It’s been 100 days since the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 as a pandemic. This week, Canada reached 100,000 confirmed cases – the vast majority of which have been in our cities.
The largest 20 cities in Canada are home to 42 per cent of Canada’s population, yet account for a remarkable 67 per cent of total cases and 75 per cent of total deaths.
Even more remarkable is how highly localized the impacts of COVID-19 have been. Edmonton has had just 48 cases per 100,000 population, compared to Montreal which has had more than 25 times that number, with 1,265 cases per 100,000 population.
In a new report released today, COVID Signpost 100, the Canadian Urban Institute (CUI) argues that Canadians’ experiences with COVID have depended largely on who we are and where we live.
The report examines five dimensions of urban life: how we live, how we move, how we work, how we care, and how we thrive. Each section presents new data comparing how the past 100 days have affected Canadians living in cities – and shows how highly varied the experiences of COVID have been.
The numbers are clear: COVID-19 is deepening the existing inequalities in Canada’s cities.
So why aren’t we hearing more about this? Every day, the Government of Canada releases an official Epidemiology Update that provides a comprehensive snapshot of Canada’s COVID data as of that day. All of the data in the report is presented at either a national or provincial/territorial level, but none is disaggregated to the city level. There is data on cases and deaths by gender and age, but none on race or other critical dimensions of diversity. Why?
The national epidemiology report is the tip of a reporting regime iceberg. It reflects a system of local, provincial and territorial public health units and health-care providers, which all provide daily reporting for their jurisdictions. The data we are collecting during this crisis is a reflection of what policy-makers have decided really matters.
Yet nowhere in this daily national report can you quickly access city-level information about cases and deaths in Canada. Nowhere can you easily compare the specific experiences of a list of cities or communities with consistently reported data to determine which cities have been most effective in containing the virus. Even in provincial reporting – for example, in Quebec’s daily report – data are reported for health regions and not for individual cities. For Vancouver, a city of more than 600,000 people – larger than four of our smallest provinces and territories combined – city-level data is not reported regularly. Instead, data for Vancouver is reported as part of a larger health authority, as is the case for Halifax, Laval and other big cities in Canada.
Because of this piecemeal and irregular approach to reporting, the COVID Signpost 100 report presents the first city-level comparison in Canada of case and death counts over the past 100 days – a critical dataset during a crisis that is so distinctly urban.
The implications here are significant. It’s about more than just having good data; this is about making good decisions. The absence of readily accessible data compromises our ability to manage the crisis and plan for an effective recovery.
In addition to the data challenges, Canada’s cities also face governance challenges. Canadian federalism is predicated on two levels of government: federal and provincial. Local governments were not included in the Constitution, and as a result, municipal leaders have never been empowered to collectively make decisions about the issues that confront them.
This has become particularly problematic during the COVID pandemic, as key decisions about services and re-openings have been made at a provincial, rather than local, scale. City leaders continue to find themselves surprised when provincial health measures are announced without consultation (but with the full expectation that local officials will enforce, and pay for the enforcement of, these rules). Municipalities now face the impossible fiscal pressure to deliver critical public services such as transit, and are having to lay off thousands of staff to cover operating deficits that they cannot legally carry. Tellingly, the federal and provincial governments have been slow to respond to the united voices of municipal leaders calling for support.
The highly subordinate relationship between municipalities and other governments in Canada is a 153-year-old legacy of Canadian federalism which is blinding us to the realities of our now highly urbanized nation.
The first wave of COVID hit Canada’s cities very hard. A second wave may manifest differently, as in the United States where some rural communities are now hotspots. In Ontario, there are already rural areas like Haldimand-Norfolk that have been impacted severely. COVID is exposing frailties and challenging us to solve systemic problems. Localized data collection and reporting, which benefits urban and rural decision-makers, is one of them.
Our country relies on cities as our economic drivers. Cities are paramount to our recovery as a nation. We must begin reporting local-level data. We must ensure city leaders have a meaningful role in making decisions that predominantly affect cities. And we must work together across governments to address the immediate municipal fiscal crisis caused by COVID, and to identify a more sustainable arrangement of resources and decision-making authority for the 21st century.
The scales tipped long ago. We are an urban nation. We need the data, resources and powers to govern it.
Mary W. Rowe is the President and Chief Executive Officer at the Canadian Urban Institute. Kate Graham, PhD is the Director of Research at the Canadian Urban Institute.
