Remembering Kimberly Rogers

ACTION PACKAGE

TAKE ACTION

What You Can Do

Social assistance needs a major overhaul to meet the needs of people.

To get started, the provincial government must:

• Repeal any and all bans after a conviction of welfare fraud
• Set social assistance benefits at adequate levels relevant to local costs
• Increase funds for training and employment programs to pre-1995 levels (adjusted for cost of living)
• Allow social assistance recipients to receive both social assistance and full student loans
• Eliminate restrictions that make it difficult for people in need to qualify
• Implement the recommendations of Kimberly Rogers’ Inquest
• Stop violating Canada’s human rights commitments and international treaty obligations
  

Send these demands to:

your MPP (find contact info for your MPP here)

and:

The Honourable Brenda Elliott,
Minister of Community, Family and Children’s Services,
Queen’s Park, Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1E9

The federal government must:

• Restore rights previously established under Canada Assistance Plan
• Increase and target transfer payments for social assistance
• Ensure every level of government upholds Canada’s human rights commitments and international treaty obligations
  

Send these demands to:

your MP (find contact info for your MP here or here)

and:
The Honourable Jane Stewart,
Minister for Human Resources Development Canada,
House of Commons, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0A6

Municipal governments must:

• Lobby the provincial government to increase social assistance rates
• Refuse to implement legislation that causes undue hardship for Ontario Works clients
• Refuse to prosecute welfare fraud cases until any and all bans are eliminated
• Refuse to violate Canada’s human rights commitments and the rights guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  

How You Can Help:

• Speak out.
  
  
• Write to your federal, provincial and municipal politicians
  
  
• Join a local, provincial or national anti-poverty organization
  
  
• Organize an event at your workplace, community centre, union or place of worship to discuss local poverty issues and the need for social assistance reform
  
  
• Talk to your friends, family, neighbours, co-workers and employers
  
  
• Download the JwD Leaflet and distribute it through your networks
  
  

Inquest into the death of Kimberly Rogers

After five weeks of intensive examination the Coroner’s Jury made fourteen recommendations including: the end of the lifetime ban from social assistance and an increase in social assistance rates to actually cover the basic cost of living.

The following section outlines Recommendations #1 and 4 from the Jury that presided over the inquest into the death of Kimberly Rogers.

The Justice with Dignity Campaign Committee considers these recommendations crucial to addressing two key issues that have had a tremendous impact on people who receive social assistance.

The quotes that accompany these recommendations are taken directly from the evidence presented by witnesses at the inquest. The Justice with Dignity Campaign Committee felt strongly that this information needed to be made available to activists who weren’t able to attend the inquest.

Recommendation 1:

To the Government of Ontario and to the Minister of Community, Family, and Children’s Services:

The zero tolerance lifetime ineligibility for social assistance as a result of the commission of welfare fraud, pursuant to Ontario Works Act, 1997, O. Reg. 134/98 Section 36 should be eliminated. The temporary ineligibility in the instance of offences that have occurred before April 1, 2000 should also be eliminated.

Rationale: Evidence indicates that this would have a devastating and detrimental effect on our society. To prevent anyone from having to go without food and/or shelter, to be deemed homeless and therefore and most importantly, to prevent the death of impoverished individuals.

Why does the ban have a “devastating and detrimental effect on our society”?

At the individual level:

1. The ban violates human rights:

• No other other category of offenders is deprived of the basic requirements for living.
• The ban imposed on recipients of Ontario Works is discriminatory. People accused of income tax fraud or unemployment insurance fraud are not subjected to a life-time ban.
• The ban violates Sections 7, 12 and 15 of the Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
  

2. The ban leaves people with no money at all:

• Social assistance is the income of last resort. Those who are subjected to a ban from receiving social assistance have no other income. Kimberley Rogers had no income at all for three months. During that time, she depended entirely upon the good will of her family and of the charitable community for food. Even after her benefits were reinstated, she still only had $18 a month for food.
• The lifetime ban is in effect for life. “If your life circumstances change, even if you become disabled, you are still subject to the ban.” Ian Morrison, Ontario Social Safety Network, Thursday, November 21, 2002
• “The ban humiliates and demoralizes those subjected to it. If person has no other source of support, this is tantamount to a sentence to go on the street, turn to crime or take your own life.” Dr. Sakinofsky, Suicide expert, November 19th, 2002

