START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
 Select the share type or view all:    

Blog: 5000 Children Die a Day  
Did you know that 1.8 million children die each year from lack of clean water. That's 5000 a day! Simple things can bring about a lot of change in poor countries.
See what a group from Destin is doing to help stop poverty in the Philippines.

Read More Here - 5000 Children Die A Day...

Earl B

Posted: Apr 8, 2008 8:04am | comment (0) | discuss () | permalink  
Blog: Poverty two exibition  
I am a artist mainly using Driftwood/sand as a medium to get people to remember that poverty still rolls along with a death rate of 1,200 people per hour, I have for the last 3 years put on a exibition of Poverty, last year other artists exhibited as well.

The exhibition will be during september this year in Dunbar Scotland, would any one like to give advice on how to create a virtual exhibition at the same time as the physical exhibition, or on how to market the exhibition effectivly?

If any body is interested I could post pictures of the sculptures!


Imported from external blog

Posted: Jan 5, 2008 11:06am | comment (0) | discuss () | permalink  
Blog: Erradicating Poverty  

Capitalism needs poverty. It is the poor who run the machinery. So there must be an end to capitalism. The best way to do this is to stop supporting corporations. We have to think more small business and more local production, especially of clothing and food.
Empowerment is making people know what is going on. An [...]

Imported from external blog

Posted: Jun 29, 2007 9:04am | comment (4) | discuss () | permalink  
Tags: business   economy   corporations   workersrights   marxism   economicjustice   economicethics   ecologicalfarming  
Alert: LIVE 8 - G8 SUMMIT - SEND POST IT NOW ONLINE! worldwide  
Focus:Human Rights
Action Request:Visit - online
Location:Christmas Island
to me
 More options   

Dear LIVE 8 supporter,

Last year you pushed G8 leaders to make big commitments, including debt cancellation, and an extra $50 billion in aid every year for the world’s poorest people. If delivered, these steps could help to end the extreme poverty in Africa that kills 30,000 men women and children every day. All of these deaths are avoidable.

One year on, we will be watching the G8 leaders to see if the promises they made are being kept.

Thanks to you, Africa is on the agenda at this year’s G8 summit in St. Petersburg. Because you raised your voice, poverty can’t be ignored. But we want to see action, not just words from the G8 leaders. We need concrete, properly funded plans to make the G8 promises on health and education a reality. Promises alone won’t save lives.

Thousands of you took action ahead of the G8 Finance Ministers meeting earlier this month. Because of you, the ministers reaffirmed their commitments to education for all and supporting vaccine development for diseases that affect the poorest people in the world.

Now we need their bosses, the G8 leaders, to go much further. They need to know that we have not forgotten what they promised.

Click here to send a post-it note straight to St. Petersburg to remind the G8 leaders of their commitments, and to leave them in no doubt that we are watching. Let’s make promises happen.

Thank you,

The LIVE 8 Team.

p.s. There’s lots more information on whether the G8 are keeping their promises or not at:

Posted: Jul 7, 2006 3:35pm | comment (3) | discuss () | permalink  
Blog: National Child Benefit Supplement - Backgrounder  

National Child Benefit Supplement [NCBS]

What is the National Child Benefit Supplement?

The National Child Benefit Supplement [NCBS] was introduced in 1997 as a measure to prevent and reduce child poverty. The NCBS is part of the Canada Child Tax Benefit [CCTB]. Similar to what used to be known as the 'baby bonus,' the CCTB replaced existing child benefits including the Working Income Supplement.

The CCTB is delivered to families with children under the age of 18 through a Basic Benefit and the NCBS. The Basic Benefit is provided to approximately 80% of Canadian families.

Approximately 40% of families also receive the NCBS. The amount of NCBS received goes down as a family's income goes up. Families with incomes less than $22,615 receive the full NCBS, while a family with an income of more than $35,000 does not receive any NCBS.

In 2004-05, the full NCBS provides $1,511 a year for the first child, $1,295 for the second child, and $1,215 for each additional child. That is approximately equal to $115/month for each child.

