Bruce Beck Blatters on …

Not wanting to disappoint Councillor Beck’s expressed expectation of reading reaction to statements he made at Wednesday May 7’s City Hall “browbeat the Pastor” meeting, this one’s for you Bruce.

In advancing the Smith-Beck-Harris Cheerios Theory Councillor Beck demonstrated he shared his fellow councillor’s lack of even the most basic knowledge and understanding of the realities of homelessness and addiction.

He also clearly shared his council colleagues’ lack of understanding of the purpose of applying a bandage and the desire to spare Bob Bos and the Downtown Business Association the problems of the homeless on the streets of Abbotsford by once again moving the homeless to other neighbourhoods.

Councillor Beck’s statement that closing down the Food Bank for three days to renovate was the same as the Pastor complying with their demand to never feed again feed the hungry in Jubilee Park, clearly demonstrates: a) his need to sit down and spend some time watching Sesame Street in order to get an understanding of similar things and things that are not similar and b) the continuing need for dictionaries at city hall in order that they can look up and (hopefully) gain an understanding of concepts such as “three” and “never”; even the homeless know that never is a lot longer than 3 days.

Councillor Beck proceeded to speak of spending $10’s of millions of dollars to relocate the city’s seniors group. Now my first reaction was that he was being facetious in that statement, but reflecting on his his spendthrift ways as a councillor of squandering taxpayer’s money ….

What the statement clearly demonstrated was that for covering up, avoiding or mishandling the social problems of homelessness, addiction, mental illness and poverty councillors and the city can find time and money. It is only when it comes to dealing with these social problems that neither time nor resources can be found, and we get the same old “not our responsibility, we have not the wherewithal” speech.

Addressing the social problems on the streets of Abbotsford is not about ridiculous theories, harassing Pastors or chasing the problems from a favoured neighbourhood to a neighbourhood obviously less favoured by council, it is about vision, leadership and responsible, thoughtful action.

Woe unto anyone of generous spirit …

…and caring heart who dares to feed any hungry person in Jubilee Park as a Pastor and members of his congregation learned.

The Pastor was ordered to City Hall, in the manner of a naughty child to the principal’s office, when the usual Abbotsford Police tactics of physical intimidation, verbal harassment, placing visitors to Jubilee Park under surveillance and following people to their homes failed to stop the Pastor and his congregation sharing Cheerios with the hungry and destitute in Jubilee Park early Thursday mornings.

Councillors Smith, Beck and Harris, a plethora of city staff and several witnesses for the persecution were on hand to bully the good Pastor into obedience. The attempt to overwhelm was denied the city when members of the Pastor’s congregation, members of Christian leadership and several individuals experienced and knowledgeable on addiction and homelessness attended in support of the Pastor and his good works.

The councillors expanded their attempt to browbeat the Pastor into unthinking obedience to include demands that ANY church, church groups or group of churches get approval from city hall before taking any action. They proceeded to demand obedience to council dictates, even where the people involved felt that the council dictates were against their spiritual beliefs and the teachings of their faith.

This attempt to place council’s temporal dictates above matters of faith, spirituality and the teachings of Christ failed to impress the audience.

When the city failed to offer anything rational1 to support their orders, the Pastor declined to comply with the city’s dictatorial demands. Leaving the matter unresolved and the Pastor and public waiting on which police state tactic the City will attempt to force obedience with next.

Footnote:

1 The Smith-Beck-Harris Cheerios Theory on the causality homelessness and addiction was unveiled before the public for the first time at Abbotsford City Hall on Wednesday May 7.

According to the theory espoused by Abbotsford City councillors John Smith, Bruce Beck and Lynne Harris, endorsed by Abbotsford Downtown Business Association president Bob Bos, the social problems that have spilled into the city’s Jubilee Park are being worsened by a Church that serves Cheerios early Thursday mornings in the Park.

A further tenant of the Smith-Beck-Harris Cheerio Theory, associating the serving of Cheerios with the presence of persons suffering homelessness and addiction in Jubilee Park, is that if the church Pastor and congregation members would cease serving Cheerios the Park would no longer be a “sick park” as they termed it.

One of the persecution witnesses presented by the city, when asked for clarification, stated that the swelling population in the park are homeless and addicts from Vancouver.

With Cheerios never having been one of my breakfast cereal choices I had no idea the allure of Cheerios was so powerful that hearing a church was serving Cheerios Thursday mornings in Jubilee Park in Abbotsford would have the homeless and addicted leaving all the resources to be found in Vancouver to Abbotsford’s Jubilee Park.

Under the Smith-Beck-Harris Cheerios Theory should city council not be solving Abbotsford’s homeless and addiction social problems by leading a campaign to remove Cheerios from store shelves and making Abbotsford a “Cheerios Free Zone”?

Parents be warned: do not supply your children with Cheerios. Next thing you know it will be Fruit Loops the – gasp – Lucky Charms!

The Official BC Liberal government excuse?

The Official BC Liberal government excuse?

