Dear Politicians
Dear Politicians we have a problem;
You seemed to be doing a good job of running the country as of late. No major hassles that we have picked up on…at least that we can see up to this point. You have survived the political stress of the people that oppose you – so far.
But today we (you and me) have a problem. It was the mailing that you sent to my house a few days ago. That mailing got me thinking. I suppose that is why you sent it – right?
The pamphlet that you sent me is a bit “off the wall” – coming from who knows where?
You know what it is trying to do I am sure. You, as a government, would not let just anybody say something, publish something, or send out something that wasn’t well thought through – would you?
The problem we have is – somebody goofed. The pamphlet is a little “off the wall”. It isn’t too well thought out – but maybe you guys are just too busy to really watch everything that is going out – right?
Just in case you haven’t seen it…
The pamphlet is black and white. The photo on the front has a bearded man slouched on an old couch. He is wearing an under shirt, he is holding a bottle of beer and smoking a cigarette. His listless gaze at the cameraman is clear. He could care less about anything. The word “jail?” in set in over the photo...making me think – ‘this is jail’? Have I got that part right? I think so.
Something I know here… this is a model posing for you…right? You paid him or someone for his photo. Because if it was taken at last winter’s Christmas party, you would have needed a ‘model release’ to put Uncle Charlie’s photo in your pamphlet – right?
But there is no indication that he is in trouble from the photo…except the word ‘jail?’ He kind of looks like some(many) of the ‘Ontario Works’ clients that I visit around our city. They have no job, no education, no employability, and sit at home watching TV, playing video games and surfing the ‘websites’.
There is a bigger problem inside…
Inside the pamphlet there is the ‘rub’. There in bold words is a BIG QUESTION.
~ Quote…
“Why should convicted thieves, arsonists and vandals serve their sentences watching TV, playing video games, and surfing “websites” on the internet?”
End quote ~
So let’s deal with this one question. Where the dickens did it come from? Are you trying to inflame a situation that is already painful the victims of these crimes that receive no help at all? Are you just trying to make them ‘feel better’ with feelings of inflicting further pain on another person.
But my guess is that the really bad people that you are trying to get us to address here are really teenagers that are really covered by the Youth Criminal Justice Act? – which you said you were going to fix… right?
Then the pamphlet throws me a ‘curve’. You say, “They shouldn’t”. and you continue with “The Conservative Government Supports Ending House arrest for Serious Offences”.
Both you and I know that this is a personal feeling of a few people – not your government. Your documents that are available on the Internet – on ‘websites’ – state otherwise.
Your Election Platform – 2006, A. Serious Crime, Serious Time section (ii) states…
(ii) End conditional sentences ("house arrest") for serious crimes, including designated violent and sexual offences, weapons offences, major drug offences, crimes committed against children, and Impaired driving causing death or serious injury.
If you can see the conflict here… section (ii) states clearly some very horrific crimes… your new pamphlet indicates a huge broadening of a net to include a whole lot more in it and REALLY GIVE IT TO THEM! Right?
Now here is the PROBLEM WE HAVE….
You want me to stop thinking. You want me to swallow something that is out right WRONG. That won’t change the crimes that have been committed at all. It will not likely make much difference in the way that they are dealt with either. But it may get you a few extra votes from silly people that are not thinking – either.
The pamphlets points strongly to the “…watching TV, playing video games, and surfing “websites” on the internet?”
Something you need to know – just in case the authors of the pamphlet didn’t tell you… there is TV in JAIL. DUH! In the Provincial system there is a TV for a group of 24 to 32 men. They live in one pod. They all watch the same TV program. If it one portion of the Pod Population is dominat – the less dominat dudes have to watch whatever the main guys want to.
Yes it is true - there are no video games in the provincial system nor is there internet.
In the Federal Prison system they also have TV. The Prison provides one Cable TV Provider to the whole correctional facility. One signal comes in and then with the help of outside technicians the cells are provided a cable hook up. Each man then works at a job inside where he is paid real money(on paper accounting). The real money is banked and when he has enough he buys a TV – maybe from another man that has an old one – or from another guy that is getting out. Each man then pays $30+ dollars a month to the Cable TV Provider. In a local institution there are 600 men – and each one has a TV with Cable. That means the Cable TV Provider makes an easy $18,000 off the guys that live there.
The TV is a sedative and baby sitter for guys that are killing time – one day, one week, one 22 year span at a time.
