Human Resources Committee on May 11th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Welcome back.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we're continuing our study of the federal contribution to reducing poverty in Canada. Welcome to our twenty-first meeting and our second meeting here as we hear from our witnesses.

Once again, I'd like to extend a greeting on behalf of the HUMA committee as we are embarking on our study across the country to talk about some of the issues.

I want to welcome Mr. Sinclair, who is from the Face of Poverty Consultation, as well as Mr. Poworoznyk, from the Saint Leonard's Society of Nova Scotia. We will start with Mr. Sinclair.

You have some opening minutes. I know that we've suggested five minutes, but if you need a little more time, I think we're pretty flexible.

[Dr. Alasdair Sinclair, Professor Emeritus (Economics), Dalhousie University, Face of Poverty Consultation]

I was told five minutes and four points, and it's four points, of course, because this is the Four Points hotel. I didn't realize that until I got here.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

That's right. We didn't want to stay with the six or seven points.

[Dr. Alasdair Sinclair, Professor Emeritus (Economics), Dalhousie University, Face of Poverty Consultation]

Sir, the floor is yours. You have about five minutes or however much time you need.

Thank you.

The Face of Poverty Consultation is an interfaith group that seeks to increase public awareness of poverty issues and to promote action by governments to improve the situation in Nova Scotia. We are pleased to be able to make this presentation today.

Poverty is an issue in good times, and even more so in the current economic downturn. We focus on four areas where federal action can alleviate the problems of those in poverty in Canada while recognizing the importance of other issues, including global warming, foreign aid to developing countries, and financial regulation in the current global context, all of which could have an impact on our poverty in Canada.

Our first issue is much in the news but bears repetition: the reform of the employment insurance system to increase access and reduce discrimination. Increasing access can be achieved by a reduction in the number of hours of work required to be eligible for support. Reducing discrimination means having common standards re hours of work and benefits across the country.

We support the suggestion that the number of hours of work be standardized to 360 hours, down from the range of 420 to 700 hours currently in effect across the country. In a period when economic stimulus is essential to prevent a downturn, it is clear that EI payments will be spent and not saved. I'd like to emphasize that point, because the stimulus effect of expenditures by the federal government is an important component today, and I don't think there's anything that would be spent faster than increases in EI, because obviously the people will spend the money.

Our second issue relates to housing. The first report cart on ending homelessness in HRM, which I'm waving in front of me, the “Halifax Report Card on Homelessness 2009”, was produced by Community Action on Homelessness for the period of January 1 to December 31. I think you heard from them earlier today. It shows clearly the need for more affordable housing, including accommodation for those who cannot maintain housing independently and who require a form of group housing. They don't use that term, but that was the term I grew up with.

Group housing is important. As shown in the report, many of the people who are homeless have mental and other physical problems that make it very difficult for them to run what we might call a standard house. This is an area where federal financial support is critical and needs to be increased, with suitable pressure on the province to do its part.

Our third issue is early child care. While there is some tax relief for child care payments by parents, this is of no benefit to those in poverty who do not make enough to pay income tax. A similar problem arises with respect to the tax credit for children in the sports program. The federal government should work with the province to develop a program for support of children that includes all children, irrespective of their parents' income.

One of the things we do at the Face of Poverty Consultation is have an annual service on the anniversary of the promise in Parliament in 1989 that we'd eliminate child poverty. Well, that's still a goal that we might look for: to eliminate child poverty.

Our fourth issue is the progressiveness of the federal tax system. Some studies show that when all aspects of the tax system are examined, the tax system loses those progressive features it has at high incomes. At the same time, inequality of incomes is increasing, not just in Canada but globally.

These are difficult issues at the national level, but federal policy is essential to provide support for those on lower incomes, while increasing taxes on those with high incomes and wealth.

Those are my four points.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Sinclair.

Sir, you have five minutes.

[Michael Poworoznyk, Director of Operations, Saint Leonard's Society of Nova Scotia]

I'm Michael Poworoznyk, an operations director at Saint Leonard's Society of Nova Scotia. Saint Leonard's Society of Nova Scotia has recently merged with Metro Turning Point Centre. Metro Turning Point Centre is one of our facilities at Saint Leonard's now. It is Atlantic Canada's largest emergency men's shelter, with 75 beds providing emergency shelter to men over 16. We have Barry House as well, which is a women's shelter with 20 beds, and we have a men's halfway house with 21 beds and a women's halfway house with 8 beds. So we have a diverse range of services that provide help to people to assist them from crisis back to community. We see people arriving at our doors in various states of crisis.

