How BC Trimmed 107,000 People from Welfare Rolls
Some got jobs. Red tape, death likely knocked out far more.
It was almost like Dave Nash was trying to prove Premier Gordon Campbell wrong. Nash, an affable Victoria activist, was a long-term welfare recipient who was expected to work. But he didn't leave welfare for a job. In October, 2003, Nash died at the age of 55.
Campbell and a succession of human resources ministers under him during the BC Liberals’ first mandate - Murray Coell, Stan Hagen and Susan Brice - have bragged that the rapidly shrinking welfare caseload is a result of a booming economy and people moving off welfare and into jobs.
But as it turns out, Nash wasn't the only person to leave the welfare rolls via the morgue.
The month he died, he was just one of 161 people who went out that way, according to documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. Between June 2002 and January 2005, a period of 32 months, 6,065 people on welfare died.
(To put that in perspective, in 2003, the latest for which statistics are available, 443 people reportedly died in traffic accidents in the province.)
For comparison, during that period, 37,404 people left welfare by Campbell's preferred route, because they obtained employment. Put another way, for roughly every six people on welfare who got a job, one died.
Reasons for welfare deaths not tracked
While the number of deaths may sound shockingly high, perhaps more surprising is that the ministry does not keep track of why people die while on welfare.
So what happened to those 6,065 welfare recipients who died? Did they freeze to death? Have heart attacks? Kill themselves? Starve? Nobody knows.
A health ministry spokesperson says, "It's not part of the vital statistics database . . . We track deaths but not people's income status associated with it." The vital statistics office does keep track of what people who have died did for a living, but there is nowhere in their documents to indicate whether a person was on welfare or receiving income assistance.
An official with the B.C. coroners service says it doesn't gather information about employment or income assistance in its record of death investigations
The minister for employment and income assistance, Claude Richmond, who has been in his post for less than three months, will be "out of town" until late August and not reachable for comment, says ministry spokesperson Richard Chambers.
One thing the ministry does keep a close eye on is the caseload statistics, which show the number of people in the province who are surviving on welfare each month. The ministry is behind schedule posting caseload statistics, but Chambers says that when they are updated they will show that in June, 2005, there were 145,079 people surviving on welfare. That's down by 1,419 from May, and by over 107,000 from when the Liberals took power in June, 2001. And more specifically, in four years, he says, the "expected to work" category for people who are required to look for a job has declined by 78 percent.
Turning off the tap
Despite claims that everyone is working, it has been unclear why the numbers are dropping. A government attempt to distribute "exit surveys" showing what people are doing six months after they leave welfare was abandoned after it was pointed out that the surveyors couldn't find the majority of the people for whom they were looking.
In a report on welfare-to-work programs commissioned by the province and released August 3, Victoria researchers Peter Adams and Cathy Tait state as fact "that the [B.C. Employment and Assistance] Expected to Work caseload has been declining sharply over the last two years because of changes in government policies with respect to eligibility and benefits."
Researchers like Seth Klein, the director of the BC office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, have suspected for some time that changes the Liberals made to welfare eligibility requirements in June, 2002, are having the effect of shutting people out at the entrance. Or as Bruce Wallace, a researcher with the Vancouver Island Public Interest Research Group, says, when looking at whether the system as a whole is working, "Caseload decline is not necessarily a good measure. It doesn't necessarily mean people are moving into work . . . It's also because people are not able to get onto welfare."
Most people who collect welfare do so only for a short time, so there is a constant flow off the caseload. When the ministry tightens the eligibility requirements, as it did in 2002, it has the effect of closing a tap so that those who leave are not replaced.
‘No case made’
There are a variety of reasons why they are shut out. The ministry provided a table showing the number of times different codes for "no case made" were entered in the ministry's computer system between June 2002 and January 2005. They include having the wrong immigration status (13), not providing a social insurance number (23), not showing identification (10), living on an aboriginal reserve (18) and being in prison or a half-way house (22).
Four codes were entered for "client has disposed of available assets without due consideration." The code for "quit/fired/refused employment" came up 54 times. Fifty people were denied welfare because they were students in secondary or post-secondary school and 175 were out of luck because they were under 19 years old.
A number were also affected by employment requirements. In November, 2003, workers stopped using the code "non-compliance—job search", but before then it was used 111 times. In the same month they began using "fails to meet employment obligations", which had been entered just 20 times by January, 2005.
The first codes for not meeting the Liberals’ controversial independence test appear in October, 2002. In the following months it was entered 764 times. Under the rule, which is unique to BC, a person applying for welfare has to prove they have made $7,000 a year in the past two years. The independence code was used twice as often as the code for "income in excess", which came up 356 times, and more than three times as often as the code for "assets in excess", which came up 229 times.
Given what we know about the number of people who seek welfare, the total number of codes entered seems suspiciously low. In a given month, like January, 2005, for instance, just 30 "no case made" codes were entered. A note cautions that more than one code may be applied to each file: "the total number of files closed is always less than the total number of NCM codes used in any given month."
Do that few people really apply?
The explanation seems to lie in what is counted as an "application". In 2002, the Liberals introduced a three-week wait period between when people make a "pre-application" and when they go through the full application procedure. Clearly the wait period has had an effect. The ministry's Chambers explains that many people don't return after that period. "In some cases, files aren't even opened," he says.
In February, Monday Magazine reported that in each month since the Liberals changed the rules, over 3,000 British Columbians who filled out a pre-application form never received help. The ministry provided the numbers in response to a freedom of information request. Between June, 2002, and September, 2004, a total of 206,759 people filled out "pre-application" forms because they were seeking assistance. Over that same period a total of 122,361 people completed the application process and began receiving welfare payments.
