Category Archives: Homeless

Homeless, Poverty

Response to a Letter

Leave a comment

First, I believe the only way to make any true headway on issues such as poverty or homelessness requires the entire community to be involved. We are speaking of very complex issues that need many new, innovative ideas so we can tease apart the separate threads making up the Gordian knot we currently have. In order to generate these ideas we must have discussion, debate and conversation. The second is that as part of the examination of these problems, issues and ideas it is a fair question to ask about my personal frame of reference. Having an understanding of my background and life experience should help readers understand what I am saying and not have misunderstandings occur, such as happened in the first paragraph of your letter.

Blame is a fool’s game. It accomplishes nothing and gets in the way of change. It would have been most beneficial to course of my life to have dealt with my mental health issues at a much earlier point in my life. I did not or could not get it together then and there is nothing I can do to change that past. I could blame myself for not having been able to act before and constantly beat myself up over that, but that behaviour accomplishes nothing. I have to let it go and accept it as one of the realities of my life I cannot change. While I cannot change what went before, I am responsible for my future mental health. I could be incredibly stupid and go back to the old behaviours that left me vulnerable to having my life trashed by mental illness. Alternatively I could choose to act in a rational and intelligent manner, accepting the reality that I suffer from mental illness. I can, by acting responsibly, choose to walk a path more to my liking. I have medication to put a bottom I can deal with on what was a bottomless pit of mental hell, tools to get me through the bad days, knowledge about my own mental health, awareness of and access to mental health resources to deal with unusual stress or problems, friends and groups for understanding and support, I have regained joy and found passion to pursue interests, issues and causes. Most importantly I have regained my ability to make choices. Hanging onto blame would only serve to anchor me in the unhealthy mental state of my past. I choose to let go and live well.

In a similar manner it is a pointless waste of time to attempt to assign blame for poverty, homelessness, addiction, mental health issues, injustices and the uncivil, selfish behaviour rampant in our society these days. There is plenty of blame to go around and absolutely no point in getting into a pointless argument about who, what, where, why or how we got into this mess. We are in it and I do not really care about blame. What I am concerned about is the future and that we as a community behave rationally and intelligently in the choices we make and the actions we take.

It is clear to me that the actions currently being untaken in regards to dealing with these issues have accomplished pretty well nothing positive while serving to add to the rolls of the poor, homeless, addicted, untreated mentally ill, victims of crime and a host of others ill-fated enough to need support. To continue current policies and behaviours expecting different results is to me behaving in a manner as insane as the insanity of an addict. What I in fact advocate, is that if we want to attain positive results (for example: cause the number of the working poor who depend on the food bank for enough food to live to go down or to reduce the number of homeless living on the streets), we must change policies and behaviours to reflect what is real as opposed to the current practice of seeing what one wants to see or believing what one wants to believe. Reality does not care what you want to see or believe it just IS. Ignoring or denying reality because you do not like, want to believe or want to acknowledge that particular reality is as pointless a waste as blaming. Refusing to face reality perpetuates current behaviours, wasting large amounts of money, resources and time to no purpose. When what you are doing only serves to increase the problems and challenges faced – it is time to change your behaviour.

Before we proceed to your points 1 thru 5 there is a question I need an answer to be able to more accurately understand the points you raise. Since I do not know you I have no real way to determine if you are narrow-minded, wilfully blind or merely uninformed. Your statements equate being homeless with being an addict which is erroneous. Before continuing to read I would suggest you familiarize with the reality of homelessness. Yes those with addictions make up a significant percentage of the homeless but they are far from all the homeless. The last figure I read, sent by another fellow citizen less than pleased with my words, was from a Toronto Star article on a study that cited addiction as the primary cause for 30% of those who found themselves living on the streets; a far cry from all the homeless. Labelling all the homeless as addicts, because some are, is no more fair than me labelling you as an unthinking, war mongering, ass-kissing megalomaniac who believes the size of his cojones is dependent on sending others abroad to kill and be killed just because conservative party leader Harper is.

