We recently learned that the City of Kawartha Lakes isn’t big on having conversations.
How else to explain their reluctance to pass a simple motion sent to all municipalities in Ontario from the City of Kingston, asking that they endorse having a national conversation about a basic income guarantee for Canadians?
A basic income guarantee is known by many names, including a guaranteed annual income and negative income tax. But the essence is that it ensures everyone an income sufficient to meet their basic needs, regardless of work status.
Let’s say it was set at $18,000 per year. If someone earned $12,000 in one year at a part-time job, then at tax time an additional $6,000 would be given to that person, spread out over 12 months using the existing income tax system. Clean and simple and minimal bureaucracy. With basic income, no one is overseeing the process to determine if it is ‘deserved.’ We could literally scrap the entire welfare system and review other levels of bureaucracy for savings, too.
According to Kawartha Lakes This Week, most councillors were against getting involved. Councillor Pat Dunn is quoted as saying, “I can guarantee it’s going to come out of taxpayers’ [pockets].” “This is ridiculous; it is so far out of our mandate…”
I do wonder when we all started becoming ‘taxpayers’ and stopped being citizens. When did we start focusing only on what’s best for the economy and not what’s best for society? A good economy is the subset of a good society, not the other way around.
At least two councillors objected to Coun. Dunn’s comments. Both Councillors Doug Elsmlie and Patrick O’Reilly indicated that supporting the motion would merely signal an opportunity to engage the Province and federal government, who would obviously be the funders.
Nearby, Peterborough County Council endorsed the Kingston motion. The City of Peterborough is still considering it. They saw the value of having a conversation about an issue that would affect the lives of all their citizens in one way or another, not just low-income earners.
In the downstream effects of poverty, though, it is towns and cities – the level of government closest to the people – that sees the effect of poverty firsthand. So why the reluctance to have a conversation in the City of Kawartha Lakes?
These are good conversations to have. It is unfortunate the City of Kawartha Lakes has chosen to remain dumb on this issue.
— This article was originally published in Kawartha Lakes This Week here.
All I can say is that in your last sentence of this article I think you accidentally used the word ‘dumb’ and instead should have used ‘stupid’ lol. But in all seriousness, this is an important issue and I believe I am going to have to do some respectful but responsive twitter work in regard to it.