homelessinabbotsford_com's Blog

'Assistance to Shelter Act' makes this Remembrance Day a Day of Shame in BC

homelessinabbotsford_com — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 04:11:53 -0800

November 11th is Remembrance Day in Canada; a result of November 11th being the date the Armistice ending World War I was signed. It is the day Canadians commemorate the sacrifices of members of the armed forces and of civilians in times of war or conflict.

It is the day we remember those who served, fought, bled and died to preserve the freedom of Canada and Canadians to make their own choices and decisions.

A Day of Shame in British Columbia this year as a result of the BC government’s introduction of the ‘Assistance to Shelter Act’ - an act written to strip freedom of choice from the a specific group of citizens – the Homeless.

This shameful Act is made more shameful, more intolerable, by virtue of the fact that it is for the purpose of enabling the BC government to remove the homeless from areas of high visibility and relocate them to less visible or embarrassing locations during the 2010 Winter Olympics.

The logic of seeking to avoid the embarrassment of having the homeless visible to the international community during the Olympics through the criminal violation of internationally recognized human rights escapes me.

Unless the government of BC expects the international community to be bamboozled by claims that the government’s action is about providing shelter from the weather for the homeless, when the actions of the government demonstrate the lack of any true concern about whether the homeless are sheltered from the weather or not.

If the BC government was concerned about the homeless being sheltered from inclement weather, the government would not be appealing the Adams ruling which found that people have a right to erect their own temporary shelter to protect themselves.

The case was not blanket permission for the homeless to erect temporary shelters but rested on the fact that the number of people who are homeless in Victoria far exceed the number of available shelter beds.

Thus a government that was truly concerned about sheltering the homeless would not be seeking to prevent the homeless erecting shelter, but would instead seek to resolve the issue of homeless camps by providing shelter beds and appropriate housing.

Instead the BC government will empower police to use force to remove the homeless from the streets, ignoring the inconvenient fact that there more homeless that there are shelter beds.

To ensure that the government can have the police remove the homeless from sight during a specific time period of their choosing, the Act gives the Minister the power to issue an extreme weather alert. As opposed to the situation currently, where the calling of an extreme weather alert is in the hands of individual representatives in each community.

The minister and the BC government have claimed that this Act, violating the human rights of the homeless, is necessary “for their own good” and is NOT simply a tool to “sweep the homeless under the carpet” and remove them from sight during the Olympics.

Even if the actions of the BC government supported (which they clearly do not) the BC governments claim that the purpose of the Act was to benefit the homeless and not about Olympic beautification, William Pitt was right when he stated “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

On this Remembrance Day of 2009, Canadian troops are in Kabul province in Afghanistan; serving, fighting, bleeding and dying seeking to protect the freedom of the Afghani people to choose from the tyranny of the Taliban.

While in the province of British Columbia in their homeland of Canada the provincial government is seeking to impose the tyranny of “for their own good”, stripping the right to choose from homeless Canadians.

Which is why November 11th is a Day of Shame in British Columbia this year, as the government seeks to violate the freedom to choose of the homeless; a freedom that those we Remember on November 11th served, fought, bled and died to ensure for Canada and all Canadians.

On Remembrance Day it is important to remember not only those who made sacrifices but why those sacrifices were made.

Lest We Forget the price paid for our freedom and the right to choose for ourselves and in the forgetting dishonour the sacrifices of those we Remember on November 11th by allowing tyrants to violate the right of Canadians to decide what is best for them, themselves.

BC to Legislate to Violate the Homeless

homelessinabbotsford_com — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 01:21:53 -0800

Everyone is treated the same by the BC government – except for those who aren’t.

Rich Coleman speaks of passing legislation stripping the homeless of their Charter rights by permitting police to use force to drag the homeless to the door of a shelter. Not in, just to the door.

In response Vancouver city councillor Andrea Reimer tweeted "Thinking about introducing a motion requiring police to pick up Minister Coleman next time he's in Vancouver and drop him off at Jenny Craig," which resulted in Councillor Reimer being assailed by the press.

Unfortunately Councillor Reimer opted for political expediency over character and conviction and retracted her statement and apologized.

Unfortunate because Reimer’s tweet was a most apt and penetrating critique of the liberal government’s ‘Assistance to Shelter Act’.

