Go to the Globe and Mail homepage

Jump to main navigationJump to main content

Report on Business

Economy Lab

Delving into the forces that shape our living standards
Best Business Blog, EPPY awards, 2011 and 2012

Entry archive:

Economy Lab has moved

Only Globe Unlimited members will now have access to a wide range of insightful commentary
and analysis on the economy and markets previously offered on this page.


Globe Unlimited subscribers will be able to read these columns,
written by some of Canada’s most deeply respected economists,
such as Christopher Ragan, Sheryl King, Andrew Jackson, and Clement Gignac,
as part of our ROB INSIGHT section.


All of our readers will still be able to browse the Economy Lab archives and read our
broader coverage of economic data and news by accessing their 10 free articles a month.


Learn more about Globe Unlimited and how to subscribe.

In Ontario, a single individual may receive $599 per month in social assistance; a single parent with one child may receive $1,023 per month (Peter Power/The Globe and Mail)
In Ontario, a single individual may receive $599 per month in social assistance; a single parent with one child may receive $1,023 per month (Peter Power/The Globe and Mail)

Economy Lab

How Ontario's budget hurts its poorest citizens Add to ...

Tammy Schirle is an Associate Professor of Economics at Wilfrid Laurier University

It’s one short line in the Ontario 2012 Budget that sounds fairly innocent: “The government is not proposing any increases to social assistance rates at this time.” While the media has focused on wage freezes and collective bargaining in the public sector, I have not seen much concern for those who rely on social assistance. Perhaps most people don’t care.

More related to this story

Social assistance rates are not extravagant – they are designed to meet the most basic needs for survival. A single individual in Ontario may receive $599 per month in assistance; a single parent with one child may receive $1,023 per month.

Just like wage freezes, welfare freezes result in a real reduction in living standards if the inflation rate is positive. Those experiencing wage freezes will need to cut back on luxury items. Unlike public sector wage freezes, those experiencing welfare freezes will need to cut back on basics like food.

Think of a basic $100 grocery list – this should buy a week’s worth of basic groceries. This past year, food prices increased by 3.7 per cent, so we might expect that same bag of groceries to cost $103.70 a year from now. But with the welfare freeze, you won’t have an extra $4, so you have to cut something – perhaps eat less meat and more macaroni, or simply skip one more meal a week.

It’s often difficult to understand the circumstances that put someone on the welfare rolls – I certainly haven’t known any child who dreamed of becoming a social assistance recipient when they grow up. Most popular criticism of social assistance recipients tends to focus on the few who abuse the system – perhaps that makes some people feel better about their position in society and making cutbacks like this. But each welfare recipient’s story is unique, and I tend to simply accept that some people need our help.

If looking to reduce the cost of social assistance, the province should look at constructive long-term strategies for reducing the number of welfare recipients. For example, research (by David Green and others) has shown that high school graduation among the children of welfare recipients significantly reduces the child’s likelihood of becoming a welfare recipient in adulthood. This is particularly important for kids coming from the most troubled family backgrounds.

A creative provincial budget would think about long-term investments that reduce reliance on social assistance. Forcing someone to skip lunch seems counter-productive.

Follow Economy Lab on twitter

In the know

Most popular video »

Highlights

More from The Globe and Mail

Most Popular Stories