Idea

It is painful to read headlines listing fires at camps and lodges locally and across the country. Unfortunately, not a month goes by without another needless death due to appalling living conditions in Canada.

Additionally, the number of buildings closed on the grounds that they are not suitable for human habitation is increasing. Why have such conditions worsened over the past decade, despite tens of billions of dollars in federal housing financing commitments?

It is critical to frame the collapse of housing security within a contradictory policy environment. Namely, the National Housing Strategy Act 2019 (NHSA), passed by Parliament, calls on the Government of Canada to “recognize that the right to adequate housing is a fundamental human right affirmed in international law; and recognize that housing is essential to the inherent dignity and well-being of the person and to building sustainable and inclusive communities.”

NHSA also created a watchdog within the Federal Housing Advocate who will hold the government accountable for ensuring NHSA achieves stated goals. However, the Advocate said in a recent report about the camps that “every day is a matter of life and death for the people living in the camps”, stating that despite clear threats to life and security, the camps violate one’s right to shelter.

We must overcome any uncertainty and focus on a plan to end the camps.

But since the NHSA came into force, we have collectively failed to address the growing number of Canadians who lack basic housing. The exile of many people to transit shelters, run-down camps, deplorable hostels and one-room hotels is proof of this. In Winnipeg alone, those in such precarious situations number in the thousands.

What should alarm community organizations and others working to combat difficult housing conditions are policies that lean toward punitive measures that seek to criminalize homelessness while falling short of enforcing basic building standards and codes.

The most striking of these is the United States Supreme Court’s decision in The City Grants Pass Oregon v. It was the decision in Johnson et al. The result gave cities the right not only to ban camps, but also to make a living from such a potential criminal activity.

Although the root causes of the global housing crisis lie in the massive lack of affordable housing and critical supports, it is such policy responses that are gaining widespread momentum.

Closer to home, a group of Ontario mayors recently called on the provincial government to consider invoking the notwithstanding clause to overcome legal hurdles to closing camps arising from an earlier court ruling preventing forced evictions. In Vancouver, the fight to forcibly remove hundreds of people camped in Hastings polarized those who advocated for the standards to be enforced, while others defended people’s right to remain.

Such scenarios will continue unless more affordable housing is built and/or allocated.

It is critical to state clearly and unequivocally that encampments are an inherently dangerous form of shelter and that most, if not all, lack sanitation, fire safety or basic standards of use. In fact, I would argue that such conditions cause more harm than reduction, regardless of whether they are seen as affirming one’s right to housing.

Earlier this month, I attended a workshop hosted by the Mental Health Commission of Canada, which launched Housing First in Canada 15 years ago.

The aim of the workshop was to examine the state of affairs in addressing mental health and homelessness.

It became clear during the session that Manitoba is seen as a leader in solutions to end homelessness using a range of tools. This includes the recent provincial allocation of over $4 million to establish new Assertive Community Actions (ACT) teams and Flexible ACT or FACT teams.

This will go a long way in providing assistance to the most vulnerable. This can be even more effective when combined with a clear plan to secure quality housing.