Edmonton Social Planning Council

Author: Web Administrator

Research Update: A Look at Alberta’s Oil and Gas Bailout

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ custom_margin=”0px||0px||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||false|false”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.3″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”3px||5px|||” border_width_bottom=”1px” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”||||||||” custom_margin=”||3px|||” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][/et_pb_post_title][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_image src=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/boxes_1.gif” title_text=”boxes_1″ align=”center” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”-2px||-1px||false|false” custom_padding=”||7px|||”][/et_pb_image][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px|auto|0px|auto|false|false” custom_padding=”37px|0px|44px|0px|false|false”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.5.6″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ custom_padding=”||32px|||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9kYXRlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJkYXRlX2Zvcm1hdCI6ImRlZmF1bHQiLCJjdXN0b21fZGF0ZV9mb3JtYXQiOiIifX0=@[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Research-Update-August-2020.pdf” button_text=”Download the August 2020 Research Update” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” custom_button=”on” button_text_color=”#ffffff” button_bg_color=”#008ac1″ custom_margin=”||19px|||” custom_padding=”||5px|||”][/et_pb_button][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ text_line_height=”1.6em” header_2_font=”|600|||||||” header_2_text_color=”#008ac1″ header_2_font_size=”24px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”95%” module_alignment=”left” custom_margin=”-1px|0px|2px|-96px|false|false” locked=”off”]

Note: this is excerpted from the August 2020 edition of our “Research Update” publication. The Edmonton Social Planning Council, in collaboration with our volunteers, strives to provide stakeholders and community members with up-to-date reviews, prepared by our volunteers, on recently published social research reports and publications.

Reviewed by Hanna Nash

In Alberta’s Failed Oil and Gas Bailout, authors Jim Storrie, Duncan Kinney, and Regan Boychuk discuss their dissatisfaction with the Government of Alberta’s investments in the oil and gas industry. These authors come from non-profit watch groups established to keep a continuous look on government decisions and protect the interest of Albertans.

Storrie, Kinney, and Boychuk examine the actions of Crown investment manager Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo), responsible for over $100 billion of provincial assets. According to the authors, this management company has allocated $1.1 billion from Alberta’s pension funds and the Alberta Heritage Saving Trust Fund to junior and intermediate provincial oil and gas producers and oil field service companies at the direction of the prior and current Alberta governments. The main focus of the report is the contention the authors have with AIMCo’s likely loss of millions of the public dollars it invested. Part of this loss is due to falling shares that each of the publicly traded companies it invested in have already experienced, in addition to the bankruptcies of companies that have received millions of dollars in AIMCo investments, the fallout from COVID-19 concerns, Russia and Saudi Arabia’s oil price war, and the expected cost of Alberta’s oil well environmental clean-up initiative.

The report is a well researched and thorough review of AIMCo’s problematic relationship with Alberta’s current government, the United Conservative Party (UCP), and the lack of checks and balances in place that have allowed a mismanagement of funds to occur. The authors demonstrate how the UCP used their political influence to push the interests of oil and gas companies into AIMCo’s investment profile—largely due to the political donations that the UCP and their third-party advertisers received from oil and gas companies. The authors discuss the conflicts of interest these relationships present as they create an environment of investment focused solely in the oil and gas sector, without any attention given to alternate investment areas. Additionally, the passing of Bill 22, in the fall of 2019, now permits AIMCo to oversee investment management for many essential pension funds in Alberta such as the Alberta Teachers’ Retirement Fund (ATRF). This directive from the province has angered many Albertans as such pension funds and investments are now solely controlled by AIMCo. Despite ATRF’s dissatisfaction with AIMCo’s performance, they are not permitted to dissolve their relationship as Bill 22 does not provide any alternative methods or options of investment management. These investment protocols coupled with a lack of transparency from AIMCo have given many Albertans rise to feel distrustful where AIMCo is concerned.

Storrie, Kinney, and Boychuk’s in-depth review of AIMCo’s investment practices presents troubling and worrying indications of how public funds in Alberta are being spent. The authors portray a very distrustful relationship between the UCP and those whose money is being invested in businesses that are operating at a loss rather than a profit. Notably, the money being used by the current provincial government is largely deferred money that Albertans earned and chose to invest in a retirement fund; they have not given permission for their government to invest through such methods.

This report is very well researched and investigated, however, it is obvious that the authors present a very strong bias against investing public funds in non-renewable energy resources. At times, the report produced a more personal opinion of the current UCP government’s business practices rather than an unbiased presentation of information.

The non-profit groups on behalf of which the authors are writing are undoubtedly interested in the current political climate of Alberta’s government, and how government action will impact future generations of investment and growth. The authors provide insight into the difficulties that Albertans currently face, and promote open and transparent interactions between the provincial government and its Crown corporation for the benefit of Albertans.

