It’s hard to believe that my year at CPJ is coming to an end! It has been a busy year at CPJ with many events, meetings, paper launches, conferences and much more. I want to take a moment to reflect back on the past year, especially some of the highlights. Read more »
In June 2009, the Government of Canada rejected a recommendation from the UN Human Rights Council that Ottawa establish a poverty elimination strategy. Why? The Government of Canada argued that addressing poverty was a provincial responsibility. Much of the current debate centers on the issue of jurisdictional responsibility. Many advocates for the elimination of poverty argue that any sustainable plan to address poverty on a national level must come from the federal government. However, the federal government argues that programs to address poverty are the responsibility of the provinces as laid out The Constitution Act, 1867.Read more »
If we allow spending cuts to be the only option in dealing with the deficit, we are saying that taxes cost us something but spending cuts don't. Essentially, we are saying that we can afford greater poverty and inequality, more private procurement of basic goods and services, and crumbling physical infrastructure, but we cannot possibly afford to pay a slightly greater percentage of our income in taxes. With citizenship and taxes, we get what we pay for. If we want a strong, democratic country characterized by economic security, opportunity for all, and strong social ties, then we need to be prepared to pay for it with our taxes. Read more »
We know that poverty in Canada exists, that it is more severe among certain groups and sectors, but we also know that Canada is a very wealthy country. Is someone living under the poverty line “poor” when we compare incomes to other countries? What are we really measuring when we read poverty statistics?
Unfortunately, there is no official measure of poverty in Canada. But CPJ intern Kathryn Cummings helps us understand what measures are currently used and why our values as a society can help to define the best measure available… Read more »
Refugee policies are complicated, require sensitivity, and stir up much emotion. As a result, it is crucial that the public be involved in the development of such policies to provide various viewpoints and options. But with the recent refugee bill public debate was only held during the amendment process, not in the drafting of the legislation. Eventually all parties and many refugee advocacy organizations accepted the amendments, recognizing that there were some improvements, but still cautious about the prospects for future refugee cases. Read more »
A short but fractious parliamentary session ended last week. Rancorous in tone and highlighted by disputes over the democratic rights of Parliament and its committees, the session produced little legislative achievements. However, two examples demonstrate that Canada’s political parties are capable of cooperating effectively when they choose to. A collaborative, consultative approach by parties willing to compromise for the sake of the common good would benefit all Canadians and promote a more vibrant, engaged democracy. The choice is up to parliamentarians themselves. Read more »
One popular view of poverty is that it is a matter of individual responsibility. From this perspective, income security programs like Guaranteed Livable Income reward irresponsible behaviour. However, this view fails to account for the complex reality of modern poverty and the high proportion of working poor in Canada. This understanding of responsibility also lacks context since the reality is that everyone is interdependent. Recognizing this interdependency should lead us to a more holistic, communitarian sense of well-being. Read more »
June 11 marks the second anniversary of the Canadian Government’s apology for the Indian Residential Schools. But an apology by itself is not enough. Forgiveness, reconciliation and the restoration of broken relationships requires a change in behaviour: repentance. In recent months, there have been more promises and actions to restore relations with Aboriginal peoples and the Government of Canada. But is it enough? Taking responsibility for the past can and should inspire significant and lasting change for the future –building a new legacy of change and hope. Read more »
Our work at CPJ is to bring change through government policies. The personal stories inspire and speak strongly to the Biblical foundations of the call to promote justice. But so do the statistics, because they highlight potential policy options for promoting dignity for all Canadians. At CPJ's Annual General Meeting on May 27, 2010, Richard Shillington, from Informetrica and CPJ's Karri Munn-Venn looked at the statistics and stories that motivate us to continue our work to end poverty in Canada and promote dignity for everyone. Read more »
It was a beautiful Sunday afternoon when a lively group of Ottawans rambled down the highway to Hamilton. There were two priests, two young adults from a local parish and the two of us. We were among the 85 or so clergy and lay people from across the country making our way to “Community Justice Camp – Live the Change you want to see.”
Community –be it geographic, experience-based, or otherwise –is central in our pursuit of social justice. At Justice Camp we had the opportunity to be among a wonderful group of justice advocates from across the country to learn, share, and grow together as we explored how to discern and interpret local needs in a way that leads to charity, justice, and a strong and healthy community for all. Read more »
It’s hard to believe that my year at CPJ is coming to an end! It has been a busy year at CPJ with many events, meetings, paper launches, conferences and much more. I want to take a moment to reflect back on the past year, especially some of the highlights. 
We know that poverty in Canada exists, that it is more severe among certain groups and sectors, but we also know that Canada is a very wealthy country. Is someone living under the poverty line “poor” when we compare incomes to other countries? What are we really measuring when we read poverty statistics?
Refugee policies are complicated, require sensitivity, and stir up much emotion. As a result, it is crucial that the public be involved in the development of such policies to provide various viewpoints and options. But with the recent refugee bill public debate was only held during the amendment process, not in the drafting of the legislation. Eventually all parties and many refugee advocacy organizations accepted the amendments, recognizing that there were some improvements, but still cautious about the prospects for future refugee cases. 
A short but fractious parliamentary session ended last week. Rancorous in tone and highlighted by disputes over the democratic rights of Parliament and its committees, the session produced little legislative achievements. However, two examples demonstrate that Canada’s political parties are capable of cooperating effectively when they choose to. A collaborative, consultative approach by parties willing to compromise for the sake of the common good would benefit all Canadians and promote a more vibrant, engaged democracy. The choice is up to parliamentarians themselves. 
One popular view of poverty is that it is a matter of individual responsibility. From this perspective, income security programs like Guaranteed Livable Income reward irresponsible behaviour. However, this view fails to account for the complex reality of modern poverty and the high proportion of working poor in Canada. This understanding of responsibility also lacks context since the reality is that everyone is interdependent. Recognizing this interdependency should lead us to a more holistic, communitarian sense of well-being. 
June 11 marks the second anniversary of the Canadian Government’s apology for the Indian Residential Schools. But an apology by itself is not enough. Forgiveness, reconciliation and the restoration of broken relationships requires a change in behaviour: repentance. In recent months, there have been more promises and actions to restore relations with Aboriginal peoples and the Government of Canada. But is it enough? Taking responsibility for the past can and should inspire significant and lasting change for the future –building a new legacy of change and hope. 
