Human Resources Committee on May 12th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and our study on the federal contribution to reducing poverty in Canada, we'll commence with our twenty-sixth meeting.

I'd like to welcome all our guests today.

We want to thank you very much taking the time out of your busy schedules to be here with us. This is an issue that the committee has been looking at over the last number of months in Ottawa. We've been out on the road for the last couple of days. We were in Halifax yesterday, we are in Moncton today, and we will be in Montreal tomorrow. We're hoping that we can hear what's happening on the ground and can take back some of your suggestions and ideas to look at incorporating into a report.

Once again, we want to thank you very much for being here. You can each take five minutes to go through your presentation. I have a timer. If you're close to the time, don't worry. It will go off just to let you know that five minutes has gone by, but don't stop your remarks. Finish up what you're saying. Then we'll then have a couple of rounds of questioning from the members of Parliament. Those rounds will last seven minutes and five minutes.

There are headsets here if you need translation, either English to French or French to English. The last bit of housekeeping is that you don't need to turn the mikes on and off when you've been identified. The ladies and gentlemen behind us here will get those mikes on.

I will start with Ms. Phyllis Mockler-Caissie, project manager with the Poverty Reduction Initiative.

Welcome. Maybe you can tell us a bit about yourself, Ms. Mockler-Caissie, and then we'll have your remarks. Once again, thank you for being here.

[Phyllis Mockler-Caissie, Project Manager, Poverty Reduction Initiative]

Thank you very much.

As Dean has said, my name is Phyllis Mockler-Caissie. I am a provincial civil servant and I have been assigned the role of project manager for the poverty reduction initiative that currently is under way in New Brunswick.

I have worked with the department or with government for over 20 years. I do a lot of project management. I work in the planning, research, and evaluation branch of the Department of Social Development, but in this role I wear the hat of project manager for this very important initiative.

On October 17, 2008, Premier Shawn Graham announced that he was sponsoring a major public engagement initiative to develop a poverty reduction plan in New Brunswick. This collaborative approach to addressing a societal problem is being carried out in three phases.

The first phase, the public dialogues, ended on March 30 and resulted in the development of a “What was Said” report affirming the contribution of the participants. The participants included a cross-section of the population, who shared their stories and experiences related to poverty.

In addition to the face-to-face dialogue sessions held around the province, citizens participated online and by sending us e-mails and letters. Smaller face-to-face dialogue sessions were also held to allow those who were not comfortable at a public meeting a chance to be involved.

We heard some very emotional stories from nearly 2,500 New Brunswickers. The participants talked about what causes poverty and what can be done to reduce it.

We believe a public engagement initiative is a very innovative way of dealing with a very important problem. This is not the typical approach that governments use to find out what needs to be done to solve a problem that affects all of society. It goes beyond the traditional method of governing and seeks to involve the public in decision-making. It wasn't a consultation; it was an engagement process.

It is a way of bringing together citizens, community non-profit organizations, business leaders, and government leaders to talk about ways to solve a problem. I would like to share with you some of what was said. What I'm telling you represents the passionate voices of members of the public and does not represent the position of the leadership team, government, or any sector of society, nor does it represent the views of any one individual. It represents the views of many people. I will focus on the issues that fall under the mandate of the federal government and not on all the issues that were identified as the causes of poverty.

Frequently, people said that lack of education is the primary cause of poverty. Over and over, New Brunswickers said they are living in poverty due to high student loan debt. They indicated that the high interest rates charged on their loans and the exceptionally high monthly payments required by the National Student Loans Service Centre are causing them a great deal of financial hardship.

Given the lack of employment opportunities in New Brunswick, many graduates are forced to leave their home province to find meaningful employment. Even then, the cost of living is so high that they are struggling to meet their student loan repayment obligations, and many are defaulting. This is causing pressure on them as they are being sent to collection agencies and getting bad credit ratings. In one instance, we heard that it almost cost a young graduate a job when the employer, a financial institution, was alerted to problems related to repayment of the outstanding student loan.

