As Victoria's housing crisis continues, communities and residents are exploring innovative housing solutions to meet their diverse needs. For many, tiny houses on wheels offer an affordable, sustainable, safe and dignified housing option. However, mobile tiny houses are not legally allowed as residential units in most municipalities across BC, including Victoria. People who want to go tiny are being denied this housing option, or else living illegally and insecurely in mobile units. On October 20 2018, residents will vote for new mayors and councils across BC. This is a perfect time to tell our elected officials that we need access to housing that is truly affordable, sustainable, and conducive to long-term health of our communities. Around the world, tiny houses are gaining in popularity as an alternative model of affordable and sustainable housing for diverse populations. In growing urban centres, vacant, irregular or undeveloped lots could accommodate temporary tiny houses as a means of gentle densification. Tiny houses could also be used as small-scale infill housing to fit within residential neighbourhood contexts, or as laneway alternatives on single-family residentially zoned lots, creating space for intergenerational living. Zoning bylaws and building codes need to be updated to reduce barriers to alternative living. Housing options along the entire housing continuum should be discussed as part of any affordable housing strategy. Including tiny homes in election campaigns and later in zoning regulation changes is an important step towards creating room for innovative and creative solutions driven by the community. If enough people sign this petition, we’ll be able to convince mayoral and council candidates in Victoria to include mobile tiny houses in their election platforms this October and, when elected, to work on legalizing tiny houses by creating municipal zoning for mobile tiny houses and supporting tiny house amendments to the BC building code.

As Vancouver's housing crisis continues, communities and residents are exploring innovative housing solutions to meet their diverse needs. For many, tiny houses on wheels offer an affordable, sustainable, safe and dignified housing option. However, mobile tiny houses are not legally allowed as residential units in most municipalities across BC, including Vancouver. People who want to go tiny are being denied this housing option, or else living illegally and insecurely in mobile units. On October 20 2018, residents will vote for new mayors and councils across BC. This is a perfect time to tell our elected officials that we need access to housing that is truly affordable, sustainable, and conducive to long-term health of our communities. Around the world, tiny houses are gaining in popularity as an alternative model of affordable and sustainable housing for diverse populations. In growing urban centres, vacant, irregular or undeveloped lots could accommodate temporary tiny houses as a means of gentle densification. Tiny houses could also be used as small-scale infill housing to fit within residential neighbourhood contexts, or as laneway alternatives on single-family residentially zoned lots, creating space for intergenerational living. Zoning bylaws and building codes need to be updated to reduce barriers to alternative living. Housing options along the entire housing continuum should be discussed as part of any affordable housing strategy. Including tiny homes in election campaigns and later in zoning regulation changes is an important step towards creating room for innovative and creative solutions driven by the community. If enough people sign this petition, we’ll be able to convince mayoral and council candidates in Vancouver to include mobile tiny houses in their election platforms this October and, when elected, to work on legalizing tiny houses by creating municipal zoning for mobile tiny houses and supporting tiny house amendments to the BC building code.

Despite significant public concern, last year, the federal and provincial Liberal governments approved the sale of Retirement Concepts – the largest private provider of residential-care and assisted-living services in B.C. – to Chinese investment firm Anbang Insurance. Alarmingly, on February 23, 2018, a Chinese government regulator took control of Anbang’s assets (including Retirement Concepts' facilities) due to fraud and embezzlement. There is substantial concern that, in order to deal with the debt, Retirement Concepts’ facilities will face operational cuts, layoffs and contracting out, and the sale of facility assets. This has created an environment of fear and uncertainty for frontline care and support workers, the seniors they care for, and their families.

In North America, safe roads and licensed drivers are something that we take for granted. Pedestrian deaths are not a daily norm, and if they are to ever occur, we can be sure that the drivers will be held accountable. This is not the case for citizens of Bangladesh, where unregulated driving and lack of road safety lead to hundreds of deaths on a regular basis. Ambulances cannot even travel to patients on time due to no rules regarding the safe passage of medical vehicles. Last week, the deaths of two teenagers in a senseless truck hit and run sparked massive protests across the nation. Teenagers, young adults, teachers and more took to the streets halting civilian drivers, and government officials, demanding proof of licensing. Protesters have a simple demand: Safer roads. This demand was not met. What they were met with was violence. Multiple students and teens have been severely injured, raped and even murdered for daring to speak out about the lack of consequences that government officials and the wealthy face for reckless driving which results in the deaths of hundreds. More than a hundred students were injured on August 4th when police opened fired with rubber bullets. Students shared stories, pleas and proof of the violence via facebook. The government's response was to halt mobile internet access for 24 hours. This is a violation of human rights, children are being attacked and losing their lives for demanding safer living conditions, and it is our responsibility to foster change.

