Mayor John Tory budget cuts unfairly target vulnerable: city expert panel
Requests for a 2.6 per cent budget reduction from Tory, backed by council, "disproportionately" impacts low-income, vulnerable population.

Thestar.com
By JENNIFER PAGLIARO
Dec. 12, 2016

A group of academics and representatives from community agencies assembled by the city say Mayor John Tory’s request for across-the-board budget cuts unfairly impacts the city’s most disadvantaged and vulnerable residents.

At the request of council, staff reported back on the social and economic impacts of Tory’s request that all city divisions and agencies find 2.6 per cent in reductions - what has been part of his carefully-crafted narrative about first saving money before announcing plans to raise needed revenues, including tolling the Gardiner Expressway and the Don Valley Parkway.

But that exercise, the expert group says, was flawed from the start.

“One of the primary conclusions of the reviewers was that an across the board 2.6 per cent reduction to all city programs and agencies, by design, disproportionately and negatively impacts low-income, vulnerable and marginalized residents - because these residents are at a disadvantage to begin with,” reads a briefing note prepared as part of the 2017 budget process and published Monday.

Tory has argued that all departments needed to participate in the search for “efficiencies” - that the public expects governments to find a way to “do the same for less.”

“What we’re doing is asking people to do what every family does every year, what every small business does every year, what every big business does, what every non-profit organization does and what every government should do,” he said in July when council backed that request.

But in order to meet that request, the proposals for cuts put forward by city staff could mean closing transitional housing with shelters already at capacity; higher transit fares; or fewer resources for women experiencing violence - “in an environment characterized by underfunding, rising costs and underpaid staff,” the note reads.

The reviewers - who include three academics from Ryerson University and the University of Toronto, and executives from several local agencies including the Fred Victor Centre, United Way of Toronto and York Region, and Social Planning Toronto - said those divisions that serve vulnerable populations have less base funding to begun with and requesting the same 2.6 per cent reduction proves more difficult than those with larger budgets.

Though characterized as “high level observations,” the group’s findings also confirm council critics’ concern that the budget is unfair to middle and low-income residents.

Many of the high impact cuts identified are currently spared in the preliminary operating budget.

But those possible budget cuts have been presented as a list of options to council as they look to close a $91-million operating gap.

The reviewers said those possible cuts “will have a very negative, and in some instances, potentially lethal impact on low-income and vulnerable residents, as well as residents from equity-seeking groups.”

“It’s kind of a caution flag for the budget committee…If they look at any of these as further cuts,” said Councillor Pam McConnell, who has led the poverty reduction strategy. “My job will be to defend these programs that are essential for vulnerable people.”

She said the city will continue to receive similar impact reports as the poverty reduction strategy is implemented and that she hopes to see more input from those with lived experiences.

Several programs, including $3 million in new initiatives as part of the Tory-backed anti-poverty plan have yet to be included in the budget.

Tory has made clear he would not leave those programs, including 75 new childcare subsidies and improved student nutrition, on the chopping block.

The budget is finalized by council in February.