The risk of rupture in VBAC is low enough, and the probable number of VBACs in that Ontario study low enough, that it doesn't actually say anything about the safety of HBAC. All we know is that it's not so unsafe it can affect the numbers... which we probably already knew, given the existing literature on VBAC. Ontario wasn't taking the highest risk VBACs for birth at home, either. Single lower transverse incision with no other complications.
However, when we look at the death/injury rate for VBAC, does anyone know of a study which separates the place of birth? Although the rate of catastrophic uterine rupture is very low, and we understand which risk factors predispose to UR, we are terrible at predicting whether those risk factors will cause a catastrophic UR in any given woman. The NIH report lists outcomes for mother and baby for UR, but these were all hospital births. I suspect that the baby's chance of surviving a catastrophic UR OOH will be 0%.
Every birth is a crap shoot. However, we improve the odds of not shooting craps when we make sure that only women in the lowest risk categories, i.e. "no identifiable risk factors" are the women being cared for OOH.