It is damn frustrating, damn annoying and damning.
Category Archives: Politics
Government Opts to Increase Homeless
I cannot claim I was surprised when I heard the municipal and provincial governments plan to continue to increase the homeless population in Abbotsford; a goal they have been very successful at achieving over the last decade in Abbotsford.
Is There a Barkman Homeless Plan?
When Mr. Barkman didn’t supply the details following his announcement of a plan to solve homelessness in Abbotsford [February 2014] I thought he had decided to wait until the municipal election campaign to set out how he plans to bring about Abbotsford not needing housing for homeless persons in 2 years.
The campaign for seats on Abbotsford’s City Council has begun and Mr. Barkman is running for re-election, but there has been no mention of any Barkman Homeless Plan.
At least one assumes that Mr. Barkman meant he has a plan to end homelessness in Abbotsford when he voted to turn down $$millions of dollars$$ of provincial funding by voting down the ACS Housing First project stating: “We need housing now, not in two years.”
Because, if Mr. Barkman didn’t have a plan to end homelessness in Abbotsford, and Abbotsford will need housing for the homeless in two years, surely Mr. Barkman should have voted to accept the millions of provincial dollars and to build the ACS housing proposal?
After all it would have been nonsensical [or as John Smith called it – irrational] for Mr. Barkman to vote against building housing the city would need even more desperately in two years.
Unless………… “We need housing now, not in two years” was simply another example of an Abbotsford city councillor excuse mongering and the totally vacuous, totally absurd “We need housing now, not in two years” was the best pretence Mr. Barkman could fabricate for voting to turn down millions of dollars from the province and to continue Abbotsford City Council’s policy of increasing the number of homeless on the streets of Abbotsford?
In which case Mr. Barkman voted down the ACS Housing First proposal for reasons he is unwilling to publicly admit to.
So Mr. Barkman, did you vote NO because you have a plan or for self-serving reasons?
Watching the Misadventures of Abbotsford City Council I wondered why somebody didn’t do something about this debacle.
Then I realized I AM SOMEBODY.
BLEEP Deniability
Deniability: noun; 1. the ability to deny something, especially on the basis of being officially uninformed; 2. the ability to deny something, as knowledge of or connection with a repugnant activity
Politicians and politics have always been long on promises and short on delivery, but over recent decades the promises have become longer and delivery extremely short.
As if that was not bad enough, over recent years politicians and politics have become long on deniability, while responsibility has headed towards non-existence.
The federal government downloads as much cost and ‘stick it to the provinces’ as it can; the provinces point fingers at the federal government and distance themselves from responsibility by downloading and sticking ministries and crown corporations with responsibility for problems; municipal governments point fingers at ministries and the provincial government insisting it is all the responsibility of the provincial government and they bear no responsibility for acting; the voters stick the politicians and politics with all the responsibility for problems by insisting politicians not tell voters anything they do not want to hear and punishing anyone who dares to speak of reality on an issue.
And so it does not matter how despicable, unconscionable or inhuman an action or action is because………nobody bears any responsibility for what occurred or occurs. And so the despicable, unconscionable and inhuman move from being the results of an error to being rare to being uncommon to not that unusual to ‘that is the way it goes’.
It is how the despicable, unconscionable and inhuman become no big deal; where the question becomes “what is wrong with that?”
Where it is business as usual for Vancouver Costal Health to have an employee take a frail, elderly woman from Squamish and drive her into Fraser Health and dump her in Abbotsford – a city she has no knowledge of or connection to – not at a Fraser Health facility, but at the emergency shelter.
Apparently there are no resources or facilities in all of Vancouver Coastal Health healthier or more appropriate for a senior citizen than an emergency shelter in Abbotsford.
Where a non-Vancouver Coastal Health medical professional notices the blood stains on the elbows of the sleeves of the maltreated senior’s shirt and after looking at her elbows gently helps her to the nursing station so the wounds on her elbows can be treated and bandaged.
While the Vancouver Coastal Health employee states that acute had said her elbows were cared for; before scurrying back to Vancouver Coastal Health.
While the senior explained she had hurt her elbows when she fell and had to crawl for help.
Nursing and shelter staff are well aware that an emergency shelter is no place for any senior citizen…….but what choice do they have? Toss her on the street?
As inappropriate as the emergency shelter is for this frail elderly woman, she is at least somewhere were the staff [people, her fellow human beings] are compassionate and caring.
What a Concept – Homeless Have Rights!
