Barrie's Homeless Policy Ignites Global Outrage: The UN Takes Notice, and an Expert Panel Weighs In

In June, the City of Barrie's attempt to ban aid to homeless people on public property sparked national controversy, prompting a reevaluation after widespread backlash. The contentious "Addressing Chronic Homelessness" Bills 67 & 68 were deferred for reconsideration at the June 21 Council meeting. Critics argue the bills criminalize homelessness. Despite this, the September 19 Community Safety Committee Meeting witnessed the council's stance unchanged, drawing global criticism. Following a UN inquiry, the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition highlighted Barrie's policies in a report, emphasizing their unfair targeting of impoverished and homeless individuals.

We convened a panel discussion to shed light on these developments. Our panelists included Jennifer van Gennip of Redwood Park Communities, community advocate Michael Speers, and Alyssa Wright from the Engage Barrie Organization.

May 17 motion -
The May 17 Direct Motion Without Notice, brought to the table by Councillors Bryn Hamilton and Sergio Morales, was framed as an initiative "to address chronic homelessness" in the Barrie City. This context set the stage for various community responses.

Michael Speers expressed his dismay at the Barrie City council's decision. He criticized the council for its lack of transparency and believed that such an important issue demanded broader consultation with the public. He also hinted at a pattern of the council, particularly under the leadership of the current Mayor Alex Nuttall, to discuss matters behind closed doors, assemble supporters in advance, and then present decisions with limited scope for debate or dialogue. 

Alyssa Wright of Engage Barrie pointed out an unexpected silver lining to the council's move. “The fact that they did try to push it through as a direct motion without notice just rang alarm bells for many people who might not otherwise have been paying attention,“ she said. 

Jennifer van Gennip recognized some beneficial elements within the motion, such as funding commitments for what's commonly considered a social service challenge. "We had just a few weeks left of council before the summer break," she said, expressing skepticism about the motion's potential speed of progress, especially considering the inclusion of a public meeting and the imminent council summer recess.

Bill 67 and 68: June 21 Meeting - 
Speers, expressed skepticism about the city's intentions. If the bylaws weren't meant to criminalize assistance, he pondered, why propose them in the first place? When confronted with criticisms from various provincial and national agencies, the mayor and other officials seemed to shift their narrative, suggesting they were merely attempting to "modernize the language" of existing bylaws. Speers criticized this response as "gaslighting."

van Gennip emphasized that the staff writes bylaws based on the council's directions. When the council claimed the bylaws didn't reflect their intentions, it raised questions about their transparency and honesty. She said these by-laws also infringe on human rights. 

The Struggles of Homelessness - 
Gennip voiced her concerns about society's perception and treatment of those experiencing homelessness and drug addiction. She emphasized that drugs often serve as a coping mechanism for the harsh realities of living on the streets, and that many might resort to them out of sheer desperation. “But honestly, if I was experiencing homelessness, drugs are a great way to help cope with homelessness,“ she said. Gennip said, "Drugs would be one of them," referring to her potential coping mechanisms if she were to become homeless.

Need for Systemic Change -  
Van Gennip emphasized that while the council verbally assures they aren't targeting the homeless, their motions suggest otherwise. She called for clear amendments to the existing motion if the council truly desires to change its direction.

Speers called on any council member who disagreed with the apparent aim of the motion to take a stand and initiate changes. “Stand up and actually say that you made a mistake when unanimously voted to support this motion in the first place,“ he said. 

As the conversation wrapped up, Wright accentuated the importance of unified governance, where all levels cooperate without laying blame.