I am a mother, a wife, and a daughter. I am a recipient of basic income. We are not statistics to be dismissed, we are humans. Doug Ford made an explicit campaign promise to protect this pilot project through to its completion in 2020. A guaranteed unconditional income has proven to provide security, stability, and human dignity, and the government made a commitment to me and 4,000 Ontarians to deliver that security. Yet less than a month into his term, Doug Ford has already violated that trust and destroyed a program that was restoring hope to us and gathering evidence that could give hope to many more Ontarians and Canadians. Promises broken in an instant and with no warning will change our lives, and not for the better. Basic income has allowed me to go back to school, afford hospital parking passes each month for my special needs child. Across the pilot sites, people who were previously struggling and often desperate are now starting businesses, getting educations, and providing for their families. [1] It has given us a moment where life was a little easier and a glimmer of hope that we will be ok! Doug Ford and Lisa MacLeod are ripping that away. Even a Conservative former Senator is calling Ford and MacLeod out for the heartless and deceptive move. [2] This is an outright betrayal not only of our core Canadian values of compassion and care, but also of a promise this government made and the people to whom they made it. This is unfair and unjust, and we deserve better. Sign the petition telling Doug Ford and Minister MacLeod to keep their promise and complete the pilot - and get ready to help us to keep up the heat until we win this back. SOURCE: [1] http://lindsayadvocate.ca/basic-income-gone-fords-abrupt-cancellation-of-program-devastates-lindsay/ [2] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-doug-ford-speaks-for-the-people-just-not-low-income-people/

Multi-age child care centres (located in the licensee's residence) are currently eligible for only family funding rates, rather than the group funding rates that they really deserve. The difference between group and family funding rates works out to hundreds of dollars per month that Group centres (located in the licensee's residence) receive and Multi-Age centres (located in the licensee's residence) do not. The following outlines the ways in which licensed Multi-Age programs are the same as Group (30 month to school age) programs licensed for up to 8 children, and why they should receive the same amount of funding: 1. Both can be operated in a licensee’s residence. 2.There must always be a certified Early Childhood Educator (ECE) caring for the children in both Multi-Age and Group care programs. This means that staff in both Multi-Age and Group programs are required to have the same qualifications. Unlike in Family care programs where the care providers do not need to have their ECE certification. 3. Licensees of Multi-Age and Group programs are eligible to hire ECEs to care for the children in their programs. Unlike in licensed Family and In Home Multi-Age programs, where the licensee themselves must provide care to the children in the program. Hiring staff creates greater overhead costs which is partially why Group centres receive more funding than Family centres. Since Multi-Age centre licensees are eligible to hire staff, they should be considered the same as Group centres and receive the group funding rate as well. 4. In both Multi-Age and Group centres the staff to child ratio is 1:8. Unlike in Family care programs where the ratio is 1:7 Multi-Age centres can offer spaces for children from 0 - 12 years of age, while Group (30 month to school age) centres can only accommodate children 2.5 - 6 years of age. This means that Multi-Age centres can accommodate infants and toddlers, while Group (30 months to school age) centres can not. It is important to note that there is a great lack of infant and toddler child care spaces in the province on British Columbia. Changing the policy to give all Multi-Age centres group funding rates is a simple way to encourage current and future licensees to maintain and create Multi-Age centres. Thus maintaining and creating more infant and toddler child care spaces in the province. Caregivers in Multi-Age programs are required to have their ECE certification. They should be able to make fair wages for the important work that they do and the credentials they have obtained throughout their time in college and other professional development programs. Giving Multi-Age centres the higher group funding rate will help Multi-Age centres maintain fair wages for their qualified staff. Parents of children attending Multi-Age care programs should be eligible for the same child care fee reduction rates as parents of children attending almost identical Group (30 months to school age) programs. The group funding rate for parents is 1.5 to 2 times higher than the family funding rate. Most centres licensed as "Multi-Age" do receive the group funding rates from CCOF. However, the policy currently states that if a Multi-Age centre is operated out of the licensee's residence then they are only eligible for family funding rates. Meanwhile, a Group (30 month to school age) program can be operated out of the licensee's residence and still receive the higher group funding rates. Minister Chen is making important changes in child care right now. Let's put this one small policy change on her priority list. Minister Chen must change the unfair policy which states that Multi-Age child care centres located in the licensee's residence are only eligible for family funding rates. It is only fair that all Multi-Age child care centres receive group funding rates!

Doug Ford’s announcement that he’s going to single-handedly slash Toronto city council in half is a massive abuse of power. Ford and his cronies cooked this idea up behind closed doors, without any consultation or even once mentioning it during his election campaign. If Ford wanted to help Toronto then he would be using his powers to support affordable housing, transit, and jobs. Instead, without any consultation, he is dropping this bombshell on Toronto right in the middle of the municipal elections. And it isn’t a coincidence—he’s purposefully meddling in our political system to cause chaos and make it easier to control City Hall from Queen's Park. With fewer councillors, Ford’s banking on ramming his agenda through City Hall, so he and his developer friends can have their way. But we’re not going to let it happen. Leadnow and Progress Toronto are teaming up to stop Ford’s takeover of Toronto. We’re ready to fight back—are you? Sign the petition telling for Ford to keep his hands off Toronto.

