Cases of child pornography violations are steadily on the rise in Canada, whether it be making, distributing, or consuming material. News headlines from across the country crop up every week revealing a new slew of child porn offenders. The Canadian Centre for Child Protection recently stated, in a summary of key findings on child abuse images over the Internet, that there has been a “growing proliferation of child sexual abuse images and videos on the Internet” over the past 13 years. A few weeks ago, the federal government announced in its budget that it would place “new investments” toward protecting children from abusive online images. It more recently stated it would give $4.5 million to the Canadian Centre for Child Protection to fund an effective new online program called Project Arachnid, that combs in the internet for images of child pornography so that police can more easily catch who is in possession. Ontario has some of the highest rates of child porn incidents in the country, so it’s newsworthy to understand just how many incidents have been recorded over time, and how dramatically these cases have increased. In fact, child porn offences nearly tripled between 2010 and 2016, according to StatsCan.
The interactive map below digs a little deeper into how prominent child pornography possession is in Ontario’s largest cities. The illustration compares the rates per 100,000 people of child porn violations between each urban centre in 2016. Notably, Toronto (the largest city) has the lowest rate at 3.48, while Guelph has the highest, at 23.43. Guelph Police Service’s Annual Report for 2016 states that cases of child pornography increased from 2015. This is newsworthy because it may hint at some sort of criminal anomaly within Ontario cities, or may allude to the Guelph Police Service’s efficiency in tracking child porn offenders – though these speculations are not conclusive, by any means. In 2015, the federal government also introduced the Tougher Penalties for Child Predators Act, which increased the mandatory minimum penalties for crimes, which could lead to an increase in the number of incidents captured in the data for Guelph and other Ontario cities.
Child Pornography Violations: Rates per 100,000 persons in Ontario’s largest urban centres, 2016
After an architectural battle for private enterprise, the Château Laurier is constructed on public lands, in 1912. Source: Library and Archives Canada, PA-034088.
While recent Twitter comments condemned the re-designs for the Château Laurier addition as “the same ugly glass structure” that “birds might enjoy pooping on,” they also echo criticisms from the hotel’s distant past.
In fact, designs for the beloved Château itself were once seen as a “blot on our government,” and an “indignity” to Major’s Hill Park’s public space, as esteemed merchant Mr. Poulin told the Ottawa Journal from August, 1907.
Public lands for private enterprise
Similar statements from ‘leading citizens’ were collected by the Journal – Ottawa’s 20th century Twitter – after the Grand Trunk Railway company revealed their designs for the expensive hotel and train station, and left a citizenry divided.
Public opinion from ‘leadings citizens’ reflects how controversial the public site at Major’s Hill Park was for the proposed Château Laurier. Source: The Ottawa Journal, Aug. 15, 1907. City of Ottawa Archives.
The hotel would be built at the front of Major’s Hill Park, a public space many Ottawans valued for its heritage and scenic view of the Parliament buildings. Here, the developers felt it would have unfettered access to tourists using the adjacent railroad.
An unhappy Mr Ross, of the C. Ross department store, told the Journal it would “utterly destroy one of the finest pieces of natural scenery that Ottawa has.”
J.R. Jackson, in a dramatic letter to the next day’s issue, wrote that “every man, woman and child [. . .] would say let the Grand Trunk and its hotel (and station, too, for that matter) get out of Ottawa bag and baggage, rather than surrender the choicest public grounds [. . .] to be a private promenade…”
Not all Ottawans opposed the site, however. A Dr. Kennedy expressed that most park-goers weren’t actually from the city, and “would be more struck by a handsome hotel [. . .] than they are by the Park itself.”
The Château’s architect, a New Yorker named Bradford Lee Gilbert, mirrored these claims in an urgent letter to Grand Trunk’s general manager, Charles Hays, that month. “Judging from the number of benches provided, [the park] is not used to very great extent by the citizens of Ottawa,” he wrote.
Gilbert’s letter, obtained from the Library and Archives, argued the Château’s gothic structure would “harmonize” with the Parliament buildings, and wouldn’t pose any threats to the park’s usage.
Public lands for government-gain
But the designs would have to win the federal government over before construction could begin. An archival letter to Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier reveals the government wasn’t keen to have the hotel in a space that could be used for new government buildings instead. After Laurier suggested that Napean Point be a more suitable location, Hays argued otherwise.