We heard that eligibility rules for getting interest relief and debt reduction assistance are too stringent and are providing only temporary relief. Often, existing high student loan debt is causing students to drop out of post-secondary education before they finish their program of study. In other cases, the thought of incurring high student debt is preventing many from furthering their education. We heard from one New Brunswicker who stated that, at 40 years of age, he was still trying to pay off his student loan.

Many people said more has to be done to forgive student loan debt, because it causes them to live in poverty for years after they complete school and really prevents people from becoming self-sufficient.

New Brunswickers also said that the employment insurance system is causing financial hardship. They said the waiting period for EI is too long, and often, they said, even after being determined eligible for benefits, it was taking too long for them to receive a cheque. In the interim, they are struggling to meet their financial obligations.

Further, people said the benefits are too low. We also heard that it is difficult for some to accumulate enough weeks to be entitled to EI. In addition, many people who want to go back to school are having trouble accessing training funds under the EI program. Many said they were not aware that they could even get assistance through EI, and then, when they did seek help, they found the eligibility criteria too complex.

People said that disabled New Brunswickers usually live below the poverty line. It was stated that persons receiving a disability pension do not have enough resources to live on and are unable to buy the goods and services necessary for their comfort and mobility. It was raised many times that there needs to be a guaranteed annual income for persons with disabilities, similar to that provided to seniors.

Another cause of poverty is the lack of decent and affordable housing. People said that rents are so high there's not much left over to meet their other basic needs. Often, people said that families and individuals are sacrificing nutritious food in order to pay their shelter costs. We all know that safe, adequate, and affordable housing is a fundamental building block for societal well-being.

We heard that there is a lack of subsidized housing, a lack of housing options, particularly for persons with mental health issues and those with physical disabilities. It was said that social housing is too remote, too removed from other resources that low income people have to access, particularly for those living in the rural area who commute to the urban centres for doctors.

Participants said there was a lack of affordable housing in the rural areas. Many people indicated that grouping low-income housing units together doesn't work. It was said that it's difficult to raise children in neighbourhoods that are riddled with issues related to poverty. People said that kids who live in poverty are further marginalized by growing up in low-income housing that is collected in a single area. This type of housing perpetuates the generational cycle of poverty. The children living in these neighbourhoods are exposed to crime, drugs, alcohol, and teen pregnancies.

These are but a few of the causes of poverty as identified by New Brunswickers in this process. I want to thank you for allowing me to echo the voices of New Brunswickers in this public engagement initiative.

Poverty affects all of us and, therefore, it is recognized that it will take all of us to find ways to reduce it. Through new partnerships with community organizations, the business sector, and all levels of government, we hope we can improve the lives of those living in poverty in our province and across the nation.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Phyllis.

We're now going to move along and have Miguel LeBlanc speak. He has five minutes.

Welcome, Miguel. I see here that you're from the New Brunswick Association of Social Workers. The floor is yours.

[Miguel LeBlanc, Executive Director, New Brunswick Association of Social Workers]

First, thank you for this opportunity. I am Miguel LeBlanc, the executive director of the New Brunswick Association of Social Workers. We have over 1,500 members in the province.

Our mandate is the promotion of the social work profession and the advancement of social policy that affects our clients and, second, the protection of the public through self-regulation. My members work in a diverse field, in everything from child protection, addiction, and mental health services to health, hospitals, counselling, and so forth. So what I'm going to be recommending comes from people who have front-line experience.

We believe that all levels of government have a responsibility to protect the most vulnerable in each community. Therefore, processes need to be developed that will work with all levels of government to reach a common goal, because the federal government's role is to provide leadership in eliminating poverty in Canada.

Social workers believe this study is one step in reaching this goal and we applaud the members and the government for taking this on.

The role of the federal government is also to develop and set national standards and policies that will ensure the protection of people in need and, through the social transfer, to ensure each province has the appropriate level of funding. The reality is that the federal government does have and must use its fiscal and funding power in working with all levels of government in ensuring that national standards are met and adhered to, for example, through legislation.

