The current government of Canada through the party in power in Ottawa has made a mockery of their recently imposed policy of total control over the ability of international aid programs to assist the world's most vulnerable people. Kairos, a group of prominent Canadian churches, was abruptly told by the conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper that their funding had been cancelled for 2010. No meaningful explanation was given at the time except the vague comment that the organization no longer met the funding criteria of the Canadian International Development Agency's (CIDA) priorities of providing food security and helping youth.
The treatment of this organization by the government of Canada is not acceptable and the public needs to speak out persistently in support of Kairos and other organizations that bring relief to millions of people in undeveloped countries around the globe.
Accusations against Kairos appear to be greatly unjustified in the face of the limited explanation by government and the immediate defense offered by Kairos Executive Director, Mary Corkery. From the limited response from government it appears that the government was misguided in its claim to crack down on anti-Semitism, a charge that Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, made at a conference in Jerusalem over a week ago when he stated that Kairos was promoting a boycott of Israeli corporations and products. This accusation was denied by Kairos.
If this is the rationale by the Canadian government for withdrawing funding to Kairos then it appears that any injustice is possible when false accusations are made to support a right wing agenda. What has happened is that an important financial aid program has been compromised and government actions have interfered with the delicate work being done by Kairos. Furthermore, this action has cast a shadow over other Canadian international development agencies carrying out similar work across the Globe.
We have a government in Canada that states that our own economic prosperity trumps international aid to the world's poorest. A government that anticipates that speaking out about injustices is a recipe for withdrawal of financial support. International aid organizations will now be concerned that by speaking out about injustices which they observe will result potentially in withdrawal of vital financial support. This is the old problem of social policy coming in conflict with the reality of injustice. The question is: Can an organization that receives funding from government openly criticize the funding source?
Some would argue that the funder has this right to choose since it does not want to be seen as supporting an injustice. It’s a delicate balance for the funder and especially for a government that supposedly represents the people and spends their tax dollars. However, the problem is who defines the injustice? This again depends on the ideology of the funding decision maker or their blatant miscalculation of events. In the case of Kairos it appears to be both.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Poverty Reduction Strategies
Poverty reduction strategies being announced by certain governments is a welcomed development in the war on poverty in Canada. Strategies in the area of poverty reduction are necessary because the existence of poverty is a complex situation brought about by historical thinking about the "poor" and what they should be entitled to. Our society's ideas of how we should treat those who are not able to support themselves comes from a time when individuals had to fend for themselves or had to depend on the charitable works of religious groups and others.
Our society is changing. For some time it has been acceptable to think of poverty as caused by the way society is structured which makes it difficult if not impossible for some people to be self sustaining. Lack of opportunities for some in our society leaves them vulnerable to a life of poverty and no way of escaping. Governments forced by community-based organizations have accepted the fact that they have an important role to play in alleviating poverty.
Over the last few years governments have announced poverty reduction strategies that give the impression that a new approach is being thought out that will set targets for not only the reduction but the elimination of poverty. Such bold announcements hold out much promise and time will tell if such targets can reasonably be met. Nevertheless, the goals have been set and in all cases after much collaboration with community groups close to the poverty problem. This is obviously much better and holds out greater promise than simply throwing money at specific segments of the poverty experience and hoping that this will somehow solve the overall problem.
A new report just released by the Canadian Association of Social Workers on December 1, 2009 reviewed the poverty reduction strategies that have been developed to date by provincial governments titled: “Tuning into Poverty the Provincial Way”. It reviews the strategies developed by five provinces: Quebec; Newfoundland and Labrador; Nova Scotia; Ontario; and Manitoba. Not included in the CASW report was the New Brunswick poverty reduction strategy which was announced in November, too late for the report, and also the commitment of the Federal government by way of a motion in the House of Commons on November 24, 2009 to, " …develop an immediate plan to eliminate poverty in Canada for all". No target dates were established for the reduction or elimination of poverty.
Most of these strategies were reached after an extended collaboration with relevant stakeholders and community groups recognizing that a meaningful strategy could not be developed in isolation from those living and working directly with the problem. Some of the targeted goals for the reduction and elimination of poverty may be optimistic but, nevertheless, they represent a target that time will reveal if it was realistic or not.