PUBLICATION SOURCE:

Storrie, J., Kinney, D., & Boychuk, R. (2020). Alberta’s failed oil and gas bailout. Progress Alberta. https://pressprogress.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/AIMCO-report.pdf

ABOUT THE RESEARCH REVIEWER:

Hanna Nash enjoys ballet performances and other live theatre, as well as outdoor sports, and travelling to new countries. Hanna is interested in sharing information and knowledge to Edmonton’s diverse communities.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.4″ custom_padding=”0px|20px|0px|20px|false|false” border_color_left=”#a6c942″ custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_testimonial author=”Posted by:” job_title=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3IiLCJzZXR0aW5ncyI6eyJiZWZvcmUiOiIiLCJhZnRlciI6IiIsIm5hbWVfZm9ybWF0IjoiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIiwibGluayI6Im9uIiwibGlua19kZXN0aW5hdGlvbiI6ImF1dGhvcl93ZWJzaXRlIn19@” portrait_url=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3JfcHJvZmlsZV9waWN0dXJlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnt9fQ==@” quote_icon=”off” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”job_title,portrait_url” _module_preset=”default” body_text_color=”#000000″ author_font=”||||||||” author_text_align=”center” author_text_color=”#008ac1″ position_font=”||||||||” position_text_color=”#000000″ company_text_color=”#000000″ background_color=”#ffffff” text_orientation=”center” module_alignment=”center” custom_margin=”0px|0px|4px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”32px|0px|0px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_testimonial][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.65)” header_font_size=”20px” text_orientation=”center” custom_margin=”||50px|||” custom_padding=”48px|||||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9jYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiUmVsYXRlZCBjYXRlZ29yaWVzOiAgIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJsaW5rX3RvX3Rlcm1fcGFnZSI6Im9uIiwic2VwYXJhdG9yIjoiIHwgIiwiY2F0ZWdvcnlfdHlwZSI6ImNhdGVnb3J5In19@[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

September 10, 2020
Research Update: COVID-19 and the Future of Long-Term Care

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ custom_margin=”0px||0px||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||false|false”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.3″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”3px||5px|||” border_width_bottom=”1px” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”||||||||” custom_margin=”||3px|||” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][/et_pb_post_title][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_image src=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/boxes_1.gif” title_text=”boxes_1″ align=”center” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”-2px||-1px||false|false” custom_padding=”||7px|||”][/et_pb_image][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px|auto|0px|auto|false|false” custom_padding=”37px|0px|44px|0px|false|false”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.5.6″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ custom_padding=”||32px|||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9kYXRlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJkYXRlX2Zvcm1hdCI6ImRlZmF1bHQiLCJjdXN0b21fZGF0ZV9mb3JtYXQiOiIifX0=@[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Research-Update-August-2020.pdf” button_text=”Download the August 2020 Research Update” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” custom_button=”on” button_text_color=”#ffffff” button_bg_color=”#008ac1″ custom_margin=”||28px|||” custom_padding=”||5px|||”][/et_pb_button][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ text_line_height=”1.6em” header_2_font=”|600|||||||” header_2_text_color=”#008ac1″ header_2_font_size=”24px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”95%” module_alignment=”left” custom_margin=”-1px|0px|2px|-96px|false|false” locked=”off”]

Note: this is excerpted from the August 2020 edition of our “Research Update” publication. The Edmonton Social Planning Council, in collaboration with our volunteers, strives to provide stakeholders and community members with up-to-date reviews, prepared by our volunteers, on recently published social research reports and publications.

Reviewed by Mona Haimour

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on vulnerable and priority populations, particularly the elderly that are living in long-term care (LTC) facilities, has been eye-opening and challenging. Figures show that 81% of COVID-19 deaths in Canada were recorded in long-term care nursing homes. This is higher than the average for Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, at 42%. Not only are the figures staggering, but evidence shows that the physical and social environments where the elderly are left to die are inhumane.

In their high-level and peer-reviewed policy briefing report titled Restoring Trust: COVID-19 and the Future of Long-Term Care, experts from reputable Canadian universities (York University, Conestoga College, University of Toronto, Université de Montréal, University of Alberta, University of Ottawa, Mount Saint Vincent University, and University of Calgary) share their research findings on challenges encountered with respect to Canada’s response to, and recovery from, COVID-19. These experts form the Royal Society of Canada (RSC) Task Force on COVID-19, chaired by Professor Carole Estabrooks (University of Alberta). The purpose of this initiative is to synthesize and frame evidence that will help policy-makers make informed and shared decisions.

To understand the real story of the LTC COVID-19 deaths and what it will take to solve this enduring crisis, the RSC has adopted a systematic and comprehensive approach to guide their work. This is evident in three focus areas: context and policy status before COVID-19, vulnerabilities exposed as a result of COVID-19, and principles for action and leading options.

Findings from the review of the context and policy status before the pandemic show that the complexity of the health and social profiles of our elderly (e.g., advanced age, dementia, chronic medical conditions, low immunity status, limited access to uninsured services, etc.) that live in the LTC-nursing homes is beyond what the capacity of the current workforce is capable of and trained to provide care for. Other key findings such as the ongoing decline in the ratio of regulated health care professionals to unregulated health care professionals (care aides and personal support workers), heavy workloads, lack of formal training and education, as well as low wages and poor employee benefits have been identified as chronic issues that caused direct negative impacts on patient safety and quality care.

