Panhandlers aren’t going away

Councillor Gord Steeves (St. Vital) is leading a misguided discussion on what to do with panhandlers who operate on boulevards in Winnipeg.

Steeves cites safety and public image as the reasons for this push.

But this is nothing new. Winnipeg already has by-laws in place to discourage aggressive panhandlers and people who clean windshields at stop lights, otherwise known as squeegee kids.

The problem is, these laws only serve make these people invisible, which is unrealistic. From this blogger’s perspective, the boulevard panhandlers only showed up after the squeegee ordinance was passed.

Panhandling isn’t going to disappear, no matter how illegal it is. There will still be people in need.

The arguments are that people panhandling either aren’t really in need (“fashionable homelessness” is something that is visible in Osborne Village during warmer months) or they spend the money on intoxicants.

These are valid points, but they don’t address the rest of the panhandling population that is genuinely in need. It’s difficult to distinguish who is more needy (a label that NOBODY wants to earn), so the public is left to choose for themselves.

The questions we need to ask are: What is the real safety risk to boulevard panhandling? I haven’t read one story about a panhandler being hit by a car, or of one attacking the people stopped at lights. The “safety” seems to be referring to the safety of our delicate personal constitution.

I understand it’s difficult to walk/drive by the same person every day and be asked for money. I live downtown - believe me, I know. But that’s what living in a city is all about; living amongst people of all socio-economic levels.

You can’t just tell these people to move along and expect them to stop panhandling. Just like you can’t clear drunks out of old hotels and expect them to sober up because of it.

The most unexpected panhandling I’ve witnessed has been in Coun. Steeves’ own district. Panhandlers bravely stand at Bishop Grandin Blvd. and St. Mary’s Rd. hoping to skim a little bit of money from the shoppers at St. Vital Centre.

It’s puzzling because one doesn’t expect to see panhandling that far from the city centre, but I thought it was ingenious. Tapping a market flush with spare cash, I bet they make a killing.

My question is, did they drive to that intersection? They probably didn’t walk from downtown.

It’s not so much a safety issue as an image issue, which Steeves admits is part of it. Dedicating more time and money to relegating these people is foolish.

Why not spend that money on social programs that provide food and clothing to the needy? Other countries have “living wage” policies (Denmark, Sweden), where even if you’re not working, you still make enough money to live - and it’s not welfare. Those same countries have virtually no homeless people.

Correlation or causation I can’t say, but it sure sounds good.

It’s up to you to give money to someone on the street or not. Just don’t persecute them for being there in the first place.