There are many different indicators to measure the health of an economy. One of those measures is the number of families relying on social assistance. Social Assistance is a program funded by provincial governments that is provided to people who do not have the resources to meet basic needs. The focus of this note is on social assistance provided to people who are not prevented by disabilities from gaining employment. People dealing with long term disabilities are granted support through other programs.
ASYLUM CLAIMANTS PROCESSED IN CANADA Number of asylum claims processed in Ontario, Quebec, rest of Canada and the entire country, over the period of 2000 to 2017 Recently, the number of asylum-seekers – people applying for refugee status at the Canadian border (as opposed to individuals claiming refugee status from their country of origin) – has attracted a great deal of media attention. The focus has been on the recent unexpected influx of asylum-seekers crossing the border from the U.S. into Manitoba and Quebec. The federal government has made an assertion that Canada can handle the surge in newcomers. However, it is provincial or municipal governments, and in particular local social agencies, in a municipality in which the claim is being made, that are responsible for allocating the necessary resources to handle the surge in asylumseekers. This is important for understanding the potential impact it may have on the agencies' ability to provide those individuals with the required assistance and other support.
ASYLUM CLAIMANTS PROCESSED IN CANADANumber of asylum claims processed in Ontario, Quebec, rest of Canada and the entire country, over the period of 2000 to 2017Recently, the number of asylum-seekers – people applying for refugee status at the Canadian border (as opposed to individuals claiming refugee status from their country of origin) – has attracted a great deal of media attention. The focus has been on the recent unexpected influx of asylum-seekers crossing the border from the U.S. into Manitoba and Quebec. The federal government has made an assertion that Canada can handle the surge in newcomers. However, it is provincial or municipal governments, and in particular local social agencies, in a municipality in which the claim is being made, that are responsible for allocating the necessary resources to handle the surge in asylumseekers. This is important for understanding the potential impact it may have on the agencies' ability to provide those individuals with the required assistance and other support.
THE TRADE-OFF BETWEEN EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL ASSISTANCE CASELOADS, ALBERTA, 2005-2017As employment falls, social assistance caseloads typically rise. Caseloads have recently increased considerably more than in the past, which may suggest a new trendSocial assistance is part of a social safety net that "catches" individuals who have lost their jobs. In this issue of Social Policy Trends we plot monthly data on the number of employed persons per 100 adults aged 15-64 years, versus the number of social assistance caseloads in the same age bracket, from April 2005 to April 2017. Our attention is restricted to social assistance cases defined by the provincial government as "expected to work (ETW)" cases. Such cases are established for those who are either employable persons temporarily out of work, or adults whose market income is insufficient to meet their basic needs.
Most people with income below Canada's official poverty line avoid homelessness. They do so by making extraordinary efforts to minimize out-of-pocket expenses and so conserve income for rent. These efforts involve moving to less expensive accommodations, living in more crowded housing, forgoing non-necessities, and relying on charities to reduce expenditures on food, clothing, and other necessities. These efforts to minimize expenditures mean that the poverty line is a poor measure of the income required to avoid homelessness. The absence of such a measure means we are unable to determine whether income supports are adequate for keeping people from experiencing homelessness. The Homeless Income Cut Off (HICO) measures the amount of income families and individuals need to minimize their risk of becoming homeless after they have exhausted their own efforts to remain housed. This paper explains how the HICO is calculated and how it can be used to gauge the adequacy of income support policies intended to keep Canadians from becoming homeless. Since income supports and the costs of necessities vary across Canada and over time, this paper presents calculations of the HICO for seven cities (Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal and Halifax) and for eight years (2015–22). The HICO does not describe what people with low-income must do before they receive income assistance. Rather, it shows how bad the affordability crisis is for them — a crisis caused by rising housing costs and food prices, lagging incomes and holes in the social safety net. The calculations show the extent to which Canadians with low income must rely on food banks and other charities to hang on to their housing, a reliance made necessary by income supports that are frequently inadequate for this purpose. The HICO provides policymakers with a gauge against which they can evaluate the adequacy on income supports for preventing homelessness. Income supports need, at the very least, to be sufficient to enable families and individuals to maintain their housing after they have exhausted their own efforts to do so.
