“As more and more cutbacks happen, more people are at my door. As a church, we do what we can but it’s only a band aid because they will be back again next week or next month.”

“How can I teach someone how to manage their diabetes if they don’t have adequate food, shelter and things like adequate footwear.”

“I’m concerned about the parents I work with whose opportunities for recreation for themselves and their children, are few and far between.”

“If I see one more woman who has been released from jail without any money, no groceries, no place to live and an appointment for next week to see an income assistance worker, I’m going to snap!”

“People don’t always feel comfortable telling me in my office how our policies affect them. Being part of the Urban Core Support Network keeps me in touch with how people are impacted individually and as a group. It puts a face on my work.”

“I can’t see another single woman who has been battered and tell her that she will only receive $264/month to live on because I know she will just go back to the abuse again. What choice does she have?”

“Social development is an important part of building a healthy community. I’m part of UCSN because we have come together to find solutions and we work together to reduce poverty in our community.”

Having heard such provocative voices of poverty, participants were able to clearly focus on the goal of the pending exercise.

Additional clarification of the impacts of the four policies were presented. The goal was to stimulate discussion and to set the stage for the next session designed to inform, and to engage all participants in the public policy-making process in New Brunswick.

In reviewing the four policies, the presenter cited some key aspects of each policy, which were felt to be barriers to those living in poverty, rather than as an “assistance” to them which was the intention of the four government policies.

Such examples included:

Under - Economic Unit Policy(EUP)/Household Income Policy (HIP)

• Every single parent is supposed to have a Case Plan but many people do not realize this, and government staff seems unable to keep up with this work or to implement it in full due to various challenges including from clients themselves. Single parents with a case plan who want to share accommodations are exempted from the EUP/HIP
• People reported they often “had to lie” in order to meet some of the conditions or criteria.

Under Wage Exemption Policy

• People resist doing part time work for pay because it has too much negative impact on their total income. It becomes unfeasible to work given the expenses of related ‘extra’ expenses such as transportation, childcare, and so on.

Under Housing Policy

• There is a lack of any policy regarding Single Persons having access to reasonable housing.