This analysis completes the review we did of the party platforms with a specific view of how they stack up on poverty reduction initiatives. This final analysis takes a look at the Conservative Party of Canada platform.
 
While the document is nearly 70 pages long the word “poverty” is not mentioned, so we will focus on the initiatives in the platform that are directly related to Canadians living in low-income.
 
Job creation is a main feature of the CPC platform.  While we applaud the effort to increase employment for Canadians, there is some question as to the efficacy of one of the CPC’s major strategies to do so, reducing corporate taxes, which this platform boasts will soon be the lowest in the G7. Economists seem to have mixed reviews on whether or not this strategy actually creates employment. We wonder if employment will in fact be created in Canada and whether it will offer wages that allow people to live out of poverty. The Hiring Tax Credit For Small Business seems to have more merit in ensuring that job creation takes place locally, although we feel this also needs to be paired with assurances that wages are high enough to keep people out of poverty.
 
The platform refers to several initiatives that the CPC has taken to provide skills training opportunities for students but it is somewhat unclear as to what the plans are to continue these programs. The effectiveness of the programs was also unclear in terms of how many students were aided, how much of the debt load was decreased, and the increased employment of students.  While we recognize the link between education and ending the cycle of poverty, it is difficult to evaluate these programs’ potential impact for people in low-income because of the lack of detail.
 
The “Family Tax Cut” section of the platform highlights initiatives for low-income Canadians more so than any other section. This section reviews past initiatives that have seen the tax burden decreased for low-income Canadians. In addition to maintaining these tax cuts, the CPC platform proposes income-splitting for spouses with dependents under the age of 18. This initiative is unlikely to yield much benefit for low-income Canadians. The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives wrote a piece explaining the limitations of income-splitting for low-income families here: http://www.policyalternatives.ca/newsroom/updates/robin-hood-reverse-real-numbers-behind-income-splitting
 
The CPC plan also proposes to increase the Guaranteed Income Supplement for approximately 680,000 seniors, which is a laudable aim. We would suggest going even further, since this proposal increases the GIS but not at a level that would lift all seniors out of poverty.
 
The CPC will also enhance the Wage Earner Protection Program, to support people who lose employment as a result of an employer going bankrupt. This is a good step to providing income security, if only for a short period of time, to Canadians who would be otherwise relying on benefits to get by.
 
This platform stands out in the reliance on job creation, tax credits, and tax breaks as means to impact the lives of low-income Calgarians. While these are important measures, there does seem to be a lack of social safety net responses as well as significant investment in post-secondary education and skills training initiatives. It is worth noting that all the other party platforms include a national housing strategy and increased women’s equality, who are more likely than men to live in poverty as a result of wage disparity.