POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
1
Comparing Apples and Oranges?
A comparison of provincial Poverty Reduction Strategies in Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, Ontario, and Québec
18 March 2015
Erin AuCoin, Lauren Hills, Geranda Notten*
* In alphabetical order.
Contacting author:
Geranda Notten
[email protected]
Graduate School of Public and International Affairs
University of Ottawa
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
Acronyms
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: History
Section 1: Introduction
Section 2: Manitoba
Box 2.1: Commentary
Section 3: Newfoundland and Labrador
Box 3.1: Commentary
Section 4: Ontario
Box 4.1: Commentary
Section 5: Québec
Box 5.1: Commentary
Section 6: Inter-Provincial Analysis
3
4444 4
5
7
7
7
9
10
12
13
15
16
18
19
Chapter 3: Timelines
Section 1: Introduction
Section 2: Progress Reports
Section 3: Public Consultations
Section 4: Overall Process
23
23
24
26
28
Chapter 4: Goals, Objectives, Targets, and Indicators
Section 1: Introduction
Box 4.1: Income poverty indicators in Canada
Section 2: Manitoba
Section 3: Newfoundland and Labrador
Section 4: Ontario
Section 5: Québec
Section 6: Inter-Provincial Analysis
Chapter 5: Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction and Conclusion
Manitoba
Newfoundland and Labrador
Ontario
Québec
Appendix
Goals,
Targets
Objectives
Indicators
Manitoba
Newfoundland and Labrador
Ontario
Québec
31
31
33
33
34
34
35
36
39
41
41
42
43
44
46
48
48
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
3
Executive Summary
A Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) process is an increasingly popular policy tool in the fight
against poverty. A PRS is a document announcing a long-term policy goal (poverty reduction) and a
plan on how to make and measure progress towards this goal over the medium term (typically 5 or 10
years). It is produced and implemented by a governance process involving many stakeholders and
signals the start of a policy cycle requiring multiple rounds to achieve the goal. A PRS process that is
community-driven, results-oriented, comprehensive, partnership-oriented, and based on a long-term
perspective holds the promise of more cost-effective and sustainable outcomes by improving the 'status
quo' policy package in local policymaking contexts. Whether this is the case is not clear: particularly in
advanced economies as academic research lags behind government practice.
This report describes and compares key aspects of PRS processes in four Canadian provinces
(Quebec, Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Ontario) and thereby provides a baseline of
information for comparison. The question guiding our research is whether Provincial PRS processes are
similar or whether they are more like ‘Apples and Oranges’? This report develops a conceptual
framework defining these aspects and traces each provincial PRS process by analyzing publicly
available documents. We focused on three aspects: the history of each province's PRS process; the
sequencing of the process’ activities (which we label as a PRS timeline); and the goals, objectives,
indicators, and targets expressed in the strategy. Through an examination of these elements, we find
that the provincial PRS processes are similar in the major aspects of their PRS development and in the
presence of goals, objectives, indicators and targets. All PRS processes begin with the creation of a
strategy document (PRS); all PRS processes include progress reporting and public consultations.
Despite similarities, however, the process by which a PRS develops – and the order in which the
aspects of PRS development take place – differ across provinces. Moreover, while all provinces use
goals objectives, indicators and targets, the content and focus of these differ. In sum, this research
concludes that provincial PRS processes, while similar, have significant differences and by no means
follow a specific format.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
Acronyms
LICO – Low-income cut-off
LIM – Low-income measure
MBM – Market basket measure
PRS – Poverty Reduction Strategy
CLEP - Collectif pour une loi sur l’élimination de la pauvreté
CLQP - Collectif pour un Québec sans pauvreté
MPHM - Make Poverty History Manitoba
EIA - Employment and Income Assistance
4
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
5
Chapter 1: Introduction1
For the past decade, the consequences of rising income and wealth inequality have been a major concern
among policymakers, academics and civil society groups in Canada and elsewhere. The growing disparities are
feared to exacerbate disparities among persons' life chances, in particular those at the bottom and the middle of
societies' ranks (OECD, 2008 & 2011; Beyond GDP; Piketty, 2014; Corak, 2013; the Occupy and Idle no More
movements). Policy is the key tool by which societies can counter these effects (OECD, 2011; Banting & Myles,
2013). At the domestic level these include particular policies influencing taxes and transfer systems, labour markets, social protection, education, health, housing and social services.
Parallel to the concern about rising inequality, a new policy process called a Poverty Reduction Strategy
(PRS) complements the above-mentioned 'business as usual' policies. In the early 2000s, Québec was the first
Canadian province to introduce a PRS process and now, 12 of 13 provinces and territories either have one or
have announced the intention to create? Elaborate? one. The Canadian experience is part of an international trend
among jurisdictions in developed countries, including the European Union and its member states (European
Commission, 2010).
The core of a PRS is a document announcing a long term policy goal (poverty reduction) and a plan on
how to make and measure progress towards this goal over the medium term (typically 5 or 10 years). The core is
the proverbial eye of a tropical storm: a PRS is produced by a governance process involving many stakeholders
and it represents the formal start of a policy cycle requiring multiple rounds to achieve the goal. A 'good' PRS is
said to be “community-driven, results-oriented, comprehensive, partnership-oriented, and based on a long-term
perspective” (International Monetary Fund). A successful PRS process thus holds the promise of more costeffective and sustainable poverty reduction by improving the 'status quo' policy package in local policymaking
contexts. The following logic model sketches the influence that a PRS process may have on a chain of policy and
wellbeing outcomes (Mertens & Wilson, 2012, p.243-54):
PRS Process
Policies
Wellbeing outcomes
Whether this is the case is not clear: particularly in advanced economies as academic research on this subject
lags behind government practice. Hence the above indicated question mark between PRS process and policies.
This report describes and compares key aspects of PRS processes in four Canadian provinces (Quebec,
Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Ontario) and thereby provides a baseline of information for comparing key aspects of PRS processes. It develops a conceptual framework defining these aspects and traces each
provincial PRS process by analyzing publicly available documents. The question guiding this research is wheth1
Acknowledgement: This report was prepared as part of a Directed Research Projects course at the Faculty of Social
Sciences at the University of Ottawa during the Fall of 2014. The research team consisted of Erin AuCoin (4rth year
undergraduate sociology), Lauren Hills (4rth year undergraduate development) and was supervised by Geranda Notten.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
6
er Provincial PRS processes are similar or whether they are more like ‘Apples and Oranges’? This report provides a baseline of information for comparison. Eventually, this research, along with future research, will provide insight into the effectiveness of PRS processes in a Canadian context, and how best to employ this relatively new policy process to ensure cost-effective and sustained poverty reduction.
This report presents a first and necessary step to understanding how to best use this policy process in a Canadian context. We documented and assessed the poverty reduction strategies of four provinces, in terms of the
following aspects:
1.
History;
2.
Timeline;
3.
Goals, objectives, targets, and indicators of the strategy.
Ontario and Québec were selected as provinces prior to the beginning of the project, as they are the larg-
est provinces with the largest legislatures in Canada and have had poverty reduction strategies in place for a
measurable amount of time. Among those provinces with PRS processes in place two other provinces were selected on the basis of the following selection criteria:

Geographic diversity;

Socioeconomic status of population;

Governance of province/territory;