I think I would echo a lot of things that have been said to you across the country, but housing is probably one of our number one concerns. Our effort in our organization is to navigate people to safe affordable housing—housing that is in community and helps them integrate into community. So there are a number of features to that type of housing. It needs to be safe and affordable. We can find unsafe affordable housing in rooming houses and so on that are substandard. We're even hearing that landlords are getting out of that business because they can't make enough money to update their buildings and so on. We can find safe unaffordable housing, where many of us would live.

But the real feature we look at is not to have extensive social housing being built all in one place, because those activities of the seventies and so on really created neighbourhoods that had a single-income feature or a homogeneous population in terms of their poverty status. That ghettoization is really problematic. So we would advocate for supported housing models that have been pioneered in many places. Many of you are familiar with Ottawa; there's a great scattered housing program there. Hostels-to-homes programs exist throughout the country. We would look forward to seeing federal support for those.

When we look at that kind of thing, that kind of housing definitely needs infrastructure. We definitely need to build some. I think that's a good place to start. That has been done by HPS, for example, over the last little while and SCPI before that.

But where the real crux of the matter comes is in providing supports. Those supports need a funding source. That investment needs to be ongoing and sustainable. The idea that organizations apply for government funding as a pilot, or as an initial investment, and hope to build.... We're always challenged by funders to build sustainability. I think it's time for the decision-makers and the policy-makers to start working out how we create a core funding option for some of these things, much like the health care system or the justice system. We consider the proactive investment as just that: a proactive investment that delivers returns. There are research papers galore that really emphasize that a proactive investment socially does produce returns in justice and health. So we need to see that.

The other thing I would say is that at Saint Leonard's we have looked at options of how to partner. Of course, as Metro Turning Point and Saint Leonard's began that discussion, we were very open about taking risks and doing that. I would urge and challenge our policy-makers to reward partnership, to figure out how to reward partnership instead of seeing partnership as an opportunity for gaining efficiencies, which typically equals saving money. Instead, be able to offer agencies that are willing to develop a full partnership, which share staff or facilities or budget in some way, an opportunity to have a bit of financial plus given into their budget. That way, they can, one, begin to cover the actual cost of the partnership and, two, begin to invest in studying that partnership.

Some agencies aren't as adept as others at writing those things into their budgets. But it's important to reward those partnerships and see that happening and to see what real partnership is. It's more than referral—saying if we can't serve a client and agency X can, we're going to send that client there. Well that's great collaboration. It develops from referral, where we might start to see staff understanding their niches and beginning to function in them. But real partnership goes from the front door to the finance office. We successfully developed that with Metro Turning Point and Saint Leonard's. That led us into a merger, and that will produce a return on investment of efficiency over time, I'm sure, but initially there are some costs.

Then the final thing I would say to challenge our policy-makers is that we are in an economic downturn and requiring stimulus. I think the economic downturn has produced a bit of a revolution in understanding that life is not about defining “more” and how to get it; instead, people are starting to be challenged to define “enough” and how to give more away. I would urge our policy-makers to support that philanthropic revolution and to up the tax credit for donors who are donating to our organizations.

I'm very happy, when I donate to political parties, that I get 75% as a return. However, when I donate to my favourite charities, it's a substantially lower tax credit. I think there is something to be said. That is a financial piece that isn't necessarily widespread, but it could be a way to inspire more of that involvement. As well, when people put investment from their wallet, they often put more investment from their time and energy, and they get to know the issues. I really believe that the more people know how to help, the more they will help, and we will create a better community. As people get involved, as people we serve get into scattered housing and their housing is among other people in our community with differing backgrounds, the primary feature of relationships then is not their addiction, their mental health status, or their poverty; it becomes two people in a laundry room doing laundry together in an apartment. Landscaper Bob says to formerly homeless Bill, who just got an apartment, “My place is hiring, man. You look like you could do something. If you want to get involved, I know I can get you in.”

