Being evicted from one’s home can irrevocably change their life. It can mean not just losing housing, but losing stability, losing community, and in some cases, losing one’s sense of self-worth.
CCHR and Right to Housing Toronto (R2HTO) recently held a workshop to discuss evictions and the right to housing. To understand the impact of evictions during the pandemic from the ground up, we spoke with three lawyers who assist tenants facing evictions about the cases they see most often, the pandemic’s effect on tenants, and some of the client stories that have stayed with them.
Melissa Bramson and Ryan Hardy are both with the Tenant Duty Counsel Program (TDCP), a program of the Advocacy Centre for Tenants Ontario funded by Legal Aid Ontario. TDCP are a group of lawyers and community legal workers who help tenants facing a hearing at the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) by providing basic legal advice, helping to work out settlements with landlords, and reviewing and helping fill out some forms and documents, especially those related to eviction.
Bramson is the full-time tenant duty counsel in Ottawa based out of Community Legal Services of Ottawa, and Hardy is the supervisor for the Tenant Duty Counsel in Toronto and the Peel region. Both Bramson and Hardy say that most of the requests they get for help from tenants facing eviction are related to rent arrears, where the tenant was unable to pay their rent in full.
“I think a lot of my team would tell you it feels like we’re getting a narrower range of issues that we talk to people about,” Hardy says. “People in the pre-pandemic era would come in with all kinds of situations, just a wider range of things and problems that they were dealing with. It definitely feels like it’s narrowed a bit, and so arrears are first and foremost and it really kind of dominates.”
While rent arrears have always made up a large percentage of reasons that landlords file for eviction, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in many people losing their income and therefore unable to pay all their rent.
“Recently, a large majority of people who are in arrears are people who lost their job because of COVID. You know CERB came through for a little bit, but maybe didn’t cover the same amount that they were used to. So, there’s a whole new group of people that are now in arrears,” Bramson says. This situation is especially true for those living in some of Canada’s most unaffordable cities to live as a renter, such as Toronto or Ottawa.
Yodit Edemariam is the director of legal services at Rexdale Community Legal Clinic, a non-profit legal clinic that serves people who are living on low incomes in the northwest of Toronto.
Edemariam says she has also seen the pandemic’s impact on people’s ability to pay their rent.
“People have had to make impossible choices about going to unsafe work versus trying to keep up with their rent and we have seen arrears across the province at levels that I have never seen in my career.”
The large number of arrears cases currently at the LTB may not just be due to people’s inability to pay their rent in full, but also due to the kinds of applications that the LTB seem to be prioritizing.
“There’s a huge volume of non-payment of rent cases that are being heard at the Board. I can see that based on the file numbers,” says Bramson. “For example, you have a number like EAL-12345-21, meaning that the landlord filed that application in 2021. So, I can see that all of the L1 non-payment of rent cases are from 2021, and I would say in comparison, the tenant applications for things like maintenance and repair, the majority of those that are on our docket are from 2019 and 2020, so it’s very clear what the LTB‘s priority is.”
Hardy says he has seen a similar trend.
“The tenant applications are a small fraction of what the Board is doing,” he says. “It’s a lot more work for most tenants to do their applications successfully, so it’s always been skewed, but it feels more dramatic now, and some of that is the Board scheduling.”
Tenant applications at the LTB can be related to a landlord who is neglecting the rental unit and not doing repairs, it can be related to a major appliance that is not working like a fridge, or harassment issues that tenants are facing by their landlord or representatives, just to name a few.
“I spoke to a gentleman just last week who had filed a pair of tenant applications in November. He was still waiting for his hearing, but his landlord’s hearing for eviction for arrears had been scheduled just in a couple of months,” Hardy says. “So, even though he had filed first, he was waiting much longer to get heard.”
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and public health guidelines, the LTB moved hearings online in March 2020. This has created challenges for some tenants, such as those who do not have access to a computer or reliable connection, those who are not comfortable with technology or those with language barriers.
“I have to do a lot of explaining to people on how to sign in [to the hearing]. People saying ‘I got this link but what does it mean?’” Bramson says. “Over the weekend, I got an email from a tenant who I had sent a PDF document to fill in and she said she didn’t know how to fill it in. This is something that we wouldn’t have dealt with before because we would tell her to go get a physical copy at the counter, but the counters are closed. “
Hardy says having hearings online also makes it challenging to provide the best advice to tenants.
“We provide legal advice and the advice will focus on different ways of trying to defend against the arrears application,” Hardy says. “If there’s technical defects in the landlord’s application, we’re going to try to talk about that. That’s something that’s a lot harder to do these days than it was because before usually people would be sitting there with their documents that you could look over. It’s much more difficult to do that now.”
With the online hearings “tenants and tenant duty counsel are at a huge disadvantage by not having that paperwork,” Bramson says. “And then the landlord’s the person who filed it, so they would have that paperwork and already have the products that they need, which makes it an unfair disadvantage right at the beginning.”
The cases that go in front of the LTB all have a letter and a number attached to them; Bramson referred to a hypothetical EAL-12345-21, which could be an application to evict a tenant for non-payment of rent and to collect rent that the tenant owes. Behind these application numbers lie real individuals with their own stories and journeys.
