For a while, I’ve wondered if the province or individual school districts track graduation rates by what elementary or middle school a student attended. That seems very specific, but I’ve always been interested to know if graduation rates are lower for kids that go to elementary and middle schools in priority neighbourhoods vs schools with a wider variety of income levels. High schools in Saint John are a mix bag of kids from various incomes and I suspect it’s the transition to high school where a lot of kids get left behind.

Someday, I’ll look into that information.

For now, let’s look at the provincial assessment results I mentioned above, some of which are troubling. I’m going to use St. John the Baptist-King Edward and Hazen White-St. Francis as my examples.

SJBKE:

-In 2010, 18.5 per cent of kids in Grade 6 who completed the provincial science assessment scored a grade that was at or above an appropriate level. This compares to 50.1 per cent of kids province-wide who are at or above an appropriate level, and 41.5 per cent of kids district-wide.

-In 2009, 10.5 per cent of kids in Grade 7 who completed the provincial writing assessment scored a grade that was at or above an appropriate level. The school brought this number up to 25.8 per cent in 2010, but that’s still pretty low.

The numbers are equally troubling at Hazen White-St. Francis, another school that sits in one of Saint John’s priority neighbourhoods:

-The Grade 7 writing scores have been equally low at Hazen White – only 33.3 per cent of kids were at or above an appropriate level in 2010 (although this is an improvement on their respective 2009 and 2008 scores of 7.1 and 9.1 per cent, it’s still pretty low.)

There are a few reasons why you can take some legitimacy away from these numbers. For one, I’m not sure exactly what constitutes an “appropriate” level. I’ll have to do more research into this. For two, there’s low enrolment at both schools, so if there are a couple of students who do particularly poorly on these assessments, they skew the numbers. And for three, they’re just numbers. It’s hard to measure someone’s performance by a standardized test, which these assessments are for the most part.

But I’m not sure we can totally disregard or ignore these numbers. When you have more than 80 per cent of the kids in given grade not measuring up to your standards, you have to look inward and figure out where you went wrong.

Since I went to one of these priority neighbourhood schools, things have changed. There’s a lot more programming in the schools now designed to give these kids more opportunities. PALS is a great example. But is it enough? Is it really making a difference? We might not know the answer to these questions for a while – but that doesn’t mean I’m going to stop asking these important questions.

Sources:

http://www.gnb.ca/0000/results/district_8/hazenwhite_assessment.html

http://www.gnb.ca/0000/results/district_8/stjohnbaptist_perception_summary.html

Keep all of this in mind for my next post, where I’ll talk about a controversial proposal by an Ontario school board to group low-income kids into one school in an attempt to narrow the learning gap.

The article came on the heels of a fare hike by the TTC, bringing fares up to $3.

Pat Capponi, whose book “The War at Home” kept me engaged and mortified at the same time last summer, talked about her down-and-out days when she would have to use two feet to transport herself somewhere, as she was unable to afford to take public transportation.

Capponi said she doesn’t mind walking as much now, because she can afford warm clothing in the winter, proper footwear and enough food.

But a lot of people living below the line do not have these necessities.

So what are we doing for them?

How can we expect people to go job hunting if they are limited in transportation?

How can we expect people to feel like they’re a part of society when they can’t, as Kelly Lamrock said at a recent poverty forum in Fredericton, afford the transportation to go and have coffee with a friend?

This can make people in poverty feel like they’re isolated.

When people read about poverty, they picture someone living in a cardboard box on the street.

But what about the single mother who is trying to make ends meet, but has to choose between transportation to work and food? Is this the point where we’re really starting to punish people for being poor?

In a vast city like Toronto, I can certainly understand why public transportation might be a bit more expensive.

But in Saint John, transit rates were raised not that long ago. It costs $2.25 to take the bus one way in the city.

For a single mother who needs to buy groceries or do laundry, that means taking cabs, especially when you live in a neighbourhood where it’s not realistic to walk to these things.

And cabs are expensive too.

What I’m getting at here is whether we’re making it easy to isolate the poor. In many municipalities, the poor are already concentrated in certain neighbourhoods and areas. Are we making it easier for that to happen?

Public transportation should be subsidized so that rates are raised only when absolutely necessary. Being able to travel easier would make a big difference in the lives of many living below the line.