3. The rules around welfare fraud are confusing, complicated and not always explained to the recipient.

• “The way that social assistance policies operate expose people to fraud….the regulations are a mess….they are sometimes vague. Someone on welfare is …always breaking a rule that they don’t know about. If I accept a second-hand couch from my sister, will I be defrauding the system?” Dr. Margaret Little, December 6, 2002.
• “We have an example of a client who was advised by her worker to apply for CPP. She did that, got CPP, but didn’t know that she had to report it – when her worker asked her about it, she thanked the worker for helping her – then she was charged with fraud and lost both her housing and her cat.” Jacqueline Thompson, Lifespin, November 5, 2002

At the community level:

• There have been few or no studies of the impact of the ban on individuals and on the agencies that are expected to respond when an individual is left with no income. To this day, we have no way of knowing if communities have the capacity to address the needs of inviduals who are subjected to a lifetime ban. What will they eat? Where will they live? How will they afford warm clothes for the winter?
• “From my initial phone call I was dumbfounded about the situation Kim was put in. A pregnant woman, cut off social assistance, sujbect to house arrest, and only allowed out for three hours per week. How do you expect someone to get through that, and pregnant? I couldn’t believe it…..I was sorry there wasn’t more I could do or my organization could do…I hadn’t worked with anyone before who was subject to the ban….” Eileen Creasy, Family Support Worker, Better Beginnings, Better Futures. November 5th, 2002.
• “As much as we work, there are not enough resources when you have (homeless) people. We have 89 shelter beds available. Well over 100 people are absolutely homeless. People are sleeping outside. Living in vans, sleeping over hot air vents, under bridges. People are sleeping on the streets.
• People who work in social service agencies are stressed, …exhausted. They feel hopeless. They take one step forward, and two back. They feel they can’t do their job properly.” Janet Gasparini, Sudbury Social Planning Council, November 22, 2002
• When a person is subjected to the ban, they become completely dependent upon others, either family or the community, for their most basic needs. Kimberly Rogers was given the best support possible, but it wasn’t enough. That is only possible through a social assistance program that provides adequately for shelter, food and other basic necessities.

At the societal level:

• Research shows that societies with greater poverty have higher mortality rates across the entire population.
• “What matters in determining mortality and health in a society is less the overall wealth of that society and more how evenly wealth is distributed. The more equally wealth is distributed, the better the health of that society.” British Medical Journal, 1996, p.312
• “In the unique circumstances of this case, if (Ms. Rogers) is exposed to the full three months suspension of her benefits, a member of our community carrying an unborn child may well be homeless and deprived of basic sustenance. Such a situation would jeopardize the health of Ms Rogers and the fetus, thereby adversely affecting not only mother and child but also the public – its dignity, its human rights commitments, and its health care resources. For many reasons there is overwhelming public interest in protecting a pregnant woman in our community from being destitute.” Justice Gloria Epstein, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, May 31, 2001

Recommendation 4:

To the Government of Ontario – The Minister of Community, Families and Children’s Services

The Minister of Community, Families and Children’s Services and the Ontario Works Program should assess the adequacy of all social assistance rates. Allowances for housing and basic needs should be based on actual costs within a particular community or region. In developing the allowance, data about the nutritional food basket prepared annually by local health units, and the average rent data prepared by the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation should be considered.

Rationale: To ensure that social assistance rates are adequate and adjusted annually if necessary.