Hardy, who came back to working at the Tenant Duty Counsel in November 2020 after some time off, says the scale of arrears that people were dealing with made an impact on him.
“Seeing what people were up against was really shocking. There were so many people who had fallen victim to the pandemic/lockdown in different ways. People whose entire industries had ceased to function,” he says. “I spoke to a guy who was a tattoo artist, working independently, making good money and getting to do something creative, and then it was just done.”
Bramson thinks of tenants who are disadvantaged by eviction hearings moving online.
“I had a tenant who didn’t know how to submit her evidence in one email. I tried to talk her through it with my tech hat on and I said instead of sending one document at a time, you can attach six attachments to one email, but she didn’t know how to do it,” Bramson recalls.
“At the hearing, [the tenant] apologized to the [LTB] member, and for one reason or another, the matter was adjourned, and the member said to her, ‘at the next hearing, organize yourself because if I get multiple emails like this again, we might be talking about costs.’ So, costs are not to be confused with an administrative fine, but it’s something where if someone’s conduct was unreasonable, then the Board can award costs as a penalty. [The member] was saying it was unreasonable that the tenant didn’t know how to attach documents which is something that stuck out to me because she just didn’t understand the process.”
Edemariam, with the Rexdale Community Legal Clinic, says she thinks a lot about poverty and choice when it comes to her clients.
“I think from the Landlord and Tenant Board or the powers that be that there is a real misunderstanding of how people are living. I’ve seen clients’ bank statements, and that’s been one of the most profound experiences I’ve had in my career,” she says. “I think a lot about what poverty does in terms of where people live. I think sometimes people might ask our clients, ‘so why do you stay if there’s like a horrible mouse infestation and the landlord isn’t doing anything.’ And then they’re like ‘where am I gonna go? Where am I going to find a three-bedroom for this amount? So, the things people tolerate because of a lack of choice really sticks with me.”
Edemariam says she also thinks about the pride that her clients have about their communities and the importance of maintaining that community.
“I think there’s a lot of discourse here in social housing like ‘we’ve given you this extraordinary thing for cheap so you just basically take whatever it’s given’, but we see people building their own communities even when they’re told so many distressing narratives about the communities in which they live.”
The importance of community and helping people stay in their homes is also something that Bramson thinks about.
“No one is ever evicted into a more beneficial situation than they were in,” she says.
For Edemariam, something that her colleague once said has stuck with her.
“My colleague said that everything she’s been able to do in her life is because she had a safe place to live. And I think that’s a common theme throughout our work: how does anyone deal with anything in their lives unless there is an affordable and safe place to do so?”
Discrimination is the differential and unjust treatment of people based on personal characteristics. It often occurs when people judge others based on stereotypes, prejudice, and biases. In the context of renting a home, renters can experience discrimination by their landlords. This can occur at many stages of the housing process including when a renter is searching for housing, when they apply for housing, or while the renter is living in their rental home.
Black people, Indigenous peoples, newcomers, those living on lower incomes, single mothers, members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community, young people, seniors, and families with children generally face higher levels of discrimination in housing. Many people can face multiple forms of discrimination based on their intersecting identities. For example, an Indigenous woman does not experience the world as an Indigenous person and as a woman separately. Instead, these identities intersect and she may experience multiple forms of oppression and discrimination at once as an Indigenous woman.
Discrimination can sometimes be overt. For example, a landlord who tells a single mother with two children that a two-bedroom unit is best suited for a couple without children is discriminating against her in an overt way based on family composition and marital status. However, discrimination can often be very subtle and difficult to identify. For example, a landlord requiring co-signors or guarantors for a newcomer renter is making renting difficult because most newcomers will not have a community or family to support them on that front. This form of discrimination is more indirect. It is referred to as constructive discrimination, where a policy or rule indirectly creates barriers for particular groups of people.
Other examples of discrimination may include:
The lack of available rental property in both Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) has forced many renters to put up with discrimination as they fear not finding another place to call home. While the vacancy rate in Toronto increased in 2020 to 3.4%, the vacancy rate for affordable rental units remained low. The vacancy rate for purpose-built rentals with rents ranging from $750 – $999 was 1.4%. This means that for every 1,000 affordable rental units in the city there were only 14 units available for rent. The low vacancy rate of affordable rental housing means that a landlord has access to a larger pool of renters to choose from and may base their choice on discriminatory grounds. Additionally, when rental housing is scarce, renters are more willing to stay in housing situations where they are being discriminated against by their landlord.
How does the Ontario Human Rights Code protect against discrimination?
The Ontario Human Rights Code seeks to ensure that all people are treated equally and that their rights are protected. The Ontario Human Rights Code (“the Code”) prohibits discrimination in housing based on the following protected grounds:
In addition to the Code, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects peoples’ rights to be treated equally under the law. Canada also has obligations under international law, in particular, under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Charter, to ensure that all people are treated with dignity and that their human rights are respected. Canada has also signed several international treaties which commit the government to protect people from discrimination.
