not including PEPP on the announcement isn’t helping matters.” So we have a statement that residents should be warned and then a statement about the stigma for those with mental illnesses. A warning on the one hand and then the pointing to the damage of stigma on the other. 

The second article, which uses the same website address as the first, is headlined with “Neighbours cry foul at LHSC’s handling of possible move of psychoses program to residential area“ and again starts with the alarmist opening sentence, “A London hospital might move a program for those with schizophrenia and other psychoses into a residential neighbourhood.”  Very much like the first article, Mr.Sher has linked mental illness with the inference of danger moving into a residential neighbourhood. Much of the next several paragraphs are the same as the first article then we have the response from neighbours, “The lack of disclosure upset neighbours, who received notices from the hospital that made no mention of the psychoses program.” Again the inference of some cover up of danger by not sharing this information with the neighbours. 

Both articles imply that mental illness is dangerous and the hospital is trying to cover up the move of PEPP and at the end of each article, the following poll appears. “Would you be upset if a program for people with psychotic disorders moved into your neighbourhood? “ I’m not sure The London Free Press could be any less ambiguous about the linking of those with a mental illness to causing disruption and danger to a neighbourhood. This insensitivity to those with mental illness leads to increased stigma and prejudice and is being amplified by the very large reach of our local newspaper.

I have no argument that LHSC should have been much more thoughtful about the potential move of these programs. They seem to have dropped the ball and it also seems to me that in this case there are some employees with an axe to grind about the program’s move and because they had that axe to grind they contacted The London Free Press. Fair enough, and so they should, but to then create the kind of connections the article did between implied danger and young adults with serious mental health issues is sensational, insensitive and unfeeling. If a diabetes program were to move into the neighbourhood would Mr. Sher be as compelled to shine the light of journalism on this issue? If the hospital hid plans to move a geriatric specialist  into the neighbourhood should we not also be worried?  All those old people are coming from somewhere and they’re coming to your neighbourhood! No, of course not, but in these articles this medical and physical illness is being ostracized for reasons I am having trouble understanding.

The lives of people with mental illnesses are hard enough without articles like these coming out and re-instilling false fears. We don’t need to be worried about the mentally ill living amongst us for indeed they already are and have always done so. Mr. Sher’s article has made it just that much harder for people with a mental illness, including those I love, to be accepted for who they are. I’m not sure why Mr. Sher reported this story with this slant but perhaps next time he covers mental health he could be a little less cavalier about linking mental illness with danger and perhaps a little more thoughtful about the impact this kind of writing has on our fellow Londoners with a mental illness. We could all learn a lesson here and exposing stigma and prejudice about mental illness is not only for Mental Health Day, in my house and in our community, it should be everyday. 

Our newspaper should better serve our community and not resort to this kind of sensational reporting. Most of the time it does this, but in the case of these two articles there is a lot of room for improvement. I hope that happens and I hope Mr. Sher pauses next time before increasing the prejudice and stigma of mental illness by linking it to cover ups and implied danger. Those with a mental illness and their families have enough of a burden already without the added weight of this kind of sensational reporting.

Try

Posted on by
2

As I look around, read books, follow twitter, watch movies, consider elections, I notice that much of my focus and many of our our discussions are inward looking and smaller than what came before us. These small things incite us to banter back and forth rasher than lift our eyes to ideas that are larger than ourselves. Even when discussing homelessness, poverty, suffering, the conversation will inevitably drift toward who is doing what wrong or sputter out in a tacit acknowledgement that we have no power to change any of this. We are, myself a prime example, small people unable to narrate a story that goes beyond  our own small selves.

This is a harsh idea and even in writing this I want to erase it as a blasphemy against my own self delusion and scream that this is not me. I want to  write that there a great things afoot, portents of momentous change, tides of deep and powerful currents that will wash up upon the beach something tremendous and true. But that is not the case.