Additionally, the review shows that the LTC facilities had not met the safety regulations related to the prevention and control of communicable diseases. These included lack of visitation policies and practices, shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) and other essential supplies, and inadequate training on how to use PPE and conduct screenings for COVID-19. These vulnerabilities along with the chronic issues that emerged from the analysis of the context and policy status have hindered LTC capacity to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in preventable deaths.

Moving forward, the RSC has provided recommendations that derive from the collected evidence, targeting all levels of governments (federal, provincial, and territorial). The RSC has called for a reform and redesign of the current LTC sector. The key recommendations focus on adopting a strategic, targeted, and sustainable approach to solve the enduring LTC workforce crisis. These recommendations include establishing national standards that focus on revamping the LTC infrastructure by providing continued funding support for pandemic resources and beyond, staffing and staffing mix in nursing homes, and establishing appropriate and regulated education and training for the LTC workforce.

The implementation plans for these standards should be taken seriously and start immediately by stakeholders at the provincial and territorial level of government. Meaning, urgent action plans should be put in place with emphasis on enhancing the quality of staff education and training, as well as working conditions of the health care professionals—regardless of their level—including work benefits and mental health support. Moreover, emphasis on the need and value of creating a robust and transparent data collection system that captures and tracks the essential variables and elements related to quality of care and quality of life for both the residents and health care professionals is a crucial step toward a better and safer future for LTCs.

While it is evident from the policy briefing report that Canada’s LTC sector is in dire need of change, many concerning questions begin to arise as a result of uncertainty, like who is going to take initiative and be the voice for fundamental change in the sector? Furthermore, it is unclear how soon this will happen, given that the COVID-19 pandemic is far from over. Another concern lies with the health and well-being of our elderly people and their families. Their voices, along with those of health care professionals and front-line workers, should be heard, expressed, and valued as well.

Publication Source:

Estabrooks, C. A., Straus, S., Flood, C. M., Keefe, J., Armstrong, P., Donner, G., . . .Wolfson, M. (2020). Restoring trust: COVID-19 and the future of long-term care. Royal Society of Canada. https://rscsrc.ca/sites/default/files/LTC%20PB%20%2B%20ES_EN.pdf

ABOUT THE RESEARCH REVIEWER:

Mona Haimour is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Health Systems and Sustainability at MacEwan University. Her commitment to enhance women’s health and public health started during her work overseas. She specializes in sustainability, priority populations, and health equity. Her personal interests include running, jumping rope, and reading.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.4″ custom_padding=”0px|20px|0px|20px|false|false” border_color_left=”#a6c942″ custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_testimonial author=”Posted by:” job_title=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3IiLCJzZXR0aW5ncyI6eyJiZWZvcmUiOiIiLCJhZnRlciI6IiIsIm5hbWVfZm9ybWF0IjoiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIiwibGluayI6Im9uIiwibGlua19kZXN0aW5hdGlvbiI6ImF1dGhvcl93ZWJzaXRlIn19@” portrait_url=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3JfcHJvZmlsZV9waWN0dXJlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnt9fQ==@” quote_icon=”off” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”job_title,portrait_url” _module_preset=”default” body_text_color=”#000000″ author_font=”||||||||” author_text_align=”center” author_text_color=”#008ac1″ position_font=”||||||||” position_text_color=”#000000″ company_text_color=”#000000″ background_color=”#ffffff” text_orientation=”center” module_alignment=”center” custom_margin=”0px|0px|4px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”32px|0px|0px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_testimonial][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.65)” header_font_size=”20px” text_orientation=”center” custom_margin=”||50px|||” custom_padding=”48px|||||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9jYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiUmVsYXRlZCBjYXRlZ29yaWVzOiAgIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJsaW5rX3RvX3Rlcm1fcGFnZSI6Im9uIiwic2VwYXJhdG9yIjoiIHwgIiwiY2F0ZWdvcnlfdHlwZSI6ImNhdGVnb3J5In19@[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

September 3, 2020
Blog: The UCP’s economic “he-covery” plan doesn’t look like Alberta

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ custom_margin=”0px||0px||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||false|false”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.3″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”3px||5px|||” border_width_bottom=”1px” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”||||||||” custom_margin=”||3px|||” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][/et_pb_post_title][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_image src=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/boxes_1.gif” title_text=”boxes_1″ align=”center” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”-2px||-1px||false|false” custom_padding=”||7px|||”][/et_pb_image][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px|auto|0px|auto|false|false” custom_padding=”37px|0px|44px|0px|false|false”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.5.6″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ custom_padding=”||32px|||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9kYXRlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJkYXRlX2Zvcm1hdCI6ImRlZmF1bHQiLCJjdXN0b21fZGF0ZV9mb3JtYXQiOiIifX0=@[/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.5.7″ text_line_height=”1.6em” header_2_font=”|600|||||||” header_2_text_color=”#008ac1″ header_2_font_size=”24px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”95%” module_alignment=”left” custom_margin=”-1px|0px|2px|-96px|false|false” locked=”off”]