If a renter believes they have been discriminated against, they can file a claim to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the “Tribunal”). This claim must be made based on a protected ground under the Code and filed within one year of the event. Once the claim is filed, the application will be sent to their landlord who may then respond to the claim. The renter is then given the option of mediation before a hearing takes place. In mediation, the Tribunal will hear both sides of the dispute and try to find a resolution that satisfies both parties – the renter and the landlord. If a settlement is not reached or the renter chooses not to pursue mediation, their claim will go to a hearing. During the hearing, the parties will each present evidence to support their position to the adjudicator who will consider both sides and make a final decision. This process can be quite lengthy and onerous on renters. The Tribunal aims to hold a hearing within a year of an application being filed but this may take longer depending on the circumstances. Additionally, final decisions are usually given to the parties three to six months following the hearing.
What makes discrimination a systemic issue is when it is caused by patterns of behavior, policies or practices that are a part of the structures of our society, organizations and institutions which put certain groups at a disadvantage. We can determine whether systemic discrimination is occurring in different ways. We can look at data to see how many marginalized people are represented in an organization and how they are treated. We can look at the policies and decision-making of institutions to see if they exclude certain groups. This is because although policies may seem neutral on the surface, they do not affect everyone equally. We can also look at the culture of organizations to see if that leads to certain groups being marginalized or excluded.
Examples of systemic discrimination in housing may include:
In 2019, the federal government passed the National Housing Strategy Act (NSHA), Canada’s first piece of legislation to identify housing as a fundamental human right. Under the NHSA, the federal government is required to ensure that vulnerable groups can participate in developing housing policy. To encourage participation, the NHSA establishes several mechanisms allowing for systemic issues, including those related to discrimination, to come to the attention of policy makers.
Three mechanisms created under the NHSA are meant to hold the federal government accountable to implement the right to housing:
The National Housing Council has been established, while the Federal Housing Advocate is yet to be named. The Federal Housing Advocate role in particular, creates an opportunity for people and communities to bring systemic issues to its attention by allowing them to make a submission. The Federal Housing Advocate can then investigate these issues and make recommendations to the federal Minister responsible to find policy solutions.
Claims to the Federal Housing Advocate are different from claims at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario in the following ways:
In addition to the federal mechanisms in place, the City of Toronto has also made a commitment to a rights-based approach to housing policy through its 10-year housing plan, the HousingTO 2020-2030 Action Plan.
The plan includes the establishment of the Housing Commissioner’s Office that will hold the City accountable for the right to housing and to its promise of addressing systemic housing barriers. The Commissioner will help the City create policies that are consistent with the right to housing and will monitor its progress in reaching its goals. Additionally, the Commissioner will ensure that vulnerable groups are consulted about housing policy and that the systemic issues they face will be brought to the attention of City Council. Similar to the Federal Housing Advocate role, the creation of the Housing Commissioner will provide an opportunity for groups to bring forward their experiences of systemic discrimination in housing. The City of Toronto’s Housing Commissioner has yet to be established.
June 15, 2021
Like many people, Priscilla Johnstone did not always know what kind of work she wanted to do when she got older. As a child, she dreamt about being a cop. As a young adult, she worked in the health sector. Now, she works as the Homelessness Action Plan Manager at the Saskatoon Housing Initiative Partnership (SHIP). While her current job is not where she thought she would end up, in many ways, her previous work experience and her lived experience make her the ideal person for the work that she is now doing.
Johnstone joined SHIP, an organization that provides consultation, research services, and front-line support to groups developing affordable housing, in September 2020. At SHIP, Johnstone is working on the implementation of coordinated access and the Homeless Individuals and Families Information System (HIFIS), which is part of the federal government’s Reaching Home homelessness strategy program.
Reaching Home was designed to support the goals of the federal government’s National Housing Strategy, which was introduced in 2017 with the aim of advancing the right to housing and addressing a range of housing needs, from shelters and community housing to affordable rental and homeownership.
A large part of Johnstone’s job is making sure that SHIP’s work has an Indigenous lens. In Saskatoon, this is particularly important.
In the 2018 Point-in-Time Homelessness Count, 85.5 percent of the homeless population identified as Indigenous.
“Because the Indigenous homeless population is so high, we want to be able to focus on and come from an Indigenous lens and an Indigenous perspective on why some of those issues are recurring,” Johnstone says. “Basically, I want to be able to provide insight into the historical reasons as to why there are a lot of reasons surrounding homelessness for Indigenous people.”
Johnstone works closely with Derek Rope from Medicine Rope Strategies in Saskatoon. Together, they have worked with survivors from residential schools – a group of more than 90 from Saskatoon and the surrounding area – on “the best way to engage Indigenous elders and knowledge keepers on how to tackle the housing issues,” she says.
“There is a lot of talk about Indigenous inclusion and [coming at things] from an Indigenous lens and collaboration moving forward, but there is difficulty in the sense as to what is the appropriate way to have engagement,” she says. “Here in Saskatoon, we have multiple demographics of Indigenous people; we have First Nations, we have Métis, and some Inuit. Because those different values and views come into place, there needs to be more of a collaboration piece moving forward, so that all voices are heard.”
Johnstone is working to bring forth an Indigenous framework for Indigenous inclusion following the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and the recommendations from the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women Inquiry.
“When I think of the magnitude of that stuff, it’s enormous,” Johnstone says.
Still, because of her own experience, she remains hopeful.
Johnstone’s mother went to a residential school. Her father went to a day school.