But I don’t claim to know how to run the TTC, or Saint John Transit, and so on.

I’m just asking what we’re doing to make it easier for the poor to get from spot A to spot B. Are we doing enough? What can we do to improve the situation?

I don’t have answers for these questions, but I wish I did.

Some food for thought.

The Old North End neighbourhood has been identified as one of Saint John’s five priority neighbourhoods. In 2006, 46.8 per cent of the families in the neighbourhood were living in poverty (source: Vibrant Communities, “Poverty and Plenty II: A Statistical Snapshot of the Quality of Life in Saint John”).

ONE Change, a non-profit organization with an office on Victoria St. in the neighbourhood, has played a large part in the community coming together over the last few years.

Tammy Calvin, Vice President of Residence with ONE Change, has witnessed the change in the neighbourhood first hand.

“This neighbourhood six years ago was distraught. It’s just a neighbourhood that’s been so neglected over the years.”

Calvin says that the organization made a major transformation when they moved to a new building after their original one was torched by arsonists.

“Originally, we were just going to have this little spot, it was going to be more like an office,” says Calvin. “Funding became available for us to build one that was a little bigger, a little better.”

The new building is outfitted with a computer lab and a medical lab. Volunteers and paid staff offer job search help, resume building and even a formula and diaper program out of the new building.

“Since they burned it down, we just got better.”

Upgraded facilities have helped the organization better respond to crises in the community.

When two families lost everything they owned in a fire in the neighbourhood shortly before Christmas, ONE Change opened their doors to help.

“Susan Boudreau [a ONE Change volunteer and North End resident] heard about the fires and got the ball on the go,” says Calvin.

The ONE Change building became the headquarters for people to drop off donations for the families in need.

“People gave so much. It touched people. Right up until Christmas Day, they were still dropping stuff off even though the family had enough.”

“This is a neighbourhood that takes care of each other.”

ONE Change tries to bring the community closer together by holding parties for all of the major holidays, as well as Old North End Days.

This year’s Christmas party had about 450 attendees, estimates Calvin.

“We celebrate all the holidays. It’s important when you live in poverty, you need something to celebrate.”

The entire party only cost $1,000, with much of the food being donated by local businesses.

The organization also helps host Old North End days, a weeklong celebration that embraces the neighbourhood’s past, present and future, with an activity in the neighbourhood each day.

Coming up with money is one of the biggest challenges the organization faces. Although ONE Change receives funding from all three levels of government, money is still hard to find, says Calvin.

“You get a lot of different groups all applying for the same funding, there’s just not enough there.”

“We do a lot with a little though,” she says, citing the Christmas party as an example of the organization’s resourcefulness.

The biggest change in the neighbourhood, however, is coming from the youth. ONE Change has a youth council that is very active in the community.

“One of the things they’re working on is to let businesses know that they appreciate their service,” says Calvin. “They’re putting together a program where you give this business some sort of a reward, [even if] it’s just name recognition.”

The youth council also hosts events just for the neighbourhood’s teens. Each week, girls of all ages from the neighbourhood gather at One Change for “Girls’ World.”

“Sometimes there’s 30 girls that show up and they just do girl stuff,” she says.

The youth council works with the seniors in the neighbourhood to make sure they feel safe and cared for.

“Six years ago, we did a survey. Seniors were afraid to come out of their house. These teenagers now want to do things for the seniors,” Calvin says.“If a senior needs their lawn mowed, one of our kids will go over and do it.”

ONE Change is also helping homeless teen mothers make a positive change in their lives with the ONE life program. The program provides housing to the mothers with the main stipulation being that they attend school.

The result of the youth getting involved in their community is simple.

“You can tell the difference between the teenagers in this neighbourhood now and the ones that were here six years ago,” says Calvin. “These ones are engaged in the neighbourhood, they’re going to school, they’re involved in many, many, many activities.”

Calvin attributes much of the neighbourhood’s progress to its residents.

“If you’re going to make a real change in a neighbourhood, it’s got to come from the residents. It’s no good if it comes from outside in,” she says.

Calvin envisions a mixed-income neighbourhood in the Old North End’s future.