If we zoom out and look at ourselves over the last 150 years we discover something interesting. Tsunamis of innovation and social change drove us forward at break neck speeds until we began to slow – somewhere in the late 60’s or 70’s. It is true that in that time we erupted in terrible world consuming wars but we also changed the lives of a large part of the worlds population for the better. The 1st and 2nd industrial revolutions spurred the creation of women’s rights enshrined in law, the rise of the right of minorities, the lifting out of poverty of millions of families, the gift of eduction to billions that could never achieve it before, the eradication of life destroying diseases, the birth of non violence as means to political change. We took flight around the world and to the moon, we built computers where none had ever existed, we understood the mysteries of the building blocks of life, we created institutions of learning and community that spanned continents, and in Canada we decided that health and well being weren’t only for the the wealthy but were a right of every Canadian. We shone in our quest to move beyond ourselves and explore uncharted waters of human endeavour. We were, despite our flaws, magnificent.

But since the slowdown began to happen what have we achieved? Someone from 1960 would not feel so out of place in 2013. In fact I believe they’d wonder why we hadn’t achieved more. They probably would have wondered why we didn’t continue on that magnificent trajectory. Why hadn’t we ended hunger and poverty on our planet? Why haven’t we sent humankind to live on other worlds? Why haven’t we stretched ourselves in understanding and compassion?. Why haven’t we inscribed in every corner of the planet, in every village and city, on every heart and hearth, laws that protect and enrich us all rather than those that protect what we have? Why? There is no doubt in my mind that if we had had the will to do these things, to take what was given to us and build upon it. the planet would be cleaner, we would be safer, and everyone better for it. We chose, an important word that chose, to not do these things.

Now it would be easy, and understandably so, to hide behind the notion of our own lack of individual influence and power. But we can’t really do that can we? We chose not to do these bigger things. We chose not to end suffering in other parts of the world, we chose not to be serious about the state of our planet, we chose not invest in education and health care, we chose not to demand of our governments to abolish the humiliation of poverty, we chose not to demand of ourselves and each other something larger than ourselves. We stay small, stare inwardly, and shut the world from our ears so that we can live our comfortably small lives. Most of us don’t even show up to participate in the the one thing that lifted us all up to begin with – we don’t even vote.

In writing this I acknowledge my own complicity in everything i have criticized and chances are that tomorrow, or next week, or next year I will go back to continuing down the path I always have. But shouldn’t I at least try to lift my eyes a little higher? Shouldn’t we at least stop looking inward, even for an hour, and look beyond our own small lives and consider something larger? I hope we do. On Thursday some of you can do this here in London. You can go to the polls and vote and that can be your rebellion in the the face of smallness. Revolutions have been started with much, much less. Maybe you will continue on looking outward and remind me when my gaze drops to the ground that I need to keep looking up. Maybe you won’t. But we should try. Shouldn’t we at least do that?. Try.

Culmination

Posted on by
Reply

This last Wednesday I had the privilege of speaking at Ignite London. Ignite is a series of talks presented by people from the community with ideas about which they are passionate. The format of the talks is simple. Five minutes and twenty slides auto advanced every fifteen seconds to make your point. The format is straight forward but the work in getting there, well not so simple.

My talk was about the power of community to use social media and the web to share ideas but how there is trouble translating this to a focused local effort in London.

The reason it was hard to get to the point where I could make that presentation wasn’t because of the writing or the slides but in the experiences I had to have and the work I had to put in order to get to the point where I could write it. This is true for anyone who cares passionately about something and the drive that builds within them to share that passion with the people around them. My passion is for community.

For me it has been a strange journey from the privilege of creating and teaching art to  personal and family struggles to advocacy to work in a non-profit to friendships developed along the way to my latest job as an executive director and my work with a group of citizens eager to change the world. All those experiences culminated in a five minute presentation to a group of people who mostly did not who I was or how my journey led me to that moment and how that has culminating in this writing.

The reason I am sharing this with you is that I want you to imagine the billions of other journeys that have led or will lead to similar moments around the world. A farmer in India or an engineer in Israel or a teacher in Kenya or a mother in the Ukraine or a nurse in Turkey or a homeless person in Arizona. All of these people have had a series of moments that led them to the moments of culmination in which something has happened. Something small and human or something monumental and world-changing and every one of those paths are connected to our own in some small or large way. That is miraculous. That all of these lives on this tiny blue orb in this vast universe continue to cross each others paths and culminate in moments that we all have in common.