Access to public services; and

The length of time that the poverty reduction strategy has been in place.
Based on these criteria, we selected Newfoundland and Labrador and Manitoba. Both Newfoundland
and Labrador and Manitoba's strategies have been implemented for a significant amount of time ensuring that
there are noteworthy documents for process tracing. Together with Ontario and Quebec, this sample is also reflective of the geographic and socioeconomic diversity in Canada. We understand that this selection comes at the
cost of excluding the unique population and governance structure of Nunavut, we recognize however, that this
territory has minimal information and reporting data available.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
7
Chapter 2: Histories
Section 1: Introduction
The history section is designed to get a glimpse into the process of developing and maintaining a PRS
in each of the provinces studied. For each province, research was structured to gain a multi-perspective picture
of the creation and progression of the PRS from inception to the current date [December 2014]. Information was
collected from official government documents, news articles from regional papers, blogs or publications
authored by involved civil society organizations, any academic literature concerning the PRS in question, and
any other relevant sources. In addition to laying out the chronological progression and different perspectives of
the PRS in question, both researchers have created a commentary on each history explaining in more detail the
research process and outlining some analysis of the information based on their perspectives of the collected
information.
Section 2: Manitoba
In the mid-2000s, the Make Poverty History Manitoba [MPHM] network was created. This
group was connected to the larger Make Poverty History Canada campaign and consisted of a
collection of organizations mainly based in Winnipeg who started collaborating, consulting various
stakeholders, conducting research, and advocating for a PRS to be adopted by the Manitoban
government (CCPAM, The View from Here, 2009).
In May of 2009, the NDP government officially released the government’s PRS AllAboard,
which centered on the areas of housing, education and job support, families, and accessible coordinated
services (Manitoba, 2009). The AllAboard PRS included a requirement to create legislation around the
PRS that would solidify the terms of the plan in law (Manitoba, 2009).
The quiet release of a PRS was a surprise to the civil society activists working on the issue, as
they had not previously been aware that the government was in process of developing a plan (Bernas,
2014). Shortly after the official PRS release, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives released The
View from Here, a report based on the Make Poverty History consultations which highlighted the state
of poverty in Manitoba and the specific government actions that a comprehensive PRS should include,
many of which had not been included in the AllAbroad PRS (CCPAM, 2009). Critics of the official
PRS claimed that while it laid out a decent policy framework, it had little long-term vision, few
methods of implementation, and its plans lacked substantive action (Poverty Reduction & Manitoba,
n.d.). The MPHM in collaboration with the Canadian Federation of Students launched a campaign in
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
8
the fall of 2009 called “Target Poverty Manitoba” which was designed to advocate for the setting of
specific targets and actions by the government to ensure the goals of the PRS were actually being
prioritized and met (Target Poverty, 2009).
In June of 2011, the Poverty Reduction Strategy Act received royal assent (CCSM, 2011). This
Act required the government to implement a long-term PRS, develop indicators to track progress,
publish annual progress reports, include the PRS in the annual budget, and create a committee to
oversee the PRS (CCSM, 2011). In the spring of 2012, progress indicators were selected for future
monitoring and reporting of the plan. Shortly after the development of the indicators, the government
released its first progress report, which made the additional goal of seeking progress on each identified
indicator from 2012 to 2016 (Manitoba, 2012). To better organize government action around this goal,
the report identified seven priority areas upon which all actions and programs would be focused on
over the next four years (Manitoba, 2012).
In late 2012, the MPHM began to campaign the government of Manitoba to raise the
Employment and Income Assistance rates included under the PRS strategy, stating that the current rates
and slated increases were not enough to provide sufficient assistance to those in poverty (Increase EIA
Rates in Manitoba. 2014). The campaign focused on rental allowances for people on EIA. The
government raised the rental allowance in the budget for 2013 and agreed to the overall target of 75%
of market value allowance, but MPHM continues the ongoing campaign - as of October 2014 - for the
setting of a specific deadline for the target to be met as well as bigger yearly increases (Increase EIA
Rates in Manitoba. 2014).
In 2013, the government launched a round of public consultations on the PRS to gain feedback,
critique, and insight for the next years of implementation (Manitoba, 2013a). The consultations
consisted of an online survey and public meetings with invited stakeholders (Manitoba, 2013a). Civil
society stakeholders were pleased that consultations took place but noted that the meetings had few
participants, individuals and groups were given very short notice about meeting times and locations,
and not much time was given for participant feedback (ALL ABOARD: Poverty Reduction Strategy
Newsfeed, 2014). Many NGOs critiqued the government for only engaging in consultation rather than
seeking collaboration with non-governmental poverty focused organizations (ALL ABOARD: Poverty
Reduction Strategy Newsfeed, 2014). Following the consultations, the government released a summary
report which highlighted the key findings and promised the release of seven new action plans related to
the seven priority areas over the next few years (Manitoba, 2013).
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
9
Action plans for employment, food security, and targeted individual and group support were
released in 2013. As of November 2014, no indication has been given as to when the remainder of the
action plans will be released. Progress reports for 2013 and 2014 were released on time and both
indicated progress had been achieved in some areas, but that greater collaboration with key
stakeholders is needed for better results (Manitoba 2013b, Manitoba 2014).
Box 2.1: Manitoba Commentary by Lauren Hills
The government of Manitoba has released documents reporting all the activities they have
conducted, the funds allocated, and the general plan of what they are going to do surrounding the PRS.
However, little information can be found from their perspective of what inspired the timing of the PRS
and the main motivations for structuring it in the manner that they did. Civil society stakeholders do not
seem to know or be very involved in the government’s motivations either. While NGOs were active and
organized prior to the PRS release, they were not consulted in the creation of the official plan in 2009
and were only consulted after the updated plan was released in 2012. Even in those consultations, one
of the major complaints by participants was that they felt more time was dedicated to the government
reiterating plans and activities rather than opening the floor to comments or critiques (ALL ABOARD:
Poverty Reduction Strategy Newsfeed, 2014). In general, the relationship between civil society and the
government appears to be more reactionary than collaborative. NGOs and the MPHM network react to
the government’s plans with publicity and campaigns, and while the government at times reacts to the
advocacy with adjustments, genuine dialogue and planning together seems to be limited or nonexistent. Specific civil society movements or organizations are not mentioned in any government
documents. Consequently, the government could have been motivated to create a PRS based on
genuine concern about the poverty levels in the province and a belief that a PRS would be an effective
policy. They could also have been motivated by pressure from other provincial governments
implementing similar policies, or perhaps another reason altogether. In any case, specific motivation is
difficult to determine from the information available. This limited ability to pinpoint motivation makes
it difficult to discern whether or not it is actually a highly prioritized or potentially successful policy.
Overall, the process of Manitoba’s PRS appears to have less organization and direction than the
process observed in Québec. In Québec, the process, during the initial stages of developing the
legislation was more transparent and public. By the time the PRS was made official, a detailed and
well-developed structure, timeline, goals and activities were in place, which functioned in an organized
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
10
manner with few major adjustments for the next years. In Manitoba, the process feels more haphazard.
The initial plan had few specific measures, no timeline for implementation, and no reported process of
development. No official progress reports were released until a few years after the initial plan’s release
despite the fact that the PRS legislation required it. The plan was significantly overhauled after only
four years of implementation. Key non-governmental stakeholders were not consulted in the
development of either strategy. It appears as though the government is developing the structure and
content of the plan as it is being implemented. However, more involvement from provincial
stakeholders and greater process transparency may be required to make the policy as effective as
promised.
I was not able to find much information concerning Manitoba’s PRS beyond what was provided
in official government documents or by involved NGOs commenting on specific critiques or
campaigns. Articles that were found in news sources mainly appear to be contributed by people
involved in an NGO or the MPHM network. This may be due to the relatively short lifespan of the
plan, which limits the ability to conduct long-term objective or academic analysis by individuals or
groups outside of the government and NGOs.
Section 3: Newfoundland and Labrador
Prior to the 2003 provincial election, Danny Williams of Newfoundland and Labrador's Progressive
Conservative party committed to address poverty (Collin, 2007). Once elected, the Progressive Conservative
government took budgetary steps to reducing poverty, including a low-income tax credit, improvements to the
social safety net, and a higher minimum wage (Locke & Rowe, 2009). The province's 2005 Speech from the
Throne formally committed to create a poverty reduction strategy with the overall goal of achieving the lowest
poverty rates in Canada over a ten-year period. To successfully achieve this goal, the province identified the need
for a long-term, comprehensive and integrated approach, which incorporates all levels of government and community partners.
By June 2005, a background report to guide consultations was released; this report defined poverty as
both lack of financial resources and social exclusion and highlighted three determinants of poverty: social trends,
labor market conditions, and government policies (CASW, 2009). From June to July 2005, workshops were held
across the province to obtain input from stakeholders. Sessions were held with community-based, business and
labor groups, and a summary report of responses was released in November 2005 (Government of NFL, 2006,
P12). Information was also collected from sessions with poverty-centric organizations and focus groups with
individuals living in poverty, as well as from a toll-free phone line (which received over 450 phone calls) e-mail
feedback (which received more than 100 submissions) and written submissions (of which there were approxi-
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
11
mately 60). No summary report was released on these consultation sessions and individual responses but Gilroy
(2005) identified eight common priorities for which there was broad consensus and found that all input articulated the desire for a holistic, community-based approach which takes into account the differing needs of specific
groups and regions.
The province reaffirmed their commitment to reduce poverty in May 2006, and the poverty reduction
strategy, Reducing Poverty: An Action Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador was released in June 2006 using
information from consultation sessions, best practices, and research (Government of NFL, 2006b). The strategy
received unanimous support in the province's House of Assembly (Collin, 2007). Implementation efforts, as dictated by the strategy, were to be led by the Minister of Human Resources, Labor, and Employment, governed by
a Ministerial Committee, and supported by a Deputy Ministers' Committee and an Interdepartmental Working
Group mandated to guide the work of the strategy (Collin, 2007, Government of NFL, 2006a, P10).
The strategy itself identified nine guiding principles, five goals and twenty objectives to reduce poverty
in Canada by improving access to relevant programs and services. The strategy further made the commitment to
allocate funds in the province’s yearly budget accordingly and to identify indicators of progress.
The continued commitment to the province's poverty reduction strategy was reiterated in a 2007 election
document (Gogan, 2009).At this same time, opposition members in the provincial legislature, social action
groups, and people living in poverty were speaking out against tax cuts affiliated with the poverty reduction
strategy (Locke & Rowe, 2009). In 2008, NDP leader Lorraine Michael criticized the strategy's focus, indicating
that some aspects of the plan’s scope, such as dental care and housing, are “programs people have a right to; they
are not poverty reduction” (Locke & Rowe, 2009).
In fall 2008 to winter 2009, a second round of consultations were held and it was found that affected
groups and individuals perceived the strategy’s initiatives as effective. These consultations included minister-led
round tables, public sessions, focus groups with individuals living in poverty and vulnerable to poverty, sessions
with community-based groups, telephone, e-mail and written feedback, and staff consultation (Gogan, 2009).
Although no report detailing these consultations was released, the province did publish the consultation guides
used in these sessions.
In 2009, the indicators for monitoring and reporting were identified; these were not made available to the
public until the first progress report was published in 2010. In addition to identifying and detailing indicators,
this progress report also summarized progress made on each goal, described goals for 2014, and provided a
summary of PRS initiatives. Susan Sullivan, the lead Minister on the strategy at this time, indicated that this report showed significant signs of success and progress toward the plan's goals (Government of NFL, 2009). The
report further made the commitment to release bi-annual reports – a commitment that was not followed through
in succeeding years.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
12
Following the release of this report, a third round of consultations was held in October to November
2010, but again no report of the results or key feedback was released to the public.
While the Progressive Conservative Party of Newfoundland and Labrador has led the province from the
strategy's beginning to the present, December 2010 marked a regime change when Danny Williams resigned as
premier and Kathy Dunderdale replaced him. This leadership shift marked a reduction in focus on the province's
poverty reduction strategy.
In 2012, Liberal critic Andrew Parsons noted the lateness of the second progress report, which was
meant to have been released in 2011. John Shea, the minister responsible for the strategy at that time, indicated
that the strategy's goal – to have the lowest poverty in Canada – was still on-track, and that an updated action
plan was expected “very soon” (CBC News, 2012). No specific timeline for this update was presented and no
further information concerning the PRS was released from the government for a few years afterwards.
In 2013, NDP Leader Lorraine Michael questioned whether poverty reduction was still a priority (NDP
Caucus, 2013). She indicated that a 2011 Department of Advanced Education and Skills report claimed that the
strategy was moving into its next phase, but that the 2013 report did not discuss this progression or the strategy
itself in-depth. She further noted that the staffing situation of poverty reduction was in question, as several key
positions created for the facilitation of the PRS were now vacant or eliminated.
A second progress report was finally published in June 2014. This report summarized progress made on
goals since 2010, identified next steps, and summarized initiatives implemented in the past years. A news release
accompanying this report indicated that the province reaffirmed its commitment to reducing poverty and that
work is underway to develop a new action plan and consultations to guide future directions and themes in poverty reduction (Government of NFL, 2014). Whether or not the government chooses to maintain future regular
action around the PRS will show if it is indeed a priority.
Box 3.1: Newfoundland and Labrador Commentary by Erin AuCoin
The process of finding information for Newfoundland's historical narrative was challenging, as there was
limited information available and little to no information from non-government sources.
The literature search for this province focused on the climate in which the strategy was created, how
poverty is framed within the context of the strategy, reactions to the strategy from other governmental parities
and community stakeholders, and perceptions of the strategy's successes and failures.
Although www.canadiansocialresearch.net synthesized a chronological list of important documents,
news releases, and reactions to Newfoundland's strategy, there was very little information available compared to
other provinces. The majority of what was listed came from government sources, and the final narrative consequently lacks perspectives and reactions from community stakeholders. Given that Newfoundland frames their
strategy as community-focused and places an emphasis on the integrated, collaborative nature of its develop-
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
13
ment, the lack of non-government resources is surprising.
Also of note is that within these government resources, there is a lack of information regarding community responses. Although a summary report was released of community-based, business and labor group sessions
after the first consultations, no reports were released for consultations with poverty-centric groups and individuals experiencing poverty or for later consultations. In fact, there is little to no information on the province's second or third round of consultations, including information regarding who participated in these sessions.
Using the internet, Google Scholar, and the uOttawa Library Databases, I was able to find news articles,
reactions, and scholarly sources, but they were relatively few in number. This, combined with the lack of information on www.canadiansocialresearch.net, indicated that rather than being unable to find information, this information simply did not exist.
There are several potential reasons for Newfoundland's comparative lack of data. Newfoundland is a
relatively small province with a relatively small government; there are comparatively less resources devoted to
poverty reduction and thus, it may be perceived as less of a priority. While the Conservatives have retained power throughout the strategy's implementation, the leader of the party changed halfway through its implementation.
