Thursday, March 15, 2012

Every few years British Columbians open their newspapers to a story concerning our (right-of-centre) provincial government “floating” the idea of (re)training Lower Mainland welfare recipients for under-filled jobs in smaller communities. Like the story I read in today's Globe (at bottom).

Usually these stories are met with horror by our (left-of-centre) opposition, who rightly make the case that many welfare recipients are unemployable due to a range of health issues, some of which include alcohol and drug addiction. Indeed, there is something totalitarian in such training-for-relocation "proposals", even though our federal immigration system has long favoured those willing to live in smaller communities over settlement in larger urban centres.

While my own feelings on this issue are skewed by what I see as the inevitable migration of younger Lower Mainlanders from cost prohibitive cities and polluted suburbs to smaller towns like Lillooet, Quesnel and Fort St John, it is not the “news” contained within this article that interests me but how that news was made. Was there a press release, or was this idea tossed out informally (but deliberately) by provincial MLA’s? And if the latter, to what end?

With the provincial Liberal Party sagging in the polls, I cannot help but wonder if this “trial balloon,” as the Globe described it, has less to do with filling jobs and bolstering small town economies than appealing to those middle class voters who have come to fear the homeless, the unemployed. As for where exactly those jobs might be, I am sure some of them will lie between the Alberta tar sands and Kitamaat.


"LIberals eye jobs in Interior for welfare recipients"
Terri Theodore, Vancouver

British Columbia's governing Liberals are floating a controversial idea to put welfare recipients to work: train them and ship them north.

Liberal cabinet ministers are openly musing about offering people on social assistance the opportunity to receive training and then relocate to areas of the province facing a labour shortage, such as northern B.C. and the interior.

The province's finance and environment ministers described it as a no-brainer that would put people to work and help employers, while critics suggested it would ignore the underlying reasons people find themselves needing assistance in the first place.

“... You can get people off of welfare, which is costing government money, and put them into a job,” Finance Minister Kevin Falcon told reporters in Victoria on Wednesday.

Mr. Falcon suggested such a program could even finance itself.

His cabinet colleague, Environment Minister Terry Lake, called it common-sense.

“So often we hear of young, employable people who can't find jobs in certain parts of the province, whereas we know that in other parts of the province, the northwest, the northeast in particular, there are opportunities,” he said at an unrelated event in Vancouver.

Mr. Lake stressed that no one would be forced into such a program.

Neither minister could say how many people might jump at the opportunity. In fact, Mr. Lake said the plan was in the “feedback” stage, admitting the idea was a merely trial balloon.

“Sometimes in government when you get sort of common-sense ideas, there are all kind of reasons why they can't happen. Hopefully this is one that can happen.”

When he introduced his budget last month, Mr. Falcon said the province was considering providing training, accommodation and transportation for unemployed workers, but he didn't elaborate.

Carole James, the Opposition New Democrats' social development critic, said such a program wouldn't address the underlying problems that lead some people into social assistance, such as addiction and mental illness.

“Giving them a ticket to move up north is not going to solve the poverty struggles and the education struggles that those individuals are facing,” she said.

Ms. James said the government has already missed opportunities to help low-income British Columbians by cutting funding for training in recent years.

A report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives released in 2010 examined two B.C. government training programs for welfare recipients and concluded neither “provided a pathway out of poverty.”

The report, written by University of British Columbia professor Shauna Butterwick, focused on people who had multiple barriers to employment, such as addiction, mental and physical health problems or physical disabilities.

Ms. Butterwick, whose report did not specifically address relocating social assistance recipients, said provincial training programs in B.C. have been used to reduce the welfare caseload and increase the supply of low-wage workers rather than to address underlying issues.

“An employment focus must be balanced with meeting client needs, which is the welfare system's primary function,” the report said. “It is clear from our study that the main interests of government is cost-saving, not providing social programs for those in need.”

Ms. Butterwick made nine recommendations, including improved access to longer-term education and training.

1 comment:

  1. This is off topic, but I have a few comp copies of my new book available. Want one?