dear emily lowan and bc greens: what if we funded solutions first?

Dear Emily and BC Greens,

Let's talk about budgets, homelessness, mental health, addiction treatment and housing.

We have been discussing the numbers, and I keep coming back to one simple idea.

We don't necessarily need all the money up front forever. We need enough to get started.

British Columbia has a tobacco litigation settlement worth more than $3.6 billion over approximately 18 years, including an initial payment of $936 million.

The BC Greens have proposed a one-time wealth tax estimated to raise $22.2 billion, alongside a recurring wealth levy projected to raise $5.4 billion annually.

Those are proposed revenues, of course, not guaranteed money. But let's consider what we could do if we planned our budget around solving problems instead of endlessly managing the consequences.

What if we used a portion of the money available now to establish permanent housing, mental-health services, addiction treatment, detox and rehabilitation facilities?

What if we invested in the infrastructure and support people need to recover, rebuild their lives and remain housed?

And if we needed to borrow to bridge a temporary funding gap, could we establish a responsible repayment plan using future revenues, including the proposed recurring wealth levy, once it was implemented?

The point is not to spend recklessly or assume that every dollar of the tobacco settlement is unrestricted. The point is to plan ahead, examine the legal and financial details, and use available resources strategically.

stop paying for the crisis. start funding the solutions.

Homelessness is expensive. Emergency responses, repeated hospital visits, policing, temporary accommodation and untreated health problems all carry costs.

What would happen if we invested more in preventing those crises?

What if people had a safe home, access to treatment when they needed it, and ongoing support instead of being left to struggle until their situation became an emergency?

We should measure the results: how many people are housed, how many remain housed, how many receive treatment, and what costs are avoided over time.

This isn't about pretending money is unlimited. It's about recognizing that budgets reflect choices.

If we have the resources to build a better system, why should people have to wait until every future dollar arrives before we begin?

Emily and the BC Greens, I'd like to see you explore this approach: use available funds to get the work underway, establish sustainable long-term financing, and make sure public money delivers measurable results for people and communities.

We have the opportunity to do more than manage homelessness. We can work toward ending it.

Let's start planning for that.

— Tina Winterlik