In other words, 84,000 people, or about four out of 10, who filled out a pre-application form did not get help. Now it appears they didn't even complete the application process.
Asked about people who pre-apply then don't come back after three weeks, Chambers says, "If they don't come back it's because they no longer require income assistance. Their financial circumstances have changed." They may have found a job, he says, or moved back into a parent's home. "In any case they're in a different position . . . than they were when they first came in."
Opening the drain
Many of the codes that are used for denying people help are also applied to people who are already receiving welfare payments. And there are others, such as "person deceased" that only get applied to people already on the rolls. In all there are 44 different codes, and a note says that for each time a case is closed up to six codes may be entered.
EAWs entered the code for "no response to cheque hold or letter" a total of 50,850 times, many more than they entered a code saying someone got a job. Another 5,865 were for "cheque returned, no client contact." And yet another 18,267 were automatically closed by the ministry's computer system, which ministry spokesperson Chambers explains is usually because they've been asked to pick up a cheque at a welfare office and haven't come in.
The code for "moved out of province" got entered 6,325 times. A return to secondary or post-secondary school factored in the closing of 5,854 cases. A stay in prison or half-way house was involved in 1,955 closures. Other codes cover people having too much income, having too many assets, being under 19 years old, living on an aboriginal reserve or not being Canadian. The code for "Quit/Fired/Refused employment" got entered 651 times.
A total of 6,059 entries were made for "refused request for information."
"Sometimes they do quite a financial audit when you're applying," says Sue Hendricks, an income assistance advocate with Victoria's Together Against Poverty Society. It's normal for the workers to ask for an income tax return and bank statements, she says. Other times they want things that are more difficult to get, such as income tax returns going back three years, older bank statements, credit card receipts or banking information for the applicant's roommates.
For people with disabilities, she says, there is a 23-page booklet that needs to be filled out by a doctor. It requires a great deal of care, she adds. "It's very difficult to pass that one."
A few other numbers show how policies introduced by the B.C. Liberals in 2002 were used to cut people off. The code for "non-compliance—job search" got entered 2,097 times, but the last time was in November 2003. In that same month, ministry workers began entering the code for "non-compliant with employment plan." By January 2005, little more than a year later, they would have used it 2,723 times.
‘A very arbitrary rule’
Hendricks says many of the people she's seen since starting at TAPS in March have lost welfare payments because of not doing a job search or complying with an employment plan. There was one client, for instance, who was supposed to go to the John Howard Society for job training. "He missed only one appointment and he was cut off." A single mom with three kids, including a 21-year-old daughter with developmental challenges and two who were younger, faced a similar situation. She was in a job program for women with barriers to employment, but "She missed appointments because her daughter was sick . . . She just felt she needed to be there for this person, and she got cut off." Eventually the ministry put her back on, but not before causing a great deal of stress.
Hendricks also remembers a woman with two kids under six who was expected to work. "I had a woman who had children but she didn't have daycare but she had to go on a job search," she says. "She wanted to do a job search," she adds, but it didn't make sense to drag the children around to do it.
Finally, "does not meet 2-year independence test", which requires a person to show they've earned at least $7,000 a year in the previous two years, first came up as a reason for a case being closed in October 2002. It has since been used 2,812 times. "The people who are having trouble with it are of course young people. And immigrants," says Hendricks.
"It's a very arbitrary rule," says VIPIRG's Wallace, who has been researching why people are denied welfare. "The problem with the test is it's actually denying financial assistance to people who are in dire need . . . It disregards that person's emergency."
When Murray Coell was the human resources minister, he argued the rule is about breaking the cycle of welfare dependence and forcing people to become self-sufficient. Wallace says, "I don't think it really is an effective way to meet the ministry's goal of helping people find jobs." He thinks there's another agenda: "It's expressly made to deny young folks welfare."
And it has another effect, he says. "It also acts as a disincentive to apply. . . There are obviously many people who know they can't apply because they don't have two-year independence."
There's been a fair bit of publicity around the independence test, he says, but there has been little about the exemptions to it. Many don't know the test doesn't apply in a number of situations, including when they have been in jail for six months, are leaving an abusive relationship or are in emergency need. Even when a person applies for welfare, he says, the worker they deal with may or may not offer information about the exemptions.
The result, he says, is a system that does a poor job at what it's supposed to do, providing financial assistance to people who are in dire need.
Ministry spokesperson Richard Chambers sees it very differently: "The system of income assistance we have here is working and more resources are going to the people who need them most."
Welfare payments to rise?
There are stories circulating among welfare advocates that the ministry is going to raise the rates soon. There's no question that's necessary. As TAPS' Hendricks says, "No one can live on $510 a month in Victoria."
But to fix the system, to get it back to where it is a reliable safety net for people in need, the government has to do a lot more than raise the rates. Dropping the two-year independence test and stream-lining the bureaucratic application process would be a good place to start.
Andrew MacLeod is a frequent contributor to The Tyee and a staff writer for Monday Magazine in Victoria where a version of this article also runs today. His previous Tyee articles on welfare issues include:
Libs' Welfare-to-Jobs Program a Bust, Reveals Delayed Report Welfare's New Era: Survival of the Fittest
Where Did All the Welfare Cases Go?
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
- Shadow Workers of the World, Revolt!
