In Canadian cities like Regina, Saskatoon, and Montreal, Quebec, homelessness is increasingly at the center of public debate, revealing stark divides in how communities perceive and address this crisis. Recent events, from Regina’s city council discussions to Montreal’s Saint-Henri shelter controversy, highlight a clash between the urgent need for shelters and housing and local opposition, often labelled as “Not in My Backyard” or NIMBYism.
At a recent Regina city council meeting, discussions about a proposed emergency shelter sparked hours of debate, reflecting both public support and significant opposition. Landlord and Saskatchewan United Party candidate Dustin Plett argued that a shelter near his properties would increase crime and deter future developments. The opposition swayed the council to vote down the shelter, leading to frustration from some councillors, with Ward 3’s Andrew Stevens remarking, “I think we collectively look like a bunch of morons,” and Ward 6’s Dan LeBlanc criticising the council’s approach to homelessness as mere “Thoughts and Prayers.”
This pattern is not unique to Regina. In Montreal’s Saint-Henri neighbourhood, opposition to the Maison Benoît Labre shelter near an elementary school underscores a similar struggle. Residents cite concerns over safety and drug use near children, framing the shelter as creating an undesirable neighbourhood. While it is natural to want children to be safe, the discomfort often obscures the reality that homelessness is not a personal failure.
As Joshua Evans of the Affordable Housing Solutions Lab at the University of Alberta explains, homelessness is an inevitable outcome of Canada’s market-driven housing model, which expects individuals to finance their housing without comprehensive government support. This approach primarily benefits middle- and upper-income earners, leaving vulnerable populations to navigate a system that places profit above basic needs. By treating housing as a commodity, Canada’s approach has predictably exposed vulnerable populations. Hence, the discomfort many feel in witnessing homelessness, Evan argues, should not obscure the reality that housing insecurity is systemic.
Canada’s ongoing housing crisis, however, has not gone unrecognised by policymakers. Quebec’s recent housing strategy, announced by Minister France-Élaine Duranceau, aims to build 560,000 new housing units over the next decade. However, the focus remains largely on increasing supply rather than ensuring affordability for low-income households. Plans to repurpose unused government buildings and incentivise municipalities are steps forward, but without new funding for social housing, this strategy risks widening rather than bridging the gap.
Vancouver’s recent shortfall in meeting its affordable housing targets serves as a stark reminder of these systemic gaps. Despite a provincial mandate under the Housing Supply Act, which requires municipalities to reach specific housing completion goals, the city fell short of affordable housing targets, producing only 313 affordable units out of a goal of 1,405, while nearly meeting targets for market-driven rentals completing 4,143 of the 5,202 new units required. These gaps disproportionately affect low-income and marginalized residents, underscoring the persistent failures in Canada’s housing approach.
Amidst ongoing housing debates, one promising model is gaining traction: Housing First, which prioritises providing people experiencing chronic homelessness with stable housing without preconditions, such as sobriety or participation in treatment programs. Extensive research, including the At Home/Chez Soi project funded by Health Canada, has shown that Housing First can effectively reduce chronic homelessness and improve long-term stability.
Yet, despite its successes, homelessness in Canada continues to rise, with an estimated 150,000 to 300,000 people living without stable shelter, with a 20 percent increase per year since 2018. Increasing the construction and subsidisation of shelters would be a better alternative, as current spending on homelessness programs at Infrastructure Canada is $561 million per year, and to achieve a 50% decrease in chronic homelessness, an additional $3.5 billion per year is required.
Nonetheless, in Saskatoon, the 250-meter rule barring shelters near elementary schools has further complicated shelter placements, reflecting a broader trend of zoning restrictions and public resistance under the banner of NIMBYism. Ward 3 Councillor David Kirton, while supporting existing shelters, voiced frustration with the rule’s constraints, observing that some opponents go beyond “Not in My Backyard” to an attitude of “Not in Anybody’s Backyard.” Erin Dej, a criminology professor at Wilfrid Laurier University, acknowledges the validity of concerns around crime but argues that fear should not halt solutions, as shelters, if well-resourced, can address these concerns.
With Canada’s homelessness crisis accelerating, a dual challenge emerges: navigating legitimate community concerns while actively confronting the systemic failures of a market-driven housing approach. NIMBYism in cities like Regina and Montreal reveals a disconnect between empathy for the unhoused people and a willingness to share community space. This division is not just an abstract policy debate; it impacts real lives, like that of Stéphane Neveu, who has been living on the streets since losing his apartment in a fire. Neveu’s frustration with the government’s approach reflects a broader sentiment among those experiencing homelessness: “We’re not child molesters. We’re not bad people; we’re only homeless.” His plea highlights how the stigma surrounding unhoused people too often leads to harmful misconceptions and policies that further marginalize individuals in need.
Hence, the path forward calls for more than policies that merely increase housing supply; it demands a recalibration toward affordability and inclusion. Canada’s commitment to “leaving no one behind” will ring hollow unless it abandons the stigmatisation mindset that homelessness is someone else’s problem. If we want to see real change, we must treat housing not as a privilege for the few but as a fundamental right.
Edited by Olivia Moore
This is an article written by a Staff Writer. Catalyst is a student-led platform that fosters engagement with global issues from a learning perspective. The opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect the views of the publication.
Victoria Forte is in her third and final year at McGill University, where she is completing her B.A. in Political Science and Gender, Sexuality, Feminist, and Social Justice Studies. As she navigates her final year, Victoria brings a fresh perspective as a new staff writer for Catalyst. Her academic and journalistic pursuits are driven by a deep interest in exploring the intersections of power, identity, and social justice.