Approximately 70 people attended the poverty reduction consultation for Kitchener on Thursday, 19 June 2008, from 1-4 pm. It was held at the Lion’s Arena on Rittenhouse and Blockline Roads. Area Members of the Provincial Parliament in attendance were Hon John Milloy, MPP (Kitchener Centre), Leeanna Pendergast, MPP (Kitchener–Conestoga) and Elizabeth Witmer, MPP (Kitchener–Waterloo)r. Milloy and Pendergast stayed for the whole consultation; Witmer left after an hour.

In attendance was a good mix of people: persons living in poverty, social service and health care agencies staff, chamber of commerce staff, peoples of colour, labour union members, and advocates.

Though the primary focus was on child poverty, groups broadened their comments to include adults on Ontario Works, workers with low wages, persons with mental health and addiction issues, parents with special needs children, etc.

Tables of 6 persons worked on the questions, but did not have adequate time to respond. For example, Question # 5 was not discussed.

Some themes which came out numerous times:

• Partnerships and coalitions in the Waterloo Region are working well. Some of the larger, government-mandated services are not always at the table: school boards, Family and Children’s Services, Probation, Parole, etc. The work of the coalitions sometimes is not communicated to other staff.
• Neighbourhood centres and outreach workers are doing a very good job in the region. Decentralizing of services is important, especially getting services closer to the people. This is even more critical when families and persons are new Canadians. Trust needs to be built up with persons and families who are struggling in poverty
• Affordable housing is much needed in the region.
• Services should be universal, so that there is no stigma attached to people requesting the services.
• Services should be person or family centred, building on assets, rather than specifically geared to problems.
• Transportation is a very significant issue for persons and families with lower incomes.
• An increase in social assistance is absolutely necessary.
• There needs to be more support for families in transition out of poverty. It is difficult to negotiate the “systems” (housing, social assistance, childcare, medical and dental benefits, etc). A family or person needs to make many changes in lifestyle and sometimes cultural adjustments when an adult begins working. Can there be social workers to assist/ coach people through this process.
• Addictions and mental health are critical issues which need to be addressed. There are too few services for children and adults.
• Labour and employment standards and enforcement are critical. Temporary Employment Agencies and Money Marts need regulation.
• Lives in the Balance, 25 in 5, and SPNO were all mentioned several times by different tables.

MPPs John Milloy and Leeanna Pendergast will be holding a public consultation at the Schwaben Club, 1668 King Street East, from 6-9 pm on Thursday, 3 July 2008. Elizabeth Witmer MPP said that she would be holding a public consultation in her riding later in July – neither date nor place was provided.

Brice Balmer with comments by Greg DeGroot Maggetti

Interfaith Social Assistance Reform Coalition

On Wednesday June, 18, Cabinet Committee Chair Deborah Matthews held the 13th of 14 Minister’s Consultations in Toronto. The meeting was held in York-South Weston, the second poorest riding in the province. Local MPP Laura Albanese attended, along with staff members from the Premier’s office and MPP’s Mario Sergio and Laurel Broten‘s office. Approximately 60 members of Toronto’s activist and service provision organizations (including those run by and for people living in poverty) who received invitations attended. A handful of other community members who wished to be involved were invited to participate in the meeting.

There were 2 roundtable sessions of 9 tables working through one or two of the government’s questions followed by plenary sessions in which the moderator from each table reported the results of the discussion to the room.

The 25 in 5 declaration principles were endorsed by many and highlighted frequently as an example of looking towards structural changes through policy to raise people out of poverty rather than focusing on specific programs. Better integration across ministries and recognition of community run services that are already working well, but could be more effective with government leadership and funding, were thought to be central to this.

There was also a near consensus in the room that the poverty reduction strategy must address all of those living in poverty as opposed to the focus on children first. The need for continuing to involve the community during this process was stressed, specifically through the creation of an arms-length advisory group to monitor and report on the government’s progress on the strategy. Success would be contingent on moving people out of poverty in ALL sub-populations, rather than simply reducing the poverty rate according to one central measure.

The room was energetic with many innovative ideas flowing, however the theme of focusing on the fundamental mechanisms that should be part of a government led and funded policy was central to the discussion.

On Monday June 16th, approximately 70 individuals participated in the Minister’s consultation session in Thunder Bay. The participants included advocates from grassroots organizations, representatives and directors from social service agencies, and many individuals living in poverty. Minister Deb Matthews presided and was accompanied by local MPP’s Bill Mauro and Michael Gravelle, as well as staff from their offices.

The consultation process was structured around six pre-determined questions set by the Cabinet Committee on Poverty Reduction. The participants were broken into groups of eight and were asked to address each of the questions. After discussion and brainstorming around each issue, the group moderator summarized the discussion for the larger group and Minister Matthews. After each question, there was some time for questions or additional points from participants. All participants were encouraged to leave their notes for each question and to add additional information by visiting the website.

