GTA Clinics Reject Vision Report’s Three Clinic Model

We are pleased to announce that GTA clinics have rejected the “three clinic” model proposed in the Transformation Project’s Vision Report.

On January 17, 2015, over one hundred staff workers, board members, and community members, representing 13 GTA legal clinics, convened at the “Clinics and Communities Conference,” where they agreed that the proposals provided by the Report  — in particular its proposal to close existing clinics and replace them with three mega service centres — fail to meet the particular needs of the GTA’s diverse clinics and neighbourhoods.

This synopsis provides an overview of the conference’s discussions and potential implications. To see a report-back from KBCLS, click here.

Format

The all-day conference was organized by Kensington Bellwoods Community Legal Services, independently of the Transformation Project and Legal Aid Ontario. Its goal was to explore alternatives to the Vision Report’s current proposals and process. The conference was the first time since the Project started that GTA clinic members (aside from the handful of Steering Committee representatives) have gathered together to discuss their specific needs, challenges, and strengths.

The conference’s first panel featured speakers from four legal clinics (Parkdale, Rexdale, Downsview, and West Scarborough), who outlined the various issues facing their local communities. The speakers highlighted differences and similarities in struggles by low-income communities to access justice across Toronto.

The second panel featured Kathy Laird of the Human Rights Legal Support Centre, Josephine Grey of Low Income Families Together, and Mary Jane Mossman of Osgoode Hall Law School, who presented various critiques of the Report and its process. The speakers canvassed the need for pilot projects, such as community hubs, clinic clustering, and resource sharing across catchment borders. They also emphasised the need for provincial policy change and increased clinic funding.

Discussion

The conference provided clinics with a chance to identify and discuss many of the concerns and much of the confusion raised by the Vision Report.

For instance, attendees spoke of a lack of clarity regarding the “endorsement” process. Jack De Klerk (ED of Neighbourhood Legal Services), responded, as Project Co-Chair, that clinics will no longer be expected to formally vote in February. Rather, any future endorsement process will serve as a mechanism for feedback, and not a step towards implementation. This did not fully quell people’s confusion.

Audience members also raised procedural and administrative concerns about the GTA Transformation Project process, including the undisclosed amount of Transformation-related funding that has been allocated to Flemingdon Community Legal Services. Flemingdon’s ED, Marjorie Hiley, is one of the two Project Co-Chairs. Approximately $200,000 to $300,000 of this fund remains unspent.

Audience members noted that the Project needs to — but has thus far failed to — respond to the particularities of Toronto’s different clinics and neighbourhoods. The audience highlighted the inadequacies of the Project’s “one size fits all” approach to the provision of legal aid services.

Next Steps

In considering ways to move forward, it was heartening to hear clinic members state their desire to work more closely with neighbouring clinics. Many staff members acknowledged the need for united advocacy for a fairer social assistance program, in order to systematically address the immense ODSP caseload overwhelming clinics.

Attendees also suggested that the Project may benefit from a reorganization of the Working Group and Steering Group Committees’ structures and decision-making processes. Community groups called for increased community and partner representation at the management level of the Project, while many clinics (including Parkdale) acknowledged a need for more widespread community consultation. Others called for more structural change, suggesting an alternative process of oversight which would be community-driven.

Surprisingly, there was little mention of the increased funding to legal clinics recently announced by the Ministry of the Attorney General and Legal Aid Ontario, which apparently includes funding for 70+ new clinic positions.

As the conference was not a Project-organised event, the meeting did not conclude with any official undertaking by Project members about their next steps. Nonetheless, it was understood that the next Project Steering Committee meeting on February 25, 2015 will address the comments and issues raised at the conference, including the collective rejection of the Vision Report’s proposal to close clinics.

We at Concerned Parkdale are delighted that clinics have clearly shown their strength in numbers and collective action. We look forward to seeing clinics negotiate with the province and LAO for increased, reliable, and sustainable funding to ensure access to justice for all Ontarians. We note that this is a call that has been made of clinics for months now by clinic users, clinic workers, the media, ourselves, KBCLS, Keep Neighbourhood Legal Clinics, Stop Clinic Mergers, the Law Union of Ontario, law professors, and hundreds of Canadians. As of this conference, it seems those calls are finally being heeded, and we are excited to see the outcome.

