WELFARE RATES STILL SUCK

Ron Carten

 “Punitive!” That is the word Jean Swanson, a community organizer in the Downtown Eastside and author of Poor Bashing: The Politics of Exclusion, uses to describe welfare policy in B.C. And if anyone thinks the increase in welfare rates announced in the provincial budget marks a change in that policy they would be dead wrong.

Those familiar with welfare in B.C. will see no change in such barriers to accessing the program as the three-week wait, the two-year independence test, the two-year limit, the 1-800 number enquiry and the mandatory internet application process. These barriers combined with a lack of affordable housing are what have contributed to the rising rate of homelessness not only in Vancouver but across the province, according to Swanson who now helps coordinate the province-wide Raise the Rates campaign from Carnegie Centre.

In 2001, before the Liberals put up these barriers, about 15 per cent of the street homeless in Vancouver were not on welfare, but by early 2004 over 75 per cent of those homeless said they were not on welfare, a 2006 paper by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) entitled Denied Assistance reported. So, while the B.C. government trumpets the reduction in welfare caseloads as evidence that the poorest of the province are getting back to work, the story on the street in Vancouver, as anyone can see, says it isn’t so.

Even while the unemployment rate in B.C. was rising in 2002, the welfare caseload dropped dramatically as a result of the new barriers to welfare, and it continued to drop up to the present at a rate greater than later decreases in the provincial unemployment rate, according to the CCPA paper, demonstrating that those who were not accessing welfare since 2002 were not being absorbed into the economy. And that means homelessness for many.

“The province needs to be building 2,000 units of affordable housing every year,” Swanson goes on to say. “We’re not talking radical here. We could have it without raising taxes.”

The Liberals have allotted $38 million for social housing in the coming year. In contrast Raise the Rates has costed their 2,000 units at $700 million. The obvious conclusion is that there will continue to be, by most measures, a severe shortage in affordable housing.

Swanson did a calculation last year that shows how much people on welfare have been squeezed since as far back as 1980. “I figured using the Bank of Canada inflation calculator that if people had the same purchasing power last year as they did in 1980 they would have got $802 instead of $510.” The figures refer to single people on welfare now referred to as “expected to work”. Although their rates have gone up to $610 with the new budget, these figures should still create a lot of frustration among welfare recipients.

So, how did it wind up that welfare recipients in the first decade of the millennium fare so much worse than their brothers and sisters did in the 1980s?

In 1996 Ottawa finally ended the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP), which had its annual increases capped in the few years preceding that. It was a federal cost-sharing program with the provinces that helped fund social assistance. According to Swanson, “CAP had more rights for people on welfare. The right to an adequate income or an income that met basic requirements, the right not to have to work for welfare, the right to get welfare if you were in need – that one is really being violated – and the right to an appeal. We still have kind of a half-assed appeal system, but it isn’t very good. So, Ottawa caused it,” Swanson says.

Of course, the province has made several cuts to welfare rates since 1980. Moreover, the unwillingness of the provincial government to index the rates to inflation has allowed virtual cuts to be made every year as inflation increased. The rate hike that the Liberals announced a few days ago doesn’t even keep up with inflation since 1992 when the last major shelter rate increase took place. Failing to index is another way to take back from people on welfare what they desperately need.

The increase in the budget of $100 dollars to singles on welfare, Swanson says, “might mean that they don’t have to scrounge quite so much for food, they don’t have to use the bins so much, panhandle so much.”

The word “punitive” in the light of all this is a painfully accurate way to describe welfare policy in B.C. today.


Google
Search Columbia Journal Search WWW