One in 10 Canadian children live in poverty: report

Child poverty advocates say one in every nine children in Ontario currently lives in poverty and they're warning Premier Dalton McGuinty that a $25-billion deficit is no excuse for scaling back promises.

CTV News Channel: Campaign 2000 coalition on report

The coalition of Campaign 2000 has released an annual report card on child poverty in Canada and says there is a lot of potential but the country as dropped the ball on protecting its most vulnerable.

Canada AM: Laurel Rothman, report author

20 years ago an all-party resolution aimed to eliminate child poverty by the year 2000, but according to the author of the 2009 report card on national child and family poverty, Canada has made a small improvement since 1989.

Watch: See all Videos in the Player

Font-size: Share Print Comments(85)

- Facebook
- Twitter
- DIGG
- StumbleUpon
- Newsvine
- Reddit
- delicious
- Yahoo! Buzz

Photos

View Larger Image

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Tue. Nov. 24 2009 9:57 PM ET

Twenty years after the House of Commons resolved to eliminate child poverty in Canada, almost one in 10 Canadian children still live in low-income families, according to a new report.

The 2009 Report Card on Child and Family Poverty says approximately 9.5 per cent of Canadian children live in poverty, down from 11.9 per cent in 1989.

The report was released Tuesday, on the 20th anniversary of a House of Commons all-party resolution to eliminate poverty among Canadian children by the year 2000.

The report calls on Ottawa to provide a per-child tax benefit of up to $5,400, to enact a federal hourly minimum wage of $11 and to set targets for reducing poverty in aboriginal communities, among other suggested measures.

Campaign 2000, the organization that authored the report card, used after-tax, final statistics from two years ago to come to their conclusions -- meaning that the impact of the current recession is not accounted for in the report.

Laurel Rothman, one of the authors of this year's report card and the national co-ordinator for Campaign 2000, said Canada's progress on the poverty file has been minimal since the 1989 promise was made.

"After a period of about 12 to 15 years of economic growth and prosperity, the poverty rate only came down a very small amount," Rothman told CTV's Canada AM during a Tuesday morning telephone interview from Ottawa.

"We still have more than 634,000 children living in low-income families," Rothman said.

"Many of them often have to resort to food banks, they may not have secure housing and have to move frequently and change schools."

These same families are often unable to find affordable childcare, which also puts them at a disadvantage.

"We're really quite stuck in this country and we need to move forward," Rothman said.

In order for that to happen, Rothman said Canadian leaders need to make child poverty a priority issue.

"I think the biggest hurdle is lack of leadership and determination," Rothman said.

She said other countries have managed to make headway on the same issue by mobilizing their elected leaders, non-governmental organizations and other resources to set goals and meet them.

"We're looking to our leaders to put their heads together to work together on this and set a target and dedicate resources to ending child and family poverty in Canada," Rothman said.

Comments are now closed for this story

Steve T
said
0 0

Not to be insensitive, but our definition of "poverty" might take some other countries by surprise. I'm guessing that children in many countries around the world would be happy to live in the "impoverished" conditions in Canada, compared to the regular conditions in their home country. Statistics like "one in ten Canadian children live in poverty" make splashy headlines, and often are used to further certain political agendas, but they do not tell the whole story.

david sawkiw[saskatchewan farmer]
said
0 0

A promise in 1989? That's just about as bad as the Liberals signing on to Kyoto years ago, and doing NOTHING.........

Dr
said
0 0

Great Steve, rather than compare the situation of our children to those in Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland, let;s compare them to Chad, Nigeria, and Paraguay. I'm starting to feel better already.

adora - alberta
said
0 0

How many of these children are in single family homes? How many of these children are in the same home? How come the families with the lowest incomes have the highest volume of children?

cam
said
0 0

No surprise when for 30 years western democracies have been exporting their manufacturing base to sweat shops in the third world.Countries that survive raping their natural resources experience short term gain and long term pain.

Rickinclayton
said
0 0

Come on now people many cities can't afford to help children in need, bying olympic tickets for dignitaries, wasting millions on LRT ect. and the worst part is our tax dollars are being use for this.shameful.

Portes
said
0 0

Steve T you are right. It is sad that we should have this in this country. It will take a lot off effort and a lot of money to overcome this. I have been to countries where they live on $10.00 a month if they are lucky. But Canada should not have a problem such as this,all levels of Government should work together on this and not one blaming the other as is the usual case. I think that the start should be education for all the children, with free school meals during the day for those who want them, I am not talking about feeding them junk either, balanced meals

Ian Ottawa
said
0 0

You want to solve a problem then insist on everyone that is collecting a welfare cheque to have substance abuse tests including alcohol and smoking. Put them to work cleaning the streets, sorting re-cycled garbage and enroll them in a GED program. Handouts are way out of line and only instill a self of entitlement and do not solve the problems. Instead of the Childrens Aid Society telling the clients what they want to hear and start telling them what they Need to hear we are just setting up a system of failure. Don't throw money without setting rules.

Roger
said
0 0

Obviously Steve your middle class or upper middle class? I bet your one of those people that thinks you earned your pay. You also likely think Canada is a perfect little meritocracy, despite overwhelming sociological evidence to the contrary. Keep everything the same because youâ€™re doing fine right? With the amount of net worth massive corporations are raking in, the amount of billions spent on bailing out banks and transnationalâ€™s somehow people still think the poor are "not that hard done by" and "just need to get a job." Yes because clearly the poor deserve their lot, while billionaires worked hard for their money? The poor, poor investment bankers need welfare, while the real poor can rejoice that they donâ€™t live in the third world! The level of class arrogance astounds me.

