Human Resources Committee on March 10th, 2009

[Dr. Andrew Sharpe]

I don't have specific estimates of the cost. Obviously, it would depend on how much you want to spend. It's very sensitive to how much you want to spend. I think you have to focus also, more importantly, on the benefits of reducing poverty, not just the short-term benefits but the long-term benefits. Take the aboriginal community. If we can reduce poverty there, there will be fewer health problems, there will be less crime, and there will also be additional revenues for the government through additional tax revenues. I think you have to look at it from both the cost and the benefit perspective.

Most studies show that, for example, investing in education, over the long term, results in significant benefits, long-term benefits that greatly exceed the cost.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

Are we out of time now?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Well, I'm being very flexible on time.

Mr. Battle, you have a short time to answer.

[Ken Battle]

Sorry, I guess I left it back.... I just wanted to give you a price tag of one of our major proposals. Our proposal is that the Canada child tax benefit be increased. It's around $3,400 to $3,500 now per child, maximum. We propose that it go up to $5,000.

Our proposal would take existing federal spending--so that's the universal child care benefit, the non-refundable child tax credit, and the Canada child tax benefit--and go back to a single program, a larger Canada child tax benefit. That would cost about $4 billion. That would be the incremental cost.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

An additional $4 billion?

[Ken Battle]

Over what we're spending now.

[Sherri Torjman]

That's to increase it to $5,000 per child.

[Ken Battle]

Yes.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Thank you.

Madam Beaudin, you have the floor.

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

Thank you very much.

You suggest increasing the tax benefit to $5,000. You just mentioned a figure of $100 a month per child.

[Ken Battle]

Sorry, perhaps I can clarify that. The $100 a month is the universal child care benefit. I would get rid of that.

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

You would get rid of that?

My question was on the universal child care benefit. I spent the last five years of my life working in the field with so-called underprivileged families with three, four or five children. I even spent the day yesterday with them in order to find out if this amount of $100 was helpful and pulled them out of poverty.

First of all, these people continue to bear children. Next, the money is used for housing. Housing is still more or less affordable. Therefore, this income allows them to pay for housing that is still much too expensive for that family. It is also used to cover other costs. These mothers are not in the labour force and their spouses work at low wages, so that theses families are not much better off. They could even be prone to take on debt, since that small additional income can lead them to buy some stuff.

If we want to assist parents, we have to do it with some other measures, for example a housing program. You said it is difficult to imagine a national housing strategy. Why? We should also improve employment insurance and provide access to education through community organizations that work in the field with those families, while providing also child care for those children.

We must look at the benefit within the framework of a global strategy that includes a national housing strategy. Yesterday, at the UN, Canada was again fingered out in the discussion on housing because we are the only country to not have a national housing strategy. Why?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Is your question directed to a specific witness?

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

Ms. Torjman talked about a national housing strategy, but others could answer also.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Madam Torjman.

[Sherri Torjman]

Thank you for your question.

We agree entirely about a strategy on poverty that would include a number of components. In fact, we've prepared a report, called Poverty Policy, that talks about ten major components of a strategy. They are related and interlinked. So we agree entirely with what you have identified as a problem.

In terms of housing, this is one area in which there has always been a question around whether it is federal or provincial. You know, how much should the federal government get involved in an area that is potentially seen as a provincial jurisdiction? There have been problems around that aspect.

The other point, of course, is that housing is a big expenditure. It comes with a big price tag. If you're going to build new housing, or even retrofit or repair existing housing, it does cost a lot of money. That's why, as I said, we were pleased to see the investment in affordable housing in this budget. What we were concerned about, and what Mr. Battle was not able to say when asked if he supports these measures, was that there wasn't reference to the need for a national strategy. Rather, there was almost a reference again to the fact that this was only for infrastructure, for immediate investment in infrastructure, for economic stimulus purposes. This was instead of saying, “This is part of a leadership role that we are taking to meet a major problem in our country.”

So that really was our objection. While we were pleased to see the money, we were concerned about that aspect. We think it should really be revisited.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Thank you, Madam Torjman.

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

You could answer in writing, if required.

You said first of all that the situation of seniors has improved in recent years. In the new budget, there is mention of housing for seniors and First Nations, but not for families. Are there new social housing units being built for low income families with young children, for unattached people or single-parent families? These are said to be the groups at risk. But there is nothing in the most recent budget that talks about building social housing for these groups.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

I think that was mostly a comment.

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

No, I asked a question.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

I cannot allow you more time, I am sorry.

Mr. Lobb, you are next.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Roberts, I noticed in your presentation you spoke about a holistic approach. You talked about income but also assets. I found that interesting. I wonder if you could elaborate on the types of assets or how assets are going to help those in need.

[Dr. Glen Roberts]

In fact, we did a presentation a few years ago, which I'd be happy to send you, if that is appropriate. It talked about the issue of assets, and the assets are quite broadly defined. They are financial assets, obviously, but they are also human assets, the things one needs over time. We think about that in terms of a life perspective. You need to have assets to actually help you get out of poverty, but it doesn't necessarily mean at any one point in time. You need these assets over time in order to transition either out of poverty or over time.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

In your proposal, does that come in the form of a loan or a micro loan? How would one obtain those?

[Dr. Glen Roberts]

We didn't go into that level of detail. What we're suggesting is that rather than just focusing on poverty from simply an income perspective, you need to think about that also in terms of assets. Maybe you're short on income at any point in time, but you might have assets that allow you to overcome that and transition at an appropriate time. It's not just about income.