A while back some had bought simple computers and were taking classes to learn how to operate a computer. Some men had bought computer games with their money and spent huge amounts of time playing games. It was a huge baby sitting service. But that is basically all gone – a new “tough on crime and do your time the hard way” came in under the LIBERALS. Now guys coming out have no idea what to do with a computer… and are like so far behind that they will likely never catch up.
Pause…
My guess is the guy you have on your pamphlet photo is just out of prison and he is watching what his nephew is doing on a computer game – or on the internet “websites” – right? He hasn’t got a clue what is going on. So car theft makes a lot of sense – when you have few skills, no one will hire you, and you are a survivor or hard time and tough on crime politicians. Go figure… how did he get that way?
He hasn’t a clue what to do with the world around him.
Now if you want a real issue – how about the victims of crime? What is your platform stating about that one?
Every traffic ticket we pay, every fine levied there is an amount set aside for Victim’s of Crime. It is now a huge pot of money collecting interest somewhere – I have been told. And if a Victim of Crime needs assistance it is not really there for them without a royal nightmare to get any help.
Maybe if you took a new approach to your tough stance – and made the convicted thieves work at a job to pay for the property damage that they have done… that would be a good idea? But you have to give them a chance first! Right?
Maybe if the guy that started the fire was made to work for the contractor that has to rebuild the house that burned – he would prove to be an excellent worker and the contractor would keep him on?
Maybe if we helped the vandal start his own company to restore the property damage that was done…then have to hire other vandals… they would get a new appreciation of how hard it is to put back the damage. This new company would not pay them any more than their food and housing. Maybe they would have a new pride in what they would do.
Just encourage me with one thing… you are thinking men and women – right? And if you can promise me one thing – YOU WILL THINK TOO.
I promise you one thing as well – I WILL NOT STOP THINKING. And when really dumb things are in my mail box – I promise you that I will THINK about what is being stated. And when it is DUMB – I will tell you.
~ Pastor Murray Lincoln ~
Praying for all Politicians…
Resources:
SOCIAL POLICY PROPOSALS: CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA
http://www.casw-acts.ca/public/conservative_e.pdf
Conservative Platform
http://www.conservative.ca/media/20060113-Platform.pdf
You seemed to be doing a good job of running the country as of late. No major hassles that we have picked up on…at least that we can see up to this point. You have survived the political stress of the people that oppose you – so far.
But today we (you and me) have a problem. It was the mailing that you sent to my house a few days ago. That mailing got me thinking. I suppose that is why you sent it – right?
The pamphlet that you sent me is a bit “off the wall” – coming from who knows where?
You know what it is trying to do I am sure. You, as a government, would not let just anybody say something, publish something, or send out something that wasn’t well thought through – would you?
The problem we have is – somebody goofed. The pamphlet is a little “off the wall”. It isn’t too well thought out – but maybe you guys are just too busy to really watch everything that is going out – right?
Just in case you haven’t seen it…
The pamphlet is black and white. The photo on the front has a bearded man slouched on an old couch. He is wearing an under shirt, he is holding a bottle of beer and smoking a cigarette. His listless gaze at the cameraman is clear. He could care less about anything. The word “jail?” in set in over the photo...making me think – ‘this is jail’? Have I got that part right? I think so.
Something I know here… this is a model posing for you…right? You paid him or someone for his photo. Because if it was taken at last winter’s Christmas party, you would have needed a ‘model release’ to put Uncle Charlie’s photo in your pamphlet – right?
But there is no indication that he is in trouble from the photo…except the word ‘jail?’ He kind of looks like some(many) of the ‘Ontario Works’ clients that I visit around our city. They have no job, no education, no employability, and sit at home watching TV, playing video games and surfing the ‘websites’.
There is a bigger problem inside…
Inside the pamphlet there is the ‘rub’. There in bold words is a BIG QUESTION.
~ Quote…
“Why should convicted thieves, arsonists and vandals serve their sentences watching TV, playing video games, and surfing “websites” on the internet?”
End quote ~
So let’s deal with this one question. Where the dickens did it come from? Are you trying to inflame a situation that is already painful the victims of these crimes that receive no help at all? Are you just trying to make them ‘feel better’ with feelings of inflicting further pain on another person.
But my guess is that the really bad people that you are trying to get us to address here are really teenagers that are really covered by the Youth Criminal Justice Act? – which you said you were going to fix… right?
Then the pamphlet throws me a ‘curve’. You say, “They shouldn’t”. and you continue with “The Conservative Government Supports Ending House arrest for Serious Offences”.
