An Ontario resident says the agenda of some advocacy groups includes an element of ‘lawlessness’ that allows for ‘an open air, unregulated, illegal drug site.’
A homeless encampment is seen in Toronto on June 7, 2021. (Photo by Ian Willms/Getty Images)
More and bigger homeless encampments have been set up across Canada recently and, with the help of advocacy groups, they’re taking on a more permanent feel.
Hunkering down for the winter, some have generators, heating stoves, winterized tents, and more. Advocacy groups have helped them obtain these supplies, along with legal help to stop attempts at moving them.
It’s becoming increasingly difficult for cities to remove encampments from parks and other public properties. A Nov. 24 Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision is a case in point. Justice Ian Carter blocked Kingston’s attempt to remove an encampment on the grounds that it would violate the charter right to “life, liberty, and security.”
It’s the second such court decision in Ontario in 2023; the other stopped the removal of an encampment in Waterloo earlier this year.
While many in these advocacy groups are well-meaning in offering charity to those in need, there’s also an element of “using these people as pawns in a political game,” says Mr. Smith, a resident of Cobourg, Ont. He preferred to use a pseudonym to avoid any impacts to his business for speaking on the matter.
Mr. Smith has dedicated much effort to looking into the growing encampment problem in his town—it’s one of the many smaller-sized cities in Canada seeing a homelessness and encampment problem for the first time. He noted the support of the local Green Wood Coalition and Legal Help Centre in “emboldening” the encampment residents to stay despite eviction notices and the desire of locals to see the encampment situation resolved.
Shelter space is available, but encampment residents choose not to use it for various reasons. This is common nationwide, and objections include that shelters may have curfews or prohibit drug use.
The agenda of some advocacy groups extends beyond providing immediate aid to the encampment, Mr. Smith said. It includes advocacy for controversial policy direction that allows for the “lawlessness” he says is currently prevailing at the encampment, which he calls “an open air, unregulated, illegal drug site.”
‘Unhoused Protestors’
At an encampment in St. John’s, Nfld., the Social Justice Co-op NL is running an initiative called Tent City For Change. The group calls encampment residents “unhoused protestors.” The encampment represents “a political movement,” said a volunteer for the organization, Laurel Huget, in a Nov. 29 interview with CBC.
One of the group’s Facebook posts regarding the encampment rails against “individuals who are trying to co-opt this movement for their own fascist/political gain,” while another speaks of revolution. The group notes that shelter spaces are available but “are not fit,” so the encampment has set up in the city’s Bannerman Park, which has washrooms and Wi-Fi. Other posts on the group’s website show an Antifa flag, calls to “resist capitalism,” an initiative to raise funds for an anarchist organization, and rallies for Palestine.
The Social Justice Co-op NL didn’t reply to an Epoch Times request for comment by press time. Nor did the Green Wood Coalition in Cobourg and a handful of other such advocacy groups.
The rallying cry of this group and many like it is, “housing is a human right.” While saying housing is an essential need sounds innocuous, it is used to push for a housing policy approach many Canadians would find unpalatable, says lawyer Aaron Wudrick with the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.
Housing as a Human Right
The statement that “housing is a human right” is usually meant in the sense that the government should provide housing for everyone whether they do anything to earn it or not, Mr. Wudrick said. That doesn’t sit well with people who have to work hard and pay for their own housing, he said.
“I think most people would be open to the idea of providing housing for people who are committed to, say, getting their lives back in order,” he told The Epoch Times. “But the idea that everyone is going to get a home and you don’t have to do anything at all to keep the right to stay there—I think it’s a political non-starter.”
He said it’s similar to safe supply policy, which gives opioids to addicts with the stated purpose of preventing overdoses from unregulated drugs, though critics say it fuels addiction. “It’s like you’re supposed to supply these things no questions asked. There’s no expectations, there’s no rules, you just get it,” he said.
In January, judge Michael Valente of Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice ruled against the City of Waterloo’s plans to remove an encampment, saying it violated charter rights. It was the first decision in Ontario to build off of a 2009 British Columbia court decision that determined removing encampments violates the charter right to “life, liberty, and security” if not enough shelter spaces are available to house those displaced.
