Food Insecurity Archives - Ontario Dietitians in Public Health

Ontario Dietitians in Public Health (ODPH) appreciates the opportunity to offer input on Ontario’s 2026 budget consultation. ODPH is the professional association of Registered Dietitians (RDs) working in Ontario’s public health system. We are recognized leaders in public health nutrition representing local public health agencies across Ontario. One of ODPH’s key priorities is working towards effective solutions to reduce household food insecurity (HFI).

HFI is the inadequate or insecure access to food due to financial constraints (Li et al., 2023). The experience of HFI can range from worrying about not having enough food (marginal HFI), to the inability to afford a balanced diet and/or missing meals (moderate HFI), to extreme cases of not eating for days (severe HFI). HFI is a critical indicator of a household’s financial situation and a highly sensitive measure of material deprivation, making it an important measure for guiding policy decisions.

Among households reporting HFI, those reliant on social assistance experience the highest prevalence and severity of HFI. In 2023, 70% of households relying on Ontario Works (OW) or the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) were food-insecure and 43% were severely so (PROOF, 2025a). Ontario’s social assistance rates remain far below the poverty line ‒ most recipients living in deep poverty earn less than 75% of the Market Basket Measure, Canada’s Official Poverty Line (Laidley & Oliviera, 2025). Although Ontario does provide limited nutrition-related financial supports, such as the Pregnant and Breastfeeding Nutritional Allowance and the Special Diet Allowance, these allowances are far below what is needed to meet basic nutritional requirements. HFI is strongly linked to income. As income decreases, both the risk and severity of HFI increases, making income-based policy solutions critical.

The urgency is evident with severe HFI in Ontario rising markedly from 4.8% of households in 2022 to 7.9% in 2024 (Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion, 2025). HFI is a major financial liability for Ontario’s healthcare system. Adults living with HFI account for a disproportionate share of health care costs, including mental health-related emergency visits and hospitalizations, with the greatest costs associated with severe HFI (PROOF, ND). Without effective policy action, HFI will continue to escalate with worsening consequences to Ontario’s economic progress and to the health and well-being of Ontarians.

ODPH recommends increasing social assistance rates and nutritional allowances to reflect actual costs of living and indexing Ontario Works rates to inflation.

Recommendation 1: Increase Ontario Works (OW) rates to align with the actual cost of food and housing and index rates to inflation annually.

OW rates have not increased since October 1, 2018, despite an inflation rate of more than 20% since then, significantly reducing purchasing power and living standards (Tabarra and Laidley, 2024).

Food cost data collected in May-June 2024 by 32 Ontario public health units were compiled and compared to OW incomes for various household scenarios. The analysis found that these households are unlikely to be able to afford the cost of food needed to meet the nutritional needs of all household members. Further, estimated monthly rent and other basic living costs exceed OW shelter and basic needs allowances by approximately $1000-$2000 per month (Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion, 2025).

Recommendation 2: Increase Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) rates to align with the actual cost of food and housing.

ODPH commends the Ontario government’s efforts to support vulnerable Ontarians, including increasing the earned income exemption for ODSP from $200 to $1000 and indexing ODSP rate increases to inflation that began in July 2023. However, further action is needed to strengthen income security for ODSP recipients.

Food cost data collected in May-June 2024 by 32 public health units showed that a single adult and a single pregnant adult receiving ODSP would need to spend approximately 30% of their monthly income to afford a nutritionally adequate diet. This would leave just over $1,000 per month for rent and all other living expenses, estimated to exceed $2,100 per month (Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion, 2025).

Recommendation 3: Increase the Pregnancy and Breastfeeding Nutritional Allowance and Special Diet Allowance for all eligible conditions.

The monthly allocations in the OW and ODSP Policy Directives for the Pregnancy/Breastfeeding Nutritional Allowance (PBNA) (ODSP Policy Directive 6.5 and OW Policy Directive 6.5) and Special Diet Allowance (SDA) (ODSP Policy Directive 6.4 and OW Policy Directive 6.6) have not increased in over a decade, even though the cost of food and infant formula have increased significantly.

Food cost data collected in May-June 2024 by 32 public health units, and compared with ODSP for a single adult, showed that 29% of monthly income would be required to purchase a nutritionally adequate diet. This would leave just over $1,000 per month for rent and all other living expenses, estimated to exceed $2,100 per month (Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion, 2025).

Conclusion

The analyses of Ontario’s income security programs to actual cost of nutritious food and estimates of other living costs provide compelling evidence of the insufficiency of OW and ODSP, resulting in high risk of severe food insecurity, which is related to poorer health and well-being (Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion, 2025).

ODPH calls for immediate and sustained investment to increase social assistance rates and nutritional allowances in Ontario. Without bold, measurable action, HFI will continue to undermine community well-being, strain municipal resources, deepen inequities and increase pressure on Ontario’s health care system. Investing in income security is both a social responsibility and an economic imperative.

References

Government of Ontario, Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development. (2025) News Release: Ontario Raising Minimum Wage to Protect Workers. Available at: https://news.ontario.ca/en/release/1006550/ontario-raising-minimum-wage-to-protect-workers

Laidley J, Oliveira T. (2025) Welfare in Canada, 2024. Maytree. Retrieved from: https://maytree.com/

Li T, Fafard St-Germain AA, Tarasuk V. (2023) Household food insecurity in Canada, 2022. Toronto: Research to identify policy options to reduce food insecurity (PROOF). Retrieved from: https://proof.utoronto.ca/

Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion (Public Health Ontario). (2025) Food insecurity & food affordability in Ontario. Toronto, ON: King’s Printer for Ontario. Retrieved from: https://www.publichealthontario.ca/en/Health-Topics/Health-Equity

Ontario Dietitians in Public Health. (2020) Position Statement and Recommendations on Responses to Food Insecurity. Available at: https://odph.ca/section/food-insecurity/

Ontario Living Wage Network. (2025) Updated 2025 Rates. Available at: https://www.ontariolivingwage.ca/updated_2025_rates

PROOF (Food Insecurity Policy Research). (2025a) Ontario Election 2025: Putting a plan for adequate social assistance on the table. Available at: https://proof.utoronto.ca/2025/ontario-election-2025-putting-a-plan-for-adequate-social-assistance-on-the-table/

PROOF (Food Insecurity Policy Research). (2025b) New data on household food insecurity in 2024. Available at: https://proof.utoronto.ca/2025/new-data-on-household-food-insecurity-in-2024/

