Quixote's Horse: Workfare - Little Brother Watches Back

Little Brother Watches Back

Big Brother is Watching.
Little Brother Watches Back. - graffiti on a Cobourg wall

"Effective May 31, 1999 your assistance will be CANCELED. This decision was made under REGULATIONS 18 and 20 of the Ontario Works Act and Regulations."

With that terse statement the local OW office responded to my creed based refusal to sign the "Part 2" portion of the Ontario Works application (the so-called "Participation Agreement"). I filed the obligatory Request for an Internal Review, received the obligatory upholding of the Administrative Decision and fired off the Appeal to the SBT along with a request for interim benefits.

And I waited. No interim benefits.

It was no surprise.

Perhaps some of you have forgotten the "poor bashing" political climate at the time. The Ontario Works Act was deliberately drafted to contain vague, undefined terms ("The better to cut you off.", sneered the Big Bad Wolf) and the following unbelievably unconstitutional slap in our collective faces:

s.67(2) The Tribunal shall not inquire into or make a decision concerning,
(a) the constitutional validity of a provision of an Act
or a regulation; ...

Translation: Apparently the Ontario government became rather annoyed when the predecessor to the Social Benefits Tribunal (the Social Assistance Review Board, or SARB) ruled in the famous "Spouse in the House" Falkiner case that social services and the Ontario government had no right to poke their intrusive noses into the bedrooms of social assistance recipients. SARB had cited the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Subsequently, the Court of Appeal held that 'receipt of social assistance' was an analogous (and thus protected) ground of discrimination under s.15 (discrimination) of the Charter. Although leave to appeal the case to the Supreme Court of Canada was granted to the province, the appeal was discontinued.

So did the government respond by bringing their legislation and policies in line with the Charter? Silly wabbit! Of course not! The government promptly included the legislative cite above in the Ontario Works Act and the Social Benefits Tribunal dutifully proceeded to simply ignore Charter based appeals and appeals based upon the Ontario Human Rights Code.

Do you remember US President Clinton's public spokesperson creating a bit of a stir with his (in)famous quip, "stroke of the pen, law of the land"? In a similar act of utter disdain for your democratic legal rights, the Ontario government slyly declared that it had the right to deny the legislatively protected human rights of welfare recipients... and of course that meant they were now taking the position that they had the right to deny your human rights too whenever they felt like it. They have been busy little bees doing exactly that ever since. In case you missed the previous two installments of this account, let me repeat:

Human rights belong to you and not to governments... either to abrogate or bestow.

I personally believe that human rights come from God. Thus, the Ontario government was, from my Christian creed based perspective, insinuating itself between me and my God. That did it for me.

Others took a little more convincing.

First they came for...

It took a week, a visit to his office and then a visit to his Campaign Manager but John Gerretsen, M.P.P. finally provided a letter of guarded support addressed to Lance Thurston, Commissioner of Client Services and dated May 18, 1999 which included: "... would appreciate if you would reconsider re-instating his benefits during the period in which his file is being reviewed."

OK - it was not exactly an affirmation of my human rights but it did address that niggling but practical problem of how I was going to pay my rent and find enough to eat.

You guessed it - the local social services administrator simply ignored it.

On June 1, 1999 Kingston’s Low Income Needs Coalition organized an information picket outside the local social services office. After approximately one hour, a small representative group accompanied by local television and radio media proceeded inside to occupy the offices. We politely requested of social assistance personnel that interim benefits be granted immediately and that the obligation to sign the participation agreement be waived. The requests were not met although the local staff promised to request that my file be reviewed as quickly as possible. L.I.N.C. promised to return.

In a letter dated and delivered on June 4, 1999, Tanie Steacy, Manager, Program Delivery of the local social services office indicated that my SBT Appeal had arrived in Toronto but that a client service representative had not been assigned. There was still no indication that interim benefits would be forthcoming.

On June 7, 1999 Kingston’s Low Income Needs Coalition organized a larger occupation of the local social services office. This noisy demonstration again featured television and radio coverage as well as the Kingston police. L.I.N.C. advised that the demonstrators would not leave until interim benefits were granted. After approximately an hour, the local staff shook off their apparent paralysis, contacted the SBT and an order granting Interim Benefits was immediately faxed to Kingston. The demonstrators then left peacefully. The entire city was treated to the pics of chanting demonstrators, fleeting shots of police in the back rooms and interviews with various participants.

The state had been caught unprepared, with its protocol pants down around its ankles, but it was not long in adapting.

In a letter addressed to L.I.N.C. dated June 15, 1999 (copied to Mayor Bennett, members of Council, John Gerretsen MPP, Peter Miliken MP, Bert Meunier CAO, K. Elizabeth Fulton Admin. Frontenac Mgt. Board, Bonnie McIsaac Prog. Super. Ministry of Community and Social Services) and signed by Tanie Steacy Manager program Delivery, Adele Lafrance Manager Administrative Services and Lance Thurston Commissioner Community Development Services, it was indicated that the social services office "will not engage in any customer service [sic] activities demanded by LINC through occupation, demonstration and\or disruption at our Social Services business [sic] place." I drafted a detailed reply to this challenging missive and sent it by e-mail to selected LINC members for critique. As far as I know, this reply was never sent. Big mistake... but it would be a while yet before the local activist community, still flush from the public relations victory, would realize it.

In a letter dated July 14, 1999, the SBT indicated that it would not "... inquire into or make a decision concerning... the constitutional validity... or legislative authority for a regulation made under the Act... The other matters... will go forward to a hearing."

Little Brother had grabbed an early battle victory but the City, the Province and the SBT served notice that this war was only just beginning. Every single step was destined to be contested. The next battle was to be with the Ontario Human Rights Commission itself. That one required international support and even a little divine intervention.

Part 4: Who Watches the Watchers (part 1)...

Top of the page

Table of Contents

Little Brother Watches Back

Part 4: Who Watches the Watchers (part 1)...