Human Resources Committee on March 10th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

He hasn't left you a lot of time, I'm afraid. Give a very brief answer, please.

[Pamela McConnell]

It's one of the biggest issues. I would say that essential to growing a healthy population is to have children who learn at the same level so they can deal with their peers and be contributing, as children, all the way through. That means that you have to have decent, affordable child care from the very beginning. I just remind you that in Sweden, the day you give birth you can find out where your daycare is, and if you're in Quebec, you actually get a decent cost for that.

We have 4,000 empty spaces in Toronto. We have spaces, but we have nobody who can afford them, because they're too much for people who don't get subsidies, and we don't have enough subsidies. That's how you could help us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you so much.

For the final word, we'll go to Mr. Brassard.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

One of the issues in dealing with a poverty reduction strategy is to think to the future. From my standpoint, anyway, I see a looming crisis. It's the elephant in the room that people mention but don't really want to talk about, and that's the level of household debt in this country right now. We're looking at about $1.70 for every dollar that's taken in.

A lot of what we're dealing with, from what I sense through this committee's work and some of the research I've done, are the needs of the present. How are we dealing with the needs of the future, given the circumstances that exist? There are a lot of people in precarious positions right now financially. If interest rates go up, they're going to be in significantly precarious positions.

Mr. Barata, you spoke about the child tax benefit. Nanos Research recently did a poll and found that only 15% of the child tax benefit will go towards spending, and 85% will go towards paying household debt, so the idea that somehow this is going to lift people out of poverty perhaps is a little jaded.

I'd like to go across the panel. I only have four minutes or less now, but how do we deal with the looming crisis?

[Michael Bach]

I'll give a couple of very practical proposals. The federal government, under the previous government, introduced the registered disability savings plan to provide future economic security for people with significant disabilities. There are so many who aren't going to be able to tap that. What we're proposing is that the federal government allow people to actually use that as an asset to get into the housing market. There are people who actually have assets. It could build security for some of the most vulnerable people. It's a great instrument, but for many people with disabilities, they're going to pass, and the asset is going to go on to their families.

[Pedro Barata]

I'd like to do a plug for Prosper Canada. I think financial inclusion and financial literacy is a core component of really helping to empower families with the tools they need to, first of all, access all the programs and benefits that are available through the tax system and otherwise. It's also important to equip them with tools for financial planning and with access to financial tools. Normally, these are products marketed to middle- and upper-income families. Those have to be more targeted to lower-income families. I think there are very cost-effective ways that leverage community partnerships that can help families get ahead.

[Donald Johnson]

I'll give one example, and that is a greater share of donations to organizations such as JA Canada, junior achievement, which provides classes for students, giving them an education in financial literacy so they understand that keeping their financial situation in order is very helpful. I think our proposal on stimulating more charitable giving would be helpful to address that issue.

[Pamela McConnell]

We haven't talked much about free transit. I think it's a major piece of what families spend their money on. I would take your federal transit tax and move it into an opportunity for an accessible fare. It is going to be costly. In our city, it's $46 million. That would be very helpful for a lot of people, along with it being free for children on transit, which we've done.

[Mary Todorow]

Well, the clientele we deal with are living in poverty, and those folks don't usually get loans to buy a house.

I've been following this just personally, this whole idea of people being in debt, and I know that a lot of it in Toronto is driven by the high housing prices and people being over-leveraged. If interest rates were to go up by 2% or 3%, people might have to walk away from homes. Those people will be looking for rental housing and there's not enough of it.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Johnson, the numbers you gave with respect to the capital gains were astounding. You spoke specifically about the United Way benefit. Can you give me examples of other organizations that have benefited from this charitable donations situation?

[Donald Johnson]

I think all areas of the charitable sector have benefited, primarily health care, education, social services, hospitals, universities, colleges, arts and culture organizations, social service agencies like United Way, and religious organizations.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

It's been broadly supported, then, across the board.