It is totally irresponsible and un-Canadian for any Prime Minister to shove his nose so far up the American president’s derriere. It is beyond irresponsible to abandon our role as peacekeepers and place our soldiers in a situation where they will kill innocent bystanders and they cannot tell who the enemy is. It is insanity to spend our soldiers lives so that a bumper crop of poppies (heroin) can be raised, processed and exported to our streets to kill and addict the very Canadians our troops are pledged to protect. It is incomprehensible that any leader would think that aggressive actions, bullying and going around wrecking death and destruction make you a “player or leader” on the world stage. I cannot in any way comprehend how it is that Harper thinks the size of our military and his willingness to waste their lives and our countries treasures in military adventurism in any way enhances the size of his cojones.

On point 1 – Yes I believe in punishing crime. I do however suspect, based on your statements about “rights and freedoms” that we do have a very different view about our legal system. I believe everyone is entitled to the same “rights and freedoms”. Based on your words, you and your fellow conservatives advocate that some have or should have more “rights and freedoms” than others. Just what are the criteria you use for deciding which rights and freedoms someone should have? Where you were born, skin colour, religious beliefs? Does the amount of money you have and the size of donations to the conservative party entitle one to more “rights and freedoms” than those with less money and who vote Green? My personal beliefs is that our legal system should be as level a playing field as possible and that everyone should have the same “rights and freedoms”.

Your point that jailing pushers would solve addiction is a fallacy. Let us be perfectly clear on one point about the drug trade and that is, in one of those huge ironic twists that the Universe seems to abound in, the drug trade is the ultimate expression of Capitalism. Supply and demand is the foundation upon which the drug trade (legal and illegal) is built. No matter how many pushers you lock up, the lure of big bucks and all the things money buys ensure a ready supply of people willing to sell drugs to make the $$$. Similar to the way in which tobacco companies had and have no trouble finding people to make, distribute and sell a product causing death and suffering. If your approach to this group of issues is throwing pushers in jail, then you are doomed to failure as our society’s worship of the $$$ guaranties an endless supply of those willing to sell harmful products – of any shape or form. The only way to drive pushers out of business is to eliminate demand. This whole area of discussion demonstrates that what sounds good and appeals to ones personal world view often, when viewed rationally and through the lens of reality, will not accomplish your goal – unless your goal is to fill up prisons. We know from the experience of the USA that using incarceration to address drug use only fills up the prisons and makes rich those involved in the building and running of prisons. Yet another of those Universal ironies, another legal way to get rich from the illegal drug trade.

I have nothing against locking up pushers. I just firmly believe that for ethical, moral and spiritual values we should be concentrating our resources and time on helping the addicts as opposed to the conservatives desire to pour unlimited dollars into jailing pushers and then claiming we have no money to build detox beds. Build the detox beds, help the addicts get sober, you eliminate the demand, which eliminates the $$$ and thus the pushers. You and the conservatives may not find this approach nearly as soul satisfying as throwing lots of people in jail, but it has at least the possibility of working and it will help addicts.

Point 2: Another illustration of differing viewpoints. You see “down-and-outers” were I see my fellow human beings in pain and in need of help. As to your compassion and willingness to “give time, money and your home” – this is an important piece of what is needed to help those suffering with or from such challenges as addictions, mental health, homelessness or pure bad luck to get back on their feet. If some of the badly needed changes can be brought into being, I will be calling upon you to help execute those changes. Although there will be need of monies, properly spent, it is personal time and caring that will be the deciding factors in how successful we as a community will be in reclaiming lost lives.

This belief, that the soul of a community is determined by the involvement of citizens in volunteering, is why I also volunteer my time with organizations and activities that have nothing to do with poverty and homeless issues.

I think I will just pass on the issue of who gives more; it would be entering a pointless snake pit of definitions. Any decent accountant can build support for either side of your statement. There is far to much that needs doing and far to many who need help to waste time in semantically debates. I do not care where the giving comes from. What I do care about is that all the resources are used to take actions that efficiently and effectively produce positive results.

