May 17

This online discussion featured Alan Broadbent, Chair, Maytree, who described the power of public policy to transform society, and explored why some ideas resonate with decision-makers. Sherri Torjman, Vice-President, Caledon Institute of Social Policy, highlighted and described a few key recommendations from the policy document.

The publication, Charting Prosperity: Practical Ideas for a Stronger Canada, presents policy proposals intended to contribute to Canada’s prosperity while protecting the country’s most vulnerable. It presents more than 50 ideas, covering five thematic areas:

  1. income support and social security;
  2. democracy and participation;
  3. inclusion and protection;
  4. immigrant and refugee selection; and
  5. diversity and integration.

Find out more and download Charting Prosperity: Practical Ideas for a Stronger Canada.

YouTube Preview Image

Presentation overview

Alan Broadbent

Alan spent some time reflecting on the importance of a policy lens in all the work that Maytree does.

The best way to overcome big issues and problems is to change the way society thinks and acts. It is by tapping into the power of our collective will, and attendant large public budgets, that we can take the great strides forward. The greatest advances in the wellbeing of populations have always come from public measures.

So Maytree has focused on public policy as the biggest lever available to us in building stronger and more equitable societies. It is our view that without a public policy lens on our work, we are just engaging in a plethora of pilot projects which miss that chance to be transformative for more than a relative handful of people. And while I would never scoff at helping a handful of people, it seems more responsible to our public obligations to seek the leverage that could scale up and multiply the positive impact of our work. In our view, that comes from affecting the way we act together.

We at Maytree have clearly embraced this principle, and have put a policy lens on all of our work. Our publication, Charting Prosperity: Practical Ideas for a Stronger Canada, is a view through that lens onto our work at Maytree and in various organizations we support.

Persuasive Policy

Our support of policy work is broad and deep. And it is driven by our clear sense of what makes effective policy, which we think of the three I’s of effective policy:

  • Ideas
  • Instruments
  • Investments

Every policy must be driven by a good idea which holds real promise of positive change, change that will improve the lives of people and communities. Those good ideas must be embedded in instruments that will work, that can be implemented successfully, and that won’t encounter insurmountable political barriers. The instruments must be something that governments, or businesses, can say “yes” to. And there must be investment to make it happen, either investment by governments for public policy, by business for changes to corporate employment or social engagement policy, or by institutions.

Ideas, Instruments, and Investments must all be in place, and trying to achieve change without all three being present is terribly difficult.

Paying attention to policy is paying attention to the biggest lever for change you will have. Get good at it.

Sherri Torjman

Caledon’s policy recommendations fall into three main categories, which can be useful for anyone working on policy:

Incremental - change to an existing measure, such as:

  • increased benefits in both absolute and/or relative terms (i.e., amount and relative to cost of living)
  • extension of benefits (i.e., duration)
  • expanded eligibility

Example: incremental reform: improve the Working Income Tax Benefit (WITB)

Structural – more complex

  • introduction of a new program or benefit to an existing system
  • significant redesign of an existing measure
  • extension of an existing measure to a new population

Example: structural reform: make refundable the caregiver tax credit and the infirm dependant tax credit

Architectural - working at the system level

  • reconfiguration of several related programs or benefits, could include shift in jurisdictions of responsibility
  • introduction of new measures
  • associated incremental and structural reforms of existing measures

Example: architectural reform: implement a Basic Income Plan for Canadians with severe disabilities

There are good policy precedents from around the world that can help us to make the case for some of the work we’re doing here.

Q&A

Alan and Sherri took questions for the final 30 minutes of the webinar.

How does Maytree choose projects? What makes a program interesting or important to support?

It has to be in Maytree’s general mandate of anti-poverty work, has to be innovative, and has high likelihood of impact/solution to the presenting problem. It’s important that any proposals or ideas that are brought to Maytree must include ideas about instruments that would be effective, costs of these solutions and who would bear these costs.

We use an analytical framework to assess any proposal (similar to the previously mentioned three I’s of effective policy) – ideas, plan and people. The idea has to be a good idea, with competitive advantage, that has a good chance to be an effective solution to a set of problems. There has to be a good and credible plan in place of how you’re going to get traction around that idea. We have to have faith that the people involved can actually achieve this.

