Star: City Housing for 1,500 Planned

[AnarchoSocialist]

Everyone, and everyone neighbourhood should carry their fair share of the public housing burden. Why must only a few wards keep being saddled with more than their share of public housing?

Because it is easier to build (be it public housing or condos) in wards and neighborhoods where there is less wealth. Wealthier neighborhoods can buy OMB appeals and fund campaigns with their disposable incomes, which makes it much easier to keep out undesireables.

Of course if there were social democratic politicians in power (or even a progressive Liberal or Conservative) who would see through this nonesense and ignore interest groups, there would not be this problem. That isn't the case though, so instead, the trend of containing social housing in existing districts will continue.

 

[TrickyRicky]

"It just sounds as if the people in need are being used to make some kind of a veiled point."

People in need are and have always been used to make veiled points. It strikes me however that some of the interests most involved in championing social programs don't recognize their complicity in this game.

It makes perfect sense that a disproportionate number of affordable units would be located in the inner city based on a need and services argument. That said the old city of Toronto already has a strong base of such units and is not experiencing a growth of low income residence. Therefore locating 9 out of 10 new projects in inner city wards it seems to me can only be justified as either appropriate because it is politically expedient or ideologically satisfying. My guess is a combination of the two.