PROOF (Food Insecurity Policy Research). (ND) What are the implications of food insecurity for health and health care? Available at: https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/what-are-the-implications-of-food-insecurity-for-health-and-health-care/

Tabbara M and Laidley J. (2024) Too many income supports still aren’t indexed. Maytree. Available at: https://maytree.com/publications/too-many-income-supports-still-arent-indexed/

Tarasuk V, Li T, Fafard St-Germain AA. (2022) Household food insecurity in Canada, 2021. Toronto: Research to identify policy options to reduce food insecurity (PROOF). Retrieved from: https://proof.utoronto.ca/

Le 7 janvier 2026

L’honorable Claude Carignan, sénateur, président du Comité des finances nationales Claude.Carignan@sen.parl.gc.ca

L’honorable Éric Forest, sénateur, vice-président du Comité des finances nationales Eric.Forest@sen.parl.gc.ca

L’honorable Clément Gignac, sénateur, membre du Comité des finances nationales Clement.Gignac@sen.parl.gc.ca

L’honorable Andrew Cardozo, sénateur, membre du Comité des finances nationales Andrew.Cardozo@sen.parl.gc.ca

L’honorable Pierre J. Dalphond, sénateur, membre du Comité des finances nationales PierreJ.Dalphond@sen.parl.gc.ca

L’honorable Rosa Galvez, sénatrice, membre du Comité des finances nationales Rosa.Galvez@sen.parl.gc.ca

L’honorable Martine Hébert, sénatrice, membre du Comité des finances nationales Martine.Hebert@sen.parl.gc.ca

L’honorable Joan Kingston, sénatrice, membre du Comité des finances nationales Joan.Kingston@sen.parl.gc.ca

L’honorable Jane MacAdam, sénatrice, membre du Comité des finances nationales Jane.MacAdam@sen.parl.gc.ca

L’honorable Elizabeth Marshall, sénatrice, membre du Comité des finances nationales Elizabeth.Marshall@sen.parl.gc.ca

L’honorable Krista Ross, sénatrice, membre du Comité des finances nationales Krista.Ross@sen.parl.gc.ca

Sara Gajic, greffière, Comité des finances nationales Sara.Gajic@sen.parl.gc.ca

Comité des finances nationales NFFN@SEN.PARL.GC.CA

Monsieur le président, Monsieur le vice-président, Mesdames et Messieurs les membres, Madame la greffière du Comité des finances nationales du Sénat du Canada,

L’organisme Diététistes en santé publique de l’Ontario (ODPH), l’association professionnelle des diététistes autorisés travaillant dans le système de santé publique de l’Ontario, vous écrit pour vous demander de soutenir le projet de loi S-206, Loi concernant l’élaboration d’un cadre national sur le revenu de base suffisant, actuellement à l’étude par le Comité des finances nationales du Sénat. Depuis 2015, l’association des Diététistes en santé publique de l’Ontario a fermement soutenu l’idée d’un revenu de base garanti comme levier politique efficace pour réduire le problème répandu de l’insécurité alimentaire des ménages au Canada.[1]

Le programme de recherche Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF) définit l’insécurité alimentaire des ménages (IAM) comme étant « l’accès insuffisant ou incertain à la nourriture en raison des contraintes financières » et ajoute qu’il s’agit d’un grave problème de santé publique, d’un indicateur de privation matérielle généralisée et d’un enjeu de politique publique.[2] L’expérience de l’insécurité alimentaire peut aller de préoccupations ou de problèmes d’accès à la nourriture (une IAM marginale) à l’incapacité de se permettre une alimentation équilibrée et/ou à des repas manqués (une IAM modérée), jusqu’à des cas extrêmes où les personnes sont privées de nourriture pendant plusieurs jours (une IAM grave). »

En 2024, l’insécurité alimentaire au Canada a atteint son niveau le plus élevé depuis le début de la surveillance nationale il y a près de 20 ans. Un Canadien sur quatre (25,5 %) habitant dans les dix provinces a connu l’insécurité alimentaire, ce qui représente environ 9,9 millions de personnes, dont 2,5 millions d’enfants – 75 % de ces enfants vivaient dans des ménages confrontés à une insécurité alimentaire modérée ou grave.[3] Ces estimations n’incluent pas les communautés des Premières Nations ni les territoires, où les taux sont généralement encore plus élevés, en particulier au Nunavut. Les taux provinciaux variaient considérablement, allant de 19,8 % au Québec à 30,9 % en Alberta, ce qui souligne la nécessité d’une réponse nationale coordonnée.3

L’insécurité alimentaire est fondamentalement une question de revenu, et pas seulement un « problème alimentaire ». En 2023, 70 % des ménages dont la principale source de revenu était l’aide sociale au Canada ont déclaré avoir connu l’insécurité alimentaire.³ Cependant, l’emploi n’est pas nécessairement une protection, 58,6 % des ménages en situation d’insécurité alimentaire déclarent que leur emploi est leur principale source de revenu, ce groupe affichant quand même la plus forte augmentation en insécurité alimentaire entre 2021 et 2022.³ Un récent sondage mené par les Banques alimentaires Canada a révélé que les bas salaires et le nombre d’heures de travail insuffisant figuraient parmi les principales raisons pour lesquelles les gens se tournaient vers les banques alimentaires.[4] Les recherches soulignent également une tendance croissante à la précarité des emplois, avec des horaires instables et un manque d’avantages sociaux essentiels, ce qui crée des défis importants pour la main-d’œuvre actuelle.[v] L’IAM est un indicateur essentiel de la situation financière d’un ménage, car les ménages qui n’ont pas les moyens de se nourrir ont également du mal à satisfaire d’autres besoins fondamentaux. Les revenus n’ont pas suivi le rythme de l’augmentation du coût de la vie : depuis 2021, l’indice des prix à la consommation a augmenté de 26 % pour le logement, de 25 % pour l’alimentation et de 20 % pour les transports.⁴

De nombreuses données canadiennes démontrent que l’insécurité alimentaire est étroitement liée à des effets néfastes sur la santé physique et mentale, outre l’influence d’autres déterminants sociaux de la santé. Des recherches établissant un lien entre les données sur l’insécurité alimentaire issues d’enquêtes sur la santé de la population et les dossiers administratifs de santé ont fourni des preuves solides que les personnes en situation d’insécurité alimentaire sont plus susceptibles d’être hospitalisées pour un large éventail de pathologies, de rester plus longtemps à l’hôpital et de mourir prématurément (avant l’âge de 83 ans) de toutes causes confondues à l’exception du cancer.[6] Il existe un lien particulièrement fort entre l’IAM et une mauvaise santé mentale. Le risque de souffrir de dépression, de troubles anxieux, de troubles de l’humeur ou de pensées suicidaires augmente avec la gravité de l’insécurité alimentaire, tant chez les adultes que chez les jeunes.⁶ Les conséquences de l’insécurité alimentaire sur la santé sont extrêmement coûteuses pour le système de santé public canadien.[7] Les politiques conçues dans le but de réduire l’insécurité alimentaire des ménages ont le potentiel de faire le contrepoids aux dépenses publiques considérables en matière de soins de santé pour les gouvernements fédéral, provinciaux et territoriaux. Ces économies doivent être prises en compte dans le cadre national proposé pour un revenu de base garanti.