- How First Nations Are Gearing Up for Legal Battle Against Gateway
- Bad Apple
- Economist Calls Gateway Pipeline an Inflationary 'Threat'
- Bow Down Canadians, Corporations Are King
- UK urges quick completion of Canada-EU free trade agreement
- Tides Canada: Let's Have Open, Honest Debate about Our Energy Future
- Is Canada Ignoring Signs of a Coming Economic Collapse?
- No Way, YVR!
- My Kodak Moment
- Eleven Oily Questions for Every MP
- How First Nations Are Gearing Up for Legal Battle Against Gateway
- We'll Frack Alberta's Next Election, Vow Landowners
- Economist Calls Gateway Pipeline an Inflationary 'Threat'
- Is Canada Ignoring Signs of a Coming Economic Collapse?
- View from the Reichstag
- Shadow Workers of the World, Revolt!
- Bow Down Canadians, Corporations Are King
- Reality Check for Europe Bashing Republicans
- Tides Canada: Let's Have Open, Honest Debate about Our Energy Future
- How First Nations Are Gearing Up for Legal Battle Against Gateway
- Turning Turtle in Bangkok
- My Kodak Moment
- Where Can You Go for a Real Movie Experience Anymore?
- Bad Apple
- Libs Threaten Hard Won Logging Agreements: Simpson
- Catalyst Paper says one union at Crofton mill voted down new labour agreement
- Market for Enbridge's Gateway Pipeline Remains Murky
- A Tour of Duty in BC's Poverty 'War Zone'
- Tides Canada: Let's Have Open, Honest Debate about Our Energy Future
47
Login or register to post comments
jesterjogger
6 years ago
Comments on "How BC Trimmed 107,000 People from Welfare Rol
This comment has been removed for containing defamitory content.
Tyee Site Manager
Mel from Calgary
6 years ago
Apparently the BC government plan has two benefits. E.G. Dave Nash mentioned in the article, he got off the welfare rolls and is now going to save medicare dollars by dying at such a young age.
This is the ultimate for the neo-cons who believe the poor deserve to be poor.
Steve P
6 years ago
Without downplaying the mortality rate of people on welfare since the rules changed under the provincial Liberals, it would be very interesting to compare the June 2002 - Jan 2005 mortality rate with the mortality rate for the previous decade.
Has the mortality rate for people on welfare increased since the changes were made?
If so, that would be an interesting story that could point to how more recent policy changes are correlated with increased mortality.
JIm
6 years ago
What investigative journalism. People on welfare are dying and it's the direct fault of the Liberals. Yet no info to back up that claim.
This is propaganda at its finest. Point 1 - Can you show a long term chart that shows a dramatic increase in so called "welfare deaths". If you cannot than this article is a complete joke.
Secound, and you admit this, you don't know how or why these people died.
Without those two important facts this is just a plain piece of propaganda. How can you write an article like this missing two of the most important facts?
And I hate to break it to you but if you stay on welfare your whole life you'll be poor your whole life. So called Neo-cons want people to work to get out of poverty and feel good about themselves. But I guess people working is a horrible thing to hope for. Keep them on welfare and in poverty for ever!!!!!!! Ya, that's the way to go.
How do you suggest the "poor" get "rich" while at the same time not working? I would really like to hear this one.
skeptikool
6 years ago
Bureaucrats are a seperate breed. Whether in the Welfare Dept, Medical services or law enforcement they need only sit on their hands to thrive in their jobs.
As far as mainstream media is concerned we will get titbits between elections but, investigative journalism? Dreamer!
Crass
6 years ago
JIm - Neo-Cons want people to work so they don't have to themselves. Share/profit value increases for those shareholders and owners of firms that can diminish costs by lowering wages (i.e. the $6.00 per/hr/ 'Training Wage'), tearing up union contracts, forcing people off welfare, et al.
This enables shareholders and other parisites of our capitalist system to spend most of there time pursuing recreational activities.
StanM.
6 years ago
While this is strictly annecdotal, since 2001 I have noticed a very definite trend in increased numbers of homeless people, transients and panhandlers in the Metro Vancouver area. I have noticed this is neighbourhoods that have never had to experience it. I have to think that in many or most cases, this is where those who have been unable to access welfare are ending up.
I really have to pity people like poor Jim in the earlier post. He seems to have a what's mine is mine attitude and by god everyone should be able to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Well, I have news for you not everyone can. I would agree that there are those who take advantage of the system where they can. But I would suggest that in business and all facets of life that is true as well. It is human nature, to survive however we can.
While I am not a practising Christian, I was certainly raised with those values. I was raised to believe that it was and is good and proper to assist those WHO CANNOT ASSIST THEMSELVES. Here we live in one of the most prosperous countries in the World and we seem reluctant to open our wallets for those few extra dollars it would take to help those who need it the most. What a travesty! What a crime against Canadian and British Columbian humanity!
And Jim, it does not matter whether it is one, two or a thousand people who may have died being unable to access the system. Even just one fallen through the cracks is a crime and a tragedy. So, Jim, tell me where is your humanity. If it is just what is mine is mine, then I feel sorry for you but I still hope that you never have to find out what it is like to fall through the cracks. It's not a very pleasant place and not likely that you would survive very long.
asvelte275
6 years ago
I remember that 23 page application for the mentally ill. I`d call it cruel and unusual punishment for being non-functional. It filled people with despair and yes there were suicides over it. I`ve tried - in my own mind - to define fascism and the singular feature I`ve found is lack of compassion. That`s why G.W. has no problem sending ill-equipped troops to Iraq. He doesn`t waste time thinking about humanity and it`s associated suffering. Gordo has a similar view of success. May none of you ever break down. It`s an ugly world sometimes.
skeptikool
6 years ago
Is the B.C. Government collaborating with sleazy employers? A letter writer today might lead one to believe such a possibility.