Maytree is most interested in solutions. We have to go beyond a “culture of complaint”, and working with others to innovate solutions and bring forward ways to solve problems.

If there was one idea that could be implemented now from Policy Insights that would have the most impact, which would you choose?

Alan – Extending the municipal vote to permanent residents is an idea whose time has come. You shouldn’t have taxation without representation. People paying taxes in a jurisdiction should be able to cast a vote for the leaders who are going to be spending that money. Find out more (PDF).

Sherri – Increases to Working Income Tax Benefit (WITB). People experience the difficulties of trying to make ends meet with rapidly rising costs. There is a general sympathy to advance this policy proposal.  At the same time, having other jurisdictions on board with provincial poverty reduction strategies gives WITB some momentum. They are looking to changes at the federal level in order to effect their own proposed reforms  and would view  favourably that sort of change. Find out more (PDF).

Can you comment on handling issues where one jurisdiction believes it is another’s issue (i.e., provincial, federal responsibilities) and vice versa to lead to inaction?

Alan – It is a huge issue in Canada. Very often when governments want to avoid doing something, it’s a good stalling technique. Regarding the opportunistic nature of policy windows opening and closing, it’s very difficult to predict when you’ll get both political and public service alignment. When you involved other jurisdictions, the complexity increases yet again.

Sherri – This happens very often in social policy. There is a great advantage, in this case, to embarking on architectural reform, where you really are talking about federal and provincial/territorial governments coming together to resolve a common issue. If it’s possible to get your concern raised at one of the many federal-provincial/territorial  tables on the particular issue, that can be very helpful  to ensure joint action.

There is a growing gap between the haves and have-nots, which requires a shift at the values level in the economy (e.g., the presumption that maximizing growth is a first principle). What do you suggest for addressing a values-based, structural problem?

Sherri – Before you propose specific reforms, you need to  talk about values. Caledon has  put forward documents that speak to the issue of values, such as “Reclaiming our Humanity.” Values form the foundation and basis for a caring society.

Social and economic well-being are intrinsically linked. We’re seeing more and more research coming out in mainstream research, from groups like the OECD.  We need to  build on these arguments to continue to make clear links between economic and social well-being.
The growing importance of measures like the well-being and happiness indices helps build the values case. . Some of this work is being done by top economists and is gaining traction.

The recent book The Spirit Level documents the outcomes and high costs of inequality. We can work this evidence into the values-based narrative to help show the serious personal and societal problems associated with widening inequality.

Alan – It’s important to have a narrative on values and for groups to be clear, in public, about what their values are. Frank Sharry talks about the importance of volume and velocity in communications (http://maytree.com/blog/?p=1698). If we don’t do that, someone else will do that for us. In policy terms, it’s not enough to do this. However, it’s important to recognize that decision-makers we’re seeking to influence are not going to spend a lot of time with value statements/narratives. They want to be brought something they can say yes to, not just problems. While we must make the values argument, we must also come up with the short and pointed policy proposal that can be implemented and will work.

How will the new makeup of Parliament affect which policy ideas will gain traction? Is this an opportunity?

Alan – It’s unpredictable. The best we can do is to be ready with our policy work, be persistent, to be ready to take advantage of policy windows when they open.

Sherri – There may be some opportunities we can see in the current context. Proposals that involve many players, including the private and voluntary sector, ideas around social innovation and social finance appear to be of interest to the current federal government. It’s also important to look at government not only with the policy measures that they can create and put forward, but also the kinds of enabling environments that they can help create for voluntary and private sector groups to do their work well..

There is also significant work to be done to help governments understand how they can enable  us to do our work  – e.g., removing restrictions to charities and educing administrative barriers.  .

What advice would you give to nonprofits that are just getting started in policy?

Alan – It’s critical to (and Caledon does this very well) start with data and a strong analysis that is based in data, not start with a bunch of opinions. The reason for that is that when you get near the end of the road of the policy process, when a government is seriously looking at implementing your policy recommendations, if it turns out that you were wrong about the data they will not only not implement, but won’t listen to you again.