“Our family had a lot of domestic violence and alcoholism in my younger years. In my childhood we spent a lot of time running from shelter to shelter because of the domestic violence situation that had occurred in my home,” Johnstone shares. “We moved around all the time, from on reserve to urban settings. Back and forth, back and forth.”
Johnstone’s “saving grace”, she says, was that “because of my experience with my mom going back and forth to shelters and talking to counsellors, at a young age, I started reaching out to guidance counsellors. So, I learned how to build those mechanisms of support and how to navigate through those traumas and addictions and violence in the home and to move past it.”
Breaking cycles of trauma, however, is hard, and it took some starts and stops, Johnstone admits.
“I was a teenage mom. I dropped out of high school in Grade 10. I had my first child when I was 17. Single mom,” she says. “I really struggled.”
She credits a work placement program for helping her turn around her life for good. Through the program, she got her GED and started working as a practicum student in the health sector, eventually working there for 10 years.
After completing her diploma in addictions, she came across a mentorship opportunity with the Regina Police Service for Indigenous people to learn about policing through a two-week trial and decided to apply on a whim.
“I wasn’t even there for like three days and I was like ‘absolutely, I want to do this,’” she says.
That two-week trial led to a nine-year career in the police services.
“When I was a kid, I always wanted to be a police officer,” she explains. “But I gave up on that because I didn’t finish school and because I was a teenage mom, so I thought that would never happen for me.”
Working as a police officer had a huge impact on Johnstone.
“I worked in an urban setting for policing, as well as a First Nations setting. I saw first-hand human beings at their worst, and the biggest things that I saw were issues of social injustices that create addictions and just how everything kind of perpetuates itself. Most crimes happen because of lack of,” she says.
“Those values and beliefs that I have learned from that policing perspective, as well as when I worked in health, those are the foundations that have helped me in regard to the work that I am doing right now because I have that complete understanding of how those situations impact individuals and families,” Johnstone says. “And my goal is just to be an advocate moving forward. So, that is what makes me hopeful.”
Johnstone is also buoyed by the increasing openness of the federal government to engage with Indigenous Peoples.
Reaching Home, the federal program that supports Johnstone’s work at SHIP, specifically speaks about the government’s commitment to “achieving reconciliation with Indigenous peoples” by “engaging with National Indigenous Organizations and Indigenous service providers” and working together to develop an approach on how to allocate funding, which is a great start.
“Our government has brought the conversations back to the community level of First Nations people, as well as Inuit and Métis to have a voice, so that in and of itself makes me hopeful. That they are willing to listen, they are willing to work with, they are willing to walk with…” says Johnstone.
While Johnstone feels that the government has made progress in how it engages with Indigenous people, she says that more can be done at all levels of government. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the Indigenous housing crisis as people struggle with unexpected job loss and ongoing housing unaffordability. Indigenous advocates and supporters are calling on the federal government to provide long-term funding for an Urban Indigenous Housing Strategy created by Indigenous people for Indigenous people living in cities.
Johnstone hopes that as “Indigenous cultures and ways of knowing are slowly starting to make their way” into Western approaches, that we also learn from COVID-19 and continue to take more collective and partnership approaches to solving major issues like the housing crisis.
“There is no way we would be able to mitigate and work through this pandemic if there wasn’t collaboration and doing this community work together as a whole. I think [more people would have died] if we hadn’t worked together collectively through multi-organizations and multi-sectors and multi-jurisdictions,” she says.
Johnstone recently attended a workshop organized by CCHR and the Social Rights Advocacy Centre in partnership with the National Right to Housing Network that brought together different organizations from the Prairies to discuss intersectional challenges and solutions to key housing challenges in the region. Workshops like these are “fundamental in terms of the work and moving together,” she says.
“To bring systemic changes, one person can’t do it by themselves. One community can’t do it by themselves. It needs to be a collective.”
Priscilla Johnstone
The next regional workshop will take place in September and bring together housing advocates, community leaders, and people with lived experience to discuss the systemic issues faced by tenants in the North.
Throughout the spring, summer and fall of 2021, the Centre for Equality Rights in Accommodation (CERA) and the Right to Housing Toronto (R2HTO) ran a 5-part virtual workshop series across Toronto and the GTA to address critical challenges in advancing the right to housing, and to build awareness of how to claim the right to housing under the National Housing Strategy Act and HousingTO 2020-2030 Action Plan.
#1: Using the National Housing Strategy Act and HousingTO Plan
Participants at this workshop had a rich conversation about systemic housing issues and how people can claim their right to housing under the National Housing Strategy Act and the HousingTO 2020-2030 Action Plan.
#2: Addressing Systemic Discrimination in Housing
Participants heard from people who have experienced discrimination in their housing and learned about the frameworks that protect communities from these issues. They also joined small groups to propose solutions to address these issues.
#3: Evictions and the Right to Housing
This workshop provided an overview of the international frameworks and provincial laws that protect renters from eviction and focused on trends in evictions during the pandemic. Participants learned about the National Housing Strategy Act and eviction prevention policies, and discussed how the right to housing can be realized over time.
#4: Addressing Maintenance & Repairs
This workshop provided an overview of the legal frameworks that protect renters’ right to adequate housing by ensuring that housing is habitable and in a good state of repair. Participants learned how maintenance and repairs in rental homes can be a systemic housing issue and discussed how communities can address these issues and claim their right to housing.