With those networking opportunities, people start to build community. That's really what we're looking at. That can make a substantial impact for a relatively low cost.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Poworoznyk.

I appreciate your talking about that. I know it's the first time I've actually heard it in our hearings in terms of adjusting the rate that people offer in terms of donations. Once again, as we hear a variety of ideas, it's not just one thing; it might be a combination. I appreciate that thought process, because it would potentially encourage more giving if we adjusted the tax rate. Maybe we'll get back to that a little bit later.

Thanks again for your presentation.

We're now going to move over to Ms. Sutherland.

Thank you for being here. You've got five minutes or thereabouts for your presentation.

[Betty Jean Sutherland, Equality Representative, Canadian Union of Public Employees - Nova Scotia]

Thank you very much. I would have been on time, but I couldn't find parking.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees-Atlantic Region represents approximately 16,000 Nova Scotia members, and we have approximately 6,000 members who reside in Newfoundland and Labrador. We are citizens, voters, and taxpayers of Canada. We have a great interest in the work of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities and its study on the federal government's contribution to reducing poverty in Canada.

By Canadian standards, Nova Scotia is definitely not a high-wage province. In 2007, more than one out of every four people worked in Nova Scotia for less than $10 an hour. By this standard, Nova Scotia has the third highest proportion of low-paid workers in the country, after Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador. The province also has the third lowest average hourly wage, above New Brunswick and P.E.I., and roughly on par with Newfoundland and Labrador. Based on Statistics Canada's low-income cut-off in 2006, 8.4% of Nova Scotians were living in low-income situations. The Province of Newfoundland adopted a poverty reduction strategy in 2006. In 2004, Statistics Canada information determined that some 62,000 individuals living in 33,000 families in Newfoundland and Labrador were living in poverty.

CUPE Atlantic will address the role that the federal government should play in addressing poverty in five particular areas: employment insurance, the Canada-Quebec Pension Plan and old age security, literacy, child care, and minimum wage.

On employment insurance, CUPE Atlantic urges the federal government to make the following immediate changes: revise EI legislation so that all mandatory EI premiums are returned as benefits to workers; reduce the number of qualifying hours for regular benefits to 360, increase the benefit to at least 60% of earnings over the best 12 weeks, increase the amount of time workers receive benefits to 50 weeks, provide training for laid-off workers to access the new jobs created through public investment, and cancel plans for EI office closures.

On the Canada-Quebec Pension Plan and old age security, in the last century trade unions and other popular organizations demanded that the Government of Canada establish a comprehensive, earnings-based, universal public pension that would provide all workers with adequate retirement income. In the 1960s, Canadians went some way toward that goal with the creation of the Canada-Quebec Pension Plan and the old age security system.

The Canada-Quebec Pension Plan is designed to provide some measure of dignity to Canadians as they age. It is a tremendous social program success story. It ensures a minimum retirement income for some 93% of working Canadians through the use of mandatory enrolment, funding security, inflation protection through indexation, portability, and disability provisions. However, it only provides for an earning replacement rate of 25% of earnings up to the average industrial wage. As of 2009, this provided a maximum monthly payment of $908.75 for a 65-year-old who had maximum workforce participation with maximum earnings. In reality, the average monthly benefit payable is only $501.82, which reflects the number of part-time workers and workers who have taken leaves of absence from the paid employment market due to pregnancy leave, parental leave, and compassionate care leave, for example. This disproportionately affects women workers.

On literacy, for CUPE, reading and writing are not ends in themselves. We understand literacy to be about reading the world, not just the words. Literacy is a tool for equity and social change--a means to further equality and access. We describe literacy as the skills we need for work, learning, and life. Workplace programs include reading, writing, math, using computers, oral communication, and English or French as a second or other language, upgraded for certification or for further education and critical thinking.

On child care as a part of the comprehensive poverty reduction strategy, CUPE insists on the creation of a pan-Canadian, public, non-profit, affordable, high-quality early learning and child care program to deliver a framework and conditions to ensure quality, affordable, public, non-profit, accessible, and inclusive child care programs for parents and their children.

On minimum wage, CUPE Atlantic knows that the federal government cannot legislate minimum wages for each province. However, this committee can certainly point to the effect that higher wages can have on the Canadian community. Higher wages can increase the independence and self-sufficiency of teens and youth, enabling young adults to leave home and to help reduce post-secondary education debt, provide a better tax base on which to build healthy communities, and inject more disposable income to be spent on consumer goods and services in support of the local economy. This is especially true since people with marginal incomes are more likely to spend money locally.