Justice Valente took it a step further, however, saying the spaces available must be accessible, or low-barrier. Shelters that require sobriety and don’t accommodate couples, for example, may be considered inadequate housing.
Justice Carter in Kingston took note of these decisions and similarly said the city’s Belle Park encampment should not be removed, though he did say the tents should be removed during the day and only permitted at night.Federal housing legislation in 2019 codified housing as a human right. The National Housing Strategy Act says “adequate housing is a fundamental human right.” The crime of vagrancy was also removed from the Criminal Code in 2019. Federal housing advocate Marie-Josée Houle, whose office falls under the Canadian Human Rights Commission, said in an interim report on encampments in October that the encampments in cities across Canada are a “growing human rights crisis.”
B.C. Human Rights Commissioner Kasari Govender called for adding “social condition” as a protected ground in the provincial Human Rights Code in 2020.
A report on encampments published last year by the federal housing advocate’s office speaks strongly of housing as a human right, connecting it to what it calls colonial oppression.
“The existence of housing precarity and homelessness is intertwined with … colonial reality,” it states. “The lack of affordable housing, the opioid crisis, racial injustice, police misconduct, and ongoing colonization all converge at these sites.”
It speaks of destigmatizing homelessness in the same terms safe supply advocates speak of destigmatizing drug use. Attempts to remove drug use or encampments from highly populated public places is said to drive people “into the shadows.”
“Residents have been arrested and criminalized under bylaws outlawing behaviours such as camping, bathing, or defecating in public—activities which are unavoidable when sheltering in place. Far from causing a decline in homelessness, these responses have simply driven people experiencing homelessness into the shadows, away from areas of relative safety and beyond the reach of service providers,” the report says.
Encampments an ‘Extremely Urgent’ Problem: Poll
The number of Canadians who feel encampments are an “extremely urgent” problem has greatly increased in the past few years, according to a 2022 National Survey on Homeless Encampments coordinated by Infrastructure Canada.
It breaks down encampment information into “before the pandemic” and “since the pandemic.” Before COVID-19, only 11 percent of the general public felt this to be an “extremely urgent” problem, and 34 percent said the urgency of the problem was “low.” Since the pandemic, 45 percent say it is “extremely urgent” with another 28 percent saying it’s a high priority. Only three percent said the urgency is “low.”
About 75 percent of respondents said the number of residents in encampments in their cities had risen. And 80 percent reported an increase in the number of encampments.
The report also looked at solutions tried and the success of such solutions. Creating new shelters had the most success, with a reported success rate of 59 percent. Increasing availability of public and transitional housing and increasing capacity at existing shelters were also reported successful.
Mr. Smith has looked at solutions for Cobourg as well. He works in finance and has looked into costs for providing shelter and he thinks it’s manageable, it’s just that government bureaucracy and finger-pointing are getting in the way.
“Every politician and and political organization or government or agency is trying to spin it that it’s somebody else’s fault,” he said.
“I think the private sector needs to step up,” he said, adding he’s starting to organize that in Cobourg.
People are feeling unsafe, Mr. Smith said, with thefts allegedly perpetrated by encampment residents, open drug use, and unnerving encounters becoming more frequent. For example, he heard of a man getting into someone’s car in broad daylight while the driver was in it.
Another Cobourg resident, who wished to remain unnamed, said her neighbour recently found people sleeping in her backyard treehouse.
Similar reports are heard in other cities. Hamilton has permitted encampments on public property, with some limitations, while facing legal challenges similar to those in Waterloo and Kingston. A comment on a recent article about the situation by the Waterloo Region Record says: “I have lived in this area for over four years and the last few months I have never felt more unsafe in my life. … Just last week two men decided my patio was a great spot to do drugs without any pants on. I have made numerous police reports.”
A recent town meeting in Cobourg on the situation drew hundreds, Mr. Smith said, bursting past capacity at the venue. The atmosphere was like a tinderbox, he said. “All it takes is the spark … and this town’s going to explode. … They want a vigilante solution because nothing’s happened.”