Homeless, Municipal

Letter to the Editor: pamphlet

Leave a comment

I was sent a copy of the ‘pamphlet’ that Mr. Teichroeb claimed was given to the homeless as they were being forced to relocate in order that the city could ‘clean up’ the site they were occupying. Mr. Jim Wright forwarded it to me after he had received it from the City Manager of Bylaws.

1. This is a revised letter. In the original I failed to note the May 2005 revision date. I also could not find the Park Inn Hotel when I searched for Hotels and Motels in Abbotsford. I mistakenly thought that perhaps it was one of the hotels the city had earlier torn down, but being uncomfortable with making an assumption I widened my search (experience is that assumptions can cause problems, so I went back to widen the search in hopes of having fact not assumption) Further research turned up at 2509 Pauline Street: Park Inn Cold Beer & Wine Store; Park Inn Hotel – listed as a Bed & Breakfast; Station Pub & Restaurant. I am not sure what use this is to the homeless not of the wisdom/reason of including a wine and beer store and a pub on a list that is suppose to be of assistance in overcoming homelessness.

2. “General Housing Services”. I would never have considered a Motel to be “general housing services”. Calling a Motel “general housing services” is meaningless gibberish of the first order. Besides at $66.00 a night, if you can afford Super 8, you can afford housing in Abbotsford.

3. Should any readers of this letter have the misfortune to need to seek shelter and the much greater misfortune to be depending on the city for help and/or information in finding shelter (or help) do not waste time seeking the “William Booth Emergency Shelter” on Morey Street. Not there. And of course the Salvation Army Share & Care Centre has relocated.

4. Since this came from Gordon Ferguson it would appear that Mr. Teichroeb is not alone as a member of the city administration who lacks the ability to apply intelligent thought to the homeless situation. Why else would one be handing out an out-dated John Howard Society pamphlet (for newly released prisoners) to the homeless (note: I have not been able to locate a relocated homeless person who actually was handed this pamphlet). One would reasonable expect that city officials should be aware of major changes (front page reports in the local papers) in the city, such as the move of the Salvation Army.

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, Poverty

The Ottawa Manifesto Regarding Poverty And Homelessness

Leave a comment

We, the members of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada’s Roundtable on Poverty and Homelessness, and other signatories, are representative of the many Canadian people of Christian faith who believe that the care of poor and vulnerable people of all ages is a central tenet of our own faith, of good government, and of responsible, compassionate citizenship. We have already committed significant personal and organizational resources to this purpose. We have witnessed the rise of homelessness as a crisis of disturbing proportions, and of societal, systemic and individual complexity. The time has come to add to material action a clear, creative and challenging public voice. We believe that Jesus Christ was and is the unique Son of God, and that he lived, died and was resurrected for our salvation. We believe that the Bible is, in its entirety, God-breathed, and that His voice may be heard clearly throughout. And we are convinced that the teaching and example of Jesus, together with the repeated testimony of the Bible, reveal that God specifically values those who are poor and rejected as having been made in His image, and, therefore, as inherently precious to Him. We are convinced of the fundamental dignity and worth of each and every human being, without qualification.

We All Need Homes, Not Just Housing

A home is more than just four walls and a roof. It’s a whole life situation that means being welcomed into a safe, secure and dignified place to live; healthy, nurturing relationships; the opportunity for education, meaningful work for reasonable pay; and to worship, dream and play in vibrant community. Housing initiatives need to take these values into account, and aim at creating far more than “affordable” space.

We Are More Alike Than Different

Drastically different life circumstances can create the illusion that we are inherently different beings, especially when those external differences are ones that may frighten or repulse us – such as homelessness. These perceived differences allow us to distance ourselves still farther, until we can easily justify our nonengagement with people who are homeless. Yet the closer we get to people, even those whose experiences, circumstances and proclivities seem completely foreign to us, the more essentially similar we find ourselves to be. People who are homeless have the same needs and longings we all share.

Compassion Demands Action

Compassion is more than a feeling. Genuinely caring about people motivates us to take action. We must, therefore, apply ourselves to learn why people become homeless or are trapped in poverty, engage in social and political advocacy, make a point of getting to know people who may live outside our own “comfort zones”, and seek to share our time, abilities and material resources. All of these energies are directed at effecting material change – such as dignified housing, meaningful work, or access to health care or education – in the lives of the people for whom we have compassion.

Grace And Mercy Are For All Of Us

Choosing to help only those who “deserve” help and leaving behind those whose behaviours we may disapprove of is prejudicial and not Biblical. The grace and mercy of God, upon which we all rely, are, by definition, only for people who are undeserving and/or guilty. Christians, knowing themselves to be by nature undeserving, ought to be able to identify with those who appear to be homeless or poor because of their own behaviours. “God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” Romans 5:8

Ignoring Poverty Impoverishes All Of Us

Abandoning people to poverty increases health problems and welfare rolls, and sometimes drives people to crime – all major burdens for governments, and therefore, tax payers. The generational entrenchment of poverty diminishes hope (the capacity to dream) and the sense of personal value in the individual. Children, the unrealized potential of our nation, when they are born into poverty, start life so far behind others that they may never be able to catch up. The whole of society is enriched when the creative gifts of the poor are supported by governmental and social systems that affirm the value of what they have to offer. When people are shut out because of their poverty, poverty itself “snowballs”, at once increasing our societal burden and diminishing our societal capacity. Homelessness in Canada is a clear and concrete manifestation of this truth.