The NCBS Clawback

The 1997 agreement between the federal, provincial and territorial governments required that the amount of the NCBS be deducted from the families on social assistance. This is known as the NCBS clawback. In spite of the agreement, Manitoba and New Brunswick do not clawback the NCBS. All of the other provinces and territories clawback some or all of the benefit.

The Ontario government claws back the NCBS from both Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Program recipients.

What Happens to the Clawed Back Funds?

The monies that are clawed back from families on social assistance are supposed to be reinvested in new programs for low-income families.

In Ontario, approximately $250 million is reinvested in various provincial and municipal programs. Approximately 80% of the NCBS clawback is invested in provincial programs, such as, the Ontario Child Care Supplement for Working Families. Families in receipt of social assistance do not usually benefit from this program because of the way the program is designed. The remaining 20% of the NCBS clawback is distributed among municipalities and used in a broad range of programs. Many of the reinvestment programs are important and need to be funded - but not by taking money away from the poorest families in our communities.

The Liberal Promise in Ontario

During the last provincial election, Dalton McGuinty acknowledged that the NCBS clawback was wrong and promised to end it in his first mandate.

Six months into their mandate, the Liberals announced that, instead of ending the clawback, they would "cap" it while they conducted a review of the program. The effect of the cap is to allow social assistance families to keep the July 2004 increase in the NCBS. For a family with one child, the increase amounts to $48 a year, a far cry from the $1,511 in benefits that go to low-income families that are not on social assistance.

The Myth of the 'Welfare Wall'

Governments say that the NCBS must be clawed back to ensure that working families are always better off than families on social assistance. Governments argue that clawing back the NCBS from families on social assistance is necessary because parents on social assistance "need" an incentive to find paid work.

This argument reinforces discriminatory stereotypes about persons on social assistance. It ignores the reality that social assistance recipients face numerous systemic barriers, including disability, access to affordable childcare, and lack of jobs. We do not structure our labour market to provide full employment. To benefit other players in our economy, the unemployment rate in Canada hovers around seven percent. In addition, minimum wage jobs, where much of our labour market growth is found, do not provide enough income to allow even a single person to get above the poverty line.

Imposing the clawback on social assistance families also ignores the reality that the same families may cycle between social assistance and precarious paid work. It does not provide the kind of meaningful support that low-income families need to stay out of poverty. This so-called "incentive" plan does nothing more than punish families who need to rely on social assistance.

Discrimination Against People on Social Assistance

Families on social assistance are generally the poorest people in our communities. For instance, a single mom with one child is supposed to make ends meet on the $957/month she receives from social assistance. How can a family of two survive when the average cost of a two-bedroom apartment in Ontario is $886/month?

It is simply not fair that the Ontario government is taking away the NCBS from families on social assistance that so desperately need it.

TAKE ACTION to End the NCBS Clawback

Sign a Petition to End the Clawback of the
National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS)

Ending the clawback of the National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS) would make a big difference in the lives of families on social assistance. When you’re already living below the poverty line, being able to keep the approximately $115 you get every month for each of your children would go a long way towards paying your bills. But that’s not what happens.

Every month the federal government allows the Ontario government to clawback the NCBS from 163,726 children across the province – simply because their parents are on social assistance. It’s not right.

Tell the Ontario government to end the clawback immediately!

For additional information

Blog: The Welfare Wall - Hiding the Truth About Poverty

Poverty in Canada and the Clawback of the National Child Benefit Supplement

Posted: Apr 24, 2006 8:34am | comment (0) | discuss () | permalink  
Blog: Proposed Reforms to the Ontario Human Rights Code  

Proposed Reforms to the
Ontario Human Rights Code

Ontario Human Rights Commissioner, Barbara Hall, contradicts Attorney General's Claim that She Supports his Human Rights Reform Proposal