Depuis plus de trois décennies, les banques alimentaires constituent la principale réponse à l’insécurité alimentaire au Canada. Malgré des investissements massifs dans un système alimentaire secondaire destiné aux personnes qui n’ont pas les moyens de se procurer de la nourriture de la manière la plus digne socialement (c’est-à-dire en achetant chez des détaillants alimentaires), les banques alimentaires ont plus que jamais du mal à répondre à la demande. En mars 2025, les banques alimentaires ont enregistré plus de 2 millions de visites au Canada, soit une augmentation de 5 % par rapport à mars 2024 et de 99,4 % par rapport à mars 2019.⁴Bien que les banques alimentaires puissent apporter une aide alimentaire temporaire, elles ne s’attaquent pas à la cause profonde de l’IAM, des revenus insuffisants et instables.¹ En fait, seul environ un quart des ménages en situation d’insécurité alimentaire ont recours aux banques alimentaires, et le problème persiste même pour ceux qui le font.[8]

Au cours des 12 derniers mois, plusieurs municipalités de l’Ontario ont déclaré des situations d’urgence en matière d’insécurité alimentaire, notamment Mississauga, en novembre 2024; Toronto en décembre 2024; Kingston, en janvier 2025; Brantford, en février 2025; Brockville, en juin 2025 et Orillia, en août 2025. Ces déclarations démontrent clairement que l’insécurité alimentaire a atteint un niveau critique dans tout l’Ontario, ce qui entraîne une demande insoutenable pour le système alimentaire caritatif et oblige les administrations municipales et les organisations communautaires à demander aux gouvernements fédéral et provincial d’intervenir avec des solutions politiques à long terme.

Les seules interventions qui ont démontré leur efficacité dans la réduction de l’insécurité alimentaire des ménages sont celles qui améliorent les revenus des ménages vulnérables.^[ix] Les recherches sur les politiques fédérales et provinciales en matière de revenus, notamment les pensions publiques pour les personnes âgées, l’aide sociale, les prestations pour enfants et le salaire minimum, ont montré une réduction de l’insécurité alimentaire lorsque ces interventions améliorent les revenus des ménages à faible revenu.⁸ Les recherches sur l’impact du régime de pensions publiques du Canada pour les personnes âgées constituent le parallèle le plus fort avec le revenu minimum garanti. Il a été démontré que le fait d’atteindre l’âge d’admissibilité à la pension publique réduit de près de 50 % le risque d’insécurité alimentaire chez les adultes à faible revenu et sans famille. ^[10]

La mise en place d’un revenu minimum pour les Canadiens en âge de travailler et leurs familles (similaire à l’aide que reçoivent les personnes âgées dans le cadre des programmes publics de pensions de retraite) réduirait la vulnérabilité des ménages qui dépendent des revenus du travail mais qui ne parviennent toujours pas à joindre les deux bouts, tout en garantissant un revenu suffisant aux personnes qui ne font pas partie de la population active pour couvrir leurs besoins fondamentaux. Selon un rapport récent du directeur parlementaire du budget, un revenu de base garanti à l’échelle nationale réduirait considérablement la pauvreté au Canada d’ici 2025, soit de 34 % pour les ménages définis comme des familles nucléaires et de 40 % pour ceux définis comme des familles économiques, selon la mesure du panier de consommation.[11]

Compte tenu de l’ampleur de l’insécurité alimentaire des ménages et de ses répercussions profondes sur la santé et les coûts économiques, le Canada a un besoin urgent de solutions politiques fondées sur le revenu qui s’attaquent directement à cette question. Le rapport 2025 du Conseil consultatif national sur la pauvreté a pris en considération l’idée d’un revenu de base ciblé afin de garantir que tout le monde atteigne au moins le seuil officiel de pauvreté au Canada grâce à son salaire ou aux prestations gouvernementales. ^[12] Le soutien au projet de loi S-206 est une étape cruciale vers la réalisation de cette vision, car il jette les bases d’un cadre de revenu de base susceptible de réduire la pauvreté et d’améliorer les résultats en matière de santé au Canada. L’ODPH invite respectueusement le Comité des finances nationales à soutenir le projet de loi S-206 et à contribuer à bâtir un Canada plus fort, plus sain et plus équitable. Nous vous remercions de votre attention.

Salutations distinguées,

Luisa Magalhaes, M.Sc.S., Dt.P. Karina Kwong, M.S.P., Dt.P.

Présidente, ODPH Vice-présidente, Groupe de travail sur l’insécurité alimentaire

c.c L’honorable Kim Pate, sénatrice

Loretta Ryan, directrice générale, Association des agences locales de santé publique (Ontario)

Références

1. Diététistes en santé publique de l’Ontario (ODPH). Disponible (en français et en anglais) à : https://odph.ca/section/insecurite-alimentaire/

2. Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). Understanding Household Food Insecurity [page Web en ligne]. Disponible à : https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/

3. Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). (2025) New Data on Household Food Insecurity in 2024. Disponible à : https://proof.utoronto.ca/2025/new-data-on-household-food-insecurity-in-2024/

4. Banques alimentaires Canada. (2025). Bilan-Faim 2025. Disponible à : https://content.foodbankscanada.ca/wordpress/2025/10/FBC_HungerCount_FR_2025.pdf

5. Martin JC and Lewchuk W. (2018). The Generation Effect: Millennials, employment precarity and the 21^st Century workplace. Disponible à : https://pepso.ca/documents/the-generation-effect-full-report.pdf

6. Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). (2023). What are the implications of food insecurity for health and health care? Disponible à : https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/what-are-the-implications-of-food-insecurity-for-health-and-health-care/