Although it is hardly surprising that the insight of Reimer’s comments should go unperceived and unremarked by a press corps that gave rise to the Victoria Times Colonist inaccurate headline “Law would force homeless inside”.

Coleman said the proposed law gives police authority to take people to shelters, even if it requires them to use force and that the government is doing it because they need to protect people who won't help themselves.

Now, we know that being overweight raises the likelihood of dying from a heart attack or other health related complications.

Given that Mr. Coleman’s decision not to lose the excess weight puts his life at risk and in light of the BC Liberal government having adopted a policy of intervention in order “to protect people who won't help themselves” does it not follow that Mr. Coleman must be taken, by force if necessary, to a weight loss clinic “for his own good” whether he wants to go or not?

If we are going to start having special rules and treatment for one classification or sub-group of citizens for what we deem to be “their own good”, should this principle not apply to all deemed “who won't help themselves”?

A rather steep, slippery and treacherous slope to step onto.

Or will the BC government be limiting protecting “people who won't help themselves” to the homeless to avoid those who are not powerless to defend themselves from this type of assault on their rights and freedoms?

The government claims that this course of action is in the best interest of the homeless; choosing to ignore that those who know and interact with the homeless on a daily basis believe this course of action is likely to cost, not save, lives.

Moreover the government has chosen to wilfully ignore the wildcard Mother Nature has added into the mix this winter of 2009/10 - H1N1

Consider that the homeless are an at risk population with numerous health related issues and challenges; this is the first wave of H1N1; a second wave is expected in the New Year; all the schools in Kitimat are closed because of a H1N1 outbreak, as other schools have been forced to close by H1N1.

Picture a crowded homeless shelter full of people. Is not a crowded shelter an even better place for the transmission of H1N1 than a school? Are not the homeless, an at risk population, “ripe for the infecting” by H1N1? How many will die as a result of the H1N1 virus if forced to shelters?

Given the H1N1 pandemic sweeping the globe, forcing the homeless to shelters will condemn some to their death.

Hmmmm. Government rounds up what is considered a problem population and sends them off to locations where they die…. Sounds familiar…

Hope Falcon Lying

homelessinabbotsford_com — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 05:50:31 -0700

I sincerely hope that Health Minister Kevin Falcon was lying through his teeth in his recent response to questions about cuts to mental health and addiction services.

If he actually believes what he was saying reflects the state of mental health and/or addiction services in BC … … there are a lot of British Columbians in need of those services who are *bleeped*, myself included.

The heat this summer had a serious negative effect on my mental state, leaving me struggling to return to the state of Wellness I had attained. Unfortunately there is a 10 month waiting period to get to see a psychiatrist; after you spend 11/2 - 2 months working through the backlog at mental health services to get referred to see a psychiatrist.

I have a Wellness Plan, tools and have built a strong support system and so I have a reasonable chance of not falling into a downward spiral during what could be a year long wait for services … with luck.

What would it mean to you or someone you know who, facing a mental health crisis, seeks help and faces a year long wait to start to get the services you/they need? What level of worsening does this delay cause in someone’s mental state and what does this do to that individual?

I was not the only person the heat this summer caused mental challenges for. I have heard from numerous others who, finding their mental state causing them problems went to the hospital to get help in order not to relapse and were turned away. Our local hospital’s mental services are insufficient to meet the normal day-to-day demands for its services; the increase in demand caused by the weather overwhelmed these inadequate services.

I could go on for pages on the service cuts (or as the Health Minister calls it ‘reorganized delivery’), the services that are simply not provided or how overwhelmed the services and programs provided are.

Fraser Health is the fastest growing health region in terms of population growth and thus demand for services. Exacerbating matters is the fact that for those on the limited support provided for people disabled by mental health issues, rent costs are forcing patients out of Costal Health into Fraser Health in search of more affordable, or at least less unaffordable, housing.

The budget for mental health in our region has not reflected the increase in demand. This year’s budget is the same as last year. While on a strictly definitional basis this is not a budget cut, in the real world that those of us who are not politicians inhabit holding a budget at the same level is a budget cut.

In a sensible move addiction services were moved into mental health. I say sensible because the growing knowledge base on addiction and addiction recovery has shown this to be more of a mental health problem that a strictly simpler problem of ‘addiction’.

