What this is not about: The broken promises, etc.
To me, it’s not that the federal government is implementing nothing close to what they promised nor that they have the wrong definition and delivery mechanism for the CDB.
It’s not that they gamed the disability advocacy community.
It’s also not that they will mount the CDB on top of social assistance which differs from OAS in that OAS has no low-income clawbacks and is almost a universal bedrock program.
It’s also not that they removed a key Minister to an unrelated portfolio.
It’s not that they dropped the tidbit that the CDB will have a household income definition nor is it their aspiration in writing that disability incomes should somehow rise to OAS GIS levels through social assistance or through some other mystery mechanism.
And it’s not that they continue to say ‘nothing about us without us’ when they make unilateral announcements that virtually no disability advocate with lived experience of disability and low-income has ever supported.
What this is about: Policy-free but on message
To me what it’s really about is that we have entered a policy-free and a design-free ecosystem where what matters most is ‘communications’ and being ‘on message’. This ecosystem is populated by a Cabal of beltway savants who believe that whatever governments decide to do can work if messaged properly to the public.
If that puzzles you, remember that the true con man believes the con.
But they are smart enough to have anticipated the firestorm of negativity.
And in their anticipation of that storm, the most important thing in their view for the government is to weather it.
In other words, they expect to get away with what they have done by noting that the legislation and the initial design both mark important first steps to build on.
In fact, the legislation and the initial design are important first steps but the reality is that they are backward steps in almost all possible ways: definition, consultation, benefit unit, adequacy, timing, implementation.
For both seniors benefits in 1952 and the National Child Benefit in 1998, there were long term plans in place for funding, design change, adequacy, fairness and most importantly, a plan to replace social and income assistance programs with a superior plan.
With the CDB, there are only short terms plans to further marginalize the advocacy community on a small number of design matters without a longer-term vision for anything.
All I can really say at this moment is that I hope that we are all prepared to ensure the government is not permitted to weather the storm.
Communications lines and responses
Question
“The new Canada disability benefit – why did you decide to cap it at $2,400 a year?”
Minister Kamal Khera
“Well, let me just first say, the Canada Disability Benefit is our major milestone to support those lowest income individuals with disabilities. As you know, we are investing 6.1 billion dollars to support some of the most vulnerable (and) lowest income people living with disabilities. This is going to help 600,000 individuals with disabilities.
We know there’s more to do but I do want to take an opportunity to thank the relentless advocacy of the disability community and we are going to continue now to work on the regulations to be make sure that we support (measures) to get it to people as soon as possible.”
Comments
- The government promised a program modeled after GIS that pays $16.2 billion to 2.1 million low-income seniors each year. $1.6 billion per year will be paid to 600,000 persons with disabilities based on an outmoded disability (DTC) definition largely utilized by better-off seniors (largest single group) who meet that definition.
- There is much more to do
- It has taken the government over 4 years to implement the CDB after it was first announced during the Throne Speech of 2020
- Thanking the disability community for their relentless advocacy is odd in that the announced design is counter to and often in direct opposition to almost all of the advocacy by the disability income advocacy sector: e.g. too low; wrong definition; wrong delivery mechanism; nothing yet about indexation or appeals mechanisms.
- The announced design renders the regulations more of an afterthought (a ‘fait accompli’) rather than a work in progress.
Question
“Advocates … for people with disabilities are saying that its not enough money that its not going to lift people out of poverty so what do you say to that?”
Minister Kamal Khera
Look, I’ll say it, I think there’s always more to do but I will say if you look at the Budget, this is the largest single item that you will see (in the Budget) 6.1 billion dollars.
This is around building a social safety net around persons and this goes in line with the work that we’ve been able to do -whether it is with the Canada Child Benefit or Old Age Security and I think it’s really important also for provinces and territories to step up and see what more they can do to ensure that persons with disabilities (have) those supports that they need and we really want to make sure that this benefit is an income supplement, not an income replacement. We are going to continue to work with the provinces and territories to make sure that happens.”
Comments
- The comparison to large and comprehensive programs like the CCB and OAS that each spend tens of billions each year on an almost universal basis is completely misplaced. There is no comparison but more importantly, no plan for later investments beyond the $6.1 billion over six years, and $1.4 billion annually thereafter. Many more announcements in the Budget were for more than $6.1 billion.
- Provinces and Territories deliver basic income assistance to very low-income people with disabilities based on approaches to welfare devised in the 1930’s. They also deliver Workers’ Compensations, supports and services.
- Provinces and Territories do not have the fiscal tools to mount parallel benefits to the CDB.
- The CDB has always be touted as an addition to, not a replacement of existing disability benefits, including federal, provincial or private.
- In all the many announcement of the CDB, there was no request for Provinces and Territories to parallel the CDB in their benefit schemes. This is completely new. The CDB should not depend on increased spending on provincial and territorial programs to achieve adequacy.
- To meet the stated Budget goal of equalling OAS/GIS, Ontario would be forced to make an immediate $3,000 per year per recipient increase in ODSP.
Question
“What do you think about when you hear that people are saying this isn’t going to lift anybody out of poverty. It’s not going to do what it’s meant to do?”
Minister Kamal Khera
“Look, as I mentioned this benefit is a major milestone – a stepping stone – we did not have a Canada disability benefit that existed (before). It’s our government that put it in place. There’s way more to do; we’re going to continue to work with partners as well as the community (and) work on the regulations as we speak now. And also we’re asking provinces and territories because they have a role and responsibility to do more to support those people in our communities.”
Comments
- This is the first time the CDB has been referred to as a stepping stone.
- The GIS to which the government alluded as a comparator was a milestone and NOT a stepping stone. GIS represents the single largest benefit paid to seniors in Canada. The CDB as planned will pay a benefit that’s one fifth of ODSP.
- GIS pays a non-taxable benefit to low-income seniors of an amount that is more than 5 times the announced CDB and it pays it to almost all low-income seniors.
- Working with the community on regulations appears superfluous since the major policy directions for the design have already been announced.
- Regardless, the government appears to have ignored the vast majority of recommendations made during consultations and parliamentary committee hearings.
- What reason is there to believe that the remainder of regulatory conversations would be any different?
Question
“200 dollars, I mean, how can you…. you’re saying there’s more to do. Is looking at increasing the amount something that your government would do?”
Minister Kamal Khera
“Look, as I mentioned, this is a benefit that is a major milestone to support some of the most vulnerable persons with disabilities in Canada and I want to take a moment to thank the relentless advocacy of the disability community…”
Comments
- It appears that the simple announcement along with framework CDB legislation with no design and no funding is considered by the government to be a major milestone. This is an exceedingly low bar for a major milestone.
- Why thank the disability community if you ignore almost all the recommendations they made over the last four years?
Question
“…. Right but they’re advocating for more, they’re saying 200 dollars is not…”
Minister Kamal Khera
“Look, this is a starting point. This is a key (mile)stone in the creation of a key benefit that our government has put forward. We’re going to continue to work with provinces and territories to make sure that they get the supports that they need and make sure that provinces do not claw back any of the supports that the federal government is putting forward. There’s more to do and we will continue to work with the community.”
Comment
- It is not a key milestone and stepping stones are laid following a starting point.
- And what supports to provinces and territories will you be giving?
- As long as the pedigree of the benefits is a refundable credit, provinces will not claw it back and the federal government knows that.
- This is a ‘straw man’ and insofar as they know that, they are acting in bad faith.
With thanks to Trevor Manson