Sherbrooke homelessness advocate warns of stigma, centralization
By William Crooks
Local Journalism Initiative
A new provincial bill intended to regulate the placement of supervised consumption services is facing strong opposition from homelessness advocates across Quebec, including in Sherbrooke. Bill 103, introduced by Minister Lionel Carmant, would prohibit the establishment of such centres within 150 metres of schools and daycare centres. But critics say the proposed law is not only incoherent—it threatens to increase stigma, reduce access to essential services, and strip decision-making power away from local communities.
Gabriel Pallotta, coordinator of the Table itinérance de Sherbrooke, expressed concern that the bill sends the wrong message and risks undoing two decades of collaborative efforts in the region.
“The first issue is the message it sends,” Pallotta said in an interview. “It makes an amalgam between people experiencing homelessness and public nuisance. That’s a dangerous association—especially right now, when public discourse is becoming more polarized.”
According to Pallotta, the bill’s language implies that people who use drugs or who live on the street are a threat to be managed rather than citizens to be supported. “The term ‘inconvenience’ is used in the legislation. That’s really problematic. It fuels a narrative where some people are framed as less welcome, less worthy.”
These concerns are echoed at the provincial level. The Réseau SOLIDARITÉ Itinérance du Québec (RSIQ), a network representing over 200 community groups, released a statement calling the bill “stigmatizing and incoherent.” Boromir Vallée Dore, Executive Director of the RSIQ, stated that Bill 103 contradicts several foundational policies the government claims to uphold, including the National Policy to Combat Homelessness and the Public Health and Social Services Act.
“Bill 103 represents a troubling step backward,” Vallée Dore said. “It undermines principles of inclusion and access to services.”
The RSIQ is particularly concerned about the broader implications of the bill. While its immediate effect would be to restrict the location of supervised consumption centres, there are fears that it could later be expanded to other types of support services, such as shelters and drop-in centres. That, advocates argue, would jeopardize access for the people who need them most.
In Sherbrooke, Pallotta said the threat is not just theoretical. He pointed out that the city has developed a unique, collaborative model that relies on input from many local actors: public health boards, municipal representatives, community organizations, and even law enforcement.
“In Sherbrooke, we’re all around the same table,” he said. “Instead of everyone working in their own office, we discuss projects together, we adjust based on local needs, and we try to respond in a way that’s inclusive.”
He gave the example of a recent public awareness campaign discouraging motorists from giving money to panhandlers at intersections. “The first version of the campaign was stigmatizing,” Pallotta admitted. “But through back-and-forth with community groups and the police, we reworked it. The final version addressed safety concerns while respecting the dignity of the people involved.”
He fears Bill 103 could upend that kind of collaboration. “Right now, we make these decisions together. But under this law, the minister would have almost absolute and arbitrary powers. It centralizes decision-making in a way that doesn’t reflect local realities.”
Those realities, he said, are becoming more complex. “We’re seeing an increase in mental health challenges and drug dependency. It’s not just a question of more people—it’s about more intense needs. The drugs out there now are more toxic, often mixed with unpredictable substances. People don’t always know what they’re taking.”
Pallotta believes the COVID-19 pandemic intensified underlying stress in the population, and that social services haven’t been adequately scaled up to respond. “We’re at a point where we need to think about treating people with permanent damage from drug use. That’s the level we’re dealing with.”
Asked why public discourse around homelessness seems to be getting harsher, Pallotta pointed to the role of social media and digital echo chambers. “There’s a polarization. People form strong opinions without necessarily having all the information. It creates a lot of fear and stigma.”
And that fear, he added, is real. “It’s understandable. If someone approaches your car asking for money and you don’t know them or understand their situation, it can be uncomfortable or even frightening.”
But fear, he argues, should not be the basis for legislation. “Instead of reacting by tightening rules and increasing police involvement, we should be pushing for strong public policies that prevent people from ending up in survival situations to begin with.”
Despite his many criticisms of Bill 103, Pallotta acknowledged one potentially positive element: the bill includes a requirement for cohabitation plans—strategies developed in advance of opening a new service to address neighbourhood concerns. “That’s a good idea,” he said. “But right now, it puts all the responsibility on the community organizations. If the government provided resources to help create those plans collaboratively, it could be a great tool.”
Ultimately, Pallotta said, the public has a role to play beyond charitable giving. “Of course, you can donate to organizations. But more importantly, we need people to raise their voices and demand better policies. We’re constantly treating the symptoms. What we need are solutions that stop the flow.”
The RSIQ’s full brief, along with its recommendations for changes to Bill 103, can be found on their website.