In a public statement posted on the Ontario Human rights Commission's website, Chief Human Rights Commissioner Barbara Hall has made it clear that she has not expressed support for the Ontario Government's proposal to provide "direct access" to the Human Rights Tribunal. She plans to await all details regarding any reform proposal before expressing a view on it. See her statement below, obtained from the OHRC website. This public statement directly contradicts Attorney General Michael Bryant's earlier claim that Chief Commissioner Hall supported his proposal

Read More at:

Users, lawyers want input to planned human rights system changes

It's been just over a month since the provincial government announced its plans to reform Ontario's human rights system, but stakeholders say they want input on the "rushed" legislation before it's tabled this spring. Read More at this link

Calls for letters to the editor of Toronto Star to let them know what you think of the Government's proposals to Weaken the Human Rights Commission

The Saturday, April 8, 2006 the Toronto Star included a good article by columnist Helen Henderson on the continually-growing opposition to the Ontario Government's proposals to weaken the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Even from some among the small group, mainly lawyers, who support the Government's direction, there have come calls for the Government to heed the call for public consultations. From that group, there have also been calls for the Government to announce more specifics about its hitherto-vague plans.
Read More at:

Discussion Paper on Strengthening Ontario's Human Rights Commission and Tribunal

The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) Alliance's new Discussion Paper on Options for Reforming Ontario's Human Rights Commission. Please read this, send the AODA Alliance your feedback, and circulate this Discussion Paper widely.
Read More at:

Call for Responses to Helen Henderson's article: Rights debate marred by Chicken Littles, Toronto Star April 1, 2006

Toronto Star’s disability columnist Helen Henderson’s column in the April 1, 2006 Toronto Star is quite insulting to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) Alliance. The AODA Alliance was among the first to lead off the growing tide of opposition to the Government’s plan to weaken the Human Rights Commission. Its position has received wide support from organizations in the disability community. Helen Henderson’s article is available online at this pinpoint URL: This column’s headline refers to the AODA Alliance speakers at its March 16, 2006 Queens Park news conference as “chicken littles”. The more letters that are sent in to the Toronto Star by different people, the more likely that some will get printed. Keep your letter to around 100 words.
Read More at:

Update - March 31, 2006

In this update, we provide you with the following:

* A quick background summary of the current issue surrounding the Government's plans to privatize the enforcement of human rights in Ontario by weakening the Ontario Human Rights Commission, for those who want more or who haven't been following the issue.

* On April 5, 2006 in Toronto there will be an important public forum about the Government's plans to weaken the Human Rights Commission. See the invitation below. Come to it. Bring friends and family. ASL is provided.

* A letter to the editor in today's London Free Press from unstoppable disability rights advocate Cathy Vincent Linderoos, urging Premier McGuinty not to introduce his plans to weaken the Human Rights Commission. Please write letters to your local newspaper with this same message.

* Four more prominent organizations have joined the swelling list of those opposing the Government's plan to privatize enforcement of human rights on the backs of discrimination victims like persons with disabilities. See the letters below from
* the MS Society,
* the Canadian Association of Retired Persons,
* the Ontario Coalition of Accessibility Advisory Committees, and
* the Peterborough Council for Persons with Disabilities.

Read More at:

A Community Forum on the Need to Rescue the Ontario Human Rights Commission

Update - March 29, 2006

Ontario’s Attorney General Publicly Refuses to Commit to Consulting With Public Before Introducing Legislation to Weaken the Ontario Human Rights Code - Claims He’s Consulted But Doesn’t Acknowledge the Major Disability Organizations He’s Ignored

On Wednesday, March 29, 2006, during Question Period in the Ontario Legislature, NDP Leader Howard Hampton called on the Ontario Government to undertake a public consultation on how to reform the Human Rights Commission, rather than going ahead with its plans to weaken the Human Rights Commission. (See full text) Responding for the Government, the Attorney General rejected the call for further consultations. He said: "On the contrary, we've been working with those very groups that the member just referred to for well over a year, and consulting with them.” Contrary to what the Attorney General said, prominent community organizations have not been consulted - organizations that wrote the Government to oppose the plan to weaken the Human Rights Commission and who call for a consultation.
Read More at:

