http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090225/judge_scholarships_090225/20090225?hub=TopStories

Former judge wants to bar Muslims from scholarships

Updated Wed. Feb. 25 2009 12:14 PM ET

Geoff Nixon, CTV.ca News

A retired judge wants two Ontario universities to bar Muslim students from being awarded scholarships he has established, though the spokesperson for one institution says her school won’t support a proposal that “flies in the face of everything we stand for.”

Paul Staniszewski said he objects to the “medieval violence” used by the Taliban — such as when Taliban militants recently kidnapped and beheaded Polish engineer Piotr Stanczak — and he wishes to “disqualify” Muslim students from receiving financial aid he has paid for.

“I’m reacting to what’s going on to people who aren’t even soldiers, who are having their heads beheaded and this stuff is shown on the TVs and everything else,” Staniszewski told CTV.ca in a phone interview from his Tecumseh, Ont., home, just outside of Windsor.

“I am doing the same thing these people are doing, except I’m not cutting off heads, I’m cutting off applications for help in their studies,” he added later in the interview.

Staniszewski, who is in his 80s, has established scholarships at both the University of Windsor and York University’s Osgoode Hall Law School.

The University of Windsor website lists three $1,000 scholarships under the name of the judge and his wife, and the York University website lists an award that is also named after the couple.

According to the description of The Honourable Paul I.B. and Mrs. Tevis Staniszewski Award, the retired judge graduated Osgoode in 1954 and practiced law for 13 years until he was appointed as a federal judge in 1967.

Staniszewski said he has attempted to contact both schools about his idea, though he told CTV.ca that he has only made contact with York University so far.

“They told me to put that in writing and they’ll take it up with the board,” he said.

York University spokesperson Alex Bilyk said he had no comment on the issue.

University of Windsor spokesperson Lori Lewis said the school could never support such a measure, though she said it was her understanding the administration had not been contacted about the matter.

“It goes without saying that our position is that we don’t discriminate against our students and that is not an acceptable restriction,” Lewis told CTV.ca.

“It’s against the law and it flies in the face of everything that we stand for at this university,” she added.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090225/gangs_ottawa_090225/20090225?hub=TopStories

Expert doubts mandatory sentences effective

Updated Wed. Feb. 25 2009 6:45 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Mandatory minimum prison sentences will do little to deter the gang activity plaguing cities across Canada, says a prominent criminal lawyer on the eve of a federal announcement of new anti-crime legislation.

The new bill, which Prime Minister Stephen Harper will announce in B.C. on Thursday, will reportedly contain mandatory minimum prison sentences for drive-by shootings and some serious drug offences.

It is also expected to include an automatic first-degree murder charge for gang-related killings.

However, Julian Falconer said Wednesday that mandatory minimum prison sentences are a misallocation of public funds.

“The truth of the matter is that there is very little, or any, criminological data that suggests they work,” Falconer said during an interview on CTV’s Power Play.

“The reality is that the only people that generally respond to this form of deterrence are your more opportunistic — what one would call less-organized — offenders. For your highly-organized offenders, your hardened thugs, there is no evidence that that form of deterrence works.”

The new legislation comes at a time when B.C.’s Lower Mainland is experiencing a spike in gang activity. More than a dozen shootings in the past few weeks have led to a handful of deaths.

Oddly, while Harper visits the West Coast to speak about the upcoming legislation, two B.C. cabinet ministers will travel to Ottawa to lobby for tougher anti-gang laws.

Attorney General Wally Oppal and Solicitor General John van Dongen will meet with federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson on Thursday to request tougher sentencing, disclosure and surveillance laws to fight gang activity.

Enforcement or punishment?

While the federal opposition parties said Wednesday they would likely support the new legislation, opposition MPs called for the government to do more to prevent crime.

“By all means punish the thugs that are wreaking havoc in communities causing death,” NDP MP Olivia Chow said on Power Play. “But what the New Democrats want is to catch them before they kill and maim. Aside from punishment we have to do the enforcement.”

Chow said the 2,500 new police officers the federal government promised for municipalities across the country have yet to be hired.

But Dave MacKenzie, parliamentary secretary the public safety minister, responded by saying that the RCMP has hired 1,600 new constables, more than the target of 1,000 new hires.

“This (gang activity) is not isolated to one part of the country,” MacKenzie said. “It’s major stuff. I think the legislation we’re bringing forward will go a long way to helping the police and the prosecutors and the judges in their job.”

According to Falconer, more money needs to be spent on prison rehabilitation and reintegration services, as well as programs to keep youth out of gangs.

“I’d ask the question, when we talk about gangs and gang activity, we have to appreciate that many of the individuals that make up these gangs are youth that are being recruited from the streets,” Falconer said. “Disenchanted youth, and there are ways of trying to re-integrate and bring people back in the fold that aren’t completely lost.”