Written by: Tom Ndekezi, Summer Student Research Assistant

When Jason Kenney took to the stage in early July to announce the UCP government’s $10 billion injection into Alberta’s infrastructure in the wake of COVID-19 and falling oil prices, he did it with a video. As the camera cut to shots of Kenney’s RV tour of Southern Alberta, where he visited factories, bumped elbows with foremen, and made announcement after announcement in front of a familiar blue podium with Alberta’s Recovery Plan printed in bold block lettering, there was one glaring omission. In the entire four minute runtime of a video shot across Alberta and meant to showcase the province’s economic diversity, there were barely any women.

Social media took notice, and within hours the UCP’s economic recovery plan had been dubbed the “he-covery.” Shots of Kenney standing hands-on-hips in front of what can only be described as multitudes of white men certainly didn’t help, and whatever version of Alberta the Premier was touring, it certainly didn’t look like one that was 49.8% female and 23.5% people of colour. Whether intentionally or not, the video made a statement, and for many of Kenney’s critics it was a concerning depiction of the Alberta that the current provincial government wants to build, and who it is that they are building it for.

There’s a temptation to call the lack of women in the provincial government’s video a harmless oversight, but messaging matters. The fact that Kenney chose to drive an RV across the province rather than fly or even take a tour bus says as much. By filling the promotional video for Alberta’s Recovery Plan with images of farms, factories, and distilleries, Kenney and the UCP government were showcasing the Alberta their recovery plan is going to work for. But by leaving out women, Indigenous people, and people of colour, it is unclear as to how those groups fit into that plan.

It must be acknowledged that the impacts of economic downturns are not distributed evenly, especially in resource economies like Alberta’s. Research from the Edmonton Social Planning Council shows that male-dominated industries like oil and gas tend to react more adversely to recessions than female-dominated industries like healthcare and social services. That being said, losses suffered in the energy sector have reverberations that are felt in every corner of Alberta’s economy, by men and women alike. Women and people of colour also experience higher rates of poverty and financial instability, even when there isn’t a global pandemic wreaking havoc on the economy.

Alberta’s current economic reality is also complicated by the two-pronged assault brought on by falling oil prices and COVID-19, and women have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic. The suspension of in-person schooling forced many families to make tough decisions regarding childcare, and more often than not it was women who had to bear the burden of those responsibilities. Women have also lost over twice as many jobs as men as a result of the pandemic, many of which were part-time, low-wage positions.

Women are quite literally on the frontlines of the pandemic. Not only are women the overwhelming majority of essential workers like nurses, cashiers and personal support workers, but sadly, women also make up the majority of Canada’s COVID-19 cases and deaths. In the same way that we have seen the effects of falling oil prices target male-dominated industries, the dynamics of the pandemic have been such that women have been especially vulnerable. Therefore to try and propose a provincial economic recovery plan that fails to highlight women is shortsighted and incomplete at best, and yet the UCP has done exactly that.

The promotional video blunder might have been just that, a blunder, but it is also the latest example of the UCP’s increasing disregard for women’s issues. We have already seen the current provincial government deem health services required by women unnecessary and deny them a seat at the table for the province-wide curriculum review. The lack of female representation in Alberta’s Recovery Plan seems to be the most recent manifestation of that indifference.

The provincial government has billed Alberta’s Recovery Plan as a “plan for today that provides hope for the future.” Unfortunately, the first images of that plan look like the Alberta of yesterday. In a province whose population is becoming more and more diverse, the disparity between the UCP’s picture of Alberta and what Alberta actually looks like is only going to grow. At the end of the day, a poorly thought out promotional video may not be of any real consequence, but the UCP government would be wise to remember that when it comes to painting grand visions of the future, what you say is often just as important as what—or who—you leave out.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.4″ custom_padding=”0px|20px|0px|20px|false|false” border_color_left=”#a6c942″ custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_testimonial author=”Posted by:” job_title=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3IiLCJzZXR0aW5ncyI6eyJiZWZvcmUiOiIiLCJhZnRlciI6IiIsIm5hbWVfZm9ybWF0IjoiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIiwibGluayI6Im9uIiwibGlua19kZXN0aW5hdGlvbiI6ImF1dGhvcl93ZWJzaXRlIn19@” portrait_url=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3JfcHJvZmlsZV9waWN0dXJlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnt9fQ==@” quote_icon=”off” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”job_title,portrait_url” _module_preset=”default” body_text_color=”#000000″ author_font=”||||||||” author_text_align=”center” author_text_color=”#008ac1″ position_font=”||||||||” position_text_color=”#000000″ company_text_color=”#000000″ background_color=”#ffffff” text_orientation=”center” module_alignment=”center” custom_margin=”0px|0px|4px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”32px|0px|0px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_testimonial][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.65)” header_font_size=”20px” text_orientation=”center” custom_margin=”||50px|||” custom_padding=”48px|||||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9jYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiUmVsYXRlZCBjYXRlZ29yaWVzOiAgIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJsaW5rX3RvX3Rlcm1fcGFnZSI6Im9uIiwic2VwYXJhdG9yIjoiIHwgIiwiY2F0ZWdvcnlfdHlwZSI6ImNhdGVnb3J5In19@[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