Don from Calgary
said
0 0

Poverty is a vague term. Our definition of poverty in Canada is very different from much of the world. I’m not saying there is no poverty but I can tell you first hand that there are many people who consider themselves poor when they can’t afford the movie channel on cable. There are also people who will tell you how poor they are with a beer in their hand. Yes, there are children in this country that can be taken better care of, and they are(most of the time) victims of poor money management by irresponsible adults. There is enough social welfare money in this country to give every citizen a thousand dollar a week paycheck, but no matter how much is spent the problem never really gets solved...the billions of dollars we dump into poverty seems to just fizzle away never to be seen again and with very little results. Things that are shunned like food stamps and care packages should be considered, social programs that show little or no results should be scrapped and rethought…etc. Unfortunately, child poverty is something that is with us forever until we are ready to hire strong leaders and make tough decisions which in my opinion are not the Canadian way.

Stephen B
said
0 0

The two biggest causes of poverty are high taxes and bad life decisions. The time has come to cut government spending and return the savings to the taxpayers and to educate people on making better life decisions.

John E
said
0 0

There is enough blame to go around on this issue. So whether you're Conservative, Liberal or NDP it sould not matter. Children should be our nation's focus. To provide for our youth's well being is to provide for the well being of our nation. Poverty leads to increased crime, increased drug use, increased welfare and despair. We should be focussing our efforts on helping our youth not just programs to incarcerate them. Youth crime is a symthom of youth poverty and our gov't should be allocating more, much more, effort and finances to the issue.

Dr
said
0 0

"Poverty is a vague term. Our definition of poverty in Canada is very different from much of the world." Absolutely untrue. Canada's definition used in this article is identical to that used internationally.

Rob
said
0 0

For this report I am very curious how they defined low income. Is it $10,000, 20,000 or 30,000 a year in after tax income, add to that a statistic about howw that compares to other nations with a similar cost of living and it could prove the first comment to be quite true.

C from Ottawa
said
0 0

These children are not needy because of government mismanagement (any government, Lib or Con), but because of the poor decisions and lack of responsibility of the parents. Lets drop the emotion and look at the real issue here.

CYL
said
0 0

this is a sore topic, and having seen the video clip, no surprise. There are women having children to collect welfare. These children do not get this money as a result, so, the streets. The drug addicts, they are all over the streets. Choices are made. Unemployment. People trying to live beyond their means. Then there's the government, increasing tax, GST/PST/HST whatever you want to call it, it's TAX, isn't one better off in 'poverty' ? Note: my retirement pension is less than what the refugees are getting. And, it will get worst............

We have our priorities striaght
said
0 0

Imagine if the Conservatives just decided to abide by Election Canada's rules and instead of wasting how many hundreds of thousands they're paying their lawyers to sue the watchdog, they put that money towards underfunded existing programs to combat child poverty and hunger in our Canadian communities! (Btw - CONs aren't saying they didn't cheat, the premise of their suit is that they think the Watchdog isn't allowed to investigate any of their shady dealings - KUDOS on the transparency Steve-O)

Rick in NB, Ste Marie
said
0 0

david sawkiw, kids are cold and hungry. do you think its the rigth time to be doing your rant dance?. This is a problem that was addressed 20 years ago, yet no government has stepped foward to except the challenge. As a country we should be ashamed or at least concerned. While you and i sit an type cute little barbs, kids in your province as well as mine are doing without. In this case we should all be hanging are heads. There are far too many food bank being used in this country.

Dr
said
0 0

Canadaâ€™s poverty rates are among the highest in the wealthy industrialized nations (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development[OECD], 2008).Despite the accumulating evidence that impoverishment is one of the greatest threats to human development, health, and quality of life, little progress has been made in addressing the incidence and effects of poverty. Much of this inaction has to do with the reluctance of government authorities to implement policies that will (a) reduce the extent of material deprivation experienced by Canadians, and (b) provide health supports and services to impoverished Canadians. Governments are assisted in their avoidance of these issues by the existence of conflicting models of poverty and its effects, the limiting of health-related research to traditional approaches associated with epidemiological and behavioural models of health and its determinants, and the difficulties associated with engaging in forceful health advocacy in increasingly conservative political environments. These issues are especially important to health-care workers, as the presence of poverty (a) influences human development in all its spheres, (b) is a determinant of morbidity and mortality associated with a variety of disorders, and (c) shapes the ability of Canadians to access and benefit from health services. Examination of these issues and how they could be addressed by health authorities, agencies, and advocacy groups suggests ways forward for researchers, health-care workers, and citizens concerned with maximizing human development and enhancing health.

Canadian Journal of Nursing Research 2009,Vol. 41 No 2, 7â€“18

Dave
said
0 0

Raising children is not the responsibility of the government, nor the education system, not even the local police are responsible for raising YOUR children. It is the parents responsibility. If the parents have drug, alcohol, and gambling problems, then we will have children living in poverty. Neighbours can help each other but ultimately it is the parents job until they are deemed unfit for raising their children, then the government will take them away. Besides, to live in a house with clean running water both hot and cold, to have central heating, electricity, and a telephone is living in standards well above any shanty town or garbage dump where millions of families now live around this world of ours. And by the way, they too are our neighbours.

TruthSeekingMissle
said
0 0

I don't think characterize the drop in child poverty as a "very small amount" is accurate. According to this article, on a per capita basis, child poverty has come down 30% in the last 20 years. To me that is an astounding achievement. The other posters have alluded to a fact of life: there will always be poor humans as long as there are humans. It is very sad and unfortunate that children suffer the weaknesses of their parents. But as long as we allow these children to remain with their parents, and charge their parents with their financial well being, some children will always live in poverty.

Anne
said
0 0

There is a huge problem with affordable daycare. Parents need to work to survive, and yet, they cannot afford daycare. Good daycare, in a proper facility, where it is safe and secure. And to be realistic, there is also a huge problem with some parents. I worked at charity bingos for a number of years, and our highest intake of money was always around the receipt of welfare/unemployment cheques. I saw women in there that most certainly were poor, and of an age that they likely had children at home and they were wasting money on bingo, not food for their children. So, there are many sides to this poverty issue.