I have 13 recommendations. I would like to briefly talk to you about them.

We believe that the federal government must implement a national housing strategy.

We believe that the federal government must implement a national child care and early childhood education program. This will help low-income people and single parents to access affordable day care and, at the same time, to go out into the workforce.

Improvements in employment insurance need to be made. We applaud the five-week extension to the EI program, but the waiting period is too long. We believe the waiting period should be eliminated.

Social workers recommend the creation of a national pharmacare plan that would provide first-dollar coverage for prescription drugs. This would remove the barriers associated with employment for people who receive social assistance. This would allow them to be in the workforce, start earning some money, and have drug coverage.

We recommend the development and implementation of community economic development initiatives and job creation strategies and training to spur economic development. In New Brunswick, it's especially needed in the northern and eastern communities, the rural communities.

Another aspect that needs to be addressed regarding the rural communities is the issue of transportation. It's a major problem and needs to be addressed. Therefore, we recommend that the federal government do its part in adopting a rural transportation policy.

The federal government must also review and make every policy decision from a gender-based lens, which recognizes the unfortunate but real inequality between men and women in our community. I think this is vital when we start looking at the statistics and the gaps between women and men living in poverty.

We believe that there must be an implementation of a homeless strategy that provides adequate core and long-term sustainable funding to NGOs to provide services to homeless people.

Furthermore, we believe that we must implement a strategy that will provide adequate--and again--core and long-term sustainable funding to all the NGOs providing services to the most vulnerable people. They're providing excellent service; however, sometimes they can't meet the demand.

We need to work with all levels of government to develop and implement national standards and policies to eradicate poverty and improve the well-being and the quality of life of every Canadian through the social transfer. Again, we truly believe that the federal government does have a role in using its funding and fiscal powers to ensure that every province and all levels of government adhere to the national standard, either through legislation or fiscal penalties for non-compliance, for example.

We do believe that we need to develop processes to build working relationships with all levels of government by providing a leadership role.

We believe that the government must implement the Kelowna Accord for the first nations people and Inuit.

My last recommendation is that we need to start reviewing the Statistics Canada low-income cutoff. It definitely does not meet the individual's needs. I think we need to base the low-income cutoff on quality of life. Therefore, we need to increase the low-income cutoff.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Miguel.

We're now going to move to Gary Glauser from the New Brunswick Non-Profit Housing Association.

Welcome, sir.

[Gary Glauser, Policy and Conference Coordinator, New Brunswick Non-Profit Housing Association]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I'm with the association as its policy and conference coordinator. I've been with the association for a few years. Prior to that, I worked for a long time for Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, so housing is near and dear to my heart.

Our association has some 200 non-profit and co-op housing providers in the province of New Brunswick, who supply some 7,000 units of affordable housing to aboriginal and non-aboriginal families, seniors, and individuals with special needs.

We have just finished our annual conference here in Moncton on the weekend. Attendees included the provincial Minister of Social Development, CMHC, the president of the Canadian Housing and Renewal Association, and Elizabeth Weir from Energy Efficiency NB. These are all people who are active in the whole area of affordable housing. We had a very good discussion there.

Today's meeting follows very well from that discussion. We welcome the opportunity to discuss the important federal role in reducing poverty in Canada. We strongly advocate for a federal leadership role in this initiative.

We fully realize that it's a multi-faceted issue and requires a multi-pronged strategy, as we're dealing with a lot of issues, including income issues, housing affordability, and energy, poverty, health, education, and training issues. However, our main message today to the committee is that a federal strategy to reduce poverty must have as its central pillar an assurance that all Canadians have access to safe, secure, and affordable housing.

Quite simply, a lack of affordable housing is a major contributor to poverty, as many Canadians are paying more than 30% of their income on housing. In New Brunswick, there are 30,000 households that are paying more than 30% of their income on housing. There's an active waiting list for housing. The number is very high. It's at least 5,000. Maybe Phyllis can help me there. It's a huge number and it doesn't seem to be going down.