Background:

“Poverty is a huge underlying component … to health status … (H)ow wealth is shared in society is one of the principal determinants of differing health status among wealthy societies such as (Canada). The more equally wealth is shared, the higher the overall health status of a society/country.” Dr. Penny Sutcliffe, Medical Officer of Health, Sudbury, Ontario, November 22, 2002

Provincial cut to social assistance in 1995 21.6%
Increase in cost of living since 1995 12.8% (Statistics Canada)
Decline in OW purchasing power of since 1995 34%

Housing: 1
An analysis of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation October 2000 & 2001 Rental
Market Reports demonstrates that the Ontario Works’ shelter allowance cannot cover the average
rent rates in Ontario.

OW shelter allowances:

• For a one person household is $325
• For a two person household is $511
• For a three person household is $554
• For a four person household is $602

Ranges of Average Rent:

• Bachelor/Studio lowest is $375 (Thunder Bay); highest is $695 (Toronto)
• One Bedroom lowest is $529 (Sudbury); highest is $866 (Toronto)
• Two Bedroom lowest is $620 (Sudbury); highest is $1,027 (Toronto)
• Three +Bedroom lowest is $694 (Sudbury); highest is $1214 (Toronto)

Faced with this reality, many families have no choice but to use the ‘Basic Needs Allowance’
portion of their OW benefits to cover the accommodation costs. ‘Basic Needs Allowance’ is for
all other expenses, including food.

1. CMHC October 2000 & 2001 Rental Market Reports
Income Security Advocacy Centre, “Ontario Works Statistics”, October 2002
Ministry of Community, Families, & Children’s Services

“The cuts had devastating impacts on the community that we serve. Not only were the shelter costs cut, and the landlords were not prepared to take a 21% cut in rents, we had a 400% increase in calls from people seeking assistance. There were people who lost their children. People went through incredible stress. They had to go to food banks … some people gave up their kids to CAS because they couldn’t make it…. The University in our community actually opened up a residence for the overflow of children who were taken in by the CAS. It has a devastating effect on our community.” Jacqueline Thompson, Lifespin, London, Ontario, November 26, 2002

“Most of the women I interviewed are paying more for rent than their allowance. Housing is so hard to find in their budget range. Landlords also know that these people are vulnerable. I had a single mom on welfare living above me who was treated much differently than I was by the landlords”. Margaret Little, Ph.D., December 4, 2002.

Food:
The thirty-seven (37) Public Health Units on Ontario are required to complete the ‘Nutritious Food Basket Survey” on an annual basis, following the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care protocol. Sixty-six (66) food items, that are nutritionally balanced, are surveyed. The Public Health Units are required to report on how this information is then used to promote, or support policy development that would increase access to healthy foods.

Analysis of Affordable Food on Ontario Works: An Example:
In Sudbury, a family of four (two adults and two children) on Ontario Works receives a maximum of $1,250 per month, ($602 for shelter, $648 for basic needs, including food).

According to the Nutritious Food Basket Report for Sudbury, nutritious foods would cost $115 per week, or $460 per month for this family 2. The average rent for this area, for a two bedroom apartment, is $620 3. The balance of $170 would be available for all other living expenses, including utilities, telephone, house cleaning supplies, transportation, clothes, toiletries, recreation, etc. Transportation, alone, for this family would be $210 per month (Sudbury Transit bus pass).

Ontario Works: $1,250

For this family to cover the costs of basic living expenses – beyond food and shelter – the purchase of nutritious foods is often jeopardized. There is a clear risk to health for people on Ontario Works unless the actual cost of nutritious foods is factored into the amount of social assistance.

“ We keep a monthly list of hot meal programs. One of the biggest barriers [to securing employment] is a healthy diet. Every Health Unit is supposed to cost a healthy food basket. I have not seen any community come up with a healthy food basket that matches the basic needs allowance and that doesn’t include razors and shampoo and other things that you need to look good [to apply for work, and secure a job].” Jacqueline Thompson, Lifespin, London, Ontario, November 26, 2002

2 “The Cost of Eating Well: Sudbury & District Health Unit Nutritious Food Basket 2002”, Sept. 2002
3 CMHC October 2000 & 2001 Rental Market Reports

