Immigration status and food bank assistance in the Greater Toronto Area Winston Husbands 1998
FOOD BANKS, IMMIGRANTS AND THE CANADIAN PUBLIC Immigration is viewed somewhat controversially throughout Canada. Among the general public and intellectual elites, politically significant opinion holds that immigrants and/or current levels of immigration jeopardise Canada’s social and economic well-being. According to this view, immigrants take scarce jobs away from Canadians, or they make unreasonable claims on social program spending, or they refuse to integrate into Canadian society (or some combination of the above). Moreover, popular discourse frequently refers to a noticeably racialized interpretation of “immigrant”, which is often reflected in attitudes towards “immigrants” and immigration. The controversy surrounding immigration raises important issues for food banks. First, their emergency food programs require a generous public. Second, they continually attempt to motivate the public’s interest in what governments should do to address hunger. But how would public opinion respond to any suggestion that food banks were swamped with immigrants and refugees? Would it matter if the “immigrants” were actually Canadian citizens? Would public opinion assume that the “immigrants” were from Asia, Africa, Latin America or the Caribbean? If so, would the debate about immigrants and Canadian immigration policy assume a more sinister trajectory? The answers to these questions could well influence the extent to which food banks can continue to depend on public goodwill, and influence as well public support for policy initiatives to address hunger and insecure access to food. However, if the process of settling in Canada is such that it inflates the risk of hunger among recent immigrants, then anti-hunger organizations should not allow this to go unchallenged. This report examines the situation of three groups of food recipients based on immigration and residency status up to February-March 1997: those who were born in Canada, foreign-born who have lived in Canada for five years or longer (established immigrants), and those who have resided in Canada for less than five years (recent immigrants). The report demonstrates that “immigrants” are no more likely than other Canadians to be assisted by a food bank. In the Greater Toronto Area, the distribution of Canadian-born and foreign-born food recipients is consistent with the population distribution of persons born in Canada or abroad. However, recent immigrants and, to some extent, established immigrants, experience a less severe food insecurity problem than Canadian-born food recipients, despite the fact that they are more disadvantaged. The report then attempts to facilitate how these differences in the severity of food insecurity may be understood. Finally, the report summarises the challenges confronting recent immigrants, as well as the public policy challenge arising from the situation they face. The report is based on Daily Bread Food Bank’s 1997 survey of people assisted by emergency hamper programs in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA - Toronto, Peel, York and Durham). The survey was conducted from mid-February to mid-March, and involved face-to-face structured interviews with 838 food recipients at 36 food banks that are members of Daily Bread.1 “IMMIGRANTS” ARE NOT THE PROBLEM Over half (54%) of food recipients were born in Canada, 30 percent were established immigrants (i.e., lived in Canada for at least five years), and 16 percent had immigrated to Canada in the four years leading up to the survey. In other words, the proportion of foreign-born food recipients (46%) is roughly equivalent to the proportion of immigrants in the population of the GTA (41%, based on the 1996 census of Canada). In the city of Toronto by itself, the proportion of foreign-born food recipients is exactly the same as the proportion of immigrants in the city’s population (47%). A clear majority (61%) of established immigrants are Canadian citizens, while three-quarters of the recent immigrants were permanent residents (Figure 1). Refugee claimants are a tiny minority of food recipients (3.2%).2 Currently, only 1 percent of established immigrants and 17 percent of recent immigrants are refugees. On the whole, food recipients have lived in the GTA for a considerable period of time. Two-thirds of the Canadian-born food recipients, and 47 percent of established immigrants, had resided in the GTA for 10 or more years. Among food recipients who have been in Canada for one to four years, more than 90 percent appears to have lived solely in the GTA. All of the most recent immigrants (i.e., in Canada for less than one year) had lived in the GTA the entire time. SIZE, SHAPE AND TALENT Established immigrants tend to be older than either Canadian-born recipients or recent immigrants. Most (60%) Canadian-born food recipients were less than 40 years of age, whereas the majority (53%) of established immigrants were 40 or older. Three-quarters of recent immigrants were in their 30s or 40s (Figure 2). Given these age profiles, it is not surprising that recent immigrants were much more likely to be married (i.e., including common law) and supporting children aged 18 or less (Table 1). On the other hand, a rather large proportion of Canadian-born food recipients were single persons. Consequently, recent immigrants supported larger households, especially compared to the Canadian-born. The average household size among recent immigrants was 3.3 persons, compared to 2.9 among established immigrants, and 2.2 persons per household among food recipients who were born in Canada. But despite their high rates of marriage and large proportion of married couples supporting children, children accounted for only 38 percent of the total number of people in all households among recent immigrants, compared to 43.5 percent among established immigrants and 33.5 percent among those born in Canada. Recent immigrants’ high rate of marriage and low ratio of children to adults suggest that single parent households are relatively uncommon. Only 11 percent of recent immigrants were single parents, compared to one-quarter of Canadian-born food recipients and a third of established immigrants (Table 1). By far, recent immigrants have the highest levels of educational attainment. Almost half of recent immigrants were university or college graduates - 39 percent graduated from university, and 9 percent were college graduates (Figure 3).3 This pattern is a clear contrast with Canadian-born food recipients, half of whom did not complete high school. However, this educational advantage does not translate into an income advantage. In fact, the huge discrepancy between recent immigrants’ educational status, on one hand, and their employment and income status suggests that their disadvantage is both relative and absolute.