I am comforted by that. Comforted by the knowledge that there are billions of others on a journey that has common cause with mine. The common cause of life that I can share and help or be helped on my journey through life . We have opportunities to offer and receive that is the result of the culmination of our experiences that lead us to that moment. That moment of connection.That moment of sharing our story. That moment of comfort.

Think of that as you go about your day. Your life culminates continuously in the opportunity to share your story and to offer and receive comfort from your fellow human beings. I live in a world of wonder and woe but am grateful to be sharing that with all of you. Am grateful to be able to offer and receive.

City of Opportunity III – Resolve

Posted on by
Reply

Those of us who were hoping against hope for a change of heart by certain members of council last night all faced a hard lesson in a number of ways. For some it was that the best arguments don’t often win the day, for others it was the shocking display of naked one-upmanship, for a few it was about the anger at those councilors who would say anything to win an argument, but for me it was simply about one lesson.

I was amazed in the last 10 days at the generosity of friends, acquaintances, and complete strangers who rallied around the issues I was facing with my last two blog posts and the reaction by Councilor White and was often left speechless by the unqualified expressions of support and understanding. I am grateful to all of you who supported me through that difficult time but I also stood rapt by the power of the community to come together so quickly and with such focus around the issue of affordable housing which council was about to cut anyway.

In a matter of days we collectively went from vague unease to outright, full-blown advocacy on behalf of those in our city who could not be heard. I saw tweets, Facebook posts, blogs, and in person conversation that gathered together in numbers that the powers in City Hall heard clearly and could not be lightly ignored. We decided we would not stand for cuts that would leave behind our fellow citizens whether they had disabilities or needed a home. We knew and believed that London should be a city that was about our collective good not expedient cuts to justify a policy that our current circumstances had determined was no longer relevant. I was held rapt by the potential of community.

In the last year we have gone through a trial by fire in London and more and more of us are waking up to the fact that we are afraid for our future and that the only way to overcome this fear is to face it openly and transparently, to consider not just our own well-being but the wellbeing of every one of our neighbors as well. We are learning that the world has changed and the only way for us to succeed is to make sure no one is left behind and that the basics of housing, health, and dignity are not open to negotiation.

But because we create community at the speed of light, an idea expressed brilliantly by Glen Pearson, other things can as quickly distract us. Social Media as a means of community building is like quicksilver and flows along the path of least resistance and at this critical time we cannot afford to be distracted.

I am not assigning blame here, I often get as distracted quicker than most, but I am pointing out that we must understand our goals, focus our resolve, and not be distracted by anything until the issues of economic equality, environment, livability, intelligent growth, and fairness in London are achieved. Once we achieve them, and I have great faith in my community that we can, we cannot ever let them be taken away or watered down. This is not only about politics and running for office but is also about continually gathering an authentically engaged community and applying a steady tide of pressure to those who hold public office in our name so that they understand that we demand more than only our participation at the ballot box.

So I’m asking you all friends to think, to talk, to gather, to move forward, to not be distracted, and build upon the amazing accomplishment you all made in the last week. Let us decide to throw out the old ways of power, and create for ourselves and for our neighborurs a place that we can proudly say is city of opportunity for all.

City of Opportunity II – I speak as a Londoner

Posted on by
7

I must begin this post by stating clearly: I  AM IN NO WAY REPRESENTING THE OPINION OR POSITION OF ANY ORGANIZATION OR GROUP AND THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED HERE AND ON THIS WEB SITE ARE SOLELY MY OWN AND ARE NOT ENDORSED BY ANY ORGANIZATION OR GROUP

Councilor White in the previous Blog Post to this asked a question at the beginning. She asked ” Will you kindly clarify your comment about the Glen Cairn Centre? Are you speaking for them or as the Emerging Leaders, ED?”  Respectfully I have never claimed publicly nor privately to speak for Glen Cairn Centre or on behalf of Emerging Leaders who is my current employer. I ask Councilor White that when she called my previous employer and current employer Friday to complain about me was she speaking as a City Councilor or as someone who works for Children Aid Society or as a Private Citizen? Does she represent the City of London Council when she handles a CAS case? Does she represent CAS when she speaks at council? Or is she or any other Londoner allowed to speak out when they see something they disagree with?