Sherri – We have found it helpful  to supplement the data with stories, by talking with  people and finding out what’s going on in their lives.  We then try  to move those private troubles into private issues. Part of our role is to understand the situation of someone living  a certain problem and translate that into policy terms – moving the practical into the policy.

A combined approach with data and qualitative information, such as focus groups and  meetings, can help to make policy recommendations that will actually have an impact on peoples’ daily lives.

Tagged with:
Apr 29

Ken Battle is President of the Caledon Institute. Sherri Torjman is Vice-President of the Caledon Institute. Michael Mendelson is Senior Scholar at the Caledon Institute.

Maytree’s yearly Policy Insights document presents policy proposals prepared by Maytree, its partners and grantees. These recommendations make up the three important “I”s of public policy: ideas, instruments, and investments. They each identify a powerful idea to improve the life of Canadians, the instruments which will be effective in creating that improvement, and the investments that must be made to operationalize the instruments. These recommendations build on the power and potential of public services, and the resiliency of Canadians. You can read a summary of recommendations and download the complete collection of Policy Insights in PDF format. Please share and distribute to your networks.

Register for Maytree Policy Insights 2011 - Report Release Webinar on Eventbrite

An estimated three million Canadians act as unpaid or informal caregivers. They provide care and assistance to family members and friends in need of support because of physical, cognitive or mental health conditions.

Caregiving is not new. Family members and friends have long taken care of each other when an individual requires intensive assistance because of aging, illness or disability. What is new is the fact that this issue is receiving more public attention.

First, rising health costs are forcing governments to look at community-based options as an alternative to the traditional health care system. Hospitals, in particular, are overcrowded and unable to cope expeditiously with emergencies as well as surgical and other procedures. The problem has been exacerbated by concerns about Canada’s preparedness to meet the long-term care needs of an aging population.

Second, despite the recession, employers have identified labour shortages in certain sectors of the economy. As the population ages and retires, they will need to compete for relatively scarce talent. Employers are recognizing that they must pay more attention to the personal needs of their employees, such as flexible work schedules that help accommodate caregiving responsibilities.

Finally, caregiver concerns are also gaining political traction. The Parliamentary Committee on Palliative and Compassionate Care recently held hearings on a wide range of issues related to caregiving.

Make refundable the caregiver and infirm dependant tax credits

In recognition of the unique financial pressures facing caregivers, the federal government provides some tax relief through two specific measures. The caregiver credit reduces federal income tax for individuals providing care in their home for a low-income infirm adult relative, or a parent or grandparent age 65 and over with a low income. The infirm dependant credit gives tax relief to individuals providing support to a low-income adult infirm dependent relative, who may live in a separate residence. The amount of both credits in 2011 is $4,282, which reduces federal income taxes by a maximum $642.

Governments have often talked about increasing the amount of these tax credits. But a modest hike would make only a miniscule dent in personal debt, since caregivers get income tax savings worth only 15 percent of the amount of these credits. A small increase would barely make a difference to taxpayers who now qualify – and would be of no help at all to those who do not.

A preferred option would be to make these tax credits refundable. This means that households too poor to pay income tax would receive some money from the government to help offset their caregiving costs. Alternatively, Ottawa could turn the tax credits into a modest caregiver allowance that would assist all caregiving households. The United Kingdom and Australia, for example, pay a small cash benefit to the family caregiver of individuals requiring chronic at-home care.

Further reading:

Reports:

Tagged with:
Apr 28

Paul Born is the President of Tamarack, an organization founded with Maytree.

Maytree’s yearly Policy Insights document presents policy proposals prepared by Maytree, its partners and grantees. These recommendations make up the three important “I”s of public policy: ideas, instruments, and investments. They each identify a powerful idea to improve the life of Canadians, the instruments which will be effective in creating that improvement, and the investments that must be made to operationalize the instruments. These recommendations build on the power and potential of public services, and the resiliency of Canadians. You can read a summary of recommendations and download the complete collection of Policy Insights in PDF format. Please share and distribute to your networks.

Register for Maytree Policy Insights 2011 - Report Release Webinar on Eventbrite

Paul BornAccording to Statistics Canada’s Low Income Cut-Off, in 2007, three million Canadians, or 9.2 percent of the population, lived in poverty. As a result, communities, large and small, are facing increasingly complex and challenging issues, including homelessness and poor health.

