Propaganda muddies waters over homeless camps
Crime, safety problems are real
When the City of Toronto recently cleared a major homeless encampment in Trinity Bellwoods Park, one of the city’s most popular public spaces, activists came together to violently oppose the eviction. While they ultimately failed to stop it, they nonetheless managed to shape public narratives around the incident — often through disinformation circulated on social media.
Consequently, Trinity Bellwoods has become another case study in how activists use dishonesty to achieve their goals and, in the process, undermine municipal efforts to balance the needs of the homeless against threats to community safety.
These large encampments often create unsafe environments for residents who live in the area. Yet pro-encampment activists are quick to dismiss or trivialize widespread online testimonials of neighbourhood violence. As someone who lived adjacent to an encampment that was cleared out in May, I have personally experienced this kind of gaslighting with respect to my own safety (as have many others I know in my neighbourhood).
Yet last fall, the City of Toronto was forced to admit that encampments are unsafe. Ironically, this was caused by pro-encampment activists who dragged the city into a legal battle over the validity of evictions.
In a 29-page court submission, the city’s legal team explained that safety concerns include “frequent” violent incidents within the encampments themselves, problems with human trafficking and threats of violence and harassment against city workers and park visitors. The city noted that visitors, particularly seniors and families, were afraid to enter certain parks.
This is in addition to sanitation problems, such as used needles and feces, which litter surrounding areas. These things may be tolerable for young champagne socialists who, in their privilege, can simply look the other way, but are often intolerable for parents who want to let their children enjoy Toronto’s scarce green spaces, especially lower-income parents who are not blessed with backyards or large homes.
The rights of the homeless matter, but they must be balanced against community safety needs — neighbourhoods cannot simply be abandoned to criminality and violence. While many encampments peacefully coexist with their surrounding communities and, for the sake of compassion, ought to be left alone, there are many others that do not. Differentiating between safe and unsafe encampments requires honest and balanced reporting of facts, but this is not happening.
Consider the CBC, which, just prior to Trinity Bellwoods being cleared out, published an absurd article that portrayed the encampment’s residents as whimsical artists who enjoy music, sketching and “repairing bicycles.”
This was pure propaganda that sanitized the criminal elements that exist in these camps. The allusion to “repairing bicycles” was especially farcical, as encampments often function as chop shops for stolen bikes. As many of Toronto’s media outlets seem similarly committed to burying community safety issues, it’s no wonder that the city let the problem simmer for so long.
When Toronto clears out encampments, it sends city workers to handle the process. They offer campers rehousing (including government-paid hotel rooms), food, harm reduction and other social support. But they are put at risk when they encounter violent mobs of pro-encampment activists.
Indeed, contrary to what activists often claim, police are sent only as security to protect workers from any mobs that may show up. They do not handle evictions themselves.
Recent incidents demonstrate the need for security. In May, when Toronto cleared out Lamport Stadium Park, a sizable contingent of police was sent, but three officers were nonetheless injured. One can only imagine what would have happened to city workers had no security been provided for them.
In Trinity Bellwoods, a large police presence resulted in a 12-hour standoff with a mob of activists, who hurled abuse at police and city workers and attempted to vandalize fences erected to protect workers during the eviction process. Ultimately, three protesters were charged, one for allegedly assaulting an officer and another for alleged assault with a weapon. One journalist was reported to have been surrounded by protesters and assaulted with an object.
Yet the city’s reasonable security measures are being spun as evidence of a callous and over-militarized police state. The spin is being supported by outright fabrications spread by pro-encampment activists.
For example, Zoe Dodd, a highly visible activist affiliated with the Encampment Safety Network (ESN), tweeted that police were firing rubber bullets at protesters. Despite this being untrue, Dodd’s rubber bullet story was retweeted over 500 times. It was reported as fact by Blogto, which also castigated the city for wasting money on “police helicopters” (the helicopters actually belonged to local news stations).
Dodd also tweeted residents were given only five minutes to gather their things — another fib. City officials confirmed campers were given two hours to pack their belongings, and were provided with more time as they continued packing.
Meanwhile, Evy Kwong, a columnist with the Toronto Star, falsely claimed that campers were not being given any safe rehousing options. When the City of Toronto reached out to the Star about Kwong’s false claims, she doubled down and whined on Twitter about being “bullied” and “silenced,” as if it were offensive to ask her not to spread false information.
And in a now-deleted tweet, the ESN implied that it had negotiated a peaceful resolution between the city and residents of one of the camps. City officials say that they are “unaware of any negotiations that occurred on site or off site where the Encampment
Support Network negotiated a peaceful resolution.” Later, ESN reversed course and claimed that there had been no peaceful resolution.
There are no easy fixes to homelessness, or easy ways to balance the needs of the homeless while upholding community safety. If we are going to find solutions to these complex and sensitive problems, cities, communities and activists will all need to work together. But this won’t happen so long as pro-encampment voices are peddling fiction as fact in pursuit of their agenda.
ENCAMPMENTS OFTEN FUNCTION AS CHOP SHOPS FOR STOLEN BIKES.