#5: Ways Forward in Claiming the Right to Housing in the GTA
The final workshop in our series provided an overview of the key issues we learned from our four previous workshops on the National Housing Strategy Act, discrimination in housing, evictions, and maintenance and repairs. A panel of advocates discussed solutions proposed in previous workshops and how to take collective action to claim the right to housing in the GTA.
The National Housing Strategy Act (NHSA) is Canada’s first piece of legislation that identifies housing as a fundamental human right as recognized under international law.
It recognizes that all people have the “right to live somewhere in security, peace and dignity” and provides the federal government with a mandate to develop and support rights-based housing policies to advance its commitment to progressively realize the right to housing over time.
The NHSA recognizes that housing is important for the inherent dignity of a person and that it helps to build communities that are inclusive.
Under the NHSA, the federal government is required to:
The NHSA does not require:
Although the NHSA does not provide an avenue for individuals to pursue a complaint related to a violation of their individual right to housing, if many people are facing a similar kind of issue which hinders the realization of their right to housing, this may be identified as a systemic issue.
Examples of systemic issues:
People who are affected by these and other types of issues related to the right to housing may make a submission to the Federal Housing Advocate to investigate and make recommendations to the responsible Minister to take action. In some cases, the Federal Housing Advocate may also refer the issues raised in a submission to a Review Panel for public hearings.
Three key mechanisms have been created under the NHSA to hold the federal government accountable to implement the right to housing:
Each of these mechanisms has a distinct role and set of responsibilities, and all three interact with one another. Together they provide an innovative and participatory model through which systemic housing issues and human rights claims can be presented by affected groups and reviewed outside of the judicial system.
Let’s take a closer look at their roles and responsibilities.
The Office of the Federal Housing Advocate is located within the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Its role is to promote and ensure compliance with the federal government’s policy to progressively realize the right to housing over time through various mechanisms and processes.
The Advocate is responsible to:
The National Housing Council is a body created to further the progressive realization of the right to housing and oversee the National Housing Strategy. The Council advises the Minister responsible for housing issues in Canada about the effectiveness of the National Housing Strategy, and promotes participation and inclusion in housing policy development.
The NHSA requires that the Council is made up of individuals as well as government representatives, and includes representation from vulnerable groups, people with lived experience of homelessness and inadequate housing, people reflecting the diversity of Canadian society, and people with human rights expertise. Through the make-up of this Council, people who are directly impacted by housing challenges across the country will be involved in vital decisions to assess and ensure the government’s compliance with the right to housing.
The Council is responsible to:
The role of the Review Panel is to hear selective cases of systemic issues that are identified by the Federal Housing Advocate. When the Federal Housing Advocate receives one or more submissions on a systemic issue, the Advocate may request the National Housing Council to form from its members a three-person Review Panel to hear such issues. The Review Panel will be selected to ensure representation from vulnerable groups, people with lived experiences, and human rights expertise.
The Review Panel is responsible to:
Making submissions to the Federal Housing Advocate on systemic issues that deny affected groups their right to housing is a critical new tool for claiming the right to housing. The Federal Housing Advocate will engage with affected groups and conduct a thorough investigation into the issue. The Advocate’s findings and recommendations will be based on what is required under international human rights law to ensure the right to housing, and they cannot be ignored by the government. If the Advocate refers the issue to a review panel, this will provide an additional opportunity for affected individuals and groups to be heard and to bring forth their claim to the right to housing.
These mechanisms ensure that affected groups can participate and contribute to the realization of their right to housing, which is a core component of a rights-based approach. The meaningful engagement of rights holders that is outlined in the NHSA can be an effective way to claim the right to housing as established under the tenets of international law.
2020 was a difficult year.
In January, we came off a history-making year that saw both the Government of Canada and the City of Toronto recognize the right to housing and commit to taking a rights-based approach in their housing policy. We had been gearing up to continue pushing the right to housing agenda forward when the world changed in March with the outbreak of COVID-19.
As we near the end of 2020, thousands of people are facing potential eviction and homelessness as the pandemic rages on. Realizing the right to adequate, accessible and affordable housing has never been more urgent or essential.
Here we take stock of some of the biggest right to housing developments of 2020.
1. COVID-19 deeply impacted renters and people experiencing homelessness
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed and exacerbated economic and social inequalities across the world, and the impacts on renters have been significant. Like many countries, Canada has been in the midst of a deepening housing crisis for years, and the context was already bleak when the pandemic arrived. When several provinces went into lockdown in March, thousands of renters who lost their job or income were suddenly struggling to pay rent and vulnerable to eviction as a result.
Provincial moratoriums on eviction were swiftly put in place in March, and while these measures provided some initial relief from an immediate threat of eviction, they were ultimately short-lived. One by one, moratoriums were lifted prematurely, in some provinces as early as May, even though thousands had not yet recovered their income or employment. Since then, advocates have called for a moratorium to be reinstated, including in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario, Manitoba, and British Columbia. Ontario came close when a motion was unanimously passed by the Legislature on December 8, and now all eyes are on Premier Doug Ford to sign an executive order to implement the moratorium. For months, advocates in Ontario also raised the alarm over serious human rights and justice issues at the Landlord and Tenant Board, as thousands of eviction hearings have been rushed through and some people have lost their homes in a matter of minutes.