A change in power may have marked a change in priority and given that there is a significant drop in action and
information available after this regime change, this is certainly a possibility.
Newfoundland's poverty reduction strategy is also framed and oriented differently than I observed for
Ontario's. Whereas Ontario lays out specific funding devoted to specific actions in the strategy, Newfoundland
identifies major goals and objectives and allocates funding in the annual budget. Newfoundland has also had the
same strategy in place since 2006, and has only released two progress reports. While the province initially made
the commitment to have bi-annual reports and a new strategy by 2014, these commitments have not been met.
That the government does not seem to perceive the strategy as a priority may indicate why reactions to and perceptions of it are lacking.
Section 4: Ontario
Prior to the 2007 provincial election, Ontario's anti-poverty movement sought to make poverty reduction
an election issue. Advocacy groups conducted public events, organized petitions, and drafted open letters to push
the government to create a poverty reduction plan with concrete targets and timelines (Maxwell, 2009). In response to this, premier Dalton McGuinty promised that, if re-elected, his government would develop a PRS
within their first year and make progress on poverty reduction throughout its term (Maxwell, 2009). The election
came out in McGuinty’s favour, and shortly after re-establishing office the Liberal-led government of Ontario
established a Cabinet-level committee on poverty reduction to begin the PRS process. This committee led the
consultation process for the province's first poverty reduction strategy in 2008 and the results were used to inform the development of the strategy (Barrata & Murphy, 2012).
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
14
In December 2008, Ontario's poverty action plan, Breaking the Cycle: Ontario's Poverty Reduction
Strategy was released. This strategy identified four goals and sub-divided these goals into more specific action
areas. Funding was allocated to specific programs and initiatives within the text of the strategy, and eight indicators of progress were identified.
The reception of this strategy was mixed. Community groups, including the Social Planning Network of
Ontario, 25 in 5 coalition partners, and advocacy organizations, praised the provincial government for taking the
first step to poverty reduction (Maxwell, 2009). Politicians from the opposition parties criticized the plan, pointing out that the needs of some groups prone to poverty, such as persons with disabilities, were not sufficiently
addressed (The Star, 2008).
In February 2009 the Ontario government introduced Bill 152, The Poverty Reduction Act, and by May it
received royal assent. This bill reiterated the long-term strategy identified in the poverty action plan and introduced mechanisms for the reduction of poverty in the province, as well as the commitment to hold public reviews every 5 years in order to sustain the strategy.
Prior to its induction the bill was criticized by the NDP for lacking direction and funds, but it received
all-party support by May following adjustments and amendments (The Star2009a). Although community organizations did identify some flaws with the bill – pointing out that it fell “short of envisioning a poverty-free province” (25in5, 2009) – it was perceived as an important and “historic” step in eliminating poverty and was supported by numerous and varied advocacy organizations (The Star 2009b, 2009c, 2009d).
From 2009 to 2013, annual progress reports were released. These reports reiterated the poverty reduction
strategy’s targets and goals, identified achievements on indicators for each of the strategy's goals, and laid out
next steps.
In June 2013, the Ontario government announced a renewal of their commitment to combat poverty. In
the next few months they engaged in consultation session with a Technical Advisory Group. These consultations
included more than 800 people, 65 formal submissions and over 2,000 responses collected through market research and online survey. Among the groups consulted were the Income Security Advocacy Centre, the Ontario
Minimum Wage Advisory Panel, and the Ontario Poverty Reduction Network. Some community groups criticized the consultation process, however, arguing that the government had not sufficiently applied input gathered
from the previous consultation (Hamilton Spectator, 2013).
Before the release of the second strategy it was evident that the overall target from the first strategy of
reducing child poverty by 25% was not going to be met. The government received criticism for this and several
organizations pointed out that bold action was necessary in the coming strategy to make success more likely
(The Star, 2013, Now Toronto, 2013). The Ontario government pointed to the federal government's lack of support as a contributing factor to the strategy's failure to meet its target. Deputy premier Deb Matthews stated that
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
15
the provincial government “knew that one level of government could not achieve that ambitious goal all by itself
,“ and so “laid out a very clear plan on how to meet that target” (The Canadian Press, 2014).
In September 2014, the Ontario government released their second poverty reduction strategy: Realizing
Our Potential: Ontario's Poverty Reduction Strategy 2014-2019. This strategy reiterated the commitment to reduce child poverty by 25% and introduced the new target of eliminating homelessness on Ontario. The strategy
further identified four new goals and action areas, as well as allocated funding on initiatives and programs for
2014-2019. The strategy further eliminated one indicator from the 2008 strategy and introduced two new indicators to measure progress.
Reactions to this recent poverty strategy have been varied. While the Liberal government has been
praised for maintaining poverty reduction as a priority, the strategy has been viewed as more aspirational than
action-oriented (The Star, 2014). The housing-oriented NGO Raising the Roof praised the funding, focus, and
commitment iterated in the strategy, but found that there was a lack of focus in targets, timelines, and adequate
funding (Noble & Boros, 2014). The Association of Ontario Health Centers commended the strategy's focus on
health benefits and homelessness, but also criticized the lack of timelines, targets, and implementation plan
(AOHC, 2014). The Income Security Advocacy Centre indicated that “one of the tests” for this strategy will be
how it tackles poverty experienced by people on social assistance (ISAC, 2014) and the 25in5 Network stated
that the “strategy's bold vision requires an action plan and investment strategy” (25in5, 2014).
Box 4.1: Ontario Commentary by Erin AuCoin
The research process for Ontario was relatively straightforward; there was significant information available from the provincial government, news outlets, academic sources, and involved community stakeholders.
The literature search for this narrative focused on explaining how Ontario's poverty reduction strategy
came to be, in what climate it was created, how poverty was framed within the context of the strategy, reactions
to the strategy from other government parties and community stakeholders, and perceptions of its successes and
failures.
www.canadiansocialresearch.net synthesized a chronological list of important documents, news releases,
and reactions to Ontario's poverty reduction strategies. I was able to collect the bulk of my information from this
resource; in particular, this resource was useful for locating media and non-government stakeholder responses to
the poverty reduction's releases and to its failure to meet its initial target.
The information I did not collect from this website I was able to easily locate through Google, Google
Scholar, and the uOttawa Library Databases. There were several academic sources available that described the
climate in which the strategy had developed and describing the historical aspects of its implementation.
Because Ontario had so much information available, I feel that I was able to create a relatively nonbiased explanation of the motivation for their strategy and the community reactions to the strategy. Furthermore,
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
16
the Ontario government is open to collaborating in the poverty reduction process. The government directly follows the criteria set out in the poverty reduction strategy and has consistently met deadlines and commitments,
such as releasing progress reports and a new strategy. Because there are annual progress reports, it is easy to follow what actions Ontario has taken and, consequently, the process itself is relatively transparent.
Ontario's poverty reduction strategy is rooted in the province's anti-poverty movement – it follows that
community groups have a significant presence in collaboration and critique of the strategy. Although Ontario has
been critiqued for not implementing the input it has received, the government has consistently made the effort to
engage stakeholders. It is clear from the response to the 2014 strategy that the PRS is a priority both for the provincial government and Ontario's civil society.
Ontario is a large, politically-centered province that has the second-biggest legislature in Canada; thus,
there is likely more incentive and manpower to meet poverty reduction commitments. Moreover, Dalton
McGuinty was the leader of the Liberal Party – the province's official government – from the implementation of
the strategy to 2013, thus ensuring a measure of consistency.
Section 5: Québec
Québec’s process of developing a PRS included a highly involved civil society from the very
beginning. In 1995, a women’s rights group known as the Fédération des femmes du Québec organized
a 200 kilometer march to the National Assembly called “la marche du pain et du roses” [the march of
bread and roses] in order to raise awareness about provincial poverty and violence against women
(Québec 2009). This event sparked many governmental and public conversations about poverty within
the province. In 1997, the NGO Carrefour de pastorale en monde ouvert organized a public dialogue to
brainstorm concrete measures by which provincial poverty could be addressed (Québec 2009). In these
meetings, the creation of an anti-poverty legislation was first proposed (Québec 2009). In 1998, a large
number of Québec civil society members and groups organized to create the Collectif pour une loi sur
l’élimination de la pauvreté (CLEP), whose sole purpose was to advocate for the creation of a lawbased poverty reduction plan (Québec 2009). Over the next few years the CLEP ran numerous events,
organized public consultations, and communicated with the government in support of their goal. In
2000, they presented the government with a petition signed by over 215,000 people in favour of a
poverty reduction law (La petite histoire, 2000).
In 2001, the government responded during the beginning of their budget conversations by
indicating willingness to adopt a poverty reduction law (Québec 2004b). They held official public
consultations in spring of 2001 and released preliminary poverty reduction orientation and strategy
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
17
documents in the following months. Over the course of this period the CLEP participated in the
consultations, continued their advocacy and managed to have a great deal of influence over the final
actions and decisions of the government (Québec, 2009). In 2002, a parliamentary commission was
created and the law was drafted, and on March 3, 2003, law 112, The Act to Prevent Poverty and Social
Exclusion, came into force (Québec, 2009). The law was met with praise from civil society and it
included many elements from an earlier draft law created by the CLEP (Vaillancourt & Aubry, 2014).
However, there were some criticisms over the lack of specific targets and failure to identify measures to
address the inequality gap between rich and poor (Bouchard, 2003).
In April 2004, the first action plan for the implementation of Law 112 was released (Québec
2004a). Its strategy focused around four main goals; to improve the lives of people living in poverty, to
prevent poverty and social exclusion, to involve society as a whole, and to ensure consistent and
coherent action (Québec 2004a). It included many specific targets and measures which were applauded
by the NGO community, but the CLEP still pointed out that it excluded some key elements of their
suggestions which could pose problem for the long term alleviation of poverty (Vaillancourt & Aubry,
2014).
From 2004-2009, the government held to the terms of the legislation and began implementing
the activities and programs outlined in the plan, releasing an annual report for the purpose of charting
progress, creating a consulting community consisting of key governmental and non-governmental
stakeholders to offer critique, and establishing a research centre to identify indicators of progress for
the plan (Québec 2004a). Over this period the CLEP was renamed the Collectif pour un Québec sans
pauvreté [CLQP] and continued to operate in an advocacy, consultant, and non-partisan dialogue role
(Québec 2009).
In June 2009, the government held another round of public consultations to inform the creation
of the next stage of the PRS. The consultations, however, were criticized by civil society organizations.
Participation was restricted to stakeholders pre-selected by the government and, in the end, many
groups called for their boycott due to the exclusionary tactics and biased representation (Vaillancourt &
Aubry, 2014).
In February 2010, the final annual report for the first PRS was released, and shortly after the
second PRS for 2010-2015 was made public (Québec, 2010). This plan’s focus identified four new
goals, including making regional and local communities key players in decision-making, focusing on
work and individual self-sufficiency, supporting incomes of disadvantaged individuals, and improving
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
18
living conditions of low-income individuals and families (Québec, 2010). This plan sought to address
some of the criticisms of the first strategy by focusing on financial benefits for individuals in poverty,
renewing a priority of social housing, and directing funding to locally based anti-poverty initiatives and
collectives (CWP, 2013). The CLQP did not receive the new plan with much praise, pointing out that it
had little direction for long term change and did not include many new measures (Vaillancourt &
Aubry, 2014).
Since 2010, the government has ceased direct responsibility over annual reports and has
delegated the task to the research centre Centre d’étude sur la pauvreté et l’exclusion (CEPE), which
has released a report each year on the state of the indicators that were developed for the 2010 action
plan (CEPE, 2012; CEPE, 2013). The overarching mission identified in Law 112 is to “make Québec,
by 2013, one of the industrialized nations having the least number of persons living in poverty,
according to recognized methods for making international comparisons”. Poverty indicators are thus
key metrics with which one can assess whether or not the government is on track to meeting that goal
(Québec, 2002). As of November 2014, the latest reports on Québec’s 2013 poverty levels are yet to be
released, so the success of this goal is not able to be determined.
Box 5.1: Québec Commentary by Lauren Hills
Québec’s PRS was the first in Canada to be developed and has been in place for over ten years,
information and analyses from government, civil society, news, and academic sources was thus quite
easy to locate. The fact that the initial legislation and action plan was sparked by civil society
movements is widely reported and acknowledged by all sources, with government documents crediting
certain NGOs and the CLEP for initiating action around the issue and academic sources pointing to
civil society events and processes as the source which brought the first PRS in Canada into a reality.
Because the information regarding this period was from all sources in a relatively uniform fashion, I’m
confident that the narrative presented is largely unbiased and accurate.
The first few years of plan development show a lot of cooperative dialogue and consultation
taking place between government and non-governmental stakeholders. The extensive dialogue and
cooperation implies that it was more of a collaborative than antagonistic relationship. In addition, the
fact that there was no precedent for PRSs in Canada shows that the government felt a very strong
conviction towards making it a reality, or the pressure from civil society was very strong [or a
combination of both]. This would explain why the PRS first took form in binding legislation and
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
19
commitments such as regular progress reporting, the allocation of sufficient funds and the creation of
collaborative civil society/governmental bodies for research and advice were so ritually kept. This force
of commitment from the government and dedication to monitoring by civil society bodes well for the
potential overall success of the plan.
However, the 2010 action plan and corresponding process has identified a few sources of
contention in the civil society/governmental relationship. The limited scope of the pre-plan
consultations and the discontent expressed by many NGOs implies that the strength of willingness to
collaborate on the government’s part may be waning. Most of the critiques coming from individual
NGOs surrounding the second plan address specific programs or actions rather than a unified effort to
influence major aspects of the plan (Vaillancourt & Aubry, 2014). Information from varied sources
regarding this period was a little more difficult to locate with most searches turning up blog posts in
individual NGO websites. Not much information except, for regular progress reports has been released
from the government, academia, or civil society concerning the second action plan and its process. This
may be due to the fact that the plan is still relatively new or that it is sufficiently meeting most
expectations, but also could imply that the focus or priority surrounding it is less strong than it was at
the beginning. The report detailing whether or not Québec has met its goal of having one of the lowest
poverty rates in all industrialized nations and the dialogue that surrounds that conclusion will yield
much more information to confirm or deny whether or not poverty reduction is still a strong priority for
the government of Québec and its society.
Section 6: Inter-Provincial Analysis
In the four historical narratives, a few areas of direct comparison can be observed regarding the
development and implementation processes of the PRSs. These include: the motivations/instigating
elements which started the PRS process, the inclusion or not of legislation, the response and
involvement of non-governmental stakeholders, the consultation structure and timing, and the overall
critiques of the PRS and the government’s responses to them.
Motivation/instigating elements which started the PRS Process
In Quebec, Manitoba, and Ontario, advocacy networks of stakeholders and NGOs were
organized and working on campaigns designed to raise awareness and influence the government to
create a PRS before the processes in either province started. In Quebec these civil society-led
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
20
movements are clearly labeled by all sources to be the spark, which started the process, and a similar
view is implied in the case of Ontario. Moreover, the development of a PRS was identified as a
motivation throughout the 2007 re-election campaign of the Liberal party. In those two provinces,
consultations and collaborative planning process were enacted by the government to involve nongovernmental stakeholders in the initial plan’s development. For Manitoba, it is possible that advocacy
groups had an influence over the government’s final decision to create a PRS, but they were left out of
