Category Archives: Provincial

Federal, Homeless, Municipal, Provincial

Listen

Leave a comment

One of the downsides that does not occur to you as one seeks improved mental hygiene is the side effect of improved listening. I can hear all those voices as people shout: ‘What, I am already a great listener!’ as they close their eyes, ears and minds. Just as so many citizens of Abbotsford chose to ignore those, who for years had tried to draw their attention to homeless issues that needed to be addressed while the problem was relatively small and thus more manageable. This willful ignorance continued until homelessness grew to a size where it could no longer be ignored, a size where the problem was much larger and a great deal more complex. This is so often the case when we do not hear what is said even as we claim to be listening. With things we do not want to hear, see, think about or that disagree with how we believe the world is, our minds shut down so that what is said goes in one ear and out the other – leaving no trace or impression on the mind. How many citizens looking at “Compassion Park” see only what they want to see, a camp of homeless people. The choose not to hear, see or think about the reality that this is the tiniest tip, a small visible indication of a much larger and complex national issue. They spend all their time screaming “Not in My Backyard” to avoid the need to listen to, and then think about, the real and pressing larger issues. Apparently people prefer ignoring problems by not listening, then complaining about the Fallout because it is much easier not to listen – at least in the short run. In this manner they avoid actually having to think about what was said and the issues connected to what was said.

Take as an example the Conservative parties promise to increase prison sentences, crack down on (what they consider to be) crime, re-criminalize things (such as marijuana) they do not approve of, etc. Voters liked what they heard, but did they really listen? Listening requires concentration and critical thinking. We can all agree that probation for a drunk driver who kills or maims someone is unacceptable and that there are other specific situations/areas of the law and sentencing that need attention. BUT if you listen to and think about what the Conservative party was saying, you soon realize the Ed Fast was making a vast understatement when he stated the government would not close any of Abbotsford’s prisons because they would be needed to house ALL the prisoners after the Conservatives change the criminal code to their liking, matching it to their beliefs. If you think about it, with all the new people the Conservatives want to throw in prison and the longer (in some cases much, much, much longer) sentences they propose the prison population is going to soar explosively. Incarceration is going to be a booming industry. I do not intend to argue the philosophical or moral issues of this proposed mass incarceration, nor the effects upon Canadian society. Still, it is obvious from the election outcome the voters of Abbotsford do not want to consider, ponder or think about those issues/questions with no easy answers. So let us consider a related issue on a topic the city has demonstrated its love of: Money! The citizens of Abbotsford loved hearing the promise of cutting taxes, but also the promise of not cutting funding to popular programs such as medical coverage. The Conservatives promised a massive increase in incarcerating Canadian citizens. This is going to require building prisons, more prison guards and administrators, an expanded court and police systems, etc. The conservative promise in this area will require billions of dollars to keep, on top of the billions they have promised to spend on the military.

Cutting taxes means the federal government have less money to pay for all these promises. Either they run a big deficit, cut Medicare or raise taxes. The voters will scream about broken promises, when they bear the responsibility. If they had listened, thought and Questioned, their choice may have been much different. People so often prefer the easy answer/way, if it sounds nice they do not really ‘listen’, avoiding the trouble (or Pain) of thinking, Then complain about the fallout of their own choices and actions.

So it is with the current homeless situation in Abbotsford. For years citizens and politicians refused and/or chose not to listen to the people who advocated: “We should address homelessness”, because it was far easier not to listen. Only now that the problem has grown so large are people listening, well at least some of the people. But far to many do not want to listen and be required to actually (shudder) think. They focus on and scream about the existence of Compassion Park to avoid thinking about the larger problem that the Park is only the tiniest symptom of. Think about it, what happens if you chase them from the Park? They will not evaporate, they will just move somewhere else, until they are chased and chased and chased and chased and chased and chased and chased and chased finally returning to the site they were originally chased from. Why wouldany one want to go right back to the pointless, costly policies and actions the city pursued before? Nothing accomplished and the homeless numbers permitted to continue into an even more overwhelming problem.