G. Gravelle
said
0 0

Although what we consider to be poverty in Canada would be taken as great wealth in other countries, the fact is that the cost of living in Canada keeps going up but the income coming in doesn't keep up. With the HST slated to come in effect next year, the ratio of poverty will go up to 3 out of 10. If it wasn't for the fact that I'm married to a man who works for the government earning more than double my full-time salary and has benefits coming out his ears, I'd be in the poverty group too.

Jay - Ontario
said
0 0

For those that haven't had to do everything the hard way (there seem to be a few here), let me give you a little info: I had a half decent job, my wife stayed at home with our 3 boys, and we "made do". Sure, we were maybe 5 or 10$ ahead at the end of the month, but it was enough to afford the bare essentials (food, heat, hydro, a roof over our heads, etc.). Now, due to the recession, I've lost my job. My wife managed to get a job at Tim Hortons, making minimum wage and getting 10 to 15 hours a week. Every job I apply for, I am overqualified. Our only vehicle broke down, and as I haven't been working, we can't afford to fix it. We don't live in a city, so we are now extremely limited as to my job prospects. For those that think there are jobs everywhere, in all honesty, there aren't. All of our money get's spent on food, heat, and hydro. Creditors now call continuously. Our hydro was nearly cut off. EI has turned me down. Welfare has turned us down. We have enough cash to feed our kids for 5 more days, then what? We have no family to help us, and any friends we had have moved to other parts of the country. But, according to some here, this is our fault, due to bad money management and irresponsible behaviour. Those that say this are just too comfortable in their current position, and don't think it can happen to them. Wake up and see that system doesn't help everyone, and that some people (those on the streets) live the lives of those in third world countries. But, I guess it's their own fault, now isn't it.

Ted 999
said
0 0

Not to worry. This all appears to be part of Harpers Economic Action Plan. The Conservatives are trying to boost consumer confidence by bankrupting the entire country. I have some doubts as to the success of his Action Plan but he must know what he's doing because look at the effect it's having on the nation. Consumer bankrupcies up 43% in Canada and 70% in Alberta. Keep up the good work Harper. The Harper legacy will be Jobless Canadians, long lineups at foodbanks, massive consumer bankrupcy and a half trillion dollar deficit.

BC Guy
said
0 0

I came from a large family having a modest income that would probably qualify as being in "poverty". However, I had a rich a loving childhood experience and my siblings and I have thrived. A couple of friends who were much better off financially have failed miserably in life. A richness in values will trump a poverty in dollars.

Wayne C.
said
0 0

The big question to me has always been why do people without sufficient income have children....its like buying a car you know you can't pay for ...but its fun for a while. Is it selfishness, stupidity or simply the fact that they expect the rest of us to support their kids?

CrackerJackLee
said
0 0

adora:people with means simply don't have many kids, if any. that's why they have money. poor people have nothing (they're poor, get it...?) so they have kids. poor and uneducated women derive immense happiness from babies - maybe its a form of hope. this is more true for the wife than the husband. and what you should be aware of is that these kids, although not yours, are the future Canadians who will make the country when you are old. they will provide for you through their tax support. it behooves you to educate them and feed them well. make them happy to be Canadians by offering your moral support now. these are the people that will be tasked with our geriatric years and our burials. the love you get then is equal to the love you give now.

geo
said
0 0

what is the definition of poverty???? I heard once that it was anyone family making under $60,000 per year. I guess that is me. We really don't know what poverty is until you visit third world counties and live of the proceeds of the local dump. Once again these special interest committees get it wrong. Maybe they should give their wages for doing these studies to the poor. geeezzzz

Jake
said
0 0

I spent $26,000 last year. I paid 12,000 for law school tuition. I went to Europe for 8 weeks. I live great. We need education for people with low incomes on better ways to spend their budgets, not continually give handouts to perpetuate a problem. Remember the adage and the lesson about giving the man a fish and teaching him to fish. 2 pounds of apples are going to be the same price as your bag of Doritos.

T_from_Winnipeg
said
0 0

Adora, the reason the lowest income families have the most kids is simple, the more kids you have the more child tax/welfare you get. I have two kids and a husband who is a stay at home dad, I make over $50,000 per year. If you add up the welfare and the child tax of a single mother with 4-5 kids, they would be making as much as I do and it is tax free. Where's the incentive to get a job.

Kevin
said
0 0

I agree that the standard used to define poverty is not accurate - but it does not take awya the fact that there are many poor around us. It just shows that "socialism" will not and cannot solve the problem. How do you combat poverty? You have to deal with the whole issue of greed and selfishness - two things that we cannot legislate against. We need something beyond us to answer the greed of the heart.

dan
said
0 0

the definition of poverty and low income family should be carefully defined

CMT
said
0 0

Everyone has a view on this issue.I am a bill collector, yes that's right I am the bad guyThe government hands out tax payers dollars to welfare recipients, they are expected to pay rent, buy groceries, clothe their children and pay their bills.Most of the people on welfare are very young or are second generation recipients. They know NOTHING about paying anything. They take the money meant for rent or groceries and gamble it or drink it away...I know this for a fact because I have talked to these people on their cell phones while they are at the bingo hall etc.Their priority is things, they waste money given to them on pizza, beer and cell phones and go bar hopping and the casinos draw them in .Child poverty is a big issue because we freely hand out money to kids and expect them to make adult decisions with it..I say lets give them housing and food stamps...NO MONEY..the money never goes where its supposed to.

Mark Wallace
said
0 0

Steve has got the answer!!! All we have to do is define poverty the same way that they do in the Philippines and we can abolish poverty with one stroke of the pen.