the development process and not informed or consulted prior to the plan’s release. In Newfoundland
and Labrador, no significant organized civil-society campaigns are recorded prior to the PRS’s
induction and poverty reduction was first officially mentioned as a part of the platform for the
Conservative party’s 2003 re-election campaign. However, public consultations were held before the
release of the first plan, so while non-governmental stakeholders may not have inspired the beginning
of the PRS process, they were given platform to contribute to its development. Consequently, civilsociety pressure can be attributed to the motives of Québec, Ontario, and possibly Manitoba, and
garnering political support can be attributed to the motives of Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador.
In Québec, Ontario, and Newfoundland and Labrador, non-governmental stakeholders were given
space and time by the government to contribute to the creations of the initial plans, but in Manitoba that
was not the case.
Legislation
In terms of legislation, Québec’s PRS process is unique in that it is the only province which
enacted a poverty reduction law before creating an official policy strategy. However, the legislation
included many aspects of the later-released strategy and formed the basic structure for implementation
and monitoring of the plan. Ontario and Manitoba both created legislation a few years after the release
of their initial strategy, which solidified the terms identified in their action plans. The laws for all three
provinces lay out the requirements in implementing poverty reduction including creating monitoring
bodies, reporting on progress, and maintaining the long-term direction of the plans As these three
provinces all have laws and evidence of an active and organized civil society, it can be assumed that
there is a stronger basis for the government to be held accountable to their actions than in
Newfoundland and Labrador, where there is no legislation or evidence of a significant civil-society
movement.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
21
Response and Involvement of Non-Governmental Stakeholders
There is also the aspect of critiques to the PRS plans as they are currently ongoing. Québec,
Ontario, and Manitoba have all received critique concerning the nature of their public consultations,
with participants questioning their openness to stakeholders or the government’s track record of
applying feedback from consultations. For Québec and Ontario these critiques occurred following their
later rounds of consultation done after the initial plan was developed, with few complaints being raised
shortly after the first sessions held. Manitoba’s critiques occurred after the sole consultation session
with stakeholders already doubting the government’s willingness to take feedback into account. As it
stands, the governments have directly addressed none of these issues surrounding consultations.
Newfoundland and Labrador has not published any reports about their public consultations, neither is
there any record of consistent vocal discontent from stakeholders or participants.
Each province has also received critiques about failing to set specific targets or long-term
direction in their plans. In Manitoba, campaigns by civil society largely revolve around petitioning the
government to be more specific about aspects of their proposed activities, such as rental rates and
setting measurable progress targets. The government has responded by changing some aspects of their
plan, such as developing progress indicators and slightly raising the set rental rates, but has not engaged
in much dialogue with their critics. Québec and Ontario have been questioned by their respective civil
societies because their second action plans set less measurable targets and long-term implementation
visions with no significant alterations to their action plans. Newfoundland and Labrador has mainly
received critiques from within oppositional political parties pointing out the lack of PRS activity. These
critiques have sometimes been met with the release of some information, but have also been met with
unfulfilled promises of activity at other times.
Summary
In conclusion, Ontario and Quebec have the most similar histories and processes in regards to
the PRS beginnings, process, and the kinds of activities that the government participated in over the
course of the policy’s implementation. Both of these governments gave much space and time for
stakeholders and community groups to respond and be included in the initial stages of development and
implementation, but further in the process groups called the governments’ sincerity in collaboration
into question. The second action plans for these provinces are also critiqued as having poor direction or
specific measures, and not sufficiently building and progressing from the last action strategy.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
22
Consequently, the potential success of these two plans is promising as they have consistent and well
established strategies, but lessening public engagement and perceived government sincerity may be
compromising the ability of either PRS to function at its best capacity. Manitoba has many similarities
to Ontario and Quebec in regards to their activities and legislation, but has a lower level of engagement
with non-governmental stakeholders, and has received critiques quickly after engagement over general
lack of collaboration. Manitoba also appears to be spending less energy on developing its plans before
implementing them and adjusts their activities frequently. This could imply that the strategy is overall
less thought-out and therefore less effective, but could also indicate that the strategy will become more
refined and effective at reducing poverty over time. Newfoundland and Labrador is more comparable to
Ontario and Quebec only in that the beginning of its plan process included consultations with public
stakeholders. Otherwise, Newfoundland and Labrador has shown less consistency in following through
with its strategy, has not regularly monitored or maintained it, and has been mainly critiqued for
inaction.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
23
Chapter 3: Timeline
Section 1: Introduction
An important aspect of a PRS is the chronology of events, documents, and other actions
conducted by the government throughout the policy’s lifespan. This is especially helpful in crossprovincial comparison as key similarities or differences in pattern, order, or presence of action can be
immediately identified. For this analysis, we present this information using graphs of the PRS process
timelines. Aspects of the process are divided into different color-coded categories for the best visual
distinction. The timelines are created using Timeglider software (www.timeglider.com).
Figure 1 Overall timeline
After the initial collection of each provincial government’s PRS actions, eight categories of actions were created to consolidate the information:
1. “Release of Strategy Document” indicates when the government first made public a document
outlining their official PRS action plan with a basic timeline or strategy of implementation and
specific programs and actions identified.
2. “Bodies/Committees” indicates when the government mandated a group, committee, or centre
to advise the government about PRS implementation, monitor PRS progress, or conduct
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
24
research regarding poverty and PRS practice. Members consist of either government or civil
society stakeholders.
3. “Public Consultations” indicates when the government enacted a process of meetings, surveys,
dialogues, interviews, or any other form of public engagement specifically regarding the PRS.
4. “Legislation” indicates when legislation was assented regarding poverty reduction which
solidified specific aspects or the entirety of the PRS into law.
5. “Progress Reports” indicates when the government made public a document outlining the results
found by their PRS monitoring activities up to that point in time.
6. “Supporting/Context documents” indicates the official release of any document by the
government which provides extra information regarding PRS motivation, context, finances, or
progress indicators.
7. “Government Action” indicates any communication from the government to their citizens
regarding the PRS or poverty reduction in general.
8. “Provincial Political Events” indicates provincial elections or changes in premier leadership.
While this form of presentation enables many routes of comparative analysis, this report will
single out progress reports and public consultations as specific points of comparison. The release of
progress reports is the best indicator of the government’s consistency in monitoring PRS progress as
well as whether they uphold public transparency. The timing and frequency of public consultations are
indicators of how engaged the government is with civil society and whether or not civil society has
been given sufficient space and time to influence aspects of the PRS. Both of these categories can show
the government’s commitment to PRS monitoring and success, as well as the government’s level of
engagement with civil society. Either of these aspects could be key in determining the effectiveness of a
PRS as a policy tool.
Section 2: Progress Reports
An initial assessment of the timing and frequency of progress reports yields many observations
concerning similarities, differences, and potential implications for the four provinces.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
25
Figure 2 Manitoba progress reports
Figure 3 Newfoundland and Labrador progress reports
Figure 4 Ontario progress reports
Figure 5 Quebec progress reports
Of the four provinces, Québec and Ontario have similar cyclical patterns in regards to action
plans and progress reporting. Both of the provinces began to release reports shortly after releasing their
first action plan and both have published annual reports from that point until the present. This is
consistent with the findings in the histories, which observed that both provinces have overall
maintained regular implementation and maintenance concerning the PRS since its inception as a policy.
The regular reporting indicates that monitoring of the policy is taking place recurrently, and that there
is enough political will, legislative accountability, or civil societal scrutiny to ensure that regular action
and communication of progress takes place. This may imply that in both provinces, non-governmental
stakeholders are involved, invested, and educated about the policy as they are receiving yearly updates
on the plan’s progress.
Manitoba and Newfoundland and Labrador have a less consistent history with progress
reporting. Manitoba released their first official progress report approximately four years after their
strategy was made public, despite the fact that their legislation mandated an immediate start to regular
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
26
reporting. However, another report was released a year after the first, potentially indicating a future
pattern of regular reporting. Newfoundland and Labrador has only released two progress reports over
eight years of PRS implementation and there is no identified pattern in the timing of either report.
Information from the historical PRS research shows that the processes in Manitoba and
Newfoundland and Labrador in general have been less habitually consistent than those in Ontario and
Québec. Manitoba has not made communicating their motivations and process to the public an
ingrained part of their PRS activities and their policy has had many changes and inconsistencies over
its first few years of implementation. However, Manitoba has been more active than Newfoundland in
implementing the PRS and is currently developing more specific action plans for areas they consider
priorities in poverty reduction. It is possible that, as their process develops and becomes more directed
and specific, more consistency in reporting will develop. Newfoundland and Labrador has had gap
years where the PRS is not mentioned or acted upon by the government, and the second progress report
was only released after oppositional political parties began to ask about it. They have no legislative
structure which requires them to report on progress. This likely indicates that the PRS is less of a
priority for the current government and unless major changes happen in political will or structure, more
action and reporting is not expected. The fact that progress reports are not regular also implies that a
structure for regular progress monitoring is not in place for this province. In addition, as the
government has maintained long gaps of inactivity with little oppositional scrutiny, this potentially
indicates that non-governmental stakeholders are less capable of holding the government accountable
or are not very invested in the PRS policy.
Section 3: Public Consultations
The patterns of public consultations in the four provinces’ processes are much the same as in the
progress reporting. Quebec and Ontario both have a twice repeated cycle where public consultations
are held before the release of an action plan document. In the case of Québec, the first round of
consultations took place at the very beginning of the process and informed the creation of the PRS
legislation, which in turn laid the groundwork for the contents of the action plan released a few years
later. This backs up the overall observations that the PRS processes in Ontario and Québec are regular,
consistent, and organized. However, for both provinces, critiques were raised by stakeholders
concerning the structures of the consultations. NGOs in Québec were concerned as the second round of
consultations were open only to invited groups and had limited participation, and groups in Ontario
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
27
expressed that input from the consultations were not sufficiently addressed by the government.
Consequently, while the process of engagement for these two provinces is well established, the manner
in which they conduct consultations and engage with the results could be an issue which affects
collaborative effectiveness and overall PRS success.
Figure 6 Manitoba public consultations
Figure 7 Newfoundland and Labrador public consultations
Figure 8 Ontario public consultations
Figure 9 Quebec public consultations
Newfoundland and Labrador started their PRS process with consultations followed by an action plan,
but later on they held two other rounds of consultations that did not lead to the release of an updated
action plan. On the full timeline with all actions listed (see figures 10 to 13 below), it can be seen that
the two later rounds of consultations directly precede the release of a document identifying indicators
and the first progress report. This is consistent with the overall pattern observed in Newfoundland’s
process; while dialogue, reporting, and other activities happen sporadically, they do not consistently
lead to substantial growth and development of the PRS. This displays a lack of deep political will to
maintaining the PRS and a civil society too weak or disengaged to hold the government accountable.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
28
Manitoba also follows a different path in regards to official engagement with the public. No
consultations were held before the release of their 2009 action plan. The one round that was conducted
was held after the release of the updated 2010 action plan. Manitoba’s PRS history articulates in more
detail how non-governmental stakeholders have been largely left out of the official development
process for the majority of time that the policy has been running. The timing of the consultations is
evidence of that fact, as it appears the government has made little effort to collect the public’s input
before choosing a plan of action and only included them after the plan’s structure and components had
been selected. Consequently, it does not appear that Manitoba has set up a policy structure which
includes non-governmental stakeholders which may impact the ability of the PRS to target the areas of
poverty which are beyond the current vision of the government.
Section 4: Overall Process
In general, government actions in Québec and Ontario show consistent activity that occurs in
regular order and patterns. The above timelines show that the general order and process of both
provinces is very similar, and all activities in the two provinces are spaced out and consistent with
slightly more happening around the launch of an action plan. However; stakeholder’s critiques of the
second action plans for both provinces as well as the manner in which public consultations are
conducted may indicate that while the structure is well-established and maintained, the content and the
governments’ interactions with society and policy may need to be addressed or the ability of the plans
to meet set goals may be in jeopardy.
Newfoundland and Labrador has had one of the longest periods of time since the inception of a
PRS, but has much fewer events compared to the other provinces and long gaps of inactivity. The first
lull in activity happened directly after the premier leadership changed from Danny Williams to Kathy
Dunderdale. It is also the only province without legislation guiding and monitoring the PRS. Overall, it
is the province with one of the longest implementation periods but the lowest amount of activity over
that period. This implies that poverty reduction is a lower priority for the current government and
possibly could indicate a very ineffective strategy, as it is not regularly being monitored or maintained.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
29
Figure 10 Manitoba overall process
Figure 11 Newfoundland and Labrador overall process
Figure 12 Ontario overall process
Figure 13 Quebec overall process
Manitoba has had the shortest period of time in its process, but has packed a lot of activity into that
time. Like Ontario and Québec, it has its PRS written into law which presents some form of
accountability. While Manitoba has many of the same activities, groups, and documents as Québec and
Ontario, the order of Manitoba’s activities differs from the other two. Progress reporting starts later and
the public consultation occurs after both action plans have been released. In addition, Manitoba has
taken a different approach to action plans with the 2013 and onwards release of action plans related to
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
30
specific areas of poverty reduction, rather than including them in the main action plan as is the case for
the other provinces. It appears as though Manitoba is developing the structure of its PRS while in the
midst of implementing it, which also differs from Ontario and Québec as the structure of activity for
both provinces was developed in initial plan or legislation and commenced immediately after the law
was assented or the first action plan released. This could possibly mean that Manitoba’s policy will
have less impact on poverty than will Québec and Ontario’s, but it could also mean that as the policy
progresses it will get more established, specified, and therefore more effective.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
31
Chapter 4: Goals, Objectives, Targets and Indicators
Section 1: Introduction
In order to compare each province's poverty reduction strategy, it was first necessary to compare
what each strategy seeks to achieve and how these achievements are measured. To accomplish this, we
created tables comparing the goals, objectives, targets, and indicators identified in each province's PRS.
To create these tables, we turned to the text of each strategy. While all provinces identify
specific goals and indicators, objectives and targets are not labeled as such in each strategy. Thus, to
effectively compare the provinces, we created standardized definitions of the key poverty reduction
concepts. These definitions, selected through collaboration and through cross-referencing definitions
from dictionary.com, are as follows:

