Should we treat the symptoms or cure the disease?
The BC Basic Income Panel's research avoids discussing the biggest problems a basic income will solve and provides 65 very good solutions to some of the symptoms we are experiencing due to the larger problem of an economy that is failing people and causing poverty in the first place.
The real solution - long term income security with the type of decisions, planning, risk taking and innovation that could create is not among their 65 suggestions. All of good ideas they suggest would be cheaper and more effective if delivered on top of a national basic income in Canada.
Should we treat the symptoms or cure the disease?
The BC Basic Income Panel's research avoids discussing the biggest problems a basic income will solve and provides 65 very good solutions to some of the symptoms we are experiencing due to the larger problem of an economy that is failing people and causing poverty in the first place.
The real solution - long term income security with the type of decisions, planning, risk taking and innovation that could create is not among their 65 suggestions. All of good ideas they suggest would be cheaper and more effective if delivered on top of a national basic income in Canada.
Instead they double down on tweaking the existing system of social assistance supports that maintain the indignity of people receiving support because they are in poor circumstances instead of simply because they are Canadian.
The 65 well intentioned ideas ideas won't prevent millions of Canadians whose jobs were automated or displaced during Covid from having to apply to stigmatizing and inefficient social assistance programs once lockdowns end and extensions to Canada's recovery benefits and EI run out.
The biggest problem and solution of them all is not looked at in their report - an economic system failing to deliver wage growth to meet growing cost of living and extreme wealth inequality that is creating - and unlock all Canadians capability for better long term planning, risk taking, pathways into the middle class - these are left on the table. Also left on the table are enhancements to economic growth and productivity that a basic income create, estimated at over 600,000 jobs and an $80/yr increase to our GDP.
UBI Works believes that basic income is a key first step in realizing a human-centered economic system that can unlock our ability to pursue our potential, make us all beneficiaries in an increasingly automated economy, and help wages catch up to a rising cost of living. It can grow the economic pie for everyone, resulting in a higher standard of living for all.
Sadly, the BC Basic Income panel was failing in ambition, looking at the most 'just' way to solve the symptoms of the disease, doubling down on the existing system, without the courage to look at a real cure.
Instead of a bold and vital step... the report recommends incremental change: a series of “targeted” basic incomes for those most in need, including persons with disabilities, women escaping violence and youth transitioning out of the care of the state, coupled with less stringent restrictions on access to existing social assistance.
What the report regrettably fails to underscore is that the one in ten living in poverty cannot afford and may not survive the wait.
The Honourable Kim Pate, C.M. | L’honorable Kim Pate, C.M.
Senator for Ontario | Sénatrice pour l’Ontario
Statement: BC Expert Panel Recommends Too Little, Too Late on Basic Income
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
OTTAWA, FRIDAY, JANUARY 29, 2021—The report of the BC Expert Panel on Basic Income recommends much needed steps toward basic income for Canadians living in poverty but designs them to provide too little and too late.
The report rightly identifies that single, working-aged adults, including single parents, are most likely to be marginalized and left behind due to gaps in federal supports and the indignities and inadequacies of provincial and territorial social assistance and disability support programs. Yet it recommends continuing to slowly tinker with this patchwork of programs that we know, by design, will leave people in need still falling through the cracks.
The report highlights that guaranteed livable basic income is not a stand-alone solution. Certainly, it must work alongside robust social programs and policies to ensure, among other necessities, effective labour standards, accessible and affordable housing, and comprehensive healthcare, education and childcare. This should not devalue the merits of guaranteed livable basic income or any other component of a strong social, health and economic safety net that will create the supportive and mutually beneficial communities outlined by the report.
The report notes the abundance of existing data on the short-term benefits of guaranteed livable basic income. It thereby confirms that there is little value in further testing or piloting the concept and that the time for the implementation of permanent programs is now.
Instead of a bold and vital step, however, the report recommends incremental change: a series of “targeted” basic incomes for those most in need, including persons with disabilities, women escaping violence and youth transitioning out of the care of the state, coupled with less stringent restrictions on access to existing social assistance. It is clear that step by step, this will gradually lead closer and closer to a guaranteed livable basic income and the types of inclusive social, economic and health safety net advocated by basic income advocates, as well as the Royal Commission on the Status of Women, the Senate’s Croll Report and current Senate Finance Committee, not to mention the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.
What the report regrettably fails to underscore is that the one in ten living in poverty cannot afford and may not survive the wait.
For more information:
Emily Grant or Evan Cathcart
Office of Senator Kim Pate
emily.grant@sen.parl.gc.ca; evan2.cathcart@sen.parl.gc.ca
613-995-9220
**************************************************
L’honorable Kim Pate, C.M. | The Honourable Kim Pate, C.M.