Point 3. I apologize for the following verbal jab but while I am much healthier mentally I do fail sometimes and this jab is just to good to pass up. Apologies. I bow to your working prowess. While I have, in a factory setting, occasionally worked 2 eight hour shifts I found that by the end of the second week I had to cut back the hours and get some more sleep and rest. As for your having “worked two eight hour jobs and sometimes three” there is nothing I can say as I always had to get some sleep and as I said by the end of the second week of 16 hour days I had to cut-back to get more rest. I could not, I would not even be willing to try, work three eight hour jobs as I have always had to get some sleep each day. No, going 24 (3 X 8) hours a day without rest is beyond me.

I must also apologize as I must have misunderstood your politics as I had thought you supported the conservative party. I must be mistaken about your supporting the conservatives since you want your taxes to go to a responsible government. On top of this you want a government to “re-steer the homeless addict through rehab into a self fulfilling job in society”. I think I will also apologize for stealing your words because, although I will drop the re- in re-steer, the goal of “steering the homeless addict through rehab into a self fulfilling job in society” is an expression of a goal I can get behind and support. So with you demanding both responsible government and sound social policy it is obvious you cannot be a conservative supporter. To be truthful, I do not see how you can support any of our current political parties using your stated criteria.

Point 4. This point forces me to take my tongue “out of my cheek”. I am not sure whether the current conservative government fooled you (and many others) completely or if you were so desperate for a responsible government that you became self-delusional. It does not matter. Let us be clear on one important fiscal point – this current conservative government does not behave in a fiscally responsible manner. Actually, they do not behave in a responsible manner in most of their actions. That aside, I base my judgement of their fiscal idiocy and irresponsibility upon my education and background – Bachelor of Commerce, Chartered Accountancy and wide experience in accounting and business. A fiscally responsible government does not cut taxes, it does not even promise to cut taxes during an election campaign. A fiscally responsible government takes every cent it can muster and applies it to reducing the government debt levels you cited. A fiscally responsible government does not tout a surplus when that surplus is an illusion. The so-called surplus exists only as long as interest rates remain low. Currently they are rising and are going to continue to rise, eventually reaching and surpassing the point where increased interest costs turn the “surplus” into debt. To increase the recklessness of this, the conservative government has committed to pour out of our coffers hundreds of billions of dollars, in following their ideology, on programs or assets that will add nothing of economic benefit to our country or its citizens.

Worse, in the pursuit of their ideology the conservative government fails to think. For example, in the area of their ideological based childcare program they failed miserably to consider what effect the additional $200 would have on the working poor. I recently heard, and agreed with, the indignation someone was feeling over hardships this unthinking, ideological policy making had. She was trying to come up with someway to overcome the disaster looming for a family in jeopardy of going hungry because the $200 placed the family over the income limits for accessing the food bank. Apparently the conservatives only worry about helping the working person who is able to donate to their party. The working poor who, needing every dollar just to survive, cannot afford to waste a dollar supporting any political party appear, in the conservative world view, to be unworthy of sparing a thought about. The conservatives are so busy pursuing their ideology they have no time to behave responsibly.

I have to admit to having no understanding of your comment citing our debt having gone to pay for a rich sheik in Asia. Should you choose to clarify what you are speaking of I would be glad to address this point. Currently that statement seems incongruous to being linked to paying for roads, hospitals or helping the homeless.

Point 5. I agree people need to be engaged in their community, province and country an a daily basis. The true problem with voting is that so many fail to vote and so many of those who do vote fail to expend the effort to actually think. They would rather just hear something they like, something they want to believe is true or promises of easy, fast fixes for difficult problems thus it is you have our current political situation. If people actually took the trouble to think and apply common sense to the issues and challenges that face us, they would ignore the existing parties and forming a new political collaboration based on acting in a responsible manner based on reality – not ideologies or world view.

As to your analogy of the bridge and ambulances: I think you are viewing the situation completely wrong. I would say that in pointing out what actually results from current policies and practices, then calling for the changes necessary to act in the manner required to help steer people into fulfilling places in society, I am standing on your imaginary bridge attempting to change the direction of travel from the disastrous path over the edge. In seeking to perpetuate the current policies and actions, to remain on the same old path onto the bridge and over the edge into the abyss, thus adding to the carnage of the pileup at the bottom of the gorge (or society), you are standing at the bottom of the gorge beside the river. Perhaps you would care to join me in switching from the old path over the edge onto a new path leading upwards and outwards.