The best solution is to solve the problem of homelessness; then there is no (need for) Compassion Park. Unfortunately this ‘best solution’ is as unrealistic as many a politicians promises. Listening and thinking about the homeless situation one soon realizes how complex the situation is; one sees that it is highly improbable (OK, impossible) that you could ever reduce the number of homeless to zero. Reality is that even as you reduce the current members of the diverse group of people lumped together as homeless, new homeless are being created by government policies and policy choices. Reality is also that some of those currently homeless will, for a variety of reasons, remain homeless. While this may make one want to throw up one’s hands and give up, that is not rational. The only Rational Choice is to begin. The journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step. We can as a city, or as a society begin to take steps to address the issues that have led the homeless into homelessness. We can reduce the current numbers of homeless, helping fellow Canadians to get back the lives and ability to choose that they lost when they began their slide into homelessness.

We do this by putting in place the services, support and aid they will need to transition off the streets. By co-ordination and co-operation among the organizations, groups and churches that step forward to act. By co-ordinating existing services so that the homeless can find the right help. It does no good to have a service available if those who need it cannot find or access it. By encouraging the homeless to seek and find the help that is already in place we maximize the effectiveness of the existing services. Co-ordination also allows these existing services to maximize the good they achieve by avoiding duplication. We also need to think about (and encourage the homeless themselves to think about) what services are needed to get off the streets.

We must remember that just getting them off the streets is not a solution. If we fail to address their needs for getting their act together and making sure they get aftercare and support, follow through (as opposed to abandoning them) they will just slip back down and onto the streets.

We need to be flexible and to remember we are dealing with people. This means problems, failures, headaches etc. It also means success, triumph and lives reclaimed. We need to be committed for the long haul.

Above all else we need to begin. To take the first steps in this years long, thousand mile journey that is needed to address the issues associated with homelessness. Otherwise we risk talking the homeless to needless pain and deaths.

Perhaps what is truly needed is motivation. I suggest we move all those involved in this issue in Abbotsford into Compassion Park. Not having nice comfortable homes to go to at the end of a day spent talking about homelessness should serve to provide the decision makers with first hand experience of conditions and needs. As an aside: I would be willing to house sit for the transplantees as I am sure several of my fellow homeless would be willing to also house sit. In fact we could do the planning and discussing as the transplantees gain in dept experience with the frustrations of homelessness. I am sure we could stall … I mean discuss the matter for a year or two. This innovative proposal on transplanting should be highly motivational in getting those first steps taken and giving back to the homeless something most have lost – HOPE.

Federal, Homeless, Municipal, Provincial

Re: News letters of April 29, 2006

Leave a comment

To Mr. Hoekstra:

I must point out that it would have made it easier to understand and appreciate his problems if he had told us what business he was managing and its location (if necessary). I heartily agree that “Our focus show be on treating our ill citizens not expecting them to camp out in the rain.” Unfortunately the problem has been ignored by both the politicians and citizens, such as Mr. Hoekstra, until it has reached the point where it has become such a large problem that it can no longer be ignored. The difficultly with the approach of ignoring the problem until it becomes ‘in your face’ in size is that there is nothing in place to address the issue. As a homeless person myself I regret the need for compassion park. But until the politicians and citizens get their act together and start to get the needed co-ordination, programs and access to facilities in place the people of Abbotsford are going to have to endure compassion park and the other problems associated with having allowed the homeless. It is the price society pays for sitting on its a** with its head in the sand on an issue it wanted to ignore because it had no neat, comfortable 100% successful solutions, until it reached the size it could not be ignored. I do feel insulted Mr. Hoekstra paints us all with the same brush, many of the homeless are extremely honest and honorable. At the same time I acknowledge his difficulties and the difficulties that others can have. But, if you chose to ignore a problem until it blows up in your face, you have to deal with the mess it makes as well as the original problem. Oh, as a final point, you might want to worry about the type of customers you have if you need to worry about them “accidentally” driving over people.

