Subsidized Housing
Sometimes one has to step back and look at something from afar to see the bigger picture. This is one of those “bigger picture” things that help to explain the story.
Windsor-Essex has approximately 8,000 subsidized housing units. If we assume an average household size of 4, this would represent approximately a tenth of our population.
Our Central Housing Authority has this information on its website at www.chrwec.com., but they don’t have a map that shows all the units in one view, like the map above.
A couple of observations:
A large percentage of the residents living in subsidized housing are disadvantaged. They don’t have much political clout, but they do have medical needs, more so than most of us. And many don’t drive, so getting to the other side of the airport is a problem. Taking two accessible hospitals out of the community is going to be very hard on them.
So we have a situation where both the oncologists and the low income residents are too far away from the proposed location of the new hospital. But the oncologists have a louder voice than the low income residents.
Instead of acknowledging that the hospital location is in the wrong place, our steering committee, led by David Musyj and Dave Cooke, prefers to ignore this problem and move the public along to the next phase.
The proposed location of the new hospital on the far side of the airport is a problem. A mega-problem.
Windsor-Essex has approximately 8,000 subsidized housing units. If we assume an average household size of 4, this would represent approximately a tenth of our population.
Our Central Housing Authority has this information on its website at www.chrwec.com., but they don’t have a map that shows all the units in one view, like the map above.
A couple of observations:
- The red star south of Windsor airport is the proposed location of the new hospital. North of the airport is the city of Windsor. The airport comes between the hospital and Windsor’s residents. If this plan is allowed to come to fruition, the proposed mega hospital and Leamington District Memorial Hospital (in the far south east corner, 50 km from Windsor) will be the only two locations where Windsor Essex residents will be able to access hospital based acute healthcare services. How will this facilitate the delivery of acute healthcare services, the first objective of the Windsor Hospitals Study? Many residents are of the cynical opinion that this is more about the money to be made from developing Windsor's last major greenfield area. Looking at the map, it's hard to argue against this logic.
- The yellow stars in the north-west of the image are the locations of the three satellite facilities proposed for our region. There are no planned facilities of any kind anywhere near any of the blue markers to the east of downtown and in the county. Adding greater community support systems is smart. However, they will never be a substitute for accessible acute healthcare services when they are needed.
- County residents are being left out of this $2 billion plan. There is county support for a new acute care hospital that is closer to where many of them come in from. But where are their community support facilities? Most people haven’t read the government's “Patients First” discussion paper. Most people only think of acute care hospitals when they think of healthcare. That’s why they like this. But a plan with this many zeroes attached to it and no community satellites, is not a good 21st century plan.
- The green star is Met Hospital, which was renovated at a cost of over $100M ten years ago, and which is now slated to be demolished, including the Cancer Centre, which was built during the same renovation phase. Our oncologists said they didn’t have time to commute between this location and the new location on the other side of the airport, so it’s going to be demolished. Many of us feel this is a very wasteful use of public funds and scarce fundraising dollars.
A large percentage of the residents living in subsidized housing are disadvantaged. They don’t have much political clout, but they do have medical needs, more so than most of us. And many don’t drive, so getting to the other side of the airport is a problem. Taking two accessible hospitals out of the community is going to be very hard on them.
So we have a situation where both the oncologists and the low income residents are too far away from the proposed location of the new hospital. But the oncologists have a louder voice than the low income residents.
Instead of acknowledging that the hospital location is in the wrong place, our steering committee, led by David Musyj and Dave Cooke, prefers to ignore this problem and move the public along to the next phase.
The proposed location of the new hospital on the far side of the airport is a problem. A mega-problem.
