Human Resources Committee on April 17th, 2008

[Michel Frojmovic]

I'll start with two short cautionary notes on the whole business of measurement.

One is that probably the most cost-effective way of dramatically reducing absolute poverty in Canada is to just move your poverty line down. That would change things dramatically, and of course there are a lot of politics around that. You can also spend an inordinate amount of time debating which measure is appropriate. If you put two people in a room together and tell them to come up with a hundred different indicators, they'll do it gladly. It's always very easy to come up with a hundred new ways of measuring things, and there are also intense politics around where you put that famous line.

Having said that, I find one of the appealing things about working with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities is that you don't need to come up with a single measure. Each of these municipalities, at some level, is grappling with its own reality. Social exclusion has been part of municipal mandates for some time, certainly for as long as I've been working with this project, so when you look at this list of indicators, civic engagement--that is, how much people are involved in their community--is one of the indicators we're looking at. It can even be voting patterns.

I mentioned we are going to be putting together a report on immigration. There's a lot of social inclusion and exclusion in Canada around the theme of immigration, particularly in Canadian cities. What you don't see in this version, because it's 2004, is a set of indicators around recreation.

That list was put together by a group of kids; I was doing my municipal checklist as you were talking, and it's getting involved in swimming programs and getting involved in a whole range of recreation programs. The capacity for municipalities to keep those programs affordable is a very important part of social exclusion and inclusion, and that language is used; if you go to some municipal websites, they use “social inclusion” and “social exclusion”.

Now that I've given my cautionary notes about measurements, I'll say it is important not to talk only in terms of income. There is much more than simple income poverty going on when you're talking about poverty, and it is happening; that measurement is taking place in Canada.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Yves Lessard]

Thank you.

That's all, Mr. Martin, your time is already up.

Now I'll invite Mr. Lake to ask his questions.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

What I'd like to go is give Mr. Sarlo a chance to finish his comments from his opening statement. I think you were about to speak to some of the challenges and ran out of time.

[Prof. Chris Sarlo]

Thank you very much. It's just about a minute.

I mentioned the technical challenges. Many of them have to do with issues surrounding unreported income; additional issues relate to data and Statistics Canada. I'll simply refer you to my latest paper, which is due to be published next month.

On the political side, I really don't have to tell you folks the kind of opposition you're going to get if you embark on a serious attempt to measure the number of people who just cannot afford basic needs. For whatever reason, some folks just don't want that to happen, and I just hope that parliamentarians have the courage and the rational arguments to resist that.

The basic needs measure that I've developed should be helpful if you decide to measure the extent of real deprivation in Canada. This measure essentially takes the cost of a basket of basic needs in different parts of Canada for families of different sizes and sets up those costs as poverty lines.

As I mentioned just a moment ago, I really would urge you to resist the temptation to bulk up the poverty line by adding things like recreation items and vacations and so on. The critical issue here is not that the poor shouldn't have these things--of course they should--the question is whether people are impoverished for lack of them. I think there's great value in determining how many people just can't afford even the basic needs; to add more onto the poverty line would simply muddy the waters. I would urge you to choose a credible poverty measure and stick to it.

Those are my comments.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Thank you.

It was interesting to listen to Mr. Martin reading the poem. I think back to my own childhood; when I was growing up, it's safe to say that at least half the time, or maybe even more than half the time, we were what would be considered below the LICO. I was able to play hockey because my parents made a decision to drive $800 vehicles. We didn't eat out a whole lot when I was growing up. My parents had to make choices for us. I think it is important that we.... Growing up, I never actually thought of myself as poor. I was able to enjoy a good time with my family and things like that, but there were some challenges.

I want to have the folks from the food banks talk a little bit. We talked about the numbers of people who use the food banks; what I'm curious about is the percentage who would be repeat customers and how often those people would use a food bank.