7. Tarasuk V. (2017). Implications of a basic income guarantee for household food insecurity. Northern Policy Institute – Research Paper No. 24. Disponible à : https://proof.utoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Paper-Tarasuk-BIG-EN-17.06.13-1712.pdf

8. Li T, Fafard St-Germain AA, Tarasuk V. (2023). Household food insecurity in Canada, 2022. Toronto: Research to identify policy options to reduce food insecurity (PROOF). Disponible à : https://proof.utoronto.ca/

9. Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). What can be done to reduce food insecurity in Canada? Disponible à : https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/what-can-be-done-to-reduce-food-insecurity-in-canada/

10. McIntrye L, Dutton D, Kwok C et al. (2016). Reduction of food insecurity in low-income Canadian seniors as a likely impact of a Guaranteed Annual Income. Canadian Public Policy. 42(3), 274-286. Disponible à : https://utppublishing.com/doi/10.3138/cpp.2015-069

11. Bureau du directeur parlementaire du budget. (2025). Analyse distributive d’un revenu garanti à l’échelle nationale – Mise à jour. Disponible à : https://www.pbo-dpb.ca/en/publications/RP-2425-029-S–distributional-analysis-national-guaranteed-basic-income-update–analyse-distributive-un-revenu-base-garanti-echelle-nationale-mise-jour

12. Gouvernement du Canada. (2025). Le rapport de 2025 du Conseil consultatif national sur la pauvreté. Disponible à : https://www.canada.ca/fr/emploi-developpement-social/programmes/reduction-pauvrete/conseil-consultatif-national/rapports/annuel-2025.html

January 7, 2026

The Honourable Claude Carignan, Senator, and Chair, National Finance Committee Claude.Carignan@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Éric Forest, Senator, and Deputy Chair, National Finance Committee Eric.Forest@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Clément Gignac, Senator, and National Finance Committee Member Clement.Gignac@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Andrew Cardozo, Senator, and National Finance Committee Member Andrew.Cardozo@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Pierre J. Dalphond, Senator, and National Finance Committee Member PierreJ.Dalphond@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Rosa Galvez, Senator, and National Finance Committee Member Rosa.Galvez@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Martine Hébert, Senator, and National Finance Committee Member Martine.Hebert@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Joan Kingston, Senator, and National Finance Committee Member Joan.Kingston@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Jane MacAdam, Senator, and National Finance Committee Member Jane.MacAdam@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Elizabeth Marshall, Senator, and National Finance Committee Member Elizabeth.Marshall@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable Krista Ross, Senator, and National Finance Committee Member Krista.Ross@sen.parl.gc.ca

Sara Gajic, Clerk, National Finance Committee Sara.Gajic@sen.parl.gc.ca

National Finance Committee NFFN@SEN.PARL.GC.CA

Dear Chair, Deputy Chair, Members, and Clerk of the National Finance Committee of the Senate of Canada:

Ontario Dietitians in Public Health (ODPH), the professional association of Registered Dietitians working in Ontario’s public health system, is writing to urge your support of Bill S-206, an Act to develop a national framework for a guaranteed livable basic income, currently being considered by the National Finance Committee of the Senate. Since 2015, ODPH has strongly supported the concept of a basic income guarantee as an effective policy lever for reducing the pervasive problem of household food insecurity in Canada (1).

Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF) defines household food insecurity (HFI) as “the inadequate or insecure access to food due to financial constraints,” and further states it is a serious public health problem, a marker of pervasive material deprivation, and a matter of public policy (2). The experience of HFI can range from concerns or problems of food access (marginal HFI), to the inability to afford a balanced diet and/or missing meals (moderate HFI), to extreme cases of not eating for days (severe HFI).

In 2024, HFI in Canada reached its highest level since national monitoring began nearly 20 years ago. One in four Canadians (25.5%) living in the ten provinces experienced HFI, representing approximately 9.9 million people, including 2.5 million children – 75% of these children lived in households facing moderate or severe HFI (3). These estimates do not include First Nations communities or the territories, where rates are typically even higher, particularly in Nunavut. Provincial rates varied significantly, ranging from 19.8% in Quebec to 30.9% in Alberta, highlighting the need for a coordinated national response (3).

HFI is fundamentally an income issue, not just a “food problem.” In 2023, 70% of households with social assistance as their main source of income in Canada reported experiencing HFI (3). However, employment is not necessarily protective – 58.6% of households experiencing HFI report employment as their main income source, with this group showing the largest increase in HFI from 2021 to 2022 (3). A recent survey by Food Banks Canada found that low wages and insufficient hours were among the top reasons people turned to food banks (4). Research also highlights a growing trend of precarious jobs with unstable hours, and a lack of essential benefits, creating significant challenges for today’s workforce (5). HFI is a critical indicator of a household’s financial situation, as households unable to afford food also struggle to meet other basic needs. Incomes have not kept pace with the cost of living – since 2021, the Consumer Price Index has increased by 26% for shelter, 25% for food and 20% for transportation (4).

Extensive Canadian evidence demonstrates HFI is tightly linked to adverse physical and mental health outcomes above and beyond the influence of other social determinants of health. Research linking HFI data from population health surveys with administrative health records, has provided strong evidence that people experiencing HFI are more likely to be hospitalized for a wide range of conditions, stay in hospital longer, and die prematurely (before the age of 83) from all causes except cancer (6). A particularly strong relationship exists between HFI and poor mental health. The risk of experiencing depression, anxiety disorders, mood disorders, or suicidal thoughts increases with the severity of HFI for both adults and youth (6). The health consequences of HFI are extremely costly to Canada’s publicly funded healthcare system (7). Policies designed with the aim of reducing HFI have the potential to offset considerable public expenditures on healthcare for federal, provincial and territorial governments. These savings must be considered in the proposed national framework for a guaranteed livable basic income.

For more than three decades, food banks have been the primary response to HFI in Canada. Despite massive investments in a secondary food system for people who cannot afford to obtain food in the most socially dignified manner (i.e., buying from food retailers), food banks are struggling more than ever to meet demands. In March 2025, there were more than 2 million visits to food banks across Canada, representing a 5% increase compared to March 2024, and a 99.4% increase compared to March 2019 (4). While food banks can provide temporary food relief, they do not address the root cause of HFI – inadequate and unstable income (1). In fact, only about one-quarter of households experiencing HFI use food banks, and for those who do, the problem persists (8).