“As I have been interviewing women across Canada for a decade…most recent interviews were in the past two years…I saw such a dramatic change since the conservative government came in. The 21% cut affected everyone, but really affected women. It is harder for women to find work…each of the thirty women that I interviewed across the province said they didn’t eat at least one meal per day. One gave me a stale muffin and said that was also to be her dinner. Another told me that the small honorarium [for participating in the interview] would be used to grocery shop for the first time in two months. So food is the first thing to go. That is what they can play with, not hydro, not rent. They are not eating what they need to stay healthy.” Margaret Little, Ph.D., December 4, 2002

These are just two of the recommendations from the Coroner’s Jury Verdict on the Death of Kimberly Rogers. To read the complete text, please visit the DAWN Ontario website at this pinpoint URL:
http://dawn.thot.net/Kimberly_Rogers/kria118.html

Resolutions Regarding Ontario Works Taken by Municipalities Across Ontario

The following is a list of the municipalities across Ontario that have adopted a resolution regarding zero tolerance on the life-time ban. Across Ontario, municipalities are stating their opposition to this policy, and its “unnecessarily harsh and disproportionate treatment” of citizens of this province.

The following is a motion carried at the Sudbury and District Board of Health meeting held February 20, 2003:

14-03 VERDICT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CORONER'S JURY INTO THE DEATH OF KIMBERLY ANN ROGERS

Moved by Gasparini - Pilon: WHEREAS the Sudbury and District Medical Officer of Health provided testimony at the Kimberly Ann Rogers Inquest regarding the impact of poverty and social exclusion on health and regarding the inadequacy of social assistance support levels for basic pre-requisites for health; and

WHEREAS the Sudbury & District Board of Health in its motion, 53-02, has advocated for adequate social assistance funding and for an elimination of the permanent ban on receiving social assistance for those convicted of social assistance fraud; and

WHEREAS the verdict of the Coroner's Jury dated December 19, 2002 acknowledged:

- That Zero Tolerance lifetime ineligibility for social assistance would have a devastating and detrimental effect on our society. To prevent anyone of having to go without food and/or shelter, to be deemed homeless and therefore and most importantly, prevent the death of impoverished individuals.

- That suspension of benefits is detrimental to the client and the community.

- That social assistance rates (must be) adequate and adjusted annually if necessary.

- That there should be a full appreciation of the person's life circumstances and the impact of the consequences of a fraud conviction.

- That the Ministry of Community, Family and Children's Services and the Ontario Works Program should assess the adequacy of all social assistance rates. Allowances for housing and basic needs, should be based on actual costs within a particular community or region. In developing the allowance, data about the nutritional food basket prepared annually by local health units, and the average rent data prepared by the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation should be considered.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Sudbury & District Board of Health strongly advocate to the Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services that the provincial government rapidly proceed with the implementation of recommendations 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 & 8 consistent with the direction of the Coroner's Jury;

AND FURTHER THAT the Sudbury & District Board of Health directs the Medical Officer of Health to share the "Verdict of Coroner's Jury into the Death of Kimberly Ann Rogers" with all Ontario Boards of Health;

AND FURTHER THAT the Sudbury & District Board of Health directs the Medical Officer of Health to share this motion with all Ontario Boards of Health with a request for their support.

THE NATIONAL ANTI-POVERTY ORGANIZATION
A Voice of Canada's Poor

NAPO facts: Myths about Poverty

The Myths:

• Poverty is the failure of the individual
• The poor do not want to work
• Poor people do not pay taxes
• Welfare rates are too generous
• Poor people need to be taught basic life skills like budgeting
• The welfare system is rife with cheating and fraud
• Poor families are poor because they have too many children
• We cannot afford the social programs needed to eliminate poverty

Poverty is the failure of the individual

Massive increases in unemployment in Canada in recent years have not resulted from personal inadequacy. Many workers have lost their jobs for reasons beyond their control and cannot find work because it is not available. Many people are on welfare because they are temporarily unable to provide for themselves, often due to some personal or economic crisis beyond their control.