August 24, 2020
Blog: The Need for Culturally-Informed Approaches to Food Security

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ custom_margin=”0px||0px||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||false|false”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.3″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”3px||5px|||” border_width_bottom=”1px” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”||||||||” custom_margin=”||3px|||” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][/et_pb_post_title][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_image src=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/boxes_1.gif” title_text=”boxes_1″ align=”center” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”-2px||-1px||false|false” custom_padding=”||7px|||”][/et_pb_image][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px|auto|0px|auto|false|false” custom_padding=”37px|0px|44px|0px|false|false”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.5.6″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ custom_padding=”||32px|||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9kYXRlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJkYXRlX2Zvcm1hdCI6ImRlZmF1bHQiLCJjdXN0b21fZGF0ZV9mb3JtYXQiOiIifX0=@[/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ text_line_height=”1.6em” header_2_font=”|600|||||||” header_2_text_color=”#008ac1″ header_2_font_size=”24px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”95%” module_alignment=”left” custom_margin=”-1px|0px|2px|-96px|false|false” locked=”off”]

Written by: Tom Ndekezi, Summer Student Research Assistant

Traditional approaches to food security often emphasize food availability, access to nutritious foods, the ability for individuals and households to utilize and prepare healthy foods, and the overall stability of those factors. While that approach may help vulnerable populations gain access to healthy foods, the absence of cultural perspectives and an explicit commitment to the need for culturally appropriate foods may ultimately rob individuals of their right to dietary self-determination.

A complete understanding of food security must take cultural factors into account, particularly in a country like Canada whose Indigenous, immigrant, and racialized populations are disproportionately affected by food insecurity. In their 2017 literature review “Immigration and Food Insecurity: The Canadian Experience,” University of Ottawa researchers Diana Tarraf and Isabelle Giroux, as well as the Food and Agriculture Organization’s Dia Sanou, detail some common themes that highlight the need to incorporate cultural perspectives into traditional understandings of food security, especially with regard to new and recent immigrants to Canada.

Upon first arriving in Canada, many immigrants go through a dramatic accommodation phase during which they abandon their traditional diets and completely adopt a typical Canadian diet. This phase can last anywhere from a few days to several months as newcomers gradually become acquainted with their surroundings, identify grocery stores, get in contact with compatriots, and slowly begin to integrate traditional foods back into their diet.

This adaptation phase is often followed by what Tarraf et al. (2017) call a transition phase, in which newcomers can now structure a dietary framework for themselves and their households. For many this means creating a hybrid diet that includes traditional foods and elements of a typical Canadian diet side-by-side — think BLTs for lunch and fufu and peanut soup for dinner. For others the choice is instead an enculturated diet made up almost entirely of traditional foods. Conversely, there are those who adopt an acculturated Canadian-style diet, at the expense of traditional foods.

A traditional understanding of food security may look at the phenomenon described above and not see much of a problem with it. As long as individuals have healthy food on their plate, what is the issue with them choosing one diet over another?

Firstly, many newcomers’ traditional diets are generally healthier than the highly-processed, high-fat, and high-sugar typical Canadian diet. Recent immigrants also tend to be in better overall health than their Canadian counterparts — what is known as the Healthy Immigrant Effect — although over time their health generally declines toward the national average, and in some cases even drops below it. That downwards sloping trajectory can be partially explained by an assimilation to a typical Canadian diet, a process that is perpetuated by insufficient newcomer supports and facilitated by culturally-deficient understandings of food security.

There is also the temptation to treat the choice to adopt a specific diet as strictly that, a choice. A culturally-deficient approach to food security does not consider the wider, global understanding of what healthy foods are, and whether or not individuals have access to those foods. Although the first step towards food security may be having the choice to not eat unhealthy or low-quality foods, the realization of food security is in the agency that accompanies food sovereignty, i.e. “the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems” (Food Secure Canada).

A review of the current literature regarding food security will find, as Tarraf et al. (2017) found, that much of the discourse surrounding food security is stuck at a primary level of engagement. Much of the conversation is still satisfied with communities having access to affordable grocery stores that supply healthy and nutritious foods, but there is little to no interrogation as to what exactly those foods are and how they serve the demographics of the surrounding community. The coexistence of the Healthy Immigrant Effect and lower health outcomes among immigrant communities is a glaring incongruence, and one that can begin to be remedied by education on traditional foods and the incorporation of cultural perspectives into our understandings of food security.

