you wrote>  I am trying to locate specific policies which, over the last two to
three decades, have
exacerbated existing health inequalities in Canada.

The following may be helpful.

Campaign 2000. (2002). Child Poverty in Ontario: Report Card 2002.  Toronto:
Campaign 2000. On-line at http://www.campaign2000.ca.

Campaign 2000 (2002). Child Poverty in Canada: Report Card 2000 (2002).
Toronto: Campaign 2000. On-line at http://www.campaign2000.ca.

Yalnizyan, A. (1998).  The Growing Gap: a Report on Growing Inequality Between
the Rich and Poor in Canada.  Toronto: Centre for Social Justice. Available at
http://www.socialjustice.org

Hurtig, M. (1999). Pay the Rent or Feed the Kids: The Tragedy and Disgrace of
Poverty in Canada, M. Hurtig.  Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.

National Council on Welfare (2000). Welfare Incomes, 1999. Ottawa: National
Council on Welfare.

The website http://www.ncwcnbes.net/ has a number of devatating critiques of
Canadian national welfare policy put out by the National Council on Welfare.
Their reports are available free of charge.  The website gives details about
enrolling..

Also www.policyalternatives.ca from which the summary at the bottom is from.

Raphael, D. (2001). From increasing poverty to societal disintegration: How
economic inequality affects the health of individuals and communities.  In  H.
Armstrong, P. Armstrong, & D. Coburn (eds.), Unhealthy times: The political
economy of health and care in Canada. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Raphael, D. (2000). Health inequalities in Canada: Current discourses and
implications for public health action. Critical Public Health, 10, 193-216.

Raphael, D. (2002). Social justice is good for our hearts: Why societal factors
-- not lifestyles -- are major causes of heart disease in Canada and elsewhere.
Toronto: CSJ Foundation for Research and Education. On line at
http://www.socialjustice.org
---------------------
December 4, 2002

Rags and Riches: Wealth Inequality in Canada
Summary
By Steven Kerstetter

 Rags and Riches: Wealth Inequality in Canada analyzes data from Statistics
 Canada's Survey of Financial Security and previous surveys by the federal
agency
 dating back to 1970. The focus of the surveys was accumulated wealth or net
 worth rather than current income. Wealth was defined as all personal assets
 minus all personal debts. This study includes regional data never before
published
 that were commissioned and paid for by the Canadian Centre for Policy
 Alternatives--BC Office. This research was made possible through an inequality
 endowment fund provided by the Government of British Columbia.

 Key Findings

 Canadians may view their country as a land of opportunity, but it also a land
of
 deep and abiding inequality in the distribution of personal wealth.

  The wealthiest ten percent of family units held 53 percent of the wealth in
  1999. The wealthiest 50 percent of family units controlled an almost
  unbelievable 94.4 percent of the wealth, leaving only 5.6 percent for the
  bottom 50 percent.

  The poorest ten percent of family units have negative average wealth or
  more debts than assets. Average wealth adjusted for inflation for the
  poorest ten percent actually declined by 28 percent from -$8,031 in 1970 to
  -$10,656 in 1999.

  Average wealth adjusted for inflation for the richest ten percent of family
  units increased from $442,468 in 1970 to $980,903 in 1999--an increase of
  122 percent .

 Gaps between rich and poor are evident in the statistics for each of Canada's
 regions. There are also large differences in wealth across the regions
themselves.

  Average wealth overall tends to increase from east to west. Average wealth
  in the Atlantic region was $122,798 in 1999, and the average for Quebec
  was $155,198. Both those figures were well below the averages of
  $221,110 for Ontario, $213,114 for the three Prairie provinces and
  $251,253 for BC.

  Most of the differences in average regional wealth are the result of
  differences in wealth among the richest family units in each region.
  Differences in average wealth for the poorest and middle family units are
  smaller.

 Financial security is an elusive goal for many Canadians. Financial insecurity
may
 actually be the norm these days and financial security the exception to the
rule.

  Poor people are least able to withstand any kind of financial crisis because
  they have so few assets and often have outstanding debts. People in the
  middle may be squeezed because so much of their wealth is tied up in
  housing. Only people with above-average wealth enjoy true financial security
  because they have sizable financial assets in addition to housing and other
  non-financial assets.