Headed "B.C.'s workfare not working" the letter tells of two young people employed by a direct-sales agency. At the end of their three-month probationary period they were given an impossible sales quota and were fired when unable to meet it - immediately prior to their UIC eligibility.
The two were left without income, job benefits or recourse to return to welfare, the letter reports.
The up-side is that it will be make-work for some if this pair feel forced to turn to crime in order to survive.
Grumpy
6 years ago
Starve the poor to death, a lovely Campbell Liberal philosophy. Most of our chronic welfare types, suffer from other major afflictions, including mental illness and drug addiction. So simple and cost effective to have the poor just die away. In one of the most affluent countries, that we let this happen only shows how sick our society is.
Evil is, as evil does and BC politicians are some of the most evil around, yet they claim that being elected they can do as they damn well please, because it is democracy.
God help us, well no, becuase most of the neocons and politicos go to church and some how absolve themselves of this horror. Shame on the churches, shame on us, shame on everyone.
crh
6 years ago
Tyee, could we please have an article on corporate welfare? I hear it is increasing at an alarming rate...
jesterjogger
6 years ago
The tyee removed my remark at the top for it's supposed defamatory content. What they don't know is that I once fell thru the cracks and had to contend with abject poverty. My climb from this precarious situation was slow and difficult but also invaluable in that my perspective on this and other social issues was forever changed.
Once you have, for whatever reason, ended up on welfare it is profoundly difficult to escape. Finding a decent place to live, enough food to eat let alone getting around with one-zone trips costing 2 dollars(almost half of one days living allotment)for the chance at landing a menial, low-paying job is a soul-destroying grind. It is possible to escape but they make it very difficult.
Meanwhile one must endure the pyschological landscape of a city where it seems to be fashionable to advertise, in the most vulgar way, one's wealth and status.
At some point the grotesque inequities (and numerous other failings) of the capitalist system are going to cause it's destruction.
This can be a planned transition in which a more humane and truly sustainable societal model emerges or it can be a Margaret Atwood novel.
Our own choice for this future is reflected in the politicians we elect and the way we treat the most vulnerable people of our society.
redrivergirl
6 years ago
I think any vulnerable person in BC, either through health, or circumstance has had an increase in mortality under the BC Liberal neo-cons.
I listened to Abbott lie about MSP yesterday. He said the service was poor before maximus, but neglected to tell the truth which is that as soon as they came to power they let go of too many employees and shut MSP offices which created a crisis.
One day we will see some of this gov't arrested and jailed for corporate crime. I really believe that. Well, anyone with half a brain knows that.
The tide has already changed in the US and we are not far behind.
Ron Erwin
6 years ago
The tide indeed has changed in the US. A wave of conservative philosophy is coming here soon. Learn to surf the wave or you will drown.
I know you are already all wet.
Mel from Calgary
6 years ago
Ron we can all see that U.S. social programs have created third world conditions in their greatest cities. The rest lock themselves away in fear of the poor either in their houses or gated communities.
What a wonderful cohesive society.
The wave of conservative philosophy you talk about will not happen here because we can see from here the neo-con philosophy doesn't work.
The various privatisations and de-regulations have not worked e.g.Both Air Canada and Pacific Western Airlines were well run crown corporations, since privatised PWA turned into Canadian Airlines and bankrupt, Air Canada privatised with no dept and an infusion of taxpayers cash is struggling for it's life.
For de-regulation we can look to Alberta's attempt at electrical de-regulation, all this did was double the price for consumers and just a few weeks ago Ralph Klein's government admitted failure and decided not to proceed further.
So Ron there are two things that will hinder the right-wing. The first is our parliamentry system where governments have to explain themselves and actions. The second is people can gain information from the internet and avoid the main-stream press.
Name
6 years ago
Well said, StanM -- your thoughts were a welcome contrast to some of the creepier comments above.
If welfare systems should never be designed to create a culture of dependency, most would also agree that welfare systems should not be designed with the sole purpose of simply cutting spending either.
We'll never create the perfect system that's impervious to abuse, with just the right amount of money invested and every penny spent wisely. But that doesn't detract from the valid goals of welfare (successful citizens helping those less able to help themselves) and it doesn't mean we should abandon those goals, as MacLeod's research suggests.
What I found most disturbing about the system MacLeod described is how deliberately and expertly it has been crafted to deliver the illusion that we are providing a sensible safety net, with our tax dollars being wisely spent to help people back on their feet, when in fact nothing of the kind is happening in most cases.
If the goal of the system really is to help the neediest get back on their feet, surely the system would have a strong emphasis on identifying barriers, people falling through the cracks, etc. But there's no apparent interest in what happened to those who went missing after pre-applying, to those who were refused, who disappeared, who died. Instead, everything seems designed to create the illusion that no one needs help, which is entirely contradictory to the supposed mandate.
The main objective now seems to be: How can we turn our backs on as many people as possible to contain costs, and how can we do it in a way that best hides their suffering from public view.
Name
6 years ago
Clarification:
...and it doesn't mean we should abandon those goals, as MacLeod's research suggests is now the case
Bobb999
6 years ago
OFF TOPIC : LORD BLACK'S DAY's #ed? Red river girl: Your comment about BC Libs and corporate crime, brings to mind this new story:
Lord Conrad Black's chief partner in (...),David Radler,has just been charged by US authorities with fraud relating to Hollinger Int'l.Radler is said to be cooperating and intends to plead guilty. The thought is that by gaining Radler's cooperation, US justice will have an easier time building a case against "Napoleon" himself! Don't be surprised to see Black charged shortly.