Justice And Mercy Define Good Government

Believing that our progress is measured by our standard of care for the least privileged among us, we expect good government to formulate policy that not only works toward a level playing field, but offers “second chances” to people who have failed or done wrong. We believe that justice ought to be primarily restorative rather than punitive. We recognize that both social policies and budgets are declarations of a government’s moral intent. We will offer whatever support we can to government initiatives that are just and merciful, and will continue to use every means at our disposal to press governments at every level until such policies are made a priority. We believe that homelessness will be a priority for policy makers concerned with justice and mercy.

Poverty Belongs At The Centre

The Bible teaches clearly and consistently throughout, that care of people who are poor, oppressed or marginalized is intrinsic to both the announcing of the gospel of personal salvation, and the purpose of government. Throughout western history, when governments and the church have put care of such people at the centre of their agendas, both have flourished. For perhaps 150 years, the general political and religious trends in the western world have been aimed at reducing poverty – with a significant level of success. In recent years, however, these positive trends have diminished and further marginalized people who are poor, sometimes to the point of criminalizing certain aspects of poverty. We believe that, if this trend continues, it will ultimately be disastrous for our country and our churches. The church in Canada has a responsibility to provide moral leadership by making a priority of caring for people who are poor, and particularly people who are homeless, in its own budgets and activities.
Government Responsibility Does Not Excuse Church Apathy
While various levels of government clearly have a responsibility to address these matters, the church must not succumb to a theological dichotomy whereby we construe the church’s responsibilities to concern only the spiritual, and the government’s only the physical. As communities of faith, we have different capacities than governments or social service organizations. We must be ready to provide creative leadership in some circumstances, and partnership or humble servanthood in others, in order to create realistic, dignified and sustainable options for people who are homeless.

Christian Groups Make Good Partners For Government Initiatives

Christian groups have for many years been the largest nongovernment service provider to the poor and homeless in North America. In fact, many social services now funded and directed by government were begun by such groups. Since Christian teaching and practice encourages the development of functioning communities, a high level of volunteer participation, and the donation of money and other resources, we can often achieve more with less, adding value and offering a wealth of experience and healthy community context to government resources. Already existing Christian communities offer a holistic context for the development or implementation of services and programs that government is not equipped to create on its own. We encourage Christian groups to support and partner, wherever possible, with government initiatives aimed at the substantial reduction of homelessness, poverty, and their root causes.

Therefore, To Our Brothers And Sisters Who Struggle With Poverty And Homelessness, We Commit to…

LEARN all we can about the systemic, sociological, economic, cultural and spiritual deficits that have left them in this state. We will listen carefully to them, for they are our greatest teachers. We will seek out the knowledge others have acquired, and teach what we ourselves have learned to those who want to care more effectively for people who are poor or homeless;ACT with diligence and integrity to create with them healthy, nurturing relationships, and safe, secure, dignified homes;SPEAK on their behalf when their own voices are not heard, and support them in speaking for themselves, to the end that Canadian churches, governments, media and businesses would make the substantial reduction of homelessness, poverty and their root causes a high priority; and COOPERATE with others committed to these baseline objectives, respecting differences of approach and philosophy.

Before God, We Make These Commitments In The Places Where We Work And Serve, In Our Communities Of Faith, And In Our Personal Lives

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

Homeless, Municipal

letter to the Editor: City’s social

Leave a comment

Re: City’s social needs identified, documented

Your headline concerning the travesty of a report from the Social Planner is misleading in that it suggests that there is more than fluff and filler in the report. The report contains nothing of a definitive nature. It does contain the claim of extensive study and consultation from which no ideas or recommendations apparently emerged. This total lack of any substance also means that the articles closing line: “More details will be published in Thursday’s edition of the Abbotsford News” is pointless since there are no details to report. (Details: to report or relate minutely or in particulars; to name or state explicitly.) For months the city refrain has been: ‘we cannot act until the Social Planner reports what it is that we should be doing’. What were the brilliant plans and ideas brought forth from the Social Planner?

That the following recommendations proposed in “Abbotsford Cares: Agenda for Social Planning in the City of Abbotsford”, be approved:

1) organize a Social Sustainability Advisory Committee;
2) develop a Social Development Master Plan;
3) develop an Affordable and Accessible Housing Strategy; and
4) respond to opportunities for city involvement in social development

It appears that the best plan they could come up with is that the City administration continue to sit around doing nothing except claim they are doing something and trying to appear to be taking action to fool the public. The final line “respond to opportunities for city involvement in social development,” seems to suggest that the only hope for addressing any of the City’s pressing social needs and problems lies outside the City administration. Outwardly it appears the City’s plan is to sit around until citizens or groups begin to take action on their own, giving the City a chance to “respond to opportunities.” Unfortunately, experience suggests that any response from the City is more than likely going to be negative and add to the problem(s) being addressed.

Looking at it, this entire episode resembles nothing so much as a Farce (A ludicrous, empty show; a mockery), which would be humourous if the consequences were not so disastrous for those who so desperately need help. Seeking Leadership and Action from City leaders and administration, the citizens madly treading water in an effort to merely survive, were instead tossed an anchor. Moving this travesty from Farce to Tragedy.