Vote to Make Poverty History

A federal election is a great opportunity to advance our campaign to make poverty history. Please help to make this an election that will make a difference.

We can greatly improve the chances of governments taking serious actions to make poverty history at home and abroad if we make poverty a key election issue. If we can use the election to secure commitments from party leaders on anti-poverty policies, it will be much easier to get them to keep these promises after an election. We need to show candidates that many voters care about poverty and want to know what candidates and parties will do to make poverty history.

That is why we have launched the Vote to Make Poverty History non-partisan, third party campaign with the following goals:

1. Make poverty an issue during the election campaign;
2. Get a significant number of candidates to endorse Make Poverty History’s campaign goals;
3. Secure a commitment from political parties on Make Poverty History goals in party platforms and leader’s statements;
4. Motivate voters to vote to make poverty history;
5. Help to create favourable conditions for realizing Make Poverty History goals after the election.

GROUPS ACROSS CANADA CALL FOR AN INQUIRY INTO THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR POWER

March 31 2011 For Immediate Release 

Three Mile Island taught us all that nuclear power is inherently dangerous. With Chernobyl the whole world witnessed the awesome power of a total nuclear meltdown.
 
At Fukushima we are seeing simultaneous partial meltdowns in 3 reactors and 4 spent fuel pools.
 
Canada's reactors have a different design, but the potential for catastrophe is ever present. It was not an earthquake and tsunami that caused Japan's nuclear catastrophe -- it was the resulting total electrical blackout at the plant: the loss of onsite and offsite power. Such a blackout can be caused in a variety of ways.
 
Like other countries, Canada needs to reassess the risks and benefits of nuclear technology. This is too important a matter for nuclear engineers alone; it must be a societal decision.
Federal political parties are being challenged by groups across Canada to declare their support for a far-reaching non-partisan Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Future of Nuclear Power in Canada, independent of the nuclear industry and the CNSC, to be launched at the earliest possible date.
 
As part of that inquiry process, the groups are asking that no new licenses for nuclear power plants - whether new build projects or refurbishment projects, or off-site transportation of nuclear wastes produced by nuclear reactors - be granted until the Royal Commission has concluded its work.
 
Groups from across Canada are joining together in this appeal in hopes that the people of Canada will be adequately consulted on the future of this inherently dangerous industry. "The basic question is this: do Canadians wish nuclear power production to be expanded or to be phased out?" said Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.
 
"The endorsing groups are unanimous in their view that the Canadian Nuclear Industry, the Canadian Regulatory Regime and the Canadian and Provincial governments have failed to disseminate sufficient objective scientific information about the hazards of nuclear reactors, the specific health dangers of MEDIA RELEASE radioactive exposures, and the potential ecological consequences of major reactor malfunctions, in language that citizens and decision-makers can readily understand," said Michel Duguay, coordinator of le Mouvement Sortons le Québec du Nucléaire.
 
These groups are also unanimous in their feeling that political accountability and transparency has been insufficient in the nuclear field, as governments have often seemed to depend almost exclusively on the advice of the Canadian nuclear industry and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, without a sufficiently open and democratic process at the political level.
These groups feel that the risks of nuclear power should be assessed not only from the point of view of the physicists and engineers who populate the Canadian nuclear industry and its licensing agency, the CNSC, but also by independent bio-medical experts and people trained in the fields of biology and ecology, as well as experts drawn from the social sciences, who are independent of any promotional bias, and by our democratic institutions of government.
"Most importantly, however, the groups feel that ordinary citizens must have an opportunity to voice their views on nuclear power and to explore the implications of alternative non-nuclear energy technologies and strategies" said Michel Fugère of le Mouvement Vert Mauricie.
Before proceeding any further down the nuclear path, we ask the Canadian government to finally give ordinary Canadians a chance to debate the risks and benefits of nuclear power in relation to its alternatives in a politically meaningful forum.
 
