Category Archives: Politics

Homeless, Issues, Municipal, Politics

Behaved “Badly”?

Leave a comment

“…back in the day we used to do things like it was a never ending prison sentence. We got to use shock therapy, sterilization, frontal lobotomies. We behaved badly…”

Bruce Banman

People had their brains fried with electricity; people had holes cut into their brains; people were turned into drooling zombies by drugs; people were turned into vegetables, their personalities and minds destroyed; people were used as experimental animals by their government; and the victims of this abuse could do nothing but suffer the torture inflicted on them because they were locked up and the key thrown away.

For the ‘crime’ of having a chemical imbalance in their brain chemistry people were condemned to a HELL created, maintain and run by other Canadians.

This is not “behaving badly’. This is depraved behaviour; it is behaviour that damns those whose actions – or silence – destroyed people’s minds and lives.

And Bruce Banman pines for those good old days?

In putting an end to this depraved behaviour the Supreme Court asserted the right of those victimized NOT to be tortured; asserted the right to recovery, mental wellness, love, joy; the right to a life – NOT a tormented existence locked away for the convenience of government and society.

Once again we hear the cry “they need to be locked up for their own good”, raised across the lower mainland.

Mayors, politicians, citizens, society can delude themselves all they want, but this is not about the mental health, wellbeing and wellness of those they seek to lock away – as once they did when  “…back in the day we used to do things like it was a never ending prison sentence. We got to use shock therapy, sterilization, frontal lobotomies.” but the truth is that it is about the convenience of politicians and society.

Spare me your feinted concern for anything but your own convenience.

After more than a decade of ignoring calls to put in place the community based services, supports and housing needed to permit those living with mental illness and from other mental health issues to find wellness……

……..suddenly mayors and citizens are concerned about those they seek to lock away, ‘for their own good’ – after they have become an issue, a problem, on city streets.

A faithless, counterfeit concern fabricated for the convenience of politicians and others.

A concern whose hypocrisy is clear in the call to warehouse, to lock them up for their ‘own good’ when knowledge and understanding make it clear that a large institution warehousing people is more harmful to mental health and wellness than helpful.

If politicians and others now calling for people to be locked up for their ‘own good’ were not simply concerned about their convenience and had any true concern for the people they seek to ‘disappear’ off their streets, they would join the call to put in place the community based services, supports and housing needed to permit those suffering mental illness and from other mental health issues to find wellness.

We would not be subjected to Abbotsford’s Bruce Banman, beating his chest piously, expressing the need to ‘lock them up for their own good’ mere days after he voted down a funded proposal for first stage housing that would have helped those he, obviously, so falsely expresses concern about find mental health and wellness.

And please, spare me any those lame ‘I got to find an excuse – no matter how ridiculous’ excuses.

We are talking about providing the means for people to find wellness; a course of action and behaviour far more important than catering to baseless fears and fear mongering of merchants, even if those merchants do contribute to the election campaigns.

I am one of those fortunate enough who, finding themselves homeless on the streets of Abbotsford, were/are able to find and access the limited resources, services and support, resources, services and support that have become more limited and unavailable over time, and struggle off the streets and into housing.

I am blessed in that as the resources, services and support decreased – I had and found friends who stepped up to help me stay off the street.

It would be kinder, far kinder and more humane, to be taken out and shot – than it would be to fall into the clutches of Bruce Banman et al and locked away in a Hell of their creation – ‘for my own good.’

And their convenience.

behaviour, Consider, Issues, Municipal, Politics

This is Abbotsford: Common Sense Overrated

Leave a comment

At the Abbotsford City Council meeting on Monday February 17, 2014 Bruce Banman stepped up and delivered yet another blow to democracy in Abbotsford.

When Simon Gibson was elected as a Liberal MLA in the provincial election of May 14, 2013 Mr. Gibson, mayor and council decided democracy for the citizens of Abbotsford was not worth the cost of a by-election.

If Mr. Gibson, mayor and council had not decided that saving a few thousand dollars was more important than the democratic rights of the citizens of Abbotsford, the citizens of Abbotsford would have been going to the polls to elect a new member of council last Fall [2013] as did every city where a city councillor had been elected a provincial MLA.

Every city except Abbotsford, where it was decided the cost of a by-election was to high a price to pay for democracy.