Vision: defines the optimal future the strategy hopes to achieve

Mission: defines the present state or purpose of the strategy

Goal: an aim or desired result; within the context of a poverty reduction strategy, how this
strategy aims to improve the well-being of the populations

Objective: something that one's efforts are intended to attain, usually related to an action

Indicator: a measurement that quantifies the state or level of something; used to evaluate
success

Target: something one is trying to do or achieve; in the context of a poverty reduction strategy, a
quantifiable goal

Action: the fact or process of doing something to achieve an aim; within a policy context, steps
to work toward a goal, target, etc.
While not all of these concepts were used in the following analysis, these standardized
definitions were helpful in our initial assessments of each strategy and allowed us to compare what
each province hopes to achieve. Moreover, these definitions will contribute to later analyses and will
ensure future research adopts the same poverty reduction concepts.
Table 1 provides an overview of each province's goals, objectives, targets, and indicators. A
detailed table, comparing each of these concepts as they appear in the most recent poverty reduction
strategies, can be found in the report appendix. Province-specific tables can be found in the appropriate
province's appendix.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
32
Table 1: Goals, objectives, indicators and targets summary table2
2
Goals
Objectives
Indicators
Targets
Manitoba
✓ – 4 goals
identified
✓ - 8 objectives
identified
✓ - 21 total
indicators,
including wellbeing indicators
and indicators
related to actions
✓ - targets linked
to specific indicators – housing,
child care and
nursery school
spaces, and family
doctor access
Newfoundland
and Labrador
✓ - 5 goals
identified in 2006
strategy
✓ - divides each
goal into
objectives
✓ - 15 indicators
identified in 2010
progress report,
divided into
overall, income
and child and
youth indicators
✓ - Newfoundland will have
lowest poverty in
Canada
Ontario
✓ - 4 goals
identified in
2008-2013
strategy; 4 goals
identified in
2014-2019
strategy
✓ - no objectives
specifically
identified,
however
objectives can be
understood from
sub-headings used
for initiatives
funded
✓ - 8 indicators
identified in
2008-2013 strategy; 10 indicators
identified in
2014-2019 strategy
✓ - reduce child
poverty by 25% both strategies
Québec
✓ - 4 goals
identified in
2004-2009
strategy; 4 goals
identified in
2010-2015
strategy
✓ - no objectives
specifically
identified,
however
objectives can be
understood from
explanation of
goals
✓ - 9 indicators,
all of which are
well-being
indicators
✓ - spending targets and target to
place Québec
among nations in
the world lowest
poverty rates by
2013 (2004-2009
strategy)
This table is based on the provinces’ most recent poverty reduction strategy.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
33
Box 4.1: Income poverty indicators in Canada
The following income poverty indicators are commonly used in Canada: Low Income Cut-Off (LICO;
using income before or after taxes), Low Income Measure (LIM) and the Market Basket Measure
(MBM). The LICO threshold depends on the expected income share a family spends on necessities
such as food, shelter and clothing in comparison to the average family. If a family’s annual income before taxes falls below the family’s LICO threshold all members are counted by Statistics Canada as
poor (or ‘low income’) according to the LICO before taxes. The LICO after taxes is calculated in a similar fashion except that a family’s after tax income is used. The Low Income Measure is based on a relative threshold set at 50 per cent of national median income. Household incomes are adjusted for differences in household size using the square root of household size as an equivalence scale. The Market
Basket Measure is based on the costs of a modest basket of goods and services and compared to a
household’s disposable income. In comparison to after tax income, the definition of disposable income
is more stringent because it additionally deducts payroll taxes, out-of-pocket costs for child care and
prescription drugs.
Source: Statistics Canada, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2010003/section/s2-eng.htm.
Section 2: Manitoba
Manitoba's PRS identifies four goals, all of which are broad and high-level. These goals identify
the major areas which poverty reduction actions should be grouped under. Manitoba's strategy further
indicates seven policy/program priority areas that they believe action will contribute to achieving the
stated goals. These function as 'sub-goals', and the province has released specific action plans based on
these areas. Like the other provinces, this province's objectives are grouped under the specific goal with
which they correspond. Rather than corresponding with specific actions, however, these objectives
instead focus on improving or bettering a sub-area related to each goal. Manitoba's goals and
objectives are broader in nature, focusing on improving society more generally.
Manitoba's strategy uses more indicators than any other province assessed, with a total of
twenty-one. Indicators include both well-being indicators and indicators related to specific actions. The
main income measures used to measure success are the market basket measure, after-tax low-income
measure, and the post-2013 included low-income measure; there is no indication of what percentile
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
34
Manitoba uses to measure low-income status.
Manitoba identifies targets that correspond with measurable outcomes that directly impact
individuals experiencing poverty; these targets strive to measure the policy actions resulting from the
strategy, rather than its broad, overarching measurable impact.
Section 3: Newfoundland and Labrador
Newfoundland and Labrador's PRS identifies five goals. These goals, which frame poverty
reduction as being based on improving conditions for society, are all instrumental goals, focused on
improving the structures that contribute to poverty. Despite Newfoundland' and Labrador’s selfacknowledged focus on collaboration and community engagement, there is no goal related to this
commitment. The strategy's objectives are framed as sub-goals; each goal is sub-divided into
objectives, all of which relate to specific actions, related to achieving that overarching goal.
The strategy divides indicators into three sections: overall indicators, income indicators, and
child and youth indicators. By selecting income and children as specific areas of focus, the strategy
implies that these are priorities to reduce poverty– an implication supported by the strategy's goals. The
strategy further identifies a diverse array of income indicators, including the median after tax family
income, the personal after tax disposable income, average earnings, low income cut-offs after tax, low
income measure after-tax, and the market basket measure. The number of income measures suggests
that the strategy intends to gain as complete a portrait of poverty as possible.
The strategy's only target is to achieve the lowest poverty in Canada by 2014. Though a
progress report was released in 2014, Newfoundland and Labrador had not yet achieved this target;
instead it had the second-lowest poverty rate in Canada. The failure to meet this target was not
discussed in the report, and no updated targets have since been identified.
Section 4: Ontario
Ontario's PRS identifies four broad goals. The first three goals are well-being goals and focus
on improving societal conditions to reduce poverty. The fourth goal is instrumental and focuses on
improving societal structures that contribute to this poverty. These goals suggest that Ontario's strategy
focuses on the most vulnerable 10-20% of the population, and that Ontario's poverty reduction methods
are centered on helping those most deeply affected by poverty.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
35
The strategy does not frame its objectives as such; rather it sub-divides each goal into specific
areas of focus, in which objectives are implied. Unlike the goals, these objectives suggest that the
province's policy initiatives are spread out over a much larger population group than children and their
families and that the strategy aims to reduce poverty by addressing systemic issues.
Ontario uses ten indicators in its most recent strategy, and within that, three income
measurements, including low-income measure (LIM50), depth of poverty (LIM40), and poverty rates
of vulnerable populations. Like the province's goals, these indicators demonstrate a focus on the
province's most vulnerable citizens.
The strategy identifies one target: to reduce child poverty by 25% by 2019. This is the same
target that was used in the previous strategy and, along with the province's goals and objectives,
demonstrates an attention to child-specific policy action.
Section 5: Québec
Québec's poverty reduction strategy identifies four goals which frame poverty reduction as
being based on improving conditions for the individual. This focus on the individual is the result of a
shift from the first to the second action plan in response to critiques of the first strategy. Of the most
recent strategy's goals, three of the four focus on enabling individual success. The fourth goal focuses
on the engagement of key community stakeholders, which fits within the provincial context of civil
society involvement in poverty reduction. Québec's strategy does not frame objectives as objectives,
per say, but objectives can be identified through assessment of the actions associated with each goal.
Objectives in this strategy are thus articulated as sub-goals, or as concrete means of achieving the
strategy's broader goals.
The nine indicators identified in Québec's strategy are all well-being indicators. It is notable that
progress reports use additional indicators for measuring success. In one report, the main income
measure used is the MBM; the strategy itself also identifies the LIM at 50% and 60% as income
measures. The use of the market basket measure matches the strategy's framing of poverty as
something experienced by the individual, and of solutions to this poverty as based on improving
conditions for the individual.
Québec's targets included spending targets and, in the first strategy, the target to place Québec
among nations in the world with lowest poverty rates by 2013. The strategy also has measurable targets
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
36
as objectives, but these are not framed as targets within the document. These targets demonstrate an
attention to measure policy and to develop quantifiable government action.
Section 6: Inter-Provincial Analysis
Goals
Each province has either four or five goals and substantively, these goals are relatively similar.
All goals focus on improving conditions that correspond with poverty, and there are common themes in
all goals, including children and youth, housing, education, income, and accessibility of services. How
these goals are framed, however, is different between each province. Although Québec's goals are
similar to the other provinces, they focus in improving conditions for individuals. The Québec strategy
thus frames poverty as something experienced by an individual. Comparatively, Ontario and
Newfoundland and Labrador frame poverty as a societal issue. Ontario and Newfoundland differ as to
whether their goals are expressed in terms of well-being outcomes (i.e. improving living standards,
education levels) or as means by which such outcomes can be reached (i.e. instrumental and focusing
on policies and/or aspects of public management such as monitoring and evaluation). Ontario's goals
focus mostly on wellbeing outcomes. By comparison, Newfoundland and Labrador's goals are
instrumental and are formulated with respect to policy actions that will, presumably, lead to well-being
outcomes. In comparison to the other provinces, Manitoba's goals are vague and, rather than articulate
a specific aim or result, instead identify broad areas for future policy action.
Objectives
Each province frames their objectives differently. Manitoba and Newfoundland and Labrador
identify objectives as sub-divisions of goals, whereas Québec and Ontario do not explicitly formulate
objectives but instead have implied objectives that indicate areas of policy action within each goal's
area of focus. There is also significant divergence in how many objectives strategies use. All provinces,
except Manitoba, link objectives to public policy actions to the ultimate well-being changes they are
aiming to achieve. However, most objectives are quite broad and thus leave significant room to
interpretation as to how they are to be accomplished. Similar to the province’s goals, Manitoba's
objectives are broader than those of the other provinces; many do not relate to specific actions,
therefore rendering it unclear as to how they translate into government action. This lack of specific
connection between objectives and action makes it difficult assess whether actions contribute to
reaching the objectives.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
37
Indicators
The number of indicators varies across provinces (between eight and twenty-one) and there is
significant variance in what indicators each strategy uses. Moreover, indicators identified in official
documents do not always align with what is reported in progress reports (i.e. Québec). For all provinces
progress on goals is tracked using indicators and is described in progress reports.
While all provinces use the low-income measure (LIM), the percentile at which low-income is
assessed varies. Québec looks at 50% and 60% of the median, Ontario looks at 40% (poverty gap) and
50% (poverty rate), and Manitoba and Newfoundland and Labrador do not indicate what percentiles
they use. Additionally, all provinces except Ontario use the market based measure (MBM) and Ontario,
by contrast, is the only province to specifically look at the poverty rates of vulnerable populations.
In regards to non-income indicators, all provinces except Manitoba use relatively similar
measures. All provinces use low birth weights, an education indicator and rates of joblessness or
unemployment. Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador's education indicators focus on children and
youth, whereas Québec's focuses on diploma attainment. Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador also
use more children and youth specific indicators in comparison to Québec, which only measures low
birth weight. This difference illustrates the emphasis Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador's
strategies put on reducing child and youth poverty, whereas Québec focuses on poverty more broadly.
Manitoba, by comparison, uses a diverse array of indicators. Some of these indicators are broad
well-being measures and are similar to what is used by other provinces, but Manitoba is unique in
having indicators related to specific organizations and to specific policy actions. Unlike Newfoundland
and Labrador, Manitoba does not organize the indicators by sub-dividing them into specific policy
areas. Indicators unique to Manitoba include teen birth rates, sense of community belonging, and
prevalence of chronic disease by income quintile. Moreover, Manitoba is the only province to use
indicators specific to health-related measures, although the rest of the strategy does not demonstrate a
focus on health. This suggests an approach to poverty reduction that recognizes the broad causes and
effects of poverty.
Targets
The targets each province uses are diverse. Both Québec and Newfoundland and Labrador have
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
38
targets that compare their poverty rate to those of other provinces. Ontario's target focuses specifically
on reducing child poverty. Québec is the only province that has a spending target and this, along with
goal-specific targets, illustrates an emphasis on government action as it relates to poverty reduction.
Manitoba's targets relate to specific outcomes.
In sum, there are more and less subtle differences in the framing of the provincial strategies’
goals, the overall focus of the strategy, and the specific indicators and targets. While Manitoba's
strategy shares many similarities with the other provinces, its goals and objectives are comparatively
broad, while its indicators and targets are more specific.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
39
Chapter 5: Conclusion
Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRS) have become a popular governance tool in contemporary policymaking in developed and developing countries. A PRS involves governments and stakeholders engaging in a
process that culminates in a strategic plan to reduce poverty. These strategies are supposed to be communitydriven, result-oriented, comprehensive, partnership-oriented, and based on a long-term perspective, therefore
making it all the more likely that they are successful in acheving their goals. (International Monetary Fund).
In Canada, many of the key policy domains affecting poverty fall under provincial jurisdiction and, over
the past decade, the majority of provinces have implemented or developed a PRS.
The aim of this report has been to perform a systematic comparison of PRS processes among four Canadian provinces. We focused our analysis on the events preceding each province's PRS, as well as the text of the
strategy and how its purpose and goals are framed. We thus compared the similarities and differences between
each province's history, timeline, goals, objectives, targets and indicators. By focusing on these elements, we
also developed a conceptual framework that allowed us to establish a baseline of information as to how poverty
reduction strategies in Canada can be compared. In addition to Ontario and Québec we selected two other provinces Newfoundland and Labrador and Manitoba, based on a number of criteria including geographic and socioeconomic diversity. We then mapped the PRS process timelines of each province, identifying characteristics for