Significant numbers of people and families in Calgary face financial challenges that put them at risk of homelessness. The authors first define different levels of risk, in order to focus on people at high risk of slipping into homelessness. The authors assume, based on the findings of previous studies, that people faced with financial hardship make all possible budgetary changes to lower their cost of living and thereby retain housing. These changes include using food banks, relying on charities, eating less nutritious diets, living in more crowded conditions, moving to housing with lower rent and giving up any hope of maintaining what the designers of Canada's poverty line define as a "modest and basic standard of living." The highest risk category comprises those who have exhausted nearly all efforts to maintain their housing and are extremely vulnerable to even minor shocks to income or living costs. Estimating the number of people and households in Calgary at high risk of homelessnessrelies on key assumptions about housing costs, family structure, food budget, and expenditure reduction. The authors show how their estimates of the number of housed people at high riskof homelessness varies by these assumptions. These calculations provide insight into the effects of rent increases and food inflation on the ability of people with very low income to maintain housing. In doing so, they also provide evidence of how relatively small adjustments to income, rent, and food prices can pull people from the brink of homelessness. The estimates indicate that between 102,635 and 124,375 people in Calgary, including both adults and children, were at high risk of homelessness in 2016. The authors indicate they feel comfortable in supporting a number near the midpoint of this range, approximately 115,000 people, as the number of people at high risk of homelessness in Calgary in 2016. This at-risk population lived in approximately 40,000 households. An estimate for 2023 would need to account for higher rents and food prices but also higher incomes relative to what were observed in 2016. While the authors suggests that the at-risk population is likely higher now than it was in 2016, they note that even were this not true, the 2016 estimate of approximately 115,000 people living in 40,000 households ought to be more than enough to spur policymakers into acting. The encouragement to be found in these calculations is that relatively modest policy interventions have large impacts on the size of the population at risk of homelessness. Consistent with research elsewhere, extreme policy interventions are not required to pull large numbers of people from the brink of homelessness. The most important characteristic of these policy interventions is not their size, but simply the fact they are acted upon.
In this note, we provide measures of the effects of high rates of inflation in food pricesand the costs of housing on Canadian households reliant on government-provided income assistance. Inflation puts these households at risk because little of their income is indexed to inflation. That which is indexed to inflation varies by province and by family composition. In most provinces, protection from inflation depends on periodic ad hoc adjustments to income support payments, adjustments that are sometimes separated by many years.A notable exception is Quebec, where nearly full indexation ensures recipients of income support are protected from inflation. In other provinces, the general lack of full indexation means that during periods of inflation, Canadians reliant on social assistance are subjectto two types of risk, one economic and one political. The economic risk is due to the fact inflation threatens to cause them to endure a catastrophic fall in what is already a low standard of living. The political risk arises because in most provinces, whether inflation results in a fall in living standards is entirely dependent upon whether politicians choose to provide periodic, unscheduled increases in social assistance incomes, euphemistically referred to as income "enrichments." With a single stroke of a legislative pen the political risk can be eliminated and the economic risk minimized. The high rates of inflation currently being experienced add urgency to this consideration. We show that deteriorating health, increased reliance on food banks and rising rates of homelessness are just some of the inevitable consequences of delay.
We make use of monthly data describing the number of visits to food banks operated by the Daily Bread Food Bank in Toronto. We identify the extent to which food bank visits may be associated with changes to public policies, to changes in the cost of shelter and to changes in labour market conditions. Our measures of these changes are those that are relevant to individuals and families with limited incomes and limited abilities to borrow or save. We find that the number of visits to food banks is sensitive to measures of all three of these types of changes; food bank visits increase with increases in rent, with falls in the minimum wage and with reductions in the disability benefits available to people requiring social assistance.
In 2018, the federal government coordinated point-in-time counts in 61 Canadian communities. These counts, all conducted over the course of a few nights during the months of March and April, revealed that 25,216 people were experiencing homelessness. Of those, 20,803 slept in emergency shelters while 4,481 slept on the streets, in cars, or in some other unsuitable place. Reviewing the data for 49 of those 61 communities, this paper examines the impact of community-level conditions on the prevalence of homelessness. The structural determinants of both sheltered and unsheltered homelessness are examined. The analysis shows that more expensive low-quality rental units have a strong positive relationship with the numbers of people staying in homeless shelters. A higher percentage of people in a community living in poverty is also related to increased numbers of people having to make use of homeless shelters. Increases in social assistance income, which undoubtedly improved the well-being of recipients, had no significant relationship with the number of people experiencing homelessness. This latter result is consistent with individuals and families with low income having a small income elasticity of housing demand. For these individuals and families, marginal additions to income are first used to relieve constraints on their budgets for food, utilities, and other necessities rather than being used to finance improvements in housing conditions. The fraction of the population that self-identifies as Indigenous is positively related to both sheltered and unsheltered homelessness, a result consistent with claims of discrimination in housing markets. Finally, a milder climate is associated with higher numbers of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness.
These results suggest the most effective policy response to addressing homelessness is to lower the cost of shelter, an outcome best achieved by increasing the supplyof shelter that can be afforded by individuals and families with limited income. Tothis end, public policies directed toward reducing the cost of construction, policiesthat include reviewing density restrictions and land-use regulations and offering tax incentives, can be effective. Preventing the disappearance of single-room occupancy hotels, boarding houses, trailer parks and other forms of housing affordable to people with limited income are other policy responses likely to be associated with decreasesin homelessness. Increasing the stock of government-owned housing is another policy option, one best suited for providing housing for people whose homelessness is caused or exacerbated by disability, mental illness, substance abuse or other health issues requiring other support services. Marginal increases in income support, while important for increasing the well-being of individuals and families with limited income, are unlikely to be associated with decreases in homelessness unless they are sufficiently large to significantly reduce rates of poverty in the community.