Since 2002, a wide range of partners have formed leadership tables in more than a dozen communities across Canada, giving new momentum to efforts which seek to reduce poverty. Joined by the Vibrant Communities initiative, these tables include citizens of various income levels, community workers, representatives from all levels of government and business people. Together they are clarifying their community’s needs and identifying community assets to develop tangible strategies for tackling poverty.

A recent evaluation of this work found that, together, the 164 poverty reduction initiatives:

  • Reduced poverty for more than 170,000 households in Canada;
  • Raised $19.5 million, most of it in local communities;
  • Engaged 1,690 organizations as partners, including more than 500 businesses;
  • Mobilized 1,080 individuals as partners, including 573 people living in poverty; and
  • Inspired 35 policy and program innovations.

Vibrant Communities has become, and hopefully will continue to be, one of Canada’s best poverty reduction strategies.

Create a Community Fund of $25 million run by an arm’s-length body to help communities operate local decision-making tables

The federal government should create a Community Fund, administered by an arm’s-length body such as a foundation or nonprofit organization with a mandate to effect community-based change by funding the challenge involved in convening multiple and diverse parties. The government would develop a set of principles to guide funding decisions which would ensure diversity of investment in terms of geography, community size and nature of the proposed interventions.

The Community Fund would match the first $100,000 raised annually at the local level to enable communities to set up and operate their respective decision-making tables over the course of five years. The Fund would incorporate clear monitoring and review processes to track progress toward stated objectives and identified targets. It would also be required to produce a public annual report of its grant decisions.

A fund of $25 million would help 50 communities develop and implement their own poverty reduction strategies for five years.

Further reading:

Reports

Websites:

Tagged with:
Apr 27

Ken Battle is President of the Caledon Institute. Sherri Torjman is Vice-President of the Caledon Institute. Michael Mendelson is Senior Scholar at the Caledon Institute.

Maytree’s yearly Policy Insights document presents policy proposals prepared by Maytree, its partners and grantees. These recommendations make up the three important “I”s of public policy: ideas, instruments, and investments. They each identify a powerful idea to improve the life of Canadians, the instruments which will be effective in creating that improvement, and the investments that must be made to operationalize the instruments. These recommendations build on the power and potential of public services, and the resiliency of Canadians. You can read a summary of recommendations and download the complete collection of Policy Insights in PDF format. Please share and distribute to your networks.

Register for Maytree Policy Insights 2011 - Report Release Webinar on Eventbrite

There are approximately 113,000 school-aged aboriginal children and youth living on reserves. About 40 percent travel outside of their communities to attend school, while the majority attend on-reserve.

While some on-reserve schools are providing a high quality education, many struggle, and the result is that overall high school completion rates are low, and the gap between the educational attainment of aboriginal students and the general population is increasing. Since failure to complete high school is associated with lower wages and poorer health, low levels of educational achievement has important social and economic consequences.

There is growing recognition that reform of education is an urgent and critically important challenge to ensure opportunity and success for Aboriginal Canadians.

Implement systemic reform of education on First Nations reserves

The first step in achieving “Indian Control of Indian Education” was for the federal government to cede control over First Nations education, and this has largely been done. But the second and more crucial step is for First Nations to step into the vacuum and create the necessary organizational and financial infrastructure for a highquality education system, and this has not been done.

Despite many First Nations attempts to establish needed educational infrastructure, only bits and pieces of an education system have so far been set up on various reserves across Canada. For the most part, the major elements of an education system for First Nations are missing.

The solution proposed by the Caledon Institute is for a new Act of Parliament which would allow First Nations that wished to do so to establish properly funded First Nations school boards with clear legal empowerment and the necessary regional educational agencies to support them – called a First Nations Education Act.

Further reading:

Tagged with:
Apr 26

Sujit Choudhry, Associate Dean, holds the Scholl Chair at the Faculty of Law, and is also appointed to the Department of Political Science and the School of Public Policy and Governance, all at the University of Toronto.