the inter-provincial comparison. Using the text of each strategy and standardized definitions, we compiled each
province's goals, objectives, indicators and targets and summarized this information in a variety of tables, drawing conclusions and observations from these data. Historical narratives were then drafted based on news articles,
academic journals, government publications and the author’s commentaries. This tracing of the PRS process
provides a preliminary answer to the critical question of whether provincial PRS processes are similar or if they
are instead more like ‘apples and oranges’. It thereby offers an understanding of the context that is critical for
understanding if, how and why a PRS may contribute to achieving poverty reduction in an advanced economy
such as Canada.
The key conclusion of this research is that these PRS processes, while similar, have significant differences and by no means follow a specific format. While the provinces generally used similar elements in the development and implementation of their PRS, including public consultations and progress reports, these elements
have been implemented differently. Québec, Ontario, and Newfoundland and Labrador held consultations prior
to the release of their strategy, whereas Manitoba did not. However, Newfoundland and Labrador also held consultations following their strategy's release. In regards to progress reports, reporting mandates differ between
strategies, although aside from Newfoundland and Labrador all provinces regularly release reports.
Civil society was found to be a significant aspect of all strategies' development. Differences can be seen,
however, in the engagement of civil society in the strategies development and implementation as well as in the
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
40
text of the document itself. Whereas the commitment to create a PRS in Ontario, Québec, and Manitoba was
rooted in community action, Newfoundland and Labrador’s commitment was founded on election campaign
promises. Despite this, Manitoba did not engage in public consultations until three years in its first cycle while
Newfoundland and Labrador identified community engagement as a central focus of their strategy. Thus, there
are disparities in the ways in which governments and civil society engage in poverty reduction processes. As
PRS processes are a relatively new policy process in the Canadian context, a possible reason for Manitoba's lateness in consultations may be the simple result of a government learning how to implement a PRS process. If that
is the case, we could expect to see a convergence in provincial PRS processes over time.
High-level government action on strategies, such as the institutionalization of the process in legislation,
action plans, and the existence and engagement of PRS-specific government bodies, appear to be 'optional'. That
Newfoundland and Labrador is the only province not to have PRS legislation – and is the only province to see a
significant drop in PRS government action – suggests that legislation may be effective in maintaining poverty
reduction as a government priority. However, PRS processes are a relatively recent phenomenon. Unlike the other provinces, Ontario's PRS process did not experience any boom and bust cycle(s). Yet, it is the only province
that did not experience a political leadership/regime change until recently (2013). Legislation may not be sufficient in the face of changing priorities of leaders or political parties. While it is unlikely that a bill mandating the
government to fight poverty will be overturned, it may well be possible that a PRS process is merely continued
in name rather than substance.
From examining the strategies goals, objectives, targets and indicators, it is evident that all provinces
show a similarity in spirit, via the emphasis on employment, income indicators, and attention to different social
indicators. However, while the goals of most provinces are defined relative to the well-being outcomes they aspire to achieve, Manitoba's goals were instead of an instrumental nature focusing on policy domains. There are
further differences in each province's focus and in the framing of goals and objectives, with Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador placing an emphasis on child poverty, Québec framing poverty as something experienced by an individual, and Manitoba's broad scope of objectives.
In conclusion, a tentative answer to our question is that PRS processes are apples in the sense that they
all have a PRS process that is guided by goals, objectives and indicators. In all cases the PRS action plan marks
the start of the implementation of the strategy. All PRS processes involve public consultations and progress reporting. However, this research has also shown significant disparities in the timing of some elements and highlighted the use of optional elements, therefore suggesting that PRS processes are both apples and oranges. More
research is needed to assess what effects, if any, these similarities and differences have on the overall effectiveness of a PRS process and how such a process can result in more cost-effective and sustainable improvements in
wellbeing outcomes as a result of better policy making.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
Bibliography
Introduction and Conclusion
Banting, K., & Myles, J. (2013). Inequality and the Fading of Redistributive Politics. Introduction.,
UBC Press: Vancouver.
Barata, P., & Murphy, C. (2012). Foundations for Social Change: Reflections on Ontario’s Poverty
Reduction Strategy. Canadian Review of Social Policy/Revue canadienne de politique sociale,
(65-66).
Beyond GDP [Initiative} (n.d) Retrieved December 5, 2014, from,
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/beyond_gdp/background_en.html
Corak, M. (2013). Income inequality, equality of opportunity, and intergenerational mobility. The
Journal of Economic Perspectives, 79-102.
House of Commons [Resolution]. 24 November 1989, All-party resolution setting the goal of
eliminating child poverty in Canada,
Idle No More [Social Movement]. (n.d.). Retrieved December 5, 2014, from
,http://www.idlenomore.ca/
International Monetary Fund Factsheet: Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP), (September
2014). Retrieved December 5, 2014 from, https://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/prsp.htm
Mertens, D. M., & Wilson, A. T. (2012). Program evaluation theory and practice: A comprehensive
guide. Guilford Press.
Occupy Wall Street [Social Movement]. (n.d.) Retrieved December 5, 2014 from,
http://occupywallst.org/
Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-first Century. Harvard University Press.
41
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
42
Manitoba
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives Manitoba Office [CCPAM]. (2009). The View From Here:
Manitobans Call for a Poverty Reduction Plan. Retrieved from
https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/view-here
ALL ABOARD: Poverty Reduction Strategy Newsfeed. (2014). Social Planning Council of Winnipeg.
Retrieved November 17, 2014, from,
http://www.spcw.mb.ca/issues/all-aboard-poverty reduction-strategy/
Bernas, K. (2014, September 4). Poverty Reduction in Manitoba: Making progress, but are we thereyet? - Strategy at Work, On Poverty Reduction. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.onpovertyreduction.ca/2014/09/poverty-reduction-manitoba-making-progress-yet-2/
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives Manitoba Office [CCPAM]. (2009). The View From Here:
Manitobans Call for a Poverty Reduction Plan. Retrieved November 17,2014 from,
https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/view-here
Increase EIA Rates in Manitoba. (2014). Make Poverty History Manitoba. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from
http://makepovertyhistorymb.com]
Manitoba. (2009). AllAboard: Manitoba’s Poverty Reduction Strategy.
Retrieved November 17, 2014 from, http://www.gov.mb.ca/fs/misc/pubs/all_aboard_report.pdf
Manitoba. (2012). Four Year Strategy for All Aboard. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.gov.mb.ca/allaboard/pubs/strategy_paper.pdf
Manitoba (2013a). What We Heard: Key Findings from the March 2013 All Aboard Poverty Reduction and Social Inclusion Strategy Consultations. Retrieved November 17, 2014from,
http://www.gov.mb.ca/allaboard/pubs/what_we_heard.pdf
Manitoba. (2013b) 2012/13 Annual Report. Retrieved November 17 from,
http://www.gov.mb.ca/allaboard/pubs/all_aboard_annual_report_2012_13.pdf
Manitoba (2014). 2013/14 Annual Report. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from
http://www.gov.mb.ca/allaboard/pubs/all_aboard_annual_report_2013_14.pdf
Poverty Reduction & Manitoba (n.d). Make Poverty History Canada. Retrieved November 17,
2014 from http://www.makepovertyhistory.ca/learn/issues/poverty-reduction-plan/manitoba
Canadian Federation of Students and Make Poverty History. 2009. “Target Poverty” Retrieved
November 17, 2014 from http://targetpoverty.ca
The Poverty Reduction Strategy Act, CCSM 2011 c. P 94.7. Retrieved November 17, 2014
from http://web2.gov.mb.ca/laws/statutes/ccsm/_pdf.php?cap=p94.7
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
43
Newfoundland and Labrador
Canadian Association of Social Workers. (2009). Turning into Poverty the Provincial Way.
CBC News. (2012). Retrieved from November 17, 2014
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/poverty-plan-still-on-track-for-2014target-1.1142992. (Poverty plan still on track for 2014 target.)
Collin, C. (2007). Poverty Reduction Strategies in Québec and in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Parliamentary Information and Research Service.
Gogan, A. (2009) Newfoundland and Labrador's Poverty Reduction Strategy. The National Forum on
Income Security. Lecture conducted from Vancouver, BC.
Goss Gilroy Inc. (2005). Report on Workshop Sessions on the Development of a Poverty Reduction Strategy
[PDF document]. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.hrle.gov.nl.ca/hrle/PRSWorkshopREportSummary.pdf
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2006a). Reducing poverty: an action plan for Newfoundland and
Labrador. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from, http://monctonhomelessness.org/documents/NL_povertyreduction-strategy.pdf
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2006b). Province reaffirms commitment to poverty
reduction. [News release]. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2006/hrle/0526n01.htm.
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2009). Empowering people, engaging community,
enabling success: First progress report on the government of Newfoundland and Labrador's
poverty reduction strategy. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.aes.gov.nl.ca/publications/poverty/PRSProgessReport.pdf
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2009). First Progress Report Shows Significant Results in
Province’s Fight Against Poverty. [News release]. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2009/hrle/1214n02.htm.
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2014a). Newfoundland and Labrador poverty reduction
strategy progress report June 2014. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.aes.gov.nl.ca/poverty/pdf/prs_progress_report.pdf
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2014b). Poverty Reduction Strategy Shows Progress
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
44
towards Equality and Shared Prosperity. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2014/aes/0604n02.aspx.
Locke, F., & Rowe, P. (2009). Poverty Reduction Policies and Programs: Tracing a Path from the Past to the
Future – Newfoundland and Labrador. Community Services Council Newfoundland and Labrador. Social Development Report Series.
NDP Caucus. (2013). Is the Poverty Reduction Strategy no longer a government priority?
Retrieved November 17, 2014 from, http://nlndpcaucus.ca/nr112613PovertyReduction
Ontario
25in5.(2009). Poverty Reduction Becomes Law in Ontario: Amended Bill 152 Gets All-Party Support.
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, http://25in5.ca/event/
25in5.(2014). Bold vision in Ontario’s new Poverty Reduction Strategy; action plan and investment strategy now
required. Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, http://25in5.ca/bold-vision-in-ontarios-new-povertyreduction-strategy-action-plan-and-investment-strategy-now-required/
AOHC. (2014). Ontario’s New Poverty Reduction Strategy – Steps in the right direction but no firm targets and
timelines. Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, http://aohc.org/Ontario%E2%80%99s-New-PovertyReduction-Strategy-%E2%80%93-Steps-right-direction-no-firm-targets-and-timelines
The Canadian Press. (2014, September 3). Ontario misses target on child poverty reduction, blames Ottawa.
Retrieved November 23,2014 from http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/canada/toronto/story/1.2754692
Government of Ontario. (2014, August). Breaking the cycle: Ontario's poverty reduction strategy (2009 - 2013)
Retrieved November 23,2014 from, https://www.ontario.ca/document/breaking-cycle-ontarios-povertyreduction-strategy-2009-2013
Government of Ontario. (2009). Poverty reduction strategy (2009 annual report).
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, https://www.ontario.ca/document/poverty-reduction-strategy-2009annual-report
Government of Ontario. (2010). Poverty reduction strategy (2010 annual report).
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, https://www.ontario.ca/document/poverty-reduction-strategy-2010annual-report
Government of Ontario. (2011). Poverty reduction strategy (2011 annual report).
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, https://www.ontario.ca/document/poverty-reduction-strategy-2011annual-report
Government of Ontario. (2012). Poverty reduction strategy (2012 annual report).
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
45
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, https://www.ontario.ca/document/poverty-reduction-strategy-2012annual-report
Government of Ontario. (2013). Poverty reduction strategy (2013 annual report).
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, https://www.ontario.ca/document/poverty-reduction-strategy-2013annual-report
Government of Ontario. (2014). Realizing our potential: Ontario's poverty reduction strategy (2014-2019).
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, http://www.ontario.ca/home-and-community/realizing-ourpotential-ontarios-poverty-reduction-strategy-2014-2019-all
Hamilton Spectator. (2013). Why ask if you aren’t listening? Here we go again: Consultation on poverty reduction going nowhere — they don’t seem to hear what Ontarians are saying. Retrieved November 23, 2014
from, http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/4047028-why-ask-if-you-aren-t-
listening-/
ISAC. (2014). Tackling social assistance poverty: A test of success for Ontario’s second five-year Poverty Reduction Strategy. Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, http://us4.campaignarchive2.com/?u=095b12c98935ecaadd327bf90&id=afab5b488e
Maxwel, G. (2009). Poverty in Ontario Failed Promise and the Renewal of Hope.
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, http://www.cdhalton.ca/pdf/Poverty-in-Ontario-Report.pdf
Noble, A & Boros, C. (2014). A Review of the Ontario Poverty Reduction Strategy: Realizing Our Potential.
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, http://www.raisingtheroof.org/News-and-Events/News/A-Reviewof-the-Ontario-Poverty-Reduction-Strategy.aspx
Now Toronto. (2013, October 24). Poverty Patchwork: Can the grassroots trust the Wynne government after
missing targets? Retrieved November 23, 2014 from, http://nowtoronto.com/news/poverty-patchwork/
The Star. (2008, December 5). 'First step' on poverty draws praise.
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from,
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2008/12/05/first_step_on_poverty_draws_praise.html.
The Star. (2009a, February 26). Poverty plan slammed as an empty gesture.
Retrieved November 23, 2014, from
http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/2009/02/26/poverty_plan_slammed_as_an_empty_gestur
e.html
The Star. (2009b, May 7). 'Historic' law compels Ontario to fight poverty. Retrieved November 28,2014 from,
http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/2009/05/07/historic_law_compels_ontario_to_fight_poverty.html
The Star. (2009c May 7). Activists strengthen anti-poverty legislation. Retrieved November 23, 2014 from,
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/2009/05/07/activists_strengthen_antipoverty_legislation.html
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
46
The Star. (2009d, May 7). Welcome boost for poverty bill. Retrieved November 23, 2014 from,
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/2009/05/07/welcome_boost_for_poverty_bill.html
The Star. (2013, December 4). Poverty reduction key to fairer, more prosperous Ontario.
Retrieved November 23, 2014 from,
from,http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2013/12/04/poverty_reduction_key_to_fairer_more
_prosperous_ontario.html
The Star. (2014). Wynne’s poverty agenda keeps social justice in the window: Editorial. Retrieved November 23,
2014 from,
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2014/09/04/wynnes_poverty_agenda_keeps_social_justice_i
n_the_window_editorial.html
Quebec
Bouchard, C. (2003, January 6). Lutte contre la pauvreté - Une loi exemplaire. Le Devoir.
Retrieved November 17, 2014, from http://www.ledevoir.com/non-classe/17587/lutte-contre-la-pauvreteune-loi-exemplaire
Centre d’étude sur la pauvreté et l’exclusion (CEPE). (2012). La pauvreté, les inégalités et
l’exclusion sociale au Québec: État de situation 2012. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from
http://www.cepe.gouv.qc.ca/publications/pdf/CEPE_Etat_situation_2012.pdf
