Shelter approved downtown!

[lifegives]

Part of the social contract we have with our fellow citizens is that we won't ignore a higher level of government just because we didn't vote for them. It just means that any support the NDP had here probably was lost but since they didn't get the vote last time it really doesn't matter.

The last time I checked, different levels of government have jurisdiction over different things. Normally, they don't overlap. Invoking the paramountcy in this case is bizarre, because the City clearly exercised their legal jurisdiction, and obligation toward their constituency. And the province simply didn't like the outcome. Hence the lawsuit.

*removed* I was addressing your previous statement of "Especially when such decrees come from government run by a political party that doesn't really have any significant electoral support in the affected jurisdiction."

Just because the NDP did not have enough "electoral" support here doesn't mean that they have to stay out of town.

[BC Landlord]

*removed* I was addressing your previous statement of "Especially when such decrees come from government run by a political party that doesn't really have any significant electoral support in the affected jurisdiction."

Just because the NDP did not have enough "electoral" support here doesn't mean that they have to stay out of town.

When someone overrides a duly elected government's decision, which squarely sits under that government's jurisdiction and responsibility to the electorate, then in my books it's called a "decree". Not that I am surprised. That's very typical of socialists. They love dictatorial powers, and despise democracy.

[Boomertears]

*removed* I was addressing your previous statement of "Especially when such decrees come from government run by a political party that doesn't really have any significant electoral support in the affected jurisdiction."

Just because the NDP did not have enough "electoral" support here doesn't mean that they have to stay out of town.

When someone overrides a duly elected government's decision, which squarely sits under that government's jurisdiction and responsibility to the electorate, then in my books it's called a "decree". Not that I am surprised. That's very typical of socialists. They love dictatorial powers, and despise democracy.

City council should not be making life or death medical decisions for people far outside their areas of expertise. They should stick to determining the best location for a frozen yogurt shop. Kicking out the shelter guests would be a death sentence in many cases so the sensible provincial government overrode the short sighted municipal government. The shelter wont be closing any time soon, the cities court case will be lost. The actual lives of the shelter guests trump the supposed property use deciding rights of the city councillors.

[rustled]

When someone overrides a duly elected government's decision, which squarely sits under that government's jurisdiction and responsibility to the electorate, then in my books it's called a "decree". Not that I am surprised. That's very typical of socialists. They love dictatorial powers, and despise democracy.

City council should not be making life or death medical decisions for people far outside their areas of expertise. They should stick to determining the best location for a frozen yogurt shop. Kicking out the shelter guests would be a death sentence in many cases so the sensible provincial government overrode the short sighted municipal government. The shelter wont be closing any time soon, the cities court case will be lost. The actual lives of the shelter guests trump the supposed property use deciding rights of the city councillors.

Such hyperbolic nonsense. This is not a "life or death medical decision", it's a permitting decision. Municipal governments are responsible for these because that is the level of government we, the people, are most able to hold accountable.

If we could hold the provincial and federal levels of government accountable for the medical aspects - a) mental health, b) treatment for addiction and c) the use of illegal drugs use - the municipal permitting of where to put a shelter to "warehouse" people because the provincial and federal governments have consistently failed in their responsibilities would never have become an issue.

If kicking out any of the shelter guests would be a death sentence, it is because the provincial government has failed to provide these guests with treatment centers, failed to provide these guests with appropriate supports for mental illness, etc. The municipal government isn't responsible for the abject ongoing failures of successive provincial and federal governments - they are being scapegoated by this provincial government to avoid accountability.

And if the actual lives of the shelter guests matter, people would be holding the provincial government accountable for their refusal to fulfill the provincial government's responsibilities. Warehousing the mentally ill and the addicted in shelters is a lousy substitute for treatment and support.

[BC Landlord]

City council should not be making life or death medical decisions for people far outside their areas of expertise.

No person has ever died from homelessness. It's addictions that cut their lives short.

[Boomertears]

City council should not be making life or death medical decisions for people far outside their areas of expertise. They should stick to determining the best location for a frozen yogurt shop. Kicking out the shelter guests would be a death sentence in many cases so the sensible provincial government overrode the short sighted municipal government. The shelter wont be closing any time soon, the cities court case will be lost. The actual lives of the shelter guests trump the supposed property use deciding rights of the city councillors.

