The important people were not all in the room
A letter to Jennifer Charlesworth, ÎÚÑ»´«Ã½’s representative for children and youth.
Thank you for your report highlighting everything that we in pediatrics have been saying, including in this paper (“For the sake of children, this ministry needs a reset,” March 27) , and within the ÎÚÑ»´«Ã½ Pediatric Society.
We have been saying it with every phone call we make, every meeting with Ministry of Children and Family Development social workers we attend, every school-based meeting, and every time we call your office, which we do often.
I have called your office three times in four months to point out that MCFD is not taking action when required by a child in danger, and I have called MCFD with protection concerns six times in six months, and I am just one person.
I wait on hold for hours to get through, to report concerns of children not attending school, of them being invisible to the system, of being neglected, of having nobody speak on their behalf, and I am just one practitioner.
When you say “everyone was in the room” so this time it will be different, when yet another map to action will be planned, when yet another set of outcomes will be measured, let me remind you the whole system was not in the room.
The medical system tried to highlight how “Colby” was not being cared for.
Pediatricians, nurses, nurse practitioners, family doctors are all front-line workers who see exactly how many children have been underserved by a disjointed and unaccountable system, by multiple ministries passing the buck, by the failure of closed loop communication, and by a lack of accountability and follow-through.
Don’t start on the wrong foot already by saying everyone who matters was there. We were not there.
Dr. Jennifer Balfour, MD FRCPC
Consultant, General Pediatrics; Special interest in Infectious Disease
Clinical Associate Professor, University of British Columbia
Associate Program Director, Pediatrics Residency Program, Victoria Site
Discipline Specific Site Leader, Pediatrics, Island Medical Program
Victoria General Hospital
Others have faced our housing problems
Re: “Saanich clears hurdles to speed up pace of non-market housing,” July 17.
It is difficult as a Saanich resident to stand by and watch our council relentlessly pursue a policy for affordable housing that is so completely wrong.
Not wrong just in my opinion, but proven wrong in dozens of authoritative studies of how it has gone wrong in many other cities over the past four or five decades.
For the Saanich council to, yet again, ignore all of this information is an abdication of responsibility that will build a massive problem for future local residents.
Our most pressing housing problem in Saanich is affordable housing for people with children. We are a community and need family accommodation.
Study after study details that it is wrong to shoehorn families into slightly larger apartments in a highrise of small apartments.
It is not only bad for the families, it is the proven major cause of social disintegration in the entire project.
We are not short of land and there is no need to follow this disastrous path of tunnel-thinking about high-rise “building units.”
We should put appropriate affordable housing for families at the top of the list and use our land and financial capabilities to construct the recommended, successful designs: three or four floors, smaller buildings with adequate surrounding recreational space.
The only reason I can imagine for the way in which council is taking us over this cliff is the recurring Canadian problem of assuming that every issue we face is unique to us and has never been experienced elsewhere.
This problem is not unique to us. It has been faced many times elsewhere and well-proven solutions are readily available. There’s no excuse for ignoring them.
Alec Mitchell
Saanich
Saanich’s housing policy for renters, not owners
Re: “Saanich clears hurdles to speed up pace of non-market housing,” July 17.
Saanich’s move to delegate development permits to staff in an effort to speed up approval is a welcome development in tackling the housing crisis.
However, citizens need to be aware that it will not meaningfully move the needle in practice.
Perhaps intentionally, the words “non-market” and “affordable” are sprinkled throughout this policy, but let’s be clear, it’s only for affordable rental projects.
Rental units are needed in Saanich, but equally needed are affordable homes to buy. For young families looking to put down roots, stay in our communities, have better health, education and financial outcomes, please know that you will have no relief because of this policy change.
Intentionally ignoring the inclusion of affordable homes to buy (they were advised to include non-profits like Habitat for Humanity which focuses on affordable homes) means Saanich is continuing to bottleneck the housing market creating forever-renters with organizations funded partially by the taxpayer.
Saanich should start being specific and transparent in their language about who they are helping, which is renters and specific housing providers, not working families looking to buy.
The district has made one step forward with this policy, but it’s a huge, missed opportunity to be fair and equitable in tackling affordable housing.
Scott Dutchak
Chief executive officer
Habitat for Humanity Victoria
Pendulum has swung away from landlords
Renting out is not for the faint of heart or one without unlimited cash flow.
Years ago, the landlord held all the cards; now the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction.
Tenants have more rights than landlords and those rights often mean the landlord loses lots of money and might not be willing to rent the place out again.
Waiting six to eight months for a hearing at the Residential Tenancy Branch is unacceptable, considering the tenant isn’t paying rent and might destroy the place.
The only province worse than ÎÚÑ»´«Ã½ in regard to tenant rights is Ontario, and ÎÚÑ»´«Ã½ isn’t far behind. I fully understand that some landlords won’t rent out their suites/ houses anymore because of the risk.
If we could evict non-paying tenants within a reasonable time frame of one to two months, I am sure more landlords would consider renting out their place.
Petra Biedermann
North Saanich
Unhoused need help with their health
I am unsure why no one is recognizing that the biggest problem with the unhoused is that they need help with their mental health and addictions.
They need to be in institutions. It should be a practice that any time there is a run-in with the unhoused that involves violence, they should be entered into a detox program.
My son is a paramedic. He is trying to help people and to have something like what happened on Pandora Avenue last week is totally unacceptable.
The focus of the government needs to be getting the unhoused the help they need, not finding them housing. You need to get them into a facility to get them through withdrawal and then worry about their housing.
I was married at Alex Goolden hall in 1983 and it was wonderful, but I would not even consider having a wedding there now.
Wake up, stop the change to Centennial Square and spend the money where it is really needed.
Linda Birch
Victoria
No simple solution to overdose, housing crisis
As we all know, we are dealing with a substance use and housing crisis. A lot of letters blamed the health-care system and advocated for the government to create involuntary facilities for individuals struggling with illnesses such as substance dependency. They don’t realize that this solution won’t address the root cause.
Let’s break down why current solutions haven’t worked. Increasing health-care funding hasn’t succeeded because, while we provide robust clinical treatment for substance use, people are discharged back onto the streets.
Positive supports and safe housing post-treatment are crucial for successful long-term recovery. Imagine being unhoused, going to an incredible treatment facility to work on your sobriety and work through your traumas, and then being discharged back to the streets.
Knowing this, should we still advocate for involuntary treatment? It wouldn’t address unmet post-care needs.
From nearly a decade of experience in this field, it seems a better solution requires more collaboration between government health and housing systems.
Our government indeed needs to find long-term solutions, but simply adding funding to one department over another isn’t enough. The problem is complex and requires a complex plan.
We should be suspicious of any government claiming a simple funding solution will solve the overdose and housing crisis.
Let’s encourage in-depth conversations and invest energy in building a strong, evidence-based plan to move forward.
Priya Sharma
Victoria
Bring in little portables for more housing
In his July 13 cartoon on housing, Adrian Raeside didn’t mention the simplest way to pad the new housing quota: Designate portable toilets as a dwelling. Most construction sites have at least one, and festivals would count as multi-unit affordable housing. You could even give each a “1/2” street address and tax them!
Alanne Gibson
Victoria
SEND US YOUR LETTERS
• Email letters to: [email protected]
• Mail: Letters to the editor, ÎÚÑ»´«Ã½, 201-655 Tyee Rd., Victoria, ÎÚÑ»´«Ã½ V9A 6X5
• Submissions should be no more than 250 words; subject to editing for length and clarity. Provide your contact information; it will not be published. Avoid sending your letter as an email attachment.