Consider this: The RCMP spent a month investigating Hollinger's activities in Canada (the related company Hollinger Inc's head office is in Vancouver, I believe, still).
RCMP concluded there was insufficient evidence to charge anyone! Yet US investigators have
Radler intending to plead guilty to multiple charges, involving diverting large amounts of monies illegally,for personal gain.
If Black does get charged, he will likely face extradition from England, his main base.
I can't help comparing this story to the Emery case.In the Hollinger case, the US is likely going after some of those who deserve to be "got" - much more so than Emery, who gives his money away and pays his taxes!
It looks like Canada was prepared to let the Hollinger gang off completely, as far as criminal charges go.Apparently,one of the US charges against Radler is that he deprived Canadian taxpayers of monies due them! Yet Canada so far is actively cooperating with the US to nail Emery on draconian US drug charges. The contrast raises many questions.
I'll bet Gordo was a social hobnobber with Lord Black on some of those business trips to Hollinger Inc. in Vancouver. They're both little would-be-Napoleons, afterall, aren't they?
(Personally,I'd not be displeased to see Barbara "Babs" Amiel follow the rest of the H. gang to their deserved end).
Mel from Calgary
6 years ago
Well said Name. Talking about welfare dependancy. It is the rich and powerful who now cry-the-blues when their welfare programs are cut.
Bobb999
6 years ago
OFF TOPIC: FURTHER on TUBBY BLACK & CO.:
David Radler lives in Vancouver!
Gee, if only he wasn't cooperating with US authorities, we could have had a "race" going, for
"entertainment": Which Vancouverite would get extradited first (or at all) to face the US Justice System (so called), Radler or Emery?
nemesis
6 years ago
What a completely ridiculous article. What was the point of it anyway? Should we let long-term welfare recipients continue to collect, even if they are capable of working? What a crock! Welfare should be reserved for those who are truly in need and for no one else. This country has been fostering a welfare culture since Trudeauization began in the late 60's and it has been counterproductive. In fact if the welfare-culturists were cut off completely there would be more resources for the truly needy.
sdgreen
6 years ago
The thing is nobody seems to have an answer to the welfare question. The NDP threw mega dollars at the problem during their ten year rule, and nothing really has changed.
It appears we will always have folks that are addicted to drugs or who otherwise medically/mentally incapable of surviving in our society. For those with disabilities where work is difficult or impossible we should take care of them and I note that the Liberals have indeed increased the amount they recieve a tad.
The question that has to be determined is where a person is employable. It seems that job training is only successful for a small percentage. Why?
No doubt one of the problems is the available job market where likely these folks can only find entry level or short term employment.
It would be interesting to look at past experience and education of those on welfare, then focus energies towards what these folks are actually capable of. Perhaps we need to set aside a percentage of public service jobs for these folks to gain experience and build their self esteem?
The single mother problem is another huge barrier, but what do we do, set up 'state daycare' centres? Do we simply take the kids away for a time while mom gets on her feet? Do we demand that mom's parents take on responsibility?
The article above answers none of these questions nor does it provide any comparative numbers and therefore is only a whiners digest that seems politically motivated. Yet we have successive governments that have tried to solve this issue and none have really been successful.
So what is the answer?
ursus
6 years ago
the NDP threw mega dollars because they had mega people to support, remember klein and harris giving their welfare recipients one way tickets to collect welfare in B.C. When the NDP tried to stop this by bringing in a residence rule of three months or six can't remember which, the feds with held transfer payments to B.C. and I for one have a HUGE RESENTMENT towards klein harris and chretien for this crime against B.C. taxpayers! This is the right wing for you!
People like the american irwin think they are never going to need welfare, I know some one who survived two hitches in vietnam and survived, then a year after he got home destroyed a disc in his lower back to make a long story short he is unable to work and is totally dependent on the system, and you know how well we are caring for him.
There are many diseases and injuries that can disable us in a heart beat unable to work or care for ourselves or crippled in the extreme, not everyone has family who would care for us or stick around when the going gets tough! Whats the old saying but for the grace of god there go I well for someone on welfare it is but for the grace of gordo and well all know how much grace he has!
The answer green is show a little compasion and quit thinking of people on welfare as bums, most of them would love to get off welfare, many should be in institutions like the ones the socreds shut down so they could develop the land. Kicking these people out on the street was a crime against humanity in my opinion.
Why don't you try surviving on 512 dollars a month and see how you like it with everyone and their dog calling you a bum and mentally spitting on you as they pass by! Most people take better of their animals and have more compassion for them, then we do our less fortunates in society and that includes the mentally ill from what I have seen!
Lets put it this way gordo wasted as much as 24 million on a web portal while he was slashing welfare, how many people could we feed and cloth with 24 million? paul martin gave a 4.6 billion dollar tax break to the rich and corporations the first january he was in power, how many poor people could we feed or city infrastucture could we provide for with that much money? gordo gave a 2 billion a year tax break to his rich masters how many poor could we feed, schools could we fund properly hospitals etc... you get my point!
We sent a huge contract over seas to build ferries, money that could have been spent here providing employment and training for locals keeping the money in B.C. but no the idiotology of the right sent the work away, well I don't have to support local business either! I do not buy anything from a business with a chamber sticker on their door!