Portes
said
0 0

Ted 999What about the Liberal Party in Ontario, the NDP in other Provinces. Yes blame everything on Harper, the Federal Government does not control the money given to the Provinces for child welfare. I wish you would check your facts before posting nonsense. it is one thing to be a LIberal and another to make the Party look stupid. That is why the Party has such low standings at the moment it is people like you that turn people off it

missmae
said
0 0

I would love to see the CCTB increase...that means I could stay home with my children all the time and my husband and I wouldn't have to work opposite shifts! Childcare is too expensive... how about the gov't target that too? What about debt loads of the low to middle class families? Put a cap on the amount of debt you can have instead of getting approved for credit you can't afford. The priorities? I consider food, shelter, and utilities highest on my list, but for some it might be smokes, clothing, and extra cirricular activities to keep up appearances that they are better off then they are. What about welfare? I know several people who are defrauding the gov't out of welfare or other gov't benefits, they get more then I do and it frustrates me when they could be working or receiving the same payments I am instead of triple. These issues all need to be looked at when we consider low income. My husband and I are both hourly workers, we rent and we have a lot of debts, but we are comfortable :)

PBW
said
0 0

"The report calls on Ottawa to provide a per-child tax benefit of up to $5,400, to enact a federal hourly minimum wage of $11". I'm sure that the proposal will be enacted, but the federal minimum wage only applies to federal workers. I wonder how many children of federal workers can be considered to be living in poverty? The report also requires efforts to be made to reduce povertin in First nations communities. Perhaps that might be accomplished by having equality for males and females on reserves - except to go against the wishes of the males and amend the Indian Act would be not politically correct.As long as Canadians are happy to see manufacturing jobs exported simply so they can pay less for goods, and demand that $1.49 burger, service jobs will be low paying, and graudully our nation is being reduced to service jobs, and other jobs that do not create wealth but simply move it around - for a fee. On the other hand, what has reallly changed in two thousand years? The Roman Republic and subsequently, Empire faced exactly the same problems. "The poor are always with us" was a statement that applied in that workers' paradise, the Soviet Union, where - theoretically - there should have been no poverty; and no doubt it can be found in every nation to a greater or lesser degree. In the meantime, until someone can come up with a political and economic system that will overcome that oldest of human emotions - greed - there will always be those who will strive to get way more than their fair share, by implication forcing others to get far less than their fair share.

CRoss
said
0 0

So forgive me when you come to the door looking for money for the children in third world countries... I sincerely believe that we need to take care of our own children in Canada first.

Andrea in Ottawa
said
0 0

It is not a surprise during a recession to see that more people and children are living in poverty.Without a college, or university education it is hard for people to find a job that pays them a steady salary above the poverty line.These people need on the job training. Unfortunately, our economy is fragile, and the jobs are scarce these days.So maybe it is time to have people on unemployment back in job finding clubs to help them find work.By giving them resources to help them create good resumes, and give them tips on how to find a job, or even allow them to use a fax machine, or computer to send off resumes. Some people on unemployment have had to cut off their internet due to lack of income.On top of the children in first nations communities, low income families, single parents seem to suffer the most when it comes to child poverty.To fill childrens needs , we should be looking at the maslow hierachy of needs principle. And that includes for all children including first nations. Low income families, and single parents need childcare spaces, affordable healthcare, education, and counselling.For senior citizens, be nice to lower the costs of medication.But now it is the matter of getting the different levels of govt to show more political will to help these people who are struggling to get out of poverty.Afterall, Canada is in a recession, and poverty is on the rise. We need a National Poverty Reduction Plan.

Ken - Calgary
said
0 0

Way to go Mr. Sawkiw. Every single time you put your fingers to your keyboard, you keep proving over and over again how pig-headed and uneducated Conservatives are. I encourage you to keep proving us right.I would actually like to see the trends, not just the conclusions. Fine, 10 years later the poverty rate is up, but did poverty start to go down during the Liberal era only to jump back up again when Harper started offering useless tax cuts like the GST cut that only benefits the rich? (Actually, poverty and unemployment were at a 35 year low when the Liberals were in power.) Has the poverty line climbed directly proportional to the rate of inflation? Is there any statistical data proving that raising minimum wage eliminates the problem? As has been mentioned, the "poverty" line is a subjective term - I'd like to see what data goes into the conclusion, not just the conclusion itself. As for what to do about it, right wing governments care only about big business and the rich - so good luck getting a right wing Reform pig like Harper to take this issue seriously.

Edb
said
0 0

Let's see, 1 billion blown on Ehealth sham in Ontario, 2 billion (and counting) blown on federal gun registry sham, throw in a billion a year on CBC nonsense, and what the heck, we'll add another billion for the old Sponsorship gag from a couple of years ago. This is just the stuff we know about.Call me crazy but I'm guessing some of that cash could have been put into some healthy breakfast or lunch programs for school kids regardless of economic situation. This is not about stigma, moral judgments, or definitions of poverty. It's about government bandits squandering OUR looted cash while CANADIAN kids go hungry.

Steve
said
0 0

You raise a good point Steve T. One prominent measure of poverty frequently used by the media includes a measure of inequality. By such a measure, it is quite possible that an increase in inequality could increase poverty even though no one is poorer.

Mel Blake
said
0 0

It is a person's own choice to have children and this makes it their responsibility to care for and raise them. It is not my responsibility, the municipalities' responsibility, the province's responsibility or the federal government's responsibility. The parents of these families need to take a good long look in the mirror and decide to make the right decision with regards to their kids. No amount of Canada's already generous socialism can overcome parents who don't put their kids first, put down the beer or joint and work hard for their family. No, not every family that is poor is irresponsible. But the one's who are not eventually work their way out of poverty. Adding more support like school meals just means one less thing parents are responsible for. It rewards doing the wrong thing, just like most socialist policies.

Rick in NB, Ste Marie
said
0 0

" Daycare " Anne if your problem is affordable daycare, i'd say that you missed the point. As for the charity bingos. Those women are as desparate as any i've seen playing government VLTs, but that doesn't stop the government from making fortunes off the addicted, and i mean all governments.