Update - March 28, 2006

Ontario Government finally writes AODA Alliance about Human Rights Reform issue but with little information - AODA Alliance Writes Back Quickly

Late in the day on March 28, 2006, the Attorney General of Ontario wrote us, responding to our letters regarding proposed changes to the Human Rights Commission. The AODA Alliance Chair Catherine Dunphy immediately responded. See the text of each of these letters below. There are rumors that the Government plans to introduce a bill to weaken the Human Rights commission soon. We will keep you posted of any developments. Stay tuned. Please call your nearest MPP to tell them not to support the weakening of the Human Rights Commission.

Read More at:

Update - March 25, 2006

Major Tide of Opposition Rises in Opposition to McGuinty Government's Plans to Weaken the Ontario Human Rights Commission -- but McGuinty Government Has Not Answered Our Important Questions, and Signals it is Not Listening to Us.

In short the news is this: As a result of the AODA Alliance's successful news conference on March 16, 2006, we got good news coverage despite a flood of other big news stories. Our call for the Government to stop its plans to introduce legislation to weaken the Ontario Human rights Commission has now been echoed by many organizations.

Despite all this, the Ontario Gov't still hasn't answered any of the questions in our Feb. 27, 2006 letter [] to Premier McGuinty. To the contrary, the Ontario Gov't issued a news release on Mar. 21, 2006 saying that it plans to go ahead with its intended legislation. That news release [] doesn't respond to the sweeping call for public consultations that so many have demanded be held before any new legislation is introduced.

As a result, the AODA Alliance has written to the Premier again []. We ask him to answer our previous letter. We also ask the Government to commit that any proceedings in the Legislature on any bill to change the Human Rights Code be fully open, accessible and barrier-free. This means, among other things, that persons with disabilities and the entire public be given ample prior notice of any proceedings in the Legislature so they can arrange accessible transportation. We also ask that there be province-wide public hearings on any bill.

We need your help now more than ever to press this issue. This is especially important since the Government clearly has not listened to the incredible mounting tide in opposition to the Government's plans that has emerged in a mere three weeks. We fear the Government plans to try to slip a bill into the Legislature and quickly ram it through when the public is distracted by other big news items.

Read More at:

Call for Letters/Emails to Premier McGuinty - Re: Proposed Reforms to Ontario Human Rights Code

Read the most recent letter to Premier McGuinty from the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODO) Alliance. Please pass this on to others.

Write the Premier to support this letter's call for prior notice of all proceedings in the Legislature on any bill to amend the Human Rights Code, and generally to ensure that all proceedings on a bill are fully open, accessible and barrier-free. In your letter or email you might say:

"I urge you to fulfill the request of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act Alliance's request that all proceedings on any bill to amend the Ontario Human Rights Code be fully open, accessible and barrier-free. For example, your Government should give sufficient prior notice of all proceedings in the Legislature on any bill to amend the Code. There should be province-wide public hearings on any bill." The Premier's email address:

Read More at:

DAWN Ontario's Open Letter to Premier McGuinty
re: Proposed Reforms to the Ontario Human Rights Code


"Women with disabilities are often doubly-disadvantaged. They need a strong, effective and properly funded Ontario Human Rights Commission, not a weakened one, to investigate and prosecute organizations that discriminate against them. Women with disabilities will rarely be able to afford to hire their own lawyer, conduct their own investigation, and prosecute their own human rights cases. They shouldn't have to depend on over-worked, understaffed Legal Aid clinics. Nor should they have to hope for lawyers to take their cases pro bono. Pro bono, in the end, is charity. We heartily commend lawyers for doing pro bono work. However, charity is no substitute for a public investigation and prosecution of human rights complaints."