How many spin off jobs would have been created, trucking, supplies from toilet paper to welding rods equipment etc all bought locally! Yeh stupid is as stupid does! And in my opinion stupid is as follows blindly along with head firmly buried!
Name
6 years ago
SDgreen, you raise some of the important issues that must be faced in creating an effective welfare system, even though there are no easy, cut-and-dried solutions.
For example, women end up as dependent single moms for all sorts of reasons--we can blame them, their parents, their partners, faulty birth control, marriage breakdown, poor education or socioeconomic status... The list can go on and on and the point is that it's going to happen, one way or another, so we have to help people deal with it when it does if they can't help themselves.
Did any young girl ever look in the mirror and aspire to be a welfare mom when she grew up? Not likely. Is it fun once she ends up there? Hardly. Is the thought of trying to make it on her own an even scarier prospect? Probably, especially without quality daycare, training and support, and especially if she expects that she'll just end up rarely seeing her kids, working long hours at dead-end jobs that will never let her escape the poverty grind.
The people who get off welfare as quickly as they can are the ones who have hope and confidence that there is a brighter alternative future waiting for them out there. So an effective system must be able to provide hope and self-confidence. That's not easy to do--it doesn't come from coddling and it doesn't come from slamming doors, and it takes more money and thought and effort than the simplistic solutions that we always tend to favour.
herbie
6 years ago
How they trimmed the welfare rolls where I live was by closing the office and moving clients to the next town. The bus only runs once in the am and back in the pm. They made appointments for ten minutes before the bus got there and told claimants they didn't even make the effort to get there, so no money, come back next month.
The guy in the wheelchair was told he only got 'transit' reimbursement $2 and something for the bus that costs $18 each way.
Now the few left that are 'stuck' in town simply steal things from the rest of us, and aren't a BOTHER to welfare....
spanky
6 years ago
Hey I know, I guess just maybe that spam and dog food may not be the healthiest foods around? I know that for 5 hundred a month people do not eat well. Or maybe all the welfare bums are out growing B.C.'s #1 cash crop, Marijuana. I hear that pays well.
Martin
6 years ago
At it's peak in the 1990's, close to 10 percent of our population was receiving social assistance.
The poverty industry fails to note that the downward trend in people receiving social assistance started in the late 1990's under the NDP. (Joy McPhail was minister, and she was very proud of how many people got off the rolls while she was in office.) Even the NDP realized that the old system of simply handing out money, no questions asked, wasn't working.
Many people who have come to see welfare as an entitlement have had a really hard time accepting the new reality. Judging by his past writings, our author is among those.
deeby
6 years ago
You mean that wave that Harper and the Calgary school are supposed to be the harbingers of?
Wake up Ron. The reason that reform/alliance/conservative support has peaked is that they are fundamentally out of step with the values of the majority of Canadians.
We're all admittedly a bit greedy, and the dim amoung us will vote solely for our economic self-interest, (e.g. the last BC election) at times, but every time one of your much-vaunted conservatives opens their mouth on matters of social policy, they end up shooting themselves in the foot.
No amount of desperate trolling on the Tyee is going to change that. You guys are pathetic anachronisms....
Bobb999
6 years ago
deeby: Good shot.
The US conservative "wave" may also have peaked. It certainly has in Canada with Harper's dead ducks gang.
US public weariness with Iraq and a rejuvenated anti-war movement has dashed any hopes of the neo conservatives' campaign of "preemptive action",
and its campaign to remodel (first) the Middle East (later the world)in Uncle Sam's image. The arm chair thinkers who thunk up this impractical fantasy are now chastened and have had their wings clipped (by public opinion and by relities), having left a long trail of dead bodies in the wake of their failure.
Instead of a US conservative faction extending influence and power in the world, an effective backlash has developed.The US is increasingly isolated. The Iraq gov't has formed new alliances with one of the "axis of evil" trio, Iran. Iran has formed alliances with China and Russia. Russia and China are closer aligned with each other.
Latin American countries are aligning with powers other than the US, eg. Argentina with China.The US is alienating Latin American allies by cutting aid to those who dared to refuse to vote in the UN to exempt the US from World Court jurisdiction for crimes against humanity. This will just open such countries up to forming alliances with China/Russia.
The great neocon dream of globalization, where the transnational corporation shall inherit the earth is facing growing opposition, and not just from dreadlocked anarchists! Europeans' rejection of the EU constitution is one example
of people refusing to give up sovereignty and jurisdiction of their country over to outside bodies imposing rules regulating their economies. These are votes against globalization.
In US polls Bush is at an all time low in Americans' minds on trustworthiness, leadership, foreign policy.
The '08 US election could very well see an end to the neocon experiment of the Bush regime.
I'm betting a moderate Democrat president will
signal a turning of the tide away from conservatism. We could even see a preview of this turning tide in Congressional elections in '06
In Canada, Harper's gang failed to be able to capitalize on the worst gov't scandal in 125 years! And Ron thinks conservatism is on the ascendency in Canada? I think Ron must dwell in some other Canada in some parallel universe!
There is no evidence that right wing ideology is growing in Canada or anywhere else.Even when Harper was momentarily high in the polls, it had little to do with right wing ideology gaining traction. It had everything to do with anger toward the Libs. In fact the evidence seems to point to the tide turning away from conservatism, and US dominance, worldwide. It won't be long till Asia, not the US, dominates the world economy. US bombs and missile power won't be of much help to the US as it becomes 2nd, 3rd or 4th fiddle in world economic power.
Demand for resources should keep Canada afloat
even as the US sinks.
StanM.
