Megan Yarema2013-05-26T05:28:34-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.ca/author/index.php?author=megan-yaremaCopyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc.HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Megan YaremaGood old fashioned elbow grease.Canada's Egregious Human Rights Record Demands Explanationtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.31958812013-05-02T17:25:18-04:002013-05-02T17:25:27-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/
A total of 83 countries made statements to Canada at the UPR, the majority of which called on the government to address socio-economic disparities, violence against women and a poor record of engagement with Indigenous peoples.
This is déjà vu -- in the 2009 UPR process similar recommendations were made and Canada agreed to "continue to address socio-economic disparities and inequalities that persist across the country," stating that it will continue "to explore ways to enhance efforts to address poverty and housing issues, in collaboration with provinces and territories."
These promises have not been acted upon.
In fact, particular decisions made by government are contrary to the recommendations received: voting down Bill C-400 in February, the bill for a national housing strategy; closing down of the National Council of Welfare; cancelling the long-form census; and changes to EI that will force some recipients to accept jobs farther from home for less pay. These decisions undermine efforts to address poverty and inequality. Currently, 3-4 million people in Canada are living in poverty, between 150,000-300,000 people are visibly homeless and almost 4 million people experience hunger -- Canada has some serious work to do.
Having ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the federal government is obligated to spend the "maximum of its available resources" to ensure human rights are fulfilled. Implementing economic and social rights, such as the right to adequate housing and food and an adequate standard of living, requires government investment which may seem prohibitive. But consider this -- the cost of keeping the status quo is actually double the cost of addressing poverty. This has been researched and reiterated by the National Council of Welfare and several organizations in the country.
Critics claim that the UN should focus on developing nations, but this is the cry of individuals willing to overlook human rights abuses in their own backyard. The purpose of the UPR is to hold all governments, all countries, accountable to human rights standards. This is the principle of universality -- whereby every state is subject to review regardless of wealth, status, etc. The federal government has an opportunity -- and an obligation -- to implement international standards and improve the lives of people living in Canada; why would anyone disagree?
What makes human rights violations in Canada so egregious (levels of poverty, lack of national standards addressing homelessness and inadequate housing, unsafe drinking water in many Aboriginal communities, and levels of violence against women), is the wealth this country produces and the democratic system in place that is meant to support all people. Civil society groups have been pushing these issues for years and continue to stress the need for action.
The UPR was established as an open process to engage in constructive dialogue with civil society, however, the Canadian government has made little effort to engage with organizations between reviews. The government touts an email account set up to receive comments on the UPR found on the Canadian Heritage website as the high water mark of their outreach. This is far cry from "engagement" and is an about-face from the 2009 review where monies were allocated for face-to-face engagement sessions between government officials and NGOs across the country.
Close to 50 civil society groups and Indigenous organizations from across the country submitted reports to the UN Human Rights Council in October, 2012 commenting on the governments' progress in fulfilling human rights obligations, and several (including Canada Without Poverty) travelled to Geneva to make presentations. The reports provided to the UN an outline of the need for the federal government to develop concrete measures to implement human rights.
Canada has until September to respond to the recommendations and civil society organizations will be watching intently.
It is time to step it up Canada; commitment without action is meaningless.]]>Canada Must Respect the Right to Foodtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.28146002013-03-06T16:34:31-05:002013-05-06T05:12:01-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, following his mission to Canada last May, the report illustrates that current programs and policies are not enough to fend-off food insecurity felt by millions and calls for greater federal action.
De Schutter came to Canada to assess the level of food insecurity in the country and review Canada's efforts to fulfill the right to food. As a signatory to the International Covenant on Economic and Social Rights, Canada is obligated to allocate a "maximum of available resources" to implement human rights including the right to an adequate standard of living and the right to food. Invited by the federal government, this was not only De Schutter's first official trip to Canada -- it was also his first trip to a developed nation. He was able to meet with political leaders at all levels of government, civil society and community groups, persons living in poverty, representatives from Aboriginal populations, and food producers in Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba and Alberta.
What De Schutter found is that while some local programs are beneficial, a lack of a coordinated plan has left too many hungry:
Almost two million people in Canada are food insecure; this includes 1 in 10 families
59% of people on social assistance do not have enough money to eat
Off-reserve, 1 in 5 Aboriginal households are food insecure, three times the national average of 7.7%
Housing costs are a key contributor to food insecurity
The greatest food insecurity is in northern Canada; Nunavut is most shocking with 70% of people food insecure
Low minimum wages and social assistance rates are part of the problem
De Schutter also noted that considering Canada's wealth, "the current situation does not justify refraining from taking action that could guarantee the right to food." Canada has one of the lowest deficit to GDP and debt to GDP ratios, which De Schutter felt gives Canada, "the fiscal space to address the basic human needs of its most marginalized and disempowered."
The man did his homework.
On March 4 De Schutter presented this final report to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Recommendations included developing a national food strategy, working with provincial/territorial, municipal and Aboriginal governments to better coordinate food policy, and monitoring the level of food security in Canada clearly so that programs can be more effectively implemented.
