Human Resources Committee on April 28th, 2009

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Madame Beaudin.

[Josée Beaudin, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Courtneidge, you spoke about certain measures, including the measure to increase the child tax benefit to $5,100. Is that correct? How did you determine that amount?

[Dr. John Courtneidge]

That figure was probably provided by Dennis.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Mr. Howlett.

[Dennis Howlett]

That amount would mostly eliminate child poverty. There have been annual increases over the years, but now they have stopped. It's time now for the government to decide to continue to increase the child tax benefit to get it to a level where it could reduce child poverty to almost nothing.

These figures were put forward by Campaign 2000, the coalition against child poverty in Canada.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

You have some time left, Ms. Beaudin.

[Josée Beaudin, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

You talked about consensus. When we talk about the employment insurance program as a whole, this is a measure that can be implemented quickly and that does not require an act. Making this program more accessible would already make it possible to take action against poverty.

Do you all agree with that?

[Dennis Howlett]

Definitely.

[Armine Yalnizyan]

I believe you do need legislative changes. I don't think you can do it simply through regulations, but I may be incorrect. That's why it has to be a parliamentary process. The budget bill was very specific about how the Employment Insurance Act was changed to accommodate the extension of benefits. That was extremely welcome, but I think other changes require changes to the legislation, which may not make them quite as quick as regulatory changes. But it's for the clerk to decide if there is space within the regulatory regime, rather than going through the legislative route.

[Josée Beaudin, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

I was thinking especially of abolishing the waiting period. If we abolish that period and maintain the five weeks at the end, we would be offering workers seven weeks. Is that a measure that suits you?

[Dr. John Courtneidge]

Yes, and the hours requirements should also be reviewed. This is the big stumbling block. I know from personal experience. I'm a seasonal worker during the summer in a garden centre--I used to co-own a nursery and garden centre in England--and you can't work the number of hours in seasonal work, certainly in Ontario, that enable you to access EI. EI should be a much more universal system, so that when people are in need they are able to access those funds straight-away. Most of us live literally a hand-to-mouth existence, and no income equals no food.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Thank you, Dr. Courtneidge.

I will now go to Mr. Martin.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you very much.

Thanks to all of you for the tremendous work you do and for being here this morning. You certainly have very valuable information for all of us to consider as we try to put together a proposal for the federal government that will get them into the poverty strategy game again.

A couple of you mentioned the issue of political will and the need for political will if this is going to happen. Armine makes a great plea for immediate action. We all know that there needs to be immediate action plus a long-term plan that will take us out of this recession and forward with some confidence that nobody will be left behind.

How do we marshal the political forces? We're going out now as a committee over the next couple of months to eastern Canada and a couple of big cities--Montreal and Toronto--to hear from people about poverty. Now we may come in and come out under the radar. Who knows? Dealing with an issue, as Armine has said, that is so front of mind for so many people.... Even those who still have jobs are looking over their shoulders wondering what if and what's there if they don't.

How do we mobilize the political forces in the very near future to get behind an effort by our committee and the government, ultimately, to make the changes required?

[Dennis Howlett]

The Make Poverty History campaign has over 250,000 people who have signed up in support of our campaign. We have an online network. I'm sure you've received emails from Make Poverty History supporters, because we have supporters in every riding across the country.

I think even pollsters have commented on the change in public opinion. It used to be that people in Canada thought the poor were a small minority, and they didn't need to worry about them because they themselves were safe. That is no longer the case. People are concerned. The economic crisis has created broader public support for doing something about poverty.

The other thing that has changed is that as we have tried to get across a positive message that poverty can be eliminated both globally and in Canada, people have supported that idea. They realize that it's the smart thing to do. We have to get away from thinking of poverty in terms of welfare and as a bottomless pit and that it will always be there. It can be eliminated.

Quebec and Newfoundland have shown a smart way of actually removing the barriers and preventing people from falling so deeply into poverty that it's hard to climb out. Having the employment insurance safety net there, having day care available to people, and having pharmacare available to people has actually reduced the number of people living in poverty by providing a positive way out. And that has reduced the costs for government, not only in the welfare bill but in health care, incarceration, and other things. So they have the money to pay for the investments that are necessary.

