Poverty in Ontario – GWCSJ’s Response
As a Community Coalition, and as a member of the Ontario Coalition for Social Justice, we are comprised of community groups and individuals dedicated to progressive social change in this community of Guelph and in Ontario. We hope to create and maintain a unified voice for social justice, especially for those most impoverished and marginalized.
One of the premises which we consider in our deliberations is that: all citizens are equal in dignity as humans. To promote the values of human dignity and equality requires us to look carefully into our society – its values and attitudes. When we find evidence that people’s basic needs for nutritious food, clothing, shelter, health care and education are not being met, we must get involved in addressing the reasons for these situations and help to alleviate the problems.
An example of an issue needing serious attention is too many people with insufficient income. Despite economic growth, poverty is not decreasing.
- 15, 330 of people in Cambridge in poverty
- the income gap between rich/poor is increasing in Guelph and Cambridge1 in 8 children live in poverty
- poverty rate is stuck at 15-17% in Guelph and Cambridge
- having a job does not guarantee living out of poverty
What is the result of this situation?
- increased demand for social assistance
- most community services under stress
- poorer health – income is a strong indicator of health and causes huge strain on health care spending
- people cannot afford sufficient, nutritious food
- use of local food banks has increased over the last number of years
In Guelph, the Food Bank has seen an increase in their services every year. In 2007, the total number of individual persons receiving groceries was 13,334
- 7,342 of these were adults
- 5,992 of these were children
Individuals and families can use the food bank hamper service on a monthly basis.
In 2007, 5,992 hampers were given out to local families.
- 10.43% had no income
- 33.20% were receiving Ontario Works Assistance
- 22.36% were on Canada Pension
- 6.64% were receiving disability
- 5.72% were on Employment Insurance
- 15.73% were working
- 5.93% had other sources of income through spousal support, company pensions
(Source: Guelph Food Bank) - people cannot afford sufficient , affordable housing
- there are long waits for many subsidized housing units in Guelph
- more people seeking emergency shelter and staying longer
Reducing Poverty is Achievable
We need only look at the United Kingdom, Ireland, Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador to see that leadership has been taken in developing poverty reduction strategies which are being met with success.
(Reference for above material: United Way Community Services, Guelph and Cambridge)
We acknowledge and appreciate that the McGuinty government seems very committed to reducing poverty in Ontario. We welcome the fact that Premier McGuinty has agreed to produce a detailed poverty-reduction plan by year-end. Measurable goals and fixed deadlines are the best assurance of action.
We also give credit to the Liberal Government for the positive measures in the recent budget – $100 million to repair social housing, $135 million to provide dental care to low-income children, $32 million for school nutrition programs and a cost of living increase in social assistance payments next November.
A closer look at the links and connections between poverty and homelessness, social assistance, low income, and physical and mental disabilities could be helpful for understanding this issue more fully.
Homelessness
- 1 in 5 Guelph households is at risk of homelessness. (The definition of which is any household paying 30% or more of their monthly income on housing)
- There are approximately 80% more applications for affordable housing in Guelph and Wellington County than there are available units. (The County of Wellington has recently changed its policy on priority housing status. We need to check out how this has impacted access to affordable housing).
Social Assistance
People relying on social assistance are finding it increasingly difficult to afford decent housing, as the real value of welfare has decreased dramatically since the 1990’s and rents continue to rise. A single parent with one child is entitled to $14,251 in total welfare income for the year, while the annual average cost of a two bedroom apartment in Guelph is $9,960.00 leaving only $4,291.00 – less than $360.00 per month – to cover utilities, food, and all other household needs. (2005 stats)
Low Income
- A single, employable person on social assistance in Guelph receives an income equivalent to 45% of the Low Income Cut-Off poverty line. In Wellington County, the equivalent number is 58%
- A person working full-year, full-time at the minimum wage rate would be living under the poverty line in Guelph
- Social assistance has declined in value by 35% over the last decade
(Source for above material: Guelph Information on Poverty and Homelessness)
According to a front page story in The Mercury, January 22 /08, Guelph’s homeless are still out in the cold. Local poverty advocate, Ed Pickersgill, states: “Without an out-of-the-cold program in Guelph to address the need for programs in place to help homeless people, once the mercury drops to critical levels, people’s lives will be at risk. Ad hoc, band-aid solutions are not adequate for people needing suitable shelter.”
Shelter funding from the city and the county for homeless people is still only short-term relief. Emergency Relief is a charity response. It fits the donor-recipient model for Aid! It can never address the root causes of homelessness. While again, we appreciate the fact that the minimum wage has been increased to $8.75 an hour, we believe that long term affordable housing and raising the minimum wage now to $10.00 an hour are structural changes needed by and for the poor. The provincial government of Ontario must take responsibility for making these changes. There is proof that delaying the increase will cost the poorest people in Ontario a great deal. They will lose $2.00 hourly or $80.00 weekly for a total of $4,160.00 in 2007. And up to $12,480.00 will be lost if there are no incremental increases over three years (2008, 2009, 2010) or $8,320.00 if the Liberals keep to their projections. That’s money that working people could have spent on food, housing, and other essentials.