[Donald Johnson]

Yes.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Ms. McConnell, you briefly mentioned the mayor's “open door“ program. Can you give us an example? Development charges, for example—

[Pamela McConnell]

Yes. There would be hookup charges, development charges, and sometimes tax abatement for a while. That's raised about $106 million, and it's targeted for 1,750 rental units and 641 home ownerships. You can see that we're able to deliver on actual homes as a result of some of those taxation incentives.

It encourages us to use our own land but with developers to work with us in partnership. That has been very successful. Regent Park, which I represent, is perhaps the most successful redevelopment of public land in Canada and maybe in the world. It's quite remarkable.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you very much, everybody. This has been very enlightening. I'm very glad that we rescheduled and did get back here. I want to thank all of you for spending some time with us this morning.

Committee members, we will be breaking for a few moments and reconvening at 9:45 sharp.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Good morning. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Monday, June 13, 2016, the committee is resuming its study on poverty reduction strategies.

This is it. This is the last of the witness testimony that we'll be hearing. This has been a long study.

I thank you for being here. I know that we had to reschedule many of you as a result of our being stuck in Saint John, New Brunswick, thanks to Wayne Long.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

It wasn't that bad.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Yes, it wasn't that bad because you were at home.

Welcome to everyone.

From the City of London, we have Sandra Datars Bere, managing director of housing, social services, and Dearness Home. Welcome. I went to high school in London.

From Parkdale Activity-Recreation Centre we have Victor Willis, executive director. From the Social Planning and Research Council of Hamilton we have Deirdre Pike, senior social planner, and Alana Baltzar, volunteer for the Hamilton organizing for poverty elimination project. From Good Shepherd, we have Alan Whittle, director of community relations and planning.

Welcome to all of you. We have a full panel and lots of questions for all of you. We'll keep the introductory comments to seven minutes. If you see this light go on, that's my very not-so-subtle way of saying that time is up. This will be during the introduction as well as during the questions. We have simultaneous interpretation available if needed.

We'll get started right away with Sandra Datars Bere from the City of London.

[Sandra Datars Bere, Managing Director, Housing, Social Services, and Dearness Home, City of London]

Thank you so much.

Bonjour, and thank you, Mr. Chair, vice-chairs, and members of the House of Commons standing committee. I'm appreciative of the opportunity to participate on this panel and to contribute to your discussions on poverty reduction.

As you know, my name is Sandra Datars Bere, and I am the managing director of Housing, Social Services, and the Dearness Home, which is a long-term care facility in the City of London. Today I want to share with you an important community process that occurred in London over the last year, which led to “London for All: A Roadmap to End Poverty”. I believe this is an innovative community approach to the reduction of poverty, one that directly involves those directly affected by poverty.

With more than 62,000 Londoners living in poverty, London's poverty rates are higher than both the national and the provincial averages. Child and youth poverty rates in London have also increased significantly. In 2015, one in four children born in London was living in poverty. Since 2006, the number of Londoners receiving social assistance has increased by 10,000 people. There are two particularly vulnerable groups living in poverty, those being 24% of our children and about 41% of our indigenous people.

These figures were obviously distressing. As a result, our mayor, Matt Brown, convened an advisory panel on poverty in September 2015 with a six-month mandate—very quick—to develop a set of action-oriented recommendations on how as a community in London we can address issues related to poverty more effectively. The recommendations in this report are built on the foundation of the panel's approach, which was rooted in the social determinants of health, the best available research, the good work already happening in London, and deep engagement with over 1,000 Londoners.

The panel sought to bring London residents together to develop a deeper understanding of the community-wide impacts of poverty and the opportunities for change. Panel members attended nearly 100 meetings and heard from over 1,000 Londoners—most notably, Londoners living in poverty. The panel used multiple methods to engage Londoners, including those with lived experience, through large community conversations, online surveys, conversations hosted by community partners, and formal delegations to the panel. The goal of the 112 recommendations in this document is for London to reach its potential by ending poverty in one generation.

I'd like to highlight the shared understanding of poverty that was developed by the community.

