A job is not enough.

A job, as the cliche goes, is the best form of welfare. This has been the basis for welfare reform for the past decade or more. A paying job, any job, is regarded as better than languishing on welfare and is considered the best way to end poverty, so many reformers believe.

A concerted effort has been made to get people out of the public welfare system. The number of people supported by social assistance has been halved over the decade. We have achieved this reduction mainly by more restrictive eligibility roles, keeping welfare rates below the 1995 level (in real dollars) and pressuring recipients to take minimum paying jobs and often short term jobs. We gave these welfare programs names like "Alberta Works" or "Jobs First."

Unemployment Insurance was renamed Employment Insurance, and the rules for collecting benefits became narrower. Many unemployed workers do not, nor are they likely to collect benefits although they have paid into the fund. Included are immigrant seasonal workers and those who are irregularly employed.

Another change the Canada Child Tax Credit is designed to benefit is low-income working families, but it benefits only those families that have earned income and does not aid those without earnings.

What have these reforms produced? Poverty is just as great as ever. More than 1.7 million Canadians are still dependent on social assistance. Another 1.5 million are living in low-income families and are supported by earned income. According to a study published by Human Resources and Social Development Canada, each of these families has only one wage earner and these families are headed mostly by women. The 1.5 million is a low estimate because researchers used the Market Basket Measure to come up with their rates. Another measure, Statistic Canada Low Income Cut-off, would have given a higher figure. Whichever measure one uses, it adds up to a lot of people. The numbers of people living in poverty by any measure has remained largely the same, up or down slightly from year to year, but the number of working poor is up.

A job is clearly not enough. The advocates of welfare reform put forward the idea that working at any job was better than not working at all. They believed that being out in the world of work improves ones social and economic skills. Once they start working, low-income people would work their way onward and upward and the problem of poverty would be reduced or even disappear altogether. Perhaps it would happen over time, even over a generation.

Under current policies and programs, the most effective way out of poverty for most people is not a job. A better job is an opportunity closed to most of the poor. They do not have the skills or supports to improve their wages. Yes, we do find a few individuals who have lifted themselves up the income ladder, holding good jobs and running their own businesses. As inspiring as these cases are, they are few and far between.

According to the HRSDC study, the way to escape extreme poverty is to change the family situation--by introducing a second wage earner into the family. The same conclusion appears in a number of American studies that have studied the question intensively. This change may be achieved by marriage or common-law relationship. Or a dependent goes to work or moves out. More income and/or fewer dependents appears to be the quick answer to increasing family income.

Some American politicians and religious leaders have seized upon this idea and are working hard to promote marriage among the poor as public policy. They would like to have the state offer financial incentives to achieve those ends.

Work remains a goal in social assistance programs, but pressuring people to take any job because it pays is a questionable practise. How much counseling and advice is available? What help do people receive to improve their working and life skills? What is done to enable them to lift themselves out of long-term poverty?

We have no indications at this time as to the long-term impact on family life and especially on adolescents when the sole support mother works long or odd hours. What does the struggle to provide the necessities and a few luxuries do to a family? (American studies indicate serious problems.) Account has to be taken of the shortage of childcare spaces and also the lack of affordable housing.

Yes, work is a fine thing, no doubt, but it is not the only answer. The quality of life of poor families must be a long-term concern to be treated sensitively and addressed quickly and effectively.