Meanwhile, people experiencing homelessness were also uniquely impacted by the pandemic, as shelters reduced the number of beds available to follow physical distancing requirements. The congregate settings in shelters led some people to look for other environments to sleep that they considered safer, like in encampments which sprung up in city parks and other outdoor spaces across the country. In response, municipalities like Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, Calgary, and London sought solutions to keep people safe and housed during the pandemic, moving hundreds of people living in homelessness into vacant hotels, modular housing and other temporary housing.
Hearing reports from the ground of safety, human rights and justice concerns in encampments and evictions across Toronto, advocates with R2HTO (the Right to Housing Toronto Network) provided the City with recommendations to align its approaches with its commitment to realize the right to housing.
2. The National Housing Strategy inched forward
The Government of Canada made several announcements related to housing and homelessness in their highly-anticipated Speech from the Throne on September 23. Among these announcements were new details about the government’s funding commitments, including a goal to accelerate the creation of 3,000 affordable housing units across the country by March 2021 – a critical addition to the housing stock that will be made through the Rapid Housing Initiative.
Another signal that the federal government is making progress on its National Housing Strategy was through the appointment of Canada’s first National Housing Council, announced on November 22. The Council has a mandate to advance the government’s housing policy and National Housing Strategy, which includes the progressive realization of the right to housing.
At the same time, the federal government launched its search to fill a key position with a mandate to advance the National Housing Strategy – the Federal Housing Advocate. This position will be responsible for monitoring, assessing, reporting, and making recommendations on the right to housing across Canada. This is a new role which has yet to be filled, and the government is currently seeking qualified candidates with applications due on December 30, 2020.
3. New legislation in Ontario weakened tenants’ rights
In July 2020 the Ontario government passed Bill 184, which makes several amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act. Housing advocates raised concerns about the negative impacts that this bill will have on tenants and their rights, which we know will be disproportionally felt by marginalized Ontarians – individuals who are low-income, racialized, newcomers to Canada, youth, and persons with disabilities.
Bill 184 weakens tenants’ rights and makes it easier to evict people by effectively stripping protections from tenants and undermining access to justice. Amendments under Bill 184 also impact tenants financially and widen the power imbalance between landlords and renters.
In a time when tenants need support from our governments the most, this new legislation makes life tangibly more difficult for already-disadvantaged individuals. This bill also made it all the more evident that Ontario renters have remained a low policy priority once again this year.
4. The City of Toronto reinforced its commitment to the right to housing, and we are still waiting for a Housing Commissioner
In December 2019 we celebrated the City of Toronto becoming the first municipality in Canada to commit to a rights-based approach in its housing policy. Nine months later, the City released its HousingTO Implementation Plan 2020-2030 containing the first details of how it intends to address affordable housing and homelessness over the next ten years.
One laudable goal in their plan is the creation of 40,000 new affordable housing units in the city with specific targets to provide affordable housing for individuals most in need, including people experiencing homelessness, youth, seniors, people with physical and developmental disabilities, indigenous households, and girls- and women-led households.
While the City’s plan is a good next step to realize its commitments, key details including timelines and concrete dates, as well as additional resources, are needed to better understand how and when the City will reach the targets it has set for itself. We have identified the good and the gaps that we’ll be keeping an eye on as plans continue taking shape in 2021.
We had also hoped the City would establish the Office of the Housing Commissioner in 2020, which is a centerpiece of the City’s HousingTO plan. The purpose of the Housing Commissioner is to hold the City accountable to its commitment to realize the right to housing. The timeline has been pushed back to 2021, and we are eagerly awaiting news on how this office will take shape and to see a budget commitment made to support its work. Ensuring independent accountability for a rights-based approach to housing policy could not be more urgent as the City continues to respond to an unprecedented global pandemic that has disproportionately affected some of our most marginalized citizens.
5. New seeds were planted to claim the right to housing across Canada
In the fall, CCHR and the National Right to Housing Network kicked off a new initiative working with communities across Canada to identify systemic violations of the right to housing, propose solutions and influence systemic changes in the housing landscape. Policy advocates, community leaders and lived experts across the country came together for two online working group meetings, contributing their collective knowledge and experience to propose solutions to address the deepening housing crisis facing so many communities.
These meetings planted new seeds that will support communities to engage with and benefit from rights-based housing policy, in particular the National Housing Strategy. Stay tuned for opportunities to engage in this initiative in 2021.
2020 has been a challenging year. The impacts of COVID-19 have pushed housing issues to the forefront while the housing and evictions crisis escalated to new heights.
As many Canadians continue to grapple with income loss, financial instability and housing insecurity, 2021 will be a crucial year to advance the right to housing. At CCHR, we’ll continue working with communities, advocates and governments to push this important agenda forward and we hope you will join us in this work.
For much of the year, our homes have been our whole worlds. It’s where many of us worked, shopped, had Zoom calls with friends and family, and helped our kids get through math class. While some Canadians were adjusting to doing nearly everything from home, others were suddenly facing the possibility of losing theirs through a traumatizing life event – eviction.
Two million Ontarians lost their jobs or their income when the province went into lockdown. At CCHR, we have fielded countless stories of how this has affected the ability of people in our communities to pay their rent.