With files from The Canadian Press

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090224.wtasers0224/BNStory/National/home

GLORIA GALLOWAY

Globe and Mail Update

February 24, 2009 at 12:36 PM EST

OTTAWA — Organizations representing Canadian police say tasers are an essential tool of front-line officers and pose no threat to the public.

Tom Kaye, the vice-president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, and Charles Momy, the president of the Canadian Police Association, told a news conference Tuesday that conducted energy weapons, often referred to as tasers, help save lives.

“The conducted energy weapon is only one tool among many but it is a very valuable public safety tool for the community and for police officers,” said Chief Kaye.

The weapons have been blamed for contributing to more than 20 deaths in Canada including that of Polish traveller Robert Dzienkanski, who died after he was tasered by RCMP officers at the Vancouver airport.

But Chief Kaye insisted that any attempt to link tasers to the loss of life is unfair.

“To date, there is no evidence, either scientific of medical, that a conducted energy weapon has been the direct cause of death anywhere at any time on any person,” he told reporters.

“We are here to address the inaccurate and incomplete information that is circulating in the public relating to the use of conducted energy weapons by police.”

The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, which represents police chiefs across Canada, and the Canadian Police Association, which represents rank-and-file officers, say they want more consistent reporting of the use of the conducted energy weapons.’

“This would assure police agencies, their oversight bodies and the public that the police are exercising due diligence in the use of conducted energy weapons,” said Chief Kaye.

Mr. Momy said there is also an understanding that they should be used only in situations where there is an imminent need to control a subject and where other options have been ruled out.

In addition, he said, police should be adequately trained in the use of the weapons, and there is a need to develop a national standard to ensure that they are operating according to the manufacturers’ specifications.

But “they certainly enhance public safety and officer safety,” said Mr. Momy.

“It is our position that all police officers should be authorized to carry CEWs.”

Tasers save lives, said Mr. Momy. “There has been no research to indicate clearly that tasers are involved in the deaths of any of the individuals that we’ve seen in the past years.”

Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino also appeared at the news conference to defend the use of tasers.

Police officers are governed by Canada’s Criminal Code in their decisions to use force, said Commissioner Fantino.

It is “uncharitable” for the public to make “Monday morning quarterback decisions” about whether police have acted appropriately in dangerous situations, he said.

“So much of the misinformation and miscommunication is driven by people who have never walked in our shoes, have never faced those situations and could never pass recruitment training,” said Commissioner Fantino.

Repeated inquests into taser deployments have determined that the weapons were not linked to the deaths and that there were other factors involved, including drug use, he said.

Like the representatives of the police associations, Commissioner Fantino insisted that 150 studies worldwide have proven that “there is no direct link in any case in which a taser was deployed” to show that it was linked to the demise of an individual

In fact, a study conducted by the University of California, San Francisco found that the rate of sudden deaths increased six-fold in the first year that California law enforcement agencies deployed the use of stun guns.

And a study by Amnesty International, which included 98 autopsies, found that tasers can kill and should only be used as the weapon of last resort.

http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/article/206867

Canadian study’s conclusions disputed by private operators
April 25, 2007

Comments on this story (0)

Laurie Monsebraaten
STAFF REPORTER

When it comes to quality, non-profit child care is better for kids than programs run by commercial operators, according to new federally funded research obtained by the Star.

Even when preferential government funding for non-profit programs is considered, the measurable quality is higher by 7 to 15 per cent in non-profit daycares, says the study led by University of Toronto economics professor Gordon Cleveland.

His $200,000, three-year study, not yet formally released by Ottawa, measured quality by analyzing data on staff training, pay, complaints and observations of child-staff interactions at daycare centres in Quebec City, Toronto and across the country.

Although he doesn’t make any recommendations about government funding, Cleveland said his findings support the spirit of an NDP bill that would direct future federal cash to non-profit care only.

“For those trying to generate the highest possible quality experiences for children at an affordable cost, this non-profit advantage would seem to be very important,” he said in an interview.

But as hearings into the NDP’s proposed legislation began in Ottawa this week, commercial operators were quick to dismiss the study.

“We don’t hold this research in high regard,” said Kathy Graham, head of the Association of Daycare Operators of Ontario, who addressed the hearings yesterday. “Of course, we all know that researchers can prove whatever they want.”

“It’s with competition that you get excellence, not with (public) monopolies,” she said in an interview, adding that female entrepreneurs would be discriminated against by the legislation.

But Toronto MP Olivia Chow (NDP—Trinity Spadina) said the study is powerful evidence in favour of non-profit care.

“I’d rather learn from facts and hard science than from people whose interest is driven by profit, especially when it comes to services for our children,” said Chow, who is co-sponsoring the bill with MP Denise Savoie (NDP-Victoria).