Over the past 12 months, several Ontario municipalities declared food insecurity emergencies, including Mississauga, November 2024; Toronto, December 2024; Kingston, January 2025; Brantford, February 2025; Brockville, June 2025 and Orillia, August 2025. These declarations clearly demonstrate HFI has reached crisis levels across Ontario, resulting in an unsustainable demand on the charitable food system, and requiring municipal governments and community organizations to call on Federal and Provincial governments to step in with long-term policy solutions.

The only interventions proven to reduce household food insecurity are those that improve the incomes of vulnerable households (9). Research on federal and provincial income policies, including public pensions for seniors, social assistance, child benefits, and minimum wage, has documented reductions in food insecurity when these interventions improve the incomes of low-income households (8). Research on the impact of Canada’s public pension system for seniors provides the strongest parallel to a basic income guarantee. Reaching the age of eligibility for collecting public pensions has been shown to reduce the risk of food insecurity for low-income, unattached adults by almost 50% (10).

Establishing an income floor for working-aged Canadians and their families (similar to the support seniors receive through public pension programs) would reduce vulnerability among households that rely on employment incomes but are still unable to make ends meet, while also ensuring adequate income for those not in the workforce to cover basic needs. According to a recent report by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, a national guaranteed basic income would significantly reduce poverty in Canada by 2025 – by 34% for households defined as nuclear families and by 40% for those defined as economic families, based on the Market Basket Measure (11).

Given the magnitude of HFI and its profound health impacts and economic costs, Canada urgently needs income-based policy solutions that directly address this issue. The 2025 Report of the National Advisory Council on Poverty has included consideration of a targeted basic income to ensure everyone reaches at least Canada’s Official Poverty Line through wages and/or government benefits (12). Supporting Bill S-206 is a critical step toward this vision, laying the foundation for a basic income framework that can reduce poverty and improve health outcomes in Canada. ODPH respectfully urges the National Finance Committee to support Bill S-206 and help build a stronger, healthier, and more equitable Canada. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Luisa Magalhaes, MHSc, RD Karina Kwong, MPH, RD

Chair, ODPH Co-Chair, Food Insecurity Workgroup

cc:

The Honourable Kim Pate, Senator

Loretta Ryan, Executive Director, Association of Local Public Health Agencies (Ontario)

References

1. Ontario Dietitians in Public Health (ODPH). Available (in English and French) at: https://odph.ca/section/food-insecurity/2. Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). Understanding Household Food Insecurity [webpage online]. Available at: https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/
3. Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). (2025) New Data on Household Food Insecurity in 2024. Available at: https://proof.utoronto.ca/2025/new-data-on-household-food-insecurity-in-2024/
4. Food Banks Canada. (2025). Hunger Count 2025. Available at: https://content.foodbankscanada.ca/wordpress/2025/10/FBC_HungerCount_EN_2025.pdf
5. Martin JC and Lewchuk W. (2018). The Generation Effect: Millennials, employment precarity and the 21st Century workplace. Available at: https://pepso.ca/documents/the-generation-effect-full-report.pdf
6. Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). (2023). What are the implications of food insecurity for health and health care? Available at: https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/what-are-theimplications-of-food-insecurity-for-health-and-health-care/
7. Tarasuk V. (2017). Implications of a basic income guarantee for household food insecurity. Northern Policy Institute – Research Paper No. 24. Available at: https://proof.utoronto.ca/wpcontent/uploads/2017/06/Paper-Tarasuk-BIG-EN-17.06.13-1712.pdf
8. Li T, Fafard St-Germain AA, Tarasuk V. (2023). Household food insecurity in Canada, 2022. Toronto: Research to identify policy options to reduce food insecurity (PROOF). Available at https://proof.utoronto.ca/
9. Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). What can be done to reduce food insecurity in Canada? Available at: https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/what-can-be-done-to-reduce-food-insecurity-incanada/
10. McIntrye L, Dutton D, Kwok C et al. (2016). Reduction of food insecurity in low-income Canadian seniors as a likely impact of a Guaranteed Annual Income. Canadian Public Policy. 42(3), 274-286. Available at: https://utppublishing.com/doi/10.3138/cpp.2015-069
11. Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer. (2025). A Distributional Analysis of a National Guaranteed Basic Income – Update. Available at: https://www.pbo-dpb.ca/en/publications/RP-2425-029-S–distributional-analysis-national-guaranteed-basic-income-update–analyse-distributive-unrevenu-base-garanti-echelle-nationale-mise-jour
12. Government of Canada. (2025). 2025 Report of the National Advisory Council on Poverty. Available at: https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/poverty-reduction/nationaladvisory-council/reports/2025-annual.html

Ontario Dietitians in Public Health (ODPH) appreciates the opportunity to contribute to the development of the next Ontario Poverty Reduction Strategy (OPRS). ODPH is the professional association of Registered Dietitians (RDs) working in Ontario’s public health system. One of ODPH’s key priorities is working towards effective solutions to reduce household food insecurity (HFI).

HFI is the inadequate or insecure access to food due to financial constraints (Li et al., 2023). The experience of HFI can range from concerns or problems of food access (marginal HFI), to the inability to afford a balanced diet and/or missing meals (moderate HFI), to extreme cases of not eating for days (severe HFI). It is a critical indicator of a household’s financial situation. When households have trouble affording food, it shows they cannot meet basic needs because they do not have enough money. HFI is a highly sensitive measure of material deprivation making it an important measure for understanding poverty and guiding policy decisions.

HFI has increased dramatically over the past several years. In 2024, 1 in 4 Ontario households experienced HFI; this translates to over 4 million Ontarians (PROOF, 2025b). This is an increase of over 1.7 million Ontarians since 2021 (Tarasuk et al., 2022). Households with children are at particularly high risk, with 1 in 3 children in Ontario living in a food insecure household in 2024 (PROOF, 2025b).

HFI is a major financial liability for Ontario’s healthcare system. Adults living with HFI account for a disproportionate share of health care costs, including mental health-related emergency visits and hospitalizations, with the greatest costs associated with severe HFI (PROOF, ND). Without effective policy action, HFI will continue to escalate with worsening consequences to Ontario’s economic progress and to the health and well-being of Ontarians.

The OPRS must prioritize adequate incomes for Ontario households to afford basic costs of living, including adequate shelter and nutritious food. ODPH commends the Ontario government’s recent efforts to support vulnerable Ontarians, including increasing the earned income exemption for the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) from $200 to $1000, indexing ODSP rate increases to inflation that began in July 2023, exempting the Canada Disability Benefit from social assistance payment clawbacks, and increasing the minimum wage rate from $14/hour in January 2020 to $17.60/hour in October 2025. These are important measures for strengthening income security in Ontario.