Homeless, Provincial

Province urged to create housing

Leave a comment

Fund it with property-transfer taxes, municipal politicians say

Frances Bula, with file from Jonathan Fowlie
Vancouver Sun
Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Some B.C. municipal politicians have urged the provincial government to use the hundreds of millions of dollars it collects in property-transfer taxes to help fund a housing program that will create housing.

However, at least one mayor said Tuesday it’s not really housing that’s needed. Instead, the province needs to put more into mental health and addictions treatment to get people off the street.

Whichever approach was argued, homelessness and housing dominated conversations at the Union of B.C. Municipalities annual meeting in Victoria this week. The meeting has attracted 1,900 councillors and regional district representatives from around the province.

“[Monday], we had a session on health that turned out to be about homelessness. A second session on affordable housing turned out to be about homelessness,” said New Westminster Mayor Wayne Wright, as he spoke Tuesday at a session for delegates from large urban centres.
Homelessness continued to be the theme of Wright’s day as he went to the washroom at the Empress Hotel, next to the convention centre, and found himself sharing it with a homeless man who was using it as his wash-up facility for the day.

Wright, along with many others, said the province has a crisis on its hands and no one is tackling it. “We spend billions on cancer research. Yet here we have a disease that’s in the middle of us that we’re not attacking the same way.”

Many politicians criticized, for the second day, Housing Minister Rich Coleman’s recently announced housing strategy, which will provide money to build shelters and transitional housing, along with giving housing subsidies to poor families living in private apartments who are spending a lot of money on housing in relation to their income.

Councillors like Dean Fortin of Victoria and Heather Deal of Vancouver argued that with vacancy rates near zero in those cities, housing subsidies won’t solve any problems, but will just raise rents.

Several politicians, including Alan Nixon from North Vancouver, Vic Derman of Saanich, and Al Hogarth of Maple Ridge, urged the provincial government to create a funding mechanism similar to the one now used for transportation, where part of the gas tax goes towards transit projects.
The property transfer tax, created in 1988 to discourage speculation, and which generated $830 million for the province last year, could be used to create a housing fund that others could add to.

That recommendation was echoed Tuesday afternoon, when delegates heard recommendations from an “economic opportunities” task force, which made the same suggestion.

But Mayor Gord Robson of Maple Ridge said his municipality doesn’t need housing, it needs treatment for its mentally ill and drug-addicted homeless people. Robson said a recent survey of all 177 homeless people in the Tri-Cities area showed that 98 per cent of them were either mentally ill or drug-addicted or both. “We don’t need housing, we need help. We can’t put them in jail. We can’t take them outside of town and shoot them. What do we do? They’re sick, it’s an epidemic, there’s thousands of them.”

The housing minister’s new assistant deputy minister, Mary Freeman, said the ministry wants to hear from communities about what is working and what isn’t so it can make adjustments.
The issue of affordable housing was once again addressed on Tuesday when Vancouver police arrested six protesters from the Downtown Eastside who had occupied an abandoned hotel.
The protesters moved into the empty North Star Hotel at 5 West Hastings St. on Sunday, demanding it be converted into social housing.

On Tuesday afternoon, VPD spokesman Const. Tim Fanning said the six people — three women and three men — were arrested and charged with assault by trespass. Fanning said the arrests were made without incident. “It went very smoothly. We kept the lines of communication open between the people running the protest and the leadership of the police operation and that helped keep things civil,” he said.

Homeless

Drop-in

Leave a comment

“What do we need?” is a question often posed to me. With all that is needed to begin to address the many facets of the homeless question it can be hard, especially with the complications and massive needs that are a result of neglect and/or thoughtlessly actions or inactions, to decide where to start. These days I feel there is one item that stands out because it has the promise to save lives if we can act quickly enough.

The final touches are being put on the official Abbotsford strategy for extreme weather. Truly nice to see a positive step forward in a timely fashion without hemming and hawing or a list of reasons why not. Although the project I want to get off the ground may not cause hemming and hawing it will cause screaming, massive lists of “Why nots”, NIMBY’s, and have politics rearing its ugly head. An extreme weather plan is needed, but weather conditions that are not deemed extreme can still, in our wet, rainy climate pose significant threats to health and even life.