Both you and I know that this is a personal feeling of a few people – not your government. Your documents that are available on the Internet – on ‘websites’ – state otherwise.
Your Election Platform – 2006, A. Serious Crime, Serious Time section (ii) states…
(ii) End conditional sentences ("house arrest") for serious crimes, including designated violent and sexual offences, weapons offences, major drug offences, crimes committed against children, and Impaired driving causing death or serious injury.
If you can see the conflict here… section (ii) states clearly some very horrific crimes… your new pamphlet indicates a huge broadening of a net to include a whole lot more in it and REALLY GIVE IT TO THEM! Right?
Now here is the PROBLEM WE HAVE….
You want me to stop thinking. You want me to swallow something that is out right WRONG. That won’t change the crimes that have been committed at all. It will not likely make much difference in the way that they are dealt with either. But it may get you a few extra votes from silly people that are not thinking – either.
The pamphlets points strongly to the “…watching TV, playing video games, and surfing “websites” on the internet?”
Something you need to know – just in case the authors of the pamphlet didn’t tell you… there is TV in JAIL. DUH! In the Provincial system there is a TV for a group of 24 to 32 men. They live in one pod. They all watch the same TV program. If it one portion of the Pod Population is dominat – the less dominat dudes have to watch whatever the main guys want to.
Yes it is true - there are no video games in the provincial system nor is there internet.
In the Federal Prison system they also have TV. The Prison provides one Cable TV Provider to the whole correctional facility. One signal comes in and then with the help of outside technicians the cells are provided a cable hook up. Each man then works at a job inside where he is paid real money(on paper accounting). The real money is banked and when he has enough he buys a TV – maybe from another man that has an old one – or from another guy that is getting out. Each man then pays $30+ dollars a month to the Cable TV Provider. In a local institution there are 600 men – and each one has a TV with Cable. That means the Cable TV Provider makes an easy $18,000 off the guys that live there.
The TV is a sedative and baby sitter for guys that are killing time – one day, one week, one 22 year span at a time.
A while back some had bought simple computers and were taking classes to learn how to operate a computer. Some men had bought computer games with their money and spent huge amounts of time playing games. It was a huge baby sitting service. But that is basically all gone – a new “tough on crime and do your time the hard way” came in under the LIBERALS. Now guys coming out have no idea what to do with a computer… and are like so far behind that they will likely never catch up.
Pause…
My guess is the guy you have on your pamphlet photo is just out of prison and he is watching what his nephew is doing on a computer game – or on the internet “websites” – right? He hasn’t got a clue what is going on. So car theft makes a lot of sense – when you have few skills, no one will hire you, and you are a survivor or hard time and tough on crime politicians. Go figure… how did he get that way?
He hasn’t a clue what to do with the world around him.
Now if you want a real issue – how about the victims of crime? What is your platform stating about that one?
Every traffic ticket we pay, every fine levied there is an amount set aside for Victim’s of Crime. It is now a huge pot of money collecting interest somewhere – I have been told. And if a Victim of Crime needs assistance it is not really there for them without a royal nightmare to get any help.
Maybe if you took a new approach to your tough stance – and made the convicted thieves work at a job to pay for the property damage that they have done… that would be a good idea? But you have to give them a chance first! Right?
Maybe if the guy that started the fire was made to work for the contractor that has to rebuild the house that burned – he would prove to be an excellent worker and the contractor would keep him on?
Maybe if we helped the vandal start his own company to restore the property damage that was done…then have to hire other vandals… they would get a new appreciation of how hard it is to put back the damage. This new company would not pay them any more than their food and housing. Maybe they would have a new pride in what they would do.
Just encourage me with one thing… you are thinking men and women – right? And if you can promise me one thing – YOU WILL THINK TOO.
I promise you one thing as well – I WILL NOT STOP THINKING. And when really dumb things are in my mail box – I promise you that I will THINK about what is being stated. And when it is DUMB – I will tell you.
~ Pastor Murray Lincoln ~
Praying for all Politicians…
Resources:
SOCIAL POLICY PROPOSALS: CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA
http://www.casw-acts.ca/public/conservative_e.pdf
Conservative Platform
http://www.conservative.ca/media/20060113-Platform.pdf
4 Comments:
Did you send your letter to any politicians?
If you didn’t please consider doing so.
Please let me know if you get any responses from them.
I sent this letter to them but haven’t received any responses yet.
I will not be holding my breath.