While significantly (doubling? tripling?) increasing the responsibilities of mental health, there was no funding provided to pay for addiction services.

It needs to be noted that Minister Rich Coleman’s ministry plays a role in increasing the problems for those dealing with mental health and addiction challenges. The unrealistic levels of Income Assistance and the lack of safe, healthy affordable housing significantly increases the barriers to recovery for those with mental or addiction issues.

Dealing with housing, budgeting or income assistance is a major stressor for people whether challenged by mental issues or not.

If you need mental health services you are well aware of the limited services currently available, the limited numbers and access to those services, the gaping holes in services and the problem of the time it takes to get access to services.

The lack of services and capacity is denying access to Recovery to British Columbians. It is costing the taxpayers of BC more tax dollars to deal with the consequences of people denied mental health care than it would to provide the needed care.

Sadly, twistedly, the mental health system itself, due to a lack of funding, proper management and leadership has become a mental health issue.

Which is why, although I am not a fan of the propensity of politicians to lie, I am praying Kevin Falcon was lying through his teeth in his statements on the state of mental health services in BC. The alternative, he believes what he said, is disastrous for anyone with mental health or addiction issues in their lives.

Housing Bruce and Craig

homelessinabbotsford_com — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 04:11:23 -0700

Craig Holuboch and Bruce are why I was and am so disgusted by the behaviour of city council and the people of the neighbourhood about the lost supported, affordable housing project proposed for 2323 Emerson Street, Abbotsford.

The relapse rate for those in transition from treatment to the outside world is so high that treatment is referred to as “a relapse preparation program” by some.

It is a transition full of challenges that is made far more difficult by the lack of safe, healthy affordable housing. Particularly housing that comes with support for the rough patches; support geared to the individuals needs.

Having watched the toll (in the form of relapsing) the lack of affordable, safe, healthy supportive housing takes on those coming out of treatment, it would seem to be a no brainer to provide this needed housing. Apparently not to government, even though it has been demonstrated that providing this housing has a dramatic effect on the rate of success of those transitioning out of treatment.

It is expensive and costly to keep recycling people through the treatment/help/programs systems and industry, time after time after time. Not just in terms of the large expenditure of tax dollars spent, but also in terms of the human toll it takes on those being run through the system time after time.

The path to recovery and wellness is like building a car for a journey. Putting a powerful engine in won’t accomplish much without a transmission. Similarly treatment (the engine) doesn’t accomplish much without a successful way to transition (the transmission) out of treatment back into the world.

Making that transition is hard and stressful enough without the burden of less than supportive, healthy, safe and affordable housing.

Bruce is an interesting case and a person I have known going back to the time I was homeless.

People, who see him pushing his overflowing cart along the street, do not see the intelligent man that Bruce is. I always appreciate the opportunity to engage in discourse with him, an opportunity that occurs as we are both frequent visitors to the library.

If one takes the time to sit and talk to Bruce it is quickly apparent that he is aware of the fact his packrat ways are what prevent him from being housed. Having experienced it I empathize with being intellectually aware of what the problem is – but being powerless to do anything about it.

It is interesting that not many weeks ago that Bruce and I were sitting in the library lobby having a conversation as to what would be necessary for him to find – and stay in – housing. It was not really all that difficult to arrive at a conclusion. Since Bruce finds himself powerless over his packrat ways, what he needs is help to deal with this reality of his life.

What Bruce needs is housing that comes with support in the form of help to decide which of his finds he will keep and which will be removed from the premises. He needs someone to build a relationship and gently but firmly, on at least a weekly basis, invest the time to help Bruce sort and choose the ‘keepers’. Bruce did feel that shelving to organize and manage his finds would be quite helpful in managing his collection.

Safe affordable housing that provides the type of support an individual needs is part of the basic foundation needed to help Craig, Bruce and similar people thrive. Providing this type of housing is not only the ethical thing to do – it has the bonus of saving money.

National Housing Strategy

homelessinabbotsford_com — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:35:24 -0700

Homelessnes: Did you know?

Homeless and Forsaken

homelessinabbotsford_com — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 07:51:56 -0700

The suicide of Corey O'Brien was tragic, but the true tragedy of Corey’s Story (http://www.bclocalnews.com/fraser_valley/abbynews/news/62454...) is that nothing has been done about implementing the recommendations in “Lost in Transition” - the report on mental illness on the streets of Vancouver.