Reiterating his findings to the UN, De Schutter found support from Canadian human rights organizations that were in attendance. Bruce Porter from the Social Rights Advocacy Centre, presented a statement to the Human Rights Council in support of De Schutter's report:
"Canada has clearly failed to meet that obligation with respect to the right to adequate food. However, if Canada would agree to take its human rights obligations seriously, to engage in good faith with UN procedures and to take on board the Special Rapporteur's recommendations, these human rights violations can be ended."
The statement was signed by other Canadian organizations including Amnesty International Canada, Canada Without Poverty, the Centre for Equality Rights in Accommodation and Action Canada on Population and Development and Food Secure Canada.
Unfortunately the Canadian government is not on side with De Schutter and in their response to the report were on the attack making accusations about De Schutter's apparent "regrettable lack of understanding of Canada's constitutional framework". The Government also expressed "concern" about the Special Rapporteurs "unfounded criticisms" and stated that they felt De Schutter had gone beyond his mandate.
As an independent actor representing the United Nations and tasked with promoting the right to food, examining current obstacles to food security and providing recommendations to ensure everyone is free from hunger, De Schutter's report was a welcome assessment of Canada's issues in addressing hunger. Clearly the news was not easy for the federal government to hear, but one can't simply ignore reality.
In an interview with the Canadian Press De Schutter commented that he, "present[s] a mirror to the government. I look at the evidence. I go through the numbers. I listen to people. And I report to the government about what I've been seeing".
Special Rapporteurs help to ensure that human rights are respected by offering objective analysis and concrete solutions to all countries they visit. Canada has the opportunity to critically re-visit food policy through the lens of human rights by considering the recommendations made by De Schutter. Leading by example will not only benefit hungry people in Canada, but also show leadership on the world stage.]]>Homelessness in a Land of Plentytag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.27196742013-02-20T12:15:07-05:002013-04-22T05:12:01-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/Bill C-400 calling for a national housing strategy, which was debated at second reading in the House of Commons last week. Canada currently has no such strategy and no coherent plan to address homelessness, leaving thousands of people housing insecure or homeless. Homelessness in a wealthy nation like Canada is not only unreasonable, but hard to fathom considering that cost-effective solutions are within reach.
A home is not a partisan issue. It is a basic human need, and a fundamental right. International treaties that Canada has ratified, such as those protecting the rights of persons with disabilities and children, state that all people have a right to adequate housing -- regardless of age, ethnicity, or political affiliation. Housing goes far beyond politics, it is a human right.
Some suggest that current federal and provincial housing programs are sufficient, but that response does not address the persistence of homelessness and housing insecurity facing almost 400,000 people in Canada. Canada has an incessant housing problem that will only be addressed through targeted pro-active measures across the country.
BLOG CONTINUES AFTER SLIDESHOW
The government's own calculations estimate that $1 spent on housing equals $1.40 benefit to the economy. Recent costs of homelessness are pegged at $4.5 billion annually -- a figure that includes the direct costs of emergency services (such as shelters), and indirect costs such as the related strain on the health care and criminal justice systems. It is estimated that it costs approximately $100,000 in services and programs for every homeless person. It would cost considerably less to house these same individuals and provide them with the services they need.
All levels of government are spending to cope with a situation that would be cheaper to address head-on.
Strategies with targets and timelines have proved successful. Consider the At Home/Chez Soi project which saw $110 million investment from the federal government. The project took a "housing first" approach, which recognizes that homeless individuals need housing before their other social needs can be addressed. Adequate housing offers consistency that lays the foundation for a more stable life. Focusing specifically on persons with psycho-social disabilities who are homeless, participants in the program were housed 73 per cent of the time, versus 30 per cent for individuals not given shelter. This lead to substantial cost savings, "for every dollar that is spent on Housing First for these participants, $1.54 is saved through the reduction in other shelter, health and justice services."
Alberta is another success story. In 2009 a provincial plan to end homelessness established a road map for how homelessness will be substantially improved and addressed by 2018. The Alberta plan brings together a number of stakeholders, recognizing that addressing homelessness is a community effort. So far, the project has housed over 5,900 people, stabilized families, and led to dramatic savings in both the health care and justice costs.
Having a coordinated plan works, but it requires all stakeholders and levels of government. The federal government agrees. In May, 2012, federal MP Réjean Genest put forward a motion on housing and homelessness that received unanimous support from the House of Commons. The motion stated that the federal government should, "(a) keep with Canada's obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the right to housing under the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; (b) support efforts by Canadian municipalities to combat homelessness; and (c) adopt measures to expand the stock of affordable rental housing, with a view to providing economic benefits to local housing construction businesses."
Homelessness and inadequate housing is a solvable problem for a rich democracy like Canada. Putting in motion a framework for a national plan would allow Canada to uphold its human rights obligations and is a sound first step. Federal leadership is the only way to have a coordinated strategy across the country that ensures all the necessary stakeholders are at the table.]]>Random Hacks Of Kindness: Where Technical Talent, Good Intentions Convergetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.21473382012-11-26T15:45:31-05:002013-01-26T05:12:01-05:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/
This year, for the first time, RHoK is coming to Vancouver and being led by Peacegeeks founder, Renee Black.
"I felt this was a worthwhile event because you can see the results of your efforts in just two days," says Black. "It also gives people in Vancouver an opportunity to reach beyond their community virtually and have a hand in helping social change organizations around Canada and the world."