To Mr. Pihowich:

I can only say: get a dictionary. It is clear from your letter you have no understanding of what the word solution means. Solution: a. The method or process of solving a problem. b. The answer to or disposition of a problem. A solution requires solving the problem of the homeless. Spreading the homeless and their tents throughout the city in backyards solves nothing. Of course it would hide the problem so it could be ignored again. At least until it reached truly gigantic problems. Of course ignoring the problem is how it reached its present state and size, but then if you cannot understand what a solution involves it is hardly surprising you cannot understand the consequences of continuing to avoid addressing the homeless situation. As to those Barbecues, you might want to ask Councilor Lowen as I understand that one of them was his originally. But generousity is probably in the class of ‘solution’, that class of ideas and concepts you cannot grasp.

Homeless, Provincial

letter to opposition.

Leave a comment

You may not have expected Partnerships BC to lead to an article on the homeless but it did. I had a quote from Liberal Dave Hayer about the governments policy on the homeless, which I was sure should be an article for my website about being homeless in Abbotsford – http://www.homelessinabbotsford.com/. But I just could not get a handle on writing it. Until I read about you, your questions and the information about salaries at Partnerships BC. I have included the article below in case you are interested in reading it.

As I say in the article I am interested in any of these high $$$,$$$ salary positions in order to ‘grow out of my lifestyle of living on the street (aka homelessness)’. Perhaps, if the opportunity should present itself, you could enquire of the appropriate government member (minister) where I might seek and find such a lucrative position? After all “The best way to help the homeless is to make sure they have and opportunity to find a job” – and I would seize the opportunity for any similar (to Partnerships BC) position.

Thank you for your time and attention

Homeless, Poverty, Provincial

Need to Increase Welfare Rates

Leave a comment

HI everyone out in povnet land. Here’s some info on the “Shoe-In” that we held at Carnegie Centre to try to get some coverage for the need to increase welfare rates and end the barriers that keep people in need from getting welfare. We did get some media (Georgia Straight, Metro, 24 hrs, Global TV, Fairchild, CKNW) but nothing in the Sun, Province, CBC, Globe and Mail, etc. so I’m trying to make this our own media coverage. The actual event was a lot of fun and involved a lot of Downtown Eastside residents. – Jean Swanson

Carole Taylor “Shoe-In” a big success

When Finance Minister Carol Taylor introduced the provincial budget last month, she wore new $600 Gucci shoes. Six hundred dollars is $90 more than a single person gets in a month on welfare. There was no increase to welfare rates in the budget even though there’s a $2 billion surplus. Like many other people, Jaya Babu and Diane Wood were appalled by Carole Taylor’s arrogance and blindness—flaunting $600 shoes while thousand of British Columbians live in deep poverty. They began to talk about shoes, and how they might be used as an expression of resistance to injustice. Then others at Carnegie joined in the conversation and began to create an event. They had the confidence to do this. They had the faith—faith as creating what we do not see. And the Carole Taylor “Shoe-In” was born. There would be a large, golden shoe representing Carole Taylor’s $600 shoes (thank you, Miriam), and there would be $600 worth of food to give to hungry people (thank you, BCGEU, BCTF, BC Fed, CUPE 391, Michael and Diane Goldberg, CCPA staff and Andrea Ottem).

The event took place on March 28th at 11 am in the Carnegie theatre, and the Carnegie was buzzing. Lots of media showed up, and the “Shoe-In” was ready for them. The event was designed as a teach-in to teach Carole Taylor some facts about poverty in BC. She didn’t show up, but Libby Davies, our Member of Parliament, and Jenny Kwan, our Member of the Legislative Assembly, were there. Professor Bob Sarti presided over the teach-in, and he did an excellent job. Mary Ann Cantillon (thanks, Mary Ann and Sharon for the costume) was Mary Ann Antoinette and she repeated that famous phrase, “Let them eat cake.” Then delicious cake (thanks Katrina) was served to people in the theatre.