I was homeless last winter, living through day after day of often torrential rain. Even with my car, which was a water proof shelter, the rain and wet were hard to deal with. For those without such a waterproof haven the weather was a threat. I had someone come up to me and say thank you for Street Hope. I was not an official volunteer but since I was depending on them for a warm place, hot coffee and food, and since I was capable I pitched in to help where needed. This would explain his mistake and it was simpler to accept the thanks and pass it along to Dave and his dedicated band. The point was the having finished treatment and living sober he felt he needed to express his thanks because he felt that having a place for drying out, to get dry clothes, hot coffee and food was why he was alive to become sober. He was not the first person I had heard express this belief, that someone’s life was saved due to being able to drop in. Unfortunately Street Hope was judged undesirable and the people who depended on it “expendable”. In the words of the businessman Scrooge “Let them die and reduce the surplus population”. It seems likely the scrooges of the downtown Abbotsford would include “just don’t die on my doorstep and create a nuisance”.

So a open drop-in has made its way to the top of my list as it has not only the potential to save lives but its potential to provide other much needed services. It would not be open 24 hours a day, but its hours would be long and extended to cover the hours other places of help and refuge are closed. It also needs to be tasked with working with its neighbours to address problems – just as the neighbours would be tasked with doing their part in problem solving. So here are some of my ideas. Just remember that in keeping with my views on the homeless situation I do not view this as a bible but as a starting place. Anything you undertake has to be flexible, open to trying new ideas, open to community ideas and definitely not written in stone. So, this is a framework for getting off our butts and making a start. For as I have already quoted Yoda: Try not. Do or Do Not. There is no Try”. We need to stop hiding behind “try or trying to” and Do.

I want to open the Locus of Dawn. A drop-in centre for the homeless, the poor, the lonely, those in need of help and the volunteer. The mission statement of the centre is in its name:

*Locus*: n. 1: a locality; a place; 2: A center or focus of great activity or intense concentration 3: The set or configuration of all points that satisfy specific conditions. *Dawn*: n. 1: a first appearance; a beginning; or as a verb v. 1: become clear or enter one’s consciousness or emotions; 2: To begin to be perceived or understood;

For some it will be a place for people to come to begin their journey. These journeys could be to goals such as housing, employment or addiction treatment. For some it will be a place for it to enter their minds, and for it to become clear, that they need to make some changes. For the community and others involved, it is a place to begin to perceive and understand all the facets of homelessness, poverty and addiction. It will provide a focus for the great many activities needed to begin to help people move from homeless to employment and back into society. The concentration will be on its particular mission – the homeless are to be its single-minded focus and its concentration to be on addressing the needs of the homeless community. But it will be open to all those who have a need that the centre can meet as part of its daily services provided to the homeless community, welcoming all as long as it does not detract from the mission to meet the needs of the homeless. The centre needs to have a varied set (or configuration) of points (services, knowledge, contacts, et al) satisfying specific conditions (for each differing destination).

What do I envision this centre providing? *** (Subject to revision without notice to incorporate any good ideas and suggestions). 1) Coffee; a location for church groups who wish to serve food (lunches or evenings); to ensure that a supper of some sort is available daily; a place to collect and distribute clothing, bedding, etc. a place that interested groups can use to distribute to the homeless and poormail boxes, telephones for phone access, industrial washers and dryers, shower facilities, washrooms, storage lockers, computer access, internet access, email addresses and access. 2) Résumés, cover letters, job hunting help and support, dressing & grooming for job hunting and interviews, liaising with the business community to build bridges and a portfolio of work available, job referralsliaison and or out reach point for services available from governments, churches, community services, treatment facilities, recovery houses, addiction counselinga coordinating point among all the stakeholders, mediation between various stakeholders, recruiting of groups to provide goods, services, food, support and volunteers 3) leadership and advocacy on questions, problems, ideas and on issues in conflict, housing issues: desperate need for longer-term shelter beds; transitional housing; subsidized housing; BC housing issues liveable social assistance levels – $850.00; lobbying local MLAs John van Dongen and Mike de Jong on assistance levels, grants and funding for programs to address the needs to reduce homelessness. working with our local MP Ed Fast to secure federal funding not just on the homeless issues but from funds for issues affecting the homeless such as employment, education, training, wage subsidies out reach to those who cannot seek out services, employment, housing, medical treatment, mental health help etc. on their own.

