|
1000 More Beds |
|
2001 Recently we have heard some noisy reaction from city politicians about homeless advocates making so-called outrageous demands at City Hall for a thousand more shelter beds and minimum United Nations standards in shelters. Some of them even seem to be invoking spurious logic that implies that if we provide sufficient shelter beds we will somehow increase homelessness in Toronto – perhaps envisioning an “if you build it, they will come” field of homeless dreams. Let me be clear, first and foremost, that the Toronto Disaster Relief Committee (TDRC) calls for, and is working for, permanent, affordable housing for all Canadians through the creation of a national housing strategy. Known as the “one percent solution,” our proposal requires simply that each level of government increase its spending on affordable housing by one percent more of their respective total budgets. Doing this would go a long way towards eliminating – that’s right – eliminating homelessness. We know that more shelters are not the solution to homelessness. We know that provincial and federal governments are largely responsible for the growing tide of homelessness. However, a growing tide we have – and even if we got a housing strategy tomorrow, we would not see any housing built for at least a year. In the meantime, the City of Toronto must deal with the homelessness crisis in its backyard responsibly and appropriately. The City’s own report card on homelessness, released several weeks ago, draws the startling conclusion that homelessness in Toronto – I hope you’re sitting down for this – is getting worse. It states that over half the people using its shelters in 1999 were first timers. Over 2000 applications for evictions are made every month in Toronto – that’s 100 every business day. The city’s vacancy rate is 0.6%. 1400 people add their names to the waiting list for social housing every month. And the economic horizon holds little promise of better days ahead. On February 20th, John Roth, the CEO of Nortel, said that the U.S. economy is experiencing “the most abrupt downturn it has probably ever, ever experienced.” This means that the situation is not going to get better any time soon. This same City of Toronto report card says we need 675 more shelter beds, more harm reduction facilities, and more spaces for couples. It describes the large number of “hidden” homeless people in places like Scarborough. In a few weeks, the volunteer-run Out of the Cold program, which provides mats for on average 450 people a night, according to the City’s report, will close. We will lose 120 beds at the former Princess Margaret Hospital shelter in April. Where do city officials think those people are going to go? Where do they think the people made homeless every day through evictions are going to go? While they may not particularly care, at some point they have to understand that there will be a serious cost, both human and economic, to maintaining the inadequate status quo we have today. The TDRC’s research, conducted last fall, showed a shelter system bursting at the seams, always full – over full in fact with crowding and disease and violence endemic in it. When the city talks about shelters being 85 or 90 or 95% full, it is manipulating numbers to give the appearance that everything is under control, when nothing could be further from the truth. What city officials are doing is playing a numbers shell game designed to understate problems and conceal the system’s shortcomings. It is then able to conclude that although the shelter system is “tight,” it is currently providing sufficient resources for homeless people. Well, here is an example of what city officials mean by “tight.” Shelters A and B are approximately the same physical size. Shelter A has 40 cots in it. When this shelter is 90% full, there are 36 people occupying those cots. Shelter B – about the same size – has 120 mats squeezed into it (these mats are always referred to, by the way, as “beds”). When Shelter B is 90% full, there are 108 people crammed into it. Shelter B is barely survivable when it’s 75% full. Even at that capacity, it does not meet UN standards, which say there should be at least one toilet for every 20 people. Shelter B has one toilet for every 60 people. Imagine what that must be like in the morning. There are no showers. It is not uncommon for two or even three people to share a space which the United Nations says is the minimum safe amount of room for one person in a refugee camp. This standard is not just about comfort – it is a public health measure designed to prevent disease transmission. Shelter B, and others like it, are perfect breeding grounds for infectious diseases, such as tuberculosis. In fact, Toronto’s Public Health Department is currently conducting “contact tracing” in two downtown shelters. This is done after someone has been diagnosed with active TB, to see if anyone having contact with the infectious person has also been infected. Make no mistake – when tuberculosis gets a foot hold in this overcrowded shelter system of ours, it will spread like a brush fire, and given the cuts to Public Health, we will be hard pressed to stop it. We call for 1000 new shelter beds. We’ve been accused of pulling an arbitrary number out of the proverbial hat. 1000 beds is not an arbitrary number – it’s a conservative one. When we say that people will die if there are not enough shelter beds, our critics say we are spouting rhetoric. Well, that rhetoric is backed up by the coroner’s office. We have too many homeless people stuffed into every available space inside cramped and dangerous shelters. We have hundreds of temporary shelter spaces on the verge of closing. We have increasing numbers of “invisible” homeless people in the suburbs, whose welcome will eventually be worn out at friends’ and relatives’ homes. We have new homeless Torontonians every single day as a result of evictions – people who yesterday, or last week, had a roof over their heads like many of us. On February 12th, the Community Services committee of council agreed with us, and moved that council add 1000 beds within the next year. It recommended that four warming centres be opened, that the Medical Officer of Health investigate health standards in shelters, and that the city fix any deficiencies identified. It recommended that Public Health develop a strategy to locate portable toilets in areas frequented by homeless people. The TDRC has actually had to enlist the help of sympathetic unions to finance the cost of portable toilets in one waterfront location. Now, as councilors debate the budget for 2001, we are saying – not one penny must be cut from homeless services. If catastrophe is to be avoided – at the very least, a public health catastrophe – the city must find additional funds to implement the recommendations in the TDRC’s State of the Disaster report, including 1000 more shelter beds and ensuring existing shelters meet United Nations standards. There is obviously a financial cost involved in bringing emergency homeless services up to minimum safety standards. At this time of budget cutting, a recommendation to increase resources anywhere meets with an incredulous reaction. The questions city politicians need to ask themselves are these: can they imagine the city in five years, or ten, if they do not act responsibly now? Can they imagine the infectious disease rates? A beleaguered Public Health Department scrambling to contain tuberculosis, perhaps in its drug resistant forms? Shantytowns sprouting up like mushrooms on every patch of vacant land? Families squatting in makeshift shacks, cooking over open fires? None of these scenarios are far-fetched, or far off. Now is the time to turn this ship around. Buy an ounce of prevention – because a pound of cure will truly break the budget. Kathy Hardill For
more information, contact tdrc@tdrc.net |