Online bulletin no. 12 (November2014)

Prejudice– separating truth from falsehood

Prejudice is the result of judging without knowledge, of generalizing by attributing certain characteristics to an entire group or of reaching a conclusion without examining a situation as it actually is. Prejudice causes great harm to people living in poverty. Prejudices aimed at social assistance beneficiaries are among the most common and most pernicious. They prevent them from being recognized as full citizens, with all the rights of that status. Moreover, prejudices are presumptuous judgments that assign to the most vulnerable people the responsibility for difficulties that, in fact, are societal, not individual, problems.

Prejudice often flies in the face of common sense, solidarity and above all, reality. Social assistance beneficiaries are easy targets for all kinds of presumptions. For example, the tone of an article that appeared in the October 3, 2014, edition of the newspaper La Presse[1]suggested that a significant number of social assistance beneficiaries actually live south of the border and only come to Québec to collect their cheques.

We often hear comments like “people on social assistance are incompetent, irresponsible and without aim or purpose. As soon as they get some money, they run to the nearest convenience store to pick up a pack of beer or they plan bingo. We support them.They cost us a lot. They sponge off all of us. They are cheats, freeloaders and scammers.”[2]If, in the preceding comments, the expression “people on social assistance” was replaced with a term referring to another group that is a victim of discrimination, for example, “Blacks” or “immigrants”, everyone would agree that such comments are unacceptable.

Fortunately, nowadays, expressing such prejudice is no longer tolerated for most groups. Why, then, does it continue when the targets are social assistance beneficiaries?

Some very different realities

A particularly deplorable prejudice is the one claiming that as assistance becomes more generous, fewer people want to escape poverty and recover their economic independence. That prejudice cannot withstand a rigorous analysis of the facts.

The Comité remains convinced that when their income increases, people living in poverty can more easily take steps to get off social assistance. The case of families with children shows this clearly. It is the group whose income has been the most substantially increased, thanks to the government’s family policy. It is also the group for which the both withdrawal rate and entry rate are the lowest.[3]

This very tenacious prejudice is often used to justify underinvestment in social policies. We can add that it is paradoxical to maintain that more money encourages beneficiaries to want to continue receiving money from social assistance programs and discourages them from trying to improve their situation by entering the labour market while also maintaining that general fiscal policies for those who are better off promotes investment and economic vitality.

Furthermore, this prejudice justifies leaving an entire group to live in a situation of extreme insecurity, in conditions that, to use the words of the Act to Combat Poverty and Social Exclusion, result in a human being who is deprived of the resources, means, choices and power necessary to acquire and maintain economic self-sufficiency or to facilitate integration and participation in society.

The basic social assistance benefit for an independent adult with no employment constraints is $610 a month.[4] If we add the solidarity tax credit and the GST refund, that person’s total annual income would have been $8,748 ($653 a month) in 2013.[5] That amount would have to cover housing, food, clothing and all other needs, which would seem to be quite a challenge. Who could come up with a balanced budget with an income like that and be able, as the newspaper article cited above suggests, to pay for even a one-week holiday south of the border? In fact, the disposable income of an independent adult who receives social assistance scarcely covers half his or her basic needs (estimated to be $17,246 in 2013).[6]

What social assistance beneficiaries really need is support adapted to their situation, which would allow them to live in dignity and make their own choices, like all other members of society. Here, we are referring, among other things, to access to employment assistance measures and to training. A large percentage of beneficiaries do not have a secondary studies diploma.

Some myths to debunk

There are some other tenacious false ideas about social assistance beneficiaries, even though a rigorous examination of the facts contradicts them. The two most tenacious and probably the most harmful are the following: a significant proportion of beneficiaries are scammers and lazy people who exploit the system to the fullest.

“They are scammers”

The data held by the Ministère de l’Emploi et de la Soliarité sociale show that social assistance fraud is no more frequent than fraud in other areas and that it is not increasing. Overall, misrepresentations account for about 3% of benefits paid, for a total overpayment of $86 million a year (out of a total budget of some $2.8 billion). In comparison, according to the Agence du revenu du Québec, there is an annual shortfall of around $3.5 billion in the government’s cash inflows because of tax evasion.[7] It must also be pointed out that the vast majority (80%) of misrepresentations in social assistance are errors made in good faith, probably related to the complexity of the steps involved in last-resort financial assistance.

“They are lazy and freeloaders”

“Obviously, you should spend more time in Québec looking for work rather than taking holidays south of the border.” That is one of the statements in the article from the newspaper La Presse mentioned above. According to an oft-repeated comment, beneficiaries do not want to work. However, the data on new admissions to social assistance programs and on unemployment rates indicate otherwise.

Each month, around 45% of those newly admitted to social assistance programs come in because their employment insurance benefits have ended, they have lost their jobs without being entitled to employment insurance benefits or their employment insurance benefits are insufficient. That shows rather clearly a link to the labour market, where the only job openings available to them are often unstable and low-paying.

The conclusions based on an analysis of the unemployment rate point in the same direction. In 1995, the rate was 11.5%, while the social assistance rate was 11.8%. In 2013, the unemployment rate had dropped to 7.6% and the social assistance rate was 6.7%. We clearly see that many people have no other choice but social assistance when they lose their jobs. However, when the labour market offers them opportunities, they are ready to go back provided employers want to hire them.

A question of rights

One of the five objectives of the National Strategy to Combat Poverty and Social Exclusion, as stated in the Act, is to promote respect for and protection of the dignity of persons living in poverty and combat prejudices in their regard.

The Québec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms is clear.Every person has a right to full and equal recognition and exercise of his or her human rights and freedoms, without distinction, exclusion or preference based on, among other things,the person’s social status. Every person in need has a right, for himself or herself and his or her family, to measures of financial assistance and to social measures provided for by law, susceptible of ensuring the person an acceptable standard of living.

The fight against poverty stops where prejudice begins.[8]What kind of society do we want in Québec: a society that judges and excludes, where people look out only for themselves? Or do we want a united society that gives a chance to each person to develop and participate according to his or her abilities?

With less poverty, all of us stand to gain immeasurably…

1

[1]. Denis LESSARD, “Des coupes à l’aide sociale” (French only), La Presse, October 3, 2014, p.A2.

[2]. These examples are taken from a document entitled Le B.S. mythes et réalités. Guide de conscientisation(French only),Marc-André DENIGER, Canadian Council on Social Development and the Front commun des personnes assistées sociales, 2012, p.13.

[3]. From 2004 to 2014, the number of independent adults with no employment constraints receiving social assistance dropped by 9%, while the number of single-parent-family beneficiaries dropped by 27%, and the number of couples with children dropped by 16%.

[4]. Québec Web portal (page accessed on October 9, 2014).

[5].Most recent data available, Website of the Ministère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité sociale,

[6]. Guy FRÉCHET, Aline LECHAUME, Richard LEGRIS and Frédéric SAVARD, Poverty, Inequality and Social Exclusion in Québec, 2012 Progress Report, Centre d’étude sur la pauvreté et l’exclusion, 2014, pp.9 and 31.

[7]. PRESSE CANADIENNE, “Évasion fiscale : 3,5 milliards échappent à Québec” (French only), Le Devoir, March 6, 2012.

[8]. CENTRAIDE QUÉBEC ET CHAUDIÈRE-APPALACHES, Prejudice is labelling. The fight against poverty stops where prejudice begins, 2011.