Building on these important steps, ODPH offers the following recommendations for the 2025-2030 OPRS.

Recommendation 1: Improve employment income adequacy

While the recent increases to minimum wage have been much needed, the current rate of $17.60/hour (Government of Ontario, 2025) falls short for the over 800,000 employees in Ontario who earn minimum wage.

The Ontario Living Wage Network prepares annual living wage rate calculations based on real costs of living across the province. The living wage in Ontario in 2025 ranges from $21.05/hour in the London Elgin Oxford region to $27.20/hour in Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area (Ontario Living Wage Network, 2025). Nowhere in Ontario could someone work full time earning minimum wage at $17.60/hour and afford the basic costs of living. Aligning annual increases to Ontario’s minimum wage with living wage rates will ensure all working Ontarians can afford basic needs, including food.

Employment does not guarantee protection against HFI. In 2022, 58.6% of Ontario households experiencing HFI reported employment or self-employment as their main source of income (Li et al., 2023). To reduce HFI, jobs need to provide a living wage, stable hours, benefits, and protections against precarious work.

Recommendation 2: Strengthen social assistance

Ontario Works (OW): increase the rates and index rates to inflation annually;
Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP): increase the rates;
Pregnancy and Breastfeeding Nutritional Allowance (ODSP Policy Directive 6.5 and OW Policy Directive 6.5): increase the monthly amounts; and
Special Diet Allowance (ODSP Policy Directive 6.4 and OW Policy Directive 6.6): increase the monthly amounts for all eligible conditions.

Households reliant on social assistance experience the highest prevalence and severity of HFI. In 2023, 70% of households relying on OW or ODSP were food-insecure and 43% were severely so (PROOF, 2025a). This is because social assistance income for both OW and ODSP are far below Canada’s Official Poverty Line (the Market Basket Measure, or MBM), with most recipients living in deep poverty, income below 75% of the MBM (Laidley & Oliveira, 2025).

The current maximum amounts for a single individual to cover basic needs and shelter each month are $733 for OW and $1,408[1]. for ODSP. These rates are far from adequate for an individual to afford housing and nutritious food anywhere in Ontario. It is particularly concerning that OW rates have not been increased since October 1, 2018, with more than 20% inflation since then; this loss in purchasing power means a significant worsening in a person’s standard of living (Tabbara & Laidley, 2024).

The monthly allocations in the OW and ODSP Policy Directives for the Pregnancy/Breastfeeding Nutritional Allowance and Special Diet Allowance have not been reviewed or increased in over a decade, even though the cost of food and infant formula have increased significantly.

Local public health units (PHUs) in Ontario monitor food affordability by reviewing the cost of a basic nutritious diet (not considering any special dietary needs) and local rental housing rates within the context of a variety of household income scenarios. Data collected by 32 PHUs in 2024, averaged and weighted proportionally by population, showed households dependent on social assistance could not afford a basic nutritious diet. To do so, households reliant on social assistance would need to allocate an unreasonable proportion of their income to food: $1,229/month (42%) for a family of four receiving OW; $427/month (48%) for a single adult receiving OW; and $451/month (30%) for a single pregnant person receiving OW (Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion, 2025).

[1] Note: ODPH acknowledges an error in the original submission of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Consultation, November 2025. The submission incorrectly stated that the current maximum basic needs and shelter allowances for a single individual receiving ODSP were $1534/month. This figure was incorrect, and it has since been corrected to $1408/month.

Recommendation 3: Set measurable targets to reduce HFI and eliminate severe HFI by 2030

HFI is a reliable marker for economic hardship. Establishing measurable targets ensures accountability, provides clear benchmarks to monitor progress and impact, and supports the implementation of evidence-informed policies. Having targets also demonstrates Ontario’s commitment to equity, health, and economic stability by addressing the root cause of HFI, rather than relying on ineffective, short-term food-based responses.

HFI is not a food problem and cannot be solved by food charity or other programs, such as community gardens or food waste diversion initiatives (Ontario Dietitians in Public Health, 2020). Poverty places significant downstream pressures on municipalities to deliver essential public services and respond to increasing demands on social programs (e.g., emergency supports for people without adequate shelter and food) with limited sources of revenue and resources to do so. In the past 12 months, several Ontario municipalities declared food insecurity emergencies, including Mississauga, November 2024; Toronto, December 2024; Kingston, January 2025; Brantford, February 2025; and Brockville, June 2025. These declarations clearly demonstrate HFI has reached crisis levels across Ontario, resulting in an unsustainable demand on the charitable food system, and requiring municipal governments and community organizations to call on Provincial and Federal governments to step in with long-term policy solutions.

The urgency of this recommendation is evident in the sharp rise in severe HFI in Ontario, which increased from 4.8% of households in 2022 to 7.9% in 2024 (Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion, 2025). HFI is strongly linked to income, disproportionately affecting those with inadequate or unstable income, few assets and limited access to credit (Li et al., 2023). As income decreases, both the risk and severity of HFI increases, making income-based policy solutions critical.

In conclusion, ODPH urges immediate and sustained investment to reduce poverty in Ontario. Without bold, measurable action, poverty will continue to erode community well-being, strain municipal resources, and deepen inequities across the province. Addressing poverty is not only a social responsibility – it is also an economic imperative.

References

Laidley J, Oliveira T. (2025) Welfare in Canada, 2024. Maytree. Retrieved from: https://maytree.com/

Ontario Dietitians in Public Health. (2020) Position Statement and Recommendations on Responses to Food Insecurity. Available at: https://odph.ca/section/food-insecurity/

Ontario Living Wage Network. (2025) Updated 2025 Rates. Available at: https://www.ontariolivingwage.ca/updated_2025_rates

PROOF (Food Insecurity Policy Research). (2025b) New data on household food insecurity in 2024. Available at: https://proof.utoronto.ca/2025/new-data-on-household-food-insecurity-in-2024/

Tabbara M and Laidley J. (2024) Too many income supports still aren’t indexed. Maytree. Available at: https://maytree.com/publications/too-many-income-supports-still-arent-indexed/

This document provides background information on Early Childhood Food Insecurity and alPHa Resolution A24-05

Prepared by Ontario Dietitians in Public Health

We acknowledge that this document refers to breastfeeding. Breastfeeding is traditionally understood to involve an individual of the female sex and gender identity who also identifies as a woman and mother. However, it is important to recognize that there are individuals in a parenting and human milk feeding relationship with a child who may not self-identify as such and who may prefer to use the term “chestfeeding” rather than breastfeeding.

