Support your local foodbank

I know that Valentines Day is tomorrow, but as we think about honoring our loved ones, I want you to consider that many Canadians face hunger every day. For those of us who are fortunate enough not to be in that situation,we consider giving flowers and candies to our loved ones. Something to think about, instead of honoring your love with candies or flower, perhaps a donation to the foodbank in their name would be a more thoughtful gift

Every March the Food Bank of Canada puts out its Hunger Count, Now is a good time for us to think about supporting your local Food Bank, Here are some sad statistics from last March.  

In March 2015, 852,137 people received food from a food bank in Canada. More than one-third of those helped were children. 80,000 people seek help for the first time each month

Households that make the difficult decision to ask for help from food banks tend to be the most severely food insecure because their incomes are too low to cover even the most basic needs:

·       7% of households helped by food banks live primarily on income from a pension

·       16% of those assisted earn the majority of their income through work

·       18% of households receive disability-related income supports

·       46% of households accessing food banks are on provincial social assistance benefits

The households that request assistance are often forced to limit their spending on food because of the high and relatively inflexible cost of housing;

·       5% of households accessing food banks are homeless, with the majority of these living temporarily with family or friends

·       7% own their homes

·        20% of those assisted live in social housing, with subsidized rents

·       67% of households helped live in rental housing and pay market-level rents

Finally, the family composition of those accessing food banks is diverse:

·       10% of households accessing food banks are couples without children

·       44% of those helped are families with children, and nearly half of these are two-parent families

·       46% of households assisted are composed of single individuals – a group that continues to grow, having gradually increased from just 30% of the total in 2001

The Hunger Count not only tells us how many Canadians do not have food security, it makes recommendations on how to solve the problem. It is an important document and it can be read in full here

The following snapshots from the Hunger Count shows the extent of the problem:

The State of Homelessness in Canada

There was an interesting report that came out a couple of years ago, that looked at “The State of Homelessness in Canada”. It was published in 2013. It is the first extensive Canadian report card on homelessness published in 2013. This report examines what we know about homelessness, the historical, social and economic context in which it has emerged, demographic features of the problem, and potential solutions. The State of Homelessness provides a starting point to inform the development of a consistent, evidence-based approach towards ending homelessness.

The report was written by Stephen Gaetz, Jesse Donaldson, Tim Richter, & Tanya Gulliver (2013): The State of Homelessness in Canada 2013. Toronto: Canadian Homelessness Research Network Press.

The Homeless Hub (www.homelesshub.ca ) is a web-based research library and resource centre, supported by the Canadian Homelessness Research Network

In 2012, a new Canadian Definition of Homelessness was released by the Canadian Homelessness Research

Network:

“Homelessness describes the situation of an individual or family without stable, permanent, appropriate housing, or the immediate prospect, means and ability of acquiring it. It is the result of systemic or societal barriers, a lack of affordable and appropriate housing, the individual/household’s financial, mental, cognitive, behavioural or physical challenges, and/or racism and discrimination.

Most people do not choose to be homeless, and the experience is generally negative, unpleasant, stressful and distressing.” (CHRN, 2012: 1)

When we talk about homelessness there are many different types, according to the report there is a range of housing and shelter circumstances:

1) UNSHELTERED - living on the streets or in places not intended for human habitation

2) EMERGENCY SHELTERED - staying in overnight emergency shelters designed for people who are homeless

3) PROVISIONALLY ACCOMMODATED – people who are homeless whose accommodation is temporary or lacks security of tenure, including interim (or transitional) housing, people living temporarily with others (couch surfing), or living in institutional contexts (hospital, prison) without permanent housing arrangements.

4) AT RISK OF HOMELESSNESS - people who are not homeless, but whose current economic and/or housing situation is precarious or does not meet public health and safety standards.

Recent data from a March 2013 Ipsos Reid poll suggests that as many as 1.3 million Canadians have experienced homelessness or extremely insecure housing at some point during the past five years.

The number of Canadians who experience homelessness on any given night in Canada is estimated to be approximately 30,000 individuals. This is the best estimate of homelessness developed in Canada to date, and includes people who are:

I. UNSHELTERED (outside in cars, parks, on the street) – 2,880

II. STAYING IN EMERGENCY HOMELESSNESS SHELTERS – 14,400

III. STAYING IN VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN SHELTERS – 7,350

IV. PROVISIONALLY ACCOMMODATED (homeless but in hospitals, prison or interim housing) – 4,464

Interestingly, those 65 years of age and older comprised just over 1.7 percent of shelter users, which may be explained by the expanded benefits accessible to seniors, but also by the much higher mortality rate of chronically homeless persons (Hwang, et al. 2009

Canada has a long way to go in order to end the homeless crisis, but it has also made some definite steps in the right direction. We can lean on our international partners in the U.S., the UK and Australia and learn from their successes (and failures) rather than reinventing the solution. A focus on Housing First, early intervention and the development of affordable housing are all keys to being able to move away from the emergency response phase of homeless service provision.