Open Letter to PCLS re Vision Report Vote

Dear Parkdale Community Legal Services (PCLS) Board:

We understand the PCLS Board has until February 2015 to vote on the GTA Legal Clinics Transformation Project’s Vision Report, which proposes closing Toronto’s existing legal clinics and replacing them with 3 mega centres (page 28).

We write to update you about community calls to reject the Report.

As you know, Ontario’s community legal clinic system is unique in Canada, representing over forty years of reflection, relationship building, and dedication to access to justice. PCLS has been at the forefront of this work, such that clinic users, PCLS members, Parkdale residents, PCLS staff, PCLS students, and supporters are now raising their voices to protect Toronto’s clinics from the threat of closures.

In particular, in October 2014, we delivered to you 45 support letters from Parkdale residents. As well, 250 people have signed an online petition asking you to reject the Report. We encourage you to read the supporters’ comments. Several comments detail the importance of localized clinics like PCLS, including:

I have seen first hand the good work a legal clinic can do. Losing a community legal clinic will force many people to travel far from their homes to access services from people who will not retain the same institutional and personal knowledge of the clinics and staff they are replacing, and many who may not be able to even afford the cost of transit or have mobility issues will simply not be able to access the new MegaClinic’s services, leaving them without any assistance whatsoever. This will further increase the gentrification of the neighbourhood I live in, as mammoth corporations like Metcap and Akelius use unscrupulous and illegal tactics to clear out long-term low income tenants.

Petitioners include clinic users, who describe why the Report fails them:

I have used Parkdale Legal, and their services really helped me. I would not have felt comfortable going to a megaclinic. It was nice going to a place that I knew helped people like me, that knew the Parkdale community.

And, simply:

PCLS saves lives!!!

These messages clearly show the importance of community legal clinics in the lives of so many in Parkdale, at Osgoode Hall, and across Ontario. Yet, to date, we have not received a response to these letters. We request confirmation that you are meaningfully considering this and other community input in your deliberations.

PCLS and the clinic system are not perfect. In 1971, PCLS led the way by innovating legal service provision for marginalized communities, and it should continue to do so. Efforts to improve clinics should be led by user needs. This requires comprehensive consultation with clinic users, clinic staff, and community partners. This also requires collecting and examining empirical evidence about the advantages and disadvantages of various clinic models.

Yet the Vision Report demonstrates little evidence, consultation, or innovation. The Report conducts no serious assessment of recent GTA legal clinic mergers, such as those that created Hamilton Community Legal Clinic or Unison Health Community Services.

The Report also leaves a number of issues dangerously unexplored, including:

  1. Where will the access points be and who will be facilitating the services?
  2. What evidence is there to suggest that efficiencies can be obtained through mergers?
  3. What alternatives to mergers exist?
  4. What might we lose by merging? What are the advantages to a localized, community-based model

In short, the Report is neither cutting-edge nor sound; it should be rejected accordingly.

We understand that PCLS’s Executive Director, Ms. Nancy Henderson, has resigned from the Transformation Project Working Group. Why did she leave? Can we interpret Ms. Henderson’s departure as demonstrating that PCLS is withdrawing support for the Report?

If not, we would remind you that, as one of the most active clinics in this city, arguably even this country, a decision to endorse clinic closures (even and especially if PCLS itself is somehow saved) would have severe repercussions across the province. The Report, with its preoccupation with “efficiencies”, was introduced under the threat of funding cuts. Yet both the Ministry of the Attorney General and Legal Aid Ontario have announced increased funding for legal aid. There is no reason to rush into a move that could devastate access to justice throughout Ontario.

Poverty transcends borders. It forces the dislocation of marginalized people. Thus, while the mandate of the Board binds you to the PCLS community (including PCLS users who live outside Parkdale), the scope of your deliberations should not exclude people living in poverty elsewhere in the GTA; the effect of your decision will certainly not be so isolated.

Parkdale is not an island in Toronto, nor does PCLS stand alone in the clinic system. We urge you to join Kensington Bellwoods Community Legal Services and West Toronto Community Legal Services, who have already voted against the Report.

In the alternative, if you are not comfortable voting against the Report at this time, the Board should defer the vote until  at least February 2016 to ensure you can conduct adequate consultation with the Parkdale community.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Concerned Parkdale