Search

A man contacted our office after the FRO issued an order to garnish his Old Age Security payments and his federal pension, according to a court order from 1982.

A woman who was owed more than $17,000 in spousal and child support came to our Office for help in liaising with FRO officials.

An ODSP recipient complained to us about the Social Justice Tribunal of Ontario’s decision on her eligibility for the ODSP’s Work-Related Benefit.

We referred a man to the right internal complaint mechanism at the Office of the Children’s Lawyer so he could voice concerns about delays in receiving documents and in setting his court date, all of which resulted in added legal costs for him.

A man serving weekend time in jail who required anxiety medication three times a day sought our help because the correctional facility would not give him his medication on Saturday mornings when he arrived, or on Sunday evenings before he left.

We helped a woman from Manitoba who had struggled for six months to get Legal Aid Ontario to recognize her approval for legal aid in a custody case in Ontario.

A woman who broke her collarbone before she was sent to jail complained to us that she had been waiting for eight days for a sling for her arm.

Ombudsman’s Message - The value of independent oversight In many organizations, an Annual Report is a showcase of numbers, an illustrated balance sheet that carefully quantifies success, growth and value. As I present my third Annual Report as Ontario’s Ombudsman, I can see evidence of all of those things, but they are not easily quantified or reduced to a set of figures.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a meeting of council held on May 22, 2018.

My Office received a complaint about a special meeting of council for the Township of Tehkummah held on May 15, 2018.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that a non-council member motioned to move into closed session during the Township of Russell’s special meeting on April 19, 2018.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Municipality of Northern Bruce Peninsula inappropriately met in closed session on January 22, 2018 to discuss notice of an application for absolute title under the Land Titles Act for a property located within the municipality. The meeting was closed under the personal matters exception. The Ombudsman found that matters discussed during the closed meeting did not fit within the exceptions to the open meeting rules. 

We received complaints that the Town of Petrolia held meetings that did not comply with the open meeting rules when it discussed a proposal by the YMCA in camera on September 11 and October 25, 2017, and when it discussed an individual in closed session on November 14, 2017. The Ombudsman found that a presentation given by the YMCA to council on September 11, 2017 did not fit in any of the exceptions to the Act. He found that a discussion that followed the presentation fit in the exception for labour relations or employee negotiations. The Ombudsman found that the discussion on October 25, 2017 also fit within the exception for labour relations, and that the discussion on November 14, 2017 fit within the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual.

The City of Hamilton’s Waste Management Advisory Committee is a committee of council subject to the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements. The Ombudsman found that the committee contravened the Municipal Act on September 27, 2017 and January 31, 2018, when it held meetings without providing notice to the public.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Town of Deep River inappropriately met in closed session on March 21, 2018, to discuss a development proposal and various fire service issues.

The Ontario Ombudsman has a long history of independently and impartially resolving and investigating concerns about Ontario’s provincial correctional facilities. Of the more than 21,000 complaints we receive each year, close to 4,000 are about correctional facilities. In addition to resolving countless individual matters, my Office has actively monitored and, when necessary, investigated serious systemic issues within the correctional system.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Township of Tehkummah did not provide proper notice to the public for a special closed council meeting held on December 22, 2017. The Ombudsman found that the township’s discussion fit within the cited “personal matters” exception, as well as the “labor relations” exception.  However, the Ombudsman found that the township contravened the Act and the township’s procedure by-law by failing to provide proper public notice. The Ombudsman also found a number of issues with council’s procedures, and identified best practices and procedural steps to improve the township's meeting practices. 

We received complaints that a closed meeting held by council for the Town of Pelham on September 5, 2017 about town finances did not comply with the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001. We also received a complaint alleging that following the September 5, 2017 council meeting, members of council held a gathering at a local establishment that constituted an illegal meeting. The Ombudsman found that the matters discussed in camera on September 5 fit within the exceptions for labour relations and solicitor-client privilege. He also found that the informal gathering was not a meeting subject to the open meeting rules, as council members did not discuss council business.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Town of Fort Erie inappropriately met in camera on December 4, and December 6, 2017 under the “acquisition or disposition of land” exception to the Municipal Act’s open meeting rules. The December 4 and December 6 special closed meetings were to discuss a potential partnership with a post-secondary institution. The Ombudsman found that council’s discussions did not fit within the Act’s “acquisition or disposition of land” exception because council was in the early stages of deciding whether to proceed with the partnership, had not turned its mind to a specific property to purchase or lease, and was not acting with a view to protecting its bargaining position in property negotiations.

Since 1974, there have been dozens of cases in which the use of force by police in Ontario – especially the use of lethal force on people in crisis – has raised profound questions about policing standards, training and accountability. As a result, there have been more than a dozen reviews and numerous recommendations for reform. Despite incremental improvements through the years, Ontario’s police oversight system has continued to attract criticism and undermine public confidence in policing.