Although a recent American study showed no quality difference between commercial and non-profit daycare, Cleveland believes his Canadian research is more credible because it isolated its centres in areas where child care demand is so low that no centres can easily afford to provide high-quality care.

“Non-profit programs alone aren’t a magic bullet when it comes to quality,” Cleveland said. “But in markets with high demand, it is a clear marker.”

The NDP proposed legislation, which would grandfather commercial centres currently receiving federal money, would also force provinces to report annually on how child care money is spent.

Toronto Star

Stolen from Chris Tindal’s blog
http://www.christindal.ca/

Boyer’s quiz
February 22nd, 2009

Yesterday at the Fair Vote Ontario conference, Patrick Boyer (who, I believe, is one of fair voting’s best champions) told a story about when he goes into high schools with the Canadian Association of Former Parliamentarians. He said that in order to teach children and teens about democracy, he asks them to get out a piece of paper and take the following three-question pop quiz.

Question 1: Write down an issue that’s important to you.

Question 2: What do you want to see done about the issue identified in #1?

Question 3: What organization or group do you see doing #2 about #1?

He then instructs the students to take the following action. If #3 exists, get involved with them. If #3 doesn’t exist, create it.

Great advice for us all.

Sources:
http://www.healthzone.ca/health/article/590471
http://www.healthzone.ca/health/article/590080

Food supplement ‘can’t wait’
Pressure mounts on province to introduce $100-a-month benefit for welfare recipients
February 20, 2009

Comments on this story (6)

Megan Ogilvie
HEALTH REPORTER

The call for the Ontario government to introduce a $100 healthy food supplement for all adults on social assistance is getting louder.

Yesterday, Toronto’s medical officer of health added his voice to the campaign for the introduction of the monthly food supplement in the upcoming provincial budget. A coalition of 350 anti-poverty organizations, called the 25in5 Network, along with the Association of Local Public Health Agencies, has mounted the drive for more nutrition dollars.

Dr. David McKeown, the man in charge of Toronto’s public health, says proper nutrition is a key way to prevent disease and keep people healthy.

“Every year we measure what it costs to eat a healthy diet – a simple diet, not a fancy diet – in Toronto,” he says. “And every year we find that there is a gap between what people on low incomes, particularly those on social assistance, have in their pockets and what it costs to have basic shelter, and a basic nutritious diet here in the city of Toronto.”

This campaign – dubbed Put Food in the Budget – will act as a down payment to close the gap between healthy living and poverty, he says.

“That $100 a month for social assistance recipients will mean they can go out and buy healthy food now. There are health challenges that they face from not having a healthy diet. We see those now. They can’t wait.”

Yesterday, at The Stop Community Food Centre in Toronto, the Star asked three people who desperately need extra funds for healthy food just what a $100 supplement would mean to them.

‘It would mean breakfast’

Individual stories on what $100 would mean

NAME: Cheryl Duggan

SITUATION: The 42-year-old lives in Scarborough and receives social assistance, including subsidized housing with a monthly rent of $150.

WHAT THE $100 SUPPLEMENT WOULD MEAN: “It would mean breakfast,” says Duggan. “It’s that simple.”

Right now, Duggan eats one meal a day – often leftovers from a meal she cooked earlier in the week – and can only dream about fresh fruit or orange juice for breakfast. She has taken nutrition classes and knows how to eat healthy, but says her limited budget won’t stretch far enough to include the fruits and vegetables she knows her body needs. And, she says, the poor diet affects her health.

“I don’t have stacks of potato chips at home. I actually have a treat in the fridge – trail mix – but I’m so afraid to eat it because once I do, there goes my treat for the month. “

QUOTE: “It’s really difficult to eat healthy and buy healthy when you don’t have the money. I’d love to be able to shop in the regular produce aisle instead of having to shop off the rack at the back of the store where everything is pretty much dead and done.”

‘Not all of us want to eat KD’

NAME: Connie Harrison

SITUATION: A resident of St. James Town, a community housing unit at Bloor St. E. and Parliament St., the 53-year-old receives social assistance and considers herself a housing, poverty and community activist.

WHAT THE $100 SUPPLEMENT WOULD MEAN: Harrison, who has Type 2 diabetes, knows first-hand what eating well can do for health. Recently, a family member has given her money for fresh fruits and vegetables, and the better diet has helped her lose weight (she has dropped almost 40 pounds) and stabilize her blood sugar levels, which is especially important for her health condition.

Fresh fruits and vegetables are the first foods to be left out when money is tight, says Harrison, who has been known to get on her hands and knees to get the last can of on-sale tuna.

QUOTE: “That tuna and egg noodles and a can of celery soup will make a casserole,” she says. “That will feed you, yes, that will feed you. But it will pack (weight) on you. It’s not the same as eating bok choy.

“We can’t buy fruits, vegetables, the good dairy, the good yogurts. Not all of us want to eat KD and pasta.”

