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 »
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 »
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 »
Just over a year ago, in April 2009, Libby Davies (MP, Vancouver East) introduced her private member’s bill for a “Secure, Adequate, Accessible and Affordable Housing Act” (Bill C-304). If passed, this legislation will require the establishment of a national housing strategy. A strategy developed in consultation with the provinces and other stakeholders that guarantees the right to safe, secure, adequate, affordable and accessible housing for all Canadians.
Bill C-304 is currently on its way to third reading. If passed, it would serve as landmark legislation by acknowledging the right to housing. It would also provide a valuable model for future legislative efforts to address poverty, its causes, consequences, and complexities. Read more »
The recession has had a tremendous impact on Canadians. Job losses and a faltering safety net have added hundreds of thousands of people to the population of Canadians living in poverty. Economic stimulus and deficit spending are most certainly required to confront this vulnerability. Measures to create and sustain jobs and to build a strong and healthy country are needed. But this cannot be done at the expense of those on the margins, excluded from mainstream society. Read more »
By Kathy Vandergrift and Citizens for Public Justice | Tuesday, January 26th, 2010
The Prime Minister sent our MPs home to recalibrate the government agenda. The break was 20 workdays, he said.
If you could set the agenda for 2010 during this pause, what would your list of the 20 most important policy concerns include?
CPJ has come up with a list of 20 key policy questions, one for each day. We believe these issues should be debated by MPs, the voice of the people, to set directions for Canada. Read more »
Canada has always welcomed people from many different backgrounds through immigration. Newcomers have been instrumental in shaping Canada into the country it is today. However, as the economic goals of immigration take precedence, there are concerns that certain groups, particularly refugees and temporary foreign workers, are not being welcomed. It is time for decision makers to re-evaluate our primary purposes of immigration and the impacts of imminent policy changes. Read more »
Many Canadians believe it is inappropriate to pay people for "doing nothing." This notion is related to our cultural norms and values around work and income security. Our cultural valuing of economic growth, and therefore productivity, affects how we value people and what we consider to be work worth doing. In order to truly value people and their activities, regardless of income, we need to relinquish our focus on productivity and re-focus our attention on people. Read more »
Recently, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney expressed surprise that the demand for temporary foreign workers has not gone down since the recession.
However, this steady demand for temporary foreign workers should not be surprising to Minister Kenney at all. This steady demand is, in fact, the inevitable result of the temporary foreign worker program and the current government’s approach to immigration. Read more »
Some policy experts prefer conditional income support programs to Guaranteed Livable Income because they believe those who are able to work should receive lower benefits to encourage them to work, while those who are disabled should receive higher benefits since they are deserving poor. But this division assumes that it is possible to make good distinctions between who is and is not capable of working. Instead, our poor track record in judging others and their ability to work suggests that employment conditions are the equivalent of condemning some people to poverty. Income security must be unconditional and universal. 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. 
Just over a year ago, in April 2009, Libby Davies (MP, Vancouver East) introduced her private member’s bill for a “Secure, Adequate, Accessible and Affordable Housing Act” (Bill C-304). If passed, this legislation will require the establishment of a national housing strategy. A strategy developed in consultation with the provinces and other stakeholders that guarantees the right to safe, secure, adequate, affordable and accessible housing for all Canadians.
The recession has had a tremendous impact on Canadians. Job losses and a faltering safety net have added hundreds of thousands of people to the population of Canadians living in poverty. Economic stimulus and deficit spending are most certainly required to confront this vulnerability. Measures to create and sustain jobs and to build a strong and healthy country are needed. But this cannot be done at the expense of those on the margins, excluded from mainstream society. 
The Prime Minister sent our MPs home to recalibrate the government agenda. The break was 20 workdays, he said.
Canada has always welcomed people from many different backgrounds through immigration. Newcomers have been instrumental in shaping Canada into the country it is today. However, as the economic goals of immigration take precedence, there are concerns that certain groups, particularly refugees and temporary foreign workers, are not being welcomed. It is time for decision makers to re-evaluate our primary purposes of immigration and the impacts of imminent policy changes. 
Many Canadians believe it is inappropriate to pay people for "doing nothing." This notion is related to our cultural norms and values around work and income security. Our cultural valuing of economic growth, and therefore productivity, affects how we value people and what we consider to be work worth doing. In order to truly value people and their activities, regardless of income, we need to relinquish our focus on productivity and re-focus our attention on people. 
Some policy experts prefer conditional income support programs to Guaranteed Livable Income because they believe those who are able to work should receive lower benefits to encourage them to work, while those who are disabled should receive higher benefits since they are deserving poor. But this division assumes that it is possible to make good distinctions between who is and is not capable of working. Instead, our poor track record in judging others and their ability to work suggests that employment conditions are the equivalent of condemning some people to poverty. Income security must be unconditional and universal. 
