At sweet last, the wretched and oxymoronic Mike Harris-era Safe Streets Act is up against the courts. This week, the Ontario Superior Court will hear the case as legal clinic Fair Change’s 2017 effort proceeds to review. A previous effort, in 2007, to have it thrown out failed as the Supreme Court declined to hear the case after the law had been upheld. But that was then.
The act was brought in by the Harris government in 1999, in part as a response to the rise of squeegee kids, who took up reams of newspaper coverage and real estate in the minds of politicians at the time. The anti-panhandling law was vague and broad. It prohibited any sort of “aggressive” solicitation, aimed to protect “captive” audiences, and carried hefty fines that poor people who were resigned to asking for cash from strangers could never afford and even prison time for repeat offenders.
The Progressive Conservative government of the time was quick to resort to half-baked, cruel measures to address law-and-order issues that it had caused or exacerbated in the first place through economic austerity.
Fair Change argues the law is unconstitutional, a violation of Charter rights protecting expression and guarding against cruel and unusual punishment. The legal clinic and other advocates argue that the law and others like it are unfair, unreasonable, and ineffective. The act essentially criminalizes poverty, targeting marginalized, often desperate, people. Those who take to the streets to panhandle are trying to survive. Enabling police to arbitrarily harass them and to limit their capacity to make a living solves no problem — it just worsens economic suffering and social stigma, exploitation, and desperation.
For years, various advocates and outlets have argued that the Safe Streets Act should be repealed. The Toronto Star made the case in 2019 — a year after it had made the case in 2018. A familiar refrain is that the law also doesn’t even work on its own terms. The Homeless Hub has amassed plenty of evidence against it, putting together a compelling case showing the law doesn’t do what it intends to do. Indeed, it would be a bad law if it worked. But it doesn’t even do that.
The act doesn’t decrease the number of panhandlers on the streets, and the vast majority of fines issued under its authority aren’t collected. A 2019 Star investigation found that, of 31,000 tickets issued between 2013 and 2018, 46 individuals received more than 100 tickets each — and one person managed 467 tickets. The Star also found that the value of those tickets amounted to roughly $1.5 million in fines, with just under $40,000 paid. What’s the point of that?
In April 2020, in the early days of the pandemic, experts warned that the act would be worse than cruel — it would be deadly, forcing homeless people into risky situations, including court appearances, as COVID-19 was tearing through communities.
As the researchers put it in a piece for The Conversation, “In its intent and effect, the Safe Streets Act is the continuation of archaic vagrancy laws that have for centuries punished and stigmatized people for being visibly poor.” Laws such as this seek to punish the vulnerable for trying to survive, for daring to be present and seen by those more fortunate. Laws like this might make politicians look tough — they might scratch the curious itch to punish — but they solve no problem and contribute to worsening others.
Fair Change launched its challenge in 2017, when Kathleen Wynne’s Liberal government was pressured to drop the law. That, of course, didn’t immediately work out, as the Wynne government didn’t last long after that. In 2018, Doug Ford won the premiership, and here we are, waiting for the court to weigh in.
The court ought to strike down the law. If it doesn’t, the Ford government should rescind it. The Safe Streets Act does nothing to produce safe streets but instead leads to harassment and stigma against vulnerable populations, putting them at further risk and making it harder for poor people on the streets to survive. Moreover, it does nothing to root out the causes of panhandling. One might think the cruelty is the point with this law, which is blatantly unconstitutional. The Safe Streets Act is an oxymoron. It’s also barbaric. It must go.
Donate