Government?
Introduction
Homelessness is a problem in Canada with roots long in the past and has become much more dramatic during the 1990s. Although it tied up the Canadian government, pushing for effective measures at a much later period than other countries, such as Australia, the US and the UK, it still has a long way to go before viable solutions are found. The Canadian response to homelessness was intense; however, without ever managing to cope effectively with the increasing poverty, or provide people with affordable housing. Without a permanent cross-country solution, we cannot consider any actual progress is made. Therefore, the Canadian government is not considered to have taken effective measures to fight homelessness to its root.
Statistics and facts
According to a post in CBC News Canada (2013) that borrowed statistics from the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness (CAEH) and the Canadian Research Network (CRN), at least 200,000 people are homeless in Canada, in any given year, while another 150,000 Canadian citizens have found themselves living on the homeless shelter at some point of their life (CBC News). On top of that, there are also homeless people termed as hidden homeless, that do not have a place of their own to stay, and live with relatives and friends on a temporary basis, and they reach 50,000 annually (CBC News). Those facts demonstrate the need for more permanent solutions. Had the government of Canada been successful in solving homelessness, statistics would not still portray tens of thousands of Canadians living in poverty and without a home. Interestingly, the two aforementioned groups (CAEH and CRN) entrusted with the first extensive Canadian report on homelessness found that almost half the homeless population are single adult males, and another 20 percent of homeless people are youths up to their 24th year of age, and a profound majority of them comprises of aboriginal people (CBC News). If the Canadian government were sufficient in combating homelessness, it would not have its most productive people unemployed, and without a roof upon their head because they cannot afford to pay for it!
Homelessness’ Reasons
Measures Taken to Combat Homelessness: Evaluation
It had taken a long time before the Canadian government adopted the National Homelessness Initiative, a federal policy on homelessness that was later known as Homeless Partnering Strategy (HPS), as a means to fight the problem (Gaetz, 2011 p.2). The HPS was meant to support community-based solutions in more than 60 Canadian communities, and provincial governments were assigned with developing responses to homelessness -which were not implemented until a couple of years ago- when British Columbia and Alberta, among others, showed the way (Gaetz, 2011 p.2). This situation combined with the social housing operating agreements that are about to expire sometime soon, prove that measures taken to fight homelessness are rather ineffective. With the loss of subsidies, many house providers will not be able to provide RGI (Rent-Geared-to-Income) or affordable housing (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2013).
In detail, until early 1990s, the Canadian government signed social housing operating agreements (to pay for mortgage payments, and the difference between operating expenses and RGI) with non-profit housing providers. Upon the expiration of those agreements, rents were expected to cover the capital and operating expenses. However, this has never happened because numerous agreements have already expired in Canada and others are going to expire within a short time, with no indication that renewal is on the way. This means that once agreements expire, housing organizations will lose $3.5 billion annually from the governmental funds (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2013). From the 175,000 units that are expected to lose their funding by 2020, approximately a third will be nothing close to viable afterwards, while the other two thirds will be characterized by financial stability (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2013). Consequently, a lot of people will find themselves without a home, and probably end up homeless. This is definitely an ineffective way to end homelessness.
People need affordable rental housing and the government needs to provide them with homes they can afford. According to a report released by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, in 2012, in regards the concerning rental housing shortage in 27 municipalities and urban Canadian regions, showed that the overall number of rental units have declined from 2000 and onwards, plus the rental cost has increased by 20 percent (Granovsky, n.d). With fewer houses available and affordable as time goes by, it is no wonder that more people are left homeless!
On the other hand, the government has also taken some very effective steps in recent years. Studies have shown that housing investment can bring multiple profits on many levels since each house can create employment (either indirect or direct) to four to six people. Indicatively, between years 2010 and 2012, the combined “Federal-Provincial-Territorial housing spending ‘added over $3 billion per year to the economy and created or sustained 35,000 jobs’ ” (Granovsky, n.d), which is praiseworthy. However, measures such as this should not be just the exception of the rule, but the rule itself!
