Gillingham’s encampment plan is all smoke and mirrors

Mayor Scott Gillingham’s latest attempt to address encampments is weak, late, and clearly tied to his re-election campaign. For more than a decade in public office, he has had countless opportunities to lead on this issue. Instead, he has ignored businesses, residents, and front-line workers dealing with the consequences. Now, less than a year before an election, he produces a motion that looks more like political cover than meaningful action.

The motion sets out restrictions on where encampments can be located: within 50 metres of playgrounds, pools, spray pads, schools, daycares, care facilities, medians, transit shelters, bridges, and rail lines. In theory, that sounds like a step forward. In reality, it is a bureaucratic exercise that does nothing to eliminate the problem. The city’s plan is to send by-law enforcement officers to carry out these restrictions. Think about that for a moment. By-law officers are not trained to dismantle camps, deal with volatile situations, or address mental health and addiction crises. They have no weapons, no defensive training, and no experience with the confrontations that often occur in these environments. Yet the mayor is proposing that they will be the ones sent into encampments.

There is precedent here. A few years ago, the Winnipeg Fire Paramedic Service entered encampments because of safety and fire concerns. It didn’t last long. A firefighter was injured, and that practice stopped. If trained emergency personnel could not safely manage the risks, how can anyone expect by-law officers to handle it? The plan doesn’t pass the test of common sense.

The motion’s 50-metre buffer zones are a joke. Fifty metres is half a block. That’s not a solution, that’s shifting the problem over a few steps. Imagine a by-law officer pulling out a tape measure in a park, trying to decide if an encampment is 49 metres or 51 metres away from a playground. That’s not policy, that’s theatre. People experiencing homelessness will move their tents just far enough to claim compliance, and the cycle will continue. This is not about solving encampments, it’s about giving the mayor something to point to on a campaign brochure.

For years, business owners along the waterfront have pleaded for help. I’ve seen the emails sent to Gillingham and city councillors, outlining damage to property, security threats, and the impact on staff and customers. Nothing was done. Silence from the mayor’s office. But with a recent poll showing residents are dissatisfied with the direction of the city, the political urgency suddenly appears. The timing speaks for itself.

It is the same playbook Gillingham used when he called for bail reform. He held a press conference, called for change, and made it sound like he was leading a national effort. In reality, weeks earlier Prime Minister Mark Carney had already announced his government would table bail reforms. Political leaders, police chiefs, and community voices had been calling for tougher bail for years. Yet only when it was safe and fashionable did Gillingham jump in, looking for a headline. He wants voters to believe he is standing up for them, when in truth he is running behind the pack and grabbing for credit.

Winnipeggers see through it. They know the difference between leadership and posturing. Leadership requires making hard decisions early, not waiting until the polls say people are unhappy.

Other cities have faced the same crisis and taken real steps. In New York, former Mayor Bill de Blasio launched “HOME-STAT,” the largest homeless outreach program in the country, pairing trained outreach workers with police officers and social services to clear encampments and connect people to housing. It was far from perfect, but it was decisive. In San Diego, a camping ban was implemented that prohibited tents in public spaces, coupled with expanded shelter capacity. The city backed it with police enforcement, not by-law officers, and encampments in high-traffic areas dropped sharply. In Toronto, the city cleared major park encampments in 2021 by mobilizing police, outreach teams, and sanitation crews. It was controversial, but it ended months of paralysis and restored access to public spaces. These examples show that action requires coordinated teams with authority and training, not piecemeal by-law rules.

Winnipeg, under Gillingham, has done none of this. We are offered a patchwork motion that tinkers with distances and pretends enforcement can be handled by people without the tools or mandate to succeed. This isn’t policy, it’s avoidance.

Encampments are more than a political issue; they are a public safety problem. Fires, overdoses, assaults, and property destruction are common. Families should not have to walk their children past tents near playgrounds. Business owners should not watch their properties destroyed while begging city hall for help. Emergency services should not be sidelined because politicians are afraid of backlash. At the same time, people living in encampments deserve better than to be shuffled 20 metres down a path. They need shelter beds, addiction treatment, and pathways to stable housing. That requires real investment and leadership, not symbolic gestures.

The truth is Gillingham has been in office for years without addressing any of this. He was part of every budget process that allowed encampments to grow unchecked. He has seen the crime statistics. He has read the business complaints. And yet, only now, one year from an election, does he discover his voice on the issue. This is not coincidence. It is calculation.

Winnipeggers are smart enough to know when they are being sold a bill of goods. They see a mayor more concerned about his re-election than about protecting families, businesses, and the vulnerable. They see motions that move tents a few feet instead of removing them altogether. They see by-law officers being put at risk instead of trained professionals being deployed. And they see a leader trying to claim credit for bail reform after others had already done the work.

This city deserves better. Encampments are not going to disappear because of a by-law rulebook. They will only be reduced through coordinated enforcement, backed by social supports, and driven by political courage. Gillingham has had years to show that courage and has chosen not to. Winnipeg has waited long enough.