The government of Quebec was the first province to set out a strategy in 2002 to have the least number of persons living in poverty among the industrialized nations within ten years. The government of Newfoundland and Labrador made a commitment in 2005 to fund specific strategies in the budgets of 2006, 2007, and 2008 but with no target date for elimination or reduction of poverty. The government of Ontario developed a strategy in 2007 with the goal of reducing poverty by 25% in five years and 50% in ten years. The governments of Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick developed their strategies in 2009. Manitoba set no targets or time lines for the reduction of poverty; Nova Scotia to "break the cycle of poverty" by 2020; and New Brunswick "aims to reduce income poverty in the province by 25 per cent and deep income poverty by 50 per cent by 2015."
These are notable commitments on the part of governments and time will show if they were effective in actually reducing poverty or not. Nevertheless, these commitments mean that social policy as it relates to poverty is becoming acceptable and seen not only as a way for governments to address the problem but also recognizes that social democracy may be the path to address a serious humanitarian problem that has plagued society for years. It also reveals the values that underlie a caring society and its search to care for those that find themselves trapped in a life with little opportunities available to them. Lets hope that other provinces and territories and the Federal government will join the group and make this a truly national commitment.
Our society is changing. For some time it has been acceptable to think of poverty as caused by the way society is structured which makes it difficult if not impossible for some people to be self sustaining. Lack of opportunities for some in our society leaves them vulnerable to a life of poverty and no way of escaping. Governments forced by community-based organizations have accepted the fact that they have an important role to play in alleviating poverty.
Over the last few years governments have announced poverty reduction strategies that give the impression that a new approach is being thought out that will set targets for not only the reduction but the elimination of poverty. Such bold announcements hold out much promise and time will tell if such targets can reasonably be met. Nevertheless, the goals have been set and in all cases after much collaboration with community groups close to the poverty problem. This is obviously much better and holds out greater promise than simply throwing money at specific segments of the poverty experience and hoping that this will somehow solve the overall problem.
A new report just released by the Canadian Association of Social Workers on December 1, 2009 reviewed the poverty reduction strategies that have been developed to date by provincial governments titled: “Tuning into Poverty the Provincial Way”. It reviews the strategies developed by five provinces: Quebec; Newfoundland and Labrador; Nova Scotia; Ontario; and Manitoba. Not included in the CASW report was the New Brunswick poverty reduction strategy which was announced in November, too late for the report, and also the commitment of the Federal government by way of a motion in the House of Commons on November 24, 2009 to, " …develop an immediate plan to eliminate poverty in Canada for all". No target dates were established for the reduction or elimination of poverty.
Most of these strategies were reached after an extended collaboration with relevant stakeholders and community groups recognizing that a meaningful strategy could not be developed in isolation from those living and working directly with the problem. Some of the targeted goals for the reduction and elimination of poverty may be optimistic but, nevertheless, they represent a target that time will reveal if it was realistic or not.
The government of Quebec was the first province to set out a strategy in 2002 to have the least number of persons living in poverty among the industrialized nations within ten years. The government of Newfoundland and Labrador made a commitment in 2005 to fund specific strategies in the budgets of 2006, 2007, and 2008 but with no target date for elimination or reduction of poverty. The government of Ontario developed a strategy in 2007 with the goal of reducing poverty by 25% in five years and 50% in ten years. The governments of Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick developed their strategies in 2009. Manitoba set no targets or time lines for the reduction of poverty; Nova Scotia to "break the cycle of poverty" by 2020; and New Brunswick "aims to reduce income poverty in the province by 25 per cent and deep income poverty by 50 per cent by 2015."
