Cambridge council votes in support of motion to clear encampments

A majority of Cambridge city councillors on Tuesday ignored pleas by three community advocates and voted to support a motion that would see municipalities clear encampments, and move people experiencing homelessness and addiction into treatment.

Following a discussion that, at times, became heated inside city council chambers on Tuesday night, the councillors voted 6-3 in favour of the motion put forward by the Ontario Big City Mayors (OBCM).

Prior to the vote, three delegates representing separate community groups, as well as three councillors, voiced their opposition to the motion and urged council not to move forward with their support.

One delegate, Sydney MacDonald, said "forcing people into treatment against their will is not compassionate, and it's also not actually effective."

She said jurisdictions like Mexico, Sweden, Massachusetts and Vancouver have all tried involuntary treatment, but found it to increase the risk of overdose and showed no significant impact on substance use patterns. 

"People facing addiction and mental health challenges need supportive, accessible care and not coercion," MacDonald said.

Robin Shultz, another delegate, said while the motion may look good on paper, it will not solve the problems in housing and health care.

"I would call this motion a political Trojan horse of sorts. It says a lot of things that I know everyone around this table agrees with. It is up to all levels of government to tackle these issues together," Shultz said.

"I know there are people around this table tonight who have been trying to do this for years and who are frustrated and tired of seeing parts of our community get worse rather than better.

"It's also up to the provincial government to provide the City of Cambridge with the resources necessary to tackle these issues. That is how it is set out in our legal systems in Canada, and this motion is not going to make that happen. Forcing treatment on individuals with addiction and mental health challenges will only cause more harm and get us further away from solving these complex problems together," Shultz added.

Ward 4 Coun. Ross Earnshaw said while there's much he agrees with, he could not support the overall motion.

"There are elements of the motion before us which seek to undermine [the Charter of Rights and Freedoms] for a segment of society that is vulnerable and living on the margins, and seeks to do so in the face of court rulings that bar the sorts of powers that are requested in the motion," Earnshaw said.

"I consider this to be an erosion of the rule of law and therefore I cannot support it."

Meanwhile, Coun. Scott Hamilton of Ward 7 said while everyone agreed "we're in a crisis and we're all just struggling with how to address it … it's a health crisis, not a political crisis."