Jean Swanson gave a talk on why welfare rates should go up. Then Prof. Bob asked us to answer the question, “How do people on welfare get by in a 5-week month?” Downtown Eastside residents in the audience responded with many answers and Diane Wood wrote them down. The answers will be sent to Carole Taylor. Some of the answers to the questions were: use food banks; use free food outlets; beg in the streets, go binning; sleep a lot; prostitution; end up in hospital, and many more.

Seth Klein of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) spun the Wheel of Misfortune. This wheel had the many barriers to welfare on it, and it showed how difficult it was to get welfare in BC. Then Seth talked about a new CCPA report that showed that the drop in the number of people getting welfare in BC is due to the new welfare rules, and is not because more people on welfare found work. Seth said welfare rates should be raised by 50 percent, and the money to do this was there because the government had a two billion dollar surplus.

Then Prof. Bob asked the audience what it would do with the government’s $2 B surplus. There were many answers to this question, and Diane wrote them down. They will be sent to Carole Taylor. Some of the answers were: increase welfare rates; build social housing; a dental program for people on welfare; more treatment centres and harm reduction programs for drug users; opening up Riverview so mentally ill people aren’t on the streets, and many more.

Adrienne Montani from First Call gave a strong talk on the needs of poor children and poor families in BC. She said there is more child poverty in BC than in any other province. She said that the gap between rich and poor is increasing, and that those poverty facts are known to government. Yet the government turns away from the crisis of poverty. “Why does it do that?” Adrienne asked. Why do the rich turn their backs on the poor? Then there was a parade of shoes—not Gucci shoes—and a class photo on the front steps of Carnegie. After that, the $600 worth of food was distributed to people who were hungry after a five week welfare month.

The “Shoe-In” was a great success. There was a lot of energy in the Carnegie Theatre. Congratulations to the many people who worked hard to make this event inspiring, informative and lots of fun. Hopefully, some of that energy will spill over to the Raise the Rates Campaign. In her speech Jean Swanson quoted Nelson Mandela, “Like slavery and apartheid, poverty is not natural. It is man-made and can be overcome and eradicated by the actions of human beings.” –Sandy Cameron

Here’s a copy of the talk I gave at the Shoe-In, in case there’s anything in it that might be useful to anyone fighting for higher rates: Shoe-in talk March 28, 2006 I remember what this neighbourhood was like 25 years ago. It was poor. It had drug users and people with illness and disabilities. But hardly anyone was homeless. Most people had enough to eat. No one slept in the pews at First United. The stores weren’t boarded up.

Why was it different then? In those days welfare and minimum wages had more purchasing power. People could afford to rent a room, buy a sandwich at a cheap restaurant, have a cup of coffee with a friend, and get a bus pass or a phone. Now the welfare rate for a single person is $510 a month. How many voters who aren’t poor actually realize that welfare rates are so abysmally low? How many know that the $510 is divided into 2 parts. $325 is for shelter. How many people who aren’t poor know that the $325 has been frozen for 14 years or that the average rent for a crummy hotel room is $380? How many people who aren’t poor know that the support portion of welfare is $185? How many know that it was $205 a month in 1981, 25 years ago?

How many middle class or rich people or members of the legislature would have the budgeting skills to even survive on $510 a month, let alone stay healthy and look for work? Think of what you could buy if you got $852 a month for welfare. That’s what welfare you’d get today if welfare had the same purchasing power that it had 25 years ago.

Why are people in this neighbourhood so sick, so hungry, so depressed? Because provincial government policies have created a deep, deep poverty in the midst of incredible wealth.

That’s why Carole Taylor’s shoes made us angry—shoes that cost $90 more than a single person on welfare has to live on for a month. She had a $2 billion budget surplus. She could have ended the deep, deep poverty and the hardship it creates. She could have helped open the stores in our community and in low income neighbourhoods across the province. But she didn’t. The government didn’t. Instead she bought the Guccis—the shoes that say, “if you’re poor you don’t count”–the shoes that say being rich in the midst of deep, deep poverty is normal. But, as Nelson Mandela said, “Like slavery and apartheid, poverty is not natural. It is man-made, and can be overcome and eradicated by the actions of human beings.” That’s what we expect the governments we elect to do. We’re getting allies and we’re not going to stop til those welfare rates get raised.