Maytree’s yearly Policy Insights document presents policy proposals prepared by Maytree, its partners and grantees. These recommendations make up the three important “I”s of public policy: ideas, instruments, and investments. They each identify a powerful idea to improve the life of Canadians, the instruments which will be effective in creating that improvement, and the investments that must be made to operationalize the instruments. These recommendations build on the power and potential of public services, and the resiliency of Canadians. You can read a summary of recommendations and download the complete collection of Policy Insights in PDF format. Please share and distribute to your networks.

Sujit ChoudhryDebates about representation by population are a long-standing feature of Canadian democracy. Urban ridings have historically been assigned significantly larger populations than rural ones, thereby diluting the votes of urban Canadians. As a result, the interests of urban Canadians are under-represented in Parliament.

Changing demographics mean this old debate has new consequences – the votes of visible minorities are being diluted as well. Nearly all of the hundreds of thousands of new immigrants who arrive each year choose to live in Canada’s largest cities, particularly in British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario and Quebec. Most are visible minorities and their vote is not weighted equally with their rural counterparts.

Diluting urban votes decreases the influence of urban issues in Parliament. Similarly, diluting the votes of visible minorities has an impact on whether or not issues of importance to visible minority voters are addressed. New immigrants, particularly those who are visible minorities, are having a harder time than their predecessors in securing good jobs and promising futures. Tackling their issues is essential to the country’s social and economic success.

Reform is needed to ensure fairness for all Canadian voters. There are legislative changes that Parliament could take to improve voter fairness. If these types of reforms are not put in place, it may be time to consider litigation to ensure that all voters are treated equally.

Increase the size of the House of Commons by adding more seats to the most populous, urban provinces: British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario

One of the causes of vote dilution is the minimum number of seats guaranteed to the less populous provinces by various constitutional rules. The Senate clause ensures that no province can have fewer MPs than it has Senators, increasing seats for the Atlantic Provinces. The Grandfather clause means that no province can have fewer seats than it had in 1976 or the 33rd Parliament, which assists the Prairies and Quebec.

To take into account population growth in the provinces that do not benefit from the special clauses, more seats should be added to the House of Commons in the largest urban areas in British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario. This is what was recommended in a report in 2007. The government recently introduced a bill (C-12) that would do just that. Unfortunately, support for the bill in the House of Commons is wavering and the bill died when Parliament was dissolved for the federal election.

The bill is imperfect as it artificially limits growth in the size of the House after 2014, therefore preventing representation by population for British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario. It also does not deal with the flawed Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act that permits population variance within a province.

Half a step forward, however, is better than nothing and C-12 should be re-introduced in the next Parliament and passed.

Further reading:

Tagged with:
Apr 25

Ken Battle is President of the Caledon Institute. Sherri Torjman is Vice-President of the Caledon Institute. Michael Mendelson is Senior Scholar at the Caledon Institute.

Maytree’s yearly Policy Insights document presents policy proposals prepared by Maytree, its partners and grantees. These recommendations make up the three important “I”s of public policy: ideas, instruments, and investments. They each identify a powerful idea to improve the life of Canadians, the instruments which will be effective in creating that improvement, and the investments that must be made to operationalize the instruments. These recommendations build on the power and potential of public services, and the resiliency of Canadians. You can read a summary of recommendations and download the complete collection of Policy Insights in PDF format. Please share and distribute to your networks.

Ensuring that Canadians who are temporarily unemployed do not spiral into poverty is an important social policy goal. Yet income security benefits for adults, notably welfare and Employment Insurance, fail to meet the needs of Canadians who are out of work or part of the working poor.

Employment Insurance has undergone some temporary changes to help Canadians cope with the recession. The 2009 federal budget announced that current EI beneficiaries, and those who lost their jobs in 2009 and 2010 and meet the eligibility requirements, would draw benefits for an extra five weeks, up to a maximum of 50 weeks. After the budget, the federal government reform was extended, by up to 20 weeks, for some recipients.

Ottawa also extended EI benefits for persons participating in longer-term training; lengthened the duration of benefits for some workers on a reduced work week to avoid layoffs; and added severance and termination pay to the Wage-Earner Protection Program for wages owed to workers by a non-paying employer following bankruptcy, up to an amount equaling four weeks of maximum insurable earnings.

