national housing strategy

I am talking with two of attendees at an event. They are both Indigenous Peoples. Both well-versed in sensitivities around Indigenous issues. Both have been discriminated against. Branded as ‘other’. Felt the disdain of those who call themselves ‘white’.

I tell them about my awakening at an Indigenous training course I took a couple of weeks ago.

“I have never stopped to think about the richness and depth of Canadian culture as being grounded in Indigenous Peoples,” I tell them. “I have fallen for the discourse that our history as a nation began when white man arrived.”

It didn’t. It began thousands of years ago with a culture that is deeply connected to the land, the elements, nature and a desire to walk softly upon the earth.

“Discrimination and ‘other’ thinking is pervasive,” I say. “I participate in it without even recognizing I am participating in it.”

One of the men mentions the statement we make as a Foundation at the beginning of all our events acknowledging that we are standing on traditional Treaty 7 land.

“You know that calling it ‘Treaty 7’ land is a reference to colonization,” one of the individuals mentions. “For many of us, it is a reminder of all that has harmed us, not strengthened us.”

I am taken aback.

It is subtle this discrimination, this ‘other’ thinking.

Later, I am at a roundtable discussion on the National Housing Strategy the Federal Government is currently in the process of drafting.

Our host is a public figure. An elected official. Well-respected. Well liked. He has always been conscious and considerate in his approach to homelessness.

I am listening to the conversation. To my peers around the table talking about the content in the documents before us.

On a page referring to the themes to be covered by the Strategy is a list identifying those who need extra consideration due to the specialized needs of their demographic/human condition. ‘Homeless, seniors, youth, families, people with disabilities’. There is no mention of Indigenous Peoples.

Someone mentions the omission. The elected representative is surprised there is no mention. He comments that he doesn’t see how it could have gotten so far into development with such a glaring omission.

“Perhaps it’s like the language we use without thinking,” I say. And I ask him about a comment he had made earlier in the session. “You said, ‘We are not going to make silly statements like, we’re going to end homelessness. We know we’re not.”

How is that a silly statement, I ask. It is aspirational. Forward-thinking. But silly?

There is a pause and then they talk about how they were referring to the timeline. He tries to justify the statement until someone else around the table also speaks up in support of my question. “If the government plans on ensuring everyone has access to housing, won’t that mean we end homelessness?”

Another pause.

I stand corrected, the elected official says.

Language.

We get hung up in our words. Use them to divide and conquer. To separate and clarify.

We make words the ground upon which we stand, the positions we will not cede, the space we will not move from.

And in the process, our language becomes the battlefield upon which we stake our claim to be right. It becomes our battery of defenses against another so that we don’t have to give up our right to stand our ground.

It was a short week and a tough one. A week where words spoken awakened my consciousness to injustices caused by the language of Treaties that continue to define and marginalize an entire Nation. A week where language failed to inspire by its use of silly statements about what we can, or cannot do, amongst a group of people passionately committed to ending the very thing they called silly.

I believe passionately in our human capacity to create possibility from the seemingly impossible.

I believe we are all one humanity. One human race.

But the words I heard this week, and the ones omitted when they needed to be spoken, are cause for concern.

How can we stop discrimination? How can we end homelessness when the very words we use continue to mire people in the limited thinking of the past? How can we inspire one another to do better when the words we use build walls and tear down confidence in our ability to contribute our best?

Sliding stock markets, sinking commodity prices and retracting of the global economy.

The news is filled with stories of clouds hanging low over the economy, of turmoil and unrest, political disenchantment and economic disaster.

And so the world spins.

I spent Wednesday last week at a roundtable meeting on Canada’s affordable housing crisis. We met with hopefuls running in the Federal election — 2 Green Party candidates at the first session. 6 Liberals at the second. 5 NDP at the third. The Conservatives did not turn up.

Sponsored by the CHRA (Canadian Housing and Renewal Association), our goal as organizations involved in homelessness and housing is to raise the issue of Canada’s affordable housing crisis on their agenda, and thus, to make it into a national conversation this election.