ECONOMIC INSECURITY Joblessness A clear minority of all food recipients have paid employment (Figure 4). Nonetheless, the groups are distinguished in two ways. First, foreign-born food recipients are less likely than those born in Canada to have a disability which prevents them from working. This pattern may be attributed to rules (or immigration officials’ interpretation of the rules) governing immigration, as well as other disability related impediments to migration in general. Second, a large proportion of recent immigrants were attending school, many of whom (40%) had already graduated from post-secondary programs. This indicates that many recent immigrants have returned to school in order to upgrade their English or to achieve Canadian certification. Even though joblessness is widespread among all three groups of food recipients, prolonged joblessness (i.e., out of work for more than one year) is more common among the food recipients born in Canada, and among established immigrants as well, but less so among recent immigrants. Fifty-eight percent of jobless recent immigrants last worked in 1996 or 1997, compared to 30 percent of the Canadian-born and the established immigrants who were jobless at the time of the survey (February-March 1997). It is reasonable to assume that, in Toronto’s competitive job market, many Canadian-born recipients will experience much difficulty finding paid employment because of their low levels of formal education. Moreover, given their lower levels of education and higher incidence of disabled persons, a relatively large proportion of Canadian-born recipients are least able to benefit from improved employment opportunities. Nonetheless, food recipients generally expect that paid employment would improve their rather insecure access to food. Consequently, two-thirds of jobless respondents in each group was looking for work at the time of the survey.4 However, a substantial proportion of Canadian-born and established immigrants attributed their unsuccessful job search to a shortage of vacancies (43% and 45% respectively). Recent immigrants, on the other hand, were much more inclined to attribute their unsuccessful job search to factors associated with the recency of their arrival in Canada - 61 percent cited their lack of Canadian experience or their inability to speak English well enough. Low incomes, high rents Given the high rate of joblessness described above, a majority of households in each group is receiving social assistance. Two-thirds of recent immigrants were receiving welfare (GWA), as were 58 percent of the Canadian-born, but just about half of established immigrants (49%) were welfare recipients. An additional 20 percent of both Canadian-born and established immigrants were receiving family benefits (FBA), compared to just 5 percent of recent immigrants. As a consequence of widespread joblessness and reliance on social assistance (particularly welfare) as a source of income, household incomes are generally low. For example, among single persons, both Canadian-born recipients and established immigrants5 had a median monthly income of $520. Among households with three or more persons, the median income was virtually the same among the three groups, ranging from $1,150 (established immigrants) to $1,189 (recent immigrants). The amount of income retained after paying rent is substantially lower still, particularly among recent immigrants, given that a majority of food recipients lose over half of their income to rent (Figure 5). To a considerable degree, the share of household income going to pay rent depends on whether the household occupies subsidized housing. For example, among Canadian-born and established immigrants, seven of every ten households that occupy non-subsidized housing spend more than half of their income to pay for shelter, while only 15 percent of those who live in subsidized housing incur a similarly high level of shelter expenditure. Less than five percent of recent immigrants occupy subsidized units. Even if they have applied for subsidized housing, recently immigrated food recipients are likely to be far down on the various waiting lists precisely because of their recent arrival in the GTA. The low incomes and high rent-to-income ratios make it easy to understand why these households turn to food banks for assistance. Even so, recent immigrants appear to be particularly disadvantaged. A very large proportion of recent immigrants depend on welfare. We have documented elsewhere that the high cost of housing in Toronto is especially disabling for welfare recipients because of their very low allowances.6 Indeed, recent immigrants do incur the most burdensome rental expenditures (Figure 5). Consequently, recent immigrants should experience even greater insecurity of access to food than either Canadian-born recipients or established immigrants. This, however, is not the case. CHEWING ON AIR Recent immigrants are less likely than Canadian-born food recipients or established immigrants to experience severe food insecurity (Figure 6).7 Moreover, the proportion of parents in recently arrived households who reported that they did not have enough money to feed their children two or more days a week was similarly small (18%), compared to foreign-born parents who have lived in Canada more than five years (34%). In view of the more tenuous income-shelter expenditure situation experienced by food recipients who arrived in Canada recently, this general pattern contradicts normal expectations. So why is severe food insecurity much less widespread among recent immigrants compared to Canadian-born recipients? The answer lies in the size of households relative to their rent burden, as well as the length of time during which food recipients have been jobless. In addition, immigrants may benefit from the cumulative contribution