Make it easier for property owners to create housing
I follow newspapers in a few cities. London and Windsor are two and both, like Brantford, are dealing with shortages of low-cost housing.
Both London and Windsor approved the ability of property owners to add additional dwelling units, making it easier to convert basements or garages into apartments. Some have even added small standalone structures to their yards.
I and most other city residents are tired of the constant fighting and complaining over the sale of a golf course. There are human beings in this city who are homeless and fighting tooth and nail to survive. We simply do not have enough low-cost housing to meet the demand. Giving property owners the ability to add additional dwelling units could help a lot of people.
In my travels over the years, I have worked all over this great country. In Rocanville, Sask., a town of 400, the citizens were encouraged to convert basements and garages into apartments to handle the influx of 2,000-plus construction workers who would be working on a multi-year project.
I think it’s time Brantford take a serious look at the housing crisis. Let’s make it easier for property owners to do something helpful with unused space. This could help property owners financially and help our most vulnerable citizens at the same time.
Where is the harm in converting a garage into a home for grandma? You could keep elderly family close by, and, in turn, open up more rooms or apartments in buildings to help those in the city that need it most.
When the ribbon-cutting ceremony takes place at Northridge for the municipal golf course’s new clubhouse and renaming in honour of Walter Gretzky, will the invited guests and dignitaries be using port-a-potties to relieve themselves while there? I am also curious as to whether those guests will be permitted to use all of the other facilities in the clubhouse? At Arrowdale this season, no one can use the clubhouse or public restrooms because they are locked.
Let committees complete investigations
It is glaringly obvious why Justin Trudeau prorogued Parliament: to shut the committees looking into the WE scandal, and to scuttle the committee looking into Canada-China relations. Trudeau does not want the electorate to be aware of the extent of his nefarious involvement with WE, nor does he want Canadians to know how he has ‘sold out’ Canada to Communist China.
Trudeau’s actions are both cowardly and unethical, but, given his history, is that at all surprising?
The opposition would be wise to not trigger an immediate election, but should allow these committees, and other investigations, to be completed. Assuredly, Justin Trudeau is cringing, while contemplating the findings of all these inquiries.
John Harley Whitlock
Reform Act ignored
Justin Trudeau’s unilateral expulsion in 2019 of MPs Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott from the Liberal team is a testament to the omnipotence of prime ministers over their caucuses.
The Reform Act 2014, which came into force on Oct. 26, 2015, seven days after the general election, was designed to limit the power of the leader of a party to expel, elect or remove a caucus member without the vote or permission of caucus members.
The prime minister and his leadership team, as well as the NDP, ignored the obligation to have MPs vote on these rules, in direct contravention of Section 49 of the Parliament of Canada Act. The Conservative caucus complied and conducted the four recorded votes as required. The Conservative leader currently does not have the authority to expel a member.
What took place justified the whole purpose of the Reform Act, which is to rebalance the power between elected MPs and all-too powerful party leaders. Clearly, Trudeau has seen fit to allow himself to rule with an unobstructed hand, thus avoiding any possible backlash from his party members. Can you say dictator?