PeaceGeeks is a non-profit organization that assists organizations worldwide working on peace, accountability and human rights projects by improving their access to technology. "We work in a virtual world, and so it was a natural fit to launch RHoK Vancouver as it directly relates to the mandate of PeaceGeeks."
Part of a larger global initiative, RHoK is a two-day hackathon that occurs in over 20 cities around the world with over 1,000 participants working on different projects relevant to their participants. RHoK's model is to start from identifying, defining and refining problem definitions provided by subject matter experts and local stakeholders.
From there, teams come together to develop open source solutions to address these challenges. Participating with RHoK provides a chance to be part of a global movement of tech for social good.
The impact of RHoK cannot be understated. In just two days, developers and volunteers in a Toronto RHoK event worked together to create a system to engage, promote, and improve First Nation and aboriginal access to water and sanitation in a project called WaterVoices.
Expectations on results are high for Vancouver, where eight non-profits have put forward projects that require technical expertise.
A team of volunteers is organizing the hackathon and choosing non-profit projects that work toward creating a positive impact. This year, Black chose to allow projects from both Canada and around the world so as not to limit the impact of the weekend to one region.
From ending poverty to connecting women peacebuilders, the Vancouver RHoK event pulls in local tech talent to donate valuable skills and time to worthy causes.
"RHoK provides people like me with a place to participate in global change and it gives us opportunities to make an impact on our local society using our professional skills," says volunteer Naoya Makino, a web development expert. "I am also there to connect with people with similar interests; people who would like to contribute in any way to greater causes by their professional skills; people who believe technology can make a significant impact to help solve social challenges."
Recognizing the value of this event for both volunteers and organizations, various sponsors have jumped on board to support what is essentially a weekend of meaningful change. Title and supporting sponsors EMC2 and Informatica bring beliefs in innovative IT to find creative solutions to community challenges. They are in good company.
The event will be held at GrowLab on Dec. 1-2, 2012, with an evening reception at 6 p.m. on Friday, Nov. 30, sponsored by Granville Island Brewing. For more information, contact Renee Black at rhok@peacegeeks.org at or visit the PeaceGeeks website.]]>Canada Needs a Poverty Strategy Nowtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.20505072012-11-01T12:14:01-04:002013-01-01T05:12:01-05:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/Dignity for All: the campaign for a poverty-free Canada and the federal All-Party Anti-Poverty Caucus to discuss solutions to poverty. The women, who have a lived experience of poverty, spoke to a group of parliamentarians, social justice organizations and community members at the Conference Centre in Ottawa to make sure a clear message was heard: poverty still exists, and there is no reason for this in a country as wealthy as Canada.
One of the speakers, Geraldine King spoke about how she is getting ahead. She found a program that is part of the Employment Insurance system that allowed her to receive benefits while working towards higher education so she could improve her job prospects. A member of the Gull Bay First Nations, and former Canada Without Poverty board president, she is challenging every poverty stereotype, and rightly so.
King recommended that the federal government tap into the knowledge of the "poverty experts" to create a poverty plan -- people who have lived it, know the barriers and know what they need. People don't aspire to be poor, or live without food, adequate housing, or the ability to fully enjoy life, and as King aptly stated "I didn't choose poverty; poverty chose me."
While countries across the world have found themselves struggling with the effects of recession, Canada has fared well during this period and boasted about having the strongest economic growth in comparison to other G7 nations. Yet, despite this over three million people living in Canada struggle in poverty and many of these individuals are employed.
Food Banks Canada reported this week that a record-setting 882,188 people are visiting food banks each month. The report notes that this is 2.4 per cent higher than last year, and a shocking 31 per cent higher than before the recession hit in 2008. Clearly Canada's strong economic record is not telling the whole story. Low-income is cited as the main reason for increased food bank use,
BLOG CONTINUES AFTER SLIDESHOW
"People asking for help are working in low-paying jobs, receiving meagre social assistance benefits, managing on inadequate pensions."
Certain populations remain more vulnerable to poverty than others including seniors, lone-parents, Aboriginal populations, recent immigrants and racialized individuals, and single working age adults. In fact, single individuals are four times more likely to be poor than those who live in families.
The working poor have become a shocking part of the poverty equation with more individuals working precarious or low-paying jobs. This was noted in a recent report Poverty Trends Report Card -- Canada 2012 Citizens for Public Justice. Add to this the reality that long-term unemployment is on the rise and it becomes more apparent that job stability is not a luxury that everyone holds. The report also notes that 40 per cent of families struggling in poverty have one person working, while 12 per cent of poor households have two or more people working.
To make matters worse, women and racialized persons earn less than their counter parts in the work place. Women are now earning only 74 per cent of what men earn, and if you are a racialized woman you earn only $0.53 cents to the dollar compared to a non-racialized man.
Clearly not everyone is getting the same piece of the pie. Ms. King was unknowingly at a disadvantage from the start.
But poverty is more than just low income; is it poor health, social exclusion, lack of opportunity to participate fully in society, and a violation of inherent human rights. Without government support and policy change that takes into consideration the disadvantage of marginalized groups, poverty will continue to plague society. A crucial next step is to develop a federal plan to end poverty.