Nutrition is fundamental for growth and development in the early years of life (1). Early childhood malnutrition presents a considerable burden to the health care system in Ontario. The long-term effects of malnutrition during early childhood include increased risk of hypertension, dyslipidemia, insulin resistance in adulthood, poor school achievement due to impaired cognitive development and increased risk of mental illness (2). These conditions cost millions of dollars in health care expenditures.

Food insecurity, inadequate or insecure access to food due to household financial constraints, continues to be a serious and pervasive public health problem. While the prevalence of infant-specific food insecurity has not been formally investigated, as no provincial surveillance system exists, it is likely significant considering that nearly 1 in 4 children under the age of six live in a household experiencing food insecurity (3).

In the last year, Statistics Canada data demonstrated that the price of food has increased by 10.6%, rising at a rate not seen since the early 1980s (4). During the same time, the price of infant formula increased 35.5% in Ontario (5). Exclusive breastfeeding is recommended for up to two years and beyond to support healthy growth and development (6), yet many families choose to offer infant formula instead of breastfeeding for a variety of reasons. Women who experience food insecurity tend to stop exclusive breastfeeding sooner than those who are food secure and they tend to struggle more often to maintain an adequate supply of breastmilk (7,8). Medical conditions such as food allergies are another reason one may choose to offer infant formula. For those with a medical diagnosis* requiring the strict avoidance of standard soy and milk proteins, there is no substitute for breastmilk other than specialized infant formula. It is estimated that 5,125 infants and children 0-24 months of age in Ontario have a medical diagnosis requiring strict avoidance of standard soy and milk proteins and must have specialized infant formula to meet their nutrient needs (9). When household food insecurity results in unreliable access to breast milk or formula, both infant health and parental mental health are threatened which can have significant implications for our healthcare system.

*Medical diagnosis can include an IgE mediated food allergy and/or a non-IgE mediated food allergy, such as food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES), food protein-induced enteropathy (FPE), allergic proctocolitis (AP), eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and several others. Due to the variability in clinical presentation and lack of validated diagnostic tests, a diagnosis relies on a detailed medical history, physical examination, and a trial elimination of the suspected food allergen.

Provincial interventions that reduce the prevalence of food insecurity, optimize breastfeeding, and improve access to infant formula, including expansion of the Ontario Drug and Benefit program, must be actioned.

References

Britto, P. R., Lye, S. J., Proulx, K., Yousafzai, A. K., Matthews, S. G., Vaivada, T., Perez- Escamilla, R., Rao, N., Ip, P., Fernald, L. C. H., MacMillan, H., Hanson, M., Wachs, T. D., Yao, H., Yoshikawa, H., Cerezo, A., Leckman, J. F., & Bhutta, Z. A. (2017). Nurturing care: promoting early childhood development. The Lancet, 389(10064), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(16)31390-3
Martins, V. J. B., Toledo Florêncio, T. M. M., Grillo, L. P., Do Carmo P. Franco, M., Martins, P. A., Clemente, A. P. G., Santos, C. D. L., Vieira, M. de F. A., & Sawaya, A. L. (2011). Long-Lasting Effects of Undernutrition. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 8(6), 1817–1846. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph8061817
Li T, Fafard St-Germain AA, Tarasuk V. (2023). Household food insecurity in Canada, 2022. Toronto: Research to identify policy options to reduce food insecurity (PROOF). Retrieved from https://proof.utoronto.ca/
Statistics Canada. Consumer Price Index, February 2023. Retrieved 13 April 2023 from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/230321/dq230321a-eng.pdf.
Statistics Canada. Monthly Average Retail Prices for Selected Products. Retrieved March 19 2024 from Monthly average retail prices for selected products (statcan.gc.ca)
Health Canada, Canadian Paediatric Society, Dietitians of Canada, & Breastfeeding Committee for Canada. (2014). Nutrition for healthy term infants: Recommendations from six to 24 months. Canadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research, 75(2), 107.
Orr, S. K., Dachner, N., Frank, L., & Tarasuk, V. (2018). Relation between household food insecurity and breastfeeding in Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 190(11), E312–E319. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.170880
Frank, L. (2018). Finding formula: Community-based organizational responses to infant formula needs due to household food insecurity. Canadian Food Studies / La Revue Canadienne Des Études Sur L’alimentation, 5(1), 90. https://doi.org/10.15353/cfs- rcea.v5i1.230
Ontario Dietitians in Public Health and Food Allergy Canada. (2023). Call to Action: ODB Program Amendments to Support Infants and Children with a Medical Diagnosis* Requiring Strict Avoidance of Standard Soy and Milk Proteins. Retrieved from www.odph.ca

Association of Local Public Health Agencies (alPHa) Resolution A24-05, June 2024

TITLE: Early Childhood Food Insecurity: An Emerging Public Health Problem Requiring Urgent Action

SPONSOR: Ontario Dietitians in Public Health

WHEREAS
Provincial action is urgently needed to protect young children 0-24 months of age from the harmful effects of household food insecurity; and

WHEREAS
alPHa’s advocacy efforts have long underscored the need for income-based solutions to food insecurity and have previously resolved on the following areas: A15-04 (Basic Income Guarantee), A18-02 (Minimum Wage that is a Living Wage), A18-4 (Extending the Ontario Pregnancy and Breastfeeding Nutritional Allowance to 24 Months), A18-05 (Adequate Nutrition for Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Program Participants and Low Wage Earners), A23-05 (Monitoring Food Affordability); and

WHEREAS
food insecurity is a potent social determinant of health, and infants and young children are particularly susceptible to adverse effects of household food insecurity, including associated parental stress, lower breastfeeding rates, and financial barriers to accessing adequate infant formula, when needed; and

WHEREAS
when food insecurity results in early childhood malnutrition, infants and young children may experience growth faltering, compromised health, and cognitive impairments which may hinder their lifelong potential and result in considerable burden for the provincial health care system; and

WHEREAS
food prices including the price of infant formula have increased over the past year; and

WHEREAS
the Ontario Dietitians in Public Health and Food Allergy Canada has called on the Provincial government to amend the Ontario Drug Benefit program to support infants and children with a medical diagnosis*requiring strict avoidance of standard soy and milk proteins; and

WHEREAS
the Windsor-Essex County Board of Health passed the resolution Food Insecurity Compromises Infant Health in March 2024 in response to a notable local increase in infant food insecurity

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that the Association of Local Public Health Agencies call on the Provincial government to optimize early growth and development among families most impacted by food insecurity and health inequities, by:

Increasing the Pregnancy and Breastfeeding Nutritional Allowance and the Special Diet Allowance to ensure families reliant on Ontario Works or the Ontario Disability Support Program can afford the products they need to adequately nourish their infants.
Expanding the Ontario Drug Benefit include specialized infant formulas for families whose children (0-24 months) have a medical diagnosis* requiring strict avoidance of standard soy and milk proteins.