These are notable commitments on the part of governments and time will show if they were effective in actually reducing poverty or not. Nevertheless, these commitments mean that social policy as it relates to poverty is becoming acceptable and seen not only as a way for governments to address the problem but also recognizes that social democracy may be the path to address a serious humanitarian problem that has plagued society for years. It also reveals the values that underlie a caring society and its search to care for those that find themselves trapped in a life with little opportunities available to them. Lets hope that other provinces and territories and the Federal government will join the group and make this a truly national commitment.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Poverty Reduction
There is considerably more attention being given to poverty reduction and elimination than was the case in the past by a broader constituency of the community. Poverty is now seen not just as a solution for those experiencing poverty but also as a means of promoting a strategy to make the whole community more prosperous and sustainable. The rhetoric has changed by including the word "social" when referring to the terms policy, sustainability and prosperity. Social sustainability, social prosperity and social policy have broadened the discussion and invites all sectors to become involved and part of the solution. It is vital that a dialogue take place between the private, public, and voluntary/non-profit sectors so that the connections can be made between social, economic and environmental interests.
In late 2007, all parties of the Nova Scotia Legislature passed Bill-94 which created a mechanism for a poverty reduction working group which made recommendations to the government in June 2008. The government responded with its own poverty reduction strategy in April 2009 titled: " Nova Scotia's Poverty Reduction Strategy: Preventing Poverty Promoting Prosperity". The strategy has four main goals to be achieved by 2020: To enable and reward work; improve supports for those in need; focus on our children; and collaborate and coordinate. A full-time coordinator was hired in October 2009 and a ministerial committee met to implement the strategy. In November the Deputy Minister of Community Services, the lead department for the strategy, appeared before the standing committee on community services to provide an up-date on the strategy and assured the committee that firm targets would be set by December 1st .
It would appear that the government is serious about tackling the problem of poverty. At least a mechanism has been created to help the process along. Funding also seems to be available to assist with the effort which is notable even as we are facing a sluggish economy. Two sources, bilateral agreements between the federal and provincial governments, will deliver significant funding over six years to bring marginalized groups and new entrants into the workforce.
Lets not fall into the trap of thinking that just providing a person with a job will eliminate poverty in our province. Many people with jobs are still living in poverty according to the common standards for measuring poverty. We need a broader focus when trying to eliminate or reduce poverty. Although a discussion on social policy with the broader community seems desirable, it remains to be seen if all the powerful self-interests can be addressed so that poverty is actually reduced or eliminated. We need to be optimistic and see this change in strategy as an opportunity. Lets ensure that poverty is addressed in a way that will be measurable and make life better for individuals and families and contribute to the prosperity and sustainability of the community.
It will be interesting to see what the "firm targets" are that have been promised by the formation of the ministerial committee to reduce and eventually eliminate poverty in Nova Scotia. Lets support the efforts of the committee and see what can be done.
In late 2007, all parties of the Nova Scotia Legislature passed Bill-94 which created a mechanism for a poverty reduction working group which made recommendations to the government in June 2008. The government responded with its own poverty reduction strategy in April 2009 titled: " Nova Scotia's Poverty Reduction Strategy: Preventing Poverty Promoting Prosperity". The strategy has four main goals to be achieved by 2020: To enable and reward work; improve supports for those in need; focus on our children; and collaborate and coordinate. A full-time coordinator was hired in October 2009 and a ministerial committee met to implement the strategy. In November the Deputy Minister of Community Services, the lead department for the strategy, appeared before the standing committee on community services to provide an up-date on the strategy and assured the committee that firm targets would be set by December 1st .
It would appear that the government is serious about tackling the problem of poverty. At least a mechanism has been created to help the process along. Funding also seems to be available to assist with the effort which is notable even as we are facing a sluggish economy. Two sources, bilateral agreements between the federal and provincial governments, will deliver significant funding over six years to bring marginalized groups and new entrants into the workforce.
Lets not fall into the trap of thinking that just providing a person with a job will eliminate poverty in our province. Many people with jobs are still living in poverty according to the common standards for measuring poverty. We need a broader focus when trying to eliminate or reduce poverty. Although a discussion on social policy with the broader community seems desirable, it remains to be seen if all the powerful self-interests can be addressed so that poverty is actually reduced or eliminated. We need to be optimistic and see this change in strategy as an opportunity. Lets ensure that poverty is addressed in a way that will be measurable and make life better for individuals and families and contribute to the prosperity and sustainability of the community.
