Who gets help when they lose their home?
About 230 homes were destroyed by the Bradley Creek wildfire in the Okanagan Indian Band community near Vernon.
Two words keep coming to my mind:
HOMELESSNESS.
Not because people who lost their homes in a wildfire don't deserve help. They absolutely do.
Of course they should have emergency shelter, food, clothing, financial assistance and a path toward rebuilding.
But I want us to stop for a moment and think about something uncomfortable.
When a wildfire takes someone's house, suddenly everyone understands:
They lost their home.
They need somewhere to go.
They need help.
They need compassion.
They need a system that responds.
But what about the person who didn't have a house to lose in the first place?
What about the senior who has been priced out of housing?
The young person sleeping on a friend's couch?
The person living in a tent?
The person carrying everything they own in two bags?
The person who has been homeless for years?
Where is their emergency?
I have been unhoused since 2019.
I've watched homelessness grow around me right here in Kitsilano.
And this is what bothers me:
We seem to be very good at responding when a disaster creates a clearly identifiable group of people who suddenly need housing.
But homelessness doesn't always come with a dramatic news helicopter shot.
There isn't a before-and-after photograph of the house that somebody never had.
There isn't a televised evacuation order for the person who has already been sleeping outside.
There isn't a neighbourhood suddenly covered in tents because someone was already living in one.
Their crisis is quieter.
And quiet crises are easy to ignore.
We need emergency systems for wildfire victims.
We need long-term recovery for people whose homes have burned.
And we need a housing system that prevents people from becoming homeless in the first place.
These aren't competing needs.
We should not have to choose between helping a family whose home burned and helping someone who has been homeless for years.
There should be enough compassion, resources and political will to do both.
Because here's the question I keep coming back to:
WHO GETS HELP WHEN THEY LOSE THEIR HOME — AND WHO GETS HELP WHEN THEY NEVER HAD ONE?
If housing is a basic necessity, then shouldn't preventing homelessness be treated as an emergency too?
People shouldn't have to wait for their home to burn before their housing crisis becomes visible.
HELP PEOPLE BEFORE THEY LOSE EVERYTHING.
And when disaster strikes, help them again.
That's what a society is supposed to do.
Help people who need help. ALL of them.
10 Reflective Questions
1. Why does a housing crisis sometimes become more visible when a disaster takes someone's home?
2. Should preventing homelessness be treated as an emergency before someone loses everything?
3. What happens to people whose housing crisis is invisible because they never had a home to lose?
4. Should wildfire survivors and people experiencing homelessness have to compete for limited resources?
5. What does a society owe someone who has been unhoused for years?
6. Why are some forms of homelessness treated as temporary emergencies while others become normalized?
7. How can governments provide immediate disaster relief while also addressing the long-term housing crisis?
8. What would change if we treated stable housing as essential infrastructure rather than simply a personal responsibility?
9. Are our housing and emergency-support systems designed to find people who need help, or only those who know how to navigate the system?
10. How would our policies change if we truly believed that nobody should have to lose everything before they deserve help?
homelessness, housing crisis, wildfire, emergency assistance, affordable housing, housing insecurity, disaster recovery, social services, poverty, community support
#Homelessness #HousingCrisis #AffordableHousing #HousingInsecurity #WildfireRecovery #DisasterRelief #CommunitySupport #SocialServices #EveryoneDeservesHousing #HelpPeopleNow