of family members and from various networks previously generated within their ethnic or national communities in Toronto. Among Canadian-born food recipients, the large proportion of non-family (i.e., single-person) households receiving welfare exposes this group to severely insecure access to food. Household size and the cost of shelter Overall, 29 percent of food recipients experience severe food insecurity. However, severe food insecurity is more widespread among single-person households (36%) than among two-person households (27%) and households with three or more persons (25%). In other words, single-person households are more prone to severe food insecurity than larger households. In addition, among households with two or more persons, larger households are more likely to involve married couples (including common law). Married couples resided in over half (56%) of the households with three or more persons, but in only 41 percent of two-person households. Similarly, households with two spouses are larger (3.6 persons per household) than those headed by unmarried adults (3.1 persons per household). Given that (a) larger households tend toward a less severe food security problem, and (b) larger households are more likely to include married or common law partners, it follows that (c) married households also have a less severe food security problem than households headed by unmarried adults. Of course, it is not the act of marriage itself which influences the severity of household food insecurity; rather, it is the fact married persons are ‘doubling up’ and sharing costs. Indeed, one-quarter of married households experienced severe food insecurity, versus a third of households headed by unmarried adults. It has already been shown that recently immigrated food recipients have the highest rates of marriage and support larger households as well. Therefore, the relatively low percentage of these households experiencing severe food insecurity is consistent with the general relationship between marriage, household size and the severity of household food shortages. For example, among food recipients in one-person households, 29 percent of recent immigrants experienced severe food insecurity. However, when households with two or more persons are examined, the proportion of recent immigrants experiencing severe food insecurity fell to 16 percent, while one-quarter of established immigrants and 30 percent of Canadian-born food recipients experienced severe food insecurity. Similarly, among unmarried persons, over a fifth of recent immigrants experienced severe food insecurity. But among married households, only 16 percent of recent immigrants were severely food insecure, as were 18 percent of established immigrants and a third of Canadian born food recipients. In short, severe food insecurity is more widespread among Canadian-born food recipients, less so among established immigrants, and least widespread among recent immigrants. Severe food insecurity is least widespread among recent immigrants despite the fact that their shelter expenditures tend to be quite high relative to their income. Clearly, among low-income households of varying size, the proportion of income spent on rent will not sufficiently determine the severity of the household food insecurity problem. In other words, a shelter burden equivalent to 50 percent of the household’s gross income is more detrimental to food security in a single-person household earning $520 a month than in a three-person household earning $1,150 a month. This is illustrated by the fact that, among households paying rent equivalent to more than half of their income, only 16 percent of recent immigrants (who have relatively large households) were severely food insecure, compared to 36 percent of Canadian-born (small households) and 34 percent of established immigrants. This does not mean that a household’s shelter burden has no impact on the level of food insecurity.8 There is an impact, but only if the comparison involves households of the same size-class that are also likely to have similar incomes. For example, among households with two or three persons, a third of households with the highest rent burden (i.e., rent consumed more than half of the income) were severely food insecure, versus only six percent of households with the lowest rent burden (rent consumed 30% or less of income). Length of time without paid employment Recall that a relatively large proportion of jobless recent immigrants last worked within the year leading up to the survey. Recently jobless households may be less likely to experience severe food insecurity if they have assets that can be disposed in such a way as to augment the household budget. However, as the jobless period grows longer, assets will be diminished and the affected households will have a harder time making ends meet. This situation is likely to result in a less severe food insecurity problem among recent immigrants. As expected, severe food insecurity was significantly more widespread among recipients who last worked in 1995 or earlier. More than one-third (35%) of recipients who were without paid employment for more than a year had insufficient money for food two or more days a week, compared to less than a quarter (22.5%) of those who became unemployed in 1996. But once again the usual pattern held. Among food recipients who were without work for more than a year, severe food insecurity was highest among Canadian-born recipients (37%), lowest among recent immigrants (22%), with established immigrants falling between the two (30%). The problem was not as pronounced among recipients who last worked in 1996. This was particularly the case among recent immigrants, only 15 percent of whom were severely food insecure, and less so among established immigrants and the Canadian-born (both 27%).