Such hyperbolic nonsense. This is not a "life or death medical decision", it's a permitting decision. Municipal governments are responsible for these because that is the level of government we, the people, are most able to hold accountable.

If we could hold the provincial and federal levels of government accountable for the medical aspects - a) mental health, b) treatment for addiction and c) the use of illegal drugs use - the municipal permitting of where to put a shelter to "warehouse" people because the provincial and federal governments have consistently failed in their responsibilities would never have become an issue.

If kicking out any of the shelter guests would be a death sentence, it is because the provincial government has failed to provide these guests with treatment centers, failed to provide these guests with appropriate supports for mental illness, etc. The municipal government isn't responsible for the abject ongoing failures of successive provincial and federal governments - they are being scapegoated by this provincial government to avoid accountability.

And if the actual lives of the shelter guests matter, people would be holding the provincial government accountable for their refusal to fulfill the provincial government's responsibilities. Warehousing the mentally ill and the addicted in shelters is a lousy substitute for treatment and support.

And if if’s and but’s were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas now wouldn’t we? Previous governments failed to act. This provincial government was handed a super majority to right the wrongs of the previous provincial government. This is one of the ways. Fact is there is no other facility for them to go so they used their legal power of paramountcy to override a horribly short sighted decision by a horrible backwater city council. And yes homeless people die of exposure every day so being homeless can directly cause a person to die. Thank goodness the majority of people in this province don’t think as cruelly as some folks in this forum. BC NDP government has way deeper pockets to fight this battle and the court case wont see the light of day for years if ever, long after this temporary shelter is closed.

[rustled]

Such hyperbolic nonsense. This is not a "life or death medical decision", it's a permitting decision. Municipal governments are responsible for these because that is the level of government we, the people, are most able to hold accountable.

If we could hold the provincial and federal levels of government accountable for the medical aspects - a) mental health, b) treatment for addiction and c) the use of illegal drugs use - the municipal permitting of where to put a shelter to "warehouse" people because the provincial and federal governments have consistently failed in their responsibilities would never have become an issue.

If kicking out any of the shelter guests would be a death sentence, it is because the provincial government has failed to provide these guests with treatment centers, failed to provide these guests with appropriate supports for mental illness, etc. The municipal government isn't responsible for the abject ongoing failures of successive provincial and federal governments - they are being scapegoated by this provincial government to avoid accountability.

And if the actual lives of the shelter guests matter, people would be holding the provincial government accountable for their refusal to fulfill the provincial government's responsibilities. Warehousing the mentally ill and the addicted in shelters is a lousy substitute for treatment and support.

And if if’s and but’s were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas now wouldn’t we? Previous governments failed to act. This provincial government was handed a super majority to right the wrongs of the previous provincial government. This is one of the ways. Fact is there is no other facility for them to go so they used their legal power of paramountcy to override a horribly short sighted decision by a horrible backwater city council.

Fact is they are doing the same thing other governments did - warehousing people with mental illnesses and addictions. Kicking the can down the road. Shirking their responsibility to provide appropriate supports, treatment centers, etc. The shelter battle is smoke and mirrors.

And yes homeless people die of exposure every day so being homeless can directly cause a person to die.

Yup - and addiction and mental illness can be a direct cause of homelessness.

Thank goodness the majority of people in this province don’t think as cruelly as some folks in this forum.

Thank goodness people are beginning to realize how cruel it is for our governments to warehouse all the homeless together, when what's needed is more supports for mental illness and addiction, and more effective assistance for those who need a hand up.

BC NDP government has way deeper pockets to fight this battle and the court case wont see the light of day for years if ever, long after this temporary shelter is closed.

Those are not the BC NDP's pockets - they are OUR pockets. You are crowing about how the BC NDP government is wasting OUR resources in a battle to warehouse the mentally ill and addicted, instead of using OUR resources to effectively deliver the mental health services we pay them to deliver.