A by-election in the Fall of 2013, when the details of the Abbotsford Community Services housing proposal were before the public for their consideration; a by-election that would have permitted the citizens of Abbotsford to express their opinion on the housing proposal. But no, the cost of a by-election was to high a cost to allow the citizens of Abbotsford to express their will on the ACS housing proposal – or was it the cost to council and special interests that was to high to permit the citizens of Abbotsford to democratically express their views?

Keep in mind Abbotsford City Council was aware of the proposal and of the proposal being made public once all the Ts were crossed and all the Is dotted. Council knew that not holding a by-election would deny the citizens of Abbotsford the right to democratically express, through the ballot box, the citizen’s position on the ACS housing proposal. Council robbed voters of their right to vote, but hey – they saved taxpayers the cost of a by-election.

Ironic, coming from a council that willingly spends millions of dollars of taxpayer dollars every year to subsidize the ownership, by a few privileged business people,  of a professional hockey team.

A few thousand of taxpayer dollars? Far to high a price to grant taxpayers a democratic say in the actions, the governance, of city government.

Spend millions of taxpayer dollars to protect council’s ego by buying a tenant so council’s Great Folly [aka the Great White Elephant] did not sit there empty – no matter how many millions of dollars an empty Folly would have saved taxpayers? Council has no problem squandering however many millions of taxpayer dollars are required.

“It may be irrational, but that doesn’t matter,” said Councillor Smith. A statement that, while warped, makes perfect sense when you consider all the other irrational decisions made and/or supported by Councillors Smith, Barkman, MacGregor and Mr. Banman.

With a municipal election this November 2014, having run twice for council and lost one begins to wonder if the citizens, as mind-boggling as one may find it, want a council that is financially reckless and irresponsible.

What else would you call it when, after years of calling on BC housing for funding  and BC housing steps up with $2,5 million, plus hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay for support programs for residents, council tells them to take their housing and their money and shove it?

When council tells the Finance Minister to take his $$millions$$ to a community that wants to do something – besides whining – about homelessness in their community?

When the mayor, with visions of sugar–plums [or something] dancing in his head, expects Fraser Health to step up with millions of dollars to fund housing in Abbotsford; the same Fraser Health that is under scrutiny for its inability not to go $50 million over budget every year. Fraser Health, when Fraser Mental Health must make a special funding proposal to the provincial government for funding to undertake new, and needed, services.

Only reckless and irrational dreaming would have anyone thinking that the Finance Minister is going to give Fraser Health extra funds to spend on housing in Abbotsford after the mayor and council told BC Housing, the Finance Minister and the government to take their money and give it to a community that cares.

One begins to wonder if the citizens want a council that ignores reality, facts and experience and behaves irrationally when dealing with social issues such as homelessness.

A council that deployed chicken manure  in its war on the homeless. An action one Abbotsford citizen heard about when surrendering their passport as they checked into a hotel in Scandinavia where the front desk staff, upon seeing they were from Abbotsford BC informed them they were from the city that dumps chicken shit on its homeless citizens.

A council that chases the homeless around the city never answering the question “where are the homeless suppose to go?” A council that, as it pointlessly chases the homeless around Abbotsford, ensures there is no place for the homeless to go by voting not to permit ACS to use the housing first model to build housing to help the homeless transition off the streets.

A council whose action in rejecting homeless housing provide proof to the courts, for the ongoing homeless related litigation, that not only is the City of Abbotsford not doing anything about affordable housing and housing for the homeless, but that the City is actively preventing the building of homeless related housing projects.

But then Mr Banman stated “Council has to ensure that any changes made to our bylaws are made for the greater benefit of the entire community……. we also need to make sure the interests of all residents are considered in our decisions.”

A statement which brings to mind a notable prior assault on Abbotsford citizens by Mr. Banman and Councillor Smith when, after council voted not to approve the rezoning of the Mahogany at Mill Lake, Mr. Banman ambushed council and citizens by sneaking Mahogany at Mill Lake back before council at a time when one of the council members who had voted against the project could not attend the council meeting, allowing Mr. Banman and councillor Smith to have the project approved against the wishes and interests of the citizens living in the area.

An assault on democracy made worse as both Mr. Banman and Mr. Smith had accepted campaign contributions from the developer.

