I can definitely see the value in government lending a helping hand to people struggling to cope with cost of living pressures, but I’m having a hard time trying to understand the rationale behind who receives assistance and who doesn’t.
Earlier this month, the United Conservative government rolled out the Affordability Action Plan that will provide monthly cheques from now until June for seniors, families with kids under 18 and individuals already receiving government support. There's an income threshold set at $180,000 for seniors and families to receive the benefit.
Now, whether you consider the $900-million initiative an election ploy or not, it’s hard to argue with the merit of helping people make ends meet when inflation is higher than it’s been in more than a generation. When you’re living paycheque to paycheque, every little bit helps.
However, it seems to me that some of those who will be getting government cash aren’t in that precarious situation, while others who are indeed struggling to get by aren’t eligible for assistance.
I’m not saying that a household with a combined income of $180,000 is so flush it couldn’t use help with ever-escalating bills, but the 100 bucks a month per kid likely won’t mean as much to them as it would to the single person trying meet all their monthly obligations on minimum wage or thereabouts. There’s absolutely no doubt that kids are expensive, but do 80 per cent of Alberta families — that’s the number the government says would be eligible under this new plan — need such assistance?
The same goes for seniors, who are typically on fixed incomes, but if that income is anywhere close to $180,000, then I’d suggest they’re far better off than a middle-aged couple making half that amount who wouldn’t qualify under the Affordability Action Plan.
It’s curious why there wasn’t a simple means test to determine who is eligible for assistance as it would stand to reason that the less you make, the more likely you are to need government help. There are certainly many seniors and families that deserve the help, but so do a lot of other people who won’t be getting it.
I don’t mean to be a cynic about an initiative that should have altruistic goals, but it looks like those who are in line for assistance are more likely to vote UCP come the spring election whereas those on the outside looking in would be your more typical NDP supporters. It’s hard not to draw that conclusion given it should have been a no-brainer to include the working poor in any affordability plan if only — and I’m generalizing here — they didn’t vote for the New Democrats.
I’m not eligible, nor should I be, but it’s a shame that many who could use a helping hand won’t be getting one while others who could endure these inflationary times without government intervention will be cashing cheques. But who’s going to turn down free money, right?
I guess the saving grace is that despite the political influence that’s been exerted over the program, in the end there will be a great many who will be the recipients of much-needed assistance.