Immigrant communities and community support It is well understood that unemployed immigrants rely on their savings or on family members to a degree that is either lacking or not possible among native-born Canadians.9 This may explain why severe food insecurity is less widespread than expected among recent immigrants. In addition, it is quite possible that recent immigrants also find sources of support within their particular ethnic or national communities in Toronto. Indeed, there is a very long tradition of ethnic and/or national communities welcoming and assisting their more recently arrived counterparts to settle in Canada, particularly in large cities where a critical mass of newcomers congregate. These ethno-specific networks advise or assist newcomers in accessing accommodation, shopping, recreation, and so on. In addition, the networks may also generate the types of support that abate hunger. To the extent that some networks are institutionalized as clubs, associations and registered charities, newcomers sometimes benefit from very organized modes of assistance. Access to these formal and informal networks may explain to some degree why severe food insecurity is less widespread than expected among recent immigrants, despite the obvious disadvantage they face. However, many of the services provided by community-based agencies have an uncertain future as a consequence of diminished financial support from governments. Among agencies that provided settlement services for immigrants and refugees in Toronto, 20 programs were cancelled in 1995; a further 43 percent of all programs were ar risk of closing as a direct result of cuts to social program spending by the federal government and the government of Ontario.10 This loss of programs could further disadvantage recent immigrants, and ultimately increase the extent and severity of household food insecurity. Born in Canada As suggested in the preceeding analysis, the fact of being born in Canada does not predispose Canadian-born food recipients to severe food insecurity. The truth is that a disproportionate share of Canadian-born recipients are single persons (Table 1), over half of whom are receiving welfare. The maximum welfare allowance for a single person is $520 per month but, among welfare recipients, three-quarters of singles and a similar proportion (71%) of two-person households were carrying rents which consumed more than half of their monthly allowance (Figure 7). This means that a substantial proportion of welfare recipients (and, hence, of all Canadian-born) face an even greater risk of going hungry. Under these conditions, four of every ten single persons, and an identical proportion of two-person households, have insufficient money for food two or more days a week. THE CHALLENGE Most “immigrants” who are assisted by food banks in the GTA are in fact long-term residents of Canada. However, recent immigrants face a peculiar set of circumstances.11 Collectively, they display a set of highly beneficial attributes, but their standard of living is not commensurate with these attributes. They inhabit stable family situations, though the number of children per household tends to be low. They are well educated, and still maintain a high rate of educational enrollment. In addition, the data, though limited, indicate that their work histories are favourable. But most are receiving welfare, from which they can barely afford the market-driven rents they pay. Unemployed immigrants traditionally draw support from family members or their ethnic communities, in addition to using their savings. However, the extent to which recent immigrants can continue to benefit from community support is questionable. As discussed above, community agencies in Toronto were forced to terminate, or were likely to terminate, many of their immigration and settlement related programs in 1995 as a direct result of spending cuts by the federal and provincial government. Despite their often impressive credentials, recent immigrants can endure a frustrating experience trying to find work in their professions in Canada. Many do not have the resources to successfully negotiate an often byzantine process of gaining professional accreditation. This process is made more unfavourable as universities increase tuition fees. But even when professional accreditation is not an issue, recent immigrants often fall against the barrier of “Canadian experience”. In general, the food security situation of most recent immigrants and other food recipients would benefit from steady employment. But, being unemployed, they face a welfare system that is more punitive than helpful, in addition to a housing situation that is seriously deficient in affordability.12 On the whole, the evidence suggests that governments are remiss in their obligation to design and encourage policies and programs that promote household food security.13 BEING CANADIAN The profile of immigrants assisted by food banks (particularly recent immigrants) suggests that they are no less capable or talented than other Canadians. Nonetheless, recent immigrants are notably disadvantaged, even compared to other low-income food-insecure households. As a group, recent immigrants are much more likely to be receiving welfare, and to be paying rents which their low incomes cannot sustain. Obviously, they are not benefitting from their high levels of formal education. In Toronto’s competitive job market, many recent immigrants are unable to find work because they lack “Canadian experience”. It is also the case that food banks are not swamped with immigrants or people who are not Canadian citizens. Moreover, recent immigrants report a less severe food insecurity problem than other food recipients. Consequently, household food insecurity would remain a serious issue even in the absence of recent immigrants or people who are not Canadian citizens. But even though household food insecurity is not an immigration problem, the process of settling in Canada has created special problems for recently immigrated food recipients. Whether born in Canada, or not, people who turn to food banks for assistance are all food insecure. In other words, though almost all food recipients are Canadian citizens or near-citizens, their expectation of being Canadian is in abeyance. Food banks and similar community organizations have a responsibility to advocate and design programs that promote secure access to food. But this cannot be a substitute for public policy. Ultimately, governments must act to enhance the conditions and content of being Canadian. Notes
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
e.g., among welfare recipients, 73% of singles spend more than half of their income on shelter
|
|||||||