Read More at:

Human rights body needs fixing, not dismantling

by Avvy Yao-Yao Go, Margaret Parsons & Uzma Shakir
Toronto Star Op/Ed dd Mar. 13, 2006

Last month, Attorney General Michael Bryant announced his plan to revamp the Ontario Human Rights Commission. One central feature of the reform is that it will get rid of the commission's "gatekeeper" function, that is, the power of the commission to dismiss cases. Those who favour the new model say the reform is a step in the right direction because it will allow complainants to take their cases straight to the Human Rights Tribunal.

In exchange for the "direct access," however, the commission will no longer help individuals with the investigation and prosecution of their complaints. Instead, the commission will dedicate its resources to public education, research and monitoring systemic discrimination.

Is this the kind of reform our communities really need? We think not.

Read the Full Op-Ed at:

Changes to Human Rights complaints system threaten the rights of those who need it most: OPSEU

OPSEU Press Release dated Feb. 20, 2006 - Ontario Human Rights Commission - Protecting the right of all Ontarians

Report: "Making Ontario's Human Rights Commission Work"
* Download Report as a PDF file (88 kb)
* Download Report as a Word doc

Sample Letter To A Member Of The Ontario Legislature

Human Rights Reform Action Kit

Help Prevent the Gov't from Weakening Enforcement of the Ontario Human Rights Code
On Feb. 20, 2006, the Ontario Gov't said it will introduce a law (likely late March or April) to change enforcement of the Ontario Human Rights Code. That system needs reform. It's too slow, frustrating, and hard for many to use. Yet, the Government's proposal will make things worse, not better. It will create new barriers that make it harder for people to get their human rights respected.

We ask everyone to support our call for the Ontario Government to stop its announced changes. We want the Government to properly consult the public before introducing any new law and to make the human rights system better, not worse. We don't say the current system is acceptable. However it needs a fix that doesn't set victims of discrimination back.

The Government must get your message right now, before it soon introduces its planned law. The Government is testing the waters to see if there will be opposition to its announcement. Don't worry if you don't know much about the Human Rights Code. This Action Kit gives you all you need to know to help stop the Ontario Government from taking away important enforcement rights from victims of discrimination. In this Action Kit, we:

* Describe the Ontario Government's proposals
* Explain why the Government proposals will be worse for victims of discrimination
* Give you practical suggestions on how you can have your voice heard
* Provide a sample letter to send to Members of Provincial Parliament (MPPs)
* Include a copy of the AODA Alliance's February 27, 2006 letter to the Ontario Government

Help us preserve the gains we made when the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) was passed. Add your voice to ours. Endorse our position.

Read More at:

Posted: Apr 20, 2006 7:01am | comment (0) | discuss () | permalink  
Blog: Sara Anderson ends hunger strike, the struggle to raise social assistance rates continues!  

Sara Anderson ends hunger strike,
the struggle to raise social assistance rates continues!

Sara Anderson started her hunger strike two and a half weeks ago. She was demanding:

  •  a significant raise in social assistance rates;
  •  the reinstatement of the previous Special Diet Policy;
  • making it easier for people with disabilities to get onto the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP); and
  • making sure that everyone on social assistance who moves is offered a Community Start-Up Fund.

Today Sara decided to end her hunger strike after the advice of a First Nations elder that it was not her time to die. Sara accomplished a great deal in her brave and determined struggle. She brought a great deal of awareness to the desperate circumstances tens of thousands of people on social assistance live every day in this province due to the Ontario government's social assistance policies, especially regarding the low level of social assistance rates and the slashing of the previous Special Diet policy.

People and organizations across the province came to Sara's support and she received many letters of support from across the province. She was invited by the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty to speak at their anti-poverty March into Rosedale on April 8th and spoke at a media support conference at Queen's Park on April 13th. She appeared in the legislature on April 13th when NPP MPP Micheal Prue asked a question on her behalf. Although Premier Dalton McGuinty refused to meet with her when he was in Sudbury eventually she did get a meeting with Liberal MPP and cabinet minister Rick Bartolucci.

Last week Sara got the first indication of how taking action can get results. When her Ontario Works (OW) worker and her supervisor came to visit where she lives she was handed a cheque for an extra $55. This was an interesting amount since it is exactly the difference between what she used to get on the Special Diet and what she is getting now. What took place is that with pressure placed on them because of Sara's struggle OW was able to restore her Special Diet to its previous level.

