Workfare: is it really fair.
How not to help the poor
LARRY BAILLLIE VOLUNTEER STAFF
In the news recently, there has been a lot of discussion about welfare and the reduction of social assistance by utilizing workfare. According to some local media reports, the recent report from the National Council of Welfare (NCW) shows that Manitoba is not the only province in Canada that has reduced the number of people collecting social assistance since 2001. The report actually states that between 2004 and 2005 Manitoba increased the number of people collecting social assistance by 4.3 per cent, whereas there was a decrease in all other provinces except Ontario where there was a minimal increase of 0.7 per cent. Two articles by Tom Brodbeck of the Winnipeg Sun, titled “Too many on welfare” and “Bring back workfare” attempted to address this issue. What both articles failed to mention is that in the same period, Manitoba only had 5.1 per cent of the population collecting welfare, only four other provinces were lower. In fact Manitoba was below the national average of 5.4 per cent at 5.1 per cent. The province with the highest rate was Newfoundland and Labrador at 9.3 per cent and the lowest number was Alberta at 1.7 per cent. Manitoba has 60,900 people collecting welfare out of a population of 1,176,402.
Brodbeck seemed to suggest that Manitoba’s problem is that we do not use workfare. This is a policy where people who are deemed able to work are forced to work or else they lose all social assistance. Most people would think that this is a viable option. These articles suggest that workfare is a new idea. Actually the idea has been around for hundreds of years. Dallas Hansen of the Winnipeg Free Press was even harsher in his article “Willpower best weapon against poverty.” If that statement is true, what about the men that traveled across Western Canada on the work trains during the Great Depression, they had willpower, yet they still experienced severe poverty.
Hansen suggests eliminating welfare altogether for individuals who are deemed employable. All of these articles appear to be extremely oppressive, using words such as, “welfare is subsidized idleness,” “lazy people,” “discourage welfare recipients who can work from sitting on their asses all day.” Who would decide what people are deemed employable! It makes me shudder to think of the power that some people would have over others and that is oppression!
Workfare is a band-aid solution to a complicated social issue. Most politicians need a quick-fix solution for complex social issues. Some could argue that a long-term solution from a government would amount to political suicide. It is confusing when governments rename and reuse ideology that has proven ineffective over the years. This whole issue regarding social assistance and the reduction of poverty is a very contentious issue, for several reasons. One of the main reasons is that no two individuals or situations are the same, so dealing with an issue in a universal way does not solve problems; it only create new ones. If current anti-poverty progams do not work, governments have to do things differently.
Consumers of social assistance quickly realize how rigid these programs are due to distinct rules that are universal and inflexible. Rigid programs are also seen as very oppressive, since they do not address individual strengths. The best approach to dealing with poverty is for governments to become less rigid in their rules and policies. One suggestion would be to not referring to people that utilize services as clients but instead consumers. By using the term consumer, you empower people who have been disadvantaged to help take control of their lives since many consumers feel powerless. When addressing social assistance issues, governments should utilize a strengths perspective, addressing individual strengths and at the same time reducing the barriers that prevent the consumer from being successful in the workplace, barriers such as racism, discrimination, oppression, lack of supports and services, and affordable daycare, just to name a few. What might work for some people, may not work for others.
There are major flaws within the system. It is time for change! I challenge the government not to reuse and rename programs that utilize ideology that have been around for hundreds of years. Instead, look for a viable option that works in partnership between the consumers and the government. We need longterm sustainable solutions to address poverty, not band-aid solutions! Without immediate reform to the social assistance programs in Canada, the gap between the rich and poor will continue to grow.
Larry Baillie is a social work student of the University of Manitoba.
