Its all too easy to be flippant about the homeless problem in Vancouver, especially when inserting pithy quotes beside links to editorials and other media, which is basically what I do on Morning Brew. But a number of recent developments have recently thrust the DTES into the spotlight once again, prompting more than just a cynical remark or two. Passions are flaring and everyone has an opinion, and in some cases its even gotten personal. Did the protesters at the Olympic clock unveiling go too far and alienate people, or did they get everyone's attention, including the finance minister? Was the budget really housing friendly? Will the VPD's request for more cops take cash away form housing initiatives? Will there continue to be evictions from SRO hotels in the lead-up to 2010? Will the Pickton trial spur action towards protecting sex-workers? Did the VPD botch the case? What will the inquiry into the death of Paul Frank tell us about the war on the poor?

By no means do I consider myself a champion of the cause, yet it is very obvious where my allegiances lie. I cannot remove myself from the truths I see to be evident, yet I still struggle to remain open to the pragmatism of neo-liberal policies. In the example of the Woodwards development, I found myself at odds with many anti-poverty activists. While I remain wary of the project's potential to encourage gentrification, I'm also optimistic that it can set an example to private developers who want to include a non-market housing component in their plans, even if it is a subsidy grab. I also have a lot of friends who work for the Portland Hotel Society, and I find myself sounding pedantic when they are the ones who see the situation first hand. I think everyone knows that the issue is not a simple one, yet I feel that just because I might not have much first hand experience, I shouldn't let that detract from my role as a citizen journalist.

Which brings me to address a number of libelous claims that were published about me which I feel I need to address. Jamie Lee Hamilton, a prominent DTES activist posted these false and defamatory comments on her blog. Now, even though I was allowed to respond to her first volley of fabrications, the misinformation is still visible on her site. I don't know much about law, but I'm pretty sure that's constitutes libel. Furthermore I was hesitant even responding to the allegations, as it would seem to lend integrity where I believe none is deserved. She has refused to allow me to further defend my character, so I feel I must do so on Beyond Robson, hopefully without detracting from the urgency of the issue at hand.

As I said earlier, I have no illusions that I hold any semblance of authority on the subject, and by no means do I consider myself a committed activist; I've gone to some demonstrations, I buy those PIVOT calendars, I ran for the Green Party, I participated in the Woodwards Squat and as a member of Alcoholics Anonymous I have the capacity to offer help to those suffering from addictions. But for Ms. Hamilton to immediately dismiss my opinions as someone who has jumped on the bandwagon is an insult.

So, let me address the accusations at hand. Nobody was evicted from the Dominion Hotel, I didn't make any money from the art project, I didn't host it, and the actual project was about the potential impact of the project leading to gentrification of the area! (If you go to the hotel website, my room is #205). She even went so far as to say I was the owner of Beyond Robson, and therefore sold advertising to Mini which probably would make me a hypocrite. But I'm not the owner, nor am I an editor. I take some solace in the fact that this is not the first time she's been accused of false and defamatory comments on her blog as Vision Vancouver Mayoral candidate Jim Green launched a lawsuit regarding false allegations made during the 2005 civic elections.

I would expect such things from those on the right, indeed someone like Erin Airton who says "what we've done is develop a whole network of government and non-profit agencies devoted to helping the homeless stay homeless". Or someone like The West Side Tory or Citizen Vancouver but not from an advocate of sex workers, which is why an otherwise petty blog entry has taken so much of my attention.

Then there are the stalwarts of non-partisan investigative journalism The Province. Almost daily they run a Fraser-institute inspired neo-con rant under the guise of working class, tax-payer altruism. (almost as much as they attack climate change). Another look at the budget shows that the BC Liberals think a billion dollar tax break equals housing. They think that slumlords won't just raise the rents by $50, the amount of the proposed housing allowance. Sam Sullivan immediately sent out a self-congratulatory email praising the budget, only to Flip Flop on the matter. More worrisome than the lack of housing initiatives however, might just be how we got a surplus in the first place with cuts to welfare, family services, pharmacare, and women's centres. Meanwhile federal money for housing remains stuck in bureaucracy, and perhaps isn't a priority to the rural-based Conservative Party.

Herein lies the predicament Sam Sullivan is in. While in no means does it nullify his smarmy populism, the fact remains that Sam Sullivan is handcuffed by two right-wing governments whose priorities are corporate welfare and cutting taxes. Yet for all the housing the NPA is building, including Woodwards, more and more low-income hotels, or SROs, are being bought up by developers. As the Pivot Legal report titled Cracks in the Foundation pointed out, "between 2003 and 2005, despite the development of 99 new housing units, Vancouver incurred a net loss of 415 housing units for low-income singles. The rate of housing loss for this vulnerable group accelerated in 2005. While 82 new rooms for low-income singles were opened between June 2005 and June 2006, the City lost almost 400 units due to conversions, rent increases and closures during the same period...Only 270 units for low-income singles are scheduled to be built in Vancouver over the next three years."

This brings us to the apparent connection between hotel closures and the Olympics and the eery similarity to Expo 86, in which mass hotel evictions were met by promises of 'trickle down' benefits for the needy. The next article will deal with the protests surrounding 2010, the perceptions of those protesters by corporate media, and what, if anything, the VPD has learned from theStanley Cup Riots.

But for now however, there are two recent initiatives dealing with the subject. One is an essay contest held by Pivot, in which $2,000 to the essay with the best and most practical solutions to the housing crisis in Vancouver. The other is a series of public consultations by the city to develop a supportive housing strategy. You can also comment online.