  The poorest 20 percent of family units had financial assets of only $1,974 on
  average in 1999, and their average income in 1998 (the last full year before
  the latest Statistics Canada survey) was only $18,698. If their current
  income suddenly disappeared, their financial assets alone would be enough
  to keep the family going for barely five weeks.

  The richest 20 percent of family units had average financial assets of
  $262,186 in 1999 and average income of $62,518 in 1998. The financial
  assets were enough to replace normal income for more than four years.

 Housing is the single largest asset of Canadians and also their single largest
 debt. However, financial assets play a more significant role in explaining the
 skewed distribution of wealth in Canada.

  The estimated value of all principal residences in 1999 was $1.1 trillion, or
  38 percent of all total personal assets. Mortgages on principal residences
  totaled $304 billion, or 66 percent of total personal debt.

  About 60 percent of family units were homeowners, and the other 40
  percent were renters. The median wealth of homeowners with mortgages
  was $111,807 in 1999, and the median wealth of homeowners without
  mortgages was $259,200. The median wealth of renters was only $8,000.

  Housing has a surprisingly small impact on the overall skewed distribution of
  wealth. The richest 20 percent of family units had 70.4 percent of all
  personal wealth in 1999. After subtracting housing assets and mortgage
  debt, the richest group has 76.2 percent of the wealth.

 Wealth in Canada varies by family type, age, housing status, education and
 current income. But there are rich and poor in every category.

  Families tend to be much better off than people living alone, because many
  families have two incomes rather than one. Older people tend to be better
  off than younger people because they have had more time to accumulate
  assets and pay off their debts.

  Despite the general link between age and wealth, it would be wrong to
  conclude that all older people are well-to-do. Even in the older age groups
  starting at age 45, roughly one in five family units had total wealth of no
more
  than $30,000 in 1999.

  The family units most likely to be wealthy are those with high current
  incomes. Families with incomes of $75,000 or more in 1998 after federal
  and provincial income taxes had average wealth of $583,517 in 1999.

  Differences in educational attainment have less bearing on wealth than
  might be expected. However, this may be the legacy of an era where
  education was less important as a determinant of income.

 The assets, debts and wealth of all Canadians combined rose substantially over
 the years, but not everyone wound up better off. Poor family units--notably
 lone-parent families and young people--gained little or even lost ground.

  Family units headed by persons under age 25 saw their median wealth fall
  from $1,474 in 1970 to a mere $150 in 1999 after adjustments for inflation.

  Lone-parent families headed by either women or men saw their median
  wealth go from $1,870 in 1984 to $3,656 in 1999 after adjustments for
  inflation.

 The tax policies of the federal government and some provincial governments in
 recent years have conferred huge benefits on Canada's wealthiest people, the
 one group capable of fending for themselves. Meanwhile, Canada's social safety
 nets and programs of special importance to the poor have been weakened by
 cuts in government support.

  In 1999, 72 percent of the $420 billion in RRSPs and other registered
  savings plans was held by the richest 20 percent of family units. The richest
  20 percent also owned 94 percent of the $92 billion in stocks outside
  RRSPs, and 81 percent of the $80 billion in mutual and investment funds
  outside RRSPs. RRSPs and other registered plans, capital gains, and
  stock dividends all get preferred income tax treatment.

  Canada is one of the few developed countries in the world that has no
  inheritance taxes, estate taxes or wealth transfer taxes. Such taxes ensure
  some measure of equality of opportunity, and promote democratic values by
  placing limits on inherited wealth.

  The percentage of unemployed workers receiving unemployment insurance
  benefits from Ottawa was cut in half during the 1990s. Provincial
  governments have kept welfare incomes far below the poverty line in all
  parts of the country in recent years.

 The findings of this study have significant implications for public policy in
Canada.
 Governments would do well to rethink their policies of recent times, and move
 Canada back on the path towards a "just society."

Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
http://www.policyalternatives.ca

Send one line: unsubscribe click4hp to: [log in to unmask] to unsubscribe
See: http://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/click4hp.html to alter your subscription