Low-income individuals spend almost all of their income locally on rent, goods, and services. Higher-income earners, those who would benefit noticeably from a tax cut, are more likely to save the extra tax rebate, especially during an economic downturn. An increase in social assistance as well as an increase in minimum wage will mean more money in people's pockets to spend locally.

CUPE Atlantic Region appreciates the opportunity to present just a few of its ideas for a poverty reduction strategy for Canada. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Ms. Sutherland.

We're going to start with two rounds of questions. The first one will be seven minutes for questions and answers.

I will just let you know that there is translation available if you require it. English is on channel one. When Madame Beaudin asks questions, I know they will be in French.

Mr. Savage, you have the floor, sir.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you very much.

Thank you all for coming today.

I'm pleased that later on today, Michael, we're going to have a chance to see the Metro Turning Point shelter and the important work that you do. I want to ask you a question after I go to the Face of Poverty group and perhaps to Betty Jean on two issues: EI and the child tax benefit.

Your group, Alasdair, has done some tremendous work, and I've had the opportunity to meet with them fairly regularly. I see Caroline is here. She's a regular in my office. We recently had a chance to have her attend as part of our discussion on poverty with Ken Dryden. I feel like we have to preface all of these meetings around the country with the fact that we know that a lot of you have talked about this a lot. As Claudia Jahn said this morning, any chance we have to talk about it is good, and hopefully we'll produce some significant recommendations.

I spend a lot of time talking about EI these days, as do a lot of people. Sometimes people in my own Liberal caucus have said over the past year, as well, “EI is an issue for you because you're from Atlantic Canada.” Well, that's not entirely true. Where I live, for example, in Halifax, and where Megan lives, you need 700 hours. You need the maximum number of hours to qualify for EI. There are areas where the economy has struggled--Cape Breton, where it's 420. This is why it's good to go around the country. You get a sense of the fact that things vary from area to area. But we do have people who could conceivably work in the same place, who could be laid off, and one could qualify for EI and one might not, because there are 58 regions. Nova Scotia, I think, has four or five of those. I think your recommendation is an important one.

On the child tax benefit, the Caledon Institute have been great crusaders for social change. They presented to our committee last month, and in part of their presentation they said that, in fact, governments have made more progress against poverty than many people realize, even though there's still a long way to go and the challenge is daunting. Canada has made substantial strides in reducing poverty among the elderly and some among children.

We haven't done anywhere near enough, but their point is that there are some vehicles there that we can use, and one of them is the child tax benefit. I know you are among the groups that call for us to raise that to $5,200 a year. I also think you're among the groups that have suggested that the universal child care benefit would have been better served to take that $2.5 billion and put it to the child tax benefit and the low-income supplement of the child tax benefit.

Do you want to chat about how important that is for low-income families?

[Dr. Alasdair Sinclair]

Well, yes, but our point also is that to pay taxes, you have to have a pretty high income. The program has to impact on those who don't pay taxes. There has to be a program for those who are below that.

I agree that the tax credit, for those who pay taxes, for child care should be increased, because unless we get the system supported by Betty, we have expensive child care. My daughter is in the business. I know that child care is an industry like any other, and high rates are charged when it's possible to do so.

So I think you need both. You need more tax credit, but you need some solution for those who don't pay taxes.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

You don't have to pay taxes to get the benefit of some things in the tax system. You could double the GST tax credit, for example. You don't have to pay tax to get that.

[Dr. Alasdair Sinclair]

That's right.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

When I talk about the tax system, I very strongly believe that if you say you're going to reduce taxes, even at the lowest marginal rates, I get the benefit of that as well. If you're going to target your assistance, there are better ways of doing it. I think we would all agree on that.

Michael, this leads to my second point. When you go to the Metro Turning Point shelter, or you go to Hope Cottage, or you go to missions around the country, there are people the tax system will never touch. Outside of working income tax benefit, GIS, and things like that, what do we need to do, as a federal government, to assist you in the work you do at the Metro Turning Point shelter, for example? What specific initiatives would assist people who have mental health issues or addiction issues? What would you recommend the federal government's role should be there?