Welcome as these measures were, they failed to address the Achilles heel of Employment Insurance, that most are not eligible for coverage – five in 10 of the unemployed. These temporary improvements help workers who qualify for Employment Insurance, but they do nothing at all for the majority of jobless Canadians, who do not receive EI.

In addition, Canadians who work but remain below the poverty line – the working poor – have received little assistance from government. The federal government took an important step toward rectifying this situation in its 2007 Working Income Tax Benefit (WITB). At Caledon’s urging, Ottawa beefed up the program in its second year.

Make improvements to the Working Income Tax Benefit (WITB) over time so that it extends higher up the income ladder and becomes a major income support for Canadians who work at minimum and low wages

An innovative addition to federal income security architecture – the Working Income Tax Benefit (WITB) – was put in place in 2007. WITB has two major objectives – to reduce disincentives to work for Canadians stuck behind the welfare wall, and to enhance incentives to employment among the working poor (who, despite making up about half the low-income population, have received short shrift from governments for many years).

However, in its first year, WITB’s benefits were set at such a low level and the program was targeted so far down the income scale that it excluded many of the working poor.

The 2009 federal budget boosted the Working Income Tax Benefit to address key weaknesses of the original program – its lean payment and its exclusion of full-time workers earning low wages. For single workers, the maximum benefit rose from $522 in 2008 to $925 in 2009, for a substantial increase of 77.2 percent. Benefits continue to phase in above earnings of $3,000, but are reduced at the rate of 25 percent instead of 20 percent under the old design.

The maximum payment, $925, goes to workers earning between $6,700 and $10,500. Above $10,500, benefits are reduced at the rate of 15 percent (the same as before), ending at $16,667 (as opposed to $13,081 in its original form).

Further reading:

Tagged with:
Apr 21

Judy Broadbent is the Vice Chair of Maytree.

Maytree’s yearly Policy Insights document presents policy proposals prepared by Maytree, its partners and grantees. These recommendations make up the three important “I”s of public policy: ideas, instruments, and investments. They each identify a powerful idea to improve the life of Canadians, the instruments which will be effective in creating that improvement, and the investments that must be made to operationalize the instruments. These recommendations build on the power and potential of public services, and the resiliency of Canadians. You can read a summary of recommendations and download the complete collection of Policy Insights in PDF format. Please share and distribute to your networks.

Judy BroadbentIn 2009, Canada granted permanent residence to almost 23,000 refugees, more than half of whom were recruited overseas through the government’s resettlement program or sponsored by a private group. The remainder were determined to be refugees by the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) upon arrival in Canada.

Regardless of how they have arrived in the country, refugees to Canada have experienced adversity and loss. Many have witnessed violence and atrocities; some have been imprisoned and tortured. All know what it is like to live in countries where there is little regard for human rights or human lives.

Many arrive in Canada needing our support and compassion. With some help they are able to demonstrate the depths of their resilience as they carve out a future in their new country. They make new friends, learn new customs and teach us a great deal about true adversity on the one hand and true courage on the other.

It is in Canada’s best interest to ensure these resilient and talented individuals not just integrate – but thrive.

Eliminate the processing fees for refugees

After being accepted as refugees by the IRB through the Inland Refugee Program, refugees have 180 days to submit their application for permanent residence. There is a processing fee of $550 for the principal applicant and $150 for family members under the age of 22. This is a significant financial barrier for refugees who arrive with few resources, particularly young people with no family in Canada.

Some protected persons simply cannot raise the funds before the deadline. In such cases, they are still protected persons and cannot be removed from Canada, but they continue to be treated as a person temporarily in Canada. If protected persons are eventually able to acquire the funds for the processing fee, they may apply for landing on “humanitarian and compassionate” grounds. However, applying through this stream can take several years, acting as a further delay to a protected person’s full integration into Canadian society. It is also an unnecessary financial and administrative burden on government institutions which must process this new application.

About $5.3 million was collected from “Immigration cost–recovery fees for refugees” in 2008-2009. This represents only one percent of fees collected by Citizenship and Immigration and a miniscule amount of the department’s overall budget.

Eliminating the processing fee would entail a straightforward regulatory amendment to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Further reading:

Tagged with:
Apr 21

Benjamin Perrin is the author of Invisible Chains: Canada’s Underground World of Human Trafficking. Published with the support of Maytree, it is the first book to expose the issue of human trafficking in Canada.