Takes ‘courage’ to live like this

NAME: Edmond Chano

SITUATION: The 54-year-old has lived near The Stop Community Food Centre in Toronto for almost two years. He relies on vouchers, three different food banks and this community centre for his food because nearly all of his income goes toward his $650-a-month rent.

WHAT THE $100 SUPPLEMENT WOULD MEAN: Chano says the additional funds would give him the chance to shop for food with dignity, as most people in this city get to do. Trained as a chef in Switzerland, Chano says he has “expertise in nutrition” and knows his diet, primarily made up of carbohydrates, is not healthy. Since relying on food banks and community centres for food, Chano says he has developed Type 2 diabetes. “My diet is not the only reason, but it’s a contributing factor.” And he knows that, under his current circumstances, he will never eat the proper servings of fruits and vegetables as prescribed in Health Canada’s food guide.

QUOTE: This is what he would say to Dalton McGuinty if given the chance: “To have the courage of trying to live like one of the people here for three months. He won’t last one month.”

- Megan Ogilvie

———————————————————————————————

Toronto’s head doc says $100 food stipend is needed
Medical officer of health says people on social assistance need the extra funds to maintain a healthy diet
February 19, 2009

Comments on this story (11)

Toronto’s Medical Officer of Health today added his voice to the province-wide call for the Ontario government to introduce a $100 Healthy Food Supplement for all adults on social assistance in the upcoming provincial budget.

Dr. David McKeown, along with the Association of Local Public Health Agencies, joined with a coalition of 350 anti-poverty organizations to campaign for the immediate introduction of the monthly supplement.

“Every year we measure what it costs to eat a healthy diet – a simple diet, not a fancy diet – in Toronto,” McKeown said after a press conference today at The Stop Community Food Centre in Toronto.

“And every year we find that there is a gap between what people on low incomes, particularly those on social assistance, have in their pockets and what it costs to have basic shelter, and a basic nutritious diet here in the city of Toronto.”

The province maintains reducing poverty is a top priority, and have made some steps, including an investment in student nutrition programs, McKeown said. But, he added, this campaign — dubbed Put Food in the Budget — will act as a down payment to close the gap between healthy living and poverty.

“That $100 a month for social assistance recipients will mean they can go out and buy healthy food now,” McKeown said. “There are the health challenges that they face from not having a healthy diet. We see those now. They can’t wait.”

Studies have shown people with low incomes have higher rates of disease, higher rates of risk factors and higher rates of death, McKeown said.

“In almost every health measure, people with low incomes do worse,” he said. “One of the reasons is not having access to healthy food.”

Each year, Ontario’s local health units are required to report the cost of a Nutritious Food Basket to the provincial government. The basket of 66 specified foods is used as a tool to measure the cost of healthy eating in a particular area.

In Toronto, the cost of a nutritious food basket increased by 9.4 per cent from 2006 to 2008.

Janet Gasparini, a Sudbury city councillor and chair of the Social Planning Network of Ontario, said that now is the right time, when communities are struggling under a crumbling economy, to introduce a $100 monthly supplement for food.

“There’s a good economic case to be made for putting dollars into the hands of the people who will spend it in communities,” she said.

And, she added, there should be no concerns that people will spend the monthly supplement unwisely.

“There is not a doubt in my mind that what people will do is buy groceries,” she said. “It will help make sure more food is in the house and the rent is paid…People want to have good lives.”

THIS BILL IS DESIGNED BY THIS CONSERVATIVE GOVNT, PLEASE SEND A MESSAGE (EMAIL OR POSTAL) TO YOUR M.P., IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO KNOW YOU CARE ABOUT THIS

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LEAF (Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund)

LEAF Position on Bill C-484
Today at 3:39pm
Bill C-484 threatens women’s human rights and equality

Bill C-484, Unborn Victims of Crime Act, seeks to amend the Criminal Code to create a separate offence and penalties for causing the injury or death of a fetus in situations where a pregnant woman is a victim of an offence.

The Bill is, at best, a seriously misguided and ineffective attempt to protect pregnant women from violence. Without actually offering any real protection to pregnant women, Bill C-484 threatens woman’s reproductive choice. Indeed, it contains provisions that will seriously undermine women’s Charter protected constitutional rights.

By creating a specific crime for the killing of an “unborn child”, this proposed legislation will in effect grant separate legal status to the fetus. It is well established under Canadian law that the fetus has no independent legal status and hence no right to life. The fetus is not recognized as a “child” until it is born. If enacted, Bill C-484 would provide unprecedented legal recognition of the fetus and fundamentally change Canadian law. This creates the potential for legal conflict between the rights of the fetus and the rights of the pregnant woman. By elevating the legal status of the fetus, Bill C-484 opens the door to recriminalizing abortion. C-484 could lead to significant violations of women’s right to reproductive autonomy and equality. This proposed change in the law is contrary to well established Canadian jurisprudence and contrary to the law in most western jurisdictions. Bill C-484 would result in profound social, political, moral and economic impacts on women, men and children.