We were told this was only temporary, lasting only for a month or two. If it is possible for OW to do this in Sara's case they should do this for everyone who has had their Special Diet cut who has not yet reached the end of the time period for their old form. We already know that there are a number of people in Sudbury who have been cut back from $250 a month on their Special Diet to $10 or $20 a month, and a number of appeals have been launched. Being restored to this higher amount even for a few months would make an important difference in these people's lives.

In today's Northern Life (p. 6) we read about Raymond Boucher who has had his special diet slashed by $51 a month. We demand that Raymond Boucher's Special Diet be restored to its previous rate of $147 a month. Even more significantly, yesterday, Sara was informed of another instance of how struggle gets results. She was informed that despite the previous rejections of her ODSP application and the appeal hearing set for May 9th that she was now going to be granted ODSP. This will mean that she and her daughter will be able to enjoy a higher rate of support (unfortunately this will still not be enough to live on and meet human needs). All that had been submitted to ODSP since the hunger strike began was a small and not that substantial piece of medical information.

With the pressure provided by her hunger strike this technical detail was used to justify not following the usual bureaucratic regulations and to grant her ODSP status before the appeal hearing. If this can happen in Sara's case it should be happening in all the cases of people with disabilities who apply for ODSP who are routinely rejected from ODSP and often have to wait years to be transfered from OW to ODSP.

Sara's struggle has been an inspiration to anti-poverty activists across the province. It shows once again that taking action, speaking out, and putting pressure on the government can bring concrete results. Sara's hunger strike is now over but she has done a great service to the anti-poverty struggle more generally.

The struggle to raise the social assistance rates by 40% * which is only back to where they were in 1994 * will continue as will the struggle for the reinstatement of the previous Special Diet policy.

Posted: Apr 20, 2006 3:48am | comment (0) | discuss () | permalink  
Tags: women   ontario   poverty  
Blog: How I got involved in the Anti-Poverty movement  

Five yrs ago (April/2001), a woman from a neighbouring community from me named Kimberly Rogers was convicted of welfare fraud for collecting students loans while receiving social assistance (this became illegal after the Conservatives came to power in Ontario in 1995).

She pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 6 months house arrest, 18 months probabtion, ordered to repay the $13,600 overpayment, and had her welfare benefits suspended, leaving her alone and isolated in a tiny little 3rd floor apartment.

She was 5 months pregnant, without any income, unable to pay her rent, unable to feed herself & her unborn child, and unable to purchase prescription medication to treat her depression and anxiety disorder.

Kimberly launched a legal challenge and a Toronto judge re-instated her welfare benefits ($520 a month) and access to medical benefits pending the appeal. From her $520 benefit cheque, she had $52 deducted by the Ministry to reduce her overpayment.

Once her rent was paid, she was left with only $18 a month with which to live on -- who can live on $18 a month to purchase groceries, laundry, telephone, cleansers, personal hygience products, and
pay for transportation for the 3 hours a week she was allowed to leave her apartment,

A few months later (Aug/2001), 8 months pregnant, Kimberly Rogers was found dead in her tiny apartment, during one of the worst heat waves to hit Ontario.

The Inquest Jury found in Dec. 2002, that the cause of her death was suicide from a massive overdose of anti-depressants.

The circumstances of her death, and the draconian government policies (welfare rates slashed by 21.6%, lifetime welfare ban for anyone convicted of welfare fraud) that contributed to her death, had a profound effect on me.

Although I never had the opportunity to meet Kimberly Rogers in real time, I attended much of the Inquest as a representative for one of the organizations that had been granted intervenor status at the Inquest and tried to honour Kimberly by supporting and
caring for her mother during the Inquest.

Sitting in the court room for so many days, often with her mother, afforded me the opportunity to learn much about this courageous woman who was brave enough to launch a charter challenge and expose herself to a lot of negative media/public attention.