[JagXKR]

The temporary shelter was for the winter. Winter was over. Shelter not needed. Because, and let's make this simple for the folk that need help understanding, winter was over. So a shelter for the winter staying open for the non winter months is redundant.
You don't have outdoor ice rinks in the summer. You don't have outdoor swimming pools in the winter. You don't have temporary winter shelters in the summer. Duh.
Also, Eby is an left nut job. Always was always will be.

[Boomertears]

And if if’s and but’s were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas now wouldn’t we? Previous governments failed to act. This provincial government was handed a super majority to right the wrongs of the previous provincial government. This is one of the ways. Fact is there is no other facility for them to go so they used their legal power of paramountcy to override a horribly short sighted decision by a horrible backwater city council.

Fact is they are doing the same thing other governments did - warehousing people with mental illnesses and addictions. Kicking the can down the road. Shirking their responsibility to provide appropriate supports, treatment centers, etc. The shelter battle is smoke and mirrors.

And yes homeless people die of exposure every day so being homeless can directly cause a person to die.

Yup - and addiction and mental illness can be a direct cause of homelessness.

Thank goodness the majority of people in this province don’t think as cruelly as some folks in this forum.

Thank goodness people are beginning to realize how cruel it is for our governments to warehouse all the homeless together, when what's needed is more supports for mental illness and addiction, and more effective assistance for those who need a hand up.

BC NDP government has way deeper pockets to fight this battle and the court case wont see the light of day for years if ever, long after this temporary shelter is closed.

Those are not the BC NDP's pockets - they are OUR pockets. You are crowing about how the BC NDP government is wasting OUR resources in a battle to warehouse the mentally ill and addicted, instead of using OUR resources to effectively deliver the mental health services we pay them to deliver.

Im crowing about the Penticton city council government wasting municipal tax dollars on a waste of time court battle. I fully support the provincial government in this battle. And yes people already woke up by electing the NDP government to a super majority. I mean if you were correct then the liberals would have won in a landslide? News flash they lost epically. Outside this online forum echo chamber your opinion is in the very small minority. I fully support housing the homeless inside out of the elements and away from the esplanade trails and the majority in this province do as well. So how about you vote for who your going to vote for and so will I and lets just see what happens.

[Boomertears]

The temporary shelter was for the winter. Winter was over. Shelter not needed. Because, and let's make this simple for the folk that need help understanding, winter was over. So a shelter for the winter staying open for the non winter months is redundant.
You don't have outdoor ice rinks in the summer. You don't have outdoor swimming pools in the winter. You don't have temporary winter shelters in the summer. Duh.
Also, Eby is an left nut job. Always was always will be.

Yep and the province decided the heath and well being of the residents over rode the short sighted municipal council decision to close it down. You wouldn't be able to tell in this echo chamber but that ‘nut job’ won a super majority and is the housing minister for this province. Largest majority in decades, expect this clear mandate to continue.

[rustled]

Fact is they are doing the same thing other governments did - warehousing people with mental illnesses and addictions. Kicking the can down the road. Shirking their responsibility to provide appropriate supports, treatment centers, etc. The shelter battle is smoke and mirrors.

Yup - and addiction and mental illness can be a direct cause of homelessness.

Thank goodness people are beginning to realize how cruel it is for our governments to warehouse all the homeless together, when what's needed is more supports for mental illness and addiction, and more effective assistance for those who need a hand up.

Those are not the BC NDP's pockets - they are OUR pockets. You are crowing about how the BC NDP government is wasting OUR resources in a battle to warehouse the mentally ill and addicted, instead of using OUR resources to effectively deliver the mental health services we pay them to deliver.

Im crowing about the Penticton city council government wasting municipal tax dollars on a waste of time court battle. I fully support the provincial government in this battle. And yes people already woke up by electing the NDP government to a super majority. I mean if you were correct then the liberals would have won in a landslide?

Nonsense. The election wasn't a determination of whether or not the province should warehouse people who needed services for addictions and mental health.

News flash they lost epically.

So? Nothing to do with the topic. No one here is saying the BC Liberals ever did what they should have done to address addictions and mental illness.

Outside this online forum echo chamber your opinion is in the very small minority.

