Thank you very much.
Ladies and gentlemen, good day to you.
Thank you for inviting the Collectif pour un Québec sans pauvreté. This is our first time as witnesses before a standing committee of the House of Commons.
My name is Serge Petitclerc, and I am the coordinator and spokesperson of the Collectif pour un Québec sans pauvreté. Beside me is Olivier Ducharme, our researcher.
I am basically going to tell you three things today.
First of all, the Collectif would like to thank the federal government for this initiative. Just like the Quebec anti-poverty law, the federal Parliament has finally presented a bill that will bring about a national strategy on poverty reduction and establish the National Advisory Council on Poverty, as well as giving itself a general goal of eliminating poverty in the country. The Collectif welcomes the bill and its main goal of establishing the first official poverty line as well as poverty reduction targets. This is music to our ears.
Secondly, despite these positive remarks, the Collectif would like to stress that it is an error to use the MBM, the Market Basket Measure, as the main poverty indicator. The MBM as an indicator is not a bad tool, but it wasn't designed to be used this way. The MBM is to be used solely to measure the income necessary to meet the basic needs of a person or a family in terms of food, shelter, clothing, transport and other basic goods and services. Barely getting by, however, does not mean you can get out of poverty.
In our brief, you will read France's story, which serves as a perfect example. France is a retiree whose income is equal to the MBM. Before retiring, she had to live on an income that was much less because she lived on social assistance. When she retired, this was seen as an important step, because she would now be able to better meet her basic needs thanks to an improved income. For all that, she does not have the impression that she has escaped poverty. Her income does not allow her to cover any unexpected expenses. Despite being on a lower income when she was on social assistance, she could for example count on a partial reimbursement of her dental and denture expenses, as well as what she spent on eye exams and glasses. Since retiring, she has had to pay for most of her healthcare expenses, which has considerably increased her expenditures. After a fall, which left her with broken teeth and a broken arm, she fell into debt because of unexpected expenses.
That's the problem with MBM: it is too low. Getting out of poverty means you have a certain financial security, you are free to make choices and you have stability. That's the reason the Collectif's main recommendation is to raise the poverty line in order to make it more than simply meeting basic needs. For lack of anything better, the Collectif recommends using the low-income measure which is 60% of the median income as an official poverty line. This is the same tool that is used by member countries of the European Union and it does have the advantage of giving a view of poverty which is not limited to meeting basic needs.
Thirdly, the Collectif would like to stress that many improvements could be made to the bill in order to make the Canadian government's fight against poverty more effective. I won't go into details, but I will briefly mention the five suggestions that are contained in our brief.
The first suggestion is that it would be logical to include a definition of poverty in the definitions section of the bill.
The second recommendation is that this definition should be the same as the one contained in the Quebec statute, which reads as follows, “[...] the condition of a human being who is deprived of the resources, means, choices and power necessary to acquire and to maintain economic self-sufficiency or to facilitate integration and participation in society.”
Our third recommendation, if indeed the MBM is used as an indicator despite our opposition, would be to provide a definition in the act such as the list of goods that would be included in the market basket as well as the sources used to establish the price of each of these goods.
The fourth recommendation would be to change the subject in the title of the act that states “the reduction of poverty” and use instead “the elimination of poverty”, given the preamble which states, “Whereas Canada aspires to be a world leader in the eradication of poverty [...]”.
Our fifth recommendation would be to increase the number of members on the National Advisory Council of Poverty. We think that 8 to 10 people representing all the regional and socio-economic realities in Canada is spreading it a bit thin. By ways of comparison, the advisory council of Quebec is composed of 15 members. That would be a good model.
Essentially, the bill is good news for us. It is good news for people living in poverty as well as the organizations that work with them. The bill should, however, contain a more ambitious target and be improved in many ways as per the recommendations contained in the Collectif's brief.
Thank you again for inviting us and listening to us today.