It could criminalize pregnant women

If passed into law, this Bill could lead to the regulation and punishment of pregnant women in a variety of situations not explicitly addressed in the Bill.

Although the Bill specifies that it does not apply to a lawful abortion, or to any act or omission by the “mother of the child”, the experience with similar legislation in the United States shows that the Bill will have serious consequences in limiting women’s rights, consequences that are not in strict keeping with the language of the Bill.

It could be used to undermine abortion rights

The Bill has been introduced and is strongly supported by anti-abortion advocates. Many of the MPs who support Bill C-484 have longstanding ties to anti-abortion organizations and constituencies. If passed, it will be used as a tool by those who wish to limit women’s access to legal abortion.

It could lead to further violations of women’s autonomy

This proposal will also have far reaching impacts in other areas of law, including health law, child welfare law, employment law, tort law and constitutional law. Furthermore, these consequences and inequitable intrusions would be most strongly felt by women who are already marginalized in society, such as poor women, racialized women, immigrant women and disabled women. This Bill, rather than offering protection to women who are most marginalized in society, will in reality further their marginalization and the state’s intrusion into their lives.

Defence of Provocation

Bill C-484 specifically includes the defence of provocation and extends its use to the new offences created. Historically, and currently, the provocation defence has been used to excuse male violence against women who are murdered by their husbands and boyfriends. This defence shifts responsibility for male violence to the victim, by focusing on the behaviour that allegedly provokes a violent attack. There has been a long history of opposition to this defence by organizations, academics and individuals who reject its implicit endorsement of male rage in the “heat of passion” as excusable in criminal law. It is highly objectionable that this questionable defence should be further extended in the Criminal Code.

It fails to address a very real problem: male violence against wives and female partners

While this proposed legislation endangers the equality rights of all women, it would also fail to address the very real problem of spousal violence against women. It shifts the public focus away from the woman who is the immediate, intended target of harm. Notably, Bill C-484 does not make any reference to the harm done to a woman resulting from an attack that causes damage to the fetus. This is inexplicable when one considers that a fetus is never assaulted without the woman who carries the fetus also being assaulted.

In effect, the Bill attempts to mask the real issue calling out for redress: male violence. Male violence against women does indeed increase during pregnancy. However, this Bill will not effectively address this problem. Rather than this proposed legislation, we desperately need the commitment of resources for effective measures to enforce existing legislation to protect all women from violence. Protecting a pregnant woman from violence will also protect the fetus. We need to provide pregnant women with all of the necessary resources and support to ensure a safe and healthy pregnancy, including protection from male violence.

It is not necessary

It is not necessary to introduce new legislation to recognize that pregnancy and spousal violence are aggravating factors when women are assaulted. The Criminal Code and case law already recognize these factors for the purpose of sentencing. Given that most sentences arising out of the same act are served concurrently, this amendment is unlikely to have any impact on the time an offender spends in prison.

It would undermine women’s rights

We should be focusing on legal tools that can actually help to address and reduce violence against all women, including those who are pregnant. C-484 will not help to protect women from violence and will only further women’s inequality. By focusing on the rights of the fetus, instead of the rights of pregnant women, Bill C-484 has profound and disturbing implications for the health, safety and independence of all women. To pass this bill into law would be to seriously undermine women’s reproductive rights, women’s Charter rights, and women’s human rights.

We therefore recommend that Bill C-484 be defeated, with a clear message that women’s rights to autonomy and reproductive choice must be affirmed.

Canada is among a minority where most of the tax relief has gone to high-income earners and the least to lower-income workers, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. The report shows that the tax-cutting agenda of governments is contributing to what other studies, including by Statistics Canada, have shown is a growing gap between rich and poor in Canada, said Armine Yalnizyan, senior economist with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, an Ottawa-based economic think-tank. In contrast, the OECD reported that a half-dozen countries, including France, Belgium, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, and Portugal have implemented targeted tax cuts this decade which have provided the most relief to employees whose wages were less than two thirds of the national average.

The report also shows that Canadian employers’ social security contributions are “far below” the average for industrial countries, Yalnizyan noted.

“So you’re giving most of tax cut package to the best off and doing nothing for the worst off,” she said.

COnt:
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=396698

——————–

Canada’s wealthy benefit most from tax cuts, OECD finds

Eric Beauchesne, Canwest News Service
Published: Monday, March 24, 2008

OTTAWA — The tax burden on wages has eased in most of the world’s industrial countries this decade, including here, but Canada is among a minority where most of the relief has gone to high-income earners and the least to lower-income workers, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

“Across the OECD, tax-burden changes have tended to favour low-wage earners,” the Paris-based organization said in a report on changes in the tax burden on wages in its 30 member countries.