Like Sebastian, who fell behind on rent after suddenly losing his job in April. He called CCHR in a panic when his landlord told him to pay up or immediately move his family out.
Or Jin, who was laid off in May and was terrified by a threatening eviction notice. She didn’t understand the law and didn’t know where to go for help, until she found our hotline.
Then there’s Ana, who faced the impossible choice of feeding her kids or paying her rent after her work hours were cut in half. Paralyzed with fear and anxiety at the prospect of losing her home, she called CCHR in desperation just the day before her eviction hearing.
Fortunately, our case workers were there to take Sebastian, Jin and Ana’s calls, informing them about their rights, how the eviction process works, and connecting them with legal assistance, financial aid, and counselling services.
We field calls from dozens of people in similar circumstances each month, guiding 90% of them to a positive outcome. In the past two months, the number of people we’ve heard from has doubled, overwhelming our capacity to respond. We are now deeply worried we won’t be able to help hundreds more keep their homes as the pandemic carries on.
UPDATE: Bill 205 did not pass
On Monday, November 16th 2020, Bill 205 the Protecting Renters from Illegal Evictions Act, a Private Member’s Bill introduced by MPP Jessica Bell, will go to 2nd reading in the Ontario Legislature. This Bill targets the growing problem of bad-faith and unlawful evictions in Ontario that are leaving tenants struggling to secure safe, adequate and affordable housing. If passed, Bill 205 has the potential to strengthen protections for tenants facing “no-fault” evictions; expand capacity for tenants, the Landlord and Tenant Board, and other levels of Government to fight bad-faith evictions, including “renovictions;” and increase fines and penalties for landlords who break the law.
Highlights from Bill 205 include:
Bill 205 seeks to expand timelines for “no-fault” evictions, increase transparency during the legal eviction process, broaden the enforcement powers given to the Landlord and Tenant Board and Government agencies to fight bad faith evictions, and expand access to legal services for tenants facing eviction.
At CERA, we routinely hear from tenants across Ontario who receive verbal or informal written demands from landlords to move out of their apartments for reasons relating to renovations or when a landlord claims they need the apartment for a family member. These demands bypass the formal eviction process at the Landlord and Tenant Board, including the use of proper forms that notify tenants of their rights, and are sometimes accompanied by pressure and harassment from landlords. Bill 205 addresses the problem of informal landlord demands to move out by requiring the use of official Landlord and Tenant Board forms for giving tenants notice to end their tenancy. Bill 205 also requires landlords to provide detailed information, in cases where they are seeking to evict a tenant due to extensive renovations or a demolition, directly to tenants when they serve a notice of termination. These requirements will ensure tenants are served with proper forms that include information about their right to proper notice, a legal termination date and notice period in accordance with the Residential Tenancies Act, and the rules regarding compensation for tenants in instances when they are entitled to compensation for an eviction. The requirement to provide all necessary information, including permits and authorization for renovations/demolition, directly to tenants will also help ensure landlords do not attempt to evict tenants under false pretenses. Taken together, these requirements will help ensure tenants are made aware of their rights and do not vacate the rental unit in accordance with informal or bad-faith demands.
Different levels of government are working to develop unique and complementary policies that protect affordable housing and fight illegal evictions. Unfortunately, much of this work is taking place in the absence of good data collection and sharing across levels of government – a key component of well-informed policymaking. Bill 205 will assist with better data collection and sharing by creating a registry of landlord “no-fault” eviction applications that will include data on the geographic location and outcome of these applications. Data from this registry will be published on an annual basis and shared across levels of government and with the public. Among other benefits, the availability of this data will allow governments across the Province to compile and analyze aggregate data to view trendlines about where these types of evictions are more prevalent and the outcome of these eviction applications – information that will allow levels of government to target policy responses to communities most in need. For tenants, the availability of this information will help them to make more informed decisions about whether to rent from landlords with past histories of evicting tenants.
Low vacancy rates, vacancy decontrol and skyrocketing rent prices make securing affordable housing increasingly difficult for tenants across Ontario. Evictions compound this difficulty by forcing tenants out into a difficult rental market under tight timelines and with additional disruption and expenses related to moving. Bill 205 increases the length of time tenants have to vacate their property when given proper notice and increases the mandatory amount of compensation tenants are entitled to when they are evicted for one of the “no-fault” reasons. These provisions have the potential to ease the transition to a new home for tenants who are legally evicted.
Because of vacancy decontrol, a policy that allows landlords to raise the rent by an unlimited amount when a tenant vacates an apartment, the financial incentives for landlords to unlawfully evict a tenant are high. This financial incentive is unlikely to be curbed by current fines and penalties given the relatively low amount of these penalties compared to the amount that can be charged by landlords in higher rent. Additionally, the onus on proving an unlawful eviction rests with tenants who are unlikely to have the necessary resources, in the form of legal representation or otherwise, to properly investigate and seek a remedy if they were evicted in bad faith. Bill 205 includes measures to tackle the above problems by increasing the penalties for landlords who unlawfully evict tenants and includes provisions that give tenants the right to return to their unit following an unlawful eviction or be provided with another vacant unit from their landlord at the same amount of rent. Bill 205 also increases enforcement and investigative capacity for the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (the Ministry) by requiring the Landlord and Tenant Board to notify the Ministry when an Order for eviction is issued based on a “no-fault” reason and compels the Ministry to take measures to ensure the eviction was carried out in good faith. If the Ministry determines that an eviction was unlawful, Bill 205 grants them the power to notify the tenant of the unlawful eviction and extends the period of time a tenant can take action at the Landlord and Tenant Board based on this notification to two years from the date they vacated the unit instead of 12 months from the date they vacated the unit.
