Hide the RMG that I could not see

Photo Fotolia

Evelyne Couturier

Friday, December 8, 2017 07:00

UPDATE
Friday, December 8, 2017 07:00

Look at this article

Yesterday morning, Bernard Drainville revealed to the antenna of the 98.5 FM have got their hands on a presentation revealing the outlines of the plan to fight poverty, which will be deposited by the government next Sunday. There we learn that, despite the criticism of the report of the expert committee published in November, François Blais will propose to go forward with the guaranteed minimum income (RMG). Is this now the end of discrimination, the economic situation between the providers of social assistance? Can-t-we now work a little and not be penalized when one receives the assistance of last resort? People who find themselves at the bottom of the scale will they finally have the right to sufficient income to meet their needs? No, of course not. Frankly.

The RMG is a concept that has been around for a long time in the political circles. The term says it all. Basically, it is to guarantee a minimum income to all persons within a given territory. The concept is based on three principles :

• Universality : the benefit is available to everyone, regardless of age, the condition of employment, level of education, etc
• Unconditionality : no condition is associated with it, we can’t reduce it to “punish” a behavior.
• Autonomy : the use of the money received is not tagged, you can spend it as we want to.

Of course, the reality is often far from the theory. Thus, despite the “universal” of the RMG, it is rare that a project of this type applies to the entire population, rich or poor. Economic criteria and citizenship are often applied.

In Quebec, it will be recalled that Michel Chartrand, who defended a citizen’s income in the 1990s. One could go back even further and talk about the experience of Dauphin, Manitoba, in the 1970s. But it is really with the election of François Blais in 2014 as we feel that this measure could be translated into public policy in Quebec. It is that, before becoming member of parliament, the minister of Employment and social Solidarity is first and foremost a university that has long worked on the concept. It was therefore without surprise that we heard about the establishment of a committee of experts on the RMG in 2016.

Their report, however, was a bit more surprising. First, it rejected the idea of setting up this type of service, since it is neither economical nor particularly effective in fighting poverty. By giving an identical amount to everyone, including Pierre-Karl Péladeau and Paul Desmarais, Jr., it may be very costly, or to be a benefit so small that it does not change the life of person. Yet, what we see being tested today in Ontario, Finland, the netherlands, and what was in place in Manitoba in the 1970s, refers rather to the people in the most precarious, while adhering to the principles of universality, non-conditionality and self-reliance. In addition, according to the report, the income that is “decent” to secure is 55% of the market basket measure to consumption (MPC), an indicator which is used to determine the basic basket to meet the most basic needs. In other words, to avoid create disincentives to work, it would be necessary to condemn the claimants to destitution. The minister François Blais has harshly criticized the report, but especially on the first aspect, the characteristic of utopian RMG. As to the precariousness of life on social assistance, it seems to accord with his vision of the company.

Few details have emerged of the plan to fight poverty on Sunday. We do not have right to the time that the summary of Bernard Drainville, as it has developed through a document (partial) cast, and a few discussions with people (anonymous) that are at the heart of the project. If he is right, the RMG will be a name. In fact, it seems that it wants to keep employment Objective for the new service providers, a programme of “carrot” (increase of benefits in exchange for participation in a program of reintegration) and “stick” (reduction to the base benefit if it refuses to participate in the reintegration programme), and extending the first strand at all of the service providers. In short, we speak of a RMG to act in ” good poor “. As to the bar of 55%, we do not expect to see it recover. It is already better than the current state of things, but far short of what is sufficient to meet its needs.

On Sunday, there is a risk of out the drums and trumpets to say that finally, it will help the poorest of way ” effective “. Finally, we will put the necessary budget to get out of the tens of thousands of people out of poverty. We will do all that… next year, after the elections, if they vote the ” right edge “. Thus, in addition to being bad solutions to real problems, the plan to combat poverty will be a smokescreen for electoral more to hide the disastrous record of this government. We would like to expect better, but you would not dare to be so naïve.