Myths

The poor do not want to work

The fact is that most poor people do work full or part-time -- over 60% of those heading poor families, over 70% of poor unattached individuals.* If we look at the people who are dependent on welfare, we see that about 37% are children. Another 16% are single mothers, many still caring for young children. If we look at the number of welfare cases, we find that about 24% are headed by people considered to be disabled.**

* National Council of Welfare, Poverty Profile 1980-1990 (Ottawa, 1992), p.56.

** National Council of Welfare, The Canada Assistance Plan: No Time for Cuts (1991), pp.6-8.

Myths

Poor people do not pay taxes

In Ontario poor people pay about $160 million in income taxes.* Having to pay income tax starts far below the poverty line. A single mother with two children in 1991 started paying federal tax when her income reached $11,601; a single person without dependents was taxed at an income level of $6,532. Although people on welfare don't pay income tax on their social assistance, they still pay sales tax, GST and property taxes. Refundable credits reduce the cost of this tax but don't cover the total tax paid.**

* Ontario Fair Tax Commission, "If You're Poor" fact sheet 3.3), Talking Fair Taxes (Toronto, 1995)

** Ontario Fair Tax Commission, Working Group Report: Low Income Tax Relief (Toronto,1992), pp.27-29.

Myths

Welfare rates are too generous.

All welfare rates are well below the poverty line. The highest rates are still 20% below; the lowest are 76% below the poverty line.

National Council of Welfare, Weltare Incomes 1992 (1993), pp.26,27.

Myths

Poor people need to be taught basic life skills like budgeting

Many live far below the poverty line and must spend all or most of their income on basic needs. Anyone who manages to feed and clothe a family on a very limited income already has budgeting skills.

Myths

The welfare system is rife with cheating and fraud

A study conducted by a national auditing firm estimated fraud to be in the range of 3% of the Ontario welfare budget.* We have reason to believe that this estimate can be generally applied to other parts of the country. On the other hand there are estimates that income tax fraud is in the order of 20%.**

* Peat Marwick, Welfare Fraud and Overpayment: Final Report to the Ontario Social Assistance Review Committee (Toronto, 1987), p.ii.

** Investigative Productions Inc., Voices from the Shadows, documentary film broadcast on CBC September 15, 1992 (Toronto, 1992).

Myths

Poor families are poor because they have too many children

Most poor families have none, one or two children. Only 15% have 3 or more children under 18.* All children in Canada are assured a decent start in life. Recent studies show strong links between poverty and poor health and poor achievement at school. While infant mortality rates for all income groups are about half of what they were twenty years ago, according to the 1986 census the rate for the lowest income group was still about double that of the highest.** Children in poor families are more likely to suffer chronic health problems than other children.*** They are almost twice as likely to drop out of school.****

* Statistics Canada, pp.174,175.

** Canadian Institute of Child Health, The Health of Canada's Children: A CICH Profile (Ottawa, 1989), p.98.

*** CICH, p.101.

**** David P. Ross and Richard Schillington, "Child Poverty and Poor Educational Attainment: The Economic Costs and Implications for Society", in Standing Senate Committee
on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, Children in Poverty: Toward a Better Future (Ottawa, 1991), Appendix 1, p.15.

Myths

We cannot afford the social programs needed to eliminate poverty

According to per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Canada is more prosperous than all European countries.* However, Canada spends less on social security and other income support measures (including Ul and welfare) as a share of GDP than most European countries.** Western European countries such as France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden with economies not very different from ours have refused to tolerate high levels of family poverty.*** These countries provide more income and employment supports to help families with children.

* National Accounts of OECD Countries 1993 as reported in Right to an Adequate Standard of Living in a Land of Plenty, presentation to the U.N. Committee for Cultural, Economic and Social Rights by NAPO and the Charter Committee on Poverty Issues (Ottawa, 1993), p.8.