“It’s the only way to go. You need to see people that are working and how they live and as well, they can learn a lot from low-income people.”

Until then, Calvin thinks the word poverty should be used less when describing the community.

“They’re all talking about poverty but when you’re actually living in poverty, you don’t think of yourself as living in poverty. You’re so used to it,” she says.

“I think changing the wording would have a bigger impact, something more positive.”

Check out ONE Change on Facebook for more information on how to get involved.

Since the announcement of the cancellation of the Irving HQ project, Coun. Donnie Snook, Mayor Ivan Court and Saint John Harbour MLA Ed Doherty have said that the plan to renovate the park will not be scrapped.

The Telegraph-Journal published this article last Friday that mentioned something I hadn’t thought of – construction needs to be completed on the park by September 30th, or else the federal government’s share of the money disappears.

It’s slim timeline for the city and the province to scrape together the dollars to complete the renovation and start construction, but hopefully with all levels of government on board, the money can be found somewhere.

According to the TJ article, Doherty has filed a request with the Regional Development Corporation. It’s not known how much money the park could receive from the RDC or when we will know the status of the application.

Doherty also threw out the idea of receiving private donations from local philanthropists or businesses.

Doherty’s pledge to save the park was topped off by a letter he wrote to the Telegraph-Journal, which was also published last Friday.

I am glad to hear that this project is a priority for all three levels of government.

The first thing that comes to mind for me is what will happen now with the land.

Presumably, the Long Wharf and Lantic Sugar sites will revert back to their previous ownership since the MOU signed in 2008 is now a no-go. So what is the land going to be used for now? And what about any changes that have already been made to the land by Irving?

But there are two bigger questions for me.

The first is what this means for waterfront development at-large. The plan was lauded as great news for the South End and the uptown area because it was hoped that many of the employees at the world headquarters would use uptown amenities.

My assumption was that if Irving was willing to invest money in the Long Wharf so close by, more money would flow into beautification of the South End.

Councillor Donnie Snook, a representative of Ward 3, suggested in August 2009 that money from the headquarters go towards renovating Rainbow Park.

The new park would look like this, clearly a big difference from the Rainbow Park seen in the picture with Snook in the article above.

The last I heard, Saint John had plans to invest $1.5 million in the project (it’s on page 10, just so you don’t have to search through all 54 pages) with the rest of the $2.3 million needed presumably coming from money being made off of the headquarters deal.

There was even talk of extending the Harbour Passage (for those not from Saint John, Harbour Passage is a huge red sidewalk) to Rainbow Park to attract more people working at the headquarters and tourists to the South End/the renovated park.

This brings me to my second question.

Are the Rainbow Park renovations dead now that the headquarters deal is dead? Is there still an incentive for the city to renovate the park? Will they still want to extend Harbour Passage? And the big question: where is the rest of the money going to come from to foot the bill for the renovation, if the city is only putting $1.5 million in?

I grew up playing in Rainbow Park and have spent countless hours there, so from a personal side, I sure hope the renovation continues without the headquarters.

The current park has a lot of graffiti. It has broken equiment. The basketball hoops look pretty sad. Sometimes, there isn’t even a net up where the tennis court is supposed to be, and the “skateboard park area” is now just a fenced in piece of pavement.

The argument by some people on the Telegrah-Journal’s website was why invest money in something that is just going to be destroyed?

I can give you a few reasons why.

Reason #1: It would attract families from other parts of the city to come and play, ideally. Families from the rest of the city aren’t exactly flocking to bring their kids to the South End to play.

Reason #2: It would give kids something to do. Try to find amusement for your kids in the South End when you don’t have transportation or money. Your options are limited, and with more amenities at the park, it would be a better spot for kids to hang out.

Reason #3: The playground at St. John the Baptist-King Edward school was absolutely empty when I was a kid. We had a little piece of wood to sit on and some pavement, and someone was bright enough to draw a racetrack and hopscotch on the pavement.We made our own fun anyway, but actually having things to play with/on would have been nice.

Now, they have an actual playground. It’s certainly not glamourous, but they have real basketball nets, an area to play soccer, a sandbox, among other things. I was just there this summer, and it doesn’t look to me as if it’s been destroyed at all.

My point is, the kids have respected that property and appreciate it. Why would it be any different with a new Rainbow Park?