As the Poverty Trends Scorecard states, "Without an anti-poverty strategy, the progress that Canada has made will erode, diminishing the life chance and opportunities of the poor, and undercutting Canada's future prosperity."]]>Without Government Help, Poverty in Ontario is Only Gaining Steamtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.18412252012-08-31T06:56:00-04:002012-10-31T05:12:02-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/report released today by the Ontario Common Front, a coalition of over 90 groups and organizations, states that Ontario is dead last in terms of growing poverty rates, rising inequality and spending on public services.
While Ontario established a poverty action plan in 2009, there has been little change in the numbers, and therefore little change in improving the well-being of Ontarians. Without funding and action, this is likely to stay the same or even become worse.
Sid Ryan, the President of the Ontario Federation of Labour stated in the press release,
"Most people would be shocked to know that Ontario has seen the largest increase in income inequality and the second largest jump in poverty rates in all of Canada... By cutting vital programs instead of reversing a decade of corporate tax cuts, the government is handing our wealth over to bankers and CEOs. It is exacerbating inequality."
Add to this the fact that Ontario is reported in last place in terms of funding for social programs, highest number of people paying for health care services and highest tuition fees and school fees. This is at a time when Ontario has lead the country in corporate tax cuts. It is easy to see the parallel here. Without adequate funding from a strong, progressive tax base, social services suffer, and those who are most affected are the vulnerable populations. The business sector has a critical role to play in not only providing jobs that offer fair wages and benefits, but also in paying their fair share. After all, the consumers they so rely on are the population that they often short-change.
Studies have shown the cost savings that businesses would reap if poverty was reduced and ultimately eliminated. Billions are to be saved and made through higher worker retention, a healthier workforce (mentally and physically), a larger pool of educated employees and more money going into the economy as incomes rise and people have the money to spend. The Ontario Association of Food Banks reported that lost productivity alone costs $8.6- $13 billion across Canada. Imagine how this would fuel Canada's economic engine.
One reason for further worry is the austerity agenda the Ontario government has adopted as of June this year. The budget approved myriad funding cuts -- from social assistance funding, to emergencies for school closures, cancelled hospital projects and delayed child benefits. Job losses in the public sector and weakened affordable housing funds round off a list of detrimental cuts that are setting the stage for more individuals and families to struggle.
Housing is a critical element to alleviating poverty and improving mental and physical health. In Ontario there were 156,358 households waiting for affordable housing as of December 31, 2011. This is an increase of 26 per cent over the last five years. The Common Front reports that for the fourth year in a row, housing cuts are to be expected as 12 per cent reduction is slated for the coming year.
To make matters worse for the millions of Canadians who live in inadequate housing, are homeless or couch surfing, the federal government plans to continue its cuts to housing funds, which will only exacerbate the problem. Shockingly, it's the Fed's plan to invest $0 by 2016 in the federal affordable housing initiative, and cut other funds by 52 per cent. Not good news for the provinces who are responsible for addressing this challenge.
The numbers are moving in the wrong direction, and this is a province with a poverty plan -- a plan which many, including Canada Without Poverty, have noted will not meet its goal of reducing child poverty by 25 per cent by 2013.
It is clear that a strategy is not enough: political will remains the driving force behind the success of poverty reduction. With all of the knowledge on the human and financial costs of poverty versus government savings, it is clear that action is necessary for greater prosperity for all in Canada.]]>Why the Atlantic Provinces are Concerned About EItag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.16958862012-07-24T13:43:27-04:002012-09-23T05:12:09-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/
Generally the Council focuses on a number of issues such as the environment or healthcare -- and rightly so. Following the bomb that Finance Ministry Jim Flaherty dropped on the premiers in December 2011 (a cap on the Canada Health Transfer in 2016) provinces were left scrambling to have their voice heard and plan for a future with less funding for healthcare. An aging population and rising health costs may put this conversation at the forefront of the premiers' agenda, but the group would be remiss to ignore the opportunity to discuss the effect that new EI rules will have on the local economies.
Some argue that seasonal industries in the Atlantic Provinces, employing almost 20,000 people, are expected to be disproportionately affected. Workers in the shipbuilding, forestry, agriculture and fishing industries rely on the security of EI during the months work is not available. This has been the natural flow of employment for years. News of the changes to EI left Nova Scotia Premier Darrell Dexter, host of the upcoming Council of the Federation meeting, concerned that people will be pushed away from these critical industries causing them to suffer.
Other premiers in the Atlantic Provinces have also been openly critical of the changes noting that employees of seasonal industries will be unfairly targeted, as would individuals in rural locations -- two large segments of the regional population. In Nova Scotia alone, almost half of the population lives in rural regions where transit and employment opportunities are limited.
Diane Finley, Ministry of Human Resources and Skills Development, announced pending changes to EI in May of this year that will take effect in 2013. Changes target repeat users of the social insurance system, and will force individuals to accept jobs with lower pay (up to 70 per cent of their former paycheque) that are potentially an hour away from their home. Trying to assuage the concerns of local Nova Scotians on a recent visit in June, Minister Finley stated, "So we've got to take all those things into mind, but we're certainly not going to force someone to take a minimum wage job an hour away and expect them to pay for child care for two at the same time."
Kathy Dunderdale, Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, noted last month that, "there's a real disconnect between Ottawa and the reality of people's lives." An hour's drive in a rural area is not the same as a train ride in an urban centre.