Also, the Human Development Council estimates that one in six children in New Brunswick is living in poverty, and there's a huge gap between low- and high-income families. There's another indication: a single parent in Fredericton needs to have almost two minimum wage salaries to afford a suitable apartment in Fredericton. Phyllis has made the point that rents are very high and people have problems accessing the market.

We've made this point consistently in our briefs to New Brunswick's self-sufficiency initiative and to the 2008 Senate Subcommittee on Cities. We made the same pitch to Senator Eggleton last year and also to the province's poverty reduction strategy.

We strongly subscribe to the “housing first” model, under which you have to provide a person with a roof over their head. Then they can take steps to become better-educated, healthier, better-employed, and,e eventually, more self-sufficient. We view affordable housing as sort of a gateway point for other service providers. Housing can help to achieve other social and economic objectives with this integrated policy response.

Our member groups are in the business of providing affordable housing. We look at the need numbers that are tracked through the census and we also look at the housing waiting list numbers. Those are the measures we are looking at.

Again, we see the federal government playing a leadership role in ending poverty. Also, a long-term affordable housing strategy has to be in place to buttress that effort, along with community input, because we need to have policies and programs that reflect community needs. this input has to be engaged.

In New Brunswick, we have some examples of the federal government partnering with other stakeholders. We have the federal-provincial affordable housing agreements. We have local homelessness partnering strategy action groups. Also, in Fredericton, we have an affordable housing committee in which all levels of government, the private sector, the aboriginal sector, and the service groups are engaged. We're trying to partner to find affordable housing solutions.

We are very happy that in the most recent federal budget funds were allocated to affordable housing and homelessness. We anxiously await the signing of the new agreement between CMHC and the Province of New Brunswick so we can get on with program delivery.

But again, some of the programs, especially the ones attached to the economic stimulus, have a short-term timeframe, so we need to get on with the delivery of the programs. Instead of having short-term program timelines, we strongly urge the federal government to have a longer-term vision in mind so that groups can operate more effectively over time.

One way in which we think federal funding can be increased further is to simply maintain the investment the federal government currently makes in existing social housing stock. As these agreements expire, the federal dollars are no longer required. The $2 billion should stay in place over time to ensure the long-term viability of the social housing stock and help create new units.

Another fact that should be highlighted is that affordable housing, with supports, can be a very cost-effective way of attacking poverty and homelessness. You can save up to 40% on costs compared to other responses to homelessness, such as hospitals, shelters, and jails.

This topic has been researched quite a few times. We were very impressed by the Senate report, “Poverty, Housing and Homelessness: Issues and Options”, which came out of the Senate subcommittee last year. We feel that we need to be more action-oriented. We need to get the programs moving and end poverty in Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thanks, Gary.

We will now move to Leah.

You have five minutes.

[Leah Levac, As an Individual]

Thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone. I'm a doctoral student at the University of New Brunswick. I work with young women who are marginalized for social and economic reasons. I want to try to talk a little about something that I think is of parallel importance to this.

My work is funded by the Trudeau Foundation and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, so because of that I spend a lot of time thinking about the connection between policy and practice and who leads and drives those decisions. I'm going to offer three suggestions for what I think the federal government can do to support poverty reduction, and they all live at the site where policy, practice, and research meet each other.

First, I think we need to focus on creating an entirely new generation of leaders who understand the importance of social justice. That's a federal responsibility and it creates a great opportunity to align in an inter-jurisdictional way with education. I understand that there's not a direct mechanism into education from the federal level, but with an emphasis on leadership development, I think the federal government can play a strong role in supporting all sorts of initiatives that help young people to become active in their communities around important justice issues.

I'm going to give you a couple of examples of how we can do that, particularly with young people who might not identify themselves as being leaders.

