CANADA: Basic income supporter appointed as Minister in Quebec

A general election was held in Québec (Canada) on April 7th, 2014. The Parti Libéral du Québec (PLQ), under the lead of Philippe Couillard, won the elections, and now has 70 seats at the National Assembly – enough to form a majority government. On April 23rd,  2014, the new Premier, Philippe Couillard, officially unveiled his cabinet, with no less than 26 ministers.

Among them is François Blais, who has just been elected as a new MP for the PLQ (in the electoral district of Charlesbourg, in Quebec-city). Blais will be the  Minister of Employment and Social Solidarity in the Couillard government.

François Blais -Le journal de la communauté universitaire

François Blais -Le journal de la communauté universitaire

François Blais – formerly Dean of Faculty at Laval University, Québec – is a long-standing advocate of basic income, and a Life Member of BIEN. In 2001, he published an introductory book on basic income in French, which was translated into English in 2002: “Ending Poverty. A Basic Income for all Canadians” (Lorimer Publishing).

Basic income, however, was not part of the PLQ platform for this general election. It is doubtful that François Blais, as a Minister of Employment, will be able to put it on the agenda. On April 24, 2014, the daily Le Devoir wrote: “Philippe Couillard appointed François Blais as his Minister of Employment and Social Solidarity. Blais, formerly Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences at Laval University, is above all an advocate of a guaranteed minimum income. However, the Premier did not give a mandate to the new Minister to implement this ambitious reform”.

Further information:

Article in Le Devoir (in French)

CBC report (in English)

EUROPEAN UNION: major conference to discuss BIG for the entire European Union

UBIE

UBIE

Politicians and major European organisations working in the fields of health, poverty, democracy, education and the environment will discuss the potential benefits of unconditional basic income at the European Economic and Social Committee on Thursday, 10 April 2014. The conference will also mark the launch of a new network, Unconditional Basic Income Europe, which formed around the European Citizens Initiative for Unconditional Basic Income (ECI for UBI) last year. Citizens from 25 European countries have collaborated to hold this conference.

Entitled ‘Unconditional Basic Income: Emancipating European Welfare’, the conference will bring together activists, politicians, organisations and interested individuals to highlight the potential benefits of this idea. UBI gained an unprecedented amount of press coverage last year, and was backed by over 300,000 supporters across Europe during the ECI for UBI.

Unconditional Basic Income Europe

Unconditional Basic Income Europe

During its year­long run the number of countries involved with this European Citizens’ Initiative swelled from 13 to 25. “As momentum built in the last two months of the collection period of the ECI on UBI, signatures doubled,” said Klaus Sambor, general organiser of the ECI for UBI. The conference will celebrate organisers’ achievements during this ECI with reports from several of the countries involved, including the latest developments of UBI campaigns within their borders.

There will also be presentations from Guy Standing about a recent pilot project in India, Philippe van Parijs about his proposal for a ‘Eurodividend’ to be paid to all EU citizens, Ronald Blaschke of Netzwerk Grundeinskommen Germany on UBI’s potential to ameliorate hidden poverty. Others including Sian Jones of the European Anti­Poverty Network and Plamen Dimitrov, President of the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria will speak about UBI’s beneficial effects on health, the environment, democracy and social solidarity.

The conference’s moderator will be Karl Widerquist, co­Chair of the Basic Income Earth Network and editor of BINews.org. “With the UBI movement,” Widerquist writes, “people are beginning to realise that there is no freedom without freedom from poverty, and there is no freedom from poverty without unconditional access to the basic necessities of life.”

Title of the Conference: “Unconditional Basic Income: Emancipating European Welfare”
Time and place: Thursday 10 April 2014 (9.30 – 17.30) European Economic and Social Committee, Van Maerlant Building 99 rue Belliard, 1040 Brussels (Room VM3, 2nd floor)
Registration required by 5pm, Monday 7 April: please email conference@ubie.org
For more information see: https://basicincome­europe.org email: press@ubie.org
Or contact: Barb Jacobson +44 7985 670 688

BRUSSELS, Belgium: Unconditional Basic Income – Emancipating European Welfare, April 10, 2014


UBI: Emancipating European Welfare

UBI: Emancipating European Welfare

After one year of campaigning for the European Citizens’ Initiative for Unconditional Basic Income, we are still actively continuing on the path towards finding an intelligent approach to European citizens’ real needs, particularly those generated by poverty. The Initiative won the support of over 300,000 people in less than a year. Since then, a network involving people and organisations from 25 countries has come together to carry on the Initiative’s aims.

At this conference we would like to consolidate this network by reflecting both on what has happened in the past year and on our future aspirations. Our main aim is for unconditional basic income to be implemented throughout the EU. There are also moves underway to get UBI recognised as a human right under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Article 1: Human Dignity).