I have never once spoken on behalf of Emerging Leaders or Glen Cairn Centre here or on Facebook, and would never do so, without express permission. The problem becomes when this happens it has a chilling effect on free speech and citizen engagement. But so be it, I can not be silent, even if it has personal consequences for me and my family.

Councilor White and the Mayor have made some points in defending their position. But the heart of the matter remains and while both of them and others have direct experience with people in poverty and Londoners with mental health issues so do I both within my family and amongst many friends. I have advocated my entire life both privately and publicly on behalf of those who are most often left behind because it affects my life and the life of my City, Province, and Country.

Mayor Fontana had posted the following in response to the outcry on the cuts to affordable housing, he did this on Facebook and I post it here unedited and in it’s entirety:

“With a reduction in the contribution into the Affordable Housing Program, we will be shifting our approach to affordable housing. Right now there are a number of vacant units out there and a lot of individuals and families who need them. Instead of focusing on building all new units, our focus is shifting to filling existing units and entering into public private partnerships to convert exisiting spaces (like commercial space no longer being used as commercial space) into affordable housing. It’s a different approach, but it’s still a good approach and we will be able to increase the number of people we can help. London has done incredible unique things and we will continue to do so.

Affordable HousingThe reduced funding for the Program will result in a strategic shift from creation of a maximum number of permanent units to an emphasis on creating housing measures in the shorter term.Changes were made to legislation January 1, 2012. The New Housing Services Act repeals Social Housing Reform Act and gives the City of London as Service Manager more flexibility and discretion within local rules.This will give our housing experts the needed flexibility to create new housing policy and new housing programs based on the needs of Londoners, moving away from the previous prescriptive approach set out by the province.This shift in strategy is designed to achieve greater efficiency in using the City’s housing funds: 
• Families and individuals will have access to housing. While fewer permanent rental units will be created, the number of families who can quickly be accommodated in short term housing will be more than doubled. 
• The City can leverage the same amount of federal and provincial funding. 
• Jobs continue to be created through construction and renovation projects. 

Working within our funding, we will be using a combination of:
• convert to rent units (increase)
• creating more short term rental supplements (increase)
• home ownership program
• building new affordable housing units (decrease)

Affordable housing right now means keeping people in their homes.”

I think there are a couple of key points here to pay close attention to and to understand more fully and to seek clarification on.  I notice in this post the Mayor states ” a strategic shift from creation of a maximum number of permanent units to an emphasis on creating housing measures in the shorter term.” . Notice some important words here?  An emphasis on creating housing measures in the shorter term? This will mean an increase in temporary housing and not permanent housing.

