CANADA: Quebec is implementing a means-tested benefit, not a basic income

CANADA: Quebec is implementing a means-tested benefit, not a basic income

The province of Quebec, in Canada, has been fostering conversations around basic income and even, at a certain point in 2016, has appointed a long-time supporter of basic income, François Blais, as Minister of Employment and Social Solidarity. Although the term “guaranteed minimum income” has been used in an indiscriminate fashion ever since 2014, there has never been an actual mandate for Blais to implement basic income in Quebec.

 

In fact, what is being implemented in Quebec at the moment differs considerably from a basic income, as defined by the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN). According to Dorothée Boccanfuso, Chair of Quebec’s Expert Committee on Guaranteed Minimum Income, the new plan’s definition is presented as “any system that offers a guarantee of monetary resources for all, with the amount of those resources being related to a minimum threshold”. This expert committee has been tasked to make recommendations to François Blais, on income support, having produced a report. The proposed scheme has, therefore, kept existing social security system’s properties of means-testing and incentives to work, the latter strengthened through “a greater reward be provided for work efforts, through a major increase to the work premium”.

 

The enhanced economic support scheme is intended to widen its coverage, aiming at defining a “benchmark threshold”, a means-tested minimum guaranteed income to support “persons with no employment restrictions, for persons 65 and over and for people with disabilities”. There has been, clearly, an effort to cover more people with social support, trying to fill in the gaps and effectively reduce poverty levels, but still not embracing unconditionality. As the Expert Committee on Guaranteed Minimum Income puts it:

 

“The Committee wants a society that is free of poverty, but this wish can only be achieved by helping persons who are able to re-enter the labour market, pursue education and training or, more generally, better integrate into society. In the Committee’s view, poverty is not a status, but rather a situation and those who are in it must be helped to get out. The income support system must guarantee the minimum resources required for vulnerable persons to meet their immediate needs. Above all, it must eliminate barriers preventing these persons from escaping poverty.”

 

So, the social security program sought is not an unconditional basic income. However, some media sources are portraying it in misleading headlines such as “Quebec to offer basic income for 84000 people unable to work” and “Basic income to be given to 84000 people in Canada”. One the other hand, a few anti-poverty groups have clearly criticised the support scheme, calling out for a true unconditional support system. According to Serge Petitclerc, representing the group Collectif pour un Quebec sans pauvreté, the “guaranteed minimum income (…) should be unconditional and it should apply to the entire population”.

 

More information at:

Kate McFarland, “Quebec, Canada: Liberal Party’s Ideas Forum to address Minimum Income”, Basic Income News, September 18th 2016

Stanislas Jourdan, “Québec, Canada: Minister of Employment appointed to work on basic income”, Basic Income News, February 4th 2016

Yannick Vanderborght, “Québec, Canada: Minister of Employment for the provincial government reiterates his support for basic income”, Basic Income News, July 17th 2014

Loulla-Mae Eleftheriou-Smith, “Basic income to be given to 84000 people in Canada”, Independent, 11th December 2017

Karina Laframboise, “Quebec to offer basic income for 84000 people unable to work”, CBCNews, 10th December 2017

Malcolm Torry, “What’s a definition? And how should we define Basic Income?”, BIEN Congress in Lisbon, 2017

CANADA: Canadian Association of Social Workers Recommends UBIG of $20,000 As a Better Alternative Than Negative Income Tax

CANADA: Canadian Association of Social Workers Recommends UBIG of $20,000 As a Better Alternative Than Negative Income Tax

On October 30th 2017, the Canadian Association of Social Workers (CASW) released a position paper recommending a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) of $20,000 for all individuals, regardless of income. CASW’s UBIG fulfils the definition of a Basic Income. CASW argues that a UBIG is superior to a Negative Income Tax, which is being tested in other experiments (1).

CASW argues that a universal demogrant model, or UBIG, is “a cost-effective and socially responsible mechanism through which Canada can ensure dignity for all”.

CASW states there have been many federal promises to end poverty in Canada over the past 30 years, in many different forms, including Canada’s support for the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals which specifies the need to “end poverty in all its forms everywhere”. Yet in 2016, 4 million Canadians (12.9%) were living in poverty and child poverty rates even increased between 1989 and 2013.

According to CASW, conditional and heavily monitored programs are insufficient and expensive. The combined income support-related expenditures of all federal, provincial, and municipal levels of the Canadian government cost just over $185 billion. Furthermore, their implementation causes a great deal of stress given their unreliable nature, with individuals reporting stress brought on by stigma, marginalization and feelings of disempowerment and hopelessness.

CASW claims that “current social assistance systems in Canada are inadequate and contribute to a cycle of poverty”.