We hope that you will be able to attend our conference on 10 April 2014, and actively participate in the discussion of ideas which will be presented there. We would be grateful if we could receive your confirmation by 25 March. Please RSVP by e-mail: conference@ubie.org.

=== AGENDA ===

9:30 – 9:40 am: Welcome from European Economic and Social Committee (EESC)

9.40 – 9.50: Welcome from Barb Jacobson, Chair, Unconditional Basic Income Europe (UBIE)

9:50 – 10:05: Jones Sian, European Anti Poverty Network: Situation with income poverty and hidden poverty in Europe

10:05 – 10:15: Questions & Answers

10.15 – 10.30: Ronald Blaschke, Co-Founder and Member of the Board of Netzwerk Grundeinkommen Germany: Unconditional Basic Income – Consistently against (hidden) poverty and for real freedom for everyone

10:30 – 10:40: Q&A

10:40 – 11:00: Coffee Break

11:00 – 11:15: Elena Dalibot: European Alternatives, Project Coordinator: Citizens Manifesto for European Democracy, Solidarity and Equality – Different Needs and Solutions

11:15 – 11:25: Q&A

11:25 – 11:40: Gerald Häfner, MEP, Greens: Development of ECI and EU-Referendum – tools for more democracy in the EU

11:40 – 11:50 Q&A

11:50 – 12:05 David Casassas, Member of BIEN, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona: Democracy and Unconditional Basic Income

12:05 – 12:15 Q&A

12:15 – 12:30: Werner Rätz, Attac Germany, Working Group Enough for all and Working Group Beyond the Growth: Degrowth, Health and Unconditional Basic Income

12:30 – 1:00 pm Q&A (ten minutes) and General Discussion

1.00 – 2:00 pm: Lunch Break

2:00 – 2:15 – Philippe Van Parijs, Chair of Advisory Board of BIEN: Euro- Dividend – An example for an partial basic income in Europe

2:15 – 2:25: Q&A

2:25 – 2:40: Guy Standing, Honorary Co-President of BIEN: What can we learn from Namibian and Indian experiments with unconditional cash transfers?

2:40- 2:50: Q&A

2:50 – 3:20: BREAK

3:20 – 5:20: Building the European Movement for an UBI – Panel

• Stanislas Jourdan, French Movement for UBI: How the ECI woke up the European movement

• Valerija Korosec, UBI Slovenia: Running in the EU elections for UBI

• Vahur Luhtsalu, UBI Estonia: Learning-by-doing: How we jumped on the ECI-UBI train (and what are the lessons learned)

• Plamen Dimitrov (Bulgarian Trade Union president – CITUB) (tbc)

• Spanish speaker on the National Popular Initiative (tbc)

• Speaker from Scandinavia (tbc): UBI in the context of advanced welfare countries

• Klaus Sambor, Runder Tisch Grundeinkommen Austria: The movement for UBI as part of wider social movements in Europe

5:20 – 5.30: – Closing address

For more information go to: https://www.facebook.com/events/1445383579030636/

Johanna Perkio, “Universal Basic Income: A New Tool for Development Policy?”

SUMMARY: This report examines the potentials of basic income to serve as a new tool for social and development policy, drawing from the recent experiences from recent pilot projects. The structure of the report is as follows: Chapter two provides a brief literature review of cash transfer policies currently in place in many developing countries and assesses the potential advantages of universal and unconditional transfers over targeted and conditional ones. Chapter three presents the three country cases where universal cash transfer policies have been tested or gradually implemented. Chapter four concludes and explores the prospects of basic income as a part of the new development policy agenda. The empirical material regarding basic income experiments is collected from the projects’ own research reports and newsletters, as well as relevant academic and non-academic articles.

Johanna Perkio, “Universal Basic Income: A New Tool for Development Policy?Kansainvalinen Solidaarisuutyo: International Solidarity Work, January 31, 2014.

For a direct link to the PDF version of the article go to: https://sange.fi/kvsolidaarisuustyo/wp-content/uploads/Universal-Basic-Income-A-New-Tool-for-Development-Policy.pdf

Kansainvalinen Solidaarisuutyo

Kansainvalinen Solidaarisuutyo

OPINION: The Liberal Case for a Basic Income

OPINION: The Liberal Case for a Basic Income

Max Sawicky’s post on the liberal case against a universal basic income (UBI) characterizes the rationale for UBI as poverty elimination at low overhead cost. While he’s right that this is one of UBI’s benefits, he misses its much larger goal. What distinguishes UBI from the anti-poverty programs we already have in the US is that it eliminates poverty through redistribution that is explicitly unconditional and universal—it goes to everyone, whether or not they work or are looking for work. Low overhead costs are simply a bonus of abandoning the means-testing and monitoring of work effort that are the foundation of all the programs Sawicky wants to expand.