It will be interesting to see what the "firm targets" are that have been promised by the formation of the ministerial committee to reduce and eventually eliminate poverty in Nova Scotia. Lets support the efforts of the committee and see what can be done.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
The problem with agrofuels
Agrofuels, a form of biofuel, are produced from agricultural crops. They can replace fossil fuels to be used for energy to power cars and trucks as well as power to produce electricity. At one time agrofuels were considered the answer to the global energy shortage in the future. Already we have seen agriculture change from producing crops for food to large mono crops destined for conversion into fuel. This diversion from food crop production has had a noticeable effect on the security of the global food supply. Less food crops are transported to nations where food is in short supply and populations are starving.
Corporate agribusinesses are amassing large tracks of fertile land around the globe to construct mono crops of African palm oil, sugarcane, corn and soy. Huge masses of land are bought up or stolen from local farmers by industrial agribusiness companies to develop plantations. These huge mono plantations replace family agricultural which can grow a variety of sustainable crops like cotton, coffee, tobacco, potatoes, bananas and other fruit to sustain themselves and their community. Once lost to the agribusiness these communities are without a secure means to feed themselves. Furthermore, agribusiness is a threat to the environment as a result of deforestation and the use of chemicals used on the crops weakens local crops grown in the region due to the absorption of most of the groundwater.
What can we do? Much of the agribusiness is located in the global south where land is fertile and the local farmers are able to sustain themselves. Unfortunately, these farmers are no match to the large corporations that descend upon their county and force them out by offering cheap prices for their land or in extreme cases hiring "goons" to kick them off their land. The local farmers often do not have the protection of their governments who also profit form the agribusiness in their country.
Hunger and poverty can be reduced by giving priority to small scale farmers to produce food for local markets. Support our own local farmers and address the global food shortage by expressing your opinion to the Canadian government through your Member of Parliament and the Prime Minister. Ask you MP to at least support legislation that would sanction Canadian companies that engage in agriculture for the production of fuel.
Canada is planning to host the G8 conference in June 2010. Ask your government to pressure the G8 countries to increase their support for small scale sustainable agriculture in the global south.
Corporate agribusinesses are amassing large tracks of fertile land around the globe to construct mono crops of African palm oil, sugarcane, corn and soy. Huge masses of land are bought up or stolen from local farmers by industrial agribusiness companies to develop plantations. These huge mono plantations replace family agricultural which can grow a variety of sustainable crops like cotton, coffee, tobacco, potatoes, bananas and other fruit to sustain themselves and their community. Once lost to the agribusiness these communities are without a secure means to feed themselves. Furthermore, agribusiness is a threat to the environment as a result of deforestation and the use of chemicals used on the crops weakens local crops grown in the region due to the absorption of most of the groundwater.
What can we do? Much of the agribusiness is located in the global south where land is fertile and the local farmers are able to sustain themselves. Unfortunately, these farmers are no match to the large corporations that descend upon their county and force them out by offering cheap prices for their land or in extreme cases hiring "goons" to kick them off their land. The local farmers often do not have the protection of their governments who also profit form the agribusiness in their country.
Hunger and poverty can be reduced by giving priority to small scale farmers to produce food for local markets. Support our own local farmers and address the global food shortage by expressing your opinion to the Canadian government through your Member of Parliament and the Prime Minister. Ask you MP to at least support legislation that would sanction Canadian companies that engage in agriculture for the production of fuel.
Canada is planning to host the G8 conference in June 2010. Ask your government to pressure the G8 countries to increase their support for small scale sustainable agriculture in the global south.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
The Blame Game
It appears that society is too quick to ascribe blame when things go wrong. Usually the people who submit to blaming others for problems look everywhere except themselves. If we only lived in a perfect world everything would be under our control. Unfortunately, this is not reality and there are many things out of the control of the authorities. Take for example the confusion about the vaccination program for the H1N1 virus. Was it realistic for the health authorities to expect that the whole country could be vaccinated all at once? In actual fact that was not the expectation and the authorities tried to make it clear that the program would need to take place over a period of time. Best estimates at the time for vaccine production were given and plans were created for what they thought would be an orderly program to get everyone vaccinated who wanted the vaccine. What they did not expect or had no control over was the uncertainty of supply, media hype and the need to frequently change instructions.