Yes Andrew, the homeless – being Canadians – have Rights that are protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
And as anyone who is following the matter knows, The Abbotsford News obfuscation notwithstanding, the case is about the Rights and Freedoms all Canadians are entitled to and protecting the Rights and Freedoms of Canadians.
Anyone even moderately informed is aware the court case is not focused on the right of the homeless to camp in city parks. The right to camp in a city’s parks is a right only as a consequence of and in redressing the city’s violation of the Charter Rights of the homeless. As Section 24 states:
- 24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances.
As to the question of the need to go to Court……..where else, how else, would Mr. Holota have us, have Canadians, settle fundamental questions about Charter Rights and Freedoms and questions concerning the violation of those Rights and Freedoms by governments [in this case the municipal government of the City of Abbotsford]?
Pistols at dawn in front of City Hall?
Unfortunately it is highly unlikely that the question of whether the factual errors, lies of omission and disinformation written, printed and disseminated by Black Press and Andrew Holota about homelessness, the homeless and the actions of the City of Abbotsford are a violation of the Rights and Freedoms of the homeless or simply served to abet the City of Abbotsford in its continuous violation of the Rights and Freedoms of homeless Canadians will be asked or answered.
As a result, although they may be culpable, neither Black Press nor Andrew Holota are likely to suffer any consequences for contributing to the violation of or violating the Rights of homeless Canadians in Abbotsford.
Mr. Holota’s editorial is rife with statements demonstrating the part Black Press and Mr. Holota have played in creating conditions in Abbotsford where going to court to protect the Rights of homeless Canadians from the City of Abbotsford is not a matter of choice but of necessity.
“....the homeless issue in this town got hijacked by special-interest groups.”
Pivot is a non-profit Society [supported by the community through thousands of donations] whose purpose is to represent and defend the marginalized and disenfranchised by defending their human rights through the provision of access to the legal system. In doing this Pivot also protects the Rights and Freedoms of all Canadians.
Perhaps to Black Press, Andrew Holota and the City of Abbotsford a non-profit Society widely supported by its community, a Society that defends the Human Rights, the Charter Rights of the disenfranchised, is a special interest group.
To the marginalized, the disenfranchised, the powerless, the poor, to all those without the resources to defend their Rights Pivot is a Champion who fights for and defends the oppressed.
It is understandable why, as the oppressors, the City of Abbotsford, Black Press and Editor Holota would view anyone, anything or any group that would fight for and/or defend a class/group of people that the City of Abbotsford, Black Press and Editor Holota wish to oppress, harass, persecute and victimize as a ‘special-interest’ group. In protecting the interests of the homeless Pivot acts against the interests of the oppressors, threatens to force an end to the oppression and drags the oppressors into court, out of the shadows, into daylight and makes a public display of them.
It would be interesting, potentially entertaining, to see by what convoluted process Editor Holota came to label the Abbotsford chapter of the Drug War Survivors, whose membership consists almost entirely of those who have been homeless, are homeless or in the process of becoming homeless as a special interest group vis-à-vis the subject of homelessness in Abbotsford.
To the Homeless in Abbotsford the motivation of Barry Shantz in founding the Abbotsford chapter of the BC/Yukon Drug War Survivors is moot.
What matters to the homeless and all others who are powerless in Abbotsford is that the involvement of Mr. Shantz and the DWS solved a years old dilemma, a dilemma not limited to just the homeless – the barrier raised to holding the City of Abbotsford accountable for its actions by prohibitive legal costs.
Whether it was/is the City of Abbotsford’s violation of the homeless and powerless or the costly illegal subsidy agreement with the Heat, bottomless taxpayer pockets, at least from the view of Abbotsford’s municipal government and politicians, has been an insurmountable barrier to those seeking Justice.
Until Pivot, and the community that supports them, stepped forward to say ENOUGH to the City of Abbotsford and its politicians.
Pivot a special interest group? I suppose if you consider an interest in Human Rights, in protecting the Charter Rights and Freedoms of all Canadians [not just those of the privileged or wealthy], in standing up for the marginalized and disenfranchised as a ‘special’ interest.
Personally, irregardless of what the City of Abbotsford, its’ politicians, Black Press or Andrew Holota obviously believe I do not regard the behaviour of Pivot as ‘special’; to me Pivot’s behaviour is simply the behaviour of the ethical, behaviour the City of Abbotsford – although highly unlikely to – could learn a great deal from.
As English philosopher Edmund Burke stated “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
