Ontario Government’s Poverty Reduction Strategy

I disagree. It's a really substantial step forward. We have a concrete target and timeline. We will have legislation committing government to reporting annually on progress. We will have legilsation committing future governments to setting new targets every 5 years. It's pretty rare for government to give you the two by four to hit them with if they don't live up to their target!

Why wouldn't the feds have to come to the table? They are responsible for about 80% of income security spending in Ontario. Some might call it buck passing, some might call it seeing reality.

 I know NDP supporters have to be critical out of party policy, and seeing "their" issue stolen by the Liberals. But to say it's hot air flies in the face of what activists and people living in poverty are saying. That's why the NDP has lost the issue.

rural - Francesca wrote:

links on the CBC bit please

 

nice classist generalization on Frances, 25 in 5 etc.

25 in 5 is actually a coalition of groups, which has an extensive list of grassroots organizations

I really don't think that focusing on 'child poverty' should be a flag to burn.

If we lift children, we are obviously lifting parents.  But the tax paying public can't stomach the idea that we'd be helping single moms etc - so it's phrased as helping 'children' because no one can really argue against it without sounding like a compelte a$$.

The child tax benefit is dependant upon federal input - so?  There are a lot of other good things in the plan.

Yes the rates are nowhere near where they need to be, but atleast there is going to be a review of OW and the like and perhaps an attitude change will help.  I get more complaints about "attitude" and "classism" than I do about actual dollars.

The CBC reports that I heard were on the radio. They repeated them every hour the whole day - I don't know if there is any archive of this or if they translate them into print media.

My remarks were not "classist", they are based in the fact that middle-class people do not have as much invested in anti-poverty work. They have always been able to settle for less over longer periods becuase at the end of the day they are comfortable.

I support the "review" of OW, I would agree that the spying, harrasment and constant intimidation is just as bad as the un-liveable amounts. What's worse than having to survive on ~$500/month than being assessed with a $10 000 "overpayment" because some snoop decided that your roomate is your lover?

The OCB is deducted from OW/ODSP rates right now isn't it? Will that change with this new anouncement? I know I heard something about OSAP loans no longer being deducted.

The OCB is a bit of a joke. My partner and I get 50 bucks a month. Our annual family income is around $30 000. We live in Toronto where we rent a 1 bedroom for $950/month. It's almost as insulting as the 100 bucks Harper gives us each month for childcare. We've just been using that for popcorn and beer though.

The child poverty thing is still poor bashing to me. It's the classic act of the rich dividing the poor into good and bad, worthy and unworthy of charity.

By the way, the "tax paying public" is everyone. Despite what you have been taught by the poor-hating government poor people pay more taxes than rich people. There is a CCPA study that illustrates this. There is GST/PST on almost everything and there are increasingly user fees on government services (aka poor tax). So as a member of the tax paying public the only thing that I can't stomach are rich people thinking that they pay anywhere close to their fair share and the well-meaning liberals who then argue that we should focus on "child poverty" so we don't ruffle any feathers.

Handouts too easy an option by Monte Solberg

I guess our conservative government provides every province with adequate transfer and equalization, enough that child poverty and homelessness should not exist in Canada I suppose provinces are just not responsible in the way they spend the generous amounts doled out by Ottawa. "Money doesnt grow on trees." 94% of it is created as interest owing debt since 1991.

Poverty violates women's human rights: UN warns Canada

The UN has issued yet another warning to Canada

Lola 101 wrote:

More "middle-class, cleaned up" views from the Workers Action Centre, right?

Tuesday December 9, 2008

Media Advisory

TORONTO: The Ontario government’s announcement of legislation to protect temporary agency workers is good news for temp workers. http://www.workersactioncentre.org/

The Workers Action Centre is the only group that I am aware of that created an anti temp campaign.  They are the ones, busting their tails, and highlighting abuses of Temp agencies. They have had many campaigns, and have broadened their networking across Ontario to fight against the abuses that come with working for these agencies. From what I have seen, the WAC has carried the ball for low income, displaced, on the fringe workers, scarcely able to make ends meet. 