It is worth noting that an increase in the minimum wage would be spent in the community which does good for Ontario’s economy.
Raising the minimum wage NOW would be a good investment in the People of Ontario and their communities. It’s an idea whose time has come – today, not tomorrow. (Source: David Langille, former Director of the Centre for Social Justice – Toronto).
Physically or Mentally Disabled People
To be considered medically disabled in Ontario, it is necessary to be deemed so by the person’s Doctor, who gives information that is reviewed by another highly trained medical professional in the employ of the Province. In order to qualify for the Ontario Disability Support Program (O.D.S.P.), he or she must meet very stringent medical criteria and have virtually no measurable assets of any kind. If this person should receive assets through an inheritance or large gift from a relative or any other source, his or her benefits stop or are denied until the aforementioned are fully spent.
- Disabled retirees in Ontario currently receive about $980.00 per month or approximately $11,600.00 annually. Also included are very basic dental care, listed prescription medications (not dispensing fees) and small contributions to eyewear
- A portion of this amount (currently $444.00) is allocated for rent and is often paid out by Ontario directly into the bank account of the landlord
- There is a barely sufficient one-time allowance made for first and last month’s rent or damage deposit, frequently a requirement for acceptance as a tenant. This is not repeatable, even if the accommodation is sub-standard
- Limited part time employment is allowed but must be reported. The allowable employment income level is discouragingly low
- In Ontario and Canada today at least 40% of our homeless are disabled
People with disabilities need to be housed, fed, clothed, and given medical care appropriate to their needs. What is at least as important is that they enjoy a sense of dignity and equality with the more fortunate of their fellow Ontarians. Offering subsistence-level handouts on the basis of a highly demeaning and dehumanizing “means test” will never accomplish this goal.
Affordable housing and a guaranteed annual income for adults in this province would be a more life-affirming solution. Do we wish to be our brothers’ and sisters’ caregivers, or do we not? The preceding facts would seem to indicate that our current answer is a profoundly disappointing no.
(Source: Mark Muller: “Meeting the Modern Day ‘Means Test’ “.)
The 25 in 5 Network for Poverty Reduction
A day long forum was held in Toronto on Jan. 28/08, attended by 250 people from across the province. The sponsor of this forum – the 25 in 5 Network for Poverty Reduction – wants to see poverty cut in Ontario by 25% in 5 years. This group, also, wants to ensure low-income people and those who help them are at the “table” for input when MPP Deb Matthew’s cabinet committee on poverty reduction begins to flesh out the McGuinty government’s promise to put a plan in place with goals and timetables within one year. A Poverty Plan is crucial, according to activists at this forum. (Toronto Star, Jan 29/08) The group says such a goal would lift 400,000 Ontarians out of poverty within 5 years. We support this plan by this group. They also want a higher minimum wage, more affordable housing, better income support for those outside the workforce and input into how the government will define poverty. Another opinion at this Toronto forum was put forth by economist Armine Yalnizyan of the Community Social Planning Council of Toronto. According to Armine, “we should be demanding a minimum wage of $10.00 hourly now and aiming to get up to 60% of the average industrial wage in five years…That would bring us up to $11.70 an hour if that was happening today.”
That idea of raising the minimum wage was first recommended in federal Liberal Senator David Croll’s groundbreaking report: Poverty in Canada published in 1971!
We, also, want to support Fiona Nelson’s, a Toronto Health Board member, comments at this forum. She expresses what we believe is essential to reduce poverty in Ontario significantly in the short term i.e. 5 years. She indicated that it is essential to advocate for fairer taxes to provide affordable housing, child care, public transit and other services low-income families rely on. As well, Marvyn Novick, retired Ryerson University social policy professor, made an important point for us to consider in addressing poverty reduction:
He said the province of Ontario should be prepared to go into deficit should Ontario slip into recession in order to put money in the pockets of the poor and fund public infrastructure projects, such as affordable housing that create jobs.
Our Coalition supports other recommendations of the 25 in 5 network to reduce poverty provincially – beef up Ontario child benefit, medical and dental care for all workers, and policies specifically geared to helping racialized communities, aboriginal people, women, the disabled and newcomers whose rates of poverty are higher and have a higher risk of poverty. Reference: Ireland’s Deprivation Index (see article Star, Jan. 29/08)
Eradication of Poverty and a Guaranteed Annual Income: A Coalition Perspective
Taking a look at a Guaranteed Annual Income for all Canadians:
Who has been/is advocating for this program? What does it mean? Its benefits… can we afford it?