The main priorities; sustaining employment, liveable incomes, and strong community supports, were reiterated throughout the session by various individuals. The moderators spoke very clearly and passionately about what the group felt was needed to reduce poverty in Ontario. A particular point that resonated with the entire group and was repeated often was the need to put more money into the hands of individuals through an increase in social assistance and a raise to the minimum wage. Another point that was raised often was the need for funding for community programs beyond short term project funding and the need for the government to understand and coordinate their services across ministries (e.g. coordination between social services and education)

Minister Matthews took the time to comment on many of the points raised and was quite engaged in the consultation process. She portrays a sincere interest in reducing poverty; one only hopes that the government that she represents shares this sincerity.

About 45 of approximately 70 invitees came out to the Minister’s consultation in session in Scarborough on June 10. Participants included executive directors of agencies, LHIN’s, social services, Children’s’ Aid Societies, community boards, think tanks, etc.

MPPs attending included Deb Matthews, Michael Prue, and Margarett Best. Political staff also attended along with a few people from Cabinet Office. City of Toronto Councillor Joe Mihevc was also present. There were no members from the media.

The consultation followed a facilitated exercise where participants were led through the six questions in the government brochure.

Tables were colour coded and a mix of people was at each table. For example, one table included FSA Toronto, a community board member, a well known activist from the Wellesley Institute who has an interest in housing, a CAS director and another agency director. Other tables included an ODSP action group member, a labour council member, urban aboriginal representation, and a CCPA member – generally a fairly representative group from the community, activist and voluntary sector, mostly at a senior level with exceptions.

Each table picked a facilitator and someone who would take notes while others were picked by each table to report out. All were encouraged to leave behind written comments and to engage the website.

A number of participants advanced the proposals in the 25 in 5 Declaration. They also stated that they did not see the reallocation of resources question as particularly germane to poverty reduction. Most of the tables who reported out on this question simply ignored the cost-neutrality aspect of the question.

The meeting was very cordial but the table spokespeople all spoke with passion and conviction about the government’s important commitment to move substantively on poverty reduction. Most of the 25 in 5 themes were repeated over and over by table spokespersons whether that was their intent or the direction coming from their table.

At the end of each round of questions, comments from the floor were permitted, which worked well likely because of the manageable number of people present.

Minister Matthews was very engaged in the process and said that each meeting she has held is different often based on differences in community size. She talked about her previous meeting in Kingston one day earlier where most everyone in the room knew each other while this was not the case in Toronto.

Many of those who spoke talked about how services and sectors could be better coordinated (e.g. education sector with the service sector).

Minister Matthews noted that there would not be a specific report done on the Scarborough session but a more general indication of what the consultations heard would be available later on-line.

The issue of a government paper on what they were going to do (white) or what their options are (green) was raised several times. Minister Matthews said that although a good idea, there would likely not be time for that.

(Thanks to John Stapleton for notes from which this report was created)

The following observations of the Minister’s consultation on poverty reduction in Sudbury on May 26, 2008 are offered by Annette Reszczynski.

Minister Deb Matthews welcomed approximately 45 people to the Sudbury consultation. In attendance were representatives from the City, the health sector, social service organizations, the Aboriginal community, the education sector and antipoverty advocacy groups as well as individuals with first hand experience of living in poverty.

The meeting began with each small group appointing a facilitator and note taker and then groups quickly got down to the business of discussing the questions posed by the Ministry. The first questions focused on how the lives of impoverished children and their families could be improved within current resources. The next questions asked about current successes at the local level and how the efforts of various sectors could be better integrated to address poverty. The final questions asked participants to comment on the long term goals of the strategy and how the effectiveness of the strategy should be measured.

All of the questions garnered lots of discussion and participants were pretty vocal about the questions that they felt did not do justice to the subject. For example, it was clear that most participants felt that current resources available at the individual level and in the non-profit social service sector were inadequate to make a truly meaningful improvement in the lives of children and their families living in poverty. Comments were made that reducing poverty requires long term investment even if it meant an increase in taxes.

Organizations charged with helping people cope expressed feeling very stretched, with many not having had an increase in their operating dollars since 1995. An increase in social assistance rates along with an increase in the minimum wage, it was felt, would lift those most in need out of immediate crisis freeing people up to focus on exiting poverty vs. trying to survive poverty. Organizations could then in turn free up resources to do more planning and evaluation maximizing opportunities to build partnerships and deliver effective programs and services.

Participants felt programs and services offered by the provincial and federal government needed to be better coordinated to reduce duplication and redundancy and that efforts to connect upper levels of government with those groups working multisectorally at the community level needed to be stepped up.

In terms of long term goals, participants felt that reducing poverty in Ontario had to be about more than ensuring everyone has an opportunity to be gainfully employed. Individuals who cannot work full time, or at all, also have a right to an adequate income, and a life of dignity. While education and training is vitally important, that cannot be the sole focus of the strategy.

A participant from North Bay told the following story illustrating this point well. Several years ago he found himself alone as a single father with no job and decided to send his son to live with relatives in the US for two months. Despite his best efforts he ended up homeless for an extended period of time but eventually made his way to college where he recently graduated. The down side to this story was that the two months that his son was supposed to be away in order for him to get his feet on the ground turned into two years. That’s a long time for a child. An effective poverty reduction strategy would prevent these types of scenarios and their negative long term impacts.