JEY
said
0 0

I like aspects of both libertarianism and socialism. I have no problems with paying just over thirty percent tax; as long as its for good social programs like free breakfasts for poor kids. I do not want my taxpayer dollars paying for corporate bailouts or wars being waged in faraway lands.

CMR from SK
said
0 0

My husband and I have 6 beautiful children, and according to Canadian standards, we fall into the low income bracket, with my husband working part-time and going to school part-time, and myself staying at home full-time.Yet we are wealthy!! We have lots of love & happiness in our home, and we definitely never go hungry. We live simply, and yet WAY above the standard of the majority of the world!While I do acknowledge that there are many, many cases in our wonderful country, of very needy people (whether due to circumstances beyond their control, or due to their own choices), I do believe that our standard of "poverty" or "low income" is misleading.And, btw, we have 6 children, not because we are "poor", but because we believe that children are a blessing from God!! :)

Dave, Ottawa Valley
said
0 0

I know our level of "poverty" is nothing compared to South America or Africa, but I would be extremely happy to start earning enough to meet the poverty line as defined in Canada.

Jack, Hamilton
said
0 0

That wouldn't have anything to do with our immigration policies would it, especially the "family reunification" part, that has already flooded Canada with legions of unskilled people with very little earning power? At the very least, I would say it's a factor in increasing child poverty.

chuck
said
0 0

i know someone in Quebec who has kids just to collect welfare. At this time she brags about making over 70,000 a year while not working. That money goes to clubs and high fashion. i feel sorry for the kids. Her friends also do it. With this attitude prevailing and with this even being possible, are we surprised that child poverty is not decreasing ? Our social assistance programs promotes this lifestyle and discourage productivity, so do not blame everyone else for a flawed system. Look to ottawa and the provincial government who administers this nonsense, if you can live like this why would you bother taking on the tax burden of being in the middle class tax bracket?

N.D.Peer
said
0 0

These poor little kids can't help it their parents are addicted to booze or drugs. It's just not their fault, society MUST care for them....

Rhonda
said
0 0

I can feel for Jay - Ontario. This is an area where our system really slips. Our family went through this same issue many years back. We couldn't get EI and we couldn't get welfare and we had 2 young children to support. Where is the help when it is REALLY needed? ... For those who are temporarily set back... for those who really try to get through this thing we call life (without the handouts) but, due to unforseen circumstances, have sudden and drastic life changes... for those who have education, but are "overqualified" and can't get a job. Where does the help come from?It does seem to me that it is the people in these situations who are the ones who have the most difficult time getting the help they need. The ones who live the system can work the system and always do manage to get their cigarettes, booze and other "necessities" (even if their children don't benefit from it).

Jim in Ottawa
said
0 0

It seems to me that the one and only cause of child poverty is adult poverty. Children are incapable of making their own economic decisions, so if children are living in poverty, its because of the adults who are supposed to be caring for them are not making the decisions that are in the best interests of the children. Thankfully, the flip-side of this article is that a full 91.5% of children are NOT living in poverty.The bottom line is: adults have to stop looking for a scapegoat "out there:" the economy, bad government policy, greedy corporations, etc., and look themselves in the mirror and say "I have to improve. I have to do better for my children. I am prepared to do whatever it takes to join the other 91.5% for the benefit of my children." The last thing society needs is children growing up with a sense of learned helplessness.

Vince M
said
0 0

Ken in Calgary with your comment on how uneducated Conservatives are. I am a Conservative and unless you are doing better than a P.Eng then re-examine your statement. We get it, you hate Conservatives. They are all "pigs" to you. But you ought to realize they have every bit as valid a point as you and according to the polls these days - more! I guess we just get our point across without the childish name calling.

chuck
said
0 0

jay, thats the problem with our system, if you are a working person and manage to not be dirt broke, manage to do something like own a car or even a home, according to our system you do not qualify for assistance, despite those 2 things being important for you to help yourself and dig yourself out of this hole, Instead they tell you sell the house and ur car so you have no means of transit and no shelter and then they will look your way. In other words they are telling you to forfeit everything you have then beg. Tell me if this is not discrimination against working people ? Doesnt this only make poverty worse? They never told us this when they collected the tax from everyone's income though. the problem here is very systematic.

Matt
said
0 0

T fromWinepeg - My family is a single family and i think its rediculous (incentive to get a job!? yeah and whose there for the kids then?? who's there to make the home? my mother is by herself and in college trying to get her degree so she can get a job to support the family she now has to by herself.. incentive? Hmm

R Petersen
said
0 0

I admit, my children live in poverty. But just in terms of money. They do not live in poverty of mind, social interaction, or opportunity. Real poverty is tragic, but please don't insist my kids are poor just because our income is low.

Mel - Alberta
said
0 0

What about the effect of divorce on child poverty? There are dead beat parents all over this country not paying and expecting the government to make up for their failings. I have seen a man who makes over $100,000 walk away from his family with a Harley and property in a foreign country while his ex and daughter live in social housing subsidized by the tax payer. Judges and family laws need to be strict on both parents to make sure the CHILD comes first. Family planning is also crucial - to all Men the day you feel you have fathered all the kids you can afford GO GET A VASECTOMY. I know too many guys who walk away from there first family and start a second family and guess what - he can't afford both.

Monica/ MedicineHat
said
0 0

That's not a bad stat considering that the children of the Sesame Street generation are now having their own children. Many parents have the attention span and plannning ability of a kitten distracted by a piece of string. The latest bauble at Walmart trumps getting their financial lives in order.

Jessica
said
0 0

Yeah, and if some of these parents wouldn't be spending hundreds of dollars every month on cigarettes and booze, they'd have more than enough to feed their children. Priorities are skewed for some people. Then, due to lack of food and foul air in the home, these kids end up with chronic health problems. Way to go, "parents".