It's your prerogative to provide your opinion. Doesn't make either opinion a fact.

I fully support housing the homeless inside out of the elements and away from the esplanade trails and the majority in this province do as well.

I think you'll find more people are coming to realize "housing the homeless" is a lousy and cynical euphemism for "inappropriately warehousing people with mental illnesses and addictions, for whom the provincial government is failing to provide proper supports".

So how about you vote for who your going to vote for and so will I and lets just see what happens.

Doesn't matter which provincial party we vote for: the BC Liberals failed, and the BC NDP have made it obvious they intend to fill the void with the inappropriate warehousing of people with mental illnesses and addictions, for whom the provincial government is failing to provide proper supports. The BC NDP will also waste even more of our resources by forcing municipalities to accept the warehouses and deal with the consequences of centralizing and warehousing people with mental illnesses and addictions together where they're most easily preyed upon by those who will exploit people with mental illnesses and addictions.

If the BC NDP was serious about helping the homeless, they would do the job they were elected to do. And they won't do that while enough of the electorate goes along with their ruse of warehousing the homeless instead.

[Boomertears]

Im crowing about the Penticton city council government wasting municipal tax dollars on a waste of time court battle. I fully support the provincial government in this battle. And yes people already woke up by electing the NDP government to a super majority. I mean if you were correct then the liberals would have won in a landslide?

Nonsense. The election wasn't a determination of whether or not the province should warehouse people who needed services for addictions and mental health.

News flash they lost epically.

So? Nothing to do with the topic. No one here is saying the BC Liberals ever did what they should have done to address addictions and mental illness.

Outside this online forum echo chamber your opinion is in the very small minority.

It's your prerogative to provide your opinion. Doesn't make either opinion a fact.

I fully support housing the homeless inside out of the elements and away from the esplanade trails and the majority in this province do as well.

I think you'll find more people are coming to realize "housing the homeless" is a lousy and cynical euphemism for "inappropriately warehousing people with mental illnesses and addictions, for whom the provincial government is failing to provide proper supports".

So how about you vote for who your going to vote for and so will I and lets just see what happens.

Doesn't matter which provincial party we vote for: the BC Liberals failed, and the BC NDP have made it obvious they intend to fill the void with the inappropriate warehousing of people with mental illnesses and addictions, for whom the provincial government is failing to provide proper supports. The BC NDP will also waste even more of our resources by forcing municipalities to accept the warehouses and deal with the consequences of centralizing and warehousing people with mental illnesses and addictions together where they're most easily preyed upon by those who will exploit people with mental illnesses and addictions.

If the BC NDP was serious about helping the homeless, they would do the job they were elected to do. And they won't do that while enough of the electorate goes along with their ruse of warehousing the homeless instead.

Lots of heavy criticism but real light on solutions. The municipal government doesn’t want supportive housing built either. So none of what your talking about exists right now? Closing the shelter = homeless camp. Its that simple Im just pointing out that despite the right talking points bounced around this forum, the people of this province elected a left wing government and their acting exactly like that. No surprise there.

[BC Landlord]

Lots of heavy criticism but real light on solutions.

Get them into a rehab. Or, if they refuse, just let the nature take its course. That's the only solution. They are victims of themselves.

[JagXKR]

Yep and the province decided the heath and well being of the residents over rode the short sighted municipal council decision to close it down. You wouldn't be able to tell in this echo chamber but that ‘nut job’ won a super majority and is the housing minister for this province. Largest majority in decades, expect this clear mandate to continue.

I know you love the supermajority term. But the NDP won 47.7% of the vote. Less than half of the people voted for them. That is not a "clear" mandate. In fact the MAJORITY of citizens did NOT vote for the NDP.
Seats are a different matter but less than half of the votes went to them. They did not have a majority of BC citizens voting for them. And they certainly did not win the mandate of the Okanagan.
Spin it the way you want, facts be damned.
https://elections.bc.ca/docs/GE-2020-10-24_Party.html

[ckil]

Lots of heavy criticism but real light on solutions.

Get them into a rehab. Or, if they refuse, just let the nature take its coarse. That's the only solution. They are victims of themselves.

The majority have mental health issues.