This is only a beginning list of services and goals because it is my intention the centre always be a work-in-progress. That it be constantly experimenting, adjusting, adding and (were necessary) dropping offerings, always changing always flexible. Part of the centre’s gestalt would be that it will show leadership on other pressing needs such as the need for a longer-term shelter, more 2nd stage housing modeled on the Supported Independent or for reform of the provincial social ‘assistance’ system.

Based upon my own up close and personal experiences it is my opinion that a centre of this type is the most effective and efficient way to begin to address the many varied needs of the (extremely varied) homeless community. It will provide a focal point to co-ordinate and facilitate services. In the course of being homeless I have come into contact with many good people. To some of them it would provide an ideal job, their skills, education, experiences and personalities making them suitable to help accomplish the centre’s goals. For others the centre would be an anchor point for them to fan out from in reaching out to those on the streets not yet ready to come to the centre and start their journey off of the streets. Thus, when they are ready, someone is in contact and there to help and guide them in starting their journey, with the centre and its resources there to provide support and other needs. Still others feed and clothe the homeless. The centre would provide co-ordination with these people and groups to ensure that we maximize the benefits to the homeless from the food, bedding and clothing provided. The centre would also be reaching out to others to fill the gaps of the unmet needs

.It may be ambitious but … the Churches, the volunteers, the business community and the citizens of Abbotsford on board and get them involved, we can accomplish this. In addition, with the community solidly involved we can draw in the city, provincial and federal governments to do their part in addressing these needs.It may not be easy; it may not be smooth or neat and tidy.

It will require and demand vision, hard work, passion and stubbornness – but it can be done.

Caveat emptor, Homeless

If this is what Black Press’s BC reporter passesoff as thinking – it is no wonder others consider BC lala land

Leave a comment

I wish I could say my first thought upon seeing the title of Tom Fletcher’s “Discerning bums prefer ocean view” was that he was talking about the type of “bum” who would accept payment for writing trite, cliqued trivial nonsense just to meet the mortgage payment on his ocean view home. But I would be lying since it was clear that this was going to be another thoughtless rant about complex social issues. Reading this foolishness, as I did right after reading the News “Our View” on the same page, I did think that the employees of Black Press might want to insist on an environment study. Brain damage due to hazardous environmental contaminants seems a most plausible explanation for the lack of brain function inherent in both demonstrations of an inability to reason.

Given the closeness to Abbotsford and the people travelling between the two communities, perhaps the reason that nobody wanted to accept the offer of work is that they heard what happened with a similar offer made in Abbotsford. In this case the homeless accepted the promise of employment and the opportunity to move forward with their lives. As soon as the media spotlight moved on this “plenty of work” suddenly disappeared and the workers found themselves not only homeless but in many ways worse off than before they accepted “work”. Had they said “No” to the offer of work fingers would point and tongues wag about them not wanting to work, but where was/is all that moral indignation when the employer fails to keep his commitment?

Having spent long months living outside, due to circumstances beyond my control, I got lots of fresh air and retain my ability to cogitate. Which means that I am not foolish enough to see only black or white in what is a complex, many faceted situation made immensely more convoluted because it is, at its very core, a people problem. Of course some homeless do not want to work. On the other hand I, and I am sure many readers, have known people whose only “ability” was to be able to get paid for doing nothing (or at least nothing useful) on the job. There are those who defraud the Health Care system. Would it be sensible to address the problem of fraud by shutting down Medicare? While this approach would certainly stop all fraud, it would condemn all those others who do not abuse the system but seek only help in getting well to continue suffering. In the same manner I find it maddening, frustrating and disingenuous – not to mention totally lacking in any sense or compassion – to use the “bad apples” to condemn everyone else to continued depravations.

