|
Grandview - Woodland |
|
Economics—Needs |
|
Needs 1. Employment rate: According to the most recent statistically data from Health Data Warehouse 2003 published in Vancouver Coastal Health: A Health and Social Profile, CHA2 (the Grandview Woodlands area), has a significantly greater population in need of BC benefits and is comparatively worse off than other sectors of Vancouver. This comparative analysis has decreased since 2000, but the unemployment rate has increased as seen by the increase in distribution of employment insurance; this trend has been blamed on the introduction of the new BC benefits policies that was introduced by the government in 2002 (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2003). Between 2000 and 2003, BC benefits in the CHA2 sector has decreased by 8.6 % and is now sitting at 10.2%, which is still approximately 40% higher than the average (Health data Warehouse: Vancouver Coastal Health, 2005). High unemployment rates in the Grandview Woodlands area can be readily identified on any given day. During the numerous walk-abouts of the area, homeless persons newly identified as “those living on the street” as those using the new lingo would say; they are prevalent but harmless. Sitting in a coffee shop working on an assignment one week, I identified 4 or 5 of these individuals, and some of them were regulars who would come in 3 or more times a day. 2. Percentage of House hold income: According to the 2001 Statistics Canada report, CHA2 had the lowest median income for both genders when evaluated against other sectors of the Vancouver Coastal Health and British Columbia. Several factors contribute to Grandview Woodlands reputation as being, “the poorest city in Canada” (Vancouver Coastal Health, 2005). Contributing factors to Grandview Woodlands low household income levels can be attributed to several factors including: being a single-parent family; the level of education completed, and employment factors related to education level and the new BC Benefits policy (as discussed earlier), (Strathcona Research Group/PHS Community Services Society, 2005). In 2001, 29% of the Grandview Woodlands 9575 families were single-parent families (Strathcona Research Group/PHS Community Services Society, 2005). On comparison of CHA2 with the rest of Vancouver, it had the highest number of lone parent families for 2001 (Statistics Canada, 2001 Census: Vancouver Coastal Health, 2005). Families with only one parent raising the child/children, the adult may struggle as a result of only having one income to support the household. On comparison of education level for CHA2 with Vancouver, it had the highest percentage of the total population, over the age of 20 that had less than a grade 9 education (Statistics Canada, 2001 Census: Vancouver Coastal Health 2005). 3. Changes in Residential Tenancy Act: Many residents in the Grandview Woodlands area are affected by the Residential Tenancy Act changes that were imposed for 2003, as 71.5% of individuals in this community are renters (Communitywebpages, 2007). The imposed changes, as outlined by Tenants Rights Action Coalition (TRAC) in their 2001 annual report, identified several key issues that would impact the renter (as opposed to the landlord) and low income earners. TRAC identified that BC has one of the highest rental rates in Canada and that there is a need to protect further rental increases especially as the 2010 Olympics approach. They also identified the loss of the “Poverty Law” which will remove much needed aid for low income individuals who have difficulty understanding tenant rights. In addition, TRAC published in the 2001 report the Provincial Governments’ plan to close 2 of only six Residential Tenancy offices in the province (TRAC Tenant Resource & Advisory Centre, 2001). A key issue for the Grandview Woodlands community as identified by TRAC’s 2002/2003 annual report outlines a change that was implemented with public concerns raised. The initiation of “rent protection” based on “CPI” or consumer price index which can be viewed as an asset or need for renters. Renters that have had regular rental increase every annum will prevent the landlord from inflating rental prices above a calculated percentage. It can also be a deficit/need if the landlord has not increased rent in several years and can therefore use this CPI system to calculate a rental increase that may be result is increases as high as a 20%, preventing the tenant from remaining in the residence if they cannot afford it (TRAC Tenant Resource & Advisory Centre, 2002/2003). |