Elisa N
said
0 0

My husband and I both work...he is full-time selling anything from farm to forestry equipment, to snow removal, outdoor furnaces..and he does ok...but he depends on the economy to sell. I am a Support Worker going into people's home...part-time...and if I was a single mom, I wouldn't be able to survive with my kids. We are doing ok...but...we are finding the prices of EVERYTHING is going up. From food to heating...want to get rid of poverty...tell the utilities to stop raising the prices of everything... Tell the grocery stores to stop raising the price of fruits, vegetable, bread/pasta and dairy products (I don't care if they do for junk food). That alone will lower the poverty level...so that these families can afford food and heat....whether they are single parent or with 1 child or a whole brood of them...The governments (Liberal/Conservative and/or elsewhere in the world) are the cause of poverty...I have to laugh when they say they will end it. They will NEVER end poverty whether it is in Canada or in Africa... Human greed is the cause of poverty...get rid of that...you will get rid of poverty...and Canada is full of greed...

Con Servative
said
0 0

There must be poverty. You people need the fear of suffering to get you to obey orders. Thank you, Prime Minister Harper. Together, we the right-thinking people shall rule this land. We shall rule with a rod of righteousness.

J in New Brunswick
said
0 0

The amount of uncaring upper class conservatives on this message is disgusting, and yes I believe I am right in making such an assumption about these people. These people don't understand, because they're rich (and my definition of "rich" isn't that rich compared to most people's definition). The fact of the matter is these people probably own cars, houses, and have fridges and cupboards full of food. Why, because they have good jobs. Not everyone does, and not everyone can. I have a university degree, and a trades certificate, and I can't get a descent job. I've tried. Hard. In fact I'm unemployed and have been for going on 4 months, and my girlfriend and I have a 13 month old daughter. We go to the food bank, and we get what little income assistance will provide, and then I get a very small amount of EI. I did everything I was told to do (go to school, return to school for further upgrading) and I did it well. Also I have alot of student loan debt. My home province of New Brunswick is not a nice place to be for a young person, or a young family. We could use any help the government can give. Sweeping generalizations and stereotypes about the poor are not helpful. This is Canada. There is absolutely no excuse, what so ever that anyone in this country has to struggle or be unemployed. We have the money to help the poor, we just waste it on things stupid things like the Olympics or wars.

jacklantern
said
0 0

by the way, which ethnic group of children is at this risk of poverty. i'm willing to bet the majority of numbers is aboriginal. government will keep talking. everyone keep talking. talking is all people do. its all people are good at (me for example, i don't do anything directly to help a child i would consider to be living in poverty). we will talk these starving children to death. is it not as simple as if there is a problem fix it? if the majority of the children that are poor are aboriginal well then guess what there shit out of luck. the government doesn't care about them. their own chief and council sure as hell doesn't care about them. i, the aunt of a nephew of my younger brother and soon to be a second time aunt will do what i can in my family to be supportive, loving, caring, provide food and shelter for these little ones because that is the way. my fellow anishinabe men and women we need to start helping and caring for each other. western society is their own. we need to be our own. we can do it. we were not beat. only side tracked. say what you will. i/we know our truth.

len
said
0 0

The insane posts on this subject are surreal.Women breeding to get a bigger government checks,welfare recipients are all drunks,poor is not really poor if we accept third world poverty rates.Lord, what happened to our education system that has bred such bigotry?

J. Layton
said
0 0

I take offence at the comments made by Stephen B. People don't choose to be poor. In most cases they are born into poverty and need a hand to make their way out. We owe it to our "brothers" to help them. We are all in this world together. Our tax dollars are well spent on social programs that help the most needy in our society. If we followed the advice of Stephen, the rich would get richer and the poor would get poorer. That would be a sad world to live in. I think taxes should be raised, like the HST, to help those who need a helping hand. It will make the world we live in a better place for all of us.

tiiu1
said
0 0

I know that there are a lot of improvements to be made in this area, but many of the parents have a lot of issues that they need assistance with. My parents actually fled the Soviet Union and were refugees in Germany after the war and then in post-war Britain with rationing where they did encounter hunger and short rations. My father came from a upper middle class home and when he got to Canada in 1951 he ate so much pork that they became ill. His GP prescribed more vegetables, and thus he started eating broccoli, his life long favourite vegetable. Of course we should assist child poverty victims, but the parents should also bear some responsibility. My father said that he only had one child because he didn't want to work so hard.

Dave from Toronto
said
0 0

This is a subject I was deeply involved in for a number of years,both when I lived in Toronto and later when I retired and moved to Eastern Ontario.In Toronto I worked as a truck driver for a food bank,help sort foodstuffs and drove the fork lift as I was at that time the only one qualified to do so.This took up about 15-30 hrs hrs a week of my time, but after a year and a half I was so completely discouraged I gave up all together.To see the same people coming in every day using false identification,,claiming to have five or six children, complaining about the food they were given and then to go up on the roof for a cigarette to see the same couple packing food into the back of a nearly new van or station-wagonalready full of food from other charities in the area just finished it for me.The food bank did little to stop this as it improved the statistics of the place....big notice on the wall...."We served 2325 needy families last month" etcEven when some of the more grateful and deserving clientel pointed out that many of these cheats were actually selling the food we supplied nothing was done..I am not saying that everyone involved was a cheat, but it seemed that the figures were at least 40-50%, and everyone in that catogory seemed to have a cell phone, a few gold chains,and what would appear to be a ring or two that looked as if it would cost a lot....Of course all the local NDP would show up with their children to pat us all on the head a few Saturdays a year ,posing packing boxes for a photo-op and then vanishing a half hour later.Was I wrong to walk out?

eddytoronto
said
0 0

If Flaherty wants to Help he would do the following, now while our dollar still has purchasing power.1st -To revive credit demand, then take out 0% Central Bank Of Canada loans for such long overdue projects as the construction of 1,000 hospitals, the building of 50,000 miles of modern maglev rail systems, and 100 fourth-generation, high temperature, pebble bed nuclear reactors. 2nd the rebuilding of water systems and the interstate highway network. 3rd Idled auto plants should be reconverted for these purposes. Science drivers in the fields of space exploration and colonization, high energy physics, and biomedical research should also be fully funded in this way to provide technological modernization.These are quite simply the requirements for the maintenance of human civilization in this part of the world. Until measures like these are carried out, by Canada and the United States we will continue to sink deeper into the bottomless pit of economic depression.