The Mowat Centre released a report this month that states that youth, urban centres and immigrant workers will be the groups predominantly affected by EI changes. This counters the concerns of Atlantic Canada, but does not fully ease fears as the report also states that most frequent users of EI are based in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Under the new rules, frequent users will be forced to take lower wage jobs sooner than other EI claimants. Low wages and unemployment can quickly pave a path to poverty. Without federal supports, provincial resources will be limited in the effect it can have on a social safety net.
Currently, unemployment in Nova Scotia increased 0.4 percentage points over May 2012 to 9.6 per cent (the national average is 7.2 per cent). The decline in May was due to a loss of full time jobs. While the labour force has grown, employment has not kept up with demand. In recent years there has also been a decrease in Nova Scotians accessing EI, a problem that is bound to increase in areas offering seasonal jobs.
Dignity for All -- the campaign for a poverty-free Canada recently wrote a letter to Premier Dexter in advance of the Council meetings to encourage the Premier to raise the issue with his colleagues. Acknowledging the negative impact that the Atlantic Provinces will experience, the campaign questioned whether the provinces could absorb the financial effects of the changes to EI, especially if more individuals turn to welfare.
If the goal of the budget, titled "Jobs, Growth and Long-Term Prosperity Act" is to increase the economic and social well-being of Canadians, then parliamentarians must consider the impact decisions will have on all segments of the population, including the poor. While EI is not meant to focus on poverty reduction, it acts as an important transition tool between employment and often catches people before hitting welfare, the social system of last resort.
Federal and provincial governments should work in tandem to develop appropriate responses to unemployment and low income issues. Forcing individuals to take home less pay is not what will help keep the economy moving or lift people out of poverty.]]>Parliamentarians Want Action on Povertytag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.16190082012-06-22T12:19:33-04:002012-08-22T05:12:22-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/
On June 12 a number of parliamentarians gathered to announce the launch of a federal poverty caucus, including co-chair Senator Art Eggleton, the co-author of "In from the Margins," a report on housing and homelessness released in 2009. "Poverty is not benign. It affects us all. It costs us all," he noted as he addressed a crowd that included social justice organizations and members of parliament.
Partisan politics are to be set aside in the new All-Party Anti-Poverty Caucus as Senator Eggleton (Liberal) is joined by co-chairs the Hon. Michael Chong, Conservative MP, and Jean Crowder, New Democrat MP, with Rev. Don Meredith, Conservative Senator, acting as Treasurer. Following an event by the Dignity for All campaign in February of this year called "What's Next? How to Address Poverty in Canada" Canada Without Poverty helped to catalyze the formation of this bi-partisan caucus now boasting 45 members from all political parties.
"Poverty is not a Liberal concern, or a Conservative concern, or a NDP concern. It is a serious concern for all of Canadian society, as people, as fellow human beings with human rights," stated Canada Without Poverty board president Harriett McLachlan, who spoke at the event. Recognizing that solutions lie in coming together, Ms. McLachlan further commented, "You all are the All-Star team, and your opponent is now Poverty."
After struggling in poverty for almost 35 years (20 years as a single parent), McLachlan represents one of the many faces of poverty. Even though she has a Master's degree in social work, she found herself sleeping with rats in inadequate housing, feeling humiliated, dealing with poor health and in desperate need for people to listen. While she is doing better, dental and vision care remain out of reach. "I need you, and others like me need you," she reminded parliamentarians, who were encouraged to come together to find solutions.
Jean Crowder echoed this sentiment, "It is essential that parliamentarians from all parties work together on this very important issue that touches too many Canadians. The federal government has an important role in reducing poverty in Canada. It can only find solutions to this issue by collaborating with various partners at the national and local level."
The launch of the caucus is timely considering that Statistics Canada released their annual look at incomes in Canada this week and exposed the reality that poverty remained unchanged between 2009 and 2010. A two-year delay means that this is the most recent information on the low-income population from the government.
In 2010, three million people were below the after-tax Low-Income Cut-Off -- an unofficial poverty measurement tool that considers how many families are spending 20 per cent more on food, clothing and shelter than an average household. This means that millions of Canadians were struggling to ward off hunger, raise a family, improve physical and mental well-being, and participate fully in our society. Included in this enormous figure are 547,000 children.
Vulnerable populations, along with civil society groups, have been calling for action on poverty issues for years with academic reports, statistics, and first voice stories adding weight to the cry for change. Yet little has been done and many disparate views on solutions remain prevalent in the House of Commons.
"This caucus will help parliamentarians better understand the causes and the scope of poverty in Canada," remarked co-chair Michael Chong. "It's also a forum for us to discuss different solutions and approaches to reduce poverty."
Offering hope for progress on poverty at the federal government level, the caucus is a strong step in the right direction, and has been formed independently by concerned government members. Meetings of the caucus will officially begin in the fall, and all parliamentarians are welcome. Recruits should bring a sense of justice, an open mind, and a desire to offer Canadians a life free from poverty.]]>All Canadians Have a Right to Foodtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.15102062012-05-12T12:00:05-04:002012-07-12T05:12:13-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food arrived as well. Both events highlight the growing problem of hunger in Canada and help draw attention to the root cause of food insecurity: lack of income.