Centre d’étude sur la pauvreté et l’exclusion (CEPE). (2013). La pauvreté, les inégalités et
l’exclusion sociale au Québec: État de situation 2013. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.cepe.gouv.qc.ca/publications/pdf/CEPE_Etat_situation_2012.pdf
La petite histoire du Collectif pour une loi sur l’élimination de la pauvreté. (2000, June 13).
Retrieved November17, 2014, from http://www.pauvrete.qc.ca/?La-petite-histoire-du-Collectif
Québec. (2004a) Reconciling Freedom and Social Justice, A Challenge for the Future:
Government Action Plan to Combat Poverty and Social Exclusion.
Retrieved November 17, 2014, from
http://www.mess.gouv.qc.ca/grands-dossiers/lutte-contre-la-pauvrete/plan_en.asp
Québec. (2004b) Synthèse du plan d’action gouvernmental en matière de lutte contre la
lauvreté et l’exclusion sociale. Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.mess.gouv.qc.ca/grands-dossiers/lutte-contre-la-pauvrete/plan_en.asp
Québec. (2009, June) Centre de collaboration nationale sur les politiques publiques et la santé.
Loi visant à lutter contre la pauvreté et l’exclusion sociale (L.R.Q., chapitre L-7):Historique.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
Retrieved November 17, 2014 from http://www.ccnpps.ca/docs/Loi112HistoriqueFR.pdf
Québec. (2010) Government Action Plan for Solidarity and Social Inclusion: 2010-2015.
Retrieved November 17, 2014 from,
http://www.mess.gouv.qc.ca/grands-dossiers/lutte-contre-la-pauvrete/plan_en.asp
Vaillancourt, Y., and Aubry, F. (2014). Research Report on the Québec Act to Combat Poverty
and Social Exclusion, a Case of Democratic Co-construction of Public Policy.
Retrieved November 17, 2014 from, Council of Canadians with Disabilities website
http://www.ccdonline.ca/media/socialpolicy/research-report-quebec-act-to-combat-povertyand-social-exclusion.pdf
.
Appendix
47
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
48
Table A1: Comparison of Goals Table
Goals
Manitoba
(as of 2010
action plan)
NFLD
(as of 2006
strategy)
Ontario
(as of 2014
strategy)
Quebec
(as of 2010
action plan)
1. Safe Affordable Housing in Supportive
communities
2. Education, Jobs and Income Support
1. Improved access and coordination of services for
those with low incomes
2. A stronger social safety net
3. Improved earned incomes
1. Continuing to Break the Cycle of poverty for
Children and Youth
2. Moving Towards Employment and Income Security
1. Review standard practices and make regional and
local communities key players in the decisionmaking process
2. Acknowledge the value of work and foster the
self-sufficiency of individuals
3. Strong, Healthy Families
4. Accessible, Co-ordinated services
4:. Increased emphasis on early childhood development
5. A better educated population
3. A Long-Term Goal to End Homelessness in Ontario
4. Using Evidence-Based Social Policy and Measuring Success
3. Foster the Economic self-sufficiency of
underprivileged individuals
4. Improve the living conditions of low-income
individuals and families
Table A2: Comparison of Targets Table
Targets
Manitoba
No stated targets
(as of 2010
action plan)
NFLD
By 2014, Newfoundland will have the lowest rates of poverty in Canada.
(as of 2006
strategy)
Ontario
Reduce child poverty by 25%, using 2008 as base year
(as of 2014
strategy)
Quebec
2.5 billion in spending over the years of 2004-2009
(as of 2010
action plan)
Table A3: Comparison of Objectives Table
Objectives
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
Manitoba
(as of 2010
action plan)
NFLD
(as of 2006
strategy)
Ontario
(as of 2014
strategy)
Quebec
(as of 2010
action plan)
1. To ensure that Manitobans have access to safe,
adequate and affordable housing.
2. To ensure that people living in Manitoba
communities and neighbourhoods are well
supported, leading to greater social inclusion.
3. To ensure that more Manitobans participate in
high school, postsecondary and adult education, and
are prepared to participate in the labour market.
4. To ensure that Manitobans have financial security
through work, and access to income supports as
needed.
1.1: Increased capacity within government to support an integrated and coordinated approach
1.2: Improved access to existing programs and services for those with low incomes
1.3: Development of tools for ongoing analysis of
combined impacts of programs, including tax implications to avoid unintended impacts
1.4: Work with Aboriginal people to improve their
quality of life
2.1: Increased disability supports to enable people
with disabilities to participate fully in society
2.2: Enhanced justice system supports for vulnerable people
2.3: Increased availability of affordable housing
2.4: Improved access to necessities for those most
vulnerable to poverty
2.5: Increased Income Support rates
3.1: Fewer barriers to work and greater support for
low-income workers
1. Build on progress made with first PRS
2. Improve child benefits
3. Focus on student nutrition
4. Improve health benefits available to children
5. Focus on early identification and treatment of
mental health
6. Improve access to education and facilitate
success for all learners
7. Ensure equity in achieving excellence
8. Continue to improve full-day kindergarten and
early learning
9. Remove barriers and build potential for
vulnerable youth
10. Close gap in aboriginal education
11. Support first steps to adulthood for former
crown wards and youth leaving care
12. Help youth transition to the workplace
(Condensed for Goals 1 and 4)
1.1 Create Solidarity Alliances that enable local and
regional communities to have greater
responsibility in acting against poverty
1.2 Increase the financial capacity and flexibility of
49
5. To ensure that the number of Manitobans living
in low-income is reduced.
6. To ensure that Manitoba children and families are
emotionally and physically healthy, safe and secure,
socially engaged and responsible, and have access
to supports that allow them to reach their full
potential.
7. To ensure that Manitoba government services are
accessible, co-ordinated and integrated across
departments.
8. To ensure that Manitobans have access to information and supports that are responsive to their
needs.
3.2: Greater supports for the development of employment skills
3.3: Greater supports for labor force participation
and improved earnings from employment
3.4: Establish an alternative to Income Support for
youth which allows for a coordinated service specific to their needs
3.5: Develop and expand employment skills programs for vulnerable groups whose needs are not
currently being met
4.1 Strengthen the regulated early learning and
child care system
4.2 Promotion of healthy child development
4.3 Strengthen early intervention services and programs
5.1: A K to 12 system where more students graduate
5.2: Increased responsiveness to the K to 12 system
5.3: Greater access to post-secondary education,
literary and adult basic education
13. Remove barriers to employment for the most
vulnerable
14. Support employment and income security for
aboriginal peoples
15. Improve child care to give parents time to
improve employment prospects
16. Help working poor and ensure financial stability
17. Modernize the social safety net
18. Keep up momentum with long-term affordable
housing
19. Community effort to homelessness prevention
20. Work on mental health and addictions in the
homeless population
21. Work on affordable housing
22. Seek long-term sustained solution to federal
housing funding
23. Tap into community-specific knowledge for
local innovations
24. Work to social enterprise
4.2 Provide financial support aimed at reducing the
community contribution and at increasing
admissible costs under the Accèss Logis
Québec Program for two years in certain
regions
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
the Fonds québécois d’initiatives sociales so as
to better support anti-poverty initiatives,
notably at the local and regional level,
including Aboriginal communities
1.3 Integrate the Forum de la solidarité within the
Table Québec-Régions
1.4 Form a Groupe des partenaires pour la solidarité
1.5 Ensure the coherence of government actions
1.6 Institute a Solidarity Week
1.7 Improve the cohesion and dovetailing of the
services offered to young people under
Engagement jeunesse
1.8 Establish a socially responsible public
procurement strategy
1.9 Establish territory-based sustainable mobility
plans
50
4.3 Construct 240 low-rental housing units in
Nunavik
4.4 Continue the renovation of low-rental housing
4.5 Carry out one-off action to renovate certain lowrental housing units in Nunavik
4.6 Implement a special home renovation program
in the Algonquin Community of Kitcisakik
4.7 Help persons with disabilities be more
autonomous and remain in their homes for
longer
4.8 Continue introducing and developing
community support in social housing
…
4.24 Increase the active participation of seniors
4.25 Support initiatives to respect seniors
4.26 Improve the state of services for natural
caregivers
4.1 Construct 3,000 new community housing and
social housing units
Table A4: Comparison of Indicators Table
Indicators
Manitoba
(as of 2010
action plan)
NFLD
(as of 2006
strategy)
Ontario
(as of 2014
strategy)
1. Total units of social and affordable housing
supported by Manitoba Housing and Renewal
Corporation (MHRC).
2. New households served through MHRC
programs and services.
3. Households in Core Housing Need.
4. Sense of community belonging.
5. Graduation rates.
6. Participation in adult learning programs.
7. Employment rates.
8. Average weekly earnings.
9. Minimum wage rates.
10. Low-income rates.
11. Income inequality.
Overall Indicators
Low Income Cut-Offs (LICO) – After Tax
Market based Measure (MBM)
Newfoundland and Labrador Market Based Measure (NLMBM)
Low-Income Measure (LIM)
NLMBM of Housing Affordability
Income Indicators
Median After Tax Family Income
Personal After Tax Disposable Income
1.Birth Weights
2. School Readiness (Early Development Instrument)
3. Educational Progress (Combined Grade 3 and 6)
4. High School Graduation Rates
12. Post-secondary education participation
13. Early Development Instrument scores.
14. Availability of childcare.
15. Children in care.
16. Teen birth rates.
17. Potential Years of Life Lost (PYLL) by income
quintile.
18. Prevalence of chronic disease by income
quintile.
19. Average monthly number of people receiving
co-ordinated home care services.
20. Continuity of physician care.
21. Number of people using Access Centres.
Average Earnings
Jobless Family Rate
Number of Income Support Clients
Child and Youth Indicators
Healthy Birth Weights
Early Development Instrument Score
Educational Scores
High School Drop-Out Rates
Post-Secondary Educational Attainment
6. Depth of Poverty (LIM40)
7. Ontario Housing Measure
8. Not in Education, Employment, or Training
9. Long-Term Unemployment
10. Poverty Rates of Vulnerable Populations
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
Quebec
(as of 2010
action plan)
5. Low Income Measure (LIM50)
1. Low-income rate of individuals [male, female]
2. Low-income gap %
3. Proportion of households that spend at least 30%
of their income on housing (%)
4. Proportion of the population (age 25-64) with at
least a Diploma in Secondary studies [Male,
Female]
5. Life expectancy [male, female]
51
6. Low birth-weight babies (percentage over 5 year)
7. Unemployment rate (overall population) [male,
female]
8. Social Assistance rate - population under age 65
(5) [male, female]
9. Economic dependency ratio
Table A5: Manitoba Goals, Objectives, Indicators, and Target
Manitoba (as of 2010 Action Plan)
Goals
Indicators
Objectives
1. Safe Affordable Housing in Supportive communities
2. Education, Jobs and Income Support
3. Strong, Healthy Families
4. Accessible, Co-ordinated services
1. Total units of social and affordable housing supported by Manitoba Housing and Renewal
Corporation (MHRC).
2. New households served through MHRC programs and services.
3. Households in Core Housing Need.
4. Sense of community belonging.
5. Graduation rates.
6. Participation in adult learning programs.
7. Employment rates.
8. Average weekly earnings.
9. Minimum wage rates.
10. Low-income rates.
11. Income inequality.
12. Post-secondary education participation
13. Early Development Instrument scores.
14. Availability of child care.
15. Children in care.
16. Teen birth rates.
17. Potential Years of Life Lost (PYLL) by income quintile.
18. Prevalence of chronic disease by income quintile.
19. Average monthly number of people receiving co-ordinated home care services.
20. Continuity of physician care.
21. Number of people using Access Centres.
1. To ensure that Manitobans have access to safe, adequate and affordable housing.
2. To ensure that people living in Manitoba communities and neighborhoods are well supported,
leading to greater social inclusion.
3. To ensure that more Manitobans participate in high school, postsecondary and adult education,
and are prepared to participate in the labour market.
4. To ensure that Manitobans have financial security through work, and access to income supports
as needed.
5. To ensure that the number of Manitobans living in low-income is reduced.
6. To ensure that Manitoba children and families are emotionally and physically healthy, safe and
secure, socially engaged and responsible, and have access to supports that allow them to reach
their full potential.
7. To ensure that Manitoba government services are accessible, co-ordinated and integrated across
departments.
8. To ensure that Manitobans have access to information and supports that are responsive to their
needs.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
52
Table A6: Newfoundland and Labrador goals, objectives, indicators, and targets
Newfoundland and Labrador (as of 2006 strategy)
Goals
Indicators
Objectives
Targets
 Improved access and coordination of services for those with low incomes
 A stronger social safety net
 Improved earned incomes
 Increased emphasis on early childhood development
 A better educated population
Overall Indicators
 Low Income Cut-Offs (LICO) – After Tax
 Market based Measure (MBM)
 Newfoundland and Labrador Market Based Measure (NLMBM)
 Low-Income Measure (LIM)
 NLMBM of Housing Affordability
Income Indicators
 Median After Tax Family Income
 Personal After Tax Disposable Income
 Average Earnings
 Jobless Family Rate
 Number of Income Support Clients
Child and Youth Indicators
 Healthy Birth Weights
 Early Development Instrument Score
 Educational Scores
 High School Drop-Out Rates
 Post-Secondary Educational Attainment
1.1: Increased capacity within government to support an integrated and coordinated approach
1.2: Improved access to existing programs and services for those with low incomes
1.3: Development of tools for ongoing analysis of combined impacts of programs, including tax implications to avoid unintended impacts
1.4: Work with Aboriginal people to improve their quality of life
1. 2.1: Increased disability supports to enable people with disabilities to participate fully in society
2.2: Enhanced justice system supports for vulnerable people
2.3: Increased availability of affordable housing
2.4: Improved access to necessities for those most vulnerable to poverty
2.5: Increased Income Support rates
2. 3.1: Fewer barriers to work and greater support for low-income workers
3.2: Greater supports for the development of employment skills
3.3: Greater supports for labor force participation and improved earnings from employment
3.4: Establish an alternative to Income Support for youth which allows for a coordinated service specific
to their needs
3.5: Develop and expand employment skills programs for vulnerable groups whose needs are not currently being met
3. 4.1 Strengthen the regulated early learning and child care system
4.2 Promotion of healthy child development
4.3 Strengthen early intervention services and programs
4. 5.1: A K to 12 system where more students graduate
5.2: Increased responsiveness to the K to 12 system
5.3: Greater access to post-secondary education, literary and adult basic education
By 2014, Newfoundland will have the lowest rates of poverty in Canada.
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA
Table A7: Ontario goals, objectives, indicators, and targets
Ontario (as of 2014 strategy)
Goals
1.
2.
3.
4.
Indicators
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
Objectives
Continuing to Break the Cycle of Poverty for Children and Youth
Moving Towards Employment and Income Security
A Long-Term Goal to End Homelessness in Ontario
Using Evidence-Based Social Policy and Measuring Success
Birth Weights
School Readiness (Early Development Instrument)
Educational Progress (Combined Grade 3 and 6)
High School Graduation Rates
Low Income Measure (LIM50)
Depth of Poverty (LIM40)
Ontario Housing Measure
Not in Education, Employment, or Training
Long-Term Unemployment
Poverty Rates of Vulnerable Populations
Build on progress made with first PRS
Improve child benefits
Focus on student nutrition
Improve health benefits available to children
Focus on early identification and treatment of mental health
Improve access to education and facilitate success for all learners
Ensure equity in achieving excellence
Continue to improve full-day kindergarten and early learning
Remove barriers and build potential for vulnerable youth
Close gap in aboriginal education
Support first steps to adulthood for former crown wards and youth leaving care
Help youth transition to the workplace
Remove barriers to employment for the most vulnerable
Support employment and income security for aboriginal peoples
Improve child care to give parents time to improve employment prospects
Help working poor and ensure financial stability
Modernize the social safety net
Keep up momentum with long-term affordable housing
Community effort to homelessness prevention
Work on mental health and addictions in the homeless population
Work on affordable housing
Seek long-term sustained solution to federal housing funding
Tap into community-specific knowledge for local innovations
Work to social enterprise
Reduce child poverty by 25%, using 2008 as base year
Targets
Table A8: Quebec goals, objectives, indicators, and targets table
Québec (as of 2010 action plan)
Goals



