Credit: Vlastula on Flickr

Both of the candidates with actually the best shot at actually becoming the next Mayor of Vancouver (Gregor Robertson and Peter Ladner) have participated in debates on (and broadly proclaimed that they’ll work to end) homelessness in Vancouver (you can read a good recap by Tris here). Well, gentlemen, I seriously do hope that whoever wins, will seriously seek some sound advice on public policy, particularly on the issue of homelessness.

I am not an expert in homelessness policy by any means. I am, however, a specialist in environmental studies and public policy, and particularly I’ve researched issues that are clearly the domain of various levels of government. In particular, water governance in Mexico faces many challenges precisely because of this problem – overlapping jurisdictional responsibilities. Homelessness has the same basic structural problem. It should be a shared responsibility, but no actual level of government takes real responsibility and is truly accountable for dealing with homelessness.

In Mexico, wastewater governance and water supply provision, for example, is fully a responsibility of the municipality. That responsibility is enshrined in the Mexican Constitution (Article 115). Unfortunately, municipalities don’t really have a standing in the Canadian political system. Canadian federalism recognizes the Federation and the provinces (and Territories). However, municipalities/cities are not recognized (see Canada’s Cities report) and therefore, the intergovernmental relationships amongst municipalities, the provincial governments and the Federal have become really complicated [EDIT - Found even better sources on the debate on whether municipalities should be granted constitutional status in the site of the Library of the Parliament of Canada and in the Canadian Encylopedia].

This is unfortunate, and it’s a big problem if you think about it, because – who bears the brunt of homeless as a societal issue that needs to be addressed? The municipality. However, how can a municipality address an issue that requires cooperation between provinces, the Federation and the municipality if there is no actual recognized Constitutional status of the city in Canada? (see the sources I’ve included above on the state of the debate in regards to the constitutional status of the municipality/city)

According to Vision Vancouver’s blog, Gregor suggests to “build relationships with all levels of government” as one of the key actions they’ll undertake if elected.

According to Peter Ladner’s blog, Peter suggests that he will tackle homelessness “through a partnership of federal, provincial, regional, municipal governments and non-profit agencies”.

Well, dear candidates in the November 15th municipal election, you will need to not only build relationships and partnerships, but actually establish sound, solid intergovernmental agreements that lead to the implementation at a local (municipal) level of the Federal Homelessness Partnering Strategy. Although, that being said, I think we need a sound National Homelessness Action Strategy.

Homelessness is definitely a regional/municipal public policy issue, but municipalities can’t solve the problem by themselves, without the support of the Federal government. For all candidates, I suggest you coordinate your strategy with the Federal Homelessness Partnering Strategy (launched in December 2006).

Under the HPS, the federal government will offer the provinces and territories the opportunity to enter into bilateral partnerships, improve collaboration and develop linkages between the federal homelessness programs and provincial/territorial social services to help communities make strategic investments that will best serve their homeless populations.[HPS About Us]

I would also recommend investing in solid, evidence-based research on homelessness using a global, multi-country, multi-region comparative strategy. Surely, other countries have reduced homelessness. How did they do it? What did they do? What was needed?

I am sure someone must have done good research on the topic. I haven’t, but if I was a specialist in urban issues (specifically homelessness) rather than an environmental specialist, I probably would launch a research programme with applied outcomes (e.g. partner with the local communities to actually effect change).

I was able to find a good article on homelessness and health (co-authored by, amongst others, Dr. Jim Frankish, whose research I do respect a lot).

Homelessness and Health in Canada: Research Lessons and Priorities
C James Frankish; Stephen W Hwang; Darryl Quantz, Canadian Journal of Public Health; Mar/Apr 2005; 96.

[Link here]

Additional resources – Not a research paper, but Monte Paulsen’s post on The Tyee “Seven Solutions to Homelessness” is a great read.

One last word – whoever wins, please don’t just give us empty promises.

DO THINGS THAT WILL HAVE POSITIVE, LONG-LASTING POSITIVE EFFECTS!

Related posts:

1. Homelessness Action Week 2008 – October 12th to 19th, 2008
2. Upcoming event – Stop Homelessness Public Forum (Vancouver)
3. Putting back the public in public policy

I mean, let’s be honest. With regards to homelessness and poverty, a tendency to pass the buck seems common… “it’s not MY responsibility, it’s the responsibility of the other level of government“. Since today is Blog Action Day and the focus is on poverty, will the new Conservative government say that their platform is actually working towards economic recovery or will they say that it’s going to alleviate poverty? Because, really, what progress have we achieved in regards to a national homelessness policy and/or a national poverty alleviation strategy? I’m curious to hear…

Related posts:

1. Blog Action Day 2008 – Poverty
2. The measure of progress in poverty alleviation – Blog Action Day ’08
3. Homelessness Action Week 2008 – October 12th to 19th, 2008

Credit: KeepItSurreal

Environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) take it upon themselves to participate in various ways in the environmental policy-making process. Human rights organizations often seek to galvanize public opinion and protect disadvantaged people. This the basis for a healthy, participatory society.