The media played an unwarranted role in reporting, sometimes in a very cynical manner, the confusion, changing instructions and short comings of the supply of the vaccine. For days and weeks the media would report the smallest glitch in a system that annually sees the normal flu take 4,000 lives each year, usually the lives of the elderly. As of October there have been 86 deaths attributed to H1N1 Canada wide. Why, with the relatively small number of deaths so far of H1N1, would the media continue to alarm the population? Granted, any death attributed to this flu strain is serious but it should not be used to create panic. This flu strain needs to be put in perspective so that the population can make an informed decision and react in a reasonable manner.
Another problem that the mass vaccination program is faced with is the change in supply of the vaccine. Many of the decisions regarding production and supply had to be made months in advance under very tight time frames. Apparently as time went on production switched to an unadjuvanted form of the vaccine leaving the adjuvanted vaccine in short supply and delaying the delivery of the vaccine to the non-vulnerable groups which is most of the population. Health authorities were concerned that groups like pregnant mothers and children between 6 months and 5 years might be at risk of complications pursuant to the latest research. Obviously health authorities wanted to be sure that these groups were not placed at unnecessary risk.
So why do the media and others engage in the blame game? Is it because it creates excitement and makes for high ratings and sells more newspapers? Lets not blame those who are entrusted to guard our health. Yes, they need to explain the situation as best they can but if you listen carefully you will notice that they usually qualify their statements and stipulate that as the situation changes new information will be passed on. Lets not forget that the health authorities are getting information continually from other parts of the world and from new research which is coming to their attention daily. Lets be more reasonable in our criticism, pay attention and follow their advice.
The media played an unwarranted role in reporting, sometimes in a very cynical manner, the confusion, changing instructions and short comings of the supply of the vaccine. For days and weeks the media would report the smallest glitch in a system that annually sees the normal flu take 4,000 lives each year, usually the lives of the elderly. As of October there have been 86 deaths attributed to H1N1 Canada wide. Why, with the relatively small number of deaths so far of H1N1, would the media continue to alarm the population? Granted, any death attributed to this flu strain is serious but it should not be used to create panic. This flu strain needs to be put in perspective so that the population can make an informed decision and react in a reasonable manner.
Another problem that the mass vaccination program is faced with is the change in supply of the vaccine. Many of the decisions regarding production and supply had to be made months in advance under very tight time frames. Apparently as time went on production switched to an unadjuvanted form of the vaccine leaving the adjuvanted vaccine in short supply and delaying the delivery of the vaccine to the non-vulnerable groups which is most of the population. Health authorities were concerned that groups like pregnant mothers and children between 6 months and 5 years might be at risk of complications pursuant to the latest research. Obviously health authorities wanted to be sure that these groups were not placed at unnecessary risk.
So why do the media and others engage in the blame game? Is it because it creates excitement and makes for high ratings and sells more newspapers? Lets not blame those who are entrusted to guard our health. Yes, they need to explain the situation as best they can but if you listen carefully you will notice that they usually qualify their statements and stipulate that as the situation changes new information will be passed on. Lets not forget that the health authorities are getting information continually from other parts of the world and from new research which is coming to their attention daily. Lets be more reasonable in our criticism, pay attention and follow their advice.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Why don't we all have adequate pensions?
One of the planks in Canada's brand of socialism recognizes the plight of old age and provides the Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security as a right to its citizens when they reach old age. However, all Canadians do not have a pension plan. According to the Canadian Association of Retired Persons, about three quarters of Canadians in the private sector do not have a workplace pension. Government employees as well as employers in the private sector provide the CPP which has mandatory shared contributions and the pensions may be inadequate but it was meant to reduce poverty in old age when it was implemented over 40 years ago. Government and many private sector employers supplement the CPP with additional pensions for their employees but many do not leaving employees without a plan unless they have been able to put aside funds in an individual RRSP or some other investments. This subjects them to the uncertainty of the stock market leaving them vulnerable at a time when they may need their pension most.
Government pensions seem to be the most robust to weather the volatility of the market but relying on the CPP will not meet the original goal of the plan to eliminate poverty as we reach old age and by that time these people will be unable to support ourselves with paid work. This means that people who only have the CPP will need to put more aside during their working life time to supplement their pension safety net.
