June 9, 2024
An open letter to members of Victoria City Council
Homelessness: A 5M Approach
The ‘action,’ of May 16, 2024, cleaning Pandora Street of tents, belongings and persons,https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/pandora-encampment-cleared-by-city-bylaw-officers-campers-told-to-pack-up-and-go-8757722 sudden and without warning, leaves one befuddled because it was not announced before-hand nor its purpose explained after.
Whatever the explanation, it was an inchoate blip in the history of attempts to address the issues related to homelessness. In fact, it was less than a blip because within a week not only were the persons who were evicted and told to move on- whatever euphemism used- were back within a week, but the encampment has grown up and down Pandora Street, past the pre-eviction boundaries.
The blip reminds one of various attempts to fully address the issue in the last thirty years. There have been multiple studies, work forces, papers, research, discussions by, among and with concerned groups of citizens, and engagement with various professionals but nothing has happened to address the underlying issues that cause people to become homeless and thereby create a coherent, long-term strategy.
There has been some specific progress on various solutions: some housing has been created and small groups patrol the city to help with food, clothing, medical issues for individuals, and so on. However, these sorts of programs have been short-term band-aid activities. Our Place Society itself is a long-term semi-permanent solution but as such it is larger band-aid. The creation of the Courtnall Society for mental Health at the Royal Jubilee Hospital is a very welcome, necessary and permanent aid to many.
There is a different approach or, rather, set of combined solutions. Bear in mind these are not impossible; they may prove to be merely improbable for a number of reasons, but not impossible.
What is necessary is the creation of a multi-disciplinary, multi-generational, multi-professional, multi-individuated and multi-economic, permanent long-term process. The basic description for this process contains an umbrella (the canopy) structure, beneath which all necessary sub-parts (the ribs) are researched and interconnected with one another to address the differentiated solutions that would come out of such a process.
The canopy can be called the permanent ‘working group’ that is held p by the ribs. Its members, ask and promulgate what the big questions are and works to develop practical means to create a robust structure that addresses the complex social concerns that are identified as homelessness, but also the hidden realities connected but not noticed, to that issue. The working group would ask for and receive information essential to address homelessness in Victoria, a process that could be replicated across the country.
A given municipality cannot address the issues alone. Engagement of both provincial and federal government partners is critical. In addition, as the process is created and grows, multiple partners would have to be engaged. Representatives from these partners would populate the ribs and have seats under the canopy.
The most important contribution of a municipality is to get it started and be the hub to gather human resources and data, pulling them together and making the argument for multiple, mutual, correlated solutions. What may be the most important role for a municipality or set of municipalities is to be resolute when the winds of negativity with slashing, cold rain try to dampen that resolve.
Again, the process itself and the results must be multi-disciplinary, multi-generational, multi-professional and multi-individuated and multi-economic.
- Multi-disciplinary. By this word I mean a group of knowledgeable persons gathered to ask the initial big questions. By ‘knowledgeable persons’ I mean ethicists, medical folk, sociologists, practical financial minds (and others, no doubt). Some questions are these: What are the key questions we need to ask? What is the data we need to uncover? Is this umbrella group and the solutions it seeks going to be political or moral? What ideological concerns need to be identified, made explicit and discussed? What are the ethical foundations for the creation of the umbrella? What are the economic implications for either going ahead or not? Why should citizens support such an ambitious process/project/set of solutions? Is the status quo working? For whom?
- Multi-individuated. It is no secret that persons living on the street are not of one kind; there are multiple explanations for why people end up on the street. In addition, the multiple reasons why persons are on the street leads to related issues; impacts on their families, the judiciary, the police, medical professionals, the public purse, etc.
- Multi-generational. Identifying and considering the various issues cannot be a one-off activity. As noted above, there has been progress, but if the purpose is to simply create another programme, why would anyone participate? The set of issues to be identified, addressed and coordinated actions implemented cannot be addressed by a single municipality in a four year election cycle. Politicians may want to move on after a few years or the will of the people may suggest that they do. Parties get elected and then defeated and a major social issue such as homelessness gets lost or rejected by the next party or set of politicians who get elected. What we need then is politicians at a given moment to agree how they can work together multi-generationally on this multi-pronged issue, regardless of what party or set of politicians, or leaders are in place in the future. Some sort of explicit covenant that states the necessary continuance of working beyond ideological interests toward solutions must be crafted and agreed to by a first set of politicians, in such a way that all future members of their parties or ideological affiliates cannot either scuttle such significant work or chip away at it until it disappears under the weight of subtle ideological influences or quiet diversion of resources to other concerns. A covenant needs to backed up with solid, scientific, data-based, peer-reviewed evidence.
- Multi-professional. Some of these are: medical personnel and resources, teachers and educational processes from K-12 and support for families with early age children, sociological studies and experts, current groups that work within the matrix of service and concern for homelessness and related issues, present and future legal matters, law enforcement, practical financial professionals and economists (see below). There are likely other professionals that would have to be brought into the work.
