SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 339

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 19, 2024 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 339 - Sep/19/24
Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity, Lib.)
  • Sep/19/24 6:17:28 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, it is an honour and a privilege to stand in the House today for the first time after a summer break and speak to a policy proposal from the New Democratic Party on something I have always been very interested in looking at. I am always enthusiastic about any policy proposed in the House that aims to reduce or eliminate poverty in Canada. This project to bring forward a universal basic income is one that I am keenly interested in. Immediately, it caused me to look back on efforts over the last decade or so to implement something similar in the province of Ontario very close to my home; I grew up at the Chautauqua co-op in Oakville. The Liberal Wynne government in Ontario in 2017 brought forward a pilot project that would provide a basic income to 4,000 people across Ontario. That project followed recommendations made by Hugh Segal in consultation with various groups. It was a good start. Basic income would reduce poverty more effectively, and it could encourage work and reduce stigmatization, but more than that, it could also reduce a lot of the bureaucracy involved in the navigation of these various programs. Instead of using an old example, I will use a recent one. Just a couple of weeks ago, I had a gentleman in my office in Milton to discuss all of the confusion related to interim unemployment, related to his tenuous employment. He was navigating both the Ontario disability support program, Ontario Works, and employment insurance at the same time. With other benefits from the government, like the Canada child benefit and many others, there is a constellation of support programs that aim to reduce poverty in Canada. It is a lot of administration, there are a lot of programs, and when we cater all of these programs to various groups and various people, it is good because they can be very targeted. At the same time, sometimes it requires a master's in public policy to figure out how to maximize those benefits that we all pay for. I think about employment insurance often. People are often very reluctant to go on employment insurance in Ontario. I have a friend who just got laid off and said they do not want to go on EI. I asked why. That is the insurance that they have been paying into with every single paycheque since they were 16 or 17 years old. They deserve that money. The reason we pay into that program is to make sure we have stability. That stability could also be provided by a universal basic income, as proposed by this bill. Unfortunately, 10 months after the Liberal administration of this project in, I believe, Thunder Bay and Hamilton, Ontario, and a couple of other smaller municipalities, Doug Ford and his Progressive Conservative government, after saying they would allow the completion of the program so they could fully study it, cancelled it. They cancelled it very abruptly and left the 4,000 participants in this pilot project in the lurch and, quite frankly, devastated. For better or for worse, the Premier of Ontario has demonstrated the ability to change his mind quite often. Sometimes that has been good, such as when he decided not to pave the Greenbelt. At other times, like this, he went back on his word and cancelled a program he said was worth completing. It was worth completing, and this is worth studying. All the anti-poverty groups I have ever met with and continue to read about are in favour of a universal basic income. It is sort of sad to hear Conservatives talk about poverty elimination as a left-wing concept. I do not think poverty elimination is a left-wing concept. I think it is for everybody in the House. We should all be concerned with how legislation encourages poverty, creates poverty and sustains poverty in Canada. There is absolutely no reason for a wealthy country like Canada to have anybody in deep poverty. I strongly believe that a universal basic income is worth studying so we can look into all of the various ways to ensure we are doing the most for Canadians, whether they are employed, between employment, unable to find employment or, frankly, taking risks. Conservatives like to talk about how it is important, out there in the real world, despite their leader never having really ventured there, to be able to take risks financially. If we want to innovate, if we want to do art, if we want to practise something new, that might take some time. I love the idea that the universal basic income, or a guaranteed livable income, would provide people with the ability to take those risks, innovate, try something new, create art, maybe even try out for a new team or something like that, showing my stripes as an athlete. I applaud the member from the New Democratic Party for their work on this, and I am looking forward to hearing more throughout the debate.
844 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border