The people of Ontario are deeply concerned by Premier Ford's stated intention to divert mental health funding towards policing, in light of a mass shooting carried out by a mentally troubled person. From the beginning of Ford's premiership, his promised investment of $1.9 billion in mental health investments over 10 years already represented a $335 million annual cut in proposed funding to mental health. [1] From this already small proposed investment, Ford proposed shifting some of this mental health funding to policing. [2] This shift in policy perpetuates the long-standing problem of using reactionary measures like criminalization to address mental health issues, when instead, proactive measures like mental health support are needed. [3] The proposed shift in funding will harm the people of Ontario who depend on already scarce mental health resources, while signalling to the public that state force is an appropriate substitute for accessible care. [1] https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/07/26/tories-blasted-for-335m-cut-in-planned-spending-on-mental-health.html [2] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ford-to-use-mental-health-money-for-policing-1.4759578 [3] https://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Wormith/publication/19251180_The_Criminalization_of_Psychiatrically_Ill_People_A_Review_with_a_Canadian_Perspective/links/55b946f108ae092e965b313a/The-Criminalization-of-Psychiatrically-Ill-People-A-Review-with-a-Canadian-Perspective.pdf ---------- Public Advocates in support of strengthening mental health funding: Bhutila Karpoche, MPP for Parkdale-High Park Community Organizations in support of strengthening mental health funding: Warrior Women of Quinte

For many years, our neighbourhood, centred around the parallel 600 blocks of Constance Ave. and Nelson St. has contained one of the highest concentrations of low income rentals in the Greater Victoria area. While a few of us are home owners with Fairfield-perfect families, most of us are tenants, many of whom are on disability. (The shelter portion of a monthly disability cheque is under $400 for a single person.) Some of us are single parents. Some of us are seniors. Some of us have addictions. And some of us lack the social graces. So much so, in fact, that some of you wouldn't want some of us to move into your neighbourhood. We'd rather we stay here too. But we can't: our neighbourhood is being gentrified. Over the last couple of years, developers have descended upon our neighbourhood, buying up buildings and houses in order to demolish them and then put up more expensive housing.The remaining landlords have started the predictable follow up: renovations on vacated suites that price rentals out of the reach of low-income people. The overall effect is a depletion in the stock of low-income housing, in an area where renters already struggle with a 0.7 vacancy rate, one of the lowest in Canada. Unless the Esquimalt Council wants to end up being compared to Vancouver's Council under Mayor Gordon Campbell, it needs to stop treating our neighbourhood the way Campbell treated East Van. The Council needs to push pause on the developments and rent-increasing renos in this neighbourhood and to use the resultant time to come up with a policy requiring developers and renovating landlords to assist displaced tenants to find housing and to ensure that the stock of low-income housing is not further depleted. Vancouver has such a policy now and Victoria is implementing one in September. We can't save our community. We know that we don't have that kind of power. But please sign our petition so that we can at least try to get Esquimalt to help ensure that some of our displaced neighbours don't end up living on the street.

The White Pines is a project to build nine wind turbines in Prince Edward County. Four of these turbines are already complete, with the remainder expected to be installed within the next few weeks and testing scheduled for the following month. Once live, they would have provided enough clean energy to power over 3,000 homes. But Energy Minister Greg Rickford and Doug Ford’s PCs have passed legislation cancelling the project, and as a result, Ontario will now be spending money to uproot and destroy clean energy capacity that’s already been built. Doug Ford ran on a promise to keep Ontario open for business, but his government’s first piece of legislation, "The White Pines Wind Project Termination Act", would terminate this project that has been nearly 10 years in the making, at a cost of over $100 million to taxpayers. [1] At a time when the world is transitioning to renewable energy, this act would kill opportunities for future green energy investment, further put the climate at risk, and cost Ontario taxpayers millions spent destroying a nearly completed project. [2, 3] Doug Ford ran his campaign on the promise that his government is ‘for the people’. Let’s have our voice heard and let his energy minister know that Ontario wants to protect this windfarm and champion the green energies of the future. Please sign this petition to demand the reversal of the White Pines Wind Project Termination Act. Sources: [1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/wind-project-high-price-1.4742850 [2] https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/cancelling-ontario-s-wind-project-could-cost-over-100m-company-warns-1.4009397 [3] https://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-white-pines-decision-says-doug-fords-ontario-is-closed-for-business

20% of Canadians are reported to have a disability, including 200,000 Canadian children; This is predicted to rise to 25% by 2031; People of all ages have disabilities of many types; There is no building code in Canada mandating that housing be made accessible to people with disabilities; Universal design will accommodate anyone of any age or ability, going beyond mere accessibility, and demonstrating an underlying commitment to including as wide a range of users as possible; and The Canadian Human Rights Code and Charter of Rights and Freedoms forbid discrimination on the basis of disability.

Translink’s lack of affordability measures means that right now thousands of people cannot access the basic service of public transit they need to live, work and thrive. Children, youth and adults who lack access to any other form of transport remain locked out of our transit system. With free transit for children and youth 0-18 and a sliding scale pass based on income, those who are homeless can get to the shelters they need to survive, families will no longer have to make hard choices, folks can get to work without losing the bulk of their hard-earned wages, those seeking jobs can get to interviews and to work, and everyone can access the health care they need, when they need it. In the words of one dad, "I had to choose between transit to get myself to the doctor or buying my daughter milk." We can and must do better. The time is now.