Human Resources Committee on June 9th, 2009

[Karri Munn-Venn]

At Citizens for Public Justice we also support a basic income. One of my colleagues, Chandra Pasma, has been---

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Excuse me, Ms. Munn-Venn, I need you to be very short in your answer because we're short of time here.

[Karri Munn-Venn]

Yes, we support it. We think every Canadian should be able to live free from poverty and in dignity, regardless of whether or not they have the means through employment.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Merci.

You'll probably get a chance to come back on this.

I yield the floor to Mrs. Beaudin.

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

Good morning. Thank you for all your valuable information.

My question goes to Ms. Lyons. You mentioned a number of interesting things in your presentation. You mentioned local initiatives, development, and building dynamic communities. You also mentioned trends and long-term solutions, because these are problems that have been around for a number of years.

Could you talk some more about the trends. What are they?

[Sara Lyons]

Do you mean statistical trends or...?

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

I was also thinking about the nature of poverty. I imagine that you have looked at the phenomenon in your research.

[Sara Lyons]

We have not yet been able to talk about our report called “Vital Signs“. The report contains local and national statistics, not just on poverty, but on ten or so subjects, including the environment, transportation and health. The 10 to 12 topics include poverty, specifically poverty in certain sections of the population. The report focuses on 16 communities around the country; mostly, they are large cities, but some are also small towns and villages.

We can see that poverty is quite stable. We see this as something negative. I think Karri mentioned it; poverty has not changed. The level of poverty has hardly changed at all in the last 20 or 25 years, including child poverty.

I think that Susan mentioned that poverty among seniors is increasing.

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

Why is that? You bring me to my second question, and the time is flying by. I get the impression that “Vital Signs“ could be a kind of observatory.

A little earlier, Monica said that one of the roles of the federal government could be to compile current statistics and to set up a kind of observatory on the state of poverty, so that we could see how things are going.

Why have we failed? After all, we set ourselves the goal of eliminating child poverty. How do we do that? Have you looked at that question, as a way to avoiding making the same mistakes and to putting better measures in place? What could those preventative measures be?

[Sara Lyons]

We did not really analyze the reason for the failure, nor did we make specific recommendations about changes that could be made. “Vital Signs“ did not either. In fact, “Vital Signs“ is intended to be non-political. The intention of the report is to show the facts, to put them into perspective and, for the first time, to bring together all the available national, provincial and territorial data. The intention is to publish the facts so that they can be discussed by government and the general public.

I would like to add that the report is published in October each year. This is done deliberately because most elections take place in October. This does not mean that it is a partisan publication; it is not political. We want to promote discussion on those matters. We hope that political parties, other community organizations and the media will read it and ask themselves what is happening.

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

You do a lot of funding activities with community organizations. In Quebec, we are involved in building communities too, using the United Way, amongst other agencies, to bring those directly involved together with decision-makers and to unite our energies in order to try to solve problems locally.

Another problem that affects the funding of community organizations is the fact that there is no link between some services, so a kind of void is created. And you never get full funding; it is always very targeted or compartmentalized. So it is not possible to become involved when people are completely beset by problems.

Have you thought about that, and, if so, did you come up with any solutions?

[Sara Lyons]

As I said, at the round table in Hamilton, we saw that a lot of good-quality programs were being offered, but there were no links or progressions between them. Hamilton is not Quebec, but that is the problem you have just mentioned too. The federal government perhaps has a role to play in this regard. It could discreetly become familiar with each service and determine how a person can move through the services from poor to not poor. We are definitely not talking about a lack of services as such. The problem comes in how to move forward.

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

You do not feel that there is a lack of resources, human resources, at least?

[Sara Lyons]

It is perhaps not really a lack of resources. Personal resources may be an issue too. For example, there may be very good language training available designed to make access to jobs easier, but perhaps you cannot take the training if you do not have the bus fare to get to it on the other side of the city. Sometimes, you are too concerned about whether you are going to be able to eat tomorrow, or how to pay the rent at the end of the month. Individuals or families have to have a basic level of security so that they can think about improving their own situation or the family situation.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Thank you.

Before I give Mr. Martin the floor, I want to warn you that, in a few minutes, some time between noon and 12:30 p.m., we are probably going to hear bells. That lets members know that they have to go and vote. If that happens—and I think it will—I invite the witnesses to wait for us and have a coffee, if you wish. We will be back after the vote and it should not take long.

Mr. Martin, please.

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

Thank you very much, and thanks for coming today.

I certainly agree with CPJ and Canada Without Poverty as they call for a national anti-poverty strategy. I was disappointed, as was Mr. Savage and, I would suggest, others in the committee, to hear the government's response to the United Nations' recommendation that we develop a national anti-poverty strategy. I thought that's what we were doing here. I'm open to being creative in how we do that. I really am. Foundations and communities can play a role. We've met with all kinds of really marvellous, committed, hard-working organizations across the country doing good things, but all of them calling for some national leadership so we can provide some equity across the country in terms of access to programs and support for children and seniors and all that kind of thing. We're trying to figure out how it is that we put that package together.

I have just a couple of questions, one for the foundations. I know from talking to folks in Toronto, the Recession Relief Fund Coalition—I don't know if you've heard of them or not—John Andras, that they're gathering people in the Toronto area. Susan has probably heard of them. Their concern is that a lot of the agencies doing good work depend on foundations for their funding and they're finding it difficult now because the foundations are running out of money; they're not getting the same donations, they're not generating the same return on investment, and that kind of thing. They suggested at one point that we had about a six-month window before a number of the agencies they speak for actually begin to have to cut back seriously or collapse altogether. Can you...?

[Monica Patten]

I'd like to comment on that, if I may.