Hunger Awareness Week asked Canadians to "Give it Up" for hunger, reminding us that almost 900,000 people use food banks monthly -- a number that has grown since the beginning of the recession in 2008. While this number is shockingly high, the total only reflects the one in four Canadians that use this service. As people challenge themselves to 'give up' a food item they enjoy, they should think beyond food banks and consider the reason people go hungry: they can't afford food.
People living with low-income -- whether from paid employment, social assistance or both -- are forced to do more with less money. The majority of people living in poverty are employed, with 25 per cent of Canadians working low wage jobs and earning less than about $13 an hour. This is a rate that will barely keep individuals out of poverty, and it highlights the fact that this is not about accessing food, but rather having the means to purchase it.
Even Food Banks Canada (FBC) has acknowledged this issue in their 2011 Hunger Count report stating, "Low income, whether in the short or long term, is at the root of the persistent need for charitable food assistance in Canada." Food banks had never been seen in Canada before the 1980s and when introduced in 1981 were intended as an emergency measure only, and certainly not as a long-term solution to address hunger. The Canadian Association of Food Banks (the precursor to FBC) had a three year mandate when they were first established, but continued when it was clear hunger in Canada was not going away.
What has developed since their inception is a charitable model that allows individuals and corporations to offer donations with the satisfaction that they have assisted the low-income population, and contributed to the end of hunger. While these donations are helpful in the immediate, and are necessary in the current economic climate, they contribute to a perpetual cycle of need -- one that can only be broken with political will, federal funding and progressive social policy that adopts a human rights approach to poverty, income insecurity and inadequate housing.
Missing from this conversation about hunger is that everyone in Canada has a right to food. When the federal government ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, it agreed to key provisons including Article 11(1) which articulates the right to an adequate standard of living, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and Article 2(1) which obliges states to use the maximum amount of resources necessary to fulfill these rights.
This human right to adequate food means that states are not obligated to give out free food -- but to make sure food is affordable and accessible. Canada is required to fulfill the right not only as a moral imperative, but because of the commitment it made by ratifying the international treaty.
The Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Olivier De Schutter, is an independent expert who will review Canada's compliance with the economic and social right to adequate food, and is here until mid-May. Canada is the first developed country he has visited on mission, in large part because of the growing concerns around access to adequate, affordable food in one of the richest countries in the world.
De Schutter is meeting with government officials, social justice and community organizations as well as individuals struggling with food insecurity. De Schutter will communicate with the Canadian government, as well as the United Nations Human Rights Council, on any violations of the right to food, and hopefully encourage this government to take necessary steps to ensure no person in Canada is hungry. The response must go beyond food banks.
While people in Canada bring cans of food to food banks or take part in a hunger challenge this week, they must realize that this may be necessary in order to end hunger in Canada, but it is by no means sufficient. To get to the root cause of the issue we have to remember that this is a matter of money: inadequate income is ultimately what keeps individuals and families hungry. Hunger is a matter of justice, not charity.]]>Canada's Poor Have Just Become Poorertag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.14542632012-04-29T00:07:48-04:002012-06-28T05:12:03-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/
Established in 1969 as an advisory group to the Minister of National Health and Welfare, the National Council of Welfare has played a crucial role in measuring the depth and breadth of poverty in Canada, linking citizens concerns about welfare and poverty with parliament. Specifically mandated to report to the minister, the NCW was unique in its research collection and reporting providing accurate pan-Canadian data that was used by various organizations, including Canada Without Poverty and Campaign 2000.
In contrast to a statement made by MP Kellie Leitch, the National Council of Welfare does not duplicate the activities of any other organization in the non-profit sector. As both Canada Without Poverty and Campaign 2000 have stated in a recent press release, the federal government's termination of funding for this poverty advisory group, with unprecedented statutory powers, actually undermines national efforts to combat poverty. Without the informed voice of committed citizens to complement the important data, how will a minister know that his/her decisions are responding to real needs? The loss of NCW is a blow to social policy work.
What other organization has the resources and central position to produce an annual, detailed analysis of social assistance, the program of last resort across the country, as well as regular reports on the root causes of poverty? Critical information that is part of a comprehensive bank of resources produced by the NCW and relied on by many civil society organizations.
Most recently, "The Dollars and Sense of Solving Poverty" report released in August 2011, opened the dialogue around an economic argument against poverty -- investing in poverty head-on would cost $12.9 billion, but keeping the status quo would cost the government almost double.
The loss of important information gathering will leave a noticeable gap in the current knowledge of poverty in Canada. Such substantive reporting on social wellbeing is necessary in order to not only identify the cross-Canada trends and emerging issues, but also to help map out regional needs and develop targeted solutions.
The recent Welfare Incomes 2009 report (the year most recent data is available) noted that Newfoundland was the only province to provide social assistance that reached the poverty line in one category: lone parents with one child. Setting a bar for other provinces and territories to aspire to, the welfare incomes reports provide accurate data that governments can't hide from.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt once said, "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much. It is whether we provide enough for those who have little."
With no federal poverty strategy, no official poverty measurement tools, and now, no Council of Welfare, how can we assess how we are doing? In the current economic climate where employment has yet to stabilize and rising costs leave many families scrambling to make ends meet, the loss of critical information makes governments less prepared to face challenges.