Unfortunately, it would seem as though not everyone is interested in engaging in public participation processes. Earlier last week I voiced my discomfort when I found out that there was much more interest from people who are on Twitter in the American electoral process than in Canadian or Vancouver electoral issues.

I was relieved to find a number of comments on my post agreeing that we need to focus on local issues (although we can’t forget international affairs). More recently, people have started to tweet more and blog more about the upcoming Vancouver mayoral election and the potential Federal election that could take place as early as mid-October 2008. These are, in my view, good news.

That’s why I would like to encourage my readers to take it upon themselves to put back the public in public policy. There are HUNDREDS if not thousands of issues that we need to focus on, and I am going to highlight just a few (all of them, which I’ve written about before).

* The need to support small local businesses.
* The lack of a strong, nation-wide water policy in Canada and a deficient regional strategy in Metro Vancouver, particularly in the management of wastewater.
* The lack of transparency in the development of Bill C-61.
- The need to re-assess the whole Eco-Density concept and understand the heterogeneities within the Vancouver urban region.
- The whole Provincial Transit Plan of British Columbia and how other countries can teach us lessons on transportation policy.
- The lack of a homeless strategy that really addresses the needs of the needier (which are affected by, amongst other things, snow and other climatic elements).

I could go on, and on, and if you have been reading my blog for a while, you’ll easily find the issues that galvanize MY opinion : water, environment, sustainability, homelessness, urbanization, human rights, electronic rights. Oh, and POVERTY. Let’s not forget about poverty. Now, let’s go back to the issues that galvanize YOU! Never has the phrase “think global act local” been more relevant than now.

I also want to take a minute to thank people who have voted for me on the Vancouver Election Blog contest. Rebecca Bollwitt (Miss604) has been the leader for a few weeks now, and that’s awesome and deserved since she’s been covering all things Vancouver (which have included political issues too!) for over four years. David Eby is also in the ballot, and he has always been a strong advocate for homeless people. There are new blogs, like VanCity Buzz who are highlighting small, local businesses (which is a series I enjoy), and there are more experienced bloggers too, of course… there’s Gordon Price and Paul Hillsdon and Frances Bula and Stephen Rees.

I have also seen the evolution of the contest, and I have to say that, in my view, every one of the nominated blogs are deserving, as each one provides a unique perspective on Vancouver. People may or may not agree on what bloggers write, on their style or their ideas, but as it has been attributed to Voltaire (although some disagree on this too!), “I may disagree with what you are saying but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it” (I found that some people attribute these words to Evelyn Beatrice Hall).

Related posts:

1. My interview with David Berner on The Power of Social Media in Public Policy
2. Public policy, budget prioritization and the money question
3. Public policy lessons on homelessness for Vancouver’s next mayor

What is the Canadian Coalition of Electronic Rights? From their website:

How can a balance be attained between protecting the rights of creators and their entitlement to compensation for their works and the rights of Canadians who seek to access and use these works? Although there may be no definitive answer to this question there are several factors that need to exist in an amended Copyright Act to ensure a reasonable level of mutual protection for stakeholders and users. The Canadian Coalition for Electronic Rights (CCER) is an advocate for the preservation of user rights throughout the copyright reform process in Canada.
[CCER website]

I had covered the Bill C-61 discussions in a recent post, but it seemed to stir NO DISCUSSION whatsoever (with the exception of Gillian’s very good commentary). This morning I woke up to a Tweet by Andy and I figured I had to write a post about it, and try to bring more attention to it. The reality of it is, this Bill WILL affect a lot of Canadians, residents, even short-term visitors! I don’t think that people are informed enough about this issue. Thus I hope this can be a wake-up call to action. This is a relevant topic that has direct relevance to what Joe Solomon spoke about yesterday – mobilizing people to effect social change.

If you feel compelled to do so, I would urge you to read more about the CCER and the Bill C-61, and to send this letter. And as usual, the disclaimer – I am in no way associated with CCER, but I do think that the discussion should be balanced. Furthermore, I like the research and thinking of Dr. Michael Geist, who has strongly criticized the bill in its current form.

[Hat tips to Andy for his tweet, and hoping this post will attract some attention!]

Related posts:

1. Online dating… the discussion continues
2. Outrageous: Canada’s Copyright Bill C-61 lack of public consultation
3. Tazzu community and Bill C-61 – voice your concerns!