rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

The case for exempting child support from welfare

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca for as little as $5 per month!

Photo: BC Gov Photos/Flickr

Based on recent announcements, it seems that the Ministry of Social Development is in the mood to address some of the long-standing problems within B.C.'s welfare system (although welfare rates remain distressingly low). Seth Klein recently recapped the Ministry's June 11 announcement, which set out almost 30 proposed changes to the system. More recently, the Ministry also announced that it will be restoring coverage for some health supplies and medical equipment that it cut in 2010.

As Seth set out in his post, the June 11 announcements contained some positive changes. In particular, the re-introduction of an earning exemption for those in the "expected to work" category of income assistance is a significant policy shift for the Ministry. Since 2002, if recipients in that category earn any income, it has been deducted dollar for dollar from their monthly income assistance. The government's rationale for this has been that allowing recipients to exempt some earned income creates a disincentive for them to transition off of assistance to employment.

The Ministry's June 11 announcement seems to acknowledge that policy rationale is not sound, noting that the new $200 per month per family earnings exemption would give "employable individuals a better opportunity to get job skills and experience, take advantage of short-term or temporary work, and better provide for their families while receiving assistance." That is a big and very positive shift in approach.

Given the Ministry's change in outlook regarding the balance between a welfare system that provides employable recipients some basic level of dignity and support, and a system that is so cushy that recipients will choose to rely on taxpayer support over supporting themselves, this seems like a good time to raise another long-standing concern with the welfare system: child support.

History of child support exemptions

Prior to 2002, recipients could receive up to $100 per month in child support without impacting their assistance. The idea was that a limited exemption would create an incentive for parents to go out and get a child support order against their ex, and to take steps to enforce that order. In 2002, that limited exemption for child support was eliminated and, since then, any penny of child support received by a parent on income assistance has been deducted from their assistance dollar for dollar.

The government's rationale for the 2002 change was two-fold. First, the Ministry is the payer of last resort and if there is a private source of support available (a parent), a recipient should rely on that instead of welfare. The Ministry will top that amount up if it's not enough for basic necessities (as defined by the Ministry), but that's it. Second, the Ministry requires that all recipients pursue any potential income, so recipients are required to assign their child support rights over to the Ministry as a condition of welfare eligibility. There are government-funded programs that obtain and enforce family support orders on the recipients' behalf, so the exemption is no longer required as an incentive in that respect.

The problem with no exemption

A quick look at how Ministry welfare rates work quickly illustrates the difficulties with the removal of any exemption: most of the financial support many recipients receive for their children comes from the federal National Child Benefit program, not the Ministry.

The Ministry provides a portion of monthly assistance geared towards shelter costs and that amount is based on the number of people in a family regardless of age. While a single person gets $375 per month for shelter costs, a two-person family gets $570, a three-person family gets $660, a four-person family gets $700, and so on. The shelter amount continues to increase by $35-$50 per additional family member. So in terms of shelter benefits, the Ministry is providing some financial assistance for children in a family unit, just because the family unit is larger. The amount of that assistance depends on how many people are in the family, and can be quite minimal in larger families.

The larger problem involves the second portion of monthly assistance provided by the Ministry, which is intended to cover basic living necessities. This portion does not increase based on the number of children in a family. A single person gets $235, and a single person with any number of children gets $375.58. Beyond the increase for simply being a single-parent family with children, there is no additional monthly assistance paid by the Ministry for the children. Instead, most families receive much of the support for their children through the federal National Child Benefit program, which was intended to provide financial support for low-income children not tied to eligibility for welfare. The program was designed to assist recipients to transition off of welfare by providing a stable source of financial support for children that a family can continue to receive if they transitioned from welfare to low-paying employment.

Long story short, many families are getting only minimal or partial financial support for their children via the Ministry of Social Development, yet the Ministry deducts child support from the benefits it pays out, regardless of the amount of that support.

The bottom line

The level of child poverty in B.C. is well known. While the remedy to that problem may be multifaceted, one thing seems certain: low-income families with children are struggling and it seems we're far from a welfare system so lavish that families will choose it over self-sufficiency. The Ministry has a number of tools available to ensure that families receiving extraordinarily high levels of support will not inappropriately rely on the public system, and the federal benefit system has its own eligibility criteria.

The bottom line is, as long as welfare rates remain so low, creating even a partial exemption for child support payments would allow vulnerable families with children increased financial resources to meet basic costs of living.

This article was first posted on Policy Note.

Photo: BC Gov Photos/Flickr

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.