David is an ODSP recipient from the Cornwall area who became disabled and was forced into Social Assistance in late 1994 while in the final stages of receiving his Master's Degree in Political Science/ Political Theory.

Currently David is doing Organic Vegetable Farming that began as therapy and has evolved into an ongoing operation. This is causing him to become directly and intimately in conflict with ODSP, their policies and procedures.

His main argument against ODSP is:

The dominant criteria to be on ODSP is that the government of Ontario must agree the person is medically disabled, financial need is a secondary and somewhat flexible criteria. Every restriction and prohibition that applies only to disabled people on ODSP is discrimination because of medical disability. The Ontario Government via the Ontario Disability Support Program Act is the single largest source of discrimination against Ontario's disabled people.

---

David was selected for the story he has to share with fellow ODSP recipients, his dedication to bring awareness to the unjust methods that ODSP recipients are subjected to and his ongoing actions to bring pressure to bear on ODSP and the provincial government for change. David is a great example of persistence, faith, hope and knowledge. He has taken a non-violent, legal stance and is prepared to follow the path given him. David, aka "Crazy Dave" has had many doors shut in his journey and he still keeps going, it was felt that a web presence for his activities and ODSP struggle would help bring more awareness and benefit all recipients.

---

As outlined quickly in the intro David is a university undergrad who has spent many hours studying the Political arena. After his breakdown that led to his arrival on ODSP David made definite steps to plan a recovery and again try to regain his independence.

After suffering a severe episode of mental instability David signed himself into the Royal Ottawa Hospital, a mental hospital in Ottawa, and was eventually diagnosed as bi-polar, put on Zoloft and on social assistance. He created his own "psychiatric recovery therapy" that was endorsed by his psychiatrist. His plan was to go to the country, grow organic vegetables, get healthy, and get off social assistance. David has accomplished most of his goals. He started organic vegetable farming, got good at it, got a lot healthier, and then told ODSP what he was doing. By that time David knew that ODSP would be extracting the most financial recovery it could and he wanted to fight them. Thankfully David had also done a lot of human rights research at the university.

The tactic David chose to challenge ODSP was to demand the freedom to hire farm workers and claim them as an ODSP approved business expense. He did this because ODSP does not allow wages paid to workers, by a self-employed entrepreneur on ODSP, to be claimed as a business expense although Revenue Canada allows these wages to be claimed as a business expense. ODSP says wages paid out to employees are earned income that must be deducted from the ODSP recipient's cheque. This whole concept seemed very discriminatory to David as I am sure they seem strange to you also. The proof of the penalty on disallowing employee wages is in the ODSP farm income directive and the ODSP self-employment directive.

David figured out that every single Director's Decision, Internal Review Decision and SBT decision violates the Charter Rights of the disabled defendant. He won the support of McGuinty and his Liberal MPP when they were in opposition, he even has letters letters that were written to him as evidence. However, once McGuinty was elected he just 'forgot' about the whole issue and David has seen no further Liberal support from Mr. McGuinty.

David feels strongly that his work proves that every single person ever punished by ODSP was discriminated against because of medical disability. The ODSP process violates the Charter Rights of the disabled person. This means that some day, theoretically, every single ODSP punishment decision will have to be struck down because the disabled person's rights were violated. The cost will be horrendous and he is very concerned about a backlash against disabled people who seek compensation. David is trying to be the good example by not seeking compensation. He only wants the Ontario Government to get with the program of the 21st century and provide ODSP recipients with the life guaranteed them by existing legislation on Human Rights. Someday, perhaps, thousands of disabled people on ODSP will be able to say "I was violated, they violated my rights". It won't matter if the person actually violated a rule or not, they never got a fair hearing so theoretically the decision against them must be struck down. The Liberals, and before them the Conservatives know all about this problem, it is part of why they are stonewalling. The recent Spouse in the House decision won a ruling that discrimination against people on social assistance is unconstitutional. Theoretically the Liberals should have then ended all discrimination against people on Social Assistance, but they didn't, they just kept ignoring the problem and the discrimination continues. Someone, somewhere decided that the cost of stopping the discrimination was too high, and bet the odds that people like me always fail. I have not failed and I will not fail.

In all of David's writing and struggles with the government he maintains that he will stop his drive against ODSP if someone can prove to him the following:
Simply and clearly explain how the ODSP Act and associated regulations complies with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and further how the ODSP Act and associated regulations complies with the Ontario Human Rights Code.

Now there is a difficult choice to face. If we expose and receive proper recognition for the problem of discrimination that is inherent within the ODSP legislation and operation it will be very expensive, taxpayers will be very angry, and we will face a new, very public debate about who should get social assistance, how much, and why. This may or may not create a solution better than the current problems. David decided long ago that he would push the issue and hope for the best. Are you willing to join in the struggle to help overcome the blatant disregard that our Provincial Governments have for the legislation they expect everyone else but themselves to honour.

In closing remember that David uses a classic human rights argument:
To protect the human rights of any individual, we must protect the human rights of every individual. Diminishing the human rights of any person diminishes the human rights of every person.

---

To Top

Menu