Tent City ‘protest’ debate misses the point

On Tuesday opposition MHAs debated the nature of the Tent City for Change homeless encampment in downtown St. John’s, but it seems that after seven months none of them have a clear idea of what’s happening or how they should respond.

Noting that the number of residents at Tent City is rising, Progressive Conservative MHA Joedy Wall asked when the Liberal government is “going to be accountable to the people at the tent encampment?”

Responding, MHA John Abbott, lead on the province’s St. John’s Homelessness Acute Response Task Force and in whose riding the encampment resides, said he visited the encampment Monday, “talking to the individuals and talking to some of the protest organizers to make sure everybody knows how the government is approaching this very important and significant issue.”

Moments later NDP Leader Jim Dinn mentioned the propane tank fire which destroyed a tent at the encampment, asking Premier Andrew Furey: “What measures will his government take to prevent such incidents from happening in the future?”

Housing Minister Fred Hutton responded, saying that “[l]iving in a tent with open flames is unsafe, which is why this government and our community partners provide, on a very regular basis, options. We have many options that are offered to people to live either in staffed shelters, private shelters and when necessary, hotel rooms.

“We have said from the beginning that this protest, which it is, it is not a safe place for people to be, which is why we offer these solutions and will continue to. Including investing millions of dollars in our transitional supportive living initiative.”

Dinn responded by saying that “people wouldn’t be in tents if there were adequate options. This is not a protest. This is not a protest and that belies what [Hutton] really believes.”

Abbott, Hutton and Dinn were all wrong — though Dinn clarified his position in an email to NDP supporters Wednesday afternoon, saying Tent City is “more than just a protest.”

The organizers and residents of Tent City for Change have been clear from the outset that the encampment is both a place for unhoused people with no place else to go, and it’s a protest.

Over the past seven months, countless individuals have sought temporary shelter and refuge there after being turned away from emergency shelters in the city. Others have stayed longer, protesting the state of the city and province’s shelter systems. They are holding out, hoping the Furey government will implement both immediate and long-term solutions to the housing and homelessness crisis.

When The Independent visited Tent City last November, and again in March, residents, or “resident protesters” as some organizers call them, told us they don’t want to go back into public or private shelters or other temporary accommodations due to the presence of violence, drugs, or discrimination.

The politics of homelessness

It’s understandable why Dinn wants to characterize Tent City as “not just a protest”: people there have little to no choice about where else to be that is safe and has the kind of community support from fellow residents and volunteers as Tent City. Governments also routinely characterize and margainalized groups who resist unjust living conditions as “protesters,” a label that discredits them.

By calling Tent City a protest, the Liberals are once again slyly placing the onus on unhoused people to make the “right” decision and accept the government’s hand with its so-called “options.”

Tuesday’s debate in the House of Assembly began with questions from opposition MHAs about the government’s new transitional supportive living arrangement at the former hotel location near the St. John’s Airport. “The Liberals went out last fall and signed this contract with no staff and no solid plan to actually run the facility, while spending millions,” Wall said. “The proof is at the tent encampment, which is rapidly expanding.”

Hutton said “it takes a little bit of time to get the appropriate staff in place,” pointing out that End Homelessness St. John’s is running the operation. “They are currently seeking staff. They put out a call for staff,” he said. “We are going to have addictions counsellors. We are going to have mental health advocates there. We are going to have staff members through NL Health Services so that on site there will be these supports available.”

Ignoring the fact that the new site is miles from downtown, where many unhoused folks find services and community that help meet their needs, the Liberals might find there’s not as much uptake as they hoped.

Liberals still silent on housing as a human right

The fact is, advocates and unhoused folks themselves have been saying all along that they know what they need and what’s best for them.

It’s one of the key recommendations in a recent report on encampments across the country from Canada’s Federal Housing Advocate Marie-Josée Houle.

“In the absence of adequate, affordable and accessible alternatives, all governments must recognize the rights of people to live in encampments,” Houle writes in the report’s calls to action. “Supporting the dignity and autonomy of the person means governments must respect the rights of encampment residents to decide for themselves if shelter solutions best meet their needs, including for safety and security.”

The report, a publication of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, is based on the principle that housing is a human right — a position enshrined in both international and federal law. Ever since The Independent asked Hutton in March if he believes housing is a human right, the Furey government has still not clarified its position. This week Hutton’s communications director, Marc Budgell, did not respond to our questions about whether Hutton has read Houle’s report, Upholding dignity and human rights: the Federal Housing Advocate’s review of homeless encampments, and if so what his response is to Houle’s calls to action stating that governments must commit to a human rights-based approach to address the needs of encampment residents.

“All governments must publicly commit to applying a human rights-based approach to encampments that recognizes and addresses the distinct needs of First Nations, Inuit and Métis individuals, Black and other racialized individuals, women, 2SLGBTQQIA+ individuals, people fleeing gender-based violence, youth, seniors and people with disabilities,” Houle writes. “These approaches must align with Canada’s human rights obligations as affirmed in international human rights instruments, the Charter, and domestic legislation.”

Is the province infringing on the human rights of Tent City residents?

Houle is calling on the federal government to establish a National Encampments Response Plan by the end of August 2024. Despite her emphasis on the federal government’s lead role in developing new policies, she’s adamant that provincial and territorial governments have critical roles to play.

Last month we learned the Furey government paid nearly $22,000 to have security cameras installed outside Colonial Building, directly overlooking the encampment. The move has angered volunteer supporters and Tent City residents, who believe the government and police are more interested in surveillance than meaningful solutions.

Dinn raised the issue in the legislature Tuesday, asking if the government would “also install electrical outlets so people, who are really there because they don’t feel safe elsewhere, will not have to rely on propane to heat their tents? Will you install electrical outlets? Simple solution.”

Abbott said the cameras are “there for the Colonial Building,” as if their role in recording residents’ every move is an unintended consequence.

“I have said that – when I’ve been down at the tent encampment – we will provide services, but we will not be bringing services to the campsite,” Abbott added.

If the Liberals won’t tell the public what it thinks of Houle’s human rights report on tent encampments, The Independent will continue to measure the government’s actions against Houle’s recommendations. Abbott’s assertion that the Liberals “will not be bringing services to the campsite” is in direct contravention of the federal housing advocate’s recommendation that governments “must fulfill their human rights responsibilities to ensure that everyone living in encampments has access without discrimination to the necessities of life and the services needed to protect their physical and mental health, including access to water, food, sanitation, and heating and cooling, accessibility supports, healthcare and harm reduction services.”

Maybe if the Furey government took a human rights-based approach to Tent City for Change, people living out in the cold wouldn’t need to take drastic measures to meet their basic needs.

The Independent has reported extensively on Tent City for Change and the issues of housing and homelessness in Newfoundland and Labrador. We won't relent until there is change and until the human rights of unhoused people in our province are recognized and respected. Please help us continue our reporting by becoming a monthly supporter of our work.