Review standard practices and make regional and local communities key players in the decisionmaking process
Acknowledge the value of work and foster the self-sufficiency of individuals
Foster the Economic self-sufficiency of underprivileged individuals
53
POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES IN CANADA

Indicators
Objectives
[condensed
objectives for
Goals 1 and 4]
54
Improve the living conditions of low-income individuals and families




Low-income rate of individuals [rates presented for males and females]
Low-income gap
Proportion of households that spend at least 30% of their income on housing (%)
Proportion of the population (age 25-64) with at least a Diploma in Secondary studies [Male,
Female]
 Life expectancy [male, female]
 Low birth-weight babies (percentage over 5 year)
 Unemployment rate (overall population) [male, female]
 Social Assistance rate - population under age 65 (5) [male, female]
 Economic dependency ratio
1.1 Create Solidarity Alliances that enable local and regional communities to have greater responsibility
in acting against poverty
1.2 Increase the financial capacity and flexibility of the Fonds québécois d’initiatives sociales so as to
better support anti-poverty initiatives, notably at the local and regional level, including Aboriginal
communities
1.3 Integrate the Forum de la solidarité within the Table Québec-Régions
1.4 Form a Groupe des partenaires pour la solidarité
1.5 Ensure the coherence of government actions
1.6 Institute a Solidarity Week
1.7 Improve the cohesion and dovetailing of the services offered to young people under Engagement
jeunesse
1.8 Establish a socially responsible public procurement strategy
1.9 Establish territory-based sustainable mobility plans
4.1 Construct 3,000 new community housing and social housing units
4.2 Provide financial support aimed at reducing the community contribution and at increasing admissible
costs under the Accèss Logis Québec Program for two years in certain regions
4.3 Construct 240 low-rental housing units in Nunavik
4.4 Continue the renovation of low-rental housing
4.5 Carry out one-off action to renovate certain low-rental housing units in Nunavik
4.6 Implement a special home renovation program in the Algonquin Community of Kitcisakik
4.7 Help persons with disabilities be more autonomous and remain in their homes for longer
4.8 Continue introducing and developing community support in social housing
…
4.24 Increase the active participation of seniors
4.25 Support initiatives to respect seniors
4.26 Improve the state of services for natural caregivers