Bay of Quinte candidates debate poverty, trade

New Democrat Terry Cassidy (left), independent Trueman Tuck (centre) and Liberal Neil Ellis discussed poverty at the Bread and Butter Debate Monday night. Conservative Jodie Jenkins and Green candidate Rachel Nelems, who both declined to attend the debate, had empty seats left in their place. Photo by Joseph Quigley

By Joseph Quigley

BELLEVILLE – Poverty issues, income security and the Trans-Pacific Partnership were discussed at the Bread and Butter Debate Monday night.

Three Bay of Quinte federal candidates attended the event at St. Matthew’s United Church hosted by the Poverty Round Table Hastings & Prince Edward. Liberal Neil Ellis, New Democrat Terry Cassidy and independent Trueman Tuck spent the evening delivering their platforms on poverty issues.

Conservative Jodie Jenkins and Green Rachel Nelems declined the debate in advance. Seats were left empty in their place and one of the organizers, Ed Bentley, commented on their absence before the debate began.

“The invitation for this all-candidates meeting went out at the end of July. We were very anxious that the candidates would know this was an opportunity to speak to issues that are often not addressed,” Bentley said. “We know that has held true in meetings held so far this year. But we’re very grateful that the candidates before you have accepted the invitation. We regret that the candidate for the Green party has chosen not to campaign in the riding at all. We also regret that the Conservative candidate advised us that he would only be participating in candidates meetings sponsored by the chamber of commerce.”

The debate covered issues of child care, low-income housing, health care, food security and poverty reduction. Each candidate talked about how his party would help or solve these issues if elected.

One area that received a substantial amount of attention was the idea of a federally guaranteed minimum income for all Canadians.

Tuck has the provision as part of his platform and said that it was a good answer to the problem of child poverty.

“We’re a very wealthy country as far as resources,” Tuck said. “The money of this country is certainly not focused at looking after the citizens of the country. I believe the wealth of the country should be used to support the citizens. That would certainly address the child (poverty) situation if you provide a guaranteed minimum income.”

Cassidy said that he personally believes in a guaranteed minimum income, even if his party does not.

“I think it’s a great idea, personally,” he said.

“When I look at what is existing today, it’s a real spotty safety net of different programs from all over the place. All of us are talking about how we can make it better here and there. I can say without any personal antagonism to the party and their position on this, that all three parties over the years have looked at guaranteed annual incomes. It’s never really caught on. But it’s not to say that it shouldn’t be looked at seriously. It has real potential to save money given how many administrative efforts there are to deliver little bits and pieces (of funding) everywhere.

“I’m personally in support of it, and if I were elected, I would be leading the charge for our party to have a serious debate and get it done. I’m certainly not afraid to say it’s a better answer than the mish-mash we’ve got today.”

Ellis said that the Liberal party does not presently support the idea, but wants to combat poverty through taxation and housing.

“When you look at (a guaranteed) basic income, right now, no,” Ellis said. “What (the Liberals) are supporting is a tax shift to tax the one per cent. What we’re looking at – for the very poor – is housing. About 20 per cent of Ontario spends more than 30 per cent of their wages towards housing. It’s a matter of getting back to the hard-core infrastructure and getting the federal government back into geared-for-income housing.

“We also have to look at (our) aging population, and as a community we haven’t looked at housing geared for us aging people. Hopefully all three levels of government would work together on this to end poverty (as) part of a housing strategy across Canada.”

A divisive discussion arose between the candidates over the recently signed Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free-trade agreement between 12 countries, including Canada.

Ellis said that the Liberal party supports free trade, but would ensure the deal works to benefit the community.

“Free trade is obviously something the Liberal party supports, but we support protecting our markets,” he said.

“I think all three parties do support free trade. But do we need to ruin our economy by getting involved in this? It does open a huge market. We have to look at how we are going to make this deal the best for our area. How are we going to make it an advantage to Eastern Ontario?

“(Liberal leader Justin) Trudeau has said that it has to go through Parliament. It would be discussed in an open forum. We would have input from all three parties and we would make sure the deal is the best, not just for this area, but for Ontario to open up a huge market.”

In contrast, Cassidy said the deal would only hurt the Quinte region and needs to be fought against:

“The Trans-Pacific Partnership is not free trade. It’s a trade plan. There’s nothing free about it. We’re going to pay. If you think it’s free, wait and see. It’s trickle-down economics and we’re getting the crumbs of the table.

“What are we going to get? We’re going to get hurt in our dairy sector. We’re probably going to see our auto sector reduced. A local economy does not thrive in this type of free-trade environment. Local economies are what we are about in the Quinte area. If we value our lifestyle and what matters to us, then we’ve got to challenge this and not accept it because the big business and the big government have decided it’s good for us.”

Tuck also said he was opposed to the deal and that it would not benefit the average person.

“These trade agreements are not going to help you and (me) as ordinary citizens in the community at all. It will just continue to transform the world into a global marketplace in which you and I don’t count.”