Open the Armouries Now!  

February 1999

The existing shelter system in Toronto is grossly overcrowded. That some say shelters are NOT filled to capacity and have beds available is not a conflict of math, but about confused definitions of space. If one shelter is said to be running at 100% capacity and another at 80% or 90%, the implication is that there is some agreed upon, definitive measurement of "space" and its appropriateness for certain activities such as sleeping or eating. However, the reality is that defining capacity is an extremely subjective exercise and, in our shelter system, far too often is based on unhealthy, inhumane definitions of what is appropriate individual space. The "capacity" of a shelter and when or how it is determined to be full changes from one setting to another. For the most part the concern is with the amount of extra beds a given space can accommodate, regardless of questions about the size of the space, how well it will be staffed, whether it can accommodate those with addictions or mental health issues, and where that space is available (in the dining room, hallways, or some other normally social space such as the T.V. room). For example, what are the differences between a shelter operating at 100% and another operating at 80-90%? The shelter operating at 100% will often have almost no space on the floor between matrasses, and at peak times may be operating at 30% or more over normal fire code. Any space not used for sleeping may be coopted into bed space and filled immediately, often at the expense of social spaces that may also serve as service delivery or intake space. Then, when these spaces are inappropriately filled with another 20 beds or more and those beds and not all needed one night, the (il)logic is that the shelter is now running as less than 100%, at 80% or 90%, regardless of the dangerous overcrowding that constituted the original maximum level, or 100%, capacity.

It’s About Safety

The existing shelter system is dangerous to peoples’ personal safety and physical and mental health. The overcrowding that continues to increase with the addition of new beds creates high risk, volatile environments where assaults occur often and thefts are a regularity. The poor ventilation and hygiene consequences of overcrowded situations create a high risk for lice and scabies, as well as infection from air bourne diseases. The current infection rate for tuberculosis among people who are homeless is 38% and clusters of infection are popping up across the city. Also, it is well documented that the crowded living conditions and complete lack of privacy in communal emergency shelters leads to depression and deteriorating mental health. These conditions only increase as short-term crowding becomes long-term overcrowding. What is true for rats, who will attack and cannibalize one another when crowded together in a cage, is also true for their two-legged cousins.

It’s About Barriers

No one can deny that there are many barriers for people who are homeless to using the existing shelter system. These include the people that are actually barred, somewhat indiscriminately, from various shelters and those that cannot physically get to a shelter bed. Another barrier is the lack of adequate harm reduction policies and facilities that can accommodate those who use alcohol or drugs. Compulsive drug use is often linked to mental health issues and it is not possible for many people to simply quit using on command. Other mental health concerns also constitute barriers to people who are unable to tolerate the stressful overcrowded physical setting of a shelter, or whose behaviour is inappropriate therein. Even the physical health risks of the shelters are a barrier to their use. Thus, simply choosing to brave the elements, either by leaving a crowded, unhealthy setting, or having knowledge about shelter conditions and so choosing not to enter at all, becomes a coping mechanism. People concerned about their physical and mental health often make the logical decision to leave or remain outside the expanded system.

It’s There - Use It!

The Moss Park Armoury is large, mostly empty, and well ventilated space. It has the potential to provide more safety for those people who choose to leave existing crowded conditions, as well as to those who are already staying there. The large spacious Armoury building allows for less crowding, the reduced transmission of air bourne disease, and a greater sense of well being. Feeling safe gives people the ability to tolerate hostel living conditions that are at the best of times difficult. During the recent snowstorm it sheltered 150 people within two days of opening. There is reason to believe that at least 100 more people would have begun to use it had it remained open.

The Armouries physical layout and its traditional flexibility with rules is well suited for people with mental health issues and addictions. Armoury service users have been allowed to leave the premises and return intermittently throughout the day and night. This is important for people with addictions who often need their "medications" (alcohol and other drugs) intermittently during the day and night. The Armoury building is spacious enough to allow for such comings and goings, especially in the evening, without disturbing those who are sleeping.

Using the armouries also clearly draws a line to the other partner necessary to end the Homeless Disaster - the Federal Government. Their involvement in long term housing solutions does not exclude them from responsibility in helping with short term emergency measures. After all, the housing crisis is not just a home-grown-Toronto-variety. The lack of Federal involvement has pushed people into the large centres such as Toronto. It is appropriate that Art Eggleton, the Minister of Defence, not only provide relief in Honduras but also in the city in which he was a former mayor, Toronto.

We must humanize the conditions in the existing shelter system that has to be used while the Homeless Disaster continues to exist. This means a responsible assessment of our working definitions of "capacity" and "space. " In the meantime the logical and humane thing to do is to immediately open the armouries. The armouries will ease the pressures on the existing, deteriorating system until new space can be added, thereby saving peoples’ health and lives. Clearly the 150 people who used the armouries when in was briefly open during the mid-January snow storm proved that the need is real.

Back to Shelters