Poverty is a well-known social determinant of physical and mental health. CASW illustrates this with several UBI-related examples from Canada:

  • a difference of more than 20 years in life-expectancy between the high-income and low-income population in Hamilton, Ontario;
  • a reduction of 8.5% on hospitalization during the Mincome basic income pilot project in Dauphin, Manitoba (2);
  • people between 55 and 64 years of age are 50% more likely to experience food insecurity compared to seniors 65 years or older who receive the Old Age Security pension.

From CASW’s perspective, the strengthening of Old Age Security (OAS) and the introduction of the Canada Child Benefit were solid steps towards realizing a UBIG in Canada. Programs like the OAS, which are universal in nature and have few eligibility criteria, are quite inexpensive to operate. In 2013, the total cost of operating the OAS program was 0.3% of the total annual program cost. In contrast, the total administrative cost of Employment Insurance, a program with a high degree of gate-keeping and extensive eligibility criteria, was 8.1% of the total annual program cost.

According to CASW, this cost-saving potential is a fundamental strength of the UBIG which would operate under significantly fewer operational and administrative costs than, for example, a negative income tax model.

CASW further argues that the so-called “benefit trap”, that makes the adoption of part-time work unattractive and is often used to argue against a basic income guarantee, in fact only exists within the negative income tax model. Therefore, the true benefits of a basic income guarantee cannot be realized within the negative income tax model which has formed the basis of all of the pilot projects run so far in Canada.

In addition, a universal demogrant model involves significant benefits to the middle classes giving it a wider support base compared to a program that only targets low-income households.   It will therefore have more likelihood of success.

CASW recommends a UBIG of $20,000 per year with the possibility of additional fully-remunerated casual, part-time, or full-time employment. Individuals with disabilities would receive an extra $6,000 tax free per year. The UBIG should replace only traditional welfare or social assistance programs – not all existing social programming. One’s net income will then be taxed according to progressive tax brackets. This model encourages participation in the labour market.

 

Notes

(1) – A Negative Income Tax does not pay an unconditional income to every individual. Instead, it tops up earnings below a threshold, and charges tax on earnings above the threshold. The administration of a Negative Income Tax poses more challenges than the administration of a Basic Income.

(2) – This is a significant amount considering the Canadian Institute for Health Information in 2014 put the total health expenditure in Canada as upwards of $200 billion.

 

More information at:

Colleen Kennelly, “Universal Basic Income Guarantee: The Next ‘BIG’ Thing in Canadian Social Policy”, Canadian Association of Social Workers (CASW), October 2017

 

Picture: Two sides of the same Loonie … (10/100), Jamie McCaffrey, CC BY-NC 2.0

CANADA: Deloitte future jobs report recommends basic income

CANADA: Deloitte future jobs report recommends basic income

Recently, there has been a great deal of attention paid to the changing nature of work. From rising automation to the ever-expanding gig economy, the effects of shifting labor landscapes are being felt by governments, businesses, and workers around the world. A new report from Deloitte, a global consulting firm, in partnership with the Human Resources Professionals Association, wades into this discussion with an analysis of the Canadian workforce. In addition, the report offers an array of potential public policy responses to address disruptive trends in the labor market including a shorter workweek, flexible education pathways, and a basic income.

 

In the report, authors Stephen Harrington, Jeff Moir, and J. Scott Allinson provide analysis based on interviews with 50 leading experts, as well as a review of the relevant literature. The authors argue that Canada is on the verge of an “Intelligence Revolution” that will be shaped by three dominant trends: machine learning, increasing computing power, and automation. These “waves of disruptive change” are already being felt in the Canadian economy, and their effects will become increasingly significant over the next decade.

 

Specifically, the report identifies two overarching themes that have already begun to impact labor markets. First, as work becomes more decentralized, workers are increasingly finding themselves in temporary or contingent jobs. These “contingent workers” bring their skills to specific projects or tasks, moving on when the task is completed, and work for multiple companies simultaneously. These arrangements form the basis of the gig economy. Second, the researchers argue that automation is opening up new opportunities for collaborative work between machines and humans. While automation can cause job displacement in the short term, the researchers contend that new job opportunities will continue to arise as productivity increases.

 

However, the report also notes that individuals and institutions seem ill-prepared to adapt to the rapidly increasing pace of change. In Canada, the number of contingent workers has grown from 4.8 million in 1997 to 6.1 million in 2015. Today, approximately 1/3 of Canadian jobs are for contingent workers. However, temporary positions still pay 30% less on average than permanent positions, and private sector pension plans only cover 24% of the Canadian workforce. At the same time, while 41% of organizations have “fully implemented or made significant progress in adopting cognitive and AI technologies”, only 17% of business leaders report feeling ready to manage a workforce of robots, AI, or humans working side-by-side (p. 17).