6 years ago
To SDGreen and Name;
You have both highlighted some excellent points in dealing with the system. There is not one specific solution except perhaps that the system itself needs to be re-vamped from a system of handing out the dole to something more constructive like actually helping people with a proper assistance infrastructure getting people to the resources they need to get their lives back on stream and to become productive citizens again without the stigma of being a ward of the state.
Some of the novel ideas might include actually having social workers do what they were trained to do rather than just having to administer the political flavour of the month.
I certainly agree there are those who will always abuse the system in some way, they can certainly be routed out by the social workers, if they are allowed to properly do their jobs with real guidelines that allows them a degree of flexibility in determining the best way to assist the recipient and their families (please note I refuse to use the current vernacular "customer/client").
Regardless of their circumstances for being on welfare, all recipients need to be treated with dignity and respect. They need to know that the sytem is there to help them rebuild what they lost. But the system must always be mindful that there are those that we may never be able to get back to being productive citizens and we have to make allowances for that.
I think a few of us may remember the old movies where the family would fall on hard times and the social workers would show up at the door and basically abscond with the children. I think most of us were appalled by those scenes which for the most part were a very accurate portrayal of the times. Today, well things are decidedly different. Now the families fall on hard times, they break up and the kids end up on the street with little or no potential for recovery. Have we progressed?
I recall a time in this province when we did have a system of referral, when we had mental health units at the community level to assist youth, adults and families going through tough times. Sometimes, all that is required for individuals and families to move forward is a sympathetic ear and/or some sort of counselling. And yes, it should be funded by the taxpayers. Not everything can be done on a cost/study analysis, although I suspect that if one was done, it would show the benefits to our society far outweighs the cost.
don quixote
6 years ago
While BC appears to be starving its poor to death, the government of Venezuela has taken a different approach. Check this out at http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/639/639p12b.htm.
Ron Erwin
6 years ago
The Conservative Party of Canada has raised 10 times the amount of members and money than either the NDP ( who have been 1/5 supported forever, and not about to change anytime soon ) and the Liberals in the past 6 months. Whatch out for this to manifest itself into a Government very soon. Also, I think I will puke the next time I see the word neo-con posted. I prefer consevationalist. Please note the first two syllables of the word CONSERVative.
Name
6 years ago
Well said, StanM
Ron, "conservative" as a political label has its origins in Old England, among the landed gentry fighting to protect their inherited wealth and status and the feudal systems that supported their privileged perch, high above the upstart masses with their radical Liberal ideas of democracy and equal opportunity.
Surprisingly little has changed, apparently...
deeby
6 years ago
Interesting how Ron abstracts from fundraising and party membership, and assumes that electoral success will follow.
How much of that money came from corporations? And how many of those new members are fundamentalists, acting in concert to engineer a take-over and expunge the last vestiges of Red Toryism from the party policy book?
You guys will hit the wall in Ontario yet again, resulting in a Liberal minority/slim majority. The knives will come out for Harper, Peter McKay won't be able to withstand the fundamentalist tide, (gotta love one member, one vote), and you guys will get to endure a few years with another Stockwell Day as leader.
Enjoy riding that wave Ron....
StanM.
6 years ago
Hi Deeby and Name;
Well, I am going to wade into your current discussion with Ron with some trepidation. Having been involved intimately with politics in the recent past and hopefully I still have some understanding about what Ron is alluding to. (please note I do not in anyway endorse his views).
The Conservative Party of Canada today is truly mis-named. More correctly it should be referred to as the Evangelical or Fundamentalist Party of Canada. For many years the evangelical movement in Canada has never really reared its' head above the water line of Canadian politics. It has preferred to work surreptiously in the background. It has NO overriding political beliefs that the majority of Canadians can relate to other than its' misguided biblical interpretations.
The Evangelicals and other fundamentalists had opted to belong to essentially all of the political parties with a view of changing things from within the party structures. I am aware of at least a couple of them holding multiple political party memberships simultaneously and attempting to influence candidate selections especially at the provincial level. Unfortunately, in Canada, unlike the United States there is no system to monitor whether someone is a registered Liberal, Conservative, New Democrat or Bloc member other than their say-so and our belief that most people are honorable in their electorial intentions.
While I would never question their right to participate in the democratic process, I certainly question their ethics. In our province you need only look at how they managed to devastate the BC Social Credit Party to understand how they operate. If the vehicle does not work for you, kill it off and start afresh, in this particular case with the Reform BC Party and other incarnations.
With respect to funding, Deeby, money does indeed secure some form of electoral success. Again, to use the U.S. example, the evangelical movement literally poured millions and millions of dollars into the Bush Campaign which was masterfully manipulated by Karl Rove, who we must all remember is in his own right, a successfull mail marketer. They were able to get to the church members with mass mailings to engender all kinds of unwarranted fear mongering.
Will these dollars cross into Canada? Absolutely, they will and do. These folks are very much afraid of our more liberal democracy here as it flies fully into their faces. They literally cannot abide by the fact that we are as liberally minded as most of Europe. How will the money come? Well, I suspect that a lot will come in through the newly established "Focus on Family" lobby office in Ottawa. A lot already comes in to various churches, including the Roman Catholic and Alliance churches to support their continental aims. This is a religious "Manifest Destiny" policy.
If a Fundamentalist Party is elected in Canada, they will change things to the detriment of millions of Canadians. They have already said so through Ted White (who cost the Conservatives the last election) and Stephen Harper. Both of whom have said or implied they would take dead aim at the Charter and the subsequent legislative changes. They do not care on bit whose lives they trample on.
ursus
6 years ago
I for one will not vote for a neo-con like harper no matter how much money he raises from his corporate masters and americans like ron irwin spew their support! a neo-con is as a neo-con does.
ursus
6 years ago
good points StanM.