It’s too early to answer the many questions I posed in this blog, but I can say one thing. Investing in Rainbow Park would be a great move to improve the quality of life for people in the South End. I hope the project doesn’t get shelved like the world headquarters plan.

(Published in The Aquinian on Jan. 26 2010)

Sharon Saulnier is about to lose her apartment.

She has had some bad breaks – her mother passed away when she was 19 and her father is sick, leaving her as the caregiver for her disabled sister. To top it off, Saulnier had to learn to walk again after being in a bad car accident.

Now, the local Christian musician is unable to sleep at night for worry that she will soon be on the streets, unable to care for her sister.

“I’m just tired of waking up in fear every day, wondering whether I’m going to have a place to live next week.”

Saulnier and others had their chance to tell their story to Social Development Minister Kelly Lamrock at a poverty reduction forum hosted by the Fredericton Anti-Poverty Organization on Wednesday.

The Meeting Place Church, which doubles as a street level drop-in centre, played host to the forum.

Lamrock gave a speech about “Overcoming Poverty Together”, the Liberal-led poverty reduction plan, before taking questions from the audience.

The plan aims to reduce income poverty by 25 per cent and deep income poverty by 50 per cent by 2015 and promotes social and economic inclusion.

It’s the result of months of consultation that fused together the provincial government, business community and those living in poverty.

The changes laid out in the plan immediately impacted single employable recipients of social assistance, who will receive a minimum of $537 per month instead of $286.

Meanwhile, all low-income residents can now keep their government issued health card for a longer period when they find a job, making it easier to transition into the workforce.

Within a year, the deal also should help mature low-income students who often sacrifice their social assistance cheques to receive student loans.

“The social assistance system should put a priority on funding behaviour that ends the social assistance,” said Lamrock. “And that means education.”

When factoring in daycare for low-income students, trying to get a post-secondary education proves to be even more challenging.

“Childcare subsidies are all over the map in terms of whether you can get the support you need as a student,” he said.

Lamrock acknowledged that not all of the changes promised in the deal would be felt immediately.

“Change does come, but I won’t deny that it’s slow.”

He insisted that common sense policies are necessary for change.

“Now, if you’re $1.37 over for your $1000 subsidy, you receive $1000 minus $1.37,” he explained.

“It’s a first start of trying to get to common sense rules.”

As for Saulnier, she hopes that Lamrock will be able to help her keep her home. For now, she wishes for a world without stigma around poverty.

“A lot of people that drive past it on the streets everyday turn a blind eye,” she said. “They don’t see it.”

Premier Shawn Graham announced on Oct. 29 that the province of New Brunswick had reached a Memorandum of Understanding with the province of Quebec to sell nearly all of NB Power’s assets to Hydro-Quebec.

The highlights of what New Brunswick receives in return include $4.75 billion, forgiveness of debt and frozen rates for five years. Residential customers would receive the rate freeze, while industrial customers would get a 30 per cent rate reduction.

Graham stressed on the day of the announcement that the if the deal isn’t signed before March 31^st 2010, power rates will be increased by 3 per cent. Increases of 3 per cent will be an annual occurrence without this deal.

Since the deal was announced, there has been a mixture of reaction about whether the deal is positive for low-income New Brunswickers such as Orser and her sister.

The proposed rate freeze has been a popular topic in low-income communities around the province.

“The main thing that I’m concerned about is after the five year rate freeze,” says Orser.

Hydro-Quebec has said that the rates after the five year freeze will be adjusted according to inflation.

While Orser doesn’t currently have to worry about paying a separate power bill, if the rates become too high for NB Housing to absorb, her rent will go up.

Trevor Holder, Opposition MLA for Saint John Portland, says the deal does not help low-income customers who already cannot afford to pay their power bills and struggle each winter.

“There’s really no relief for the residential rate payer,” says Holder.

The loss of accountability in selling the public utility to Hydro-Quebec might be the worst part of the deal, according to Holder, whose riding consists of some of the poorest neighbourhoods in Saint John.

“If you don’t like what is happening with your public utility, it’s not like you can say, ‘I’ll just vote these guys out next time’.”

“There’s absolutely no accountability.”

