Thank you.
I would like to thank the standing committee for this opportunity to participate in this consultation process for the study of poverty reduction strategies.
I would like to briefly provide some context on Covenant House Vancouver and the work that we do as it relates to the subject matter of the committee.
We've been in existence since 1997. We serve approximately 1,300 youth, ages 16 to 24, and we provide a continuum of services ranging from outreach and drop-in services to short-term residential crisis beds and supportive transitional housing. We also provide professional, outcome-focused case management services for mental health and addiction, clinical assessments and referrals, life skills, housing support, education, and employment readiness.
We are privately funded. Over 90% of our funding is private, and every public dollar that we receive is leveraged nine to one by private funding. Last year we turned away 314 individual youth because of not enough beds, and we are on track to exceed that number this year.
Having read the poverty reduction plan, it is my view that many of the recommendations within the report will go a long way to resolving poverty within our nation. That said, I'd still like to comment on a few of the recommendations and focus on a couple of things that I believe will be particularly transformational and impactful if adopted.
With respect to defining and measuring poverty, it was noted in the report that the conceptualization and measurement of poverty is complex and continues to be a source of debate among poverty reduction advocates, social policy analysts, and policy-makers. The Parliament of Canada website states that in Canada the federal government has endorsed no official measurement of poverty. The question then arises, how do we meaningfully talk about poverty if we don't have a common language around poverty and a set of metrics to measure the impact of any and all of our efforts toward reducing poverty?
In Canada, policy, research, and program development are informed by several different metrics. While all of these metrics serve a purpose in understanding poverty-related issues at some level, they are all focused on societal deficits that serve to direct our attention to what is not working. Another way to measure would take a strength-based approach that would direct our attentions to building upon the strengths of our society that are known to reduce poverty and improve our quality of life. The report highlighted the Canadian index of well-being as an example. Regardless of what methods we adopt, the axiom “you can't fix what you don't measure” rings true here.
A large focus within government policy over the years has been to eliminate and control the burden of debt and avoid passing debt to our children and future generations, and rightly so. In the same way, why would we not share the same urgency and concern of not passing on the burden and cost of unaddressed homelessness and poverty for future generations?
Costly public policy issues and negative impacts that are associated with poverty include homelessness, welfare costs, increased unemployment, child poverty rates, social exclusion, mental health problems, addictions, and crime. We must look at the solutions to poverty as having economic opportunities that will also pay social dividends because they are both related. By investing in our human capital, we can increase workforce participation and production, which will have a corresponding impact on our tax revenues.
For example, we know that if a child is educated to post-secondary, the long-term economic impact is profound. It is estimated that over 40% of homeless youth have been involved with child welfare services. We know that in excess of 50% of homeless youth did not complete high school. The Conference Board of Canada has estimated that a child aging out of the foster care system will earn $326,000 less income over the course of their lifespan compared with the average Canadian. Further in the same report, it was estimated that by investing in the education of the estimated 2,291 youth who aged out of government care in 2011, the government would save $65.5 million in social assistance payments and raise an additional $169 million in income taxes, as well as another $54 million in consumption taxes.
We also know that poverty is intergenerational. Changing the trajectory of a homeless youth through education will work to stem the future intergenerational impact of the individual youth's children.
The youth we see at Covenant House have hopes and dreams for a better quality of life and future. When given the opportunity to pursue their ambitions, which includes becoming educated, they take advantage of it and pursue careers within business, the hospitality industry, trade work, culinary arts, engineering, film and media, the arts, and emergency and medical services.
It is time to focus on a different perspective and approach to dealing with poverty. In addressing poverty, we must pursue a holistic approach and address the root causes of the issue and not just the symptoms. We cannot continue dealing with the acute symptoms on a short-term basis and expect to achieve long-term success. Rather, we must commit to identifying and treating root causes on a longer-term basis in order to find sustainable solutions.
We need to move into generational thinking on this issue, thinking 20 or 30 years out. We need to take a balanced and sustainable approach that employs all the strengths of our society and not just see government as responsible for creating the solutions. We will need long-term leadership and champions who will find a way to manage political changes, economic conditions, and shifts in policy priorities. We must continue to develop ongoing targets in performance metrics that are continually measured and provide accountability.
Where do we start? To my mind, we will need to take a balanced approach that will choose initiatives having an immediate impact in reducing poverty as well as initiatives that will take longer to realize a return on the investment. However, our priority should be to get upstream of poverty, which will work to alleviate the economic and social costs associated with managing the crises of poverty.
Relative to our experience at Covenant House Vancouver, these might include things such as programs and initiatives that will keep at-risk youth from dropping out of school; investments and incentives to afford post-secondary education and training to all Canadian youth and untapped labour pools; effective family supports to mitigate and reduce the need to put children in care in the first place; for youth who do end up in care, ensuring that they are effectively supported to exit out of care successfully and transition into healthy adulthood; adopting a systems approach within our mental health and addictions services to ensure immediate, effective, and ongoing support to reduce the demoralizing effects of relapse; a national housing and homelessness strategy; and developing a common understanding and measurements of poverty.
Thank you.