Poverty is a community issue. Poverty impacts all of us because a community experiences poverty and cannot reach its potential when people lack or are denied the economic, social, or cultural resources to participate fully.

Poverty is an equity issue. Poverty impacts everyone, but impacts people differently and for different reasons, including discrimination, racism, and sexism.

Poverty is a human rights issue. The call for universal human rights compels us, legally and morally, to ensure an equitable and inclusive society that provides enough for all.

As well, poverty is an economic sustainability issue. At the community level, poverty has economic impacts, because individuals and families living in poverty are less likely to work and more likely to draw on emergency and social services.

The recommendations in “London for All” are centred around eight areas: changing mindsets, income and employment, health, homelessness prevention and housing, transportation, early learning and education, food security, and system change. The success of the implementation of these recommendations requires the support of the entire community. This support will be organized through an implementation body, which will carry the conversation forward by bringing partners together, developing and overseeing implementation plans, and ensuring ongoing evaluation of and accountability for the work.

The key to this approach is that each working group tied to the implementation of the plan will be composed of a minimum of one third of Londoners who know poverty at a personal level. Londoners with lived experience will be included as key decision-makers at each level in the implementation body. The implementation will be coordinated by a person with expertise from a community organization and another with lived experience.

I'm going to spend a few more minutes as I conclude my comments on some feedback as outlined for the standing committee. It reflects the work you're doing as part of your study and some feedback we'd like to give to you.

The housing recommendations in “London for All” include building a “culture of practice” around implementation of a housing first approach; engaging landlords in keeping people housed; investing in “housing allowances to support flexible, permanent housing stability for individuals and families”; and implementing strategies to “assist in housing women at risk of or experiencing homelessness”.

In terms of employment, “London for All” recommends that London become a basic income guarantee pilot site. The city staff engaged the community in consultations on this subject, and the results have been presented to the province. The plan also suggests the community build on existing work to accelerate skills training programs and meet local market needs.

Transportation to Londoners to allow Londoners to reach their jobs, attend their appointments, and access child care also emerged as a key theme. Reducing transit-related costs for people with low incomes and allowing children under 12 to ride public transit free of charge were among the recommendations.

I'm happy to say that in December of 2016 our municipal council supported this recommendation, and as of January 1, 2017, all children 12 years of age and under now ride public transit for free. In addition, council supported providing a subsidized bus pass for Londoners living on low incomes. This will begin in January of the new year.

“London for All” also recommended the creation of a coordinated local mental health and addictions strategy that is health-based, evidence-informed, and, I stress again, developed by community members with lived experience. This recommendation has also been supported by London's municipal council.

Today, more than ever before, we have a better understanding of the causes and impacts of poverty. The provincial and federal governments have begun to focus more and more on the issues involving poverty, and what is more, they recognize the important roles municipalities play in the everyday lives of their constituents.

While poverty affects individuals, it is not merely an individual problem. We all pay the price, both in real dollar costs to health care and social services and in the emotional and spiritual burden that the existence of poverty places upon us. A great city and a great country are those that include everyone—rich and poor, young and old, newcomers and long-time residents. It is a city and a country in which all of us have a true sense of ownership and belonging and in which all citizens come together towards a common goal.

It is only by working together that we more effectively address how we will fill gaps, remove barriers, and help to end the cycle of poverty for future generations of Canadians.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you very much.

From Parkdale Activity-Recreation Centre, we have now Mr. Willis, the executive director.

[Victor Willis, Executive Director, Parkdale Activity-Recreation Centre]

Good morning, and thank you to the chair and the members of the committee for the opportunity to present to you today.

My comments and observations about the effects of poverty on people with mental health histories are based on my personal and professional experience.

Lack of adequate income is a predominantly isolating experience for many people with severe mental health histories. Too often, debilitation due to symptoms and/or treatment is exacerbated by poverty, so much so that what is thought of as an invisible disability is all too apparent due to the obvious and discernible effect of being extremely poor.