I will concede that it requires an upfront investment. You have to come up with the political will to put the investment up front, but it will pay off big time. Not only will it save government money, it will increase tax revenue and boost the economy. The best way to increase productivity is not to give more money to the high-tech sector. It is already highly productive. The most bang for your buck will come from investing in training and education and stimulation at the low end of the economy, where it's the least productive. That's where you have the most to gain. So it makes sense economically. I would argue that it also is imperative morally that we do something about poverty. Wherever you come from, I think we can all agree that everyone in Canada has a lot to gain from reducing poverty.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Go ahead, Dr. Courtneidge.

[Dr. John Courtneidge]

On your trip down home, as we maritimers would call it, there are two groups that I think you should try to meet with. The first are the editorial boards of the regional newspapers, the Chronicle Herald and the other newspaper boards down home. The other group are those within the universities, including the students. The fourth part of the four-point plan I've just outlined: a federal anti-poverty act or poverty abolition act, a poverty commissioner, who you could in fact appoint on an interim basis before the act is put in place. The cost would be minimal—$1 million annually, or something like that, for an interim poverty commissioner. Then, of course, the Senate will be bringing forward its green paper, and we are encouraging you to look at this citizens income idea. So I'd recommend those two conversation groups, the editorial boards and those within the universities.

The key point they need to know concerns this elastic-band point. This elastic band represents an unequal society. The stress is felt right throughout that society. If you go to Nova Scotia, for example, with an increasingly large senior population, if you reduce income inequality and in fact create an inclusive society, you dramatically reduce health care costs. In B.C., the argument across on the other coast is that the provincial budget will go completely over the top because of the increasing health care costs. There will be no money for roads, or transit, or police, or education; it will simply be covered up that way.

So I'm saying editorial boards, and I would try to meet with the principals and students in the east coast universities.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Thank you.

Madame Yalnizyan.

[Armine Yalnizyan]

I think you'll get political will as people start losing their mortgages and losing their pensions and suddenly all the progress we've made on poverty reduction among the over-65s balloons out of control: public pensions, and improving GIS, OAS, or CPP, doing something about the fact that universally people are not protected and there's going to be a real spike-up. The biggest proportion of people working right now are those over 55 and over 65. They're small proportions of the population, but people are going back to work because they can't survive on their pensions.

I don't think you need to build up political will; I think the stories are going to come to you, and people are going to demand that you act. That's what they put you in this place for in the first place. Help us.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Thank you.

We'll now go to the government, to Mr. Komarnicki.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I certainly appreciate your presentation and the passion with which you present it.

Mr. Howlett indicated earlier that really it's a question of how you apply funding in putting it to use for those who need it the most. It's always a question of how big your pot of funding is and then where you should apply that funding. I agree with Armine Yalnizyan that having a job is probably a good first step.

The government has done a number of things; for instance, the national child benefit, an investment of about $3.6 billion. The Canada child tax credit together with the national child benefit amounts to about $9.4 billion. I would take it that's a good investment of dollars. The government recently has increased the amount you can earn before the child tax benefit is cut off. Those are good steps. Would you agree with me?

[Dennis Howlett]

The problem is that the child tax credit is not available to the poorest families. That's the problem I was pointing to.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I was speaking about the Canada child tax benefit and the national child benefit, which together are about $9.4 billion. Is that a good investment?

[Dennis Howlett]

The problem is that the child tax credit part of it is not available to the poorest families. The child tax benefit has been a good program, but I wish the additional money that was put into the child programs had been put into the existing child tax benefit, because then it would have been accessible to the poorest families.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I gather from listening to what you're saying that it's sort of a multi-faceted approach. That's one area. The other area is housing. And of course most recently there's been an announcement to extend $1.9 billion over five years for housing and homelessness programs. Would you say that is a good initiative? Perhaps more money is needed, but is it going in the right direction?

[Dennis Howlett]

Yes, and I already commented on that. It is welcomed. The one missing thing is there's not much money for building new housing. Most of it is dedicated to retrofitting, which is urgently needed, as well, so that's welcome.