I think you're right. I don't know about the six-month window, but it is absolutely clear that foundations, private foundations and public foundations like ours, have experienced a fairly dramatic drop in the resources they have available for grant-making. That said, I want to make two comments that could help alleviate both the short-term and longer-term situations.

First of all, there is not a lot of evidence yet--there may be some anecdotal evidence, but there is not a lot of hard evidence yet--that donors are stepping back from their giving. We find that very encouraging. We know, in our own world, that donors know what's happening in their communities. They are continuing to, as we say, step up to the plate and make contributions, particularly making gifts for issues around poverty and environment and so on. So that's a reality, we hope, that we are obviously trying to encourage.

Foundations themselves are working very hard to convene collaborations in the community so that what one entity or organization may have done individually they now are encouraging two to three organizations to do, to kind of pool their resources, if you will, and see how they can do that in partnership.

The third comment I want to make, and it goes to your question, I hope, as well as to the previous question, is very important for the federal government in this instance. The way in which both foundations and governments have been funding organizations--projects, short term, one year, not supporting infrastructure, if you will, not supporting operations--has undermined the capacity of those organizations, in my view, as much as anything has. We say that about the foundation world. We need to rethink not only how we direct our resources, or what an organization can use them for, but also the terms and the timeframe.

I hope this crisis, as it is, has, if it's done one thing, taught us that lesson, that we cannot go back.

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

Thank you.

I want to speak to Ms. Eng for a moment.

Some of us often look to the Canada Pension Plan and the way the government got serious about poverty among seniors at one point in its history and decided to do something big that actually captured everybody. Now we're finding that it's starting to fall apart a little bit, particularly as the demographic changes and the demand becomes so large.

You had suggested that there needed to be some other things put in place. In terms of a framework, which is what we're looking for, have you any suggestions or thoughts that you might give us as we struggle with how we do that?

[Susan Eng]

I have quite a lot.

The CPP is a good example of something that was a big idea that worked. It helped lift an entire generation out of poverty. It required substantial government investment. We are now facing a situation where the amount of coverage in CPP, for example, is simply not enough. A $10,000-a-year maximum is what people can expect, and people in the low-wage sector, who are most likely to be facing poverty in old age, will not have their maximum CPP.

So it certainly takes us a long way along, but by itself it's not enough. That is why we're recommending a separate instrument that could include a vertical enhancement of the CPP to take more people out of poverty using that kind of process.

That, of course, recommends government involvement, government dollars, but the more important part is self-reliance. The kind of pension vehicle that we're recommending in relation to the people who do not have access to employer-sponsored plans is based upon the fact that both employer and employee contribute to their own retirement savings. It's that theme of self-reliance that's really a marker of this generation.

So when we're talking about people already living in poverty who are relying on OAS or GIS, we say that you have to give them more money. As somebody before me said, the basic cause of poverty is the lack of money. For those people, we need to make sure that we are lifting them out of poverty with direct dollars now, but for the future...the opportunity arises for people to contribute to their own retirement, including through a vertically expanded CPP.

The mandatory nature of the CPP is important, because it helps make it universal. There are some who argue that if you make the pension vehicle attractive enough, people will come. That may be so, but in order to get through, especially to the low-wage sectors, there will be more needed than simply an opportunity. There needs to be some kind of encouragement.

In a slightly separate vein, important also on the theme of self-reliance, I wanted to touch on caregiving as one of those kinds of social changes that would actually help people who are facing poverty, who cannot make ends meet, who rely on the kindness of their family and friends to help them get by. An estimated 5 million Canadians today are providing informal caregiving to friends and relatives. Those people need some kind of support or incentive to allow them to keep doing this, to make sure that their jobs are waiting for them when they get back to them and the formal health care system actually facilitates their work.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

I'm sorry. I think we'll have time at the end, Mr. Martin. We'll probably have time then.

Mr. Komarnicki.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for your various suggestions. Certainly we'll take them all into account. I noted that the Community Foundations of Canada had suggested—I'm not sure if it was Monica or Sara—that money on its own won't fix the situation. But it certainly helps, and we want to be sure that we use it most effectively, if you have a certain pool of money to start with.

I have a quick question for you. You said you foster a culture of hope. I'm wondering if you can expand on that.

Secondly, with respect to ensuring that donors step up to the plate, is there any way we can do some things that would be specifically helpful to make that happen?

Also, I noted that you talked about some collaboration among the service providers. We've heard many times that there's a competition for a set of funding, and that funding is not always continued on a longer-term basis. Much time is spent competing and perhaps in making applications on a yearly basis. Do you have any specific suggestions as to how that may be improved?

Then I'll have a question or two for Karri.

Go ahead.

[Sara Lyons]

I'll try to start by addressing your first question about the culture of hope. I'm not sure who it was that did say that. One comment I would make on that is I think a critical piece of this--and this is referenced in the campaign that Karri had put forward--and that is public attitudes towards poverty. One thing I didn't say in my last comments is that I do think it's true that one of the reasons we haven't seen substantial change in poverty rates over the last number of years is that it hasn't been a government priority, it hasn't been a political priority, it hasn't been a public priority. In saying a culture of hope, I think one of the critical issues, and something the federal government may have a role in, is starting to change negative attitudes towards poverty. To put it bluntly, we need to change attitudes towards poor people. There's a culture of blame, a culture of difference, etc.

Just to go back to this question of who should be doing what and what jurisdiction, federal leadership could play a part. We do have, frankly, uneven attitudes across the country about what is the responsibility of government in taking care of the people. That's one place where there could be a role for the federal government in shifting public attitudes.

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

And the second part of the question?

[Monica Patten]

Would you like me to comment now?

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

Sure.