There are programs in place, for example, in Saint John, where, as part of supporting housing initiatives, youth are building the residences that they will then become tenants in. Not only are they learning specific skills for construction, but they're also taking ownership for the next steps in their lives.

Also, I'm a member of an organization here called 21inc, which is about leadership development with young people. We have a very specific program called the golden ticket program in which we ask people to go out and identify young people who wouldn't normally call themselves leaders but who we see behaving as leaders.

I think there are hundreds of clever and creative ways that the federal government can implement ideas--for example, inside granting programs--that would ask the question: what is it that you can do as a part of this initiative that will inspire leadership development in young people?

So that's the first suggestion.

Then, we need a dedicated response inside policy-making processes to engage young people so that they don't get called apathetic but, rather, do get invited to the table to be a part of collective decision-making. The poverty reduction initiative is something that I've been involved in studying.

We're learning in New Brunswick that young people are willing to be engaged if you ask them, but it requires a different strategy and a different approach. Sometimes it's far more time-consuming than we give people credit for. We engaged with young women who have been living in transitional housing for upwards of two years, but it took six weeks and multiple visits, with us returning over and over again, to build a relationship in order for them to feel as though they were being invited to the table.

So when we're thinking about the way we design political processes and policy-making at the federal level, we need to think about shifting some of these exceptional models into what is normative for the way that policy gets created, so that young people start to re-engage in democracy. If we don't have an effective democracy, we will have much bigger problems on our hands than poverty reduction.

Finally, I think we need to start thinking about ways in which researchers, policy-makers, and the public can come together at tables so that we know what best practice is; in health research we call it “closing the know-do gap”. That gap is even bigger in the social sciences.

We need federal leadership to help roll over what we know in the theory of knowledge translation in health; we need help moving that into social sciences so that we can bring together researchers, the public, and policy-makers and close the gap between all of the things that we know that we need to do about poverty reduction but are not currently doing.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Leah. You are right on time.

We're now going to move to our last witness, Mrs. Lillian MacMellon, from Karing Kitchen Inc.

Welcome. The floor is yours.

[Lillian MacMellon, Director, Karing Kitchen Inc.]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good afternoon, members of the committee.

I'm a member of the board and volunteer director of operations of the Karing Kitchen, in downtown Moncton. I have been a volunteer in the city for 50 years for several non-profit organizations. My passion has mainly been directed towards the poor and the vulnerable in our communities.

A United Church minister and I met back in 1985 to discuss the need to feed the homeless, seniors, children, people on social assistance, and the disabled. We formed a board of directors and opened a soup kitchen in the basement of St. John's United Church. It was open five days per week. We hired a cook and the churches agreed to send volunteers to help us every day.

In the first years of operation, we served between 50 and 75 meals each day, mainly soup and sandwiches. We soon discovered that for many, this lunch was the only meal of the day, so we began serving a full dinner every day. Today, we average 400 meals per day. We have one cook, a manager, and some volunteers, mostly seniors.

In the summer, we have been fortunate to be able to apply for four students to replace the seniors, who move out to the shore. Now we are losing one of our student positions. Our numbers increase in the summer months because we see more transients and schoolchildren, so not having these students puts a lot of pressure on our staff.

You ask how we measure poverty. We measure by the number of meals we serve and the clients who form a line all around our social hall, waiting for their meal at 11 a.m. every day. Some of these clients have been coming to our kitchen since the day we opened our doors 24 years ago. We are the only family they are connected to. We treat them with respect and provide a warm greeting and a listening ear.

Recently, we have seen an increase in clients, with some of them returning home from Alberta, where their employment opportunities ended. We are unable to keep statistics due to a shortage of staff. We are unable to hire anyone due to a shortage of finances.

I applaud the federal government for implementing some programs over the years that have helped us to look after our clients. In the year 2001, we received a grant from Human Resources Development Canada under the homelessness file to refurbish our kitchen in order to better serve our clients. Harvest House, a transition residence, and the Moncton YMCA ReConnect program for homeless people and youth at risk of becoming homeless also received funding that year.