 

In response, the report’s research team offers several suggestions. Eight job archetypes of the future are presented, and individuals are advised to develop “future-proof” human-centered skills in judgment, leadership, decision making, social awareness, systems thinking, and creativity. The report also recommends integrated partnerships between businesses and educational institutions to enable workers to meet the needs of a changing labor market.

 

However, the researchers also note that efforts by individuals and businesses alone will not be sufficient for Canada to “emerge as a winner in the Intelligence Revolution.” To this end, policy reforms must be adopted to reflect both the challenges and opportunities of a 21st century economy. Among these recommendations are a shorter workweek, increased consumption taxes, decreased income taxes, unemployment insurance, and a renewed commitment to immigration. Additionally, basic income is offered as a means to address rising automation. The researchers suggest that basic income may ease the strains of job displacement, provide support for individuals engaged in volunteer or social enterprises, and encourage entrepreneurial risk-taking.

 

You can read the report in full here.

CANADA (LINDSAY, ONTARIO): Delegates pass ‘Lindsay Declaration’ on basic income

CANADA (LINDSAY, ONTARIO): Delegates pass ‘Lindsay Declaration’ on basic income

Ontario Basic Income Network delegates. Credit to: Lindsay Advocate.

 

On November 4th 2017, the Ontario Basic Income Network (OBIN) held its annual meeting in Lindsay, Ontario, Canada. Lindsay is one of the sites of the Ontario basic income pilot project, with approximately 2,000 residents registered in the experiment. Delegates at the November 4th meeting unanimously passed “The Lindsay Declaration for a Progressive Basic Income.”

The Lindsay Declaration draws from human rights outlined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It also highlights what it considers the benefits of basic income and the momentum built by the Ontario government’s three-year basic income pilot (ongoing).

The Declaration proposes nine principles to guide basic income policy. These state that basic income must be promoted as justice rather than charity, and as abundance rather than austerity. The principles further assert that basic income must be reliable, based on cost of living and protected from creditors. Finally, the Lindsay Declaration supports basic income that does not preclude a “comprehensive social security system,” and that aligns with progressive “personal and corporate taxation.”

After the meeting, delegates voiced their intention to use the Lindsay Declaration as a tool for basic income advocacy across Canada. The Declaration has received attention from regional news and social media.

 

 

More information at:

The Lindsay Declaration

Basic Income Canada Network endorsements

Ontario delegates pass ‘Lindsay Declaration’ on basic income,” Kawartha Lakes This Week, November 7th 2017

Roderick Benns, “‘Lindsay Declaration’ on progressive basic income passed by delegates,” The Lindsay Advocate, November 7th 2017

Town of Lindsay chosen to host basic income pilot program,” Global News, October 12, 2017

CANADA: Symposium on Dauphin Mincome Experiment Held at University of Manitoba

CANADA: Symposium on Dauphin Mincome Experiment Held at University of Manitoba

By Jason Burke Murphy

 

On October 3rd, the Social Work Department at the University of Manitoba held a Symposium on the Mincome Experiment conducted in Dauphin, Manitoba in the 1970’s. This included presentations by the Director of the Mincome Experiment in the 1970’s, Ron Hikel.

The resources from the Mincome Symposium held at the University of Manitoba (including the two papers presented and an audio clip of Ron Hikel’s interview with UMFM) have been posted on the Faculty of Social Work website.

The symposium featured Ron Hikel, who was Director of the Manitoba Basic Annual Income (Mincome) Experiment. His paper is linked here: Piloting Basic Income in Canada: Lessons from the Past, Possibilities in the Present.

Shortly after the symposium, Hikel also conducted an interview you can find here. Wayne Simpson, Greg Mason, and Ryan Godwin, of the Department of Economics at the University of Manitoba also wrote this paper: The Manitoba Basic Annual Income Experiment: Lessons Learned 40 Years Later.

The conference was moderated by Jim Mulvale and Sid Frankel of the Faculty of Social Work at the University of Manitoba.

 

More information at:

David Calnitsky, “‘More Normal than Welfare’: The Mincome Experiment, Stigma, and Community Experience

Evelyn Forget on The Legacy of Mincome & other Basic Income Experiment

Jenna van Draanen interview

Claire Bott, “Evelyn Forget/Northern Institute publish new report on BIG”, Basic Income News, August 1st 2017

Kate McFarland, “Overview of Current Basic Income Related Experiments (October 2017)“, October 19th 2017