It’s important to note this as well: “While fewer permanent rental units will be created, the number of families who can quickly be accommodated in short term housing will be more than doubled. ” .  Fewer rental units and more short term or temporary housing.
What we need to recognize here is that we are in every case reducing the number of permanent homes as a means to achieve a 0% tax increase. We also need to understand there is an 8+ year waiting list for permanent housing and while moving more families into temporary housing may be attractive in the short term we will in fact be delaying the issue at the expense of those most vulnerable and  sadly who is to say that that temporary housing budget will be there in a year or 3 years or 5.
We also need to understand the economic as well as the human impact of this cut. Abe Oudshoorn ,a recognized voice in homelessness and housing issues, wrote in his blog “this means that the $1M cut to the Housing Reserve Fund represents a potential $8M loss, or at $140,000 per unit, 57 units of affordable housing not built.  Each new unit also represents 2 person years of full-time employment.“
Abe goes on to say ” affordable housing represents a much cheaper way to house people who are experiencing homelessness.  Housing an individual in shelter costs $1,450 per month, jail costs $140 per day, psychiatric acute care costs $650 per day, and acute care inpatient over $1,000 daily.  These statistics are clearly outlined in your Council-approved London Community Housing Strategy.  Therefore, putting money into housing up-front saves us much greater costs down the line.” You can read the whole post here
Councilor Joni Baechler wrote on her Facebook page ” In My Opinion
Some members of council indicated they support the cut in Affordable Housing by $ 1Million because of the “Mayor’s plan” presented to committee yesterday. To be clear, there was NO plan presented. The Mayor simply outlined how he would divert the Affordable Housing $’s. What may have been missed by some councillors was the “KEY MESSAGE” from staff on the briefing note which states: “The reduced funding from the Program will result in a STRATEGIC SHIFT from the creation of a MAXIMUM number of PERMANENT units to an emphasis on creating shorter term TEMPORARY housing MEASURES”. The plan presented is a significant divergence from the Council adopted COMMUNITY HOUSING STRATEGY. Staff DID NOT recommend the budget cut in this area.As a result of this cut, we will not be able to leverage the same $$’s in order to meet our housing targets ($20 M in municipal housing dollars has leveraged $140 M from other sources). We will construct 75 less units per year which results in the loss of 72 associated jobs. The “temporary plan” does not address the housing crisis as year after year we will fall further behind.The cut to Affordable Housing is permanent. It will temporarily solve a fiscal shortfall on the backs of the poorest and most vulnerable in our community“
Important in what Councilor Baechler states is that Staff recommended against these cuts and that we will not be able to leverage these dollars and we will construct 75 less units per year.
So despite assertions to the contrary we are left with the same terrible loss at the expense of those that can afford it the least, but if we can focus and share our concerns with Council and the Mayor for just one week ,as so many on twitter and email and by phone have, then maybe, just maybe, we can convince a thoughtful Councilor or a thoughtful Mayor to change their vote and end this tragedy and begin to create a city of opportunity for everyone.

The Best Opportunity We Have

Posted on by
1

We are having a hard time right now in the Forest City.  There’s a strike at Electro Motive Diesel, Unemployment is around 10%, and there are some 3500 people per month needing to use the London Food Bank. So what are we to do? Our Mayor, Joe Fontana, gave a speech on the state of the city and we got a song about London being the city of opportunity. Doesn’t feel like that right now though.

And while we could collectively shrug our shoulders and sigh there are people in London who are trying to create change, are agitating against the common belief that there is nothing we can do, and are trying to create a more meaningful community. People like Abe Oudshoorn who is ringing the bell on homelessness, companies like rtraction, Echidna Solutions , Orpheum Web Hosting, and so many of those in our local unions  who give back to the community again and again.

Then there’s the group I have been working with over the last few months, the Citizens Panel. Born out of a want to engage and a request through Glen Pearson by the City to engage other citizens, we are trying to create meaningful dialogue and change around the questions of social assistance and how we support those in our community who are the most disadvantaged. You can come and talk to us and your fellow citizens about this on January 29th 2012 @ 1 pm. At the Convention Centre..

We have groups like Pillar, The United Way, Glen Cairn Community Resource Centre, The Food Bank, The Sisters of St.Joeseph, London Community Foundation, and my new place of employment Emerging Leaders, where people can get involved and add to the discussion and work of who we are and where we are going in concrete ways. Yet still this is not enough.

Shakespeare said through the lines of Hamlet “What a piece of work is a man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable, in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god!, the beauty of the world, the paragon of animals”. Powerful words those. They speak of “our better angels”. And right now we need those qualities to be put to use in London. To be applied to questions of economics, wellbeing, and the commitment to how and where we live.

So many of you, and yes me to, don’t show up and don’t engage when those better angels we all have speak to us and ask us too. Times are tough and are likely to remain tough for some time to come and that is why now is the very best of times to look around you and ask where can I add my voice? Where can I contribute my time and labour? Where can I offer some of what I have to those that might need it, be that financial, spiritual, or emotional?

We have so much potential here in London but it is only realized through our combined efforts towards a common goal of community and caring. In order for that to happen we need you .We need you on the line at EMD, or volunteering in your neighbourhood, or asking questions and sharing your opinions with our leaders, or on the 29th at the convention centre. Add your industry to those mentioned above and join in on what may be the beginning of what may be the best opportunity we have.