I've experienced three generations of mental health trauma in my life. My mother was diagnosed with schizophrenia at 22 and was treated until she died at the age of 67. My 50-year-old brother has struggled most of his life without a diagnosis or treatment and is currently living in poverty on the street. My son had a first episode prior to starting university, went on to complete a degree, and is now living independently and working.

As the executive director of PARC since 1999, I've seen first-hand the effects of poverty on many hundreds of adults with mental health histories. PARC is a community-based mental health agency that provides supportive housing, individualized support, also known as intensive case management, employment support, and social recreational activities that reduce isolation. I've also seen the remarkable effect of recovering from lifelong trauma, stigma, and discrimination through meaningful activity, social connection, employment, and most fundamentally, safe, supportive housing.

When I arrived in 1999, PARC employed about 15 full-time equivalent positions, four being people with lived experience. Today PARC employs almost 100 people, with more than two-thirds being people with lived experience.

There are two distinct paths for individuals with mental health histories: affordably and safely housed, or not. As Canadians, I believe we want people to recover, live meaningful lives, and participate in society and the economy. We have legislation that enshrines accommodating people with disabilities, yet as my colleague Lana Frado, the executive director of Sound Times support services, queries, “What does the ramp for mental health look like?” I suggest that the ramp restores hope and dignity for individuals with mental health histories.

The intersection of mental health disability and poverty has many nuances. Ontario has a social assistance system that provides income assistance with two clear activities: an allowance to cover the costs of living independently, and access to prescriptions to support independence. Within the income support is an allowance for shelter. The Ontario shelter allocation is $479, which in many municipalities is completely insufficient to secure safe, affordable housing. At PARC, all the people we support living in private-market housing are using 90% of their monthly income to pay for rent. Even then, a person late with a payment is often evicted and is then put at the mercy of an impossibly scarce private affordable housing market.

What about affordable or supportive housing? Currently the affordable housing wait-list is seven to 10 years. The wait-list for Toronto supportive housing is four to five years.

The fear or threat of becoming homeless creates a climate of feeling trapped in less-than-accommodating housing, from an accessibility perspective, due to the nature of private-market affordable housing, which may not be well maintained or safe. There are many hundreds of cases across the city where buildings have long backlogs for major repairs, including heating, elevators, water pressure, holes, and pests. At the same time, the limited choice of privately affordable rental housing means living somewhere that may not have easy access to services such as health care, food, recreation, and employment opportunities, which then means requiring money to purchase transit.

In Toronto, the cost of a monthly Metropass is $147, or $3 for a one-way trip. Of course, this presumes that you have enough income left to purchase transit after food, a telephone line, or a cell phone.

It is the correlation of these circumstances that causes harm and that fits quite clearly within the realm of the poverty gap experienced by individuals and families with mental health histories.

What's the answer? I know that the answer is a core and foundational commitment to affordable and supportive housing so that individuals can experience stability in their housing as a recovery point for further gains in social and economic opportunities.

I have a case in point. Terry arrived at PARC's doors in 1992, homeless and exhibiting signs of a major mental health crisis. He began attending our drop-in and engaging in social activities. A worker found him supportive housing. He started to volunteer at PARC. Subsequently, he applied for a training opportunity that provided compensation in the form of honoraria, which built his confidence and mitigated his poverty while reinforcing his skills. He then applied for a part-time employment posting, and then became a full-time, unionized employee. Last year he moved out of his small, affordable bachelor apartment into a large, private-market one-bedroom that provides him with room for his dog and cats.

A year ago the provincial Mental Health and Addictions Leadership Advisory Council set a minimum target of 30,000 units of supportive housing. Disability income frameworks must not enshrine the right to not have enough to live on.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you very much, Mr. Willis.

We're going to move to the Social Planning and Research Council of Hamilton.

Deirdre Pike and Alana Baltzar, the next seven minutes are yours.

[Deirdre Pike, Senior Social Planner, Social Planning and Research Council of Hamilton]

Thank you, Chair and members of this committee, for the opportunity to present to you today some ideas and recommendations for your consideration as you conduct this national study on poverty reduction strategies. It's our hope that this will inform the national strategy on poverty reduction that this country so greatly needs and that this government certainly seems to be so greatly committed to.