Maytree’s yearly Policy Insights document presents policy proposals prepared by Maytree, its partners and grantees. These recommendations make up the three important “I”s of public policy: ideas, instruments, and investments. They each identify a powerful idea to improve the life of Canadians, the instruments which will be effective in creating that improvement, and the investments that must be made to operationalize the instruments. These recommendations build on the power and potential of public services, and the resiliency of Canadians. You can read a summary of recommendations and download the complete collection of Policy Insights in PDF format. Please share and distribute to your networks.

Benjamin PerrinSlavery exists when individuals are sold, traded, used, abused, and disposed – and the shocking truth is slavery is happening today in Canada. Some victims are girls and women who are coerced, deceived or threatened into the sex trade. Many are bought and sold like cattle to “pimps” or “boyfriends” who lie, threaten and deceive them. Others are international workers who are recruited to Canada, stripped of their passport and forced to work for virtually nothing either to pay for an inflated debt or out of fear.

The response of our courts and governments to their exploitation has often been disgraceful. Too many traffickers go unpunished because police are under-resourced and Canadian laws are inadequate. In contrast, some foreign victims are treated as criminals, detained, deported or ineligible for basic services.

The federal government does not have a national action plan to end human trafficking in Canada. Other countries, including Belgium, Italy, the United States, and Sweden, have innovative examples of laws, policies, and programs that have succeeded in fighting human trafficking. Their strategies to protect victims, prosecute offenders, and prevent the crime are worth replicating in Canada.

While there is still too little progress in the fight against human trafficking, there are some indications that awareness of the problem is growing. Under pressure from provincial governments and the End Modern-Day Slavery campaign, Craigslist shut down its erotic services section in Canada which was used by traffickers to advertise their victims – many of whom are children.

Adopt a national action plan to combat human trafficking

In 2002, the federal government created an interdepartmental working group to coordinate Canada’s response to human trafficking and prepare an action plan. While multiple drafts exist, none have been implemented.

The federal government should develop an action plan in consultation with provinces, territories and non-governmental organizations. The action plan should include concrete timesensitive objectives, propose legislative and regulatory reforms, establish additional resources for non-governmental organizations and police, identify priorities for the prosecution of traffickers, and develop strategies for protecting victims. The implementation of the action plan should be monitored through quarterly reports to the cabinet and annual reports to parliament.

Webinar: National Public Awareness Campaign to End Modern-Day Slavery

YouTube Preview Image

Further reading:

Tagged with:
Apr 19

Deena Ladd is the Co-ordinator of the Workers’ Action Centre.

Maytree’s yearly Policy Insights document presents policy proposals prepared by Maytree, its partners and grantees. These recommendations make up the three important “I”s of public policy: ideas, instruments, and investments. They each identify a powerful idea to improve the life of Canadians, the instruments which will be effective in creating that improvement, and the investments that must be made to operationalize the instruments. These recommendations build on the power and potential of public services, and the resiliency of Canadians. You can read a summary of recommendations and download the complete collection of Policy Insights in PDF format. Please share and distribute to your networks.Please share and distribute to your networks.

Deena LaddMore than 37 percent of workers in Canada work part-time, on contract, through temp agencies, or in self-employed situations. Many are juggling two or three jobs without employment benefits or workplace protection. The recession hit this category of workers the hardest and highlighted the inadequacy of Canada’s social safety net.

Despite the temporary changes made to Employment Insurance, many newly unemployed workers, particularly those in precarious jobs and newcomers to Canada who may have no benefits, were ineligible, and they had to spend their savings and sell their assets to qualify for social assistance. The low benefit rates of social assistance often pushes unemployed workers deeper into poverty and debt.

Those low-wage and precarious workers who were lucky enough to keep their jobs saw their wages decrease and their working conditions worsen. More workers are part-time, self-employed or temporary than before the recession. This has made it hard for workers to leave jobs even when experiencing substandard conditions and discrimination. The lack of employment opportunities has made it harder for workers to find replacement jobs when wages go unpaid.

