Findings: Old Bylaws, New Rights Gaps -
Municipal Trends Across Ontario

Rethinking Municipal Policy Responses to Encampments: Building a Human Rights Approach in Ontario

​We found that all lower tier and single tier municipalities had at least one neo-vagrancy bylaw in place that criminalized survival behaviour of people experiencing homelessness, including those living in encampments.
In contrast, only 13 municipalities had publicly available encampment protocols. Protocols varied from a single webpage to detailed pdfs, sometimes prepared by external consultants, however all protocols provided instructions on how municipal agencies, law enforcement, and service providers should respond to encampments.
​At the centre of this, we must rely on a human rights approach.
​While we can always do better than these ​minimum standards,
​we should never do worse than these most ​basic requirements.
Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness (Conference & Trip) - Ottawa 2024

Pillar 1: Decenter Policing ​and Law Enforcement

  • Are encampments on public property made illegal through bylaws or other policy tools?
  • ​Do bylaws or protocols provide guidance to minimize the involvement of police officers and/or bylaw officers?
  • Are non-enforcement approaches to the safety and wellbeing of encampment residents centred in the municipal response?

​Pillar 2: Addressing Conditions in Encampments and Basic Needs

  • Do protocols include the provision of services to meet day-to-day needs?
  • Do bylaws make it illegal to carry out activities that meet basic needs?
  • Do protocols or bylaws offer guidance on improving conditions in encampments without resorting to forced removal or displacement?

​Pillar 3: Equitable and Accessible Social Services

  • ​Do protocols include strategies for equitable access to services, for example health care, housing support, harm reduction, and culturally specific services?
  • Do protocols require participation in data collection as a condition for accessing services?
  • Do protocols include a statement regarding the ability to refuse services?

Pillar 4: Meaningful Participation

  • Is there any evidence of lived expertise engagement in the process of developing encampment protocols or other relevant policies? 
  • Do bylaws and/or protocols recognize the autonomy of encampment residents in making decisions concerning their immediate options for shelter?
  • Do protocols provide a mechanism for encampment residents to participate in local decision-making concerning encampments?

Pillar 5: Recognition of Indigenous Rights

  • Is there acknowledgement of Indigenous Rights in the protocol?
  • Is there recognition of the need to consult with Indigenous people and/or Indigenous service providers in the protocol?
Next: Conclusions and Policy Directions: Advancing Human Rights in Municipal Encampment Responses