WHO CONTROLS THE STREETS?

Which level of government is responsible for homeless, drug-addicted
prostitutes? This
sounds like the opening for a sick version of one of those lame jokes
about the Canadian
obsession for intergovernmental correctness.

But, in fact, it is a very real conundrum, especially for
policy-makers concerned with the vitality of our inner-city
neighbourhoods. The debate about Vancouver's safe injection site is a
case in point. Just why is it that its future is to be determined
solely by the federal government in Ottawa?

The answer, of course, is that the federal government has jurisdiction
over criminal law and harmful drugs. Such laws probably are more
relevant to what happens on the streets of many of our inner-city
neighbourhoods than many municipal bylaws that are explicitly
concerned with streets. In short, it is the federal government that
seems to hold much of the jurisdictional authority for what is
sometimes called "urban disorder."

Canadians justifiably pride ourselves in being less concerned with
disorder and more concerned with attacking the so-called "root causes"
of social problems. Some advocate a larger role for the federal
government in attacking root causes, especially in social housing. But
the reality is that our provinces are the levels of government best
equipped for social policy. Some already have sophisticated programs
in place.

Of course, these programs need more resources and they need to be
better co-ordinated with each other. But the solution here is not to
bring in the federal government. It is to insist that the federal
government provide more tax room for provinces to cope with the size
of the problems for which they are responsible.

Is there a role for municipalities in attacking the root causes of
social problems? Not really. If we want municipalities to be
responsible for social programs, we shall have to make them bigger
than they already are and give them a range of taxing authority that
even most mayors are not asking for. Otherwise, there will be "a race
to the bottom," with all but the richest municipalities trying to
export their social problems to their neighbours.

What municipalities are good at (or should be good at) is regulating
the use of public spaces (within the context of the Canadian Charter
of Rights and Freedoms) and providing an appropriate array of
collective services to support a high quality of urban life.

Streets that are populated by drug-addicted, homeless prostitutes are
evidence that the quality of urban life in that area is pretty low.
What is to be done and which level of government is to do it?

Let's acknowledge that our provincial governments need to go after the
root causes of the problem. They need to provide integrated services
that probably start with drug rehabilitation programs, subsidized
housing, and community-based services that are closely connected with
housing. Given other demands on provincial resources, this is asking a
lot, but these are the tough decisions that provincial governments
have to make.

But what about the selling of sexual services by someone who is not
mentally disturbed, homeless, or drug-addicted? Right now, the
Criminal Code makes it illegal to engage in public solicitation for
such services and to operate a brothel. Meanwhile, municipal
governments are licensing massage parlours and escort services, whose
advertisements are quite legal.

Why shouldn't municipalities be making the rules about what happens on
their streets and why shouldn't they be able to regulate and license
brothels and safe injection sites so that they can act to try to
prevent the obvious deterioration of some of their most sensitive
neighbourhoods?

American responses to problems of urban disorder have often involved
harsh police crackdowns with few, if any, attempts to attack root
causes. We need provincial action on root causes, not more debates
about who is responsible.

But Canadians are also justified in expecting that, when programs are
in place to provide housing and community support for people who are
indigent, mentally ill, or drug addicted, municipal government should
be able to enforce bylaws preventing people from sleeping in streets
or accosting passersby for money.

Better root-cause social policies will mean that we will have far
fewer drug-addicted, homeless prostitutes than we have now. But
municipalities are likely to still need more authority to control what
happens on public streets and sidewalks, places that are so important
for the quality of urban life for everybody.