Much like a good meal, an effective approach to achieving food security must be created with an intense awareness of exactly who is being served. And like a great meal, a formidable approach to achieving food security and food sovereignty must be created hand-in-hand with the communities it serves, leaning on their input, expertise, and cultural perspectives each step of the way.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.4″ custom_padding=”0px|20px|0px|20px|false|false” border_color_left=”#a6c942″ custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_testimonial author=”Posted by:” job_title=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3IiLCJzZXR0aW5ncyI6eyJiZWZvcmUiOiIiLCJhZnRlciI6IiIsIm5hbWVfZm9ybWF0IjoiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIiwibGluayI6Im9uIiwibGlua19kZXN0aW5hdGlvbiI6ImF1dGhvcl93ZWJzaXRlIn19@” portrait_url=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3JfcHJvZmlsZV9waWN0dXJlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnt9fQ==@” quote_icon=”off” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”job_title,portrait_url” _module_preset=”default” body_text_color=”#000000″ author_font=”||||||||” author_text_align=”center” author_text_color=”#008ac1″ position_font=”||||||||” position_text_color=”#000000″ company_text_color=”#000000″ background_color=”#ffffff” text_orientation=”center” module_alignment=”center” custom_margin=”0px|0px|4px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”32px|0px|0px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_testimonial][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.65)” header_font_size=”20px” text_orientation=”center” custom_margin=”||50px|||” custom_padding=”48px|||||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9jYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiUmVsYXRlZCBjYXRlZ29yaWVzOiAgIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJsaW5rX3RvX3Rlcm1fcGFnZSI6Im9uIiwic2VwYXJhdG9yIjoiIHwgIiwiY2F0ZWdvcnlfdHlwZSI6ImNhdGVnb3J5In19@[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

August 4, 2020
Research Update: Examining Child Care Fees Across Canada

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ custom_margin=”0px||0px||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||false|false”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.3″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”3px||5px|||” border_width_bottom=”1px” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”||||||||” custom_margin=”||3px|||” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][/et_pb_post_title][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_image src=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/boxes_1.gif” title_text=”boxes_1″ align=”center” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”-2px||-1px||false|false” custom_padding=”||7px|||”][/et_pb_image][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px|auto|0px|auto|false|false” custom_padding=”37px|0px|44px|0px|false|false”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.5.6″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ custom_padding=”||32px|||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9kYXRlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJkYXRlX2Zvcm1hdCI6ImRlZmF1bHQiLCJjdXN0b21fZGF0ZV9mb3JtYXQiOiIifX0=@[/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ text_line_height=”1.6em” header_2_font=”||||||||” header_2_text_color=”#008ac1″ header_2_font_size=”24px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”95%” module_alignment=”left” custom_margin=”44px|0px|2px|-96px|false|false” hover_enabled=”0″ locked=”off” sticky_enabled=”0″]

Note: this is excerpted from the May 2020 edition of our “Research Update” publication. The Edmonton Social Planning Council, in collaboration with our volunteers, strives to provide stakeholders and community members with up-to-date reviews, prepared by our volunteers, on recently published social research reports and publications.

Reviewed by Agatha Briglio

In 2019 a survey was sent to 37 cities, including representation, at minimum, of one city from each province and territory. The survey was part of the sixth annual Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives’ series that tracks and analyzes Canadian child care comparable fees paid to licensed child care providers across Canada. It examined child care fees across three groupings: infants, toddlers, and preschool children.

On average, infants include newborns to the age of two. In British Columbia, infant and toddlers are a combined category (zero – three years of age). The infant category is the smallest among the three groupings. Toddlers extend from the age of two to the age of three. The preschool-age category includes ages three to school entry and is the largest group.

Most centres in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland & Labrador, Iqaluit, and Yellowknife are not-for-profit licensees that follow provincial set-fee rates. A small number of for-profit centres exist, and charge at least 10% more for preschool space.

In Quebec, parents receive a rebate through a tax credit that can reimburse up to 90% of their child care fees (depending on their income).

In 2019, St. John’s, Newfoundland, became a majority set-fee city. However, 39% of its licensed spaces are still at market rates, which are 10% – 40% higher than provincial set-fee rates.

Report findings: Infant care is most expensive in Toronto, with a monthly median cost of $1,774. The lowest rates are in Quebec, where the monthly fee is set at $170.

Toddler care ranked highest in Toronto at $1,457. In Iqaluit, Nunavut, and Richmond, British Columbia, toddler care fees are more than $1,200 a month. In Iqaluit, space for toddlers and preschool age children are at the same fee. Quebec cities ranked lowest at a set-fee of $179 a month. Other rates, like Winnipeg at $415, and Charlottetown at $586, are located in set-fee provinces.

Impact of policy initiatives: In 2017, a three year federal/provincial/territorial agreement initiative was introduced as a way to reduce child care fees, specifically preschool-aged fees. It established an action plan based on five principals: accessibility, affordability, quality, inclusiveness, and flexibility. Alberta introduced a limited number of $25/day fee spaces (roughly 7%) in Edmonton and Calgary. In British Columbia, a $10/ day fee was introduced, roughly 5% of available spaces. The survey results indicate public policy (such as province-wide fees), fee regulation, and public funding—not market demand—play a role in determining child care fees. In conclusion, child care fees are lowest when licensees receive public funding set out in public policy.