“Its distance from the centre of business would make it difficult to earn its fixed charges. [. . .]For the first few years at least, an hotel on the Napean Point would be run as a loss,” he wrote to Laurier.
Grand Trunk General Manager Charles Hays tries to persuade Sir Wilfrid Laurier to choose the Major’s Hill Park site, for its economic benefits. Source: Library and Archives Canada, Laurier Papers, p. 127741.
Laurier then contacted the Grand Trunk’s Vice-President William Wainwright three days later, claiming the hotel’s height would compete too much with Parliament. “You should ask your architect if it would not be possible to take off one or two storeys,” he suggested.
Architectural Upheaval
Architect Bradford Gilbert’s miserable fate heightened the controversies. His designs for the hotel and station to cost a combined $2.5 million were approved by the government, but six days before City council examined them, Gilbert received a distressing order from Hays to re-design the building to cost $1 million less.
A distraught editorial claims that Ross & Macfarlane’s designs (bottom) are far too similar to Gilbert’s (top) to be truly original. Source: The Architectural Record, July, 1908. PressReader.
Gilbert refused to take responsibility for the re-designs the City didn’t approve of, and was fired in February, 1908. The new firm Ross & MacFarlane soon unveiled designs that an angry editorial in the Architectural Record claimed were “identical” to Gilbert’s.
“If this be ‘architecture,’ a supply of tracing paper and a brazen front are the main requisites for [. . .] that noble art,” it haughtily states.
The hotel became controversial again when designers proposed its first expansion, in 1929.
Château historian Kevin Holland said in an email that throughout history, any changes to the hotel “reflect the respective owners’ confidence in their property and its market,” and “any controversy reflects the passionate and protective views held by Ottawans for what has long been an iconic landmark in the capital.”
And if history repeats itself, today’s new ‘disdain’ might just become tomorrow’s old icon.
The City’s long-range transit plan, approved in 2011, says transit rates will increase over the next 30 years to pay for the transit system, which now includes new light rail transit. OCTranspo will also buy 80 new busses this year for an additional $50 million.
But the City faces criticism for these fee increases.
Trevor Haché, a board member with the Healthy Transportation Coalition, said transit-goers are “not seeing the same 2.5 per cent increase in their social assistance rates or hourly wages.” He argued the increase impacts other areas of life including “the amount of healthy food they can put on the table, or the amount they can heat their house in the dead of winter.”
Inflation rates have only risen an average of 1.6 per cent since 2011, which means the City hasn’t kept levies on par with inflation, as the transit plan says it would.
“Ottawa now has, amongst cities in Canada with more than 500,000 people, the most expensive cash fares in the entire country,” said Haché.
Bus-goers lined up outside the Rideau Centre all expressed concern over the price increase.
“I think it’s ridiculous. I don’t know how people are supposed to keep up with that,” said Liam MacPherson.
“[The City is] charging transit users more because they know that so many people use the bus,” suggested Brittnee Kossongo. “There are other fees that could go up instead,” she said.
Carleton University student Sarah Taylor explained the cost of life for students is “already so hard with everything increasing every year.”
“The City is clearly trying to capitalize on it,” she claimed.
Zameer Masjedee, President of the Carleton University Student Association, said the cost increase affects students in particular. “It really hurts. Transit is really essential for students to just get to the university and to commute around the city,” he said.
Masjedee claimed the Association plans to begin conversations on transit with the City this summer.
Councillor Marianne Wilkinson, who sits on the Transit Commission responsible for fare budgeting, admitted transit affordability “is an issue” but the City has no other way to make enough revenue to pay for the system. “There’s only so much available to us in [property] taxes,” she said.
Wilkinson said that despite the fare increase, the City still does not make enough to cover the costs of the system each year.
She explained the Commission assumed a 2.5 per cent inflation increase in its initial budget assessment, but could lower future levies based on forthcoming assessments. The Commission determines the increase annually.
Trevor Haché argued that to continually increase prices at a faster rate than wages sends the wrong “price signals” because it discourages people from using public transit. He suggested the Commission increase City parking rates and freeze transit fees each year instead.
“We often hear governments talking about the desire to encourage people to ride public transit, and to considering driving a little bit less […] We think increasing parking rates would do a lot for more healthy, affordable transit in this city.”
