N.B. minister slams own government on poverty issues - Action News
Home WebMail Sunday, November 24, 2024, 10:24 AM | Calgary | -15.0°C | Regions Advertise Login | Our platform is in maintenance mode. Some URLs may not be available. |
New Brunswick

N.B. minister slams own government on poverty issues

The New Brunswick government came under intense criticism for its handling of poverty issues Thursday, but not from the Opposition - it was from Social Development Minister Kelly Lamrock, who accused his own government of nickel-and-diming the poor.

Social Development Minister Kelly Lamrock proposes changes

The New Brunswick government came under intense criticism for its handling of poverty issues Thursday, but not from the Opposition.

Social Development Minister Kelly Lamrock accused his own government of nickel-and-diming the poor and proposed some big, and likely expensive, changes.

In an extraordinary speech to a group of Saint John business leaders, Lamrock trashed social assistance policies as being bureaucratic and designed exclusively to save money, not to help the poor.

'We figure out which are the least vulnerable people who can be squeezed off the system....That's what's driven social assistance reform for 20 years and it has to stop.' Kelly Lamrock, social development minister

"For 20 years we haven't had a change to social assistance that wasn't driven by finances," Lamrock said during his first major speech on poverty as social development minister after being shuffled from his position as education minister.

"A new mandate comes down from Finance and we figure out which are the least vulnerable people who can be squeezed off the system.... That's what's driven social assistance reform for 20 years and it has to stop."

Proposed changes

Lamrock said social assistance rates have to be increased, even though his government froze them last spring.

He also wants to eliminate some strict rules that punish people who get a roommate, or who make just a little bit higher than the welfare rate.

He cited the recent CBC story of a Moncton man as being a perfect example of why social reform is needed.

The man lost his annual $1,000 disability supplement because his federal disability pension pushed his monthly income $1.70 above the provincial cut-off.

"I mean, you're bound with the regulations you have today, but ideally you shouldn't have any government programs that have an absolute income threshold and then disappear," Lamrock said.

"The benefits should dwindle down with available resources. If you are $2 over, you should get the benefit, minus $2," he said.

"That hasn't been the system that was bequeathed and ministers have to follow rules when they hand out cheques, but are we actively changing those rules and reviewing them? You're darn right we are."

Lamrock also called for better literacy and job training.

Business community has role to play

Lamrockissued a challenge to the business community. He wants employers to make entry-level work more enticing to potential employees, by raising wages and offering benefits.

"We can't have the lowest social assistance rates in Canada. We can't ask people to live on less than $300 a month and wonder why they don't focus on work. It's because they focus on surviving. If we want people to make human connections in society, we can't have policies that punish people for getting a roommate, or moving in with someone else.

"And I want to be really clear on this one, if we want people to be self-reliant, we can't have a myriad of complex rules that make people feel if they take one wrong step, they lose their cheques."

Lamrock's department is consulting with people living in poverty, as well as with business leaders and the volunteer sector about social reform.

He's confident Premier Shawn Graham will agree to the changes, he said.

"To take on a job like minister of social development, you have to believe in your premier and I know that commitment is there and that's why I feel safe talking about those issues today," he said.

Lamrock suggested he realized his speech was inflammatory and probably not great politics, but said he's prepared to fight for what he believes in, whatever the consequences might be.