The Path from Poverty?

At a recent meeting of the House of Commons Human Resources Committee, Human Resources and Social Development Minister Monte Solberg stated that “the path from poverty is employment.” It’s easy to understand why the Minister feels this way; after all, what could do more for a person living in poverty than a regular paycheque?

The reality, however, is that work doesn’t always pay in Canada. Recent statistics have borne this out: in November, Campaign 2000 reported that “41% of children living in poverty live in families with at least one income earner working full-time all year.” According to Statistics Canada, in 2003 more than 50% of two parent families with children living in poverty received their principal income from employment and received no welfare or Employment Insurance (EI) payments. There are Canadians who work full-time, year round and still live in poverty.

The myth that Canadians can be grouped into two categories, those who work and are not poor, and those who are poor and do not work, cannot be sustained. Unfortunately, our social policy is far too often based on this incorrect assumption. In order to address poverty in Canada, we cannot simply aim to get people into the labour market. All sectors of society need to tackle issues like how much work pays, the availability of adequate and affordable housing, opportunities for education and training, the accessibility of quality early childhood education, and barriers to social inclusion.

There are many reasons why Canada’s social policy rarely takes an integrated approach to poverty. One reason is that we rarely demand social accountability from our politicians and policy makers. While we expect them to balance the budget and account for program spending, we don’t require details on the impact of policy and programs, monitoring progress and reporting results. In fact, we’re not always sure what the results should be, let alone what they are.

Another reason is that government ministers and federal departments too often act as silos, each making decisions in their jurisdiction according to their own priorities. It can be difficult to effectively implement priorities that cut across government departments and to work constructively with other levels of government.

A poverty reduction strategy is one way around these problems. In a report last year, the National Council of Welfare outlined the four pillars shared between effective poverty reduction strategies in Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador, and internationally. These pillars include a vision with specific targets and timelines, a cross-government action plan and budget, mechanisms of accountability and agreed-upon poverty indicators that can monitor progress.

In Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador, bold goals were set for the strategy’s long-term vision, with shorter-term targets and policy initiatives identified in wide-spread consultation with citizens. As a result, the strategies identify needs related to poverty but not necessarily focused on income, including pharmacare, education and supportive community programs. Rather than solely promote employment, decision makers in these provinces have listened to the experiences of people living in poverty to identify a wide assortment of measures that will have a very direct impact on quality of life.

In Newfoundland and Labrador, an inter-ministerial committee sets priorities for the strategy and provides guidance to an inter-departmental committee. As a result, the needs of the poor are not lost between competing departmental priorities. Both Newfoundland and Labrador and Quebec are developing local poverty measures according to their particular provincial experiences, and both have committed to on-going monitoring and reporting of progress using these poverty indicators.

Ontario and Nova Scotia are also in the process of instituting provincial poverty reduction strategies, engaging in public consultations to develop a provincial vision. So if four of Canada’s provinces have already taken a leadership role in solving poverty in their province, why does Canada need a national poverty reduction strategy?

Addressing poverty in Canada requires the involvement of every level of government and contributions from citizens, businesses and other organizations. Poverty is an issue that affects us all. But within Canada’s federal system, federal government leadership is important for developing a comprehensive and coordinated strategy to solve poverty. The federal government has certain tools that it can use to tackle poverty, including tax credits and government transfers like the Work Income Tax Benefit and the Canada Child Tax Benefits. It also has responsibility for policies and programs that impact poverty, like EI and federal income taxes.

The federal government also has a clear leadership role to play. When it comes to a problem like persistent poverty in a wealthy country like Canada, everybody has a role to play. The federal government must lead by example, identifying poverty as a significant problem, consulting those with experience of poverty, and enabling citizens, communities and others to become active in the fight against poverty.

Leadership requires a vision of how things could be different. It includes accountability for actions and responses. It inspires others to follow and commit to the same goal. It pays special attention to the marginalized and listens to the voiceless. The federal government should show leadership by adopting a poverty reduction strategy.