The candidates who came were passionate, committed and interested in learning more about the issues surrounding housing and homelessness. And, they wanted to ensure we understood why their Party is the one to vote for.

Though the NDP has long fought for a national housing strategy, it is the Green Party who has taken concrete action this election by announcing on August 25th the Party’s plan to invest in social and affordable housing.

Yet, even in their statement, there is evidence of their lack of understanding of the depth of the issue, and the causal factors that lead to homelessness.

In the media release that The Green Party distributed on their proposed National Housing Strategy, Lynne Quarmby, an electoral hopeful is quoted as saying, “The leading cause of homelessness is poverty.”

Not true.

Homelessness is first and foremost a result of governments (all levels) failure to plan and action a housing strategy that would make available, safe, secure and affordable housing at a scale that is aligned to meet the needs of the population.

Homelessness is an outcome of what we have done to create it.

Since the 1990s, with the withdrawal of the federal government’s investment in affordable housing, provinces and municipalities have struggled to respond. In their report on The State of Homelessness in Canada 2014, authors Stephen Gaetz, Tanya Gulliver and Tim Richter state: “Declining wages (even minimum wage has not kept up with inflation in any jurisdiction in Canada), reduced benefit levels–including pensions and social assistance – and a shrinking supply of affordable housing have placed more and more Canadians at risk of homelessness.” (Source Document)

The report goes on to state:

“The rise of modern mass homelessness in Canada can be traced directly back to the withdrawal of the Federal government’s investment in affordable housing and pan-Canadian cuts to welfare beginning in the 1980s. In 1982, all levels of government combined funded 20,450 new social housing units annually. By 1995, the number dropped to around 1,000, with numbers slowly climbing to 4,393 annually by 2006. Over the past 25 years, while Canada’s population increased by almost 30%, annual national investment in housing has decreased dramatically, by over 46%. In 1989, Canadians contributed, through taxation, an average of $115 per person to federal housing investments. By 2013, that figure had dropped to just over $60 per person (in 2013 dollars).”

Homelessness didn’t happen because a whole bunch of Canadians decided they didn’t want to stay at home. It happened because they did not have access to the resources and affordable housing they needed to live at home.

The Green Party’s release also states that Canada is the only OECD member without a national housing strategy.

Not true.

Most OECD members do not have a national housing strategy. What can be stated is that Canada has a rate of social renting less than the average of any other OECD country. Canada does not do a good job of taking care of its vulnerable populations. As an example, rental households most in need of support are female-led lone-parent families, seniors living alone, aboriginal families and recent new comers to Canada. (source)

A comment often heard when talking about homelessness, and one stated by one of the Green Party candidates, is that we are all one pay cheque away from homelessness.

Not true.

We’re not all one pay cheque away. Most of us have resources, and an inherent resiliency that can sustain us longer than one pay cheque should hard times hit.

That’s because, most of us are not forced to continually make decisions between putting food on the table, a roof over our heads or school books in the hands of our children. Most of us have had the privilege of being able to build lives that fulfill our dreams and allow us to feel like productive members of society. Most of us have had relatively easy access to the resources we needed to get an education, job training, health care and health supports that ensured we have what we take for granted; the daily comfort of knowing we are at home, secure and safe in our world.

For those living on the margins, whose lack of resources and limited resiliency are impeded by social policies that do not provide access to adequate income and/or housing, tough economic times call for them to do what they’ve always done. Dig in. Hunker down. Keep existing. Keep going from one door to the next hoping to find access to the resources that truly will make a difference between having nothing, and having the opportunity to lead their children, and themselves, out of poverty.

Unfortunately, for the one in ten Canadians Statistics Canada reported as living in poverty after the 2009 recession, they’ve been down so long, there is no upside to their economic situation, no matter where the world is at. No matter the economic times, vulnerable populations remain vulnerable in the face of scarcity and plenty. Unless, we do something different.

What can you do to make a difference? Join in the conversation. Help raise affordable housing onto the national agenda. When a federal candidate comes to your door, ask them, “What do you know about Canada’s affordable housing crisis?” And then ask, “What do you and your party plan to do about it? How can I help?”