- Multi-economic. I have cut out for commentary this category from the others because financial issues will be less complex than them but more potentially divisive. The inevitable duelling ideological principles, especially without reliable data, could bog down the entire process and project. For example, what does it cost a single municipality in terms of dollars to address the needs and impact of a single person who is on the street? There have been a number of studies that asked and answered this question.[1] These data need to be gathered and collated, based on best peer-reviewed studies with others that are significant from a ‘soft’ perspective. Other financial studies should be gathered. For example, the notion of a ‘universal basic income’ (UBI) for either all citizens or for the most disadvantaged.[2] This is an idea that has been floating around for decades. Experiments been conducted Canada (Manitoba), the U.S. (under Nixon), Great Britain, and elsewhere. Interest in the idea has grown and has occupied the time, researches, and thinking of many more people than even a few years ago. An interesting negative response to UBIs, was from certain billionaires who have created a lobby group in the U.S. to oppose any intent to create or experiment to see how a UBI might work.[3]
How to get started? I invite each of you, first, to think of words of wisdom that keep you alive and hopeful in the face of adversity. If it is hard to think of any, one can find any number of them on the internet,[4] some of which are icky sweet (and of doubtful aid) and some of which are profound. One place to start is to read Rutger Bregman’s Utopia for Realists.[5] Famously, Bregman was once, on air, called a ‘tiny brained moron’ and told to **** off
by former fox employee and now Putin pundit, Tucker Carlson,[6] an altercation that demonstrates the value of Bregman and Utopia. I am happy to invest in your commitment and interest by purchasing a copy for each of you. Let me know.
But, second, the most basic question is: would you Victoria City Council members start to build the umbrella?
A related question is: is the status quo working and acceptable? If not, why not? Questions that arise from that question are; A) what is the status quo and what do we mean when we say it is ‘working’? B) if we find the status quo acceptable, what are the ethical roots that determine an answer? If there are opposite answers, which do you and we wish to live with? Perhaps we can start by asking and at least find initial answers to these questions.
Endnotes
[1]. Canada: https://csuch.ca/documents/reports/english/Canadian-Substance-Use-Costs-and-Harms-Report-2023-en.pdf; https://www.camh.ca/en/driving-change/the-crisis-is-real/mental-health-statistics; https://www.homelesshub.ca/sites/default/files/attachments/costofhomelessness_paper21092012.pdf; https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/opinion-jino-distasio-homelessness-housing-first-1.4341552
U.S.: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK424861/; https://kennedystreetrecovery.org/costs-of-addiction/; https://www.givedirectly.org/basic-income/?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwjeuyBhBuEiwAJ3vuoRsqe8x2BZhVajtD63M042uMf26OGUBML0BIxhS04b9qHy30uXN9kBoCe0MQAvD_BwE
An interesting paper from Norway: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=65ab099ba5bbbc36d21557ac7b1a9ccdd6cc40e6.
[2]. https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/the-deep-and-enduring-history-of-universal-basic-income/; https://newsletter.economics.utoronto.ca/basic-income-project-for-pei-in-the-realm-of-the-possible-q-a-with-kourtney-koebel/; https://www.ubiworks.ca/; https://basicincomecanada.org/; https://basicincome.stanford.edu/about/what-is-ubi/. https://basicincome.stanford.edu/about/what-is-ubi/.
[3]. More or less randomly chosen comment and arguments: https://www.unifor.org/news/all-news/universal-basic-income-too-good-be-true; https://www.scottsantens.com/billionaire-fueled-lobbying-group-behind-the-state-bills-to-ban-universal-basic-income-experiments-ubi/; https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/1d1x3ve/billionaire_backlash_shows_the_power_of_basic/; https://www.quora.com/What-impact-do-hyper-conservative-billionaires-like-Richard-and-Liz-Uihlein-have-on-efforts-to-ban-universal-basic-income-schemes; https://www.washingtonpost.com/made-by-history/2023/06/14/universal-basic-income/; https://officeofsarah.com/blog/the-evils-of-universal-basic-income; https://www.heritage.org/poverty-and-inequality/commentary/universal-basic-income-has-been-tried-it-didnt-work; https://thewalrus.ca/how-universal-basic-income-will-save-the-economy/.
[4]. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alejandrocremades/2019/02/20/15-powerful-quotes-on-success/?sh=12c1415f1c98
[5]. Rutger Bregman, Utopia for Realists: And How We can Get There, trans., Elizabeth Manton. London and New York: Bloomsbury, 2014 (The Netherlands), 2017 (Great Britain).
[6]. https://x.com/nowthisimpact/status/1098282209834950657?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1098283273120350211%7Ctwgr%5Ed81e19a6c05726b789778c38ea6d9aa40eb924fe%7Ctwcon%5Es3_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbc.ca%2Fnews%2Fbusiness%2Fbusiness-media-fake-news-rutger-bregman-1.5027881.