Additional Background Material:
(1) List of endorsing groups as of March 31 2011  http://www.ccnr.org/concerns.pdf  (2) "Meltdowns in CANDU reactors"  http://www.ccnr.org/Melt_CANDU.pdf (3) CNSC safety concerns about CANDUs : www.ccnr.org/concerns.pdf 

Contacts:
Gordon Edwards, Ph.D., CCNR President, (514) 839 7214 Michel Duguay Ph.D., MSQN Coordinator, (418) 802 2740 Michel Fugère, Mouvmeent Vert Mauricie (MVM), (819) 532 2073 - see list (www.ccnr.org/list.pdf) for contacts in various provinces

Code Blue for Child Care

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Good child care makes Canada more democratic: Code Blue for Child Care

A national child care program is fundamental to a democratic Canada, says Code Blue for Child Care, a cross-Canada campaign to make child care a central issue in this federal election. The Code Blue coalition will join with other groups to support the Day for Democracy activities on Wednesday, April 6.

 “Good child care promotes and exemplifies democracy in action,” said Shellie Bird, Ottawa coordinator of Code Blue.  “A universal, public early childhood education and care system provides an environment where children and adults practise respect for diversity and social inclusion. It is also a community institution in its own right, and critical to women’s equality.”

A key principle that unites the groups in the Code Blue campaign is that Canada’s national child care system must be built on publicly-managed, democratically-controlled services.

“Child care is not a business,” said Sue Delanoy of the Child Care Advocacy Association on Canada. “When child care is run as a business, decisions are made by owners and shareholders – not by the community and parents. The priority is making a profit—not quality services or children’s well-being. This flies in the face of democratic participation and the public interest.”

Code Blue says a national child care program is not only the “smart thing” for a society to put in place but also the “right thing” – a human right and a children’s right. The coalition’s goal is to elect a federal government that will commit to developing an early childhood education and care system available to all families of young children in Canada. Code Blue brings together national, provincial/territorial child care organizations, labour and women’s organizations, social justice and anti-poverty groups – Canadians from all walks of life.

                                                        -30-

For more information:

Shellie Bird- Code Blue for Child Care- 613-233-0228

Sue Delanoy-Child Advocacy Association- 306-241-4952

Authorized by Code Blue for Child Care

Good questions to consider asking regarding services and supports for Immigrants and Refugees

Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants, or OCASI has prepared a list of suggested questions to ask candidates in the 2011 Federal Election. The questions focus on the broad themes of Employment, Services, Immigration, Public Messaging about immigrants and refugees, and Childcare. The questions are posted on the OCASI website at the following link (includes link to a downloadable 2-page pdf document): http://ocasi.org/index.php?qid=1079

 

-----------------------------------------------------

Employment

1. In the Canadian labour market, a wide earnings gap exists between racialized and non-racialized workers, even within the immigrant community. Racialized male immigrants make 68.7 cents for every dollar that non-racialized male immigrants make. Racialized women immigrants make 48.7 cents for every dollar that non-racialized male immigrants make. (Source: Canada’s Colour Coded Labour Market, 2011. Wellesley Institute & Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives).

·         How will your party address the employment and wage gaps between racialized and non-racialized workers?

2. Access to good jobs is one of the biggest challenges for immigrants who have lived in Canada for less than ten years, as well for Canadians from a racialized background. Immigrants and racialized workers as well as women are over-represented in part-time, temporary, contract, and casual work, where they do not have stable work hours or stable income. Often this makes it difficult for them to qualify for Employment Insurance (EI) even if they pay into the EI plan. Workers from Ontario are under-represented among those who are able to claim EI benefits.

·         How will your party ensure that immigrants and Canadians from a racialized background have access to good, stable jobs with adequate pay?

·         How will your party ensure that immigrant and racialized Ontario workers can have equitable access to Employment Insurance?

Services For Immigrants

3. Immigrant settlement services are an important resource that help many immigrants make a strong start in their new life in Canada. Recently, the Government of Canada cut funding to immigrant settlement services in Ontario by almost $44 million. The government also introduced a new funding model that will result in more cuts in Ontario. On March 2 the Parliament of Canada passed a motion to reverse the cuts. The Federal Budget released on March 22 was silent on the cuts, and they were not reversed as of the date of the election call. The immigration agreement between the federal and provincial governments has lapsed and has not yet been renewed.