Perhaps you would like to show your anti temp campaign.

 That said, the fact that Workers are going to be exploited this Christmas and New Years, is something that needs to be publicly addressed ASAP. I do not know why the government is hiding behind the January 2nd implementation.

There is lots missing from the Anti Temp legislation, but it is still improved legislation. You want to make it better, call your MPP. 

A campaign unseen, unheard and uncoordinated, is not a campaign.  The CLC may have a policy. The CLC may have some ideas. They may even have good will. But they haven't executed any kind of anti temp campaign, or I would be well informed of it. I would see it, and they would have been a visible face fighting these SOB, parasitic organizations.

I would love to see the CLC do a bold campaign. Especially since they have a broader scope then the Province of Ontario. However, as the thread is about Central Canada, and in this particular case the Ontario Governments response to the parasitic infection, I will recognise those who I have broke bread with , in fighting this cancerous disease.

The fact that over 1300 of these agencies are taking money out of peoples pockets and ripping them off in hundreds of different schemes. The racial and age discrimination, preying on immigrants, making people pay for the right to work, taking money for gloves, glasses, and stealing the pay of workers, interfering with WSIB claims, hasn't been front and centre in any CLC campaign. 

The Temp agencies will ride this out and continue with their goodwill campaigns that effectively market their exploitation.

Look at the job growth and job loss numbers. They are dominated by temp agencies and as far as I can physically see the CLC is not a visible prescence in challenging the trend.  The OFL was also slow to address a fast moving government, who want to sweep the temp agencies under the carpet. They Liberals want to say.... we did something about them, because in this next year or two the vast majority of the people permanently let go in layoffs will be working for a temp agency, whether or not they have taken Second Career programs. 

The government does not want to get rid of temp agencies, it wants to make them palatable, because in the governments mind, they are here to stay.

Olly wrote:

I disagree. It's a really substantial step forward. We have a concrete target and timeline. We will have legislation committing government to reporting annually on progress. We will have legilsation committing future governments to setting new targets every 5 years.

er...we?  Are you an Ontario Liberal Cabinet minister or something? Dalton, is that you?

_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Our Demands Most Moderate are/
We Only Want The World!
-James Connolly

Olly wrote:

I disagree. It's a really substantial step forward. We have a concrete target and timeline. We will have legislation committing government to reporting annually on progress. We will have legilsation committing future governments to setting new targets every 5 years.

 ...NOTHING is concrete with governments who can change their minds and their priorities whenever they feel like it.  No new government is ever committed to what previous governments passed.

And as for timelines, wasn't it a unanimous federal government resolution to end child poverty by the year 2000? That was passed... when? Nov. 24, 1989.

Same old, same old.

When the government is rich, poverty is forgotten.

When the government is poor, poverty can't be fixed because of bad times.

What has changed? Only more timidity and acquiescence by advocates and most activists.

             Power concedes nothing without a Demand

I posted a press release from Ontario women's groups over here:

http://www.rabble.ca/babble/feminism/ontario-women’s-groups-decry-lack-gender-focus-province’s-poverty-reduction-strategy

(Hope the link works) 

............

Maysie: the babbler formerly known as bigcitygal.

rural Francesco said:

So what do you suggest we do?

I'm not a marcher, don't do the protest thing.

.... THERE is your answer. Until we get in the face of governments and force media to pay attentin, do real analysis and report all sides on this issue, not much will change.

 It is the old dilemma of : "Do I work for positive chenge on the inside or from the outside"?

Some people say "If you are not at the table, you won't have an effective voice"

....Well, a lot of advocates and organizations are still sitting at the table.... the Children's table.... while the power adults make the calls.

                     "Power concedes nothing without a Demand"