[Wayne Hellquist]

Certainly there is a high percentage of people who rely on food banks, who are regular clients or regular customers. There is no question. However, increasingly we are seeing people who are using the food bank only periodically. And in many cases these are seniors. They're working poor, people who hold down a job or may hold down two jobs, but at minimum wage. You do the math, and you know you simply can't support your family and household on that income on an ongoing basis. So periodically they come to the food bank when they are unable to provide for their families, maybe due to an emergency that has come up, or it may be that the car has broken down, or there may be some other thing that impedes their ability to purchase food.

Certainly there is a high percentage of people who have become somewhat dependent on food banks for a portion of their food supply. Recognizing, of course, that no food bank anywhere in the country is able to supply 100% of anybody's food needs, we are only an emergency food supply.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I know, coming from Edmonton, that we have a tremendous food bank there. Marjorie Bencz has done terrific work in Edmonton, and it is a very, very well-regarded organization. I commend you guys for the work you do.

Mr. Sarlo, it's interesting to hear about the Nordic countries. In a previous meeting we had Statistics Canada in, and one of the things they pointed out is that in these Nordic countries, if you measure at the tenth percentile, where 10% of the population is poorer and 90% are better off, Canada actually measures up pretty well and the Americans actually measure up pretty well at that percentile in terms of purchasing power.

Do you have any research on that, or have you done any research on that in terms of some of those measurements?

[Prof. Chris Sarlo]

I haven't. Any use of a particular portion of the distribution of income would be a relative measure, regardless of where it's set. There is a variety of them out there. Typically they would be a percentage of median income—that's what's used in Europe—typically 60% of median after-tax income.

The research I've done is typically on market basket types of measures, looking at the measurement of basic needs and the number of people who are unable to afford that, and trying to use comparisons with other nations.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

And with the one and a half minutes I have left, I'd actually like to get a comment, if I could.

I don't know if you've had the chance to read John Richards' report on poverty that came out at the end of 2007. But one of the connections he makes is to cuts that were made at the provincial level in B.C., Alberta, and Ontario to social assistance rates, cuts that the federal Liberal government made in the mid-nineties to EI. He actually says that the result of those cuts is that employment has increased and poverty has actually decreased because of some of those measures that were taken.

Have you had a chance to read the report, and if not, what are your thoughts in terms of that?

[Prof. Chris Sarlo]

Who was that addressed to?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

That was addressed to you. I'm sorry, I was continuing with you.

[Prof. Chris Sarlo]

I have only taken a brief look at John Richards' report and I did note the conclusion you mention. I don't have a lot of comment on that. Quite frankly, I have not done a lot of work on the policy side, looking at connections between cuts or increases in various government programs and the relationship between those and poverty. I've focused a lot of my attention on measurement issues, definitional issues, and relating that to common understandings of terms, and so on.

I'll leave it at that. I wouldn't have the expertise to be able to comment any more than you have with the report by Richards.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Yves Lessard]

Thank you.

We'll move on to the second round, a round of five minutes. We'll of course start with the Liberal Party.

Mr. Dryden.

[Ken Dryden, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I'd like to ask each of you this question individually. All of you have had a lot of experience. You've worked in the field for quite some time; you know your own area; you know how your area fits in or doesn't fit in to other areas; you know people who live in low-income circumstances. You also have had experience in dealing with governments and have watched history, have watched things happen over the last number of years.

My question for each of you is, if you assume that the Government of Canada is really serious in significantly reducing poverty in this country, what is the singular message, if you have one single piece, that you would deliver to us as crucial to making a significant difference? Knowing that it's easy to be right and far more difficult to deliver right, what is your singular message?

[Shawn Pegg]

I'll start. I'll make a fool of myself, and then you guys can look better.

Looking back, what sticks out for me, as far as the federal government addressing poverty is concerned, is the big things that the federal government has done, such as the Canada Pension Plan, old age security, the guaranteed income supplement, and programs such as the Canada child tax benefit. When I look at this committee, I see that the federal government has the power to do something big.

And there are lots of proposals out there. There are proposals for long-term predictable funding for affordable housing, proposals for a national disability income support program, which would take a huge load off provinces and off municipalities.

