Evicting the squatters
The definition of “homeless” would seem self- evident: it refers to people unable to find housing, either because it is not available, or they can’t afford it.
Unfortunately, as with so many social issues, homelessness is not as straightforward as it seems. When people are offered shelter, but reject it in favour of other less savoury alternatives, is that a matter of homelessness, or some other issue?
Victoria, British Columbia’s picturesque capital, is confronted with that question as it struggles to deal with a sprawling tent city that has taken root on the lawn of the city’s courthouse.
It has about 100 moreor- less regular inhabitants and some semi- permanent shanties as well as yurts and tents. It has adopted a name — Super InTent City — created a Facebook page and a website, and issued demands for official recognition and perceived rights. “Tent city sites must be provided with basic amenities like water and bathrooms, and be close to the downtown of cities.”
Many residents and some city officials claim the site is rife with crime and drugs. Nearby residents complain of a spike in break- ins and say the city is turning a blind eye to blatant disregard for the law. Mayor Lisa Helps rejects suggestions Victoria is kowtowing to thuggishness, but agrees it’s “ridiculous” that Canada has so many people living outside.
Last week, the B. C. Supreme Court refused a request from the province for an injunction ordering the encampment be dismantled. The government argued the site was a hazard because of campfires, lack of adequate facilities, drug use and trafficking.
Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson argued that granting the request would solve nothing.
“If I were to issue the injunction at this point, I am concerned that the problems would simply migrate to other areas in the City of Victoria,” he wrote. “An injunction at this juncture may well cause greater disruption to the public and greater expense to the City of Victoria than the disruption and expense presently endured by the province.”
“The balance of convenience,” he added, “is overwhelmingly in favour of the defendants, who simply have nowhere to move to.”
This last assertion is open to question. B. C.’s housing minister says the province has already f ound more than 150 housing options for campers. In February, it opened 88 temporary shelter and rental units, while serving eviction notices on the campers. Activists promptly sued for the right to remain homeless, claimed to be on native land and brought in 45 new inhabitants from the mainland.
Homelessness is a complex and diverse problem, not a recreational opportunity. Some people are homeless because of mental illness or addiction, others from sudden overwhelming misfortune. A few genuinely prefer life without ties or responsibilities. And some young people may see it as an adventure, linked to polemical left- wing politics. Some of those in the tent city are addicts needing help.
As Hinkson noted, evicti ng the squatters would likely just shift the problem to another community or level of government. But the “convenience” of a few determined squatters cannot outweigh the right of other people to a system with rules that keep public spaces free of vandalism, drugs, excrement and violent crime.
What should be done? B.C. has the usual mix of imperfect solutions. Homeless shelters are available, even if some campers prefer the outdoors. The state offers income supplements and job training programs. Care can be provided to those with intractable mental problems or addictions. It is even rational to tolerate lower standards of public decorum in some places than others. Every city does this. But to give up in the face of threats and the fear of an unsavoury reaction is to compound the problem.
We will never entirely eliminate want, mental illness, addiction or disaster. If all homeless people were offered places in warm, safe surroundings t omorrow, some would inevitably reject the opportunity, no matter how well- meaning. But the lack of perfect choices is no excuse for surrendering public spaces to the most aggressive, belligerent or polemical.
Parks belong to the citizens, to enjoy without fear of crime, drugs or health concerns. There’s a middle ground between police dogs and pepper spray and conspicuous lawlessness that harms the homeless and the community. It’s the province’s duty to remove the tent city squatters and return the site to the community as a whole.