Listening to Claude Richmond respond to the recent think tank report on Income Assistance I was left wondering whether the BC Liberal government had adopted an official excuse for all matters pertaining to social policy.

“This does not take into consideration changes made …” Claude Richmond or Rich Coleman or Gordon Campbell or any other Liberal answering question about the latest negative evaluation of BC government social policy all spout the same deficient excuse.

Of course none of the numerous reports critical of government social policy took into consideration whether Gordon Campbell danced nude under the full moon in his back yard. A consideration that has just as much validity regarding dismissing or ignoring the reviews and reports critical of social policies as does the official “changes made” excuse.

The beauty of this Official Liberal Government Excuse is that it can be used anytime and anywhere, since there is always a time lag between the last information gathered for a report and the delivery of the report.

Thus it is that the BC Liberals can continue to bury their head in the sand on matters that their ideology wishes to ignore. Of course the fact the BC Liberals ignore social issues does not change the worsening reality faced by the most vulnerable in our society in dealing with homelessness, mental illness, addiction and poverty.

Mr. Richmond dismissed the report about the inadequacies of current Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance because the government had raised the monthly allowances by $50 + $50. Not only totally ignoring everything else the report had to say, but also ignoring the reality that even with the extra $100 a month it is not possible to survive in the lower mainland on $610 per month.

Not wanting to talk about the fact that, as the report pointed out, expecting people faced with the challenges of survival on $610 a month to conduct a job search and find employment is ludicrous; or any of the pressing issues raised in the numerous negative evaluations of the BC Liberal record of failure to deal with or address the serious social issues facing BC today, the government just labels them “out of date”.

Viewing the Liberal government’s policies from the streets one thing is clear: when Rich Coleman speaks of “not knowing what is happening on the ground” he is describing the Liberal government, not the authors of the reports that the Liberal government ignores.

Rather than continuing to use the same (lame) official excuse the Liberals should just admit they lack any understanding of what the reality on the ground is; admit they lack any knowledge of what is happening on the streets; acknowledge their lack of ideas, vision or leadership with which to address the growing poverty and social challenges faced by the province of BC.

This approach would at least have the novelty of truth.

Herd Management

The preliminary results for the Fraser Valley homeless count are out and no doubt there will be debate about what the numbers mean.

A nice academic exercise for those who are not homeless. The reality for those who are homeless is that a debate will only waste more time in pointless activity that won’t house a single homeless person.

A homeless count, is that not a wonderful concept? Counting people in the same manner we do bears, eagles and other wild animal populations in order to “manage” the population. What a wonderfully demeaning manner in which to treat any group of people.

Why is there a need to count the homeless population? Why do we need to provide numbers to prove that the homeless population has grown so large that we need to take action? It is not enough that the streets and shelters are full of people without homes/shelter?

Is that not a damning truth about us as people and a society? That we have to count the homeless to prove there are enough homeless people that we are forced to take action on homelessness.

The fact that there are any people suffering homelessness, mental illness, addiction on our streets is all that should need to exist for society to act. NO ifs, no ands and no buts – if there are people in need: just do what must be done.

Ban Cigarettes?

Before commenting on the Posts call for banning cigarettes we need to clear up one major point: does the Post in anyway have financial interests (potential profits) in the nicotine replacement industry?

Cigarettes are merely the most widely used method to feed the addiction to nicotine of nicotine addicts. Unless nicotine is added to the illegal substances list along side crack, heroin, meth etc. most addicts will merely switch from cigarettes to an alternative, legal, method of feeding their addiction. Perhaps becoming patrons of safe injections sites in Vancouver?

Should the Post’s call for making illegal cigarettes and not nicotine (the additctor) be merely an oversight, I am willing to support the Post’s call for adding nicotine to the list of illegal substances and for a prohibition on alcohol.

Not because I think that prohibition or illegalization are good ideas or effective ways to deal with addiction. Rather I think it would prove very salient and educational to the public about, our current policies on addiction and illegalization of those drugs we choose to name as illegal.

I want to urge the Post to stand solidly behind its call for prohibition of alcohol and illegalization of nicotine. Assuming its position is not merely a veiled attempt to get in on the profits, political points and bucks to be made out of the illegalization of drugs.

The post’s original opinion Friday March 21, 2008

The provincial government is continuing its attack on smoking, second-hand cigarette smoke and the people who continue to puff – all in the name of improving health and by extrapolation, reducing healthcare costs and Workers’ Compensation Board claims.

Yet the senior governments won’t do the one thing that would ultimately be the best thing for all accounts – make smoking illegal.

The provincial government ads proclaiming “improvements to B.C.’s tobacco control laws” will “protect the health of all British Columbians and their communities” but doesn’t say what the law’s all about … spin doctors proclaiming a government’s dedication to health in time for the Olympics while costing pub patrons their entertainment and pub owners their profits.

So what about smoking rooms and cigar stores? And what about drinking? It’s unhealthy too. Will the government tell us all how to live?

Smoking is legal.