A policy that hangs in the balance of the deal is the no disconnect policy that was adopted in November of 2006 by NB Power.

The policy ensures that residents unable to pay for electricity would not have their electricity shut off during the cold months.

The policy was a crucial part of Shawn Graham’s Charter for Change election platform in 2006.

Marc Belliveau, a government spokesman, insists that the policy will not change in light of the sale.

“There are absolutely no plans to change the no disconnect policy as NB Power has it right now.”

However, Andrew Secord, the Department Chair of both Economics and Environment and Society at St. Thomas University, believes otherwise.

“That’s up to Hydro-Quebec’s policies,” says Secord.

“They can set any policy they want. They might send everyone a Christmas turkey, I don’t know, but the province of New Brunswick is not going to have any control over it.”

The return that the province of New Brunswick will receive from the deal outweighs what New Brunswick is losing, says Secord. This ultimately determines the price that the most vulnerable in the province will pay for the deal.

“Long term, you’re not going to get something for nothing,” says Secord.

A lack of consultation before signing the deal has been troubling for Holder.

A public utility is something that is owned by everyone in the province, and no one was consulted before the MOU was signed, he says.

“I don’t ever remember a deal of this magnitude that has happened behind closed doors and in secrecy. The board of NB Power never even voted on this.”

Not everyone sees the deal as bad news for the low-income. Alex Arsenault of the NB Non-Profit Housing Association sees it as something positive.

“For me, it’s a good deal,” he says, noting that the money from the deal could go towards implementing the government’s poverty reduction plan.

“It’s a golden opportunity to bring down the debt to a manageable level.”

Secord warns against taking the deal at face value.

The $4.75 billion promised in the deal is assuming that New Brunswick is able to refurbish Point Lepreau to a level where it will work for an extended period, according to Section 5.1 of the MOU.

The MOU states that the “completion of the Lepreau purchase…will be subject to the following conditions to be satisfied prior to that time.”

These conditions include “The completion of the current refurbishment project” and “The restart of those facilities following successful testing.”

If Lepreau cannot be refurbished up to Hydro-Quebec’s standards, it will not be included in the deal. This will make the deal worth substantially less.

“That’s the risk, whether or not Lepreau is going to work,” says Secord. “Often these retrofit jobs run into all sorts of problems.”

“[Lepreau] wasn’t designed to be rebuilt on-site; it was built in a highly controlled environment. It’s technically not all that simple. It’s very complicated and high-risk.”

Without Point Lepreau, says Secord, the deal is worth only $2 to $2.2 billion, an amount not high enough to have a large impact on the debt.

“That doesn’t solve the problem with the high debt associated with the nuclear plant,” he explains. “That’s the financial exposure.”

While the deal is still in its early stages, so is public reaction.

The positon of the opposition Progressive Conservatives on the deal has not wavered since the day of the announcement: they are wholeheartedly opposed.

Opposition leader David Alward has threatened to push for an early election if the Liberals go forward with the deal.

“As far as we are concerned, Shawn Graham might be for sale, but New Brunswick isn’t,” says Holder.

“The bottom line for the average, everyday New Brunswicker and low-income New Brunswicker, is there is no benefit in this deal for them.”

For low-income residents like Elaine Orser and her sister, many questions still hang in the balance, unanswered.

“There are a lot of people struggling as it is with power rates,” says Orser. “I know people will have to be cutting corners if rent goes up, and the first thing that usually gets cut is the grocery bill.”

The poor face unique challenges in battling the h1n1 virus, as we’ve seen in developing countries and remote communities in Canada, where the virus has spread quickly with deadly results. Poor sanitation, an inadequate diet as well as mental stress put those living in poverty at a higher risk to contract the virus. Those with underlying medical conditions, such as an addiction and/or a mental illness, and those living on the street face even more severe challenges.With the colder weather approaching, keeping warm from the elements is a challenge in itself and can wear down the immune system easily. As food banks tend to have their shelves empty quicker in the winter months, warm clothes, sanitary items and food become hard to afford items for families living in poverty, but necessities for someone hoping to stay healthy.

