Madam Speaker, I would like to follow up on a question I posed on March 15 regarding the concept of a guaranteed annual income.
As the Minister of Human Resources Development continues his review of social policy, I want to encourage him to fully consider and do a cost benefit analysis on the concept of a guaranteed annual income.
Today I would like to present five benefits that I believe commend this notion to the minister for further consideration.
First, in terms of efficiency, we need a comprehensive program to consolidate the patchwork of social programs that presently exist. We could consolidate the guaranteed income supplement, child tax credit and exemptions, married exemptions, federal Canada Assistance Plan transfers, old age security and possibly GST tax credits under a guaranteed annual income. Unemployment insurance as well or parts of that program could also be included.
Does it not make sense to provide one form of support instead of continuing the multiple programs process and bureaucracy that exist presently?
We talk about streamlining government. The guaranteed annual income could help us in this regard.
Second, what about work incentives? Many people fear that a guaranteed annual income will encourage people not to work. I believe that is precisely what our list of programs does right now. Currently, social programs have a high taxback rate on additional earned income, some up to 100 per cent, that in many cases makes it not possible for recipients to return to work. If by finding low wage employment a person risks losing certain other important support, that person really cannot leave the system.
Because the guaranteed annual income would be integrated with the tax system it could provide a gradual taxback of benefits as a recipient finds other sources of income.
My sense is that there is only anecdotal proof that a guaranteed annual income would be a disincentive to work. In fact, the real proof may exist on the other side. A recent study of the Mincome experiment in Manitoba found that a guaranteed annual income did not affect people's work habits.
As well, the National Council of Welfare recently released a study which showed that low income Canadians respond to incentives to work better than people with above average incomes. A person struggling to make ends meet does not have the luxury to relax instead of work.
I am convinced that Canadians want to work and if properly structured a guaranteed annual income will support Canadians to do so.
As for effectiveness, social policy can be more effective if it responds to the different needs of Canadians. A guaranteed annual income is able to do just this. Flexibility in the taxback rates and guarantee levels can provide effective income support for Canadians who cannot be expected to enter the workforce and those who are able to work as well. As well, in our changing economy skills and training are essential elements that create opportunities for lower income Canadians.
A guaranteed annual income would provide income support for those people who participate in training and skills advancement.
Let us consider economic benefits. Good social policy makes good economic sense and allows us to get lower income people the money they need to buy the resources they need to serve their families and they spend it in our local communities.
Finally, let us talk about dignity for Canadians. I believe that a guaranteed annual income protects the dignity of lower income Canadians. First of all, it provides effective income support so that Canadians are able to meet their basic needs.
Second, there would be no requirement to go through the humiliating needs test that are part of the Canada Assistance Plan.
With a guaranteed annual income people do not need to remain on welfare just because it does not pay to work. Moreover, Canadians will have the support needed to gain the skills necessary to compete in today's job market.
In conclusion, I believe and I try to show that a guaranteed annual income could provide significant benefits for all Canadians. I urge the government to do a thorough cost benefit analysis of this concept. It is time to consider a real step change in Canada's social assistance policy.