“But in a significant minority of countries, tax reforms have mainly benefited high-income groups,” it said in the report, citing Canada, and a handful of other industrial nations, including the U.S..

“In Australia, Germany, Iceland, Ireland and Luxembourg, and, to a lesser extent in Canada and Norway, tax reforms tended to reduce the progressivity of the tax structure with high-earning employees benefiting the most from significantly higher tax reductions than those in the middle and bottom parts of the earnings range,” it said in the report. “Tax reductions … also tended to mainly benefit high-income earners in the United States.”

The report shows the tax burden on wages or so-called tax wedge, which is the difference between total labour costs to an employer and the net take-home pay of workers, eased by 1.3% in Canada between 2000 and 2006, which is significantly more than the 0.1% average reduction across the 30 industrial countries over that period.

However, in Canada most of that relief went to the highest income workers and the least to lower income workers, it said.

It noted, for example, that in Canada the drop in the tax burden for single workers ranged from a hefty 2.3% for those earning 150% to 200% of the average wage to a 1.6% reduction for those earning 100 to 150% of the average wage to just 1.0% for those earning between two-thirds and 100% of the average wage and to only 1.1% for those earning one-third to two-thirds of the national average wage.

The report shows that the tax-cutting agenda of governments is contributing to what other studies, including by Statistics Canada, have shown is a growing gap between rich and poor in Canada, said Armine Yalnizyan, senior economist with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, an Ottawa-based economic think-tank.

“Those earning up to twice as much as the average wage are getting more of the benefits than those making half the average wage,” she noted.

Further, the report deals with the 2000-2006 period, and tax changes since, including the tax-free savings account in the latest federal budget, are tilted even more in favour of better off Canadians.

In contrast, the OECD reported that a half-dozen countries, including France, Belgium, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, and Portugal have implemented targeted tax cuts this decade which have provided the most relief to employees whose wages were less than two thirds of the national average.

…

http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=396698

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081027/jobs_poverty_081027/20081027?hub=TopStories

39 per cent believe they’re paycheques from poverty

Updated Mon. Oct. 27 2008 11:16 AM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Nearly four in ten Canadians believe they’re just one or two paycheques away from poverty, according to a poll conducted for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

Pollster Environics surveyed 2,023 Canadians for the left-of-centre think tank. It found that Canadians are almost unanimous in their call for governments to protect their jobs.

“A shocking 96 per cent are saying ‘Do something about investing in jobs and skills (and) training right now. Don’t wait until there are better balanced budgets,’” CCPA senior economist Armine Yalnizyan told CTV’s Canada AM on Monday.

The CCPA poll found that:

* 39 per cent of Canadians think they’re just one or two paycheques from poverty
* 47 per cent struggle with personal debt regardless of income
* 44 per cent worry about having enough to retire comfortably
* 26 per cent say they are worse off than a decade ago

“The interesting thing about the poll is that Canadians looked beyond their own pocketbook issues and said … that governments need to step up to the plate, too,” Yalnizyan said.

She said Canadians look at Scandinavian and European countries’ focus on poverty reduction and say, “Why can’t we do that here?”

According to the survey:

* 90 per cent want the government to take leadership to reduce poverty
* 86 per cent believe concrete government action can greatly reduce poverty
* 81 per cent support reducing poverty by at least 25 per cent over the next five years

Yalnizyan noted that Canadians also appear to be increasingly concerned that their wages haven’t kept up with the cost of living, with about one in four saying they are worse off than they were 10 years ago.

Wages not likely to increase soon

Conference Board of Canada’s Prem Benimadhu says the current economic slowdown and what appears to be a looming recession will mean that wages are not likely to increase significantly in the near future.

“We have been talking to about 160 corporate leaders in just the last two weeks and we’ve seen a deceleration of wage increases all across Canada,” Benimadhu said on Monday.

Benimadhu said he expects that unions, particularly in the manufacturing sector, are most concerned about job losses and preventing outsourcing. He said he doesn’t expect union leaders to make wage hikes their top priority when they renegotiate contracts this year and next.

Benimadhu said that when the CBoC surveyed leaders in the manufacturing industry in July, they were forecasting wage increases of about 3.9 per cent.

“Today that figure has gone down to about to about three per cent, and in many sectors employees would be happy with a 2.5 per cent increase,” he said.
Please Add Comments(40)

pp
Oh for heaven sakes – if these people stopped trying to ‘keep up with the Jones’s’ then they would not be ‘2 paychecks away from poverty’.

I see it all the time – people want want want want… big houses, big trucks, big vacations, big toys… Homes in the country, cottages…. on and on…

Paaa-lllleeeeeaaaaasssseee

Don’t start with me. If you cannot afford to pay cash then you cannot afford it! I don’t care if you make $50K /yr or $150K /yr – Save your money then buy. Keep loans to a minimum… Don’t carry large debt loads. If you cannot pay it off at the end of the month then it’s too big to carry.