The BC Liberals and the health care system have failed to put these recommendations into effect; as a result the mentally ill homeless continue to be left abandoned to the mean streets, continuously adding new names to the list of forsaken victims.

While a tragic suicide such as Corey’s is an infrequent event, having a person in desperate need of immediate mental health treatment refused service and turned away is a weekly occurrence for the outreach nurse who ministers to Abbotsford’s homeless.

Except for those not infrequent weeks where more than one person is turned away, back to being mentally ill and homelessness on the streets of Abbotsford.

The other evening the nurse and another staff person stayed late trying to help the latest victim of the BC government and its mental health system. Struggling to get a young human being in desperate need of immediate mental health treatment, mental health services at the Abbotsford Hospital.

An ambulance was called and took her/him to the hospital … were he/she was discharged to homelessness - unable to care for or help her/himself; the police were then called and they took this individual to the hospital … to simply drop them off rather than staying and ensuring this mentally unwell individual received the care needed.

Dealing with the Abbotsford Hospital is enough to drive anyone to wanting to run away screaming. Someone having a mental health crisis will escape the madness by wandering away.

So, rather than being in hospital getting the care desperately and conspicuously needed, he/she spent the night in the stressful environment of the emergency shelter.

The homeless, by and large, have no support. No parent, sibling, relative, neighbour or friends to provide support or to advocate and fight on their behalf.

They must rely on those charged with providing healing or to serve and protect to discharge their duty with due care. When the healers and protectors cannot be bothered …

Hospital staff said to take her/him to detox.

Yes, he/she is an addict, suffering the burden of drug use. For those suffering from addiction, their treatment by hospital staff can frequently, at the very best, be called less than professional and rather haphazard.

No visit to detox was required. She/he was detoxed as the result of a mental state so bad, so degraded that it was interfering with his/her drug use.

This individual is so mentally ill that their mental illness was and is interfering with their drug use. Yet he/she was returned to the streets in a condition where she/he was mentally unable, unfit to care for him/herself; left to wander Abbotsford’s streets with decreased ability, capacity to function.

Government and society tells homeless individuals they need to seek help, yet when they seek such help they find there is no help to be had. If the homeless are to be told they need to seek help, it follows that when they do, the capacity, services and professional staff must be in place to help.

To get the homeless into recovery and wellness, it is necessary for the system to adjust to their needs as they lack the ability to navigate the current systems. The recommendations of the “Lost in Transition” report needs be implemented as a priority.

Another priority must be an attitude adjustment for hospital staff and police; while the homeless are more often than not frustrating pains in the ass, that does not justify less than professional behaviour on matters of physical and/or mental health.

The test of the soul of a society, its ethicalness and its set of values, is how that society and its government(s) treat the most vulnerable: those in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those in the shadows of life, those in need, the handicapped, the helpless and the ill.

Our failure of this test of character is written in the pain and despair of people like Corey or the young human being who is in such desperate need of healing.

It is time to make the wellness of people more of a priority than a convention centre, Olympic venues, roads, bridges and ideology. Time to recognize that the homeless mentally ill and/or addicted are wounded human beings.

Criminalizing Homelessness?

homelessinabbotsford_com — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 03:44:35 -0700

The hypocrisy, cynicism, imperiousness and ignorance in the BC Liberal governments announced new homeless policy demonstrates the Liberals apparent lack of either the leadership or ability to deal with the challenges facing the Province of BC.

Minister of Housing and Social Development Rich Coleman acknowledged the punitive nature of this new policy in his statement “…more punitive things were being contemplated…”

I would like Minister Coleman to explain why the Liberal government feels the need to inflict punishment on the homeless. One would have thought the homeless faced enough challenges in simply surviving without the need of punitive government policy.

Coleman said “The question for me is, can we find a piece of legislation where I can save a few more lives?”

Mr. Coleman is the Minister in charge of Housing and Social Development and he needs a piece of punitive new legislation to save lives?

Might I suggest that he build more affordable housing and open more shelter beds? Exactly how is dragging the homeless off to shelters going to work when there are not enough shelter beds for all the homeless on the streets; what is accomplished dragging someone to a full shelter?