·         What will your party do to ensure Ontario gets adequate funding so that immigrants to this province get the services they need for their effective social, political and economic integration?

Immigration – Families, Workers, Public Messaging

4. Families are important to all Canadians, regardless of where they were born.  And regardless of their background, all Canadians consider parents and grandparents an important part of their family. Just before the election, the Canadian Government proposed to cut by 40% the number of parents and grandparents we are allowed to successfully sponsor (from 16,200 permanent resident visas last year to 11,200 visas in 2011). In 2003, parents and grandparents represented 8.8% of all immigration. In 2010 they represented 5.4% and this will drop even further in 2011.

Historically Canada’s immigration laws and policies have not treated all immigrants equally. Examples of unequal immigration policies include the Chinese Head Tax and Exclusion Act which discriminated against immigrants from China, and the Continuous Passage Act of 1908 to deter immigration from India. Differential treatment continues under Canada’s immigration law today. Applications from some parts of the world (e.g. Europe) are processed relatively quickly while applicants from countries in Asia, Africa, Middle East, Latin America and the Caribbean find that it takes many years to reunite with parents and grandparents. In responding to these concerns, the federal government recently said that they will approve a higher quota of applications at some visa posts, but not in others which also have massive delays.

·         What will your party to do reduce the family reunification delays that disproportionately affect Canadians with a racialized background, and make the process accessible and equitable?

5. The Canadian Government has said that parents and grandparents can visit their family in Canada while they wait for approval of the sponsorship application. But Canada has a visa restriction in place for many countries and the decision to issue a visitor visa to residents from those countries is often arbitrary. Parents and grandparents from countries such as India, Pakistan, Philippines, China and many others are often refused a visitor’s visa.

·         What will your party do to make the visitor’s visa approval process more accessible and equitable for parents and grandparents as well as other family members from countries disproportionately affected because of visa restrictions, to visit family in Canada?

6. In recent years there has been a dramatic shift from permanent to temporary migration. The number of temporary foreign workers entering Canada between 2006 and 2010 increased by more than 30%, while the number of permanent residents increased by only about 12% in the same period. In 2008 for the first time Canada received more people on temporary work permits than as permanent residents. Canada is using temporary migration to address permanent labour needs. People on temporary permits are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation, and cannot contribute fully to Canadian society.

·         What will your party to make permanent and not temporary immigration a priority for Canada, and what will your party do to effectively monitor employers and better protect temporary workers from abuse and exploitation?

7. In recent months, there has been an increase of negative messages from elected public officials and media about immigrants and refugees, particularly those from racialized communities. It has led to an increase in intolerance and misinformation about these communities. For example, Tamil refugee claimants who arrived in Vancouver last summer were subject to harsh and unfair treatment, and have been repeatedly linked with allegations of criminality, terrorism and human smuggling.

·         What will your party to do counter racism and xenophobia, including the intolerance directed toward immigrants, refugees and members of racialized communities?

Childcare

8. The number of women entering Canada’s workforce has grown over the last 20 years and includes women born in Canada and immigrant women. At the national level, less than 20% of children under age 6, and less than 19% of children under age 12 have access to a licensed child care space. More than 80% of children have parents who struggle to find childcare within the present inadequate patchwork of licensed and unlicensed services and informal arrangements. Studies have shown that access to early learning and child care services is a key tool in reducing child poverty and its life-diminishing impacts. (Source: Educated, Employed and Equal - The Economic Prosperity Case for National Child Care, 2011. YWCA Canada)

·         What will your party do to ensure that immigrant parents and parents with a racialized background have equitable access to high quality, affordable, licensed childcare and early learning for their children?