This past year, Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw has been establishing her office for work on a research project on homelessness and mental health. We feel strongly that this program is exactly what is needed by some of our clients suffering with mental health issues. They need someone who cares and understands what these individuals are experiencing every day.

However, I am very concerned about what is happening in our growing city. It is my understanding that funding for Harvest House and the YMCA ReConnect program has been discontinued and they face the possibility of closure. These two important organizations help a lot of our clients.

The Karing Kitchen is in the basement of a church. We pay a small rent of only $360 per month, which barely covers the power and heat that we use. We had two small bathrooms. They were outdated and did not meet the standards for the disabled. Therefore, we had to add new bathroom facilities this past year due to the high volume of clients we see every day. We have applied to the federal and provincial governments for help with this $50,000 renovation. So far, we have not been successful.

The only funding we receive each year is $18,000 from the provincial government and $5,000 from the municipal government. We must rely on the community every year to raise the funds needed to keep operating.

We were the first soup kitchen to open in Moncton in 1985. In the Greater Moncton Area, we now have two kitchens, a mobile bus, and 23 food banks all competing for the same dollars. We need financial help and we have not been successful with the federal or provincial governments.

I am certainly not qualified to give you advice on how the government can reduce poverty. I can only relate to you some of our success stories that we have experienced over the years. They all come down to the fact that we cared for these people when they were without work. We fed them and encouraged them and, eventually, some of them found work. The rewarding part happens when they return with a cheque to express their thanks our help at a low period in their lives.

One particular story that touches our hearts is an individual who came to the kitchen every day for 10 years. He helped us carry heavy boxes, cleaned the floors, and would gladly do anything we asked of him. He couldn't find work because he couldn't read or write to fill out the forms. However, we nominated him for volunteer of the year with the City of Moncton. He was chosen and, shortly afterwards, because of the exposure he was given, someone gave him a job. Again, this has done so much for his self-esteem that he no longer has to rely on social assistance.

This is only one of the many success stories we have experienced at the kitchen over the years. It may seem small, but we feel that this part of the program works best for us: treating them with dignity, plus boosting their self-esteem.

One of the major complaints we hear at the kitchen from clients is that they can't reach their social workers. I really think the province needs more social workers and more mental health doctors. This is where the ReConnect program helps a lot of individuals find the help they need.

We see more and more young people on drugs, and also an increase in break-ins, which we feel are related to the drug scene.

I have read the 2009-10 budget of the Government of Canada, and I see millions of dollars being allocated for social housing, the working income tax benefit, and the EI benefit. All of that is positive, but when it comes to the food banks, I see the establishment of another independent task force. Unfortunately, that will not help us at the present time. When Minister Bradshaw held the homelessness portfolio, we were told there were millions left to help us, but when we try to obtain the funds, we are told that none are available.

You ask if current federal resources for reducing poverty can be deployed more effectively.I say yes. When an organization such as Karing Kitchen is trying to help some of these individuals stand on their own two feet, we need the help of the federal or provincial government. We feel that the community just can't help any more than it does at present. Therefore, if we don't receive any help from the government, we will be forced to close our doors. What will happen then to these vulnerable members of our society?

I thank you for the opportunity to express our concerns to your committee. I wish you much success with your meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much, Lillian, for talking to us and telling us about some of the things you're challenged with on a daily basis.

We're going to start with a first round of seven minutes for questions and answers.

I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Savage for the first round.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thanks to all of you. Those were wonderful presentations on the issues of poverty here in New Brunswick.

Lillian, I had to laugh when you said something to the effect that you didn't feel qualified to give advice. I think you've given us good advice. Stepping in and doing work in the community is about as good advice as we can get. It indicates to us where the gaps are.

I have some short snappers this time. I just want to go through them based on your presentations.

I'll start with Phyllis.

I was surprised to hear you mention student loan debt right off the bat. I do a lot of work on the post-secondary side, and there are student loan organizations, such as the Coalition for Student Loan Fairness, and a fellow named Julian Benedict out in B.C. There are CFS, CASA, and all the student organizations.