Instead of blinding the government to the reality of poverty and contributing to an evidence-free zone in Ottawa, we should be continuously updating social data and research -- just as we do with economic data and research -- to pave the way for solutions. Shutting down the National Council of Welfare is the wrong move.
Co-written by Laurel Rothman from Campaign 2000]]>This Budget Misses the Marktag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.13918132012-03-30T13:20:39-04:002012-05-30T05:12:01-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/
The new austerity budget focuses on reduced spending by $5.2 billion, cutting jobs, and forcing low-income seniors to wait longer for support. These spending cuts were touted as "moderate" by Finance Minister Flaherty in the weeks prior to the budget release, but in the end thousands of jobs were lost (some estimates are up to 70,000 including previous public service 'downsizing'), and no new money was set aside for such critical services as housing support. Housing is a known determinant of good health, but over three million Canadians are insecurely housed which can ultimately increase the need for expensive health services. Addressing this issue would have been the smart choice.
Small spending allotments are trampled by spending cuts to health and essential service agencies. A mention of money being set aside for Aboriginal education is accompanied by a cut of two per cent to Aboriginal Affairs, and 5.7 per cent cut to Health Canada. This seems like a "take from Peter to give to Paul" kind of game, with no one being the clear winner.
Fears around changes to the Old Age Security (OAS) age of eligibility have become a reality, with applicants being forced to wait an extra two years for benefits. Moving the age from 65 to 67 will have a detrimental effect on seniors with low-income, who rely on these benefits. The Guaranteed Income Supplement and OAS have been heralded as programs that have successfully reduced senior poverty to approximately five per cent. To reverse this trend would be to fail a vulnerable population in desperate need of support, and also out of step with the 2011 Conservative election pledge to assist seniors and increase the OAS.
Fortunately, there is a way forward, toward prosperity.
The Canada that "could be" is found within the Alternative Federal Budget (AFB), the brainchild of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Released earlier this month, the 2012 AFB offers optimism in a time of scheduled spending cuts, and demonstrates how the government could reach their goal of deficit reduction while creating a more prosperous, fair society.
Government programs will require adequate funding, and to do this we need to consider the billions lost to the federal treasury in recent years. The AFB reports that $220 billion in government revenue from taxes has been sacrificed since 2006, with the cost to society being higher rates of poverty, strained health care systems and increased unemployment.
What the Alternative Federal Budget proposes is to reinvigorate government revenues while investing in infrastructure, which will create an estimated 300,000 good-paying jobs. The record low tax rates that many corporations currently enjoy will be modestly increased to reach this goal, along with a new tax for incomes over $250,000, and the establishment of a financial transaction tax.
It comes down to choices.
Investing in people and programs that support low and middle income families is not only a moral choice, but an economical one as well. Recent reports by both government agencies and organizations (see here and here) have demonstrated that maintaining poverty is much more expensive than eliminating it. In contrast, a Canadian public health report estimated that for every $1 spent on children in their early years saves between $3 and $9 on health care, criminal justice, and social assistance costs later on.
In the weeks leading up to the federal budget, the government went into high-gear in an effort to brand any changes as part of "growth" plan. The idea was to move attention away from the negative opinions associated with an "austerity budget" - one that would greatly restrict spending on programs and services. This re-branding exercise is more about a marketing ploy than actual information on the effects the current budget choices will have on Canadians. When it comes down to it, spending cuts and low taxes equal less money in the public purse, fewer jobs and increased poverty no matter how you phrase it.
]]>Poverty: A Huge Cost to Our Health-care Systemtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.12091452012-01-16T16:16:48-05:002012-03-17T05:12:01-04:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/
The transfers are critical funding streams that can improve the dismal welfare rates, long hospital wait times, and limited child care spaces that plague all provinces. As governments are expected to do more with less, it is important to talk about addressing poverty. Poverty equals poor health and costs society billions of dollars each year, making it a key component of any conversation on health and social programs.
Poverty and health go hand-in-hand. People in poverty are more likely to use the health care system because of physical and mental health issues or illness, and be more likely to face an early death. Stress, poor nutrition, inadequate housing, and unstable social environments are a few reasons for this.
Known as the social determinants of health, these issues can lead to increased pressure on the health care system. Current healthcare spending that is associated with poverty is estimated at approximately 20 per cent. This fact demonstrates the weight that socio-economic disparities have on health systems and the importance of discussing both the future of the CST and CHT together.
While the debate on the future of the CHT has garnered media attention in the past few weeks, little commentary is surfacing on the funding of the CST, which directly impacts programs that benefit people with low-income.
The CST specifically supports provincial and territorial social assistance, post-secondary education, and reaches other social programs such as housing and childcare. Adequately funding these programs and reducing poverty saves money -- the federal government could save $7.6 billion annually on health costs, and $2.9 billion in Ontario alone according to the Ontario Association of Food Banks (OAFB)Cost of Poverty report.
This benefit has a "trickle-up" effect according to recent evidence on the impact of reducing inequality, as improving equality and the health of the low-income population has a positive impact on well-being across society.
Both the CHT and CST will be renewed in 2014 and discussions around these investments are taking place this week in Victoria, B.C. at the Council of the Federation meeting amidst talk of budget cuts and austerity.