And here’s a poem written by M. Kelly at Carnegie: $600 could have bought…

*A wheelchair for my dear wife so I could push her when she’s in too much pain to walk (a retiree)
*milk for my kids for a year (mother of four)
*Almost 300 bus tickets for my job search rides (young immigrants)
*Tune-up for old beater that gets us to work each day (Mr+Mrs working poor)
*Laser surgery for cataracts in both eyes (senior)
*Steel-toed boots and a hard hat so I could get a construction job (young man)
*150 jars of jam to go with my peanut butter sandwiches (school girl)
*I could get my prescriptions filled (senior citizen)
*600 presents from the Dollar Store so I’d always have gifts for my family (a “training” wage earner)
*Bannock to feed all the hungry tummies, and blankets for the winter (an elder)
*Decent clothes for my children to wear to school so no one laughs at them (single mom)
*Dinner for 200 people at Union Gospel Mission at Easter (homeless person)
*Brushes and paint (a starving artist)
*600 boxes of Kraft Dinner (a young mom)
*Comfortable shoes for the next 10 years for our poor, tired feet (taxpaying public)

Instead our $600 became some ugly shoes abandoned in a rich woman’s closet.
–M. Kelly Jean Swanson

Homeless, Municipal, Provincial

New faces…

Leave a comment

…lots of new faces. At one point in February 2006 the dining room at the Salvation Army was only half full at lunch. In fact they started leaving the lights off in the back half of the room so no one would sit there and they would have less of a cleanup to perform every day. This drop in lunch attendance was a reflection of how many of the homeless the police had harassed into moving out of the downtown area and into the residential neighbourhoods. Unfortunately this lack of a lunch crowd did not last long. More unfortunate was that it was not the homeless returning from the residential neighbourhoods (where courtesy of the City of Abbotsford and the Downtown Businesses they are causing headaches for the residents of those neighbourhoods) but an influx of new people, thanks to the policies of the provincial Liberal government. These policies continue to add to the ranks of the homeless and those living in poverty while failing to reduce these numbers by providing the assistance needed for people to find employment and get back on their feet.

I have been searching for employment in accounting/finance/business, which is where my experience lies, but I think I will have to change this focus. Based on observation, thanks to the policies of out Liberal provincial government, the real job growth is going to be in servicing the demands placed on society by this growing population of homeless and those living in poverty. Personally I do not know why the Liberals would choose to pursue a course or courses of action that increases the ranks of the working poor, the homeless and those living in poverty but they are. One can only conjecture that someone with ties to the Liberal’s is position to benefit from the business opportunities opened by these increased numbers.

Compounding the problems that arise from this policy of increasing the numbers living homeless on the streets or those with shelter who are depending on some form of aid to manage to (barely) survive is that the City of Abbotsford is currently just reacting to this situation. In failing to think through all the problems that flow from the increasing population of homeless and poor the city has been worsenning the problems. Obviously the local governments of the cities of British Columbia need to get together to pressure the Liberal provincial government to change policies so that they stop adding to the problems and population of working poor, homeless and those living in poverty. They also need to begin to pressure the Liberal government to design and adopt policies that will actually aid in reducing this population. I stress that it is necessary that rather than letting the Liberals claim to be or that their policies are meant to help people on to their feet – people must look at the actual effects the policies have and demand that those that do not work or (as is the case currently) make the problems worse be changed.

The fact that this is, at least in theory, a matter for the provincial (Liberal) government to address does not absolve the cities from taking action. There are both philosophical and self-interest reasons for local governments and the citizens they represent to act and become engaged with the problems.

Philosophically, it is as Martin Luther King Jr. said “He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it.” Meaning that you cannot just sit there and point at some other party as being responsible for the actions (or inactions). In just accepting the actions (or inactions) we become as guilty and responsible for the evil as if we had done the evil. Sitting there and saying ‘Oh, that is a provincial matter or responsibility’ does not absolve the city and its citizens of their responsibility for addressing the wrongs, to relieve the misery and suffering.