[Michael Poworoznyk]

In terms of tax?

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

No, in terms of direct social investment.

[Michael Poworoznyk]

One of the things I often tell people is this. They often want to buy a project or a specific program that's very time limited. What the people who arrive at our door need is ongoing, very consistent help. We need funding on an ongoing basis for the support services we provide.

Current federal programs fund predominantly infrastructure pieces in terms of the poverty reduction strategy or the homelessness partnering strategy. It's funding predominantly bricks and mortar kinds of things, and small pilots. That needs to convert to ongoing, sustainable funding for programs that have been proven to work. Supporting some of the staff time that's needed to provide the kind of help and support that people need to navigate the system and to access existing supports that are already there would be a major step forward.

I'll just come back to the point that we have to figure out ways to reward partnerships between sectors as well. Social services are encompassed in the health care sector. They're encompassed in the social service sector that's provincially funded here by the Department of Community Services. It's also within the federal funding for employment strategies. For example, a guy coming to our shelter would have three different case managers. If I add the incarceration piece, he may go into jail if it's a short time, but he may also have an additional worker in there for discharge planning and so on. That seems to me like a bit of a duplication. If there are ways to foster that partnership among all of those things and create a little bit better horizontal governance of some of that programming, that would also be advantageous.

I think the way to support that would be to offer an RFP for something like that, with a duration that you could then measure, with a research component.

Those are just some brainstorming ideas.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

What percentage of the clients you have would have mental health and addiction issues?

[Michael Poworoznyk]

The homelessness report card document probably indicates that pretty clearly. I would say that we have a very high percentage.

Is it in there?

[Dr. Alasdair Sinclair]

I think so.

[Michael Poworoznyk]

Yes, the percentage that's listed there is 50%. But we have a difficulty in that whether or not a person is diagnosed becomes a critical part of whether or not that would necessarily get listed. In terms of self-reporting, they're often hiding it due to stigma. But when we think about functioning on an everyday level, interacting in relationships, most of the guys we're seeing at the shelter for men are definitely experiencing some mental health problem.

Just logically, if you think about your life and going into a shelter and the circumstances surrounding that, it would be very hard to avoid depression and, after a while, very hard to avoid anti-social personality kinds of things, just because of the nature of what happens and the unofficial codes of the street that people interact under. Those things are very difficult for people to understand, I think, if they haven't walked in those shoes.

So I would say that we probably have well over 95%, if not 100%, of people who are experiencing some sort of mental health issue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Michael and Michael.

We're going to move to Madame Beaudin for seven minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Good day everyone. I am from Quebec where you can also find these types of shelters for men and women. One of the major problems encountered is ensuring that follow-up services are provided to these individuals once they move into supported housing. These follow-up services may be provided for a period of six months to a year, a year and a half, two years and ever longer. Do you encounter similar problems, in terms of finding the human resources needed to continue helping these individuals?

[Michael Poworoznyk]

Yes, I would say that it's definitely a major issue here. I know that in our organization, one of our trials is funding to pursue people once they've left the shelter. People will report that they've moved into an apartment, and unless we know that landlord or know that apartment address, we're not sure whether that's safe and affordable, in some cases.

So outreach and support would be very important, as would a men in supported housing program. In this city, we have a women in supported housing program. Women are moved into scattered units throughout the city and are supported with visits and whatever they need. They can call. And the services are very flexible. We would like to see a similar men in supported housing program. And while who funds that is discussed--provincial or federal--I think a federal strategy on funding those types of things.... Hostels-to-homes programs are now pretty active in many jurisdictions. They take on various forms and models, but that supported housing program is very effective. And you're right, outreach becomes very critical.

I would say that the same is true in employment programming. As we start to look down the road at Saint Leonard's, at our employment programming, we recognize that people don't lose their jobs because of hard skill issues; they lose their jobs because of soft skill issues. People need a “relationship and work attitude” apprenticeship program much more than they need a hard skill apprenticeship. And that's the nature of what supported housing means. People are moved into supported housing, and that outreach support provides that mentorship on how to relate to your landlord, how to manage your time budget so that you have time for cleaning and food preparation, and how to shop on a budget, provided you have some semblance of income, which we could talk about as well. But outreach is key.