The reason the global economy is in such a crunch right now is because people wanted BIGGER and BETTER.

Not everyone can have the ‘American Dream’… It is just that a Dream. And eventually it becomes a Nightmare when people become over extended…

It is not your right to own a house, it is your right to have adequate housing. If that means renting an apartment then so be it. In reality ownership of land is a relatively new concept that has been created from capitalism. 100 yrs ago only the very wealthy and farmers owned their own houses / land…

And another thing – Govn’t should not be bailing out companies; they are creating a false security – and it is not working anyways. The market should be left to crash and burn (as much as I dread saying this as I too would be affected), this way the weak will be weeded out and the stronger better corporations will thrive.

http://www.thestar.com/article/548153

As economy shrinks the nomadic lifestyle of contract workers will continue to grow
Dec 04, 2008 04:30 AM
Comments on this story (56)
Francine Kopun
Feature Writer

The hydro station built near the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. of Canada in its industrial heyday in Etobicoke stands now like a puzzling artifact left on a beach by a slipping tide, an elegant red brick building, windows broken, marooned in a tangle of weeds across the street from a stand of new condominiums, townhouses and social housing.

As the dim, grey afternoon draws to a close, cars whip past the old station on Birmingham St. They turn into the underground parking lots of the new neighbourhood, buildings that rise steeply where the Goodyear factory once churned out 10,500 tires a day.

Dayo Kefentse felt like she was changing her life when she first slipped the key into the door of her very own condo here in January 2007. An enthusiastic participant in the new economy since landing her first job as a star-struck reporting intern at CBC Radio in Toronto when she was 25, Kefentse has lived from contract to contract for nine years, never sure what next year, or even next month, will look like.

After nearly a decade in the workforce, Kefentse has next to no pension, some RRSPs, debt she doesn’t like to talk about, and no promise of a job past April, when her media-relations contract with the Toronto District School Board ends. Scrambling to make a name for herself has left her with little time to date, let alone marry and start a family.

She’s a lifelong member of the “you’re-on-your-own” economy, a working world where relationships are casual and everyone is permanently temporary. A world that represents the future for a growing number of Canadians in this shrinking economy.

For Kefentse, the condo was proof she was making it, despite her nomadic work life.

“All I wanted was to get my voice out there. When this (the first job) came up at CBC, I was so happy. How it was set up was irrelevant. I just wanted a chance. I remember the administrative assistant saying: `There is no pension with this,’ and I’m pretty sure my reaction was: `When do I start?’”

The cachet of a job with the CBC is one of the reasons the Crown corporation is able to employ 30 per cent of its workforce of 5,500 on contracts, as freelancers, temporary workers or casuals. The voices you hear reporting from around the city and around the world often belong to stringers and freelancers hoping to make an impression and land a permanent position. For a while, one of them was Kefentse’s.

The CBC is not alone. There was a time when getting a university education meant job security – Kefentse got a Bachelor of Arts from the University of the West Indies in Barbados after graduating from high school in Mississauga. Now, universities themselves are increasingly hiring people on contract – half the teaching at York University is currently done by contract faculty and teaching and graduate assistants.

Kefentse can’t even imagine a job for life. She has never even been offered a permanent position.

“I don’t have any clue what it would be like to work continuously,” she says, shrugging.

Her longest, most stable job, was a series of contracts at the CBC in Windsor, reporting for the local radio and television station for a little more than a year.

The permanent impermanency means she has become used to scrimping. Her friends tease her about her wardrobe. She takes her lunch to work. She cooks at home. She only recently, reluctantly, replaced a nine-year-old couch from her student days.

“Because I’ve gotten used to hoarding money, parting with it is often hard.”

With the economy crashing she has become extra-cautious. She could be unemployed again by next spring. Recently, she was contacted about a possible job in government. She doesn’t want to discuss the details, doesn’t want to jinx it.

“I hope, I hope,” she says, crossing two fingers on each hand and squeezing her eyes shut.

Uncertainty is the common thread casual employees in different fields share. It is not just being unsure where the next paycheque will come from. It is not knowing when you can book swimming lessons, language courses or dates.

Kerry Feeney, a single mother of four and a casual LCBO employee, doesn’t enrol her children in any extracurricular activities: “Who would take them (there)?” says Feeney, who works irregular hours, mostly evenings, at a Rexdale store.

Feeney once worked 25 five- and six-hour days in a row, earning $18.11 an hour working the cash and stocking shelves. Permanent employees doing the same job earn $24 an hour. Feeney has a leased vehicle, a rented house and no pension. She hopes to be hired full time one day, so she can earn benefits.

