By Jim Coggins

CHRISTIAN groups made numerous recommendations about what should be in the federal budget released this week -- and they got some of what they asked for.

Many of the agencies expressed concern for the poor and talked about long-term social changes rather than short-term remedies for immediate problems.

Kairos

Before the budget was released, Kairos, an umbrella organization supported by many mainline denominations -- Anglican, Roman Catholic, Christian Reformed, Lutheran, Mennonite, Prsybyterian, Quaker and United -- issued a detailed call for the budget to be based on "moral imperatives," asserting that those moral imperatives are supported by Christian beliefs but are not exclusively Christian.

The moral imperatives they articulated were alleviating poverty and protecting the environment. Specifically, Kairos called on the government to keep its 1989 commitment to end child poverty in Canada, to undertake social housing initiatives and to consult with those most affected by poverty -- including women, youth and indigenous peoples.

Kairos also wanted the government to shift subsidies away from the oil and gas industry -- especially the tar sands -- and toward investments in conservation and energy efficiency, renewable energy and public transportation.

In addition, Kairos called for the government to pursue the same goals for the poor and the environment in other countries. Kairos said the current economic crisis is due to "a systemic failure in global financial markets" that has enriched some people at the expense of the poor and has degraded the earth's ecosystems in search of short-term profits.

The final budget contained "some good steps" but fell short of what Kairos was calling for, said Kairos executive director Mary Corkery. There were some good initiatives on social housing but "no inkling of a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy," she said, adding that the increases to the National Child Benefit supplement and the Canada Child Tax Benefit will be helpful, but will certainly not end child poverty.

Further, she noted, the government consulted with business and other groups but not with those most adversely affected by economic problems, such as the very poor, women and indigenous people.

The budget offers $1 billion to support "clean energy technologies," but a good portion of that will go to unproven "carbon capture" technology to make tar sands oil less objectionable.

Kairos would also like to see measures to regulate global financial markets. For instance, a worldwide 0.005% tax on foreign exchange transactions would deter currency speculation and raise US$33.4 billion a year to assist sustainable development in the third world.

It is a shame that discussion of the environment and a carbon tax has fallen out of public discussion, said John Dillon, Kairos program coordinator for global economic justice. He cited a United Church survey that found 78 percent of Canadians favour action to protect the environment even if it entails some cost to the economy.

"Faith calls us to vote for what is good for the commons, not what is good for ourselves," said Corkery. Kairos, she added, is engaged in a long-term effort to change public opinion. It is individuals as well as the government that must act according to "moral imperatives."

Citizens for Public Justice

Citizens for Public Justice (CPJ), a faith-based social justice organization that has been active for over 45 years, led pre-budget workshops on poverty in various Canadian cities and called for a comprehensive "poverty reduction strategy" and a comprehensive strategy to establish a "green" economy.

In a post-budget news release, CPJ endorsed a stimulus budget but called the budget "a lost opportunity" to do more. In particular, CPJ observed that the budget did not offer a poverty reduction strategy, social infrastructure investment or a plan to make the economy greener and more sustainable.

For example, CPJ had called for at least one of the budget's measures -- the doubling of the Working Income Tax Benefit -- because it will help people to move from social assistance to employment. However, the measures will not appreciably move Canada closer to ending poverty, which CPJ public justice policy analyst Chandra Pasma called "a fundamental concern in the Bible."

The budget will help the working poor more than the unemployed poor, said Pasma. CPJ would eventually like to see a "guaranteed livable income" for all Canadians. They also called the improvements in the Employment Insurance program "insignificant."

CPJ was critical of the $2 billion in tax cuts, arguing that $2 billion in additional government spending would create more jobs. CPJ supported the $12 billion in infrastructure investments, for such things as bridges and roads, but argued that investments in "social infrastructure" -- such as health care, education and child care -- are equally important.

The $1 billion in spending on the environment is also inadequate, said Pasma, and the amounts for home renovations and social housing renovations should have had "green strings" attached.

Individuals and communities also need to be working to combat poverty, said Pasma, but "if the federal government made fighting poverty a priority, it would make it a priority for all Canadians." There is a "growing momentum" among Christians and Canadian society generally to reduce poverty, she added, and she expects that this will achieve a real decrease in poverty within the next decade.

Cardus

Cardus, another Christian think tank with roots in Christian Reformed churches, took an approach to the federal budget that was somewhat different from CPJ's approach.

Cardus argues that a key issue is "the renewal of Canada's social architecture," and its main pre-budget recommendation was that the government increase the tax credit for charitable donations from 29% to 42%. It argued that Canada's charities provide 8.6% of Canada's GDP and "impact the physical, social, and spiritual lives of virtually every Canadian." It also argued that increasing charitable giving would provide more stimulus to the economy because it would combine government money with contributions from individuals.