Mr. Banman is right, the citizens of Abbotsford need people on council who are concerned about building a community, people concerned about considering the interests of all residents not just the well connected and moneyed, in decisions; people who don’t make reckless, irresponsible, fear based or irrational decisions.

It is clear that the majority of the citizens of Abbotsford, those who are not among the well connected and/or the moneyed, need new blood on council to protect their interests from irrational, irresponsible actions such as Mr. Banman, councillors Smith, Barkman and McGregor rejecting the desperately needed housing proposed by ACS.

Media, Politics, The Economy

Border Services Death – Part Two

Leave a comment

What if, as discussed in Part One, the broadcast Media does not want to re-label as “Pseudo News” or attach a content warning label to what is currently labelled ‘News’; changes needed to provide warning to those watching the broadcast that the material being broadcast does not meet even the most minimal of standards required to inform, reveal or contribute to the understanding of issues?

Then there should be consequences for misleading the public as to the nature of the material being broadcast.

Take, for example, Global Vancouver’s support of those calling for an inquiry into the in custody death of a woman being held for deportation by Canadian Border Services.

The report aired on Global Vancouver suggested [certainly appeared to suggest] that Canadian Border Services is covering something up because they have made only limited information on what happened available.

Canadian Border Services has stated that they will be releasing more details as soon as the Coroner completes his investigation and that – as is usual with matters under investigation – Border Services cannot comment until the Coroner is finished investigating.

I think it would be very beneficial to any decision on what course of action to follow, to know if the Coroner rules the death suicide.

I am not suggesting that the death be ignored should the woman have died as a result of attempting, ultimately succeeding, suicide. We need to understand what happened and what, if anything, we can REASONABLY do to prevent such a death from happening in the future.

We seemed to have gone inquiry mad as a society, demanding an Inquiry for anything that upsets someone or where someone [or somones] don’t like the answer[s] they are given.

Let us remember that inquiries are not free, that there is no such budget item as ‘Inquiry’, which means the cost of inquiries comes from an item included in the provincial budget – such as healthcare. The more inquiries you have, the less healthcare the government can purchase for citizens.

If a group of people want an inquiry, let them pay for it; if the actions of the media force and inquiry, let those in media whose actions forced/led to the inquiry pay for it. Should something important, something that would have been found only through an inquiry, be found whoever paid for the inquiry can be reimbursed.

Should the inquiry find nothing that would not have been found, or nothing  significant and important, then the group of people or the media bear the cost – not the taxpayers.

If media chooses to act irresponsibly by calling reports broadcast ‘News’ when those reports fail to meet even minimal standards required to inform, reveal or contribute to the understanding of issues, when in fact the reports broadcast misinform, obscure or prevent the understanding of issues, there must be consequences. The same way the Supreme Court has said there are consequences of standing up and shouting “FIRE!’” in a crowded theater when there is no fire.

‘News’ has become a profit center for the corporate media conglomerates.

Given the focus on profits, the demonstrated lack of ability to manage operations efficiently, effectively and for the long term health and viability of the business, the abandonment of being good corporate citizens, the lack of understanding of the reality and complexity of the economy and the effect the financial health of the entire society has on the viability of a corporation in a timeframe of 1+ years [a state of affairs that applies to politicians, experts and pundits as well as corporate executives]………

……corporations increase profits by cutting costs. Worse, in market conditions such as exist today, with no easy, almost automatic increases in revenue, a market where there is a need to add value in order to increase revenue, corporations and their current inadequate for the task executives the corporations simply cut more costs.

The broadcast hours filled with content created by the station [or network] are the hours where corporate media conglomerates can maximize their profit, making the ‘News’ department a major contributor to the bottom line.

A change in mission, from informing to maximizing profit, that has had a profound effect on the ability to inform, reveal and contribute to understanding as well as the quality of the material generated by ‘News’ departments, as Media conglomerates fill the hours where the station creates the content as cheaply as possible.

Corporations and their executives have a right to choose to race for the bottom and ignore the long term viability of the corporation if that behavior is acceptable to stockholders.

They do not have the right to mislead the public, to fail to inform the public that ‘News’ is no longer what it once was and that the public needs to search out information from multiple sources in order to be able to make informed decisions about how the government manages the health and viability of the economy; about the costs, outcomes and consequences of decisions on social, societal issues.