If not for philosophical, moral or spiritual reasons, why then should the city or its citizens act? I am sure that the materialistic inhabitants of the city (as they have amply demonstrated) can relate to self-interest. There are many ‘costs’ associated with just accepting the situation and reacting thoughtlessly to it and these cost just continue to add up. As the numbers of homeless and poor continue to grow the costs are not likely going to climb in a straight line, with the rate of increase more likely resembling an exponential pattern for each new person added to the roles.

So what do I mean by costs? To do more that touch upon a few highlights (at least to me) would require a pages long list, which I have no interest in preparing and the reader is unlikely to have an interest in reading. I expect that if I suggest a few highlights the readers can add to the list themselves.

There are the direct costs such as the salaries paid to police and city workers who need to, time after time, deal with the same homeless. Since these persons are homeless they have nowhere to so the cycle just keeps repeating, while the costs of this cycle just continue to add up. Consider that if instead you invest in getting the person or people employed and on their feet they are not only no longer costing money but are contributing to the pool of $$$ available to be invested in further reducing the numbers of homeless on the streets and in the community.

There are a wide range of crime issues and cost associated with this that should be considered. First forget any questions of right or wrong. Focus just on the $$$ cost to deal with a homeless person through the legal system (police, lawyers, judges, trials, cost to house them in prison, etc.). It would appear to be a no-brainer that, unless we spend money on the level the Liberals are on their ideology and their friends at Partnerships BC ($160,000 average salary), it would represent a considerable cost savings to avoid the legal system by investing extra $$$ in getting these people back onto their feet. As an aside let me suggest that any extra $$$ spent on a person would be well spent if it keeps that individual out of the highly expensive legal system – even if the individual lack any pride or self-esteem and just sits on their fat ass. This because you still reap significant $$$ savings by avoiding the legal system’s very high per person costs.

Part of the costs of crime one wants to avoid fall directly onto the citizens themselves. I am not only speaking of the insurance $$$ costs but also the hassles of dealing with the fallout and paperwork of the crime, no longer having the peace of mind to feel safe, loss of memories and/or treasured family items and the nagging little worries that being the victim of crime puts into one’s mind. What price does one put onto these intangible costs?

Remember the screams of the tourist industry in Vancouver about the present and future $$$ they felt they were losing due to the presence of the homeless and poor on the streets? What effect does it have on business people or developers thinking of investing in the community? Here is a good one: What is the effect on real estate values, not just from the presence of the homeless and poor on the residential streets, but especially of any associated crime? Young G. Saini’s letter to the News reminds us that the situation has an effect on the youth of the city. Of principle concern, at least to me, is what lessons we are teaching here. Remember that the lessons adults think they are teaching may bear little relation to the lessons the young are in fact learning. Bigotry, prejudice, being judgmental, indifference to others, an uncaring attitude and ‘ME first’ selfishness are all things likely to be taught and learned here.

There are many other ‘costs’ here that I leave up to the reader to think of and consider. Let me just raise one last major ‘Cost’. What does it do to the Spirit or Spirituality of our City, Province and Country, indeed to the very ‘soul’ or fabric of our society that we have made human life the cheapest commodity on the planet? Yes, we have allowed the problem to develop into a monstrous size, some will claim that we have owe no ‘duty of care’ to our fellow citizens, others will claim it is not a matter of our own spirituality to help those among us who desperately need that help and we may find we have to be prepared to reallocate or invest some money to accomplish what needs doing. WE can do it and in fact it is the only moral course of action. Do I have all the answers – no, we need to seek out and experiment to find answers. It will take time and effort. Understand I am not calling for us to undertake massive new programs and spending, rather that we need to think and apply our resources intelligently so that we actually accomplish what we want and at a reasonable dollar investment.

May I finish with something I try to keep in mind and think we all need to remember if we are to do what our spirituality demands:

“Great opportunities to help others seldom come, but small ones come daily.”

The View from the Homeless Streets
byJames W Breckenridge
Abbotsord
www.homelessinabbotsford.com