What might be most difficult in protecting the poor from h1n1 is making sure that all of these people living “below the line” are actually vaccinated. The article mentions that health professionals will be going straight to the streets to vaccinate the poorest in the DTES. Those who are on the streets are a very visible representation of the poor, but there are many that remain hidden away and encouraging these people to get vaccinated might be tricky.

Here are a few other challenges that come to mind when it comes to safeguarding the vulnerable members of the community from a pandemic.

1. Education – People living on the streets or those who simply do not have access to cable TV, the internet or newspapers may not be fully informed about the virus and why it is necessary to get vaccinated. That is not to say that anyone living “below the line” will not be informed about the vaccine, but certainly there are some who are not. The amount of confusion about whether to receive the seasonal vaccine, the h1n1 vaccine or both here in NB will is causing general confusion for everyone, and this will surely not help the lack of information available to those in poverty about the virus. Additionally, those in poverty may be too embarrassed to make regular trips to the doctor, especially if they already have a medical condition they are not receiving treatment for because they can’t afford the treatment.

2. Cost – The vaccine is free for everyone, but those living in poverty might not be aware of this. In NB, seasonal flu vaccines cost money unless you have an underlying medical condition or a really nice family doctor (but once again, those who are poor might avoid making regular trips to the doctor). Misinformation could be the biggest barrier to the poor seeking a vaccination.

3. Transportation and Accessibility – I often talk of urban poverty on this blog, but rural poverty is a big issue in Canada as well. For those without a means of transportation to get to a doctor’s office or a flu vaccination site, how will they be vaccinated? Will there be someone to make trips to their house, or someone to drive them? For example, a round-trip on the bus for an adult is $5.00 in Saint John and $4.50 for kids and seniors. For a family living “below the line”, that’s an expensive trip. There has been talk of vaccination for kids in schools and going to the streets to vaccinate the homeless, which are positive steps, but for adults without a workplace who are living in poverty, it may be harder to get them to vaccination clinics.

Many people are still up in the air about how effective the vaccination will be and whether it’s really worth it to get vaccinated. For the most vulnerable members of society, protection against h1n1 is more than pushing them to get vaccinated. It’s about educating them on what they can do to protect themselves from the virus regardless of whether they choose to be vaccinated. To not do this is depriving them of the tools they need to protect themselves. Giving away items to increase personal hygiene could be another positive step towards flu prevention for the vulnerable — hygenic items can get pretty expensive, especially when you’re raising a big family.

The federal and many provincial governments have shown great initiative to help the most at-risk, but it remains to be seen this flu season whether enough has been done.

Living under the poverty line is difficult to do when there simply isn’t enough money to go around. But what is even worse is to feel cut off from the rest of society.

The importance of an inclusive, supportive community was most evident in Saint John this summer when the city came together to save the Romero House. The Romero House is a soup kitchen located in the Waterloo Village, one of Saint John’s most vulnerable neighbourhoods and the only vulnerable neighbourhood to have an increasing level of poverty over the last year. Romero House faced the prospect of laying off all of its full-time staff due to a major budget shortfall of $30,000.

For a city like Saint John with a lot of isolated neighbourhood poverty, the importance of the Romero House lies beyond the one hot meal a day its visitors are afforded. Romero House also offers emergency food orders, clothing, shelter, life skills training and education, as well as some basic health care.

Most importantly, Romero House offers support. I spent one afternoon around Thanksgiving of 2007 volunteering at Romero House. It was a community environment that was comfortable and non-judgmental. People exchanged pleasantries with each other and seemed to feel at home.

For someone living in poverty, it’s easy to feel anonymous. It’s easy to feel forgotten and a lot of times, you are forgotten. But at Romero House, everyone is treated like a human being and they are not left behind.

The whole reason why I created this blog and the reason why I believe the Romero House situation is so important  to learn from is because I think it’s easy to ignore problems or issues that do not directly affect you. These problems stay below the line.

It’s easy to walk past someone begging for change on the street without a passing glance. While it’s not always feasible to someone to give change, what is free and easy to give is a passing smile, a “hello” or a “how are you”. These people are a part of the community and should be treated as such, but many people in poverty report that they often feel  cut off from the rest of society and “alone in their struggles” (Source: Province of NB’s Phase I report on Poverty: What Was Said).

