In an August 2009 article in the New York Times, Barbara Ehrenreich cited a study from the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty which showed that ordinances against the publicly poor have been increasing since 2006, “along with ticketing and arrests for more “neutral” infractions like jaywalking, littering or carrying an open container of alcohol.”
In a pre-Olympic city like Vancouver, the surge in ticketing and other policy measures continues.
The Olympics are merely being used as a pretext to bring in pieces of legislation that can be used to criminalize poverty and the right to protest. In some cases, the rights of corporate sponsors are being protected while the rights of citizens are being eroded. Just as in Barcelona, Atlanta, Sydney and Athens, a whole new set of laws is being imposed on citizens to make way for the Olympic circus.
Today’s revelation that the BC government intends to force people in to shelters during cold and wet weather is another in a long line of misguided steps taken by the provincial government. The BC Auditor General’s report on the matter covers what the government is doing wrong at present.
In a document obtained by the BC Civil Liberties Association, the ‘proposed process to assist persons to shelter,’ states the following:
1. A declaration is made that extreme weather conditions exist in a local area, as specified in Extreme Weather Response Plan for that area that have been developed in accordance with BC Housing protocol (or in accordance with regulation if there is no plan in place for that area).
2. Outreach workers provide a written notice to people who are apparently made, provide information on shelter availability and encourage them to go to a shelter or other accommodation they may have access to. The worker will also advise that police officers have the authority to take them to a shelter.
3. A police officer engages with a person who has received a notice, or gives them a notice if they have not already received one. The officer encourages them to voluntarily find shelter and advises them that the officer can request an administrative order that would give them authority to transport the individual to a shelter involuntarily. The person either seeks shelter or refuses.
4. If the person refuses, the police officer contacts an official (to be determined) by telephone who issues an administrative order which the officer would then enforce. The administrative order would name the person and order that they accompany the officer to an emergency shelter. This process enables the police officer to use force.
5. The officer takes the person to a shelter. If the person is not accommodated at the shelter, alternate accommodation may be found. As a last resort, and in order for the police officer to discharge their legal responsibility, the individual may be taken to police cells, either voluntarily or involuntarily, where they will be held until the extreme weather declaration is no longer in effect.
Not only is this legislation being brought forward in an amateurish manner, no consultation has taken place. It is also likely that the proposed legislation would violate Charter Rights. In the Ministry’s own internal documents, it states:
“3. There is a need to establish a point at which the duty of the police officer ends. If an officer ‘apprehends’ a person and it turns out that (1) no shelter space is available, (2) a shelter refuses to accept a person, or (3) a person refuses to stay in the shelter, the officer remains responsible for that person. The officer would be liable for anything that happened to them if they left them outside; putting them in a cell against their will would violate their Charter rights; and the officer cannot continue to keep the person with him/her while attending to other duties.”
What would be far more constructive for the government to initiate, is to act on the recommendations of the Frank Paul Inquiry. To be floating public policy prescriptions that harass the homeless and criminalizes their situation will only add to their marginalization and force them further underground.
Government cutbacks since the mid 90’s have led to increases in poverty and homelessness. There are over 200,000 homeless people in Canada and the most conservative estimate for BC is 10,500. Homelessness has more than doubled since the Olympics were awarded to Vancouver. The urgent crisis of homelessness is of the government’s own making. By making it more difficult to access social programs and by gutting the Homes BC program which used to build 1,200 units annually, we have increased the number of homeless people while reducing the new supply of social housing units.
All of these concerns, do not even begin to address the moral dimensions of forced treatment. The linear rationalism that would be applied and excess notions of governmentality – the idea of attempting to bureaucratize solutions with a line of thinking that completely fails to address the root causes is a symptom of public policy processes that are out of touch at both the political and bureaucratic levels.
Making decisions on behalf of other people ‘for their own good’ is one of the historical explanations of colonialism. When 32% of homeless people in Metro Vancouver are aboriginal, you can see where that line of thinking has gotten us thus far.
The Inner City Inclusive Commitment Statement was signed during the Olympic bid process to ensure that rights would be protected, that social legacies would be left behind, that civil society organizations would have a seat at the table. Instead, it has been used for public relations purposes.
Don’t even get me started about the roving band of ‘branding police.’