I'm surprised to hear you indicate that education, and specifically student loan debt, is that important. But what is the solution to that? Is it to reduce student loan interest rates? Is it to eliminate interest? Is it to extend the grace period? Do you have any specific suggestions?

[Phyllis Mockler-Caissie]

Again, remember that I'm speaking about what we heard as we went around the province. I didn't come prepared with the list of what we think can be done or what people in New Brunswick think can be done, but definitely, as number one, most people said they think there should be free post-secondary education. There are examples of many other countries where students are offered free post-secondary education.

I don't know what that would cost. We're moving into another phase of this initiative wherein some solutions will be put forth in order to look at what the plan is going to look like. There will be options for solutions and there will be some costing done by another group of participants in what we're referring to as the round tables.

Among a number of things that did come out was more debt reduction, thus making it easier for students to get relief. When they're contacted.... No, when they're hounded--I'm going to use that word--over and over by an organization that I think has been established to collect debt on behalf of the federal government, the amounts that students are being asked for are atrocious. They're being asked for $500 a month when a young person is out there trying to find, first, a job, and then affordable rent, etc.

I think most students are saying, “Look, I'm not saying that I'm not going to pay it back, but I can afford $100 a month right now.” They're starting out at $30,000 in debt, they have a rent of $900 a month, they need an old car, which costs, and they have way too many other things. They're asking what it is that we want them to do. Is it to declare bankruptcy, which isn't an option?

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

No. It's not an option for 10 years in Canada. You can't even declare bankruptcy--

[Phyllis Mockler-Caissie]

Right. And that's a long time. They're saying that they can never move forward. In some instances, we heard of 28-year-olds still living with their parents because they cannot afford to be on their own and still meet their financial obligations related to student loan debt.

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

Certainly in all the provinces, except perhaps Quebec... In English Canada, we have student loan debts that are outrageously high and as MPs we deal with these all the time in our offices.

You mentioned the waiting period for EI. Are you talking about the two-week waiting period as opposed to having to wait months and months to get approved?

[Phyllis Mockler-Caissie]

Yes, and I'm not familiar with the EI system. I have no personal experience other than with a son. What we heard from people is that once they were determined eligible, there was quite a long waiting period. One particular person I talked to said they were told that people hadn't been able to review their claim because they were so backlogged.

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

“Waiting period” is really a bit of a misnomer. It's really an exclusion period of two weeks for which you don't get EI. That is what's called the waiting period. then there's the processing time.

On disabilities, you spoke about something I mentioned this morning. The Caledon Institute has proposed that for persons with disabilities we should look at having something similar to what we have for seniors, combining the OAS and the GIS and providing a living income, as well as training and everything else. We really do not treat people with disabilities with the kind of respect that a country as wealthy as Canada should. Is that what you're hearing?

[Phyllis Mockler-Caissie]

Yes. Right now, we provide social assistance benefits for persons with disabilities. If anybody knows about our social assistance rates, although they're not the lowest in the country, they fall below what would allow people to have a decent standard of living.

Persons with disabilities said that they don't want to be on welfare, that they want an income that allows them to have a decent standard of life. Their costs are often higher because of their special needs and they want to be treated differently from being on social assistance.

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

I think it was Johanne Perron who mentioned to us this morning that it's even hard to get qualified for disability assistance here.

[Phyllis Mockler-Caissie]

That is one thing we've heard. You have to be medically certified. It is quite a process.

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

Thank you very much.

I'm going to go to Gary first.

Gary, you mentioned co-ops. Are there many co-op housing units in New Brunswick?

[Gary Glauser]

Well, that number of 7,000 includes non-profit and co-op housing. For co-ops, I'm not sure of the exact number. It would be under 1,000, for sure. It's mostly non-profit housing.

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

Right. I get you.

Miguel, are you talking about a two-week waiting period on EI?

[Miguel LeBlanc]

Yes.