Saint John stepped up to the plate this summer. Residents saw that there was a need in the community, their community. The Romero House has surpassed it’s $30,000 budget shortfall in fundraising thanks to a lot of local media coverage which brought to light the immense need of the Romero House, and a lot of generosity that is still continuing to pour in from the community. Unfortunately, it took a budget crisis in order for the community to rally around its most vulnerable as they did this summer.

I remember going back to school every September when I was a kid and the teacher would ask us all what we learned over the summer. If Saint John residents were asked this question this summer, I would hope that they would answer that they learned how to come together in a time of need and support their own community members, the ones that are often most forgotten.

With the goal of an inclusive, supportive community in mind, I can only hope that it does not take another crisis for the city’s poor to receive the support they so desperately need.

The online version indicates it was published under the Health section of the paper but doesn’t specify whether the piece is opinion or not. Given that I’m not familiar with the columnist or the paper for that matter, I won’t go futher with that. But I do have some serious qualms with what the columnist is trying to say.

The article is about the social chaos going on right now on the Downtown East Side of Vancouver, which I’ve blogged about a few times on here.

Baron argues, as the title suggests, that we should lock up all of the addicts on the DTES and force treatment upon them. His logic is that forcing them to be clean would save more money than is being poured into the area now for policing and other services that the homeless take advantage of everyday.

While there may not be much logic to the situation on the DTES as Baron says, I also don’t think there is much logic to his solution either.

First of all, while many of the people on the DTES are addicted, they also face a number of other issues. Many face mental health issues which aren’t going to go away with simple treatment. If it was that simple, addiction wouldn’t exist in our society.

Second, while it is easy to force someone to become clean by detoxing them, or locking them up, that’s not going to erase the addiction. Therapy might, but that requires the person to be willing and ready to tackle whatever issues are behind their addictions. And as one of the officers in Baron’s story admits, many of these people do have underlying issues which has resulted in the addiction.

So, say that we lock up all of the addicts on the DTES. And we’ll say that they detox so technically they are leaving treatment chemical-free. What then? While there are many services in the DTES to help people put their lives back together and find employment, where are they going to live? Certainly short-term housing isn’t an issue in the DTES, but long-term housing is. And of course, all of this requires a person motivated to leave a life of addiction and poverty.

I’ve spoken to people directly involved in the community while researching for a piece I wrote back in March about the problem. The main consensus with all of the people I talked to was that the first step to addressing the issues in the DTES is safe housing. For someone trying to rebuild their life and stay off of drugs, if you can’t afford to live somewhere in which you can maintain your dignity, it’s rough.

But, alas, there is not one easy fix to the DTES. Just as there is no easy fix for kicking addiction. While programs like InSite, Vancouver’s controversial safe injection site, do not necessarily intend to send every addict that walks through the door into detox or treatment, they offer a piece of dignity to these people. Yes, they’re injecting drugs, but they’re not doing it in a dirty alleyway and the risk of overdose or AIDS is reduced.

The thing that struck me the most when I was reading this article by Baron is something that Mark Townsend of The Portland Hotel Society told me when I was doing research for my DTES article. He told me that developing a sense of community is important to the DTES. A neighbourhood of poor people doesn’t have to be a negative thing. Addiction, of course is a negative thing, but the fact that many overlook is that the DTES doesn’t consist entirely of addicts.

As far as I’m concerned, poverty is just as big of an issue as addiction in this country, and that needs to be solved before we can take on the issues of this community and the issues of addiction. Give them safe housing, support and treatment for those who face addictions or other issues, and perhaps a change will happen.

But you can’t “fix” anything if they’re going to back to sleeping on the street or in dilapidated, overpriced and unsanitary housing. I think that’s the one thing that Baron overlooks in his article.

You can lock up the addicts which will provide a band-aid fix, but if you want to solve the problem permanently, you must address the issue of poverty and everything that goes with that.

Everyone has their opinion on how we should tackle a community that faces a challenge like the DTES. Mine is that people need to bloom where they are. Turn a negative into a positive and build a strong community.

And that’s why I had trouble digesting Baron’s take on the situation.

“Give me home, home pleasures for myself/I’m so far backwards that I’m forward again/Give me home, home pleasures for myself/This corregated town’s been hard on my health.” – Street Sleeper, Grand Theft Bus.