Hannah J.
said
0 0

Re: J. Layton, Stephen B has it on the mark. We were all born poor and naked. It is up to yourself to pull yourself up in life.

Trisha
said
0 0

In our little city come the 20th of the month (Child Credit Payday) and should it land on a Friday, well our Enforcement personel usually will have between 200 and 250 calls. A real punishment to the Police just because some people have extra money in their hands.

Living in a glass house
said
0 0

In a perfect world, we would all be perfect parents, with perfect jobs and never make a financial error. There would be no substance abuse, divorce, unplanned pregnancy, etc.I read all the comments thus far, and you could characterize most of them from pompous asses, who clearly love to judge others. You could have it happen to you...poverty that is. Divorce and no child support or job loss without enough savings...be careful who you judge. Maybe contribute some ideas on how to help solve the problem. Forget that a lot of adullts make stupid decisions. Kids are entitled to food and shelter and so let's concentrate on that.

Teri
said
0 0

Some of the comments seem a bit silly re: other countries/poverty levels.The poverty levels elsewhere and how we should be greatful in comparison.How do you explain that to a child who has nothing.I always find those who have never experienced hardship of this magnitude as a child ,have so much to say.

From the Arctic
said
0 0

I believe in this story...personally, I have worked over the last 30 years since high school...I was doing okay until I started having more than 2 children. The Arctic cost of living is very expensive therefore when I thought I could afford 2 more children, I actually couldn't. Rental housing became very expensive due to the rent scale changes and they didn't do a very good job on that rental scale review. Due to my income, I did not qualify for child tax benefits, last one I got was from Sept 04 for $16 and I have never seen a cheque since although my kids were very young. They didn't count as children like the family next door to me were when it comes to the child tax benefit program. To live on welfare, it's almost impossible, with a $259 cheque if at all in 30 days is only $8.63/day, lasts less than a day here in where I live. As said earlier, I believe in this story as it's reality as some may not see it that way. Come on, for a 4 litre milk, it's over $15 or over $6 for a one litre milk. How are we then supposed to eat healthy nutritious food when it's so expensive?

Doubting Thomasina
said
0 0

OH great! Another "study" by another self-declared group of "experts." These people will never give any government a good report card. In truth, the average family in Canada now has much more than they did in 1989. The "statistics" this group created were really a matter of playing with the numbers until they got the answer they wanted. It's called a self-fulfilling prophecy, and it stinks.Poverty is a terrible thing. To call these Canadians "impoverished" is to insult the truly poor people of the world.

Doug @ BC
said
0 0

"Stephen B" said it best.It's easy to whine on about the situation,but coming up with solutions is more complex..People on the politcal right tend to think building an economy with jobs for everyone is the right way to go.People on the left simply want to mail out cheques to everyone who wants more. There are inherant problems with both of those ideas.But long term,good jobs and lower taxes work the best.There is no room on my bus for those who just want a free ride.Unfortunately with this recession,our economic growth is likely to be slow.Higher wages are out of the question because our products are already to expensive to export.And government debt limits their ability to lower taxes any time soon. Equally difficult,is the notion of mailing out more cheques.People need to realize that the govenment has no money of it's own.In fact,they have debt.It only has money that they have taken from someone else. We do not need more hand outs.Decades of Liberal socialism have proven that doesn't work for anyone.Money for nothing just encourages more people to get in line to live of the labour of someone else.Only the elderly and the disabled have an excuse for not doing something to help themselves. Children live in poverty because their parents are poor.And there are not enough working people in the entire nation to support all those who abuse drugs,fail to educate themselves,are lazy,or who just make bad choices.Confiscating the wages of the successful,will only drag them down too.In the end,it will produce lower living standards for everyone,and send the highly educated to countries that require at least a minimal amount of personal responsibility. What we EARN is more appreciated than what we are GIVEN.

DON
said
0 0

Hate to say this but this is what happens when our foolish government keeps giving our money to other countries to feed the poor our own people suffer.time to replace our whole government for they are all useless.

Linda in Vancouver
said
0 0

All those years of economic growth only brought poverty rates down a small amount.Before this recession,there were "Help Wanted" signs all over thi city.Usdually right behind someone begging for "free" donations.That tells me some people just don't want to work.That may be their right,but it comes with consequences.That may not be fair to their children.I am aware of that.But hey,if I could get "free" money to pay for my kids,I'd quit work too. If I know people who need help,I will go to the limits to teach him/her to fish.But the fish I caught are for my family.I'm sick and tired of denying my own family because there are more and more people demanding we pay more for someone elses family. If you are troubled by other people living in poverty,do as we do.DONATE to organizations that can help.Lobbying government for more "free" programs just steals money from families who may also have little to spare.And every tax increase moves someone below the poverty line. For example,if a child has the misfortune to have parents who each smoke one package per day,they have over $400 less for food every month.Suggesting that taxpayers make up the difference is just plain theft. Poor choices.Not the childrens fault,but they pay the price.But right now,I see few remedies that will actually work,and not steal from those who make better decisions. We DONATE what we can.But even working at a decent job,our family has seen lower living standards every year for quite some time.Take more from my children at your own peril.