Or perhaps the government plans to build “emergency” emergency shelters out in the boondocks to which the police can haul any homeless found on the streets off to? I am sure Mr Coleman and the Liberals can find, or have found, copies of the plans for the Japanese Internment camps from WWII.

Might I further suggest that making the necessary changes within Social Development, to inject an element of reality (safe, healthy housing for $375 a month? In what alternate reality?) into their policies and to focus on helping, not hindering, those in need of assistance, would be a far better use of Mr. Coleman’s time and save far more lives that enacting punitive legislation?

I would also point out to Mr. Coleman that his ministry does not exist in a vacuum when it comes to the homeless and those in need of assistance from his ministry.

His colleague the Minister of Health has a significant effect on the homeless through Mental Health and Addictions. Currently Mental Health is significantly underfunded and lacks programs designed to provide services to the homeless community. Compounding these problems is that Mental Health had Addictions added to its responsibilities without any additional funding to provide the array of services needed to stop recycling the addicted and provide the support and services to permit the addicted to find recovery and wellness.

Mr. Coleman would save far more lives by prevailing upon the health minister to provide the funding needed to Mental Health and Addictions, to permit them to meet the Mental Health and Addictions service needs of the homeless and all British Columbians.

Speaking of saving lives, it was the failure by the Liberal government to provide needed services that left the woman who burned to death last winter lacking the services and support to get off the streets. In the final analysis the woman died from government neglect.

“… that there is a safe place for them to spend the night …” (Attorney General Mike) de Jong said, emphasizing the Liberal government’s lack of comprehension of the realities of life for the homeless.

If the ministers and the government had a modicum of understanding they would know that shelters do not equate to safety. There are those on the street who, if forced to a shelter, would make the shelter unsafe for everyone else there. For some a shelter is the most unsafe or unhealthiest place to force them to be.

This proposed law has the potential to cost far more homeless lives than it saves.

Are the police going to return the homeless to the original spot they shanghaied them from? The homeless know their territory and the places within that territory to best survive cold weather. If the police abandon them at a shelter - when the homeless decline to be coerced and walk away from the shelter they will be in an area they do not know significantly reducing their ability to survive.

This piece of punitive legislation will also drive some homeless into hiding, where they run a greater risk of freezing to death. My homeless acquaintances are perfectly capable of surviving the cold – unless disturbed by the police.

Indeed, several homeless friends wanted me to point out to Minister Coleman that in this climate the wet is far more of a threat to their lives than cold is.

During our last provincial election I told a local Liberal candidate that if the province was ever serious about addressing the issues involved with homelessness to give me a call. The fact I have never received that phone call is no great surprise. The ideology of this government and their actions on this issue demonstrate the Liberals are not about actual solutions but about political posturing and the need to be seen doing something.

This proposed policy is about hiding the problem or giving the appearance of addressing homelessness issues; it is not about solutions.

Our current crop of politicians are about playing it safe and giving the impression of addressing issues in order to get re-elected. Which is why politicians are not about solving difficult issues since that would require innovation, change, accepting the need for mistakes to learn and progress and a willingness to risk not getting re-elected in order to pursue solutions.

Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.

And no, it is not a matter of having an overblown sense of myself to tell our local MLA to call me if the Liberals ever want to actually address homelessness and its travelling companions mental health, addictions and poverty.

There are proven best practices to address homelessness, addiction and mental illness and it has been demonstrated that these approaches and practices work. I do not have to be brilliant to be able to know what actions our government needs to take; all I need is an open mind, some research, a willingness and ability to ask questions – and listen to the answers even if they are not what I want to hear, integrity, ethics and honour.

Despite government claims of lack of funds it is not about a lack of money to fund the needed Mental Health and Addictions programs, housing or needed homeless initiatives. It is about priorities.

The Liberals manage to find the funds to pay for Olympic venues, roads, bridges, etc then claim a lack of funding for mental health, addictions and homelessness?

Clearly it is not a matter of funds but of priorities, with the Liberal government’s priority being their ideology and material things over people, ethics, integrity and honour.

Speaking about money matters, homelessness is one of the issues that expose the reality that the belief that the Liberals are good money managers or financially responsible is false.

Study after study has found that it is cheaper to find solutions to homelessness; that governments currently spend more on homelessness (on a per person basis) than it would require be spent to implement solutions that reduce homelessness and help the homeless reclaim their lives.