The idea of unconditionality is counterintuitive. Work makes our riches possible, and all should contribute, if they can, to that work. UBI does not reject this principle of reciprocity, but challenges the priority of that contribution: should subsistence be conditional on work first, or should subsistence be guaranteed to all first, and work for anything more come after basic needs are met? Clearly, throughout most of human history, when life was dominated by scarcity of resources, the answer was the former. But why should that be the case in post-scarcity societies?

For some, the problem with unconditionality is not the fear of freeriding, but of abandoning efforts to provide meaningful and rewarding work for all. It’s easy to imagine the dystopic scenario in which millions are mailed monthly checks to stay home so we don’t have to create jobs for them, or provide childcare, or invest in the infrastructure required for a thriving economy. Just let the bankers do the work and pay the taxes that fund everyone else’s UBI. But that’s not so different from the welfare state we have now in the US—except that without the UBI, 50 million Americans live below the federal government’s wholly inadequate poverty threshold.

Advocates of UBI envision a society in which absolute poverty is eliminated and productive and rewarding work is defined and shaped by individuals, not the government. Anyone who wants more than the minimum provided by the UBI will need to work, but the UBI will give them what sociologist Erik Olin Wright calls “a permanent strike fund.” They’ll come to the labor market with leverage to negotiate better wages and working conditions for unappealing work, and with funds that make more rewarding but lower paying work feasible. Those who perform unpaid care or voluntary work will have an income without the government monitoring their performance in exchange for a stipend. Time spent on education and vocational training will no longer have to be weighed against earning an income to live on. Entrepreneurs will have a bit of venture capital with which to support themselves while they try out a business. Higher wages at the bottom of the wage scale will cause more automation of the most routine jobs, but the labor savings are shared with all through the UBI.

A utopian fantasy? Hardly—but a more democratic and pluralistic version of what we have now. Income inequality remains, but those at the bottom of the income scale have their basic needs met without having to prove their deservingness. Gender inequality remains, but women receive, on balance, a redistribution of income from higher earning men whether they work or not. Children go to school with full stomachs and warm clothes, and have more of a chance to use their education to improve their lot in life. Most importantly, citizens are no longer divided into groups vying for a bigger share of a stigmatized social assistance budget, but a unified force with the political clout to defend and expand the UBI. Individuals freed from the constraints of poverty help shape the contours of the economy through their inalienable and renewable economic “votes,” as they do in the political sphere. Like political democracy, it’s not perfect, but it’s better than the alternatives.

How do we get there? Not by expanding the programs Sawicky lists, which even if expanded and more generously funded will inevitably exclude some from coverage. Instead, we should push for a UBI modeled on the one he doesn’t mention but which happens to be the strongest anti-poverty program in the US—Social Security. Social Security is the closest thing we have to a universal benefit in the U.S. It’s not unconditional, but it’s inclusive eligibility rules mean that almost 90% of seniors are covered by it. Because it’s paid individually, it provides an independent income to spouses of covered workers even if they’ve never been employed themselves. Because it’s not means-tested, it doesn’t create a disincentive toward other forms of retirement savings or earned income. And because it’s nearly universal, it creates a powerful solidarity among its recipients that has successfully resisted calls for its defunding in the name of deficit reduction or “privatization”—unlike the fragmented, stigmatized, and politically powerless recipients of the programs Sawicky thinks we should expand.

The UBI should be universal, unconditional, individual, and untaxed. Income above the UBI should be taxed progressively, with steeper increases above median income. To more effectively target child poverty than a $10,000 adult-only UBI would do, the UBI should go to children as well and be pegged to the poverty threshold of a family of four—a minimum of $6,000 per person. To the extent that they pay lower benefits than the UBI, other programs can be eliminated and their budgets used to fund it. For those that pay higher benefits than the UBI, as Social Security does for many recipients, their budgets can be reduced to the supplemental amounts alone, with the savings used to fund the UBI. Additional funding can come from phasing out the $100 trillion in tax credits that go overwhelmingly to taxpayers with incomes far above the poverty line. And yes, we’d probably still have to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans. But, as with the payroll taxes that fund Social Security, we’d know exactly where those taxes are going—to eliminate poverty.

Many on the right object to redistribution on any terms, but as Sawicky notes some on the right see UBI as the form of redistribution least disruptive to the market, and so prefer it to minimum wages, closed union shops, and employment stimulus programs that favor certain industries over others. This “market efficiency” aspect of a UBI could be the key to a bargain between the left and the right to guarantee all Americans economic security. It would be ironic if it turned out that the left was more attached to a punitive and stigmatizing welfare state than the right.

 

This article was written by Almaz Zelleke.