Landlords have access to legal representation to help them navigate the eviction process at the Landlord and Tenant Board in a manner that is vastly disproportionate to tenants. This uneven access to legal representation creates a power imbalance in favor of landlords and makes navigating the eviction process an unfair fight for tenants. Bill 205 attempts to ease this power imbalance by requiring Legal Aid Ontario to provide, upon request, legal representation to tenants who are facing eviction for “no-fault” reasons. Given that no-fault evictions target tenants from all economic circumstances, it is encouraging to see that Bill 205 proposes to bypass Legal Aid Ontario’s financial eligibility requirements in these circumstances.
While the above measures have the potential to lessen the financial incentives for landlords to engage in unlawful evictions, these measures need to be accompanied by the elimination of vacancy decontrol to truly tackle the disturbing rise in unlawful no-fault evictions across Ontario.
Further clarification and additional details are required to clarify the methods by which tenants can obtain legal aid services when facing eviction for “no-fault” reasons. It is unclear whether tenants will be able to obtain these services through Legal Aid Ontario’s Certificate program, through increased capacity and resources in Ontario’s Community Legal Aid Clinics, or a combination of both.
Evictions are a highly disruptive events, especially in the midst of a global pandemic and economic crisis, and have long-lasting physical, financial, and mental health consequences. As such, evictions should only be permitted in exceptional circumstances and as a last resort. Tenants facing eviction should be made aware of their rights and be in a position to exercise them at the outset of and throughout the eviction process. Bill 205 includes some positive steps to ensure tenants are able to navigate the eviction process in a fair and transparent manner. Of particular interest are the measures which ensure tenants are made aware of their rights through mandated use of proper documentation and increased requirements for information to be provided by landlords. As well, a province-wide, accessible registry of “no-fault” eviction applications/orders is long overdue and has the potential to influence municipal and province wide policy solutions at a targeted level. Also of interest are the commitments to crack down on unlawful “no-fault” evictions by strengthening the capacity for the Landlord and Tenant Board and the Ministry to investigate and penalize landlords who undertake these evictions. Until vacancy decontrol ends, the financial incentive for landlords to unlawfully evict tenants will remain in place, but the measures included in Bill 205 may help curb the ability of landlords to unlawfully evict tenants with little or no consequences, and are a good first step. We are encouraged by the attention being given to these important issues and hope that Bill 205 receives all due consideration from our elected representatives.
The Canadian Centre for Housing Rights (CCHR) has a long history of developing and driving forward precedent-setting litigation.
When we were known as the Centre for Equality Rights in Accommodation (CERA), we represented clients across Canada and acted in an advisory capacity on many ground-breaking legal challenges to policies and practices that denied disadvantaged groups access to housing, including:
CCHR also led a coalition of organizations, and served as a plaintiff on Tanudjaja, the historic challenge against the federal and provincial governments for violations of section 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The case argued that governments created and maintained conditions that lead to and sustain homelessness and inadequate housing.
Across our history, CCHR has promoted interpretations and applications of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in order to address rights violations faced by disadvantaged groups in need of housing. In this regard, CCHR worked in collaboration with the Charter Committee on Poverty Issues (CCPI), a national committee of low-income people and legal experts that advanced the rights of impoverished persons in Canada. CCHR assisted CCPI in test case litigation involving particularly marginalized groups.
CCHR also coordinated CCPI’s intervention at the Supreme Court of Canada in Gosselin v Québec (Attorney General), [2002] 4 SCR 429 – the only Charter case to date in which the Court had the opportunity to consider the extent to which section 7 of the Charter places obligations on governments to provide an adequate level of social assistance to prevent homelessness and its adverse effects.
CCHR also coordinated CCPI’s intervention in the case of New Brunswick (Minister of Health and Community Services) v G. (J.), [1999] 3 SCR 46 which dealt with access to legal aid for those living in poverty; Baker v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 SCR 817, on the status of international human rights law in the exercise of administrative discretion; Eldridge v British Columbia (Attorney General), [1997] 3 SCR 624 on positive obligations to address needs of disadvantaged groups under section 15 of the Charter; Thibaudeau v Canada, [1995] 2 SCR 627 on the rights of single mothers; Walker v Prince Edward Island, [1995] 2 SCR 407 and R. v Prosper, [1994] 3 SCR 236 on the right to state-funded counsel for impoverished accused; and Symes v Canada, [1993] 4 SCR 695 on the application of section 15 to socio-economic policies and taxation.
Over the span of a year, CCHR – formerly known as the Centre for Equality Rights in Accommodation (CERA) – in collaboration with Canada without Poverty, spoke to an array of people belonging to various marginalized communities about how they survive with very little financial support. This booklet summarizes our findings, gives insight into what poverty looks like in Canada and puts into question whether a lack of financial literacy is the cause of poverty.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