There are solutions to homelessness in Canada, and studies prove it. Unfortunately, nothing has been implemented as of now, regardless of the evidenced effectiveness. For example, providing shelters could result in serious savings for the Canadian taxpayers on the long run. A report from Simon Fraser University, in 2007, that was held on behalf of the BC Ministry of Health showed that people with mental illness and severe addictions could be provided with supportive housing. The report supports that if efficient housing was provided to homeless adults, other costs (non-housing) such as health and social services’ costs, would drop and save the Canadian tax payers about $211 million annually, in BC alone (Granovsky, n.d).
The Investment in Affordable Housing has a budget of $253 million annually for five years, and, according to the Federal Budget 2013, funding will continue for another five years, until 2019 (Scoffield, 2013). This could mean that aboriginal people and senior citizens of Canada, among others might have a better future lying ahead. However, this could only come to practice, if the federal government finds a way to keep territorial and provincial government accountable for the renewed federal cost-shared funds.
The Federal Budget 2013 commits to utilize $100 million to build 250 units of affordable housing, in the next two years, in Nunavut, a place which high levels of poverty and people are living in such crowded places that illnesses spread with the blink of an eye (Scoffield, 2013). Also, the Homelessness Partnering Strategy is funded with $119 million, which is lower than the previous commitment (Scoffield, 2013), and raises mixed feelings of relief and concern.
It becomes obvious that the Canadian government tries to take effective measures to end homelessness, and before judging each measure taken it should be given time to prove its worth. However, there are signs that show that the government has not yet taken the problem called homelessness into serious consideration. Keeping in mind that Ontario, which is the largest province in Canada, has never “had a homelessness secretariat, nor a coordinated strategy to end homelessness” (Gaetz, 2011 p. 24), it seems that effective funded strategies to fight homelessness have not been implemented, despite the fact that the 10 provinces are mainly responsible for housing social services, among others.
Conclusion-Recommendations
Homelessness in Canada is a relatively new problem, compared to other countries. The changes that took place in Canada during the last century, considering policy shifts and structural alterations led many Canadian people living in the streets or with friends and relatives. The homelessness crisis is the outcome of the expiration of social housing operating agreements, leaving people without affordable housing, and the decline of rental units. It is important for people to have a house to live in that they can afford. For that reason, Canada needs to commit to a well-funded strategy that will last as long as needed to supply the Canadians with affordable housing; hence, end homelessness. That strategy should involve all communities and levels of government across Canada and ongoing reinvestment should be ensured so to allow implementation and plans to be determined locally. Also, a housing strategy should be adopted to support housing for the individuals with mental problems, disabilities and addictions, and affordable housing by the private sector should also be considered and developed. Last, but not least, Canadians with low income should be provided with sufficient income to maintain their housing and support themselves and families, so to live long and safe lives. If all that are minded, then we may be able to discuss the effectiveness of the Canadian government to solve and, possibly, even eliminate homelessness from its grounds.
References:
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (2013), Fast Facts: The Loss of Subsidized Housing Through Expiring Operating Agreements. Retrieved March 14, 2014 from: https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/commentary/fast-facts-loss-subsidized-housing-through-expiring-operating-agreements
CBC News (2013), 30,000 Canadians are homeless every night. Retrieved March 13, 2014 from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/30-000-canadians-are-homeless-every-night-1.1413016
Chunn D, Gavigan SAM (2004), Welfare law, welfare fraud and the moral regulation of the ‘never deserving” poor. Soc Legal Stud 2004; 13: 219-43
Gaetz, S. (2011), Executive
Summary: Plans to End
Youth
Homelessness
in
Canada‐A
Review of the
Literature. Toronto: Eva’s Initiatives
Granovsky, David (n.d), 200,000 affordable homes threatened by expiring federal funding: Budget proposals to protect Canada’s affordable housing infrastructure. Retrieved March 14, 2014 from: http://www.chfcanada.coop/eng/pdf/Govt%20Relations-Affordable%20Housing_en.pdf
Scoffield, Heather (2013), Federal Budget 2013: Five More Years Of Affordable Housing Funding. Huff post Politics. Retrieved March 14, 2014 from: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/03/21/federal-budget-2013-affordable-housing_n_2926520.html