We also have a great many promising and best practices within Canada that should be used as examples. The untold stories of successes need to be shared so they can be replicated. The Homeless Hub website contains a wealth of resources, including a follow-up report on the State of Homelessness in Canada 2014 and case studies to help communities learn from one another.

Changes need to occur at all levels of government and commitments of financial resources and political will to end homelessness need to be established. Maintaining people in a state of homelessness is costly; ending homelessness is the goal we should all be seeking for financial and moral reasons.

Should we lower teachers wages?

I read an interesting report on Teachers salary and the impact on student learning. The report was written by David R. Johnson for the CD Howe Institute. As a BC Teacher, I was not surprised to see that we were the lowest paid. I am proud of the fact we in BC are students have consistently received high academic results. 

After reading the commentary I am drawn to the conclusion that the CD Howe Institute is laying the groundwork which will allow provincial governments to slow the growth of teachers salary and benefits as stated here:

Across these six provinces, the reality is that paying teachers relatively more is not associated with better results.

This Commentary comes to two clear conclusions. Public teacher compensation, when measured using relative earnings, shows significant variation across the six largest Canadian provinces. However, comparable student achievement assessment results are not lower in provinces where teachers are paid relatively less. Factors other than teacher compensation that are unexplored here may better explain the interprovincial variation in student achievement results.

The policy implications are fairly clear. There appears to be room to reduce the growth of teacher compensation relative to other occupations so that teachers in other provinces end up in similar salary percentiles to teachers in BC. It would also seem that other provinces could implement much less generous pension rules, emulating those in British Columbia. The BC PISA results suggest that, despite considerably lower levels of overall relative compensation, BC attracts persons to be teachers who produce high-quality outcomes.

It is unrealistic to expect that such a compensation change could occur quickly in provinces where teacher salaries fall into higher percentiles. Still, relative salaries could be reduced gradually by having a series of wage settlements where increases are less than the rate of inflation. Pension factors could also be adjusted very gradually so that the 85 (or 80 in the case of Manitoba) factor could rise by six months each year for a decade. This would allow an orderly change in retirement plans by teachers.

In the report Mr. Johnson also makes some other interesting points, which are summarized below:

In this Commentary, I look at teacher compensation in elementary and secondary publicly funded schools across Canada’s six most populous provinces and ask, “Do provinces that pay their teachers more achieve better results?”

There is significant variation in teacher salaries in these provinces – Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Manitoba and Ontario pay the most relative to other employees in their own province, while BC teacher wages are usually the lowest in relative terms.

In examining comparable academic assessments of teacher salaries and student achievement in these six Canadian provinces, I have come to this conclusion: there is no clear relationship between province-wide student results and relative teacher pay. For example, BC students, whose public school teachers have among the lowest relative salaries, generally achieve the same or better academic results as students in other provinces.

These findings suggest that factors other than high salaries and attracting stronger candidates into teaching play an important role in achieving better results. Indeed, the slightly better student achievement results (they are only slightly better and often not statistically different) in British Columbia and Alberta might lead policymakers to ask what other factors play a role in those provinces.

The menu of possibilities is quite large. Richards et al. (2008) and Richards (2014) show that British Columbia handles its Aboriginal students differently than other provinces and gets more positive outcomes. Friesen et al. (2015) make the argument that open enrolments at schools and the ensuing competition for students in British Columbia could be an important factor in attaining these better results.

Among the many policies and unique characteristics that may explain the differences in student assessment results across the provinces, this Commentary eliminates only the argument that paying teachers more is associated with better student performance.

One substantial difference among the six (provincial) plans is the time to qualify for a full pension without a reduction in benefits. BC teachers have the least generous formula to qualify – age plus years of service must total 90. Manitoba teachers have the most generous formula – age plus years of service must add up only to 80. Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario all use 85 as the qualifying factor. Quebec applies a more complicated formula in which the eligibility rule seems to fall between the 85 and 90 factors. 

Agist society or not

Key messages we want to use to stop ageism in our community  A strong message from Maddy at Home

·       Ageism is all around us.

·      All older people are different but ageism assumes that growing older is the same experience for everyone.

·      We must question ageism and how older people are often stereotyped in a certain way because of their age.

·      We live in a world where older people’s rights are denied. This must change! 

·      We live in an ageing world. Don’t let it be an ageist one.

·       Ageism leads to age discrimination, which, like all discrimination, legitimises and sustains inequalities.

·       Describing or depicting older age as something to resist or even delay reinforces ageist stereotypes and suggests living longer is a negative experience for everyone.

·      Ageism puts unnecessary pressures on ourselves to achieve certain goals at a certain time in our lives before we are deemed “too old” to do them.

·       No one can get younger but we can live in a world where living longer is celebrated and not dreaded.

·       Let’s begin to appreciate our diversity throughout our whole lives including in later age\