[Michael Buda]

My comments will be quite general. There are many existing and past very effective federal programs, and there are some good ideas for future ones. The one comment I think I'd leave, and it's similar to what Mr. Sarlo had spoken about, is that we need to get a good handle on the scope of the problem and measure it carefully and then, really importantly, set targets and then make long-term commitments.

Too often, certainly from the municipal perspective, we find excellent federal programs that end after one or two or three years. These problems, especially the problems around poverty, will not be solved in three years. They require a long-term commitment and extensive planning. From the municipal perspective, practitioners simply can't carry that planning out as effectively as they should be able to unless they know that the federal government is there as a partner not just for three years, when maybe the program will be renewed, but for the period of time it will take to address the problem. If that means a 10-year or a 20-year funding program, then we believe that's what should happen, because that's what municipal governments do.

Thank you.

[Monica Townson]

I wouldn't suggest any specific program, but I would say that it has to be a national strategy; it has to involve the provinces and the federal government, because so many of the initiatives fall within provincial jurisdiction; it has to be transparent; it has to involve all stakeholders; and it has to set goals and targets and timelines, and those have to be measured; and there has to be accountability for meeting those.

[Ken Dryden, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Sarlo.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Yves Lessard]

Mr. Sarlo, do you want to answer the question too?

[Prof. Chris Sarlo]

Sure. I more or less said it already, but let me just repeat.

The one thing I would urge you to do is to fulfill the promise you made on child poverty, and particularly the promise you made at Copenhagen when you signed that declaration. Do it right, with clear definitions, goals, targets, timelines, metrics, and accountability.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Yves Lessard]

You have 30 seconds left. Do you want to use them?

Ms. Dhalla.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

I'm going to come back on the next round.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Yves Lessard]

You will speak in the next round? All right.

Ms. Yelich, from the Conservative Party, for five minutes.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Yes, thank you.

As I said in my opening remarks today, we really do want to try to find out what we're really trying to do here, and that is to create a plan so that we can get away from a reputation of not meeting some sort of goal of eradicating poverty and deprivation. So I do think we have to try to find a formula, and that's where some of you have helped today.

To the Canadian Association of Food Banks, specifically, you probably could help us define that somewhat. We need to know the length, the breadth, and the depth of the needs, because you are talking about basic needs. So you could see a measurement basket being a very important component, and probably the most important.

I have to agree with some of the witnesses that we can't necessarily try to measure inequalities; we have to start thinking, first of all, about the deprivation. We know there is a lot out there. That has come to our attention. Some communities are really suffering.

I just want to mention to the association of food banks something that was said by another witness, who talked about seniors and mothers and said that some of the rates at which people are stepping out of poverty have increased significantly because of some of the raises in the guaranteed income supplement—and also for some of the lone mothers, because of the education many of them are now seeking.

But we want to get back to trying to decide the best way of measuring. So would you agree that perhaps it would be a really good start to measure the level of needs of those at food banks, which we could probably measure?

And perhaps the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, and Monica Townson, and Mr. Sarlo as well would like to comment on this. I think we have to start with that. Would you agree?

I'm just thinking of the different things. Even the food banks have gone on from basic needs to training, which I think goes to show that you really are working very hard to help these people. So now we have to identify the people and then find ways to help them go on and have their training needs met. I thought it was very impressive, that this is something where you are already thinking outside the box, that it's not just about trying to keep these people fed at the food bank, but about actually helping them get a quality life.

We do know that mental illness and drugs and different addictions have definitely caused a lot of problems, and that's why the people are there—or some of the reasons why they are there. That's what we're trying to identify. Why are they there, and then how we can get them out? I say this because there are also rich people using those food banks, because they have somehow been forced to leave their homes and their families, and they end up homeless. We want to identify who these people are and how we can find strategies to get them out of poverty.

So I'd like you to please advise us on how best to make up that basket, because I'm beginning to think that “low income” isn't going to work.