I vowed to do whatever I could to make a difference and advocate for an end to the lifetime welfare ban. The lifetime welfare ban was finally eliminated in 2005. I am proud to have been a part of the movement that battled for abolishing the Ban.

However, we have a very long way towards achieving any progress in Ontario -- to realize any measure of true progress, it is my belief that we must eliminate poverty. And frankly, we in Ontario can't sit around and wait for our elected officials to do it because once they're elected, a string of broken promises follows.

The Canadian government, 15 years ago, set a goal to eradicate child poverty by the year 2000.

Yet today in Ontario alone, more than 443,000 children live in poverty. And 49 per cent of immigrant children who've been in Canada for at least five years live in poverty.

In Canada, an astounding ONE MILLION Canadian children live in poverty with our Aboriginal youth disproportionately affected.

800,000 Canadians use food banks every month and 40% of food bank patrons are children!

And today I learned that globally, due to Malaria alone, a child dies every 30 seconds, totalling more than 1 million deaths a year. This is simply unacceptable.

So I plug away on my keyboard doing my part to inform, organize and mobilize Ontarians to take action re:

raising the minimum wage,
* raising social assistance rates,
* ending the clawback of the National Child Benefit Supplement,
* affordable and supportive housing,
* options for early learning and child care services,

... and the list goes on ...

Posted: Apr 17, 2006 10:53pm | comment (1) | discuss () | permalink  
Tags: poverty  
Blog: Poverty in Canada  

Poverty in Canada
and the

National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS) Claw Back


Poverty in Canada

The low-income cutoff (LICO) is still the most used "poverty" indicator.

As a measurement, it is based on the concept that people in poverty live in compromised circumstances (defined as spending a disproportionate amount of their total gross income on food, clothing, and shelter).

Household expenditure surveys conducted by Statistics Canada show that the average family spends 35 per cent of its gross income on food, clothing, and shelter.

A family is considered to be in difficult circumstances if it spends 55 per cent of its income on those three items.



Which Provinces & Territories claw back & which do not

Provinces & territories with clawbacks
(funds diverted into other programs):

  • Prince Edward Island
  • Ontario
  • Saskatchewan
  • Alberta
  • British Columbia
  • Yukon
  • Northwest Territories
  • Nunavut

Provinces & Territories with no clawbacks:

  • Newfoundland and Labrador
  • New Brunswick
  • Nova Scotia
  • Manitoba

Quebec is the only province that doesn't participate in the National Child Benefit Supplement.

Source: National Council on Welfare



The Present & Future of Child Poverty

  • A 2002 NCB report showed that child poverty was declining in Canada, from a high of 15.8 per cent in 1996 to 11.4 per cent in 2000. Now, for the first time in five years, child poverty is on the rise again.

  • Some 55,000 children who had been living in poverty before the NCB supplement was introduced were no longer in a low-income situation by 2000.

  • By the year 2007-08, the federal government will spend $10 billion to support low-income families with children through the Canada Child Tax Benefit and the NCB Supplement.

  • Benefit levels for a family of four (with two children) should rise from the current maximum of $4,680 to a projected $6,260 by 2007-08.

Sources: The 2002 National Child Benefit Progress Report & Campaign 2000

Clawbacks cause child poverty, families charge
by Lindsey Coad, Producer: Jaimie Banks

Poverty by province
Find out which of Canada's provinces & territories
are most affected by poverty, and which are least affected

requires FlashPlayer download FlashPlayer here

Relevant Links

National Child Benefit

Campaign 2000 report cards

National Child Benefit Supplement - backgrounder

An Ontario Child Benefit?