Women running for office

Equal Voice's analysis of women candidates nominated in comparison to previous elections shows that most federal parties are nominating more but there are fewer running in 'winnable' ridings:

A National Child Care Program

Women and Children Need A National Child Care Program

Canadian mothers are in the workforce in greater numbers than those in many other OECD countries - 77% of mothers of 3-5 year olds were in the workforce in 2007. Mothers, children and families face severe disadvantages without a pan-Canadian universal child care system.
This is what child care looks like for most women in Canada:

Unavailable: Today most children still lack access to regulated child care, with spaces for only about 20% of 0-5 year olds (2008). Access is even poorer for infants/toddlers, children with disabilities, Aboriginal and rural children. Many working mothers without access to regulated care or a close relative to step in must fall back on unregulated arrangements of unknown quality and safety.

Unaffordable: Canadian child care relies on parent fees so it is underfunded and unsustainable, with fees too high for ordinary families. High quality non-profit centres in large cities can cost $2000 a month; only in Québec is child care more affordable at $7 per day.

Uncertain quality: Child care quality depends on funding, staffing and whether it is operated for-profit. For-profit child care is growing in Canada, up from 20% of spaces (2004) to 25% (2008). Research shows for-profit child care - whether small individually owned centres, chains or the growing Big Box sector - is unlikely to provide the high quality care children need.

Insecure: Canada's child care is market-based, not a publicly managed system. This means a combination of high parent fees, low staff wages, unmet demand, and uncertain quality.

One of the good reasons public funding for child care is the right thing to do is that child care services stimulate the economy. Canadian research shows that every dollar invested in high quality child care programs increases GDP by $2.30 - far ahead of stimulus from construction and manufacturing. In the long term every public dollar invested in high quality child care programs returns $2.45 in economic benefits.

THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA MUST

* PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT FUNDING TO PROVINCES/TERRITORIES THAT COMMIT TO BUILDING UNIVERSALLY ACCESSIBLE, PUBLICLY MANAGED, HIGH QUALITY, NOT-FOR-PROFIT CHILD CARE SYSTEMS, WITH ADEQUATE COMPENSATION FOR QUÉBEC.
* PUBLIC FUNDING SHOULD REACH 1% OF GDP BY 2020.
* THE PAN-CANADIAN POLICY FRAMEWORK SHOULD BE BASED ON: PUBLIC PLANS, PUBLIC EXPANSION, PUBLIC FUNDING AND PUBLIC MONITORING.

To find out where your candidate stands on child care, ask the following question:

Q. If elected, will your party commit to federal leadership in providing significant funding to provinces and territories that commit to building universally accessible, publicly managed, high quality, not-for-profit child care systems, with adequate compensation to Québec?

Women and Housing Fact Sheet

This is another Fact Sheet, put out by the Ad hoc Coalition for Women's Equality

Women and Housing

In Canada, women find it hard to access housing because of several inter-related factors:

* Poverty
* Discrimination
* A shortage of affordable housing
* Women's over-representation as sole-support households

This is what housing looks like for many women in Canada:

Unaffordable: due to changes to transfer payments, cuts to income support programs increased rents and inadequate affordable housing stock.

Unstable: women who experience unemployment, long term disability or pregnancy and parenting often do not have a secure income increasing the risk of homelessness.

Inaccessible: due to long social housing wait lists, a lack of barrier-free housing for women and children with disabilities, newcomers and Aboriginal women, landlords refusing to rent based on minimum income criteria, and lending institutions that disqualify low-income women from mortgages.

Insecure: Violence against women causes housing insecurity and homelessness. Due to a lack of housing options, women escaping violence may have no choice but to return to their abusers and risk of losing their children to child welfare authorities. This is particularly acute for women with disabilities due to a lack of accessible shelters and transitional housing.

TO ADDRESS WOMEN'S HOUSING NEEDS, CANADA MUST ADOPT A NATIONAL HOUSING STRATEGY such as Bill C-304, An Act to ensure Secure, Adequate, Accessible and Affordable Housing for Canadians

A National Housing Strategy Inclusive of Women must:

o Be based in human rights principles, such as the right to adequate housing and non-discrimination and equality.
o Set targets to end homelessness with timelines and accountability mechanisms.

Consider asking your candidate the following questions:

Q. Will your party support a national housing strategy with targets, timelines and accountability mechanisms to address women's housing needs?
Q. Will your party ensure women and families in receipt of social assistance receive enough money to pay the rent and feed their kids?