Unpacking the Role of Neoliberalism on the Politics of Poverty Reduction Policies in Ontario, Canada: A Descriptive Case Study and Critical Analysis

Abstract

This paper employs a descriptive case study method to analyze and critically review the emergence of the provincial poverty reduction strategy in Ontario, Canada which was implemented in 2008 and renewed in 2014. The purpose of this study is two-fold: first, it defines the principles of neoliberalism and explores the historical growth of neoliberal thought in Canada, and specifically within Ontario, beginning in the 1980s to the present-day. Drawing on a combination of primary, secondary and grey literature, this paper discusses the ways in which neoliberal ideologies and rhetoric became deeply rooted in political thought and discourse within the province. Employing a critical theory framework, the paper highlights the contrasting ways in which neoliberal values were adopted by the different political parties in power and the detrimental impact this espousal had on individuals living in poverty within Ontario. Second, the paper illustrates the powerful ways in which anti-poverty grassroots movements and social advocacy groups assembled to push for the creation of a provincial poverty reduction strategy. The analysis ends with a critique of the neoliberal influences on the strategy’s recommendations and the future outlook of the poverty reduction strategy based on the current political climate within the province.

“Vulnerable Workers” and Third Way Governance: Shifting Subjects of Regulation in Ontario’s Employment Standard Enforcement Regime

“…Consistent with neoliberalism, TW policymakers tend to argue that poverty reduction should be principally achieved through strategies that get people, especially poor parents, off social assistance and into wage employment (Beland, Vergniolle de Chantal, and Waddan 2002). However, TW advocates, including those in elected office in Ontario, place more emphasis on the intergenerational effects of poverty and recognize the limitations of pushing or coercing people through social assistance cuts into precarious low-wage employment without some level of protection and motivation (Deacon 2003;Graefe and Hudson 2018, 320; see also Gill 2021).…”

“…Although less connected to the Liberals, several activist groups also emerged in the late 1990s and 2000s with a strong focus on the working poor, most notably the Contingent Workers Project (which morphed into the Toronto Workers Action Centre (WAC) and the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP) (Gill 2021;Hewitt-White 2000;Shantz 2002)). These groups also brought poverty to public light through rallies and the publication of evidence on the failure of Employment Standards (Cranford, Vosko, and Zukewich 2003;WAC 2000;Gill 2021;Shantz 2002;Vosko 2006;. These critiques of enforcement gained critical legitimacy early in the government's mandate, when a 2004 Auditor General Report came out strongly criticizing the OMOL for failing to enforce ES law and calling explicitly for more proactive inspections (AGO 2004).…”

“…As such, when re-elected, the government responded to the call for a poverty reduction strategy by establishing a cabinet committee tasked with that objective (Graefe and Hudson 2018;Gill 2021). The coalition's focus on pushing the government for a plan may have again relieved some of the pressure on the government to make more substantial changes, but the government was not entirely inactive, as the first budget after the 2007 election included increases in social assistance and educational and other support for parents.…”

“…Given their successes in getting the government to move, the anti-poverty coalitions proposed a broad blueprint in 2008 called "25in5," seeking a government commitment to reduce poverty by 25% in five years (Gill 2021). Again, the emphasis was on the need for more substantial action on social assistance, but the brief also highlighted demands for higher minimum wages and better employment standards in general.…”

From wages for housework to self-care: feminist perspectives on the care economy

“…The consequences have included negative impacts on welfare provision, exacerbated poverty and income inequality, and a structurally segmented healthcare system in which the poorest (treated by the public sector) lose out 'while high-income, low-risk populations are generally treated in the private sector' (Missoni and Solimano 2010). In Canada, we can identify similar developments at the federal level following Brian Mulroney's election as Prime Minister in 1984 (Gill 2021;Jamieson et al 2020). Likewise, across Europe and the United States, we can track the 'profitization' (Armstrong and Yalnizyan 2023) and 'financialization' (Hunter and Murray 2019) of care from the early 1980s through the present day.…”