I know you've already heard from some of our partners in Hamilton. Laura Cattari was here from the Hamilton Roundtable for Poverty Reduction. Shortly you'll hear from another great partner, Alan Whittle from the largest social service agency in Hamilton, Good Shepherd. In Hamilton we've known for decades the importance of collaborating with partners when it comes to getting meaningful results in reducing poverty. The Social Planning and Research Council, or the SPRC, where I've worked for 15 years on poverty reduction initiatives—15 of the 50 years that we've existed in Hamilton, in fact—has always been committed to getting the broadest range of stakeholders at the table in order to address these complex or wicked social issues in our community.

This is where I think I can make our first recommendation to you. An essential element of any successful poverty reduction strategy will be to work collaboratively across all sectors, with unsuspecting partners. My colleague Sandra didn't mention that in London, the Sisters of St. Joseph are among the key partners in their poverty reduction strategy. To me, they are one example of some of the unsuspecting partners we don't always have at the table.

When it comes to addressing poverty, one of the first voices that must be at every table, as you've heard, is that of lived experience. While social planners and other professionals are called the experts in this area, that is not the case. We know it's truly the first voice of lived experience that's most needed to reform our policies and practices when it comes to poverty reduction. Listening deeply to those voices can build the empathy those of us without the lived experience need in order to bring about that response to people with dignity and humanity, despite their low-income reality.

Here's an opportunity to make a second recommendation, which is to ensure that any poverty reduction efforts are informed by first-voice experience. To that end, I introduce to you Alana Baltzer. She is the co-chair of HOPE, that's Hamilton organizing for poverty elimination. She edits a newspaper in her local neighbourhood. She is a graduate of a private college. She has not done well by that, so there's another recommendation to consider, around education in these private colleges. Alana is here to offer you the benefit of her insight.

[Alana Baltzar, Volunteer, Hamilton Organizing for Poverty Elimination, Social Planning and Research Council of Hamilton]

Hi. I'm Alana.

I want to start this off with morning routines. We all have one, whether it's drinking coffee or tea, a shower, etc. Most people can take that for granted. It's a nice experience. My experience in the morning is waking up, putting coffee on my coffee table, turning away, and not even 30 seconds later seeing a cockroach swimming in my coffee, which causes a physical reaction at the end of that. That is an example of what it's like to live in poverty and in housing that is affordable but not necessarily the cleanest when it comes to bugs.

I grew up in poverty in Hamilton. My mom was on welfare. I'm on ODSP for mental health, and honestly, I would list all the diagnoses I've been given, but we don't have enough time to list them.

I would also like to mention that on the private colleges, I have to agree. I spent $14,000 to get a diploma that is literally useless to me. The paper is worth more than the diploma I was given. I can't get a job at all with that diploma. No one will recognize a private college diploma. Again, that strikes those in poverty, because those schools target those who are in poverty. They say things like “come to us”, “we can get you OSAP”, and “we can get you a job”. One recommendation I would have for that is to check into the success rates of those colleges. In all honesty, you'll notice that while people do have jobs, they're not in the field they went to school for or got OSAP loans for, which they now have to pay back for a diploma that's useless.

Poverty is inexcusable. You try your best to get ahead. You can't. I go to sleep each night hungry because most of the time I don't have enough food in my cupboard. ODSP does not give me enough to live on successfully after bills, my phone.... I'm lucky if I have enough to buy a strip of bus tickets to get from point A to point B for all my volunteer work. If it weren't for my community supports for all the volunteer work I do within my community, my mental health would be a lot worse than it currently is.

We need to end poverty, because children should not be going to school each day unable to learn because their stomachs won't stop growling, and they're too embarrassed to tell the teacher that they can't concentrate because they haven't had anything to eat for three days. That's because part of that goes back to parents. If you're in poverty, your parents tell you not to tell your teachers, because when you do, that always ends up in a call to the CAS.