It is rather surprising that the notion of a guaranteed annual income is being resurrected again! In an editorial in the Toronto Star, Feb. 14/08, this idea was put forth with the headline: A Tory Joins Poverty Debate. Thirty-five years ago, Senator David Croll, a progressive Liberal started a social policy debate in Canada around the issue of a basic floor income for all Canadian adults. And in 1985, it was touted again by a royal commission headed by Donald MacDonald, another Liberal. More recently, the Green party has embraced the concept. In 2008, Senator Hugh Segal, a Conservative, has been urging the study of a guaranteed income as a replacement for the myriad social and anti-poverty programs in Canada. According to this Feb. 14 editorial in the Toronto Star, 1.3 million Canadians fall below Statistics Canada low-income cut-off line. The positive side of suggesting a guaranteed income is that Hugh Segal, to his credit, wants to put poverty on the national agenda as well as in the campaign platforms of all the federal parties in the next election.
The Senate Committee on social affairs has been asked by Hugh Segal to look at a guaranteed annual income and how it could work. This committee is being chaired by Art Eggleton, former Toronto mayor, and his committee has agreed to consider the idea. It is obvious to us as a Coalition that a new approach to fighting poverty is needed in Canada. Over the past 30 years, the percentage of poor Canadians hasn’t changed; it remains fixed at between 10-11 per cent of the population, even though governments spend more than $130 billion annually on social payments to individuals.
The question posed previously: how would a guaranteed annual income work? It would replace all existing social programs like Unemployment Insurance and welfare and be implemented through the income tax system; with rebates for low-income Canadians, much the same as the existing GST tax credit.
For the critics who argue that a guaranteed annual income would be far too expensive and would in effect be paying people not to work as well as the one-size fits all approach that would overlook the specific needs of the disabled, seniors, and children, Hugh Segal has this response. He states clearly that a guaranteed annual income would remove the disincentives to work in the existing welfare system, which penalizes welfare recipients who take part-time jobs. His note of compassion is worth quoting: “it would be a mark of civility and humanity to affirm that we will not tolerate entire generations with their nose pressed to the window of a society they cannot afford to join.”
We recognize that as pragmatic realists there will most likely be practical difficulties involved in implementing a guaranteed annual income but it ought to be part of the debate on poverty in Guelph, Ontario, and Canada!
In an article in The Toronto Star, Feb. 17/08, Reginald Stackhouse, a former Progressive Conservative Member of Parliament and principal emeritus and research professor at Wycliffe College, U of T, calls for “an income for all Canadians”. According to Stackhouse, a guaranteed annual income policy has been found challenging and not tried by decision – makers in Canada. He believes that his proposal can really make poverty history in this country. The flexibility of his proposal can be looked at from the perspective of the Old Age Security Pension. Canadians aged 65 and over are entitled to this pension. In principle, we are already providing a guaranteed annual income to such Canadians with the age qualification – one segment of our population. This pension is taxable so that seniors receiving it above a certain income can find all or part of it “clawed back”. If that works with part of society, what makes it unworkable with the rest?” he asks. He asks an important question: “Why do it at all?” His four answers are worth our attention. He and Hugh Segal seem to agree on this question.
One, people are dehumanized by poverty and applying for assistance (i.e. welfare) makes people feel inferior to people not in this situation.
Second, based on what is happening now in Canada with a patchwork of uncoordinated social programs, efficiency can be had by implementing an annual income for all citizens in a cost-effective way. It can require far less administration than the multitude of social work driven programs – plus their professional fundraisers – that we now pay for.
Third, our economy will benefit because the money that people receive will be spent on goods and services that keep Canadians working. In early Feb/08, the U.S. Congress broke all legislative speed records to approve a multi-billion dollar program to revive the economy and avert a recession. Is this “voo-doo economics?” he asks rhetorically. If Americans can do this when necessary, then a Canadian basic income policy would do this all year, every year.
Fourth, in answer to a common perception about such income policy acting as a disincentive to work, Stackhouse has this to offer: “The basic income will not be so high that making more will not be an inducement to take a job – just as now, middle and upper income seniors prefer paying the “claw back” to cutting their income so that they get the entire OAS.
Obviously, the present system is not working. Hugh Segal and Reginald Stackhouse both agree on this! We need to remind ourselves that Canada is one of the most financially sound places in the world. The irony of this situation is that we still have enough poor people to populate one of our largest cities. It is time we, as a society, should start looking for an alternative!