Over six million workers rely on employment standards for basic wages and working conditions. Employment standards are supposed to set a minimum floor of standards for workers least able to negotiate fair wages and working conditions. They set out social norms such as the ability to earn wages that are enough to live on and decent conditions of work that allow a person to balance work and family life. It is critical that governments ensure workers get access to basic and existing protections and that new protections are introduced as Canada emerges from the recession.

Improve Employment Insurance by standardizing qualifying criteria to 360 hours and raising the amount of benefits to 70 percent of previous earnings

The hours needed to qualify for Employment Insurance (EI) vary across the country. Many work part-time, contract or temporary jobs and find it hard to get enough hours to qualify for EI. Workers should need only 360 hours to qualify in all regions of Canada.

Benefits should be increased to at least 70 percent of workers’ earnings. Benefits should be calculated on workers’ twelve best weeks of earnings within the previous 52-week-period (not the last 26 weeks as in the existing system). When workers receive termination or severance pay, EI benefits should not be affected. The two-week waiting period should be eliminated.

Benefits should also be extended for an additional year if the national unemployment levels exceed 6.5 percent. EI support training needs to be expanded to allow for those long-term unemployed to access them; as well as extended in duration for those recently unemployed.

Further reading:

Tagged with:
Apr 18

Naomi Alboim – a Senior Fellow at Maytree and adjunct professor and chair of the Policy Forum at the School of Policy Studies at Queen’s University.

Maytree’s yearly Policy Insights document presents policy proposals prepared by Maytree, its partners and grantees. These recommendations make up the three important “I”s of public policy: ideas, instruments, and investments. They each identify a powerful idea to improve the life of Canadians, the instruments which will be effective in creating that improvement, and the investments that must be made to operationalize the instruments. These recommendations build on the power and potential of public services, and the resiliency of Canadians. You can read a summary of recommendations and download the complete collection of Policy Insights in PDF format. Please share and distribute to your networks.

Immigrants come to Canada in one of three streams: economic, family reunification and humanitarian. The majority arrive through the economic stream. This stream includes those selected as federal skilled workers, as provincial nominees, as members of the business class or as part of the Canadian Experience Class.

In the past, most economic immigrants coming to Canada were part of the Federal Skilled Worker Program, which requires that all principal applicants be assessed for admission on the basis of a points system. But since 2002, the number of skilled worker principal applicants has declined relative to other economic classes, despite the fact that those selected under the Federal Skilled Worker Program continue to have the highest incomes and best long-term job prospects of all immigrants to Canada.

Rather than expanding the Federal Skilled Worker Program, the federal government has encouraged the growth of other programs, particularly provincial nominee programs and the Temporary Foreign Worker Program – essentially delegating the responsibility of selection to provinces and employers.

Selecting immigrants who will become future citizens of Canada is arguably one of the most important roles that a national government can play. The federal government should rethink its strategy and refocus its efforts on the proven and successful Federal Skilled Worker Program.

Eliminate the “Low Skill Pilot Project” for temporary foreign workers

Temporary foreign workers who are recruited to fill low-skilled jobs are vulnerable to exploitation and abuse, particularly if they are not provided with the rights and services available to permanent residents. The “Low Skill Pilot Project” allows temporary workers to remain in Canada for up to four years with no access to federal services, significant limitations to their rights, and few avenues to permanent residence.

The “Low Skill Pilot Project” runs the risk of becoming Canada’s version of the European Guest Workers’ program with all its difficulties. Therefore, the “Low Skill Pilot Project” for temporary foreign workers should be eliminated as soon as possible.

To increase the pool of workers to fill low-skilled jobs on an ongoing basis, employers should make these jobs more attractive to people already in Canada, whether immigrants or Canadian-born. In addition, Citizenship and Immigration Canada should increase family class and refugee admissions to provide more labour force participants who, as permanent residents, have rights and access to services. Increasing points in the Federal Skilled Worker Program for tradespeople, and those with validated job offers, will also broaden the pool of workers.

Until the “Low Skill Pilot Project” is eliminated, those temporary workers in Canada who arrived under the pilot should be granted permanent residence to avoid the growth of an undocumented population living on the margins of society, facing increased risks of exploitation, and unable to fully participate in all aspects of Canadian life.

Further reading:

Tagged with:
preload preload preload