The Carney government says its November budget empowers and invests in Canadians. But it lacks meaningful measures to reduce food insecurity – an important indicator of economic well-being and a strong predictor of poor physical health. It is therefore out of touch with the financial struggles that millions of Canadians face.
In 2024, 25.5 per cent of people in the 10 provinces and 37.4 per cent of those in the territories lived in a household affected by food insecurity – insecure or inadequate access to food due to financial constraints – based on data from Statistics Canada’s Canadian Income Survey. That’s about 10 million Canadians – the highest prevalence of food insecurity to date. The next update in the spring will likely set another record, given the current economic situation.
None of the three affordability measures highlighted for the recent budget – automatic tax filing for some low-income Canadians, institutionalization of the National School Food Program and extension of the Canada Strong Pass discounts for the winter and next summer – will lower the rate of food insecurity or alter its trajectory.
Instead, the government needs to increase income and financial stability for vulnerable households. The majority of food-insecure households have low to modest incomes, rely on often-precarious employment and are led by working-age adults.
If the government truly wants to build a stronger Canada, it must start by confronting the reality that millions cannot afford enough to eat. Real progress against food insecurity will not come from symbolic gestures or temporary half measures, but from sustained investments that strengthen and modernize income support for low- and modest-income households.
More generous benefits needed, not just automatic tax filing
The government announced in the budget that the Canada Revenue Agency will automatically file tax returns for low-income Canadians to ensure they receive government benefits for which they qualify such as the GST/HST credit, the Canada Child Benefit, the Canada Disability Benefit and more. Some low-income households may not be aware that they are entitled to these benefits or that they must file a tax return to collect them.
Getting more low-income Canadians to access all of these benefits could help. However, tax returns filed in 2023 covered 94.5 per cent of the population, including children in families where an adult filed the tax return. This suggests that most food-insecure households will not gain from the new automatic filing initiative.
In addition, almost all food-insecure families with children (98 per cent, according to my calculations) are eligible for the Canada Child Benefit – the largest federal tax-delivered cash transfer. It is also received by almost all eligible families with only a small minority not filing the required tax return.
The benefit has been shown to have the potential to reduce food insecurity, but with 33 per cent of children now living in food-insecure families, it is clear that we are far from maximizing its potential impact.
The federal government should increase benefits for lower-income families and eliminate the current age-based tiered system so that families don’t lose income when a child turns seven. Additional supplements for single-parent families and those in remote or Northern communities would help address the much higher vulnerability to food insecurity that they face.
With the government’s focus on fiscal responsibility and more efficient spending, there is a strong argument to fund some of the improvements to the child benefit by tightening income thresholds for eligibility and redirecting money currently given to high-income families who are not at risk of food insecurity.
School food and minor savings are not enough
A national school food program has the potential to improve student nutrition and educational success, build stronger school communities and even support local economies. However, there is no evidence such programs reduce food insecurity.
The government has said the federal funding to provincial and territorial school food programs will save a family of two children up to $800 per year. That amounts to $33 per child per month for the additional 400,000 students that are expected to benefit from the anticipated program expansion – a paltry figure, compared to a family’s financial needs amid rising living costs. It also does not resolve the underlying financial hardship they face.
Nor do the vacation discounts offered through the Canada Strong Pass or a proposed review to reduce ATM and e-transfer fees. It is shameful to present this pass as an affordability measure in a budget that purports to protect Canadians and help them get ahead when many households are struggling just to afford basic needs.
A different direction is needed
These measures came on the heels of other budget measures, such as the middle-class tax cut introduced following the election, which will provide limited additional support for lower-income households while allowing high earners to benefit the most. It does little to advance the stated objective that “every Canadian should be able to afford necessities, feel secure, and get ahead financially.”
While the budget offers a one-time supplement for applicants for the Canada Disability Benefit to offset the costs associated with obtaining the necessary qualifications, the benefit itself has been criticized for providing far too little assistance and for being too burdensome to access. There are also concerns that it will lead the government to overlook the need for broader income support.
In the wake of the tariff-induced economic uncertainty, the government introduced temporary Employment Insurance enhancements, such as waiving the waiting period for claims, allowing workers to keep severance payments while receiving EI benefits, increasing the benefits for long-tenured workers, adjusting the benefit calculation to require fewer hours to qualify and allowing more weeks of benefit entitlement.
The problem with these EI measures – some extended by this budget – is that they are temporary. Because the benefit calculation adjustments have already ended, the remaining extensions also likely have limited impact on precarious workers.
National school food program won’t solve food insecurity for families
Employment Insurance can play a critical role to help prevent food insecurity or its worsening by buffering some of the financial shock of job loss, but it needs to be modernized to meet current and future labour market challenges and be more generous and accessible to all workers.
Responding to crises that can exacerbate food insecurity, such as ongoing trade tensions and the economic downturn, is important but we can’t pretend it is enough. Food insecurity has been a persistent and growing problem that long predates the recent turbulence.
If the federal government truly aims to build a stronger Canada, it must start by ensuring Canadians can meet their basic needs. The kinds of investments needed to address food insecurity are those that strengthen and modernize federal income supports in a lasting way.
The budget should have included some revision of existing benefits for food-insecure households, such as the child benefit and the GST/HST credit, to provide more for lower-income, working-age adults and their children.
Until the federal government treats food security and income adequacy as cornerstones of economic policy, budgets such as this one will remain out of step with the country’s most urgent needs.