Publication Source: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. (2020). In Progress: Child Care Fees in Canada 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/progress

Volunteer Research Reviewer: Agatha Briglio works as a policy analyst for the province. She is keenly interested in low-income issues and those most at-risk in our community. Through volunteer work she hopes to continue to grow professionally as a researcher, policy analyst, and facilitator

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.4″ custom_padding=”0px|20px|0px|20px|false|false” border_color_left=”#a6c942″ custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_testimonial author=”Posted by:” job_title=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3IiLCJzZXR0aW5ncyI6eyJiZWZvcmUiOiIiLCJhZnRlciI6IiIsIm5hbWVfZm9ybWF0IjoiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIiwibGluayI6Im9uIiwibGlua19kZXN0aW5hdGlvbiI6ImF1dGhvcl93ZWJzaXRlIn19@” portrait_url=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3JfcHJvZmlsZV9waWN0dXJlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnt9fQ==@” quote_icon=”off” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”job_title,portrait_url” _module_preset=”default” body_text_color=”#000000″ author_font=”||||||||” author_text_align=”center” author_text_color=”#008ac1″ position_font=”||||||||” position_text_color=”#000000″ company_text_color=”#000000″ background_color=”#ffffff” text_orientation=”center” module_alignment=”center” custom_margin=”0px|0px|4px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”32px|0px|0px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_testimonial][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.65)” header_font_size=”20px” text_orientation=”center” custom_margin=”||50px|||” custom_padding=”48px|||||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9jYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiUmVsYXRlZCBjYXRlZ29yaWVzOiAgIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJsaW5rX3RvX3Rlcm1fcGFnZSI6Im9uIiwic2VwYXJhdG9yIjoiIHwgIiwiY2F0ZWdvcnlfdHlwZSI6ImNhdGVnb3J5In19@[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

May 21, 2020
Research Update: An Alberta Guaranteed Basic Income

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ custom_margin=”0px||0px||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||false|false”][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ _builder_version=”4.7.3″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”3px||5px|||” border_width_bottom=”1px” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_post_title meta=”off” featured_image=”off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” title_font=”||||||||” custom_margin=”||3px|||” border_color_bottom=”#a6c942″][/et_pb_post_title][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_image src=”https://edmontonsocialplanning.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/boxes_1.gif” title_text=”boxes_1″ align=”center” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _module_preset=”default” width=”100%” custom_margin=”-2px||-1px||false|false” custom_padding=”||7px|||”][/et_pb_image][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”3_4,1_4″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”100%” custom_margin=”0px|auto|0px|auto|false|false” custom_padding=”37px|0px|44px|0px|false|false”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ _builder_version=”4.5.6″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ custom_padding=”||32px|||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9kYXRlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJkYXRlX2Zvcm1hdCI6ImRlZmF1bHQiLCJjdXN0b21fZGF0ZV9mb3JtYXQiOiIifX0=@[/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.7.4″ text_line_height=”1.6em” header_2_font=”||||||||” header_2_text_color=”#008ac1″ header_2_font_size=”24px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” width=”95%” module_alignment=”left” custom_margin=”44px|0px|2px|-96px|false|false” hover_enabled=”0″ locked=”off” sticky_enabled=”0″]

Note: this is excerpted from the May 2020 edition of our “Research Update” publication. The Edmonton Social Planning Council, in collaboration with our volunteers, strives to provide stakeholders and community members with up-to-date reviews, prepared by our volunteers, on recently published social research reports and publications.

Reviewed by Kevin Beauchamp

Wayne Simpson and Harvey Stevens examine the potential options for an Alberta Guaranteed Basic Income (AGBI). Simpson is a research fellow and economics professor at the University of Manitoba, and Stevens is a retired Government of Manitoba senior policy analyst. This paper was published through The University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy.

Despite the economic booms Alberta has received, poverty persists in the province; an AGBI could help address this issue. Two arguments against implementing an AGBI relate to the financial costs and potential work disincentives. Simpson and Stevens propose an AGBI model that would improve the fairness of the tax system and not require significant funding, by making six currently non-refundable tax credits (NRTCs) refundable. The NRTCs proposed to be eliminated include the Basic Personal Amount, Age 65 and over, Pension Income, Education, Tuition, and Student Loan Interest, and would create an AGBI budget of $5.36 billion.