Pension advocates have proposed a second tier of national pension relief. One that would be robust enough to withstand changes in demographics and a volatile market. A supplementary pension plan that would ensure that the "pension gap" could be covered. However, details on this "second tier" pension are not clear yet. Would it be mandatory or voluntary? Could everyone afford it? How would it withstand demographic changes over time?
Lets have more discussion and ask government to be transparent in the discussions they are having on alleviating the pension gap.
Government pensions seem to be the most robust to weather the volatility of the market but relying on the CPP will not meet the original goal of the plan to eliminate poverty as we reach old age and by that time these people will be unable to support ourselves with paid work. This means that people who only have the CPP will need to put more aside during their working life time to supplement their pension safety net.
Pension advocates have proposed a second tier of national pension relief. One that would be robust enough to withstand changes in demographics and a volatile market. A supplementary pension plan that would ensure that the "pension gap" could be covered. However, details on this "second tier" pension are not clear yet. Would it be mandatory or voluntary? Could everyone afford it? How would it withstand demographic changes over time?
Lets have more discussion and ask government to be transparent in the discussions they are having on alleviating the pension gap.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
RE-ORDERING PRIORITIES
(The following is an excerpt taken from a paper produced and made public by the Nova Scotia Association of Social Workers - "Re-ordering Priorities: How the budget can address poverty in a meaningful way", Submission to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance, Nova Scotia Association of Social Workers, September 2006)
The top priority for all levels of government in Canada should be the elimination of poverty, and that the national budget as a policy document embodying our values as a society should provide the means to this end. In the short run, efforts must be focused on alleviating the circumstances of poor and low income people. In the long run, though, what we should be aspiring to is a society in which everyone has sufficient means to live a fulfilling life, not excluded from the mainstream and able to take advantage of all of the benefits of our prosperous nation.
Policies directed towards reducing and eventually eliminating poverty represent a solid investment in our future. Social programs should have top priority, over-riding tax cuts which disproportionably benefit those who already are well off. Governments sometimes talk about the need for a program to be sustainable. By that they mean that it can continue to be funded over the long term. Obviously, that is important. But sustainability has another side to it which we ought not to forget. Is the current level of poverty sustainable? Are increasing levels of homelessness sustainable? At what cost? Until we acknowledge that our Canadian society cannot tolerate the inequity and injustice of poverty and we reach a collective decision to deploy our considerable national resources to address the issue in a meaningful way, then our country will not prosper.
It is not difficult to see how people get trapped in poverty, worn down by the constant effort to survive and unable to muster the resources necessary to move onwards. They must also deal with the stigma of poverty, a view espoused by some that the poor are somehow responsible for their plight. Such a punitive view does not take into account the structural mechanisms that render the poor powerless and leave them stranded because of an inadequate social program and the lack of political will to make meaningful changes.
The top priority for all levels of government in Canada should be the elimination of poverty, and that the national budget as a policy document embodying our values as a society should provide the means to this end. In the short run, efforts must be focused on alleviating the circumstances of poor and low income people. In the long run, though, what we should be aspiring to is a society in which everyone has sufficient means to live a fulfilling life, not excluded from the mainstream and able to take advantage of all of the benefits of our prosperous nation.
Policies directed towards reducing and eventually eliminating poverty represent a solid investment in our future. Social programs should have top priority, over-riding tax cuts which disproportionably benefit those who already are well off. Governments sometimes talk about the need for a program to be sustainable. By that they mean that it can continue to be funded over the long term. Obviously, that is important. But sustainability has another side to it which we ought not to forget. Is the current level of poverty sustainable? Are increasing levels of homelessness sustainable? At what cost? Until we acknowledge that our Canadian society cannot tolerate the inequity and injustice of poverty and we reach a collective decision to deploy our considerable national resources to address the issue in a meaningful way, then our country will not prosper.
It is not difficult to see how people get trapped in poverty, worn down by the constant effort to survive and unable to muster the resources necessary to move onwards. They must also deal with the stigma of poverty, a view espoused by some that the poor are somehow responsible for their plight. Such a punitive view does not take into account the structural mechanisms that render the poor powerless and leave them stranded because of an inadequate social program and the lack of political will to make meaningful changes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)