Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Monday, February 20, 2012

Canada needs a national housing strategy to help end poverty, says Sen. Cordy

GOVERNMENT CONFERENCE CENTRE—Poverty is not only a reality for hundreds of thousands of Canadians, it’s a national problem that costs all Canadians.

“Canada has a filthy little secret,” Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party of Canada and MP for Saanach-Gulf Islands B.C., said of Canada’s levels of poverty. “And it’s one that costs us 5.5 per cent to 6.5 per cent of our GDP.”

 That’s $86.3-billion to $102-billion annually.

On Feb. 14, the Dignity for All campaign hosted a panel on poverty featuring politicians and poverty activists from across the political spectrum in Ottawa at the Government Conference Centre. In addition to Ms. May, Nova Scotia Liberal Senator Jane Cordy, Ontario Conservative Senator Don Meredith, NDP Human Resources critic Jean Crowder (Nanaimo-Cowichan, B.C.), Bloc Québécois MP Jean François Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie-La Mitis-Matane-Matapédia, Que.), Canada Without Poverty’s Harriet McLachlan, and Leilani Farha from the Dignity for All took part in the panel.
Moderated by Globe and Mail Hill bureau chief John Ibbitson, the issue provoked a lively debate from panelists and audience members who came to discuss what is next in the government’s approach to helping Canada’s poor.

While there is no official measure of poverty supported by the federal government, the most common measurement is Statistics Canada’s after-tax low-income cut off. It marks the income level below which families need to spend at least 20 per cent more of their income than an average family on basic necessities such as food and shelter.  Using the after-tax low-income cut off, roughly 13.3 per cent of Canadians, approximately 4.3 million people, lived in poverty in 2009. Based on this system, it was also determined that one in 10 Canadian children are born into poverty, and one in four aboriginal children are born into poverty.  One in three children living in poverty have a parent who is employed full-time. More than 900,000 Canadians use food banks every month. 

Megan Yarema, from Canada Without Poverty, started the discussion by introducing the “points of consensus” on poverty. The points were lifted from the 1989 and 2009 all-party motions in the House of Commons to address poverty, as well as 2009’s Senate report on housing and homelessness.

Ms. Yarema also cited the 2010 House Human Resources Comittee report calling for a federal poverty reduction strategy. 

There is a consensus, Ms. Yarema said, that poverty is a growing concern with “a large social and economic coast.”  There is also an agreement that it disproportionably effects the most vulnerable in Canadian society including children, new immigrants, single parents and the disabled.

“One thing we can all agree on is that we haven’t succeeded,” she said of eliminating poverty. “How is it that with collective will and understanding we are still in this position?”

Ms. Yarema added, “The research has been done, now it’s time to take steps.”

While there was an agreement on the detrimental effect of poverty, panelists’ opinions varied as to the solution. All panelists strongly voiced that poverty is a non-partisan issue, but solutions divided strongly on party lines.

In her opening remarks, Sen. Cordy stressed the importance of a national housing strategy, which she believes holds both a humanitarian and an economic impetus.

“You need a place to live to break the cycle of poverty,” she said. “It is more cost effective to provide housing and support for those who live in poverty. [Former] premier [Ed] Stelmach in Alberta says that the average homeless person costs society roughly $100,000 a year, but that cost drops to $35,000 a year if that person is given a long term home. So there is a business perspective as well as a humanitarian one.”

Mr. Ibbitson asked if there was a way governments could “get past the dichotomy of social democratic, on the one hand, libertarian on the other… right one the one hand, left on the other hand … and find a balanced facial state.”

Ms. May agreed that guaranteeing every Canadian an annual income was good fiscal policy.

“It is an investment and not a cost,” she said. “The single determinant of poor health is poverty. If we were to guarantee every Canadian an annual income, it would require a massive national conversation. But we would lift people out of poverty on an intergenerational, permanent basis and see lower crime rates, higher health outcomes, decreased costs to society overall … and on this is where your left wing and your right wing meet.”

As the author of Bill C-233, an Act to Eliminate Poverty in Canada, which was introduced in June 2011, Ms. Crowder had proposed a number of specific steps the government might take to eradicate poverty and its social stigma in Canadian society. Those include creating a federal office of Poverty Elimination, amending the Human Rights Act to include “social condition” under its protections, and renaming the Council of Welfare the “Council of Poverty and Social Inclusion.” 

Ms. Crowder’s concerns were echoed by Ms. McLachlan from Canada Without Poverty and Leilani Farha from the Dignity for All campaign who represented their organizations on the panel. Ms. McLachlan and Ms. Farha agreed that the official language surrounding poverty helps to entrench a social stigma.

Ontario Conservative Senator Don Meredith, who is also an ordained minister at the Pentecostal Praise Centre in the Greater Toronto Area, stressed that he is sympathetic to the plight of the poor. He grew up in poverty and has worked to end youth and gang violence through his work with the GTA Faith Alliance. The Conservative government, he said, is committed to ending poverty through job creation and education.

“The economic action plan is about creating jobs.  We continue to stimulate the economy, continue to invest in aboriginal communities with the resources in the North and are looking to train those who don’t have the education or skills,” said Sen. Meredith.

When an audience member posed a question about what the government could do to help Canadians with disabilities, Ms. Crowder pointedly criticized Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) idea to change Old Age Security policies. In a recent address at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, Mr. Harper said the Conservative government is considering raising the age Canadians can receive the Old Age Security benefit from 65 to 67. Ms. Crowder said the change would adversely affect people with disabilities, who are already disproportionately at risk of falling into poverty.

“Roughly one quarter of people, at age 65, who start collecting old age security start collecting because of some disability or health issue,” she said.

Throughout the discussion, panelists continued to return to the high cost of poverty to Canadian tax payers, and what poverty is costing the country in terms of health care and lost productivity.

“Poverty forces up the tax bill, depresses the economy, increases health care cost and breeds alienation and crime,” Sen. Cordy said. “A study in The Economist says that poverty costs us over $30 billion annually, with $7.5-billion in health-care costs alone between eight and $13-billion in lost productivity. The poorest quarter of Canadians uses twice the health care services as those in the wealthiest quarter. It is more cost effective to provide housing to the homeless than leave them on the streets.”

While Ms. Crowder said she believes poverty can be solved, she expressed doubts that decisive action on poverty would be forthcoming from the current government.  “We’ve had a number of different governments that have not acted.”

Original Article
Source: hill times 
Author: Mika Rekai 

No comments:

Post a Comment