Statement made on 17 November 2011 by Senator Fernand Robichaud
Hon. Fernand Robichaud:
Honourable senators, I would like to draw your attention to the issue of poverty, an issue that continues to exist, persist and do harm.
The issue of poverty is certainly not new. What is new is that we can openly admit that we have failed in our fight against poverty despite the good intentions of a number of governments in the past few decades. In this chamber and in the Senate committees, poverty has been the subject of countless discussions, studies and reports.
Honourable senators, a whole host of changes have been made to the Old Age Security Act over the years in order to reduce poverty among seniors. In that regard, the colossal work of Senator David Croll on poverty in Canada has been a driving force behind the development of social policies and programs in Canada. In fact, his 1971 report from the Special Senate Committee on Poverty is considered the bible on the issue of poverty in the country. His analysis and recommendations have definitively guided the government's actions with regard to the less fortunate in the country.
Senator David Croll did not mince words. He knew how to call a spade a spade and describe things as he saw them. It is not surprising, then, that his report opened with the words, "The poor do not choose poverty. It is at once their affliction and our national shame." This sad statement made 40 years ago unfortunately remains true today.
In 1991, the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology produced a report called Children in Poverty: Towards a Better Future, on child poverty and poverty among women and Aboriginals.
Senator Erminie Cohen published a report on child poverty in 1997. That report, Sounding the Alarm: Poverty in Canada reported on the situation of poverty in the country 25 years after the work of Senator Croll. She also recommended changes.
And what can we say about the Senate reports on poverty among Aboriginals, seniors, and people living in rural areas that underscore the links between poverty and mental health, mental illness and addiction?
Two years ago, Senators Eggleton and Segal presented the report called, In From the Margins: A Call to Action on Poverty, Housing and Homelessness in which they make the observation that, "In almost 40 years, many of the issues related to poverty have not changed enough," noting, however, some improvement in government programs and policies to reduce poverty among children, low-income workers and seniors.
In the other place, poverty has been studied by committees. As recently as last year, the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities presented a report entitled Federal Poverty Reduction Plan: Working in Partnership towards Reducing Poverty in Canada.
What I am trying to say, honourable senators, is that poverty in Canada has been studied extensively and from every angle.
On September 13, 2011, a study conducted by the Conference Board revealed that, since the 1990s, the gap between the rich and poor has been widening more rapidly in Canada than in the rest of the 17 most developed countries.
Over the past 30 years, studies have shown that the wealthy have benefited from economic growth, while the middle class and the poor have suffered a decline in their standard of living. This situation could become decidedly dangerous. Consider, for instance, the social upheavals we have seen over the past year around the globe. That is why it is crucial that we put an end to this growing inequality.
I suspect that the mass movements that have spread across North America — such as Occupy Wall Street and Occupy Bay Street — are symptomatic of the serious misgivings that more and more people around the world are feeling.
Are these people beginning to lose hope in a better world for themselves and their families?
Do they see themselves stuck in front of an insurmountable obstacle?
Do they think they can no longer get by or do anything to improve their lot in life?
I think the answers here are in the questions. But who are these people? These are people who have lost their jobs, people who no longer have the energy to go on looking for another job, or who have lost all hope of finding another job. These people are aware that a small group of people holds all the wealth and only crumbs remain for everyone else. I dare say these are people who have lost confidence in the current system and who desperately want change. These are people who see the shocking salaries and bonuses paid to CEOs, bankers and financial executives, while they cannot meet their own basic needs.
The inequalities are striking. According to Statistics Canada, the after-tax income of families who are among the richest 10 per cent increased by 24 per cent between 1989 and 2004, while the income of the poorest families decreased by 8 per cent during the same period. For the poor families, the situation is even worse. It is time to take action.
My intention here is not to blame anyone, but to encourage a discussion so that we can move forward and eliminate the problem of poverty.
A recent report produced by the National Council of Welfare on September 28, 2011, essentially says that the effects of poverty in this country cost us $25 billion annually, but that poverty could be eradicated for half of that amount.
I find their approach to be interesting. It is easy to understand that by investing now, we can save in the future.
Furthermore, this report confirms that we already have a partial system to alleviate and eliminate poverty and that we need to "get the whole job done." This report clearly says that we must stop thinking of eliminating poverty in terms of spending and start thinking of it in terms of investing.
For example, as quoted in Le Devoir, the report says that in Calgary, "a spot in a homeless shelter costs the government $42,000 annually, and housing in prison or a psychiatric hospital costs $120,000 per person. However, a subsidized spot in supportive housing costs $15,000 per year, and an affordable housing placement costs half of that."
Quite often, people who cannot pay for their medications inevitably end up in the emergency room, and we know how expensive health care services can be.
There is inequality in Canada and there are connections between poverty and education, poverty and crime, and poverty and health care.
The failure to take action is very costly. Furthermore, by reducing the number of poor people, we benefit in the long term because, as people climb out of poverty, they can participate in and contribute to the economic development of the country.
We should examine how we provide social assistance. In most regions, social assistance is difficult to access. Furthermore, there is a multitude of rules that prevent recipients from getting off social assistance. For example, in some cases, if someone on social assistance finds a temporary job, they may lose all benefits, making it better for them to be unemployed.
This type of situation should be examined seriously and critically by the authorities responsible. I know that an anti-poverty plan, which has some very good ideas, has been developed in New Brunswick with input from the public, private and community sectors.
Unfortunately, some aspects of the plan, such as increasing the minimum wage, have been deferred. It is obvious that a concerted plan to help people get off social assistance and to provide information to help them become independent, would go far to radically reform Canada's income security system.
The National Council of Welfare report has a four-part plan which includes a Canada-wide strategy for solving poverty, a sustained investment plan, a design framework based on well-being, and a forum to bring together people and ideas in order to achieve the best possible results.
It is important not only to encourage people, but also to help them climb out of poverty.
Honourable senators, in conclusion, I simply hope to spark reflection about poverty, especially since the argument that poverty is expensive is easily understood by the rich people of this world. People's natural tendency is to keep their wealth for themselves, and not to redistribute it more equitable.
Most of all, we have to talk about poverty and the poor. The poor, the forgotten, the abandoned are human beings, people who are entitled to their dignity and, in my humble opinion, a fair share of this country's national wealth.
To eliminate poverty is to give these people what they need to take care of themselves, to suitably feed and house themselves. It would give them a reason to live and allow them to contribute to the well-being of society.
I would like each and every one of you to tell me how we could eliminate poverty. I believe we have to keep talking about it. The question I want answers to is, "How do you view the poor and poverty?"