We can win the war against poverty! The political will must be generated soon among citizens of Ontario and Canada. The signs of hope are available for us to see. Various forms of a guaranteed annual income have already been adopted in such countries as Australia, New Zealand, Sweden and the Netherlands. We need to be reminded that our economy generates $1.7 trillion yearly but we still have 1.5 million people living below the poverty line. This is unacceptable! To make matters worse, more than 700,000 children live in poverty in Canada.
A basic income policy can change that situation for the first time in our history. It can ensure every Canadian has a decent standard of living – regardless of age, gender, and region or income level. It can mean that we live up to our commitment to the UN Universal Declaration on human rights…”everyone has a right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of oneself and one’s family.
Thoughts on Poverty
On Saturday, April 19, 2008, The Toronto Star, asked dozens of experts: What does it mean to be poor in Ontario today?
We thought the following 10 opinions best expressed our thoughts on the issue.
Poverty is a human tragedy that robs people of opportunity and hope. It’s not simply a statistic, it is a child who goes to school hungry and not ready to learn; a student who drops out of university because they can’t afford tuition; a parent who can’t afford to plan for the future; seniors who can’t retire in simple dignity.
Stephane Dion, Federal Liberal Party Liberal
Poverty is the single most preventable cause of illness and early death. Poverty is not having a voice; lining up at the food bank; needing to decide between paying rent, groceries, or winter boots for your child…Being unemployed because your front teeth are missing, living ashamed for always not having. Poverty is a societal failure, not the failure of the poor. Eliminating poverty is a must if we are to strengthen social cohesion – it just takes leadership and a solid plan.
Doris Grinspun, Executive Director, Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario
Poverty , for the many thousands of older women who must live on government pensions ($13,000 tops) means constant anxiety about meeting the rent, short shrift on nutritious meals and living in isolation when they can’t afford bus fare. They do without the small pleasures that make life worth living – buying a magazine, going to a movie, meeting a friend for a modest restaurant meal, brightening a day with a hobby; these are all beyond their means. This is the impoverished life we supply many of Ontario’s older women. And Ontarians in mid-life can look ahead with dread to spending one third of their life in similar poverty.
Margaret Hawthorn, Retired Librarian, Older Women’s Network (Ont.) board member
Poverty is a health threat as the single largest determinant of health is living in poverty. Poverty is a violation of one’s human rights to decent shelter, food, clothing and equal access to opportunities in a democracy. Poverty represents a failure of human society, a breakdown of civilization. Poverty is not inevitable. Ending it is possible. We should define poverty as “extinct” but first we have to take the steps to make it so.
Elizabeth May, Federal Green Party Leader
Poverty is often defined as the state of being poor, not having enough money to take care of basic necessities like food and shelter – but it is much more. Poverty not only deprives an individual of the most basic needs but robs them of their spirit, condemning them to a life of diminished opportunities, and is a disease that infects society. We have a moral obligation as citizens of the world to eradicate poverty.
Hazel McCallion, Mayor of Mississauga
No single definition or simple measure of poverty captures the deprivation and desperation experienced by too many Ontarians. Poverty means not having enough income, and not having access to the social, economic, educational, and cultural opportunities that transform people’s lives. By excluding so many, poverty limits our collective potential as a province. What Ontario needs now is a poverty reduction strategy that focuses on both income and inclusion.
Joe Mihevc, Toronto Councillor
Poverty means going without what most take for granted – food on one’s plate, a secure home, decent clothes, and a night out. Being poor means constantly worrying about money. But perhaps most tragic is the fact that many low-income people believe that poverty is their fault, perhaps because so few of our leaders acknowledge the real causes of poverty – low-paying jobs, insufficient income supports, and inadequate access to housing, education, and childcare.
Michael Polanyi, Co-Coordinator, Canadian Social Development Program, KAIROS: Canadian Ecumenical Justice Iniatives.
Ontario poverty is about the anger of not having enough to pay for rent, the grocer, heat, electricity, food on the table, clothes or transport to work, even if one is holding one or two jobs; it is about children who lie about leaving lunch at home, when there was no lunch to begin with; it is about being outside the mainstream, on a farm, on a reservation, in a north-end tenement, with your nose pressed against the window of a community you cannot afford to join.
Hugh Segal, Senator
You can spot a poor person by looking at their health record: The burden of poverty is measured in increased illness and early death caused by a toxic mix of insecure housing, inadequate income, poor food, social and economic exclusion, and other inequities. Under international law, everyone has the right to an adequate standard of living but governments have failed in their responsibility to tackle the root causes of poverty.
Michael Shapcott, Director of Community Engagement, The Wellesley Institute
poverty goes beyond seeing people not having their basic needs met for food, clean water, clothing or shelter, a concept very hard to comprehend in a country as rich as Canada. What I find more painful is the humiliation heaped on the poor by individuals who haven’t a clue about their circumstances, or worse, by those placed in positions of power to help.
Becky Thompson, Grade One Teacher, Toronto