“For me, it doesn’t really matter. I just want to make sure my children are doing well in life.” In fact, she’s counting on them to help support her in retirement.

Until now, Kefentse has barely given a thought to what happens when she retires; she has been too busy trying to turbocharge her career.

Her resumé is a trim two pages. Since 1999, she has worked at CBC radio and television in Windsor, the United Church of Canada, Global Television, City News, Elections Ontario, Metro Morning and Here and Now in Toronto, and four months in media relations for the Ontario government, the only place that ever offered her a pension.

Her most constant employment was at CBC. She worked on Metro Morning with Andy Barrie and with Avril Benoit when she was host of Here and Now, both CBC Radio Toronto newsmagazine programs. Both Barrie and Benoit provided glowing letters of reference.

“She is a fearless young journalist with a can-do attitude. Her on-air reports come to life with a sparkle that makes her a memorable broadcasting personality. In a word, Dayo has spunk,” wrote Benoit in August 2002.

That summer was a great time for Kefentse. She had begun representing CBC at public events. People were beginning to recognize her name.

“From the time she was quite young, she said she would be the next Oprah Winfrey,” says her mother, Monica Kefentse, a retired high school teacher. The dream began to seem possible.

A permanent job as an associate producer with the CBC came up and Kefentse applied. She also applied for a job as a reporter at CBC in Windsor – she drove her resumé there.

She was being considered for a job as a producer with a National Public Radio program in Los Angeles.

With her profile rising and three promising job opportunities, Kefentse began arranging to buy a condo near the Scarborough Town Centre.

“I thought if I got this job, I’d be able to push forward, get a place, settle,” she says of the associate producer position.

She didn’t get any of the jobs.

Devastated, she reluctantly withdrew from the condo deal, unable to imagine ever being secure enough to buy one. The most basic rite of adulthood seemed out of reach.

She draws on her Caribbean background to describe the situation – it was “force-ripe,” an attempt to get something to mature before its time.

“I needed a year to figure out what I was outside of CBC. I thought a lot. I read a lot. I slept a lot.” Her only work was a couple of small media relations contracts.

She read Who Moved My Cheese, a wisp of a book – 94 pages of large type for $22 – that can be summarized in two words: Expect change.

Despite not getting the reporting job in Windsor, she kept in touch with a contact there. (She is good at keeping contacts; her Rolodex is swollen like a tick.) A year later, she got a one-year reporting internship for CBC radio and television in Windsor.

She loved the hustle of covering crime and courts and local government. She made friends, began tutoring two African girls who lived nearby. She felt like she was part of a community. She started shopping for a condo.

“I was reminded by (my boss at CBC) that: `You’re here for an experience and you’re expected to move on.’ I didn’t want to leave. I was good there,” says Kefentse, laughing.

She applied for a job with the Greater Essex County School Board, but didn’t get it and moved back to Toronto in September 2004. For the next year, she did some event planning, wrote news at Global News and freelanced on air for the CBC.

By 2006, she felt her life had stalled.

“Something has to happen,” she told a friend. “I have to have a baby, get married, get a master’s or buy a place.”

She decided to buy a place. Instead of waiting for job security before buying, she decided to do the opposite. Now she had to convince herself and the bank that she was a good bet, that a permanent home was appropriate for a peripatetic worker.

To every meeting with the bank (there were more than a dozen) she dragged a black plastic accordion folder. Inside was her whole life – resumés and letters of reference, pay stubs and copies of contracts.

“To prove I am a person who works,” she says.

The loans officer was as green as she was.

“He was younger than me,” says Kefentse. “Now, he’s married, he has a child coming; he was probably 27 at the time.”

Last spring, her Rolodex came through again. She was offered a job in media relations for the government of Ontario, which led to the job with the Toronto school board.

Even today, when people hear her name, they tell her they remember her. They’ll tell her they’ve heard her recently. It happened last week at a school board meeting.

“It’s very nice; it’s very touching,” says Kefentse. “I grew up at CBC in many ways. It’s a very vital part of my professional career, what I’m about.” She cried when she told Andy Barrie she was going to take the government contract.

Kefentse is grateful to the CBC. She points to the benefits of her lifestyle. She can structure her workday however she wants. She can take days off when she wants, months off, a year off, if she has squirreled away enough money.

“This condo is my pension,” she says of her 650-square-foot home that doubles as an office. But one can’t help feeling that she is not as sure as she sounds. If real estate prices continue to fall, she could find herself with a condo worth less than she paid for it. With the economy staggering, even contract employment may be hard to find. She’s talking with a financial planner to sort things out.

Like an old boyfriend, holding out hope of reconciliation, the CBC called recently, offering her casual work during Christmas.

The girl who dreamed of being Oprah is not sure if she will take it, but then again, maybe she will. Kefentse shrugs.

“It could lead to on-air.”