While BC housing has done a reasonable job of increasing the stock of affordable housing it has failed to address the numbers involved and the need for increased funding.

On the other hand BC housing has wasted and continues wasting funds on programs that do little more than recycle the homeless through the system, generate pretty numbers that give the impression something is being accomplished and contribute substantially to the profitability of those in the poverty industry.

It is not the homeless who need punitive measures taken to punish them for living in a province where the high cost of living makes housing unaffordable for too many - it is the politicians.

ALL the politicians deserve punitive measures for putting ideology, political posturing, re-election, and political power ahead of the wellbeing of people.

The proposed legislation is just more of the same old same old and the bottom line is that doing more of the same proven ineffectual behaviours and actions will only produce more ineffectual results.

As Will Rogers stated “When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.”

It is time we stopped digging.

Ugly Economic Reality

homelessinabbotsford_com — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:26:42 -0700

The Canadian Payroll Association’s survey found 59 % of Canadians would have trouble making ends meet if their paycheque was delayed by even one week.

The implications of a serious financial crisis inherent in this result are disturbing and raise serious questions about the need for financial and societal changes. If a one week delay causes 59% of Canadians trouble making ends meet, what would the fallout be if they missed a paycheque?

The possibilities for serious economic fallout increase if one considers the two growing subgroups that were left out of the survey on the status of Canadian wage earners.

The first subgroup is those Canadians who have trouble making, or cannot make, ends meet even if their paycheque is on time.

I ran out of gas Thursday evening. Not because, as some wiseacres have suggested, I cannot read a gas gauge but because I had been down to my last 9 cents for a week.

I had been striving to stretch my last tank of gas through to the next morning as my paycheque would be deposited shortly after midnight Friday and I would have funds for more gas.

Instead I had to glide the Cavalier into a visitor spot in front of an apartment building and walk off in search of someone with a gas can and a few litres of gasoline they could spare.

70% of my budget goes to cover shelter costs leaving 30% or about $350.
Subtract the $50 a month it costs to swim, swimming permits me to walk by keeping my back toned and prevent it from crippling me, and you are down to $300. Subtract the $95 a month for insurance and $205 remains.

This works out to $51 a week for gas; an amount that sounds like plenty until you consider the rising cost of gas and the fact that any additional costs come out of these monies.

So far this month I have had to invest $40 for brake pads and another $20 in oil, fuel injector cleaner and gas conditioner. I really should have the gas tank drained, the fuel injectors cleaned and a tune-up. All of which are well beyond my ability to pay for.

Reducing me to $145 or $36 per week for gas; reducing the distance I can travel.

While the brake pads etc represent a one time expense, every month contains the need for some form of one time expense. The fact the Cavalier has needed so many one time expenses has put me behind on “normal” one time expenses eg pain medication.

Yes, I know that the car is a major expense but with no viable transportation alternative I need the car to get to work, to my volunteer/service commitments and to all the other aspects of the community I am involved with.
Also, as the reader can see from the budget numbers, there is no money in my budget for food. The car is necessary to get to free meals and free grocery sources in order to eat.

Thursdays lack of gas flows mainly from the steadily increasing gas prices. The Cavalier does not get as good mileage as the Duster did, but it has a back seat I can sleep in/on – which is an important consideration in my overall financial reality.

The Abbotsford recreation credit had gotten me a three month pool pass, providing a $50 a month cushion. Running out of gas Thursday is not surprising as this is the month the three month pool pass expired and I was out of pocket the $50 for a pool pass.

I must use gas to get to work and to get food to eat. This leaves me with limited distances I can travel forcing me to reduce, perhaps end, my community involvements. It also leaves me facing the probable need to give up volunteering or doing service work as it renders me unable to get to these commitments; a situation neither healthy for me nor helpful to the organizations or community.

To me, and too many others, it does not matter if our paycheques are on time – our current financial situations are unsustainable; we are in a death spiral down and out onto the streets of Abbotsford and homelessness.

Mathematically it is only a matter of time until I (we) find ourselves in the other subgroup the survey overlooked: those with employment and income insufficient to be able to cover the high cost of shelter in Abbotsford or the Greater Vancouver Area.