Child Benefits in Ontario - Q & A's

Charter Challenge of the National Child Benefit Supplement

Legal Challenge to the NCBS Clawback from
families on social assistance

Higher Child Benefits Needed To Counter Persistent Poverty

Social Safety News - the OSSN Newsletter
Issue 28 May 2004

Legal Challenge to the NCBS clawback
Follow this link - too long to post

National Anti-Poverty Organization (NAPO) Statement on Budget 2005

Presentation to Judy Marsales, MPP &
staff of Ted McMeekin MPP
at the Meeting of the Campaign for Adequate Welfare & Disability Benefits

Presented by Mike Hogeterp and Darlene Burkett

Why the poor are getting poorer

Op/Ed in Toronto Star, by Jacquie Chic & John Fraser, ISAC

Joanne Bury's Speech to CAW workers at Port Elgin

Provincial Party Leaders Respond to Letter
from Ontario’s Religious Leaders

Canadian Social Research Links

Women & Housing in Canada: Barriers to Equality
Report by CERA - Centre for Equality Rights in Accommodation
Women’s Housing Program

Challenging Homelessness and Poverty as
Human Rights Violations


Sign a Petition on Care2 to End the Clawback of the National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS)

Background Information
NCBS Backgrounder
The Welfare Wall -- Hiding the Truth about Poverty

Posted: Apr 17, 2006 7:07pm | comment (0) | discuss () | permalink  
Tags: poverty  
Blog: Painting Poor People with the Same Brush  

Bill's attitude towards people living in poverty is very similar to that of the previous Ontario government who came to power in 1995 with their "common sense revolution", waging war on the poor in Ontario!

It was a typical case of Blaming the Victim!

Harris proceeded to slash welfare by 21.6% (progressives prefer to call it social assistance) and by establishing a divide between the so-called "deserving poor" (people with disabilities receiving the Ontario Disability Support Program) and the "undeserving poor" (people receiving general welfare who are not disabled and therefore deemed employable).

Harris implemented a lifetime welfare ban where anyone convicted of welfare fraud would be banned from ever collecting welfare in their lifetime.

It's interesting that income tax fraud and other white collar crime was not targeted for lifetime suspensions upon conviction! Harris new exactly who pick on to advance his neo-Conservative bullcrap - those whom he felt could least defend themselves!

His P.R. folks did an outstanding job of feeding bullcrap to Ontario residents painting all poor people on social assistance as leaches on society who sit around drinking beer all day at the park while Ontario taxpayers went to work and paid taxes from their hard earned money to support the lifestyle of the poor. Poppycock!

Harris swept to victory on the backs of the most vulnerable people in Ontario!

No mention of the lack of opportunities for poor people to access relevant training and education opportunities to climb out of poverty! In fact, the Harris government introduced legislation that prevented anyone on welfare from attending college or university while receiving welfare. What does that tell you? He'd rather keep poor people in poverty.

Instead this modern day Hitler implemented the Workfare program where anyone in receipt of general welfare (not those on disability) without pre-school age children, were legislated to work for their welfare benefits.

This ready made free labour, although of benefit to many in the private sector and also to some the kiss-assing not-for-profit groups who choose to participate in the program to access free staff, also affected the working poor, as many of the working poor found themselves "displaced" due to a shortage of available employment opportunities many of these people were qualified to perform, now taken up by those legislated to work for their benefits.

The Harris years were difficult ones. I live in former Premier Harris' home riding of North Bay. And I was so freaking appalled by his bad policies that I became an activist -- not something I ever envisioned myself doing.

What we have in Ontario is nothing short of legislated poverty!

There are many who think like Bill E. He speaks from his experience and therefore uses his experience to paint all poor people with the same brush. It's a big world out there. And very, very few people I know who live in poverty even remotely fit the portrayal of poor people that Bill E has shared here.

So while I strongly disagree with his point of view, I will work hard to continue posting material on poverty issues and hope that one day, his opinion may become more enlightened.

That's my two cents worth! Your mileage may vary!

Barbara Anello

Posted: Apr 17, 2006 9:06am | comment (1) | discuss () | permalink  
Tags: poverty  
  |<     <     1     2     3     >     >|       

This group:
make poverty history
727 Members

Member Share Summary
Blog 12 Apr 8, 2008
Alert 2 Jul 7, 2006


Our sponsors help keep this site free!