As stated, where media will not re-label programming, or attach viewer advisors, where the change in standards and practices will mislead the public as to the public’s ability to make informed decisions and choices based on the programming provided by the Media – financial penalties [incentives] must be used to provide incentive for media to either invest the money to provide ‘News’ that meets at least the minimum standards require for reporting to qualify as ‘News’ OR for media to label or use viewer advisories to ensure people understand the purpose [maximize profit] of the broadcasting they are viewing.

Broadcast media today has demonstrated that as a corporation their profit drive is the same as the corporations that dump toxic waste down storm drains or into creeks to reduce the costs of disposal and maximize profit.

In the same manner that it is necessary to impose punitive fines to encourage those who need to dispose of toxic waste to dispose of it in a manner that does not penalize society, financial incentives need to be imposed on  media to encourage media to be responsible, providing either accurate labeling, viewer advisories or programming that meets the standards set out for ‘News’ for programming media labels as ‘News’.

Next: Part 3 – The Conclusion

I’m not going to listen; don’t want to hear it.

Homeless, Issues, Municipal, Politics

Abbotsford’s Ethical, Spiritual D-day

Leave a comment

Understanding, Choosing, Wisdom.

Our lives, our society, are the sum result of all the choices we make, both consciously and unconsciously. In control of the process of choosing, lies control of all aspects of our lives.

Positive control of the process of choosing requires choosing wisely; choosing wisely requires understanding. Without understand and wisdom, chance is left in control of our future.

On Monday February 3, 2014 Abbotsford City Council will decide whether Abbotsford Community Services can build the First Stage Housing they have proposed to use to help the homeless, those faced with mental health and/or substance use challenges, to begin the process of recovery.

Housing that would start to answer the question council’s decades old  policy of chasing the homeless  endlessly around Abbotsford has ignored – “Where else can they go?”.

Housing First is a model of recovery recognized by psychiatric professionals as an alternative approach to the traditional approaches to treatment; an approach pioneered in the 1990’s by Sam Tsemberis [a faculty member of the Department of Psychiatry of the New York University School of Medicine] and the Pathways to Housing organization in New York City.

The results achieved using Housing First have resulted in it being recognized as a ‘best practice’ for governments and service-agencies in their fight to end chronic homelessness; have resulted in the use of Housing First by governments and organizations in countries around the world, including Canadian cities such as Calgary, where Housing First is part of Calgary’s plan to address and end homelessness.

The mistake often made about Housing First as a result of its first priority being to provide housing, is that Housing First is not about abstinence. However, in understanding the Housing First approach one understands Housing First is about dealing with a person’s substance use and/or mental health challenges – after housing them. It is an approach that has proven to get people into treatment faster than the traditional approaches do.

An outcome that reminds us that, when addressing homelessness, mental illness and substance use, we need to remember that People are at the center of the process and when People are central to anything, it is a given that outcomes will have a large iffy [full of unresolved points or questions] factor.

But these are just facts, and while facts are important to choosing wisely, a wise choice also requires understanding and awareness of what other, less obvious or hidden decisions will be included in the choice(s) made.

Whether the City of Abbotsford and the APD step out of the 19th century and into the 21st century; whether a start is made on addressing chronic homelessness, mental illness and substance use on Abbotsford’s streets, are not the only decisions that will be made by Abbotsford City Council in their Yea or Nay on the ACS housing proposal..

Council’s Yea or Nay on the ACS proposal will decide – and declare to the world – something far more fundamental and important: What type of community Abbotsford chooses to be.

Not the type of City Abbotsford proclaims itself to be.

But the type of City revealed in the actions and behaviours of Abbotsford; for it is actions and behaviours, not words, that true colours are shown.

Will City Council choose for Abbotsford to set out to become, in the reality of deeds, the City that Abbotsford unfoundedly claims to be?

Or will City Council choose to continue to be the City its behaviour, such as the use of chicken manure as a poor man’s biological weapon against its mentally ill and homeless citizens, declared Abbotsford to be to fellow Canadians and the World.

“You can speak with spiritual eloquence, pray in public, and maintain a holy appearance… but it is your behaviour that will reveal your true character.” 

Steve Maraboli, Reflections on Life and the Human Experience