This was sent to the Premier of Ontario Dalton McGuinty, the Minister of Community and Social Services Madeleine Meilleur, Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger and Hamilton city councilor Bernie Morelli, via e-mail on Feb 24 08.
My question to you and to myself is how do they get away with the callous and unjust manner that workers approach their clients with, at Ontario Works, ODSP and even the Social Benefits Tribunal?
The answer is very simple. BECAUSE THEY CAN
For the record I would like to state, I have seen many improvements to the SBT since a change of it’s Chair and I expect to see many more. I can’t say the same for Ontario Works and ODSP.
The research shows when clients have contact with workers the response is not always the same. You could ask three different workers the same question and receive three different answers.
If the worker doesn't especially like you, they will simply ignore you. This means things like no return phone calls, ignoring verbal requests for benefits, requesting more than usual documents be brought in to prove eligibility and so on.
If the worker really doesn't like you, they will often do everything in their power to harass, intimidate and frustrate you into giving up and going away. This means things like ignoring written requests for benefits, telling you that the benefit doesn’t exist, denying benefits when you are entitled and no decision letters and so on.
If the worker does like you, they will give you any of the benefits that you ask for if you entitled. This is only if the worker is aware of the benefits requested. Here is an interesting problem. The vast majority of the workers are not aware of benefits that are available. This even includes some of the excellent workers. Another problem is that the fast majority of clients don’t even know what the benefits are.
****All clients must document, tape record and video record everything, every time when dealing with any OW or ODSP staff.****
The governments must, as a gesture of good will, give all Ontario Works and ODSP clients a written copy of the benefits that they say clients are entitled.
This would be a first concrete step taken to start the process in eliminating poverty.
Ontario Works Directive # 31.0 found at http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/mcss/english/pillars/social/ow-directives/ow_policy_directives.htm or the:
Ontario Disability Support Program Directives #s 9.1 to 9.19 Found at http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/mcss/english/pillars/social/odsp-is-directives/ODSP_incomesupport.htm
The only real remedy to this problem is for clients to sue their respective governments. For Ontario Works it would be their local municipal government and the Province of Ontario and for ODSP it would be the Province of Ontario.
In the Ontario Works Act it states No personal liability
77.(1)No action or other proceeding in damages shall be instituted against the Ministry, the Director, a delivery agent, an officer or employee of any of them or anyone acting under their authority for any act done in good faith in the execution or intended execution of a duty or authority under this Act or for any alleged neglect or default in the execution in good faith of any duty or authority under this Act.
In the Ontario Disability Support Program it states No personal liability
58. (1) No action or other proceeding in damages shall be instituted against the Ministry, the Director or a delivery agent, an officer, employee of any of them or anyone acting under their authority for any act done in good faith in the execution or intended execution of a duty or authority under this Act or for any alleged neglect or default in the execution in good faith of any duty or authority under this Act. 1997, c. 25, Sched. B, s. 58 (1).
This means that a client could sue for damages if bad faith could be proven.
It is called bad faith; a person who intentionally tries to deceive or mislead another in order to gain some advantage.
It is called willful blindness or willful deceit.
The government must get rid of the discretionary powers it allows workers in the OW and OSSP, Act, Regulations and Directives.
You’re either entitled to benefits or your not. It is extremely simple but the government will not do it until it gets sued for Bad Faith.
It’s so simple; all the government has to do is to look at how the federal government implements its Employment Insurance application process, and they are saving millions.
To receive benefits you must go online to apply, with exceptions for some disabled clients. You fill out a simple template and the next thing you experience is a cheque in the mail. If the federal government trusts us why can’t you?
Ron Payne
Welfare Legal
Hamilton, Ontario.
E-mail welfarelegal2004@hotmail.com
By Unknown, at 10:07 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By Murray Lincoln, at 2:50 PM
Thanks Ron...
You make a good point - regarding sending it on - yes we are.
PML
By Murray Lincoln, at 2:57 PM
Media Release
The Evidence Is In
Poverty’s Smoke and Mirrors, Part 2
To see part 1 http://www.special-need-child-canada.com/povertys-smoke-and-mirrors.html
The article above went out to the main media and approximately 65 other print news media starting September 21 2008. It was also put on the World Wide Web.
To my knowledge it was only printed in 3 Ontario news papers in the Letters to the Editor section.
1) Hamilton’s, Mountain News
2) Hamilton’s, Stoney Creek News
3) London’s, The London Free Press
Thank you to these three papers for caring enough about people that live in poverty to print this article.
