This bill requires Canada’s Finance Minister to create a nationwide plan for a guaranteed livable basic income. This income would be given to everyone over age 17. The plan aims to reduce poverty, improve health, education, housing, and support those in unstable jobs or with special needs. The bill also sets rules for how the government should develop, review, and report on this plan, including consulting with groups like Indigenous communities and provincial governments.
If the bill becomes law, all Canadians over 17 could receive a guaranteed amount of money to help cover basic living costs. The government will decide how much money is enough for each region, based on the cost of things like housing, food, and healthcare. The goal is to make sure everyone has enough money to live with dignity and to support health, education, and work opportunities without losing other benefits. The government will also check how well the plan works every year and report their findings to Parliament.
The bill does not include specific funding amounts. It requires the Minister of Finance to develop the plan and report on it, but the costs of implementing and paying the basic income are not specified. Since developing a national framework and ongoing reviews can involve costs, but no exact number is provided, the overall expenses are “data unavailable.” The actual costs will depend on how the government decides to fund the program and what amount of income will be provided.
Supporters argue that a guaranteed livable income would help reduce poverty and inequality. They say it would improve people’s health, education, and housing security. Proponents believe it would support those with unstable jobs and unpaid care work. They also point out that having such a program could make society fairer and more respectful, especially for vulnerable groups like Indigenous people and those facing disabilities.
Opponents worry that the bill could be very expensive and unclear about how it will be funded. They say it might lead to increased government spending which could raise taxes or cut other services. Critics also argue that providing money without requiring work could discourage employment. Some believe the government should focus on existing social programs instead of creating a new nationwide income guarantee. They also question how the program will be managed across different provinces and Indigenous communities.