StanM.
6 years ago
To Ursus;
You inadvertently identified the one area that the fundamentalists are extremely good at. They identify their vote poll by poll and they make sure they get their voters to the polls. The BC New Democrats I understand do much the same thing. The BC Liberals for all their money seem to have a problem getting their voters out en mass which is amazing to me since they have all the old Socred "On Target" Campaign materials which was a very good campaign training programme.
The biggest plus for the fundamentalists is a low voter turnout because they know who their core voters are and they can get their motivated core voters out to vote which is a real plus in tight ridings.
The obvious message here for the federal Liberals and New Democrats is to better target their votes and get their people to the polls to vote no matter what.
redrivergirl
6 years ago
Ron, the wave has come and is on the way out, despite the high water we are still struggling under via the neo-cons Martin etal, who are dismantling gov't as we speak and liquidating our hard assets of real estate etc. In spite of the minions here in BC who are still acting as if there won't be any accountability.
However, the tide is turned. And, Ron, I am grateful because I understand that this wave also includes environmental toxins which are poisoning, not just liberals, Ron. But, all of us. I was watching the walk for breast cancer on television and thought that until the people also are walking to demand strict regulations and standards cancer will continue to rise.
What is the point 'raising money' while ignoring the root of many cancers. Armstrong would have done well to 'mention' this concern to his new bike buddy, instead of just asking for money.
Welfare is an entitlement of any civil society.
We haven't deteriorated to the point of indifference and hatred to those who haven't the ability to participate in our society yet, no matter what the neo-cons want us to believe to the contrary. And, Ron, the only things neo-cons conserve is their 'wealth'. Of course, most still believe they too will have a piece of that wealth. ha! They actually are spending our future like drunken sailors on shore leave.
ursus
6 years ago
voter apathy certainly is in their favour which I suspect is part of their strategy, annoy people to the point of total disgust and when they have given up on the electoral system get your people motivated and mobile.
The religous right is so hyprocritical hiding behind the bible to control and manipulate the masses getting them all fired up about issues like gay marriage when people are starving on our streets.
duffybear
6 years ago
A few thoughts:
1. The welfare system in BC is so appalling right now that 14 major advocacy organizations in BC launched a complaint to the Ombudsman this spring; the complaint was organized through a group of public interest lawyers. The Office of the Ombudsman is now investigating the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance. There should be a report sometime within the next 6-12 months.
2. The system is so bad that even the welfare workers (who are not social workers, by the way - you only have to have Grade 12 to do the job)are upset by what they see. Many of them find it very demoralizing to have to deny money or benefits to people who are clearly in need, however they have no choice because either legislation or policy dictates they say "no". Hopefully, Bruce Wallace's study (mentioned in the article)will reveal dissenting voices within the Ministry itself.
3. In my work, I sometimes meet people who have come from reasonably well-off backgrounds, but have fallen on hard times. (Often they are women fleeing abusive relationships, or people who have suffered major injury or illness, including mental illness.) They are stunned to realize how harsh the welfare system can be. Believe me - with the way things are, you never want to be on welfare in BC.
jesterjogger
6 years ago
In my case I got laid off from a very hard but decent paying job and eventually wound up on welfare. That was 15 years ago and it is much more difficult now given that bus fares have tripled and god knows what the nominal inflation rate has been over that period for food and shelter etc. etc. This while the nominal welfare rate has actually DECREASED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It was 535/mo when I was on versus 495/mo now!!!
And for blind scrooges like erwin and nemesis I eventually ended up getting a job at a gas station where I worked for a year until a better job became available. (have you ever been in this situation?)I have a university degree in the sciences and I read the job ads in all the papers every day.
I never wanted to be on welfare but when misfortune befell me I found a system designed not to help me on my feet again, where I desperatley wanted to be, but to keep me down and make it nearly impossible for me to escape, like some sort of nightmarish kafkaesque labyrinthe.
If the sinister forces of greed and globalization, aided by the complicit policies of the traitorous and hypocritical politicians forces me into this situation again, I will not hesitate to turn to a life of "grime".
I remember when the yuppie's were up-in-arms because so many people lived in Stanley park and gordo's solution was simply to round them up like animals. Larry Campbell, god bless him, chided back that: "That's ridiculous, we're not going to arrest people just for being poor."
Ironically that fate might actually be better than the current alternative. Atleast they would have a roof over their heads and three meals a day.
redrivergirl
6 years ago
Jester, the three meals per day may hold true until they privatize prisons as they are doing and have done in the US. There, they are not even feeding prisoners three meals. They've cut down to two inferior meals in many private prisons.
Can you believe that it's come to this barbarianism?
Rod Paynter
6 years ago
Someone would do well to learn how to spell "defamatory" (see the first comment). Let pedantry reign!
ursus
6 years ago
hey paynter is this about real people concerned about a tyrant running our Province or a spelling B???
herbie
6 years ago
I won't use the word 'tyrant'when megalomaniac will suffice....
David TCA
6 years ago
I work doing Intake in Community Mental Health. Twice in the last year I have taken referrals for extremely ill individuals who fell off the welfare roles because they could not understand nor manage to comply with the changes at MHR (even the name has changed again). In both cases, they became completely isolated, totally dependent on family and much sicker than should ever happen. It was only when the aging family members' health was compromised that these folks came to our attention. I often wonder how many others are in the same (leaking) boat.