Sénatrice pour l’Ontario | Senator for Ontario
Déclaration – Les recommandations du Groupe d’experts de la Colombie‑Britannique sur le revenu de base : trop peu, trop tard
POUR DIFFUSION IMMÉDIATE
OTTAWA, VENDREDI 29 JANVIER 2021 – Le rapport du Groupe d’experts sur le revenu de base de la Colombie‑Britannique recommande la mise en place de mesures indispensables pour assurer un revenu de base aux Canadiens vivant dans la pauvreté. Or, les mesures proposées sont insuffisantes et n’auront pas d’effet à court terme.
Le rapport reconnaît, à juste titre, que les adultes célibataires en âge de travailler, y compris les chefs de familles monoparentales, sont les plus susceptibles d’être marginalisés et laissés pour compte en raison des lacunes des mesures de soutien du gouvernement fédéral ainsi que des injustices et des insuffisances des programmes d’aide sociale et de soutien aux personnes en situation de handicap offerts par les provinces et les territoires. Toutefois, il recommande de continuer à assembler lentement une mosaïque de programmes qui laisseront sans contredit les personnes dans le besoin toujours à l’écart.
Le rapport souligne également que la simple création d’un revenu viable de base garanti n’est pas une solution en soi : elle doit aller de pair avec l’adoption de programmes et de politiques sociaux solides pour garantir, entre autres, des normes de travail efficaces, l’accès à des logements adaptés et abordables, ainsi que des soins de santé, une éducation et des services de garde d’enfants de qualité. Voilà qui ne devrait en rien diminuer les mérites du revenu de base garanti ou de tout autre élément d’un solide filet de sécurité sociale, sanitaire et économique dans la création des communautés solidaires et enrichissantes décrites dans le rapport.
Le rapport fait état de l’abondance des données existantes sur les avantages à court terme du revenu de base garanti, confirmant ainsi qu’il n’est guère utile de se livrer à d’autres tests ou de lancer des projets pilotes. Il confirme que l’heure est plutôt venue de mettre en œuvre des programmes permanents.
Au lieu de préconiser une mesure audacieuse et essentielle, le rapport recommande plutôt un changement progressif, soit l’adoption d’une série de mesures « ciblées » de soutien du revenu pour les personnes les plus vulnérables, y compris les personnes en situation de handicap, les femmes qui fuient la violence et les jeunes qui ne seront plus sous la responsabilité de l’État. Il propose également de réduire les restrictions sur l’accès aux programmes d’aide sociale déjà en vigueur. Il est clair que, petit à petit, l’approche recommandée nous rapprochera d’un revenu viable de base garanti et du filet de sécurité sociale, économique et sanitaire inclusif recommandé par les défenseurs du revenu de base ainsi que par la Commission royale d’enquête sur la situation de la femme, le rapport Croll du Sénat et l’actuel Comité sénatorial des finances nationales, sans oublier la Commission de vérité et réconciliation ainsi que l’Enquête nationale sur les femmes et les filles autochtones disparues et assassinées.
Le rapport omet malheureusement de souligner qu’une personne sur dix vivant dans la pauvreté ne pourra pas survivre à toute cette attente.
Renseignements :
Emily Grant ou Evan Cathcart
Bureau de la sénatrice Kim Pate
emily.grant@sen.parl.gc.ca; evan2.cathcart@sen.parl.gc.ca
613-995-9220
Basic income and support services aren’t mutually exclusive, she said, and current programs don’t deliver much of the autonomy the report praises. “It goes back to the deserving and the undeserving,” said Forget, noting people with disabilities, youth aging out of care and seniors are seen as deserving while others are not.
One of Canada’s leading scholars on basic income says the recommendations don’t go far enough, particularly as the pandemic revealed big gaps in existing supports.
“I don’t disagree with any changes they recommend. I just don’t think they go far enough, and I don’t think they’re going to be implemented,” said Evelyn Forget, a professor at the University of Manitoba who has studied basic income for decades.
Basic income and support services aren’t mutually exclusive, she said, and current programs don’t deliver much of the autonomy the report praises.
“It goes back to the deserving and the undeserving,” said Forget, noting people with disabilities, youth aging out of care and seniors are seen as deserving while others are not.
The report notes single working-age adults, with and without children, are just under one-third of those living in poverty.
Forget said its proposals to strengthen labour regulations, expand rental assistance and extend health benefits don’t necessarily treat those people as deserving of autonomy over their decisions. A basic income would give them control.
“What basic income doesn’t require is a lot of personal oversight, and it doesn’t require us to police people’s decisions,” said Forget.
To shift the conversation about basic income to recognize it as an economic need and economic opportunity, with the goal of seeing UBI implemented in Canada.
We want a Canada where everyone can pursue their potential and not be held back by basic material constraints or unsafe environments.
Sign up to become a Backer & Believer of Basic Income! Receive news and updates about UBI Works straight to your inbox.