** Department of Finance Canada, Canada's Economic Challenges: Background (Ottawa, 1994), p.55.

*** Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) as reported in Canadian Council on Social Development, Economic and Social Welfare for Families and Children, (No. 1, June 1992). Other Sources: Campaign 2000, Ontario Prevention Clearinghouse, End Legislated Poverty, Social Planning Council of Ottawa-Carleton, Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women for Newfoundland and Labrador, Oxfam-Canada (St. John's), and Graham Riches. (March 1994) Copyright © 1997 The National Anti-Poverty Organization (NAPO)

RECOMMENDED WEBSITES AND READING

The Justice with Dignity Campaign Committee (formerly the Committee to Remember Kimberly Rogers) website
Thanks to Barbara Anello, the Justice with Dignity Campaign Committee has a Web site with our
publications and press coverage. Go to: http://dawn.thot.net/Kimberly_Rogers/

DAWN (DisAbled Women’s Network) Ontario
Maintained by Barbara Anello, this Web site is comprehensive, with readings and links to websites that cover a wide range of social justice issues. Also, complete listing of Rogers Inquest press coverage, as well as integral texts presented during the inquest. Go to: http://dawn.thot.net/

The Income Security Advocacy Centre
The Income Security Advocacy Centre works with and on behalf of low income communities in Ontario to address issues of income security and poverty. The Centre initiates and conducts test case and Charter litigation, law reform and community development related to federal and provincial income security programs. Excellent publications, including a municipal lobby kit, a sample municipal resolution, and other action resources. Go to:http://www.incomesecurity.org/index_1.html

Pay the rent, feed the kids Campaign
People on social assistance in Ontario are faced with an impossible task: to both pay their rent and feed their children. That's why low-income people and supportive organizations in Ottawa, Toronto and over a dozen other communities across Ontario are pushing for an increase in the shelter allowance so they reflect the average rent in local communities. For more information and how to participate in this campaign, go to
http://www.incomesecurity.org/index_1.html (click under “Campaigns”)
or http://dawn.thot.net/rent.html

Living Wage, Living Income Campaign
Everyone deserves an adequate standard of living - but one in six people in Ontario lives in poverty. We deserve better: it's time for a raise! Across the province, people are joining the Living Wage - Living Income campaign to demand raises to the minimum wage and social assistance rates. Check out their web site at http://www.ocsj.ca/

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC)
For a full listing of average rents across the province of Ontario. Useful information for setting guidelines on shelter rates. Canada Mortgage and Housing (CMHC) 2002 & 2001 Rental Market Reports:
http://cmhc-schl.gc.ca Click on ‘Library’; click on ‘What we publish”; click on ‘CMHC Research Reports Listings’

The Ontario Non-Profit Housing Association
ONPHA sponsors research on the need for more housing in Ontario, including Where's Home? A Picture of Housing Need in Ontario and the 1999 and 2000 updates. The Where's Home Series includes detailed Housing Need Profiles in 21 cities and regions. Go to: http://www.onpha.on.ca/affordable_housing_initiatives/fight/

Local Public Health Units
Across Ontario, local public health units are mandated to assess the cost of nutritious foods in their catchment area, and make the results available to the public. This information was used by the Medical Officer of Health of the Sudbury and District Health Unit to show that the Basic Allowance portion of Ontario Works does not cover the costs of a nutritious diet. For information about the cost of a healthy diet in your region, contact your local public health unit. Margaret Jane Hillyard Little’s book: No Car, No Radio, No Liquor Permit: The Moral Regulation of Single Mothers in Ontario 1920 – 1997, Oxford University Press, D 1998; ISBN: 0195111501

JwD Leaflet - in HTML on the Elizabeth Fry Societies website
http://www.elizabethfry.ca/rogers/1.htm

Second Anniversary of the death of Kimberly Rogers
Events scheduled for Monday, August 11, 2003

Post Inquest ACTION KIT - Ban the Bans!

Verdict of Coroner's Jury into the Death of Kimberly Ann Rogers

Kimberly Rogers Inquest Alerts
content indexed by date

Daily Inquest Reports

Daily Media Coverage

Recommendations to the Jury

Justice with Dignity Campaign

Sign or view the Guestbook

Last Updated Sept. 24, 2003 -- 8:59 AM