Dr. M
said
0 0

Much of the confusion in some of these posts comes from a failure to distinguish between two types of poverty: relative and absolute. Relative poverty will always exist, and simply reflects the fact that not everyone can be equally wealthy. Absolute poverty, however, means that someone does not have the basics of life: food, clothing, shelter, or transportation. In a wealthy country like Canada, there is no excuse for children living in absolute poverty. Some many feel that none of our children do, but there are many kids who go to school hungry every morning because parents, for whatever reason, cannot afford to provide a decent breakfast. It doesn't matter what the cause of this absolute poverty is- blaming the parents may or may not be realistic, but it is irrelevant. We cannot afford to raise a generation of kids in poverty, because they are more likely to turn to crime, use drugs, get pregnant at an earlier age, go on welfare, and get less education than their more well-off peers. The result is that a generation down the road, we pay more in taxes, and experience more crime, because of the failure of the previous generation to address this problem adequately. This isn't just an issue of social justice and compassion, but a hard-headed economic issue for all of us. You can either pay now to raise a generation of well-educated kids who don't go to school hungry, or you can pay more 20 years from now for welfare and prisons. Just check out those countries (usually called "socialist") that have gotten this right. America, on the other hand, has one of the highest crime rates in the world, and one of the highest rates of child poverty. That isn't just a coincidence.

Nov 24 comment
said
0 0

This is a very sad issue. Twenty years ago ALL parties agreed to this, and ALL pari es have failed. Let's just all try a little harder. I don't think the issue of homelessness and child poverty are too far apart. It's the holidays, why don't we all shut up for a little while and contribute to our local food bank or shelter. It's not enough but it is a start.

Remarried in Alberta
said
0 0

I was one of those low income families with a child. My husband and I split up, a year later we were divorced, I was living in an apartment with my young child my ex went to live with mommy and daddy and bounced 6 child support cheques.Of course the government doesn't know about the bounced cheques he was giving to me. But I have to say that the Ontario government treated my son and I very well while I was in my financial crisis. Everything was paid on time and my boy didn't go without. If it wasn't for the Government doing what they did for me financially I never would've been able to keep my car or my apartment.Don't kid yourself - single moms do good by the government. It's all in how you spend it.

Observer
said
0 0

@Dr - in regards to the definition of poverty, YOUR claims are absolutely untrue. The definition of "poverty" varies from country to country. If we are talking about "absolute poverty" that is one issue, but we aren't. We are talking about relative poverty as defined by the poverty line that we have set for ourselves. That makes it entirely relative to Canadian standards of living.To all of those who say that we should differentiate our definition of poverty from 3rd world nations, I have yet to see one viable argument as to why. In other less developed nations, poverty is determined by access to food, clean water, education healthcare, etc. If the vast majority of the impoverished people in this country have access to basic necessities in one way or another(which I will wager that the majority do), why should they be classified as impoverished? They might not be able to have a computer in their house, or their own car, but without a doubt they will have access to these things by other means (computer/internet through public libraries/public schools, public transit in lieu of a car, etc). Not keeping up with the Jones's does not make someone poor at a shameful level and it's not society's responsibility to try and help them to do so. As long as we provide the basics (and yes that might even mean food banks when times are tough) we have fulfilled our responsibility to provide the necessities of life. Countries that try to keep everyone on a level playing field are called communist and in those countries, people's standard of living moves up, not down.

reece
said
0 0

Children sometimes brings on poverty - I can't afford them. I'm perfectly comfortable with my salary now but the moment we decide to have kids we'll all be poor. The gov't asked what's Canadians back from having kids? Here's the reason. Yes, bring on the immigrants. They don't mind living in households with extended family but like me, their children will adopt to Canadian life styles and live like I do - hopefully making better wages but alas we know what the job situtation is becoming. Unions being busted up and jobs being shipped to communist states. We need more immigrants and alot less families feeling they NEED children that they can possibly afford. I still am shocked by impoverished people having kids - these kids will grow up and move out lieaving you in the dust and still very very poor.

Tom (Canada's Ocean Playground)
said
0 0

The parents are the irresponsible ones in this matter, the child(ren) are the victims in this issue.Parents, single or not have vices that they either have no control over or cannot or do not want to find the courage to seek help which is plentiful and free.Why work when you can have multiple children and get paid for them each month and irresponsible use it for personal vices substance rather then the intended benefactor(s).We class poverty on in comparison of how developed a Nation is, this has nothing to do with comparing Canada to Africa, Mexico, S.America or some other Nation.I agree with the comments that in-order to collect and justify a welfare cheque one must mandatory enrol into a program to get that individual back on they feet or get them trained or educated to be self sustaining.It's Canada's welfare system that need some reform. I know many people who are on some form of assistance and they do not get any guidance in an effort to improve, so they give up and stagnant.It's a shame. Another issue is jobs for these folks, however that is another news article.

Brian
said
0 0

How exactly does this report define poverty? Relative poverty, absolute poverty? X amount of dollars per year, converted to Purchasing Power Parity? "Low income" defined as what? My idea of low income may be very different from yours. Vital facts are missing here.P.S. I live in Manila right now and I suspect most kids here would love to have the kind of poverty Canadians face.

Related Websites

Read the 2009 report card

Share it with your network of friends

Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.

Share this article with Facebook

Share this article with Digg

Share this article with Newsvine

Share this article with delicious

Share this article.
Send Email

Share this article with Twitter

Share this article with StumbleUpon

Share this article with Reddit

Share this article with Yahoo! Buzz

Most Viewed News Stories

View More News Stories

Most Talked about Stories

I applaud the budget, even though Health Care and education may stay unscathed. Sadly this cannot last and I worry to later this year where cuts will become enviable. If anything, this provides the Wildrose Alliance plenty of ammo when an election is called.

J Stad

Alberta going for broke with record $4.7B budget deficit

Got something to say? Share on CTV News

Pick your location

See All Shows

Go to the Watch Home Page

Current Selection

Go to the News Home Page

CTVNews

News Programs

CTV News Channel

CTV News Team

Features

Local News

Browse

Services

Top Stories -

News Sections

News Programs

Features

Browse: