By Kendall Worth!
I explained at length in a 2024 BLOG the three elements of this policy failure. In summary,
· there
is the explicit policy (Section 6.1.8) which punishes ESIA recipients by
cutting their benefits if they choose to co-habit with one another, be that for
social, logistical or romantic reasons;
· furthermore,
even in cases where a “special need” of a client is identified that highlights
how social isolation negatively impacts their physical well-being and health,
Income Assistance benefits will not generally cover any “soft” costs related to
membership or participation in social groups;
· most
fundamentally is the harsh reality that the level of IA benefits is so
inadequate that it barely covers basic costs of shelter and food, never
mind socializing.
Over the years, I have frequently written about how issues of social isolation are particularly difficult over the holidays for people living in poverty. Holidays should be a time when society views the social isolation of marginalised people as wholly unacceptable. But the rules and regulations under the ESIA program seem impossible to change, even though the reasons for doing so (see here and here, from earlier blogs) are compelling.
The constraints placed on co-habitation seem unnecessarily restrictive and punitive, an issue I have written about extensively. For more on why changing the cohabitation polices would be a benefit to many, I refer you to some related articles from my days writing in the Nova Scotia Advocate, here, here, here and here.
For this current BLOG I spoke with Bert and Amy - not their real names, as is my standard practice as a journalist. Bert and Amy are two First Voice IA recipients who describe themselves as “friends”, ready to move their relationships up a notch.
Both of them feel socially isolated within their community, - finding it difficult to establish and maintain friendships with other IA recipients for a number of reasons. Similarly, they have been unable to establish friendly relations with other residents in their buildings or neighbourhood. This they largely attribute to the social stigma that they feel is directed towards them as IA recipients.
In this environment, Amy and Bert feel that their emerging relationship has become an important part of their coping mechanism to get through their day to day lives. However, the ESIA policy on cohabitation makes the idea of moving in together simply impossible. Should they decide to move in together (and be transparent on this development with their ESIA caseworkers), Bert and Amy will end up paying a financial price in terms of a significant reduction in their monthly benefits. This is a very real financial cost that in current circumstances they are not able to justify.
That this conversation is happening around the Christmas holidays is all the more poignant and frustrating. This is the time when people should be happily gathering together with family and friends and celebrating, even if modestly, the occasion. However, as Bert and Amy confirmed for me, Christmas is always a difficult time for those living in poverty and with mental health issues. Their social isolation feels even greater at this time. And for many, they feel vulnerable and at risk because they cannot access mental health services for two weeks during the holiday shutdown of services.
It is my opinion that it is long overdue for the NS Government to make the necessary changes to the ESIA Policy Manual and to allow – not punish - co-habitation of IA recipients. Such a policy change would not actually cost the Government a single cent. But it would enable people to make some small improvement in their financial lives, while living a more engaged, supported and sociable life. And it may even free up some much-needed housing in HRM!
That simple solution sounds like a win – win - win proposition to me!
Kendall Worth is an award-winning anti-poverty activist who lives with disabilities and tries to make ends meet on income assistance.
Comments
Post a Comment