This paper discusses and describes measures of poverty and, on the basis of that discussion, proposes a public policy response that more closely and more easily targets income support to where it is most needed and most effective. Our review of poverty measures shows there are many holes that prevent advocates and policy-makers from obtaining a clear picture of who is in poverty and the depth of that poverty. The Market Basket Measure is the most finely tuned to identifying where impoverished families live and that is in large part why it was recently adopted by the federal government to gauge its anti-poverty policies. The government of Alberta, on the other hand, evaluates its policies using a measure of poverty that allows no consideration that costs of living might vary by community. Social assistance is the main policy instrument through which the federal and provincial governments provide assistance to people in need. We show that the growing emphasis of increasing social-assistance support via child benefits provides no increase in support in what has been for some time the majority of social-assistance cases. What's more, despite a great deal of evidence that the cost of meeting basic needs varies widely by community, the amount of assistance provided is the same regardless of where one lives in the province. We propose a modification to how social assistance is provided that makes allowances for the fact poverty is deeper in some parts of the province than others and that provides support to individuals and families whether or not they have children. Our proposal is superior to rent control as a means of dealing with falling housing affordability, removes barriers to people receiving social assistance from moving to seek employment, and has features similar to a guaranteed basic income. It is also inexpensive. We estimate the cost of our proposal to be equivalent to less than one per cent of the provincial health-care budget.
This paper discusses and describes measures of poverty and, on the basis of that discussion, proposes a public policy response that more closely and more easily targets income support to where it is most needed and most effective. Our review of poverty measures shows there are many holes that prevent advocates and policy-makers from obtaining a clear picture of who is in poverty and the depth of that poverty. The Market Basket Measure is the most finely tuned to identifying where impoverished families live and that is in large part why it was recently adopted by the federal government to gauge its anti-poverty policies. The government of Alberta, on the other hand, evaluates its policies using a measure of poverty that allows no consideration that costs of living might vary by community. Social assistance is the main policy instrument through which the federal and provincial governments provide assistance to people in need. We show that the growing emphasis of increasing social-assistance support via child benefits provides no increase in support in what has been for some time the majority of social-assistance cases. What's more, despite a great deal of evidence that the cost of meeting basic needs varies widely by community, the amount of assistance provided is the same regardless of where one lives in the province. We propose a modification to how social assistance is provided that makes allowances for the fact poverty is deeper in some parts of the province than others and that provides support to individuals and families whether or not they have children. Our proposal is superior to rent control as a means of dealing with falling housing affordability, removes barriers to people receiving social assistance from moving to seek employment, and has features similar to a guaranteed basic income. It is also inexpensive. We estimate the cost of our proposal to be equivalent to less than one per cent of the provincial health-care budget.
This briefing note uses a newly completed time series on the government of Alberta's finances to present a broad overview of the government's budgetary choices since fiscal year 1965–66. The note paints a picture using broad strokes that focuses on the government's attempts to deal with volatile energy revenues. It shows that over the past 50 years the government has made a policy choice to allow volatility in energy revenues to create volatility in its budget. This policy choice has resulted in occasional bouts of severe spending contractions and likely encouraged higher rates of spending and lower taxation than would otherwise have been observed. These outcomes are the result of the government failing to heed the advice of economists, namely, to save energy revenues and in this way establish a steady and reliable source of revenue. In the note we describe a number of strategies the government has used over the years to reduce its reliance on energy revenue. Success came only after a dramatic cut to program spending in the mid-1990s. Only during this brief period in the mid-1990s was the government able to fund current expenditures without the need for energy revenues. To use a phrase made popular in the 2015 provincial election campaign, for that brief period in the mid-1990s, the government had managed to climb "off the energy roller-coaster." But it could not stay off, and the government, with the support of voters, returned to a pattern of financing spending growth not with taxation but with energy revenues. At the time of writing this note, the current government is suffering the consequences of a budget based on spending and tax choices that require a heavy reliance on energy revenues to find balance. Getting off the energy roller coaster requires new revenue, cuts to program spending, or some combination of the two. To remain off the roller coaster requires a commitment of the sort previous governments have been unable to stick to.
Defining a government by its finances is a tricky business. Adding to the complexity, governments can change the way they report those finances. This is the case in Alberta where, beginning under former premier Jim Prentice, the government switched from presenting its budgets from a fiscal plan (FP) basis to a consolidated financial (CF) basis. The FP approach did not include most of the financial implications of accounting for the Crown-controlled SUCH sector (school boards, universities and colleges, and health entities). CF-based budgeting now integrates these. The result is that the government now reports revenues and expenditures as being considerably larger than they were previously. This communiqué comes to grips with the changes to accounting methods, by adjusting Alberta's recent budgets, now reported on a CF basis, and makes those methods consistent with the FP accounting approach, used by governments in Alberta prior to 2015. This involves disentangling entity budgets, reallocating property tax shares, evaluating federal government transfers, and more. The resulting calculations make it possible to more accurately compare and contrast recent budgetary choices with those made over the past four decades. The accounting changes also have implications for the apparent size of the annual deficit. For example, the provincial government deficit in 2016-2017 is reported as being nearly $1 billion less than is calculated to have been the case had the previous accounting approach been retained.