In one of the twisted realities of this equation, once I fall out of housing into my car again I will be better off economically. While joining the growing community of Canadians living in their vehicle will result in the loss of the portion of my income I receive to cover shelter costs, I will gain back the shelter costs I pay out of other income and so be 100% better off, doubling my disposable income.

Before the numbers catch up to me and put me onto the streets I am looking to for a suitable van, in good shape and at a ridiculously good price to outfit as a mobile home. Cell phone technology, the portability of current computers and mobile internet make functioning with a van (or even the Cavalier) as one’s home quite viable.

The van would be the preferred solution from the point of view of ability to organize and the comfort of long term liveability. Important considerations in light of my lacking the energy, will or heart to make the long struggle back into what is considered proper housing until my personal economic circumstances change to a point where housing is and will remain viable affordable option.

While this is not warm and fuzzy or pleasant it is Reality and will remain Reality for a growing numbers of Canadians until we, as a country and society, decide it is an unacceptable Reality and make the required changes.

Until such time - Wanted: Van ….

Change begins with oneself.

homelessinabbotsford_com — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 02:53:38 -0700

http://www.abbotsfordtoday.ca/?p=19564

Another Big Business Bailout

homelessinabbotsford_com — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 04:54:27 -0700

Obviously Canadians are wrong in thinking the role of the CRTC is to support Canadian radio and television, protect the interests of Canadians and to make decisions that benefit Canadian viewers and listeners?

But then, how were Canadians to know the CRTC’s role had changed to protecting the interests and survival of the broadcast media conglomerates until the commission’s actions revealed this change? Actions that continue the deterioration of Canadian television and the destruction of the local in local television.

The CRTC imposed a new tax on Canadians in order to fund a bailout of large corporate media conglomerates, saving them from their own bad management decisions; decisions that had the conglomerates failing to make payments on (some) loans and teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.

Apparently the media conglomerates slick advertising campaign to have the CRTC impose a new tax on Canadians and bail out the conglomerates was successful.

A campaign that a federal government that was protecting Canadian citizens, rather than the interests of big corporate media, would have charged the media conglomerates with misleading advertising for running.

The failure of the federal government to protect Canadians from this deceptive campaign and the decision to impose a new media tax on Canadian consumers to bail out the media conglomerates is hardly surprising, given the Conservative governments record of making decisions favouring big business and the wealthy, over the needs of average, hardworking Canadians.

After all, would it be reasonable to expect the Conservatives to resist the lure of the media access and gentle treatment on issues and Conservative government actions, merely to act in the best interests of Canadians and Canada?

Evidently the Conservatives found the expectation that they act in the best interests of Canada and Canadians unreasonable; choosing to act instead in the best interests of the media conglomerates.

The Conservative decision to force Canadians to bail out the corporate media conglomerates demonstrates that the Conservatives are capitalists only when it suits them or benefits big business, the wealthy or the Conservative Party.

When letting the marketplace decide the fate of the media conglomerates would result in the bankruptcy of the media conglomerates and thus return control and ownership of local media outlets to local interests, suddenly the Conservatives are all for government intervention in the marketplace.

What is the next step for these market interventionist, interfere in the marketplace Conservatives? A tax on the internet to bail out the media conglomerates print assets?

If, as I do, you support local media and media freedom then contact you local MP and the leaders of all the federal political parties to tell them this support of the interests of the big media conglomerates over the interests of Canadians and Canada is unacceptable.

Tell them that this market intervention to bail out the media conglomerates is unacceptable.

Tell them you support true local television, radio and newspapers; that you are well aware that media conglomerate ownership of local media does not qualify as local media, is detrimental to the health of local media and the health and diversity of media in Canada as a whole.

Tell them: I support local television; I do not support bailing out media conglomerates.

Tell them: I strongly oppose forcing Canadians to bail out the media conglomerates, rescuing them from their own bad business decisions. Particularly in light of the media conglomerates blatantly deceptive ‘Save local television’ campaign, the goal of which was clearly the imposition of a tax on cable customers and the use of the revenue from such a tax to bail out the media conglomerates.

Tell them to let the marketplace decide the fate, the existence or non-existence, of the media conglomerates.

Tell the federal Conservatives that the federal government is suppose to be looking after the interests of Canadians and Canada, not the best interests of the Conservative’s media sycophants.