The equation for determining the net benefit to the recipient is “Net Benefit = G – (Family Income x BRR),” where G = size of the guarantee and BRR = Benefit Reduction Rate. As BRR increases, the depth of the benefit increases but is targeted towards a smaller number of recipients. A BRR of 10% was chosen as it benefits a larger percentage of families, minimizes work disincentives, and reduces the poverty rate by 26.3%, and poverty depth by 25.3%. Annual guarantees of $6,389 would be allocated for single-parent families and $9,305 for two-parent families. Additional “top-ups” for persons with disabilities and caregivers of disabled adults were also included. When accounting for labour supply costs, the AGBI would end up costing the provincial government $154.3 million. Net benefits would be mostly distributed to individuals in the two lowest income deciles, while higher income deciles would receive a modest income reduction of approximately 2%. In general, single-parents and single persons benefit modestly at the expense of two-parent families.

Simpson and Stevens also outline a joint Federal/Alberta GBI option. This option would remove the same NRTCs as the AGBI, along with the federal GST credit. A federally funded national GBI, with one G and BRR set for the entire country, would be complemented by a provincial GBI with its own G and BRR values. Simpson and Stevens propose a federal BRR of 15% and an Alberta BRR of 10% that would create a budget of $11.4 billion allocated for Albertans. The estimated net costs of the joint GBI would be $801.2 million.

Federal collaboration would have a more significant impact, as federal tax credits are about 50% higher than provincial tax credits. Single-parent families would receive annual guarantees of $13,674 while two-parent families would receive over $19,000. Reductions in poverty rates (44%) and depth of poverty (54%) would be more pronounced, and the gains/losses for each income decile level would also be approximately doubled, compared to the AGBI option. The relative impacts based on family unit type would remain consistent with the AGBI option.

A limitation to the two models is that they had to resort to the traditional method of measuring poverty, using Low Income Cut-Offs (LICOs) which have been criticized as a poverty measure; Simpson and Stevens acknowledge that the Market Basket Measure (MBM) is currently Canada’s official poverty measure. I also noted a large discrepancy in both models regarding the percentage change of disposable incomes between elderly singles and elderly couples in the lowest income decile level, with elderly couples benefiting more. The differences between single-parent/two-parent families and non-elderly singles/non-elderly couples at the same income decile level are much more modest.

A potential flaw in these models is that disposable income losses aren’t completely progressive along income decile levels. Higher income earners would lose a smaller percentage of disposable income compared to middle-income earners. In the joint Federal/Alberta model, the 4th and 5th income decile levels, on average, would lose more disposable income in pure terms compared to the income earners above them. Further income redistribution may be necessary to increase the equity of the GBI models for middle-income earners.

The models presented appropriately account for changes in the labour supply and tax revenue. However, if a GBI model is ever enacted, it would be worth considering the reduced costs (healthcare, social services, policing, etc.) that would likely result from a more equal society. However, these measures were beyond the scope of the research and would be very speculative at this juncture.

Publication Source: Simpson, W. & Stevens, H. (2019). An Alberta Guaranteed Basic Income: Issues and Options. University of Calgary. Retrieved from: https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/sppp/article/view/53021

Volunteer Research Reviewer: Kevin Beauchamp spent the past year as a Human Geography student at the University of Alberta and will be entering a Master of Urban and Regional Planning program this fall. Kevin plans to explore topics such as affordable housing, social marginalization, and community development throughout his Masters studies.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.7.4″ custom_padding=”0px|20px|0px|20px|false|false” border_color_left=”#a6c942″ custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_testimonial author=”Posted by:” job_title=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3IiLCJzZXR0aW5ncyI6eyJiZWZvcmUiOiIiLCJhZnRlciI6IiIsIm5hbWVfZm9ybWF0IjoiZGlzcGxheV9uYW1lIiwibGluayI6Im9uIiwibGlua19kZXN0aW5hdGlvbiI6ImF1dGhvcl93ZWJzaXRlIn19@” portrait_url=”@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9hdXRob3JfcHJvZmlsZV9waWN0dXJlIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnt9fQ==@” quote_icon=”off” disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”job_title,portrait_url” _module_preset=”default” body_text_color=”#000000″ author_font=”||||||||” author_text_align=”center” author_text_color=”#008ac1″ position_font=”||||||||” position_text_color=”#000000″ company_text_color=”#000000″ background_color=”#ffffff” text_orientation=”center” module_alignment=”center” custom_margin=”0px|0px|4px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”32px|0px|0px|0px|false|false”][/et_pb_testimonial][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|off|off” _builder_version=”4.7.4″ _dynamic_attributes=”content” _module_preset=”default” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.65)” header_font_size=”20px” text_orientation=”center” custom_margin=”||50px|||” custom_padding=”48px|||||”]@ET-DC@eyJkeW5hbWljIjp0cnVlLCJjb250ZW50IjoicG9zdF9jYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwic2V0dGluZ3MiOnsiYmVmb3JlIjoiUmVsYXRlZCBjYXRlZ29yaWVzOiAgIiwiYWZ0ZXIiOiIiLCJsaW5rX3RvX3Rlcm1fcGFnZSI6Im9uIiwic2VwYXJhdG9yIjoiIHwgIiwiY2F0ZWdvcnlfdHlwZSI6ImNhdGVnb3J5In19@[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

May 20, 2020