Mr. Fletcher so easily holds forth that some homeless would not accept housing even if it was available, with wilful blindness ignoring just how wrenching a transition this change is. Even being motivated and full of desire to begin the transition from living in my car it was most challenging to hang in and get used to being inside. Confined, jailed, walls closing in, on the verge of panic attacks – all of these were feelings I had to deal with. To a certain degree it was only stubbornness (an attribute I am noted for, although not always in a complimentary fashion) that drove me to hang in there. What truly allowed/helped me to make this gruelling adjustment was that I was participating in an 8 week psychiatric out-patient program during this time. Been there, done that and it was torturous – not some easily accomplished task.

Ah yes, Mr. Pakarinen. As those who know the views, approaches and behaviours of both of us, including Kerry himself, could tell you – I have serious philosophical and methodological differences with Mr. Pakarinen. Unfortunately it has become apparent that in order to get the media, and more importantly the citizens of our communities, province and the country itself to actually – well more accurately hopefully actually think with careful consideration about these full of twists and turns, interrelated and thorny matters you need to get the citizens and journalists attention. Since both these groups seem to approach any issue that actually involves careful thought and rational action with all the willingness of a jackass learning something new, the only approach that seems to hold any promise for a useful dialogue is the same approach one would employ in teaching a jackass something new. First you get a two by four, then you drive the jackass right between the eyes with the two by four to get its attention, then you proceed with the lesson. While, as said I have serious differences with Mr. Pakarinen he does function well as a two by four for the media and public.

Complex, byzantine, no nice neat easy answers, requiring long term commitment. All these statements are true. One of the biggest barriers to public understanding is that the only true way to begin to fully get an appreciation for this mess is to journey through it. Being in the process of the journey myself, I would not wish such a learning experience on anyone – including those who so blithely pontificate on the matter.

Homeless, Municipal

Re: Bridge Housing

Leave a comment

Self Righteousness: so self-gratifying, so self-indulgent, so sanctimonious, so often inflicting pain and misery on others in the name of helping or “correctness”.

The 2004 proposal of 6 Houses, when 30 is about what actually exist and with an MCC study suggesting that Abbotsford’s need is for close to 40 Houses, clearly demonstrates just how little understanding of reality the City has on this question. So before everybody breaks an arm smugly patting themselves on the back and the City “protects” the residents for the Houses into homelessness on the city streets, let us spare a few moments to actually THINK.

“… required to sign over their $325 a month.” Yes, well where would you suggest they find other shelter for $325 a month? Yes, there are safety issues, but it is dim-witted to suggest living on the streets would not be more of a threat to life and limb than being in their current houses.

The reason that the Province dropped bridge housing from their regulations were that the regulations were designed for institutions such as MSA hospital and thus were so onerous in a bridge housing situation nobody could realistically meet the standards. Which would mean no bridge housing; easy for council and the City, but an awfully cruel and callous way to treat those needing help on the road to recovery? But then pointing their fingers at the Provincial government is an old favourite method for the City to avoid acting on difficult issues such as homelessness.

Councillor John Smith’s “.. the moral issue” must be speaking about some special type of Abbotsford Politicians Morality. A most convenient morality; where it is “morally wrong” for the City to permit these people to be living in crowded housing, but it is “morally OK” for the City council and staff to drive these people out of shelter and onto the streets. The advantage to the City of such a fluid concept of moral behaviour is an easy way out of complex situations – to bad for the casualties, and there are casualties of this fluid “morality”.

An example of this is the Fraser Valley Inn. Yes there were problems with the Inn but the City just used an old magician’s sleight of hand to appear to act. Closing the Inn did not solve anything; it merely spread the people and problems around the city, in reality making them harder to deal with. This nice fluid view of moral behaviour means the City can continue to ignore those it tossed onto the streets and who are still there a year latter. Just who or what is going on that the City seems to like throwing people onto the streets in time for winter weather?

Be very clear on the point that I am not saying you should not want to close the substandard among them. I am saying you cannot close them until you have available alternatives for housing and services. Because throwing them onto the streets is an Immoral way to act. Unless you follow that special Abbotsford Politicians Morality, where morals can be used to act anyway you want without getting inconveniently in the way you elect to misbehave.