As of today November 06 2008 the Ontario government has only posted old outdated directives dated Sept 2001.
http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/mcss/english/pillars/social/directives/ow_policy_directives.html
Obviously these directives are of no use to anyone simply because of the fact they are outdated and the ministry is now using the July 2008 up to date directives but has not shared them with the public.
You may remember Welfare Legal was so offended by this abuse we offered $100.00 to anyone that could produce a copy of the latest Ontario Works directive 7.4.
As of this date no one has collected the $100.00. Welfare Legal now has a copy of the new directives that the government has not shared.
We take the position that this is the most serious kind of abuse by our government to implement new policies but not allow those most in need to have access to them. The only reason the government has given for this abuse is that the Ontario Government has not prepared a French version of these directives.
This is a Human Rights violation, among others, to implement a secrete version of the directives and not share them with the public and not to have a French version available.
As we have stated before the Ontario government has in fact been cutting the benefits of Ontario Works, (OW) and the Ontario Disability Support Program, (ODSP) recipients without letting the general public aware of these cuts.
The latest cuts that have become public are the cuts to benefits to grandparents that are caring for their own grandchildren, who many had, have been apprehended by the Children’s Aid Society (CAS). The grand parent’s complaints were heard loud and clear the government seems to have withdrawn these policy changes.
The new directive 7.4 and others shows more cuts that the public is not aware of yet.
One of these cuts shows that the Ontario government no longer supports volunteering here in Ontario. In the old outdated directives dated September 2001, the government used to give a small benefit to those recipients that had to do volunteer work as a condition of eligibility for OW. These cuts also affect those who wish to do volunteer work and are disabled on ODSP as well.
Are volunteers no longer needed here in Ontario?
These cuts which are ongoing, have been made to help pay for the meager increases to OW and ODSP of 2%. They are also part of the government’s bigger plan, to upload the cost of OW and ODSP from the municipality to the province and to pay for its poverty reduction strategy.
At the end of the day the government will save millions of dollars in benefits that the former Mike Harris Tories said people on OW and ODSP were entitled to. Does this make sense to anyone?
This story gets much, much worse. It turns out that the aboriginal community in Ontario had the foresight not to allow its members to be subjected to the policies and procedures put in place by the Mike Harris government, when they bought the draconian computer program from Anderson Consulting now Accenture. The cost of that program was $400 million and rising. This program was designed to cut people off of benefits automatically, with no human contact. There seems to be 2 classes of people being governed differently here, and what are the costs?
It would seem they were allowed to have their own computer program made up by a private company called AD Morrison.
http://www.admorrison.com/
A private professional researcher contacted Welfare Legal in an attempt to collect the $100.00 offered for the latest Ontario Works directive 7.4 and alerted us to a Pandora’s Box. You will see on the home page of AD Morrison’s site there is a link to “Latest Directives”. This link contained a third set of OW directives that was not available to the general public.
After Welfare Legal contacted the ministry to see if this in fact was the latest and new directive 7.4, the ministry contacted us with a reply that had nothing to do with our request. Then out of the blue this link was taken of the site.
After gathering all the evidence we soon learned that the Ontario government had not been keeping these new directive from the public since July 2008, they had in fact been hiding them starting in December 2005 and no one new about it. At least no one that has come forward so far.
There has been no response from any legal clinic or private paralegal in Ontario showing that they new about this breach of the Human Rights Code by our provincial government. If anyone was aware of this why didn’t they take it to the media? Does nobody care about this abuse? Does nobody care about eliminating poverty?
It is interesting to note that the government has even changed the directive numbers to confuse us even more once we were allowed to become aware of them.
September 2001 shows directive 31.0, the out dated benefits that we all are aware of.
December 2005 shows
7.3 is EMPLOYMENT AND PARTICIPATION BENEFITS
7.4 is COMMUNITY START UP AND MAINTENANCE BENEFIT
July 2008 shows
7.4 is EMPLOYMENT AND PARTICIPATION BENEFITS
7.5 is COMMUNITY START UP AND MAINTENANCE BENEFIT
For a copy of these directives
http://owcorruption.blogspot.com/
How can the Ontario government say it is attempting to alleviate poverty when it is secretly cutting the benefits of those most in need? (Reverse Robin Hood)
Ron Payne
Welfare Legal
Hamilton, Ontario
Phone 905-253-0205
E-mail welfarelegal2004@hotmail.com
Blog http://welfarelegal.blogspot.com/
By Unknown, at 7:56 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home