Provincial and territorial premiers will be jostling with the federal Finance Minister over funding allotments and a recent federal announcement stating that things are about to change. Regardless of the numbers, the federal government and premiers should consider Canada-wide guidelines for social service delivery and strategies that pull people out of poverty in order to reduce health-care costs and have a meaningful impact at the ground level.
Currently the annual transfers -- set to six and three per cent respectively and adjusted for inflation -- are being reworked by the federal government who in a December meeting with the premiers stated that beyond 2016 any healthcare funding would be tied to economic growth.
The bold announcement by finance Minister Flaherty "blindsided" provincial and territorial governments with a 10-year plan for both the CST and CHT: current rates would remain the same until 2016-17, but following that, the CHT would float with GDP, but not dip below three per cent total.
At the time of the announcement this would have translated to a two percentage point drop (four per cent instead of 6 per cent), meaning billions of dollars would not have reach regional health care systems that are reliant on the funds.
If the rate drops further to three per cent it is expected that would cause a $36 billion loss. Similarly striking is the absence of discussion on the social determinants of health and the role the federal government plays in setting national standards and ensuring equitable services are available for all Canadians.
In 2012-13 the CST will provide $11.9 billion to be divided among the provinces, and the money comes with no strings attached -- premiers are free to allocate the money as they see fit -- whereas the CHT must follow guidelines from the Canada Health Act.
While there seems to be little impetus to address poverty, the premiers face one alluring incentive to invest in the problem -- saving billions. The need for a robust health-care system that works in tandem with social service programs is substantial. While debate on the billion-dollar transfers ensues let's remember: It's not just about the money -- it's also what you plan do with it.
Social services and poverty reduction are part of health prevention. If governments are serious about wanting to reduce costs then they will have to deal with the root causes of poverty.
]]>Canada's Housing Crisis Goes Beyond Attawapiskattag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.11818662012-01-03T17:00:02-05:002012-03-04T05:12:01-05:00Megan Yaremahttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/megan-yarema/
From coast to coast to coast, from our biggest cities to the smallest hamlets, millions of Canadians struggle with inadequate and unaffordable housing. While hundreds of thousands more are homeless -- twin crises that warrant much greater attention from the federal government beyond an emergency response such as that being given to Attawapiskat.
In the early 1990s, the federal government abandoned a national approach to housing, replacing it with various housing agreements and programs subject to periodic renewal. In the absence of a national approach -- and a concrete, multi-stakeholder strategy founded around the human right to housing (per Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) -- it is timely to ask whether the current system is working.
The Wellesley Institute reported in 2010 that federal funding for housing declined since 1989 to sink below $2 billion. Meanwhile, over 1.5 million households (20 per cent of which are Aboriginal) experience housing insecurity, meaning more than 30 per cent of household income is devoted to shelter costs. An estimated that up to 300,000 people are absolutely homeless (i.e., sleeping on streets, in city parks etc.) while a further 450,000 to 900,000 people couch surf, use shelters, or live in overcrowded conditions.
On December 13, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) produced its biannual rental vacancy report indicating that vacancy rates have dropped on average across the country. Currently the national vacancy rate is 2.2 per cent, down from 2.6 per cent in October 2010, which has been noted by housing experts as "the danger zone" as it is less than three per cent. Fewer available spaces means higher demand, which can drive up rental costs and put low-income individuals and families in an even more difficult situation.
Making matters worse is the issue of affordability: Many major centres continue to see costs increase while average incomes remain stagnant. British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario -- the three provinces identified as the hardest hit by the 2008-2009 recession -- have the highest average rental costs.
Based on the metric of Statistics Canada's Low Income Cut-Offs After-Tax, B.C. also held the 2009 provincial title for the worst poverty rate -- 12 per cent (the national average is 9.6 per cent), and Ontario wasn't far behind at 10.1 per cent.
Inflation has outpaced labour market and welfare incomes. Housing is increasingly unaffordable for many. Federal support for housing has plummeted and could decrease further in an era of so-called fiscal restraint. The numbers point to more and more households unable to meet, or at risk of not meeting, basic needs including housing. Something's gotta give.
During the federal pre-budget discussions in the fall of 2011, Citizens for Public Justice noted that if the federal government cancelled the corporate tax cuts scheduled for January 2012, $3 billion in revenue could be directed towards addressing the housing and homelessness crises, creating 47,000 jobs, building 155,550 affordable housing units, and supporting critical repairs to 200,000 homes.
While none of these measures would solve rental problems, they would be a step forward for many low-income individuals and families on social housing waitlists. Housing is a key social determinant of health. In turn, health problems caused or exacerbated by homelessness or poor housing add to the demands and stresses on healthcare systems. According to the Health Disparities Task Group of the Federal/Provincial/Territorial Advisory Committee on Population Health and Health Security, an estimated 20 per cent of the costs of Canada's health care system are attributed to "income disparities" (i.e., poverty).
Solutions to address poverty, housing problems, and homelessness have been identified by parliamentary committees, expert working groups, social justice NGOs, and academics. The federal government has a wealth of solution options at its disposal and can choose to make tackling these issues, together, a top five priority. What it must not ignore are the images and stories from Attawapiskat -- a compelling reminder of needs to be addressed and rights to be honoured and protected.
Rob Rainer is Executive Director and Megan Yarema is Director, Education and Outreach of Canada Without Poverty, a national charity.
]]>