Continue article >>

In a post-budget analysis, director of research Ray Pennings argued that the budget will help stimulate the economy in the short term and that its provisions for tax reductions, training and environmental issues will help Canada in the long run.

However, he said the budget does not address three serious long-term issues: the over-reliance on credit in Western society, the fact that our birth rate is so slow that there will soon be more workers retiring than entering the work force, and an over-reliance on governments "to solve problems that are beyond their capacity to solve."

The budget provides help to individuals but does nothing to strengthen the institutions between government and individuals, which are closer to local needs and can provide a broader range of help, said Pennings.

While some Christian groups have been calling for more government intervention, Pennings said the role of government is significant but limited. He said he believes in "a market economy as a very effective tool to create provide goods and services." On the other hand, he said he does not believe in "a market society".

The market needs to be tempered not just by government but by other intermediary institutions, said Pennings. It is not just economic and environmental frameworks that need restructuring, he said, but also our social (who cares for whom?), family (do I have children and what do I teach them?) and moral frameworks (such as the greed and irresponsible risk-taking that led to the current crisis).

Institute of Marriage and Family Canada

The Institute of Marriage and Family Canada (IMFC), a research and lobby group with evangelical roots, said in a January 27 news release that the budget contained "some positive steps" but offered only "mixed benefits."

The news release endorsed what IMFC had been pushing for before the budget: income splitting. Currently, families with one income pay thousands of dollars more in income tax than families with two incomes. If the single-income families could divide their income between the two spouses on their income tax returns, it would help them tremendously, said IMCF executive director Dave Quist -- who added that the measure is not just designed to help "traditional families", but could also benefit single-parent families if the parent's income could be split between the parent and the oldest child. While the measure could be very expensive, the costs could be reduced if it was applied only to families with low or modest incomes.

Some measures in the budget will help the poor, aboriginals and other disadvantaged groups, said Quist. However, while some of the other Christian groups focused much of their concern on the roughly 10 percent of the population that is poor, IMFC focused more on average families, the middle class. For instance, Quist endorsed measures that will help families buy homes. He also noted a measure, overlooked by many other commentators, that will provide funding to teach "financial literacy," such as how to avoid and manage debt, to individuals and families. Strong families are the foundation of a strong society, said Quist.

Unlike many of the other agencies, IMFC is in favour of tax cuts, so that families can make their own choices about how to spend money.

The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada

The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC), an umbrella organization for evangelical denominations, issued a public letter just before the budget in conjunction with Street Level: The National Roundtable on Poverty and Homelessness.

While mainline churches and evangelicals have sometimes differed on some social policy issues, some of the EFC's pre-budget recommendations were almost identical to those of Kairos. In its letter, the EFC proposed that a top priority be issues of poverty and homelessness. The letter called for a national poverty reduction strategy, a national housing strategy and a commitment to a guaranteed minimum standard of living for all Canadians. It opposed substantial tax cuts and cuts to vital social programs and services, and it urged measures to prevent others from falling into homelessness and poverty, including improvements to the Employment Insurance program.

Don Hutchinson, vice-president in charge of the EFC's Centre for Faith and Public Life, told CC.com the budget contained "some good first steps that could be developed into a long-term strategy." For instance, there is spending on social housing which does not constitute a national housing strategy but which could lay the foundation for one.

Hutchinson affirmed the retraining provisions and the extension of Employment Insurance -- key EFC recommendations -- which will keep some people from falling into poverty and homelessness. He was also pleased that there were no substantial cuts to social programs and that the tax cuts were not huge and were at least targeted to assist those with lower incomes.

However, Hutchinson also said there are limits to what government alone can do, and he urged the government to work with "street-level practitioners" who have the expertise and the heart commitment to take government dollars farther.

Poverty is a "challenge to all Canadians -- particularly people of faith who have in their sacred texts the call to care for the poor," said Hutchinson, and people should "not rely on government to do it all." Referring to a colleague who had befriended three homeless people in Ottawa and helped them get into an apartment, Hutchinson said: "It's about relationships, and government does not have those relationships. Relationships are key to all of life."

Asked if the concern with poverty is a new one for evangelicals, Hutchinson said some evangelicals -- such as the Salvation Army, World Vision and Mennonite Central Committee -- had never lost it but other evangelicals were reawakening to their heritage.

He also suggested that the EFC, like other faith groups, has been slowly doing research and building expertise in social issues and developing relationships with government. Those decades of work are now paying off, he said, and governments are beginning to recognize that faith groups "do have recommendations in accord with good governance."

January 29/2009