Social Policy in Ontario

More spin than substance in poverty reduction plan

Posted on September 9, 2014 in Social Security Policy Context

—

TheStar.com – Opinion/Commentary – Deb Matthews unveils the latest Liberal poverty reduction plan, setting no targets and offering no money.
Sep 09 2014.   By: Carol Goar, Star Columnist

Anti-poverty advocates have learned to welcome crumbs from the Ontario Liberals.

That is what they got in the five-year poverty reduction strategy unveiled by Deputy Premier Deb Matthews last week. The 56-page blueprint consisted of recycled promises, long-term goals, soothing language and self-congratulations (despite the fact she fell far short of her last five-year target.)

But social activists lauded the government for its good intentions, its comprehensive framework and its long-sought acknowledgement that homelessness is a provincial responsibility. They politely overlooked the fact that the minister did not raise welfare rates, did not provide a nutrition allowance, did not address the shortage of child care spaces and did not offer rent supplements.

Do these advocates really speak for people living in poverty?

It seems unlikely. Good intentions don’t fill empty stomachs or pay the rent. Families in need don’t care which government does what.
Does easy praise encourage the government to aim low?

That seems highly probable. As long as Matthews can win public plaudits for saying what “stakeholders” want to hear, she needn’t risk bold action. As long as those who claim to represent the poor are onside, she needn’t back up her words with money.

The template was set 11 years ago when former premier Dalton McGuinty sent Matthews — then a rookie backbencher — on a province-wide tour to assess Ontario’s neglected social assistance system. The London MPP earned the trust of struggling single parents, individuals with disabilities, new immigrants and low-wage workers with her empathy, passion and optimism that her government could make a difference.

Everywhere Matthews went, one theme dominated: people begged for an increase in social assistance rates (slashed by 21.5 per cent by the previous Conservative government). But their top priority did not make her list of recommendations. She proposed instead that the system be streamlined, the rules be simplified and the demeaning attitudes of social assistance officials be rooted out.

Why ignore the top priority of people living in poverty? Matthews said she did not want to raise unrealistic expectations. Until the deficit was eliminated, reversing the welfare cuts imposed by Tories was not feasible.

Four years later, Matthew repeated the exercise, this time as provincial health minister. This time her objective was more ambitious: to produce the government’s first poverty reduction strategy.

Once again, Matthews consulted widely, inviting anti-poverty groups to work with her rather than lobby from the outside. Once again, her strategy provided no immediate relief for families struggling to pay for basic necessities. And once again, social activists gave her high marks.

It set an aggressive target (a 25-per-cent reduction in child poverty within five years), it boosted the Ontario Child Benefit in annual increments and it promised to end poor-bashing, they exulted.

Only one of those commitments was fulfilled. The child benefit did go up, as promised. The child poverty rate went down, but only by 9.2 per cent. The social assistance system remained rigid and judgmental. “Had the federal government done its part, we would have come very close — if not achieved — our goal of a 25-per-cent reduction in child poverty,” Matthews insisted.

Last week’s strategy, Realizing our Potential, features a new goal: ending homelessness. But it came without a target date. “We don’t even have a sense of the magnitude of the problem so I think it would be irresponsible to say when we will end it,” the minister said.

That is curious. Her government has investigated the shortage of affordable housing in Ontario three times, producing lengthy research reports. There are numerous studies by municipalities and non-profit organizations. She could get a sense of the magnitude of the problem by checking the waiting list for social housing. It now numbers 165,069 households.

It is true that Finance Minister Charles Sousa allocated $42 million a year to preventing homelessness from now until 2021 in his spring budget. But that will barely put a dent in the problem. He increased social assistance rates by one per cent. But inflation is running at 2.5 per cent in Ontario.

Matthews did not offer any new funding in her poverty reduction strategy. Nor did she set any measurable objectives.

In fairness, this is more than either of the opposition parties has offered to do. The Liberals have a vision of social justice. And they have made incremental progress since they took power in 2003.

Is this reason enough to cheer? Social activists apparently think so. The 1.6 million Ontarians living in poverty still long for tangible help.

< http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/09/09/more_spin_than_substance_in_poverty_reduction_plan_goar.html >

Tags: budget, homelessness, ideology, jurisdiction, poverty, standard of living

This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 9th, 2014 at 11:32 am and is filed under Social Security Policy Context. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.