AND FURTHER THAT
alPHa continues to advocate for income-related policies to reduce household food insecurity, especially for households with children where prevalence of food insecurity is highest.

Dr. Kwame McKenzie Chief Executive Officer Wellesley Institute

Via email: kwame@wellesleyinstitute.com

May 13, 2024

Dear Dr. McKenzie,

Ontario Dietitians in Public Health (ODPH), the official voice of Registered Dietitians working in the Ontario public health system, is writing to offer feedback on the Wellesley Institute’s policy brief, Time to regulate food prices like a utility. ODPH provides leadership and expertise in public health nutrition practice, including food insecurity, family and child health, school health, and food systems.

ODPH firmly agrees that access to affordable, nutritious food is a health equity issue that requires urgent action, and that policymakers must ensure nutritious food is affordable for all Canadians. However, we disagree that regulation of the cost of foods included in the National Nutritious Food Basket (NNFB) will lead to food affordability for all Canadians who experience food insecurity. This approach is not supported by existing evidence. Moreover, it diverts attention from policy interventions that ensure wages and income supports are sufficient to meet basic needs of Canadians.

As presented in our Position Statement and Recommendations on Responses to Food Insecurity, policy interventions that improve the financial circumstances of vulnerable households are fundamental to effectively address food insecurity. Although the name of the problem implies it, food insecurity is not strictly indicative of food deprivation but rather a symptom of overall financial hardship and pervasive material deprivation.

Households struggling to afford food also struggle to afford other costs of living such as housing, personal care, clothing and transportation.

The policy brief aptly asserts that food and nutrition can be considered optional while other necessities are not − this is precisely why addressing income inadequacy is essential to reducing food insecurity. In other words, the way to address food insecurity is to ensure adequate income for inelastic costs of living. The elasticity of food expenditures means that financial hardships can be detected more sensitively through measurement of food insecurity – if a household is compromising its food spending, they are struggling financially in many ways.

The fact that Statistics Canada has reported 78% of families experiencing food insecurity had incomes above the poverty line does not mean food insecurity is breaking away from poverty, but rather it underscores a problem with relying solely on Canada’s official poverty line, the Market Basket Measure (MBM), to understand Canadians’ financial hardships and inform social policy. As an experience-based measure of material deprivation, household food insecurity captures financial hardship in a way that income-based measures of poverty do not, accounting for the security, stability, and sufficiency of income.

Since 2008, Ontario public health units (PHUs) have been mandated by the Ministry of Health to monitor food affordability. This is achieved by comparing sample single- person and family household income estimates to local rental housing rates combined with the local cost of the Nutritious Food Basket. Food affordability reports by Ontario PHUs (see examples from Huron-Perth, Thunder Bay, Ottawa) and similar reports from other jurisdictions such as British Columbia consistently and repeatedly illustrate that households with low incomes (e.g., minimum wage employment and social assistance) cannot afford the basic costs of living.

The situation is most severe for social assistance recipients where monthly benefits are woefully inadequate. The inadequacy of Ontario Works rates is particularly glaring for single people as demonstrated by the following 2023 food affordability data from selected PHUs.

a includes Basic Allowance ($343) + Maximum Shelter Allowance ($390)

b includes GST/HST tax credit ($26), Ontario Trillium Benefit ($75 or $89 in northern regions), and Climate Action Incentive Payment ($31 or $34 in non-CMA regions)

c cost of the Ontario Nutritious Food Basket, collected by Public Health Unit in May/June 2023

d cost of market rental rates obtained from CMHC data tables (October 2022) or from municipal housing authorities; may or may not include utilities

Ontario Disability Support Program recipients are slightly better off, but in most PHU jurisdictions ODSP rates are still inadequate for just rent and food. In the second half of 2023, ODSP rates increased by 5% and indexing to inflation began. These changes will be reflected in our 2024 analyses.

ODPH’s well-established experience monitoring food affordability demonstrates that regulating the cost of the 61 Nutritious Food Basket items would do little to mitigate food insecurity for individuals and families when income is far below what is needed to pay for market rate rental housing and food costs. Policy interventions shown to reduce food insecurity include income support programs that align with the costs of living and are indexed to inflation (e.g., social assistance and seniors public pensions), adequate minimum wages (e.g., living wages), as well as the prospect of a guaranteed liveable basic income.

ODPH’s recommendations for reducing food insecurity are consistent with those of Dietitians of Canada and are well-supported by PROOF’s policy evaluation research. It is essential that these are the focal point for advocacy to reduce food insecurity.

Thank you for taking the time to review this letter. ODPH would welcome an opportunity to further discuss our position with the Wellesley Institute.

Sincerely,

Laura Abbasi, RD
Co-Chair ODPH Executive

Erin Reyce, RD
Co-Chair ODPH Food Insecurity Workgroup

Mental Health Commission of Canada

350 Albert Street, Suite 1210 Ottawa ON K1R 1A4

Via email: mhccinfo@mentalhealthcommission.ca

April 10, 2024

Re: Feedback on Mental Health and the High Cost of Living policy brief

Dear Katerina Kalenteridis, Nimesha Elanko, Catherine Willinsky, Mary Bartram, and expert reviewers

We are writing to you on behalf of PROOF and Ontario Dietitians in Public Health (ODPH) about your recent policy brief, Mental Health and the High Cost of Living, and our concerns with the presentation of food insecurity as a problem of inadequate food supply, solved through community-level responses.

PROOF is a research program at the University of Toronto studying the health implications of household food insecurity and effective policy interventions to address this serious public health problem. ODPH, the official voice of Registered Dietitians working in the Ontario public health system, provides leadership and expertise in public health nutrition practice, including food insecurity, family and child health, school health, and food systems.

We appreciate that your policy brief prominently featured the relationship between food insecurity and mental health and that it made use of quotes from the commentary by PROOF researchers in PHAC’s journal and PROOF’s 2021 annual report. PROOF researchers have contributed to much of the literature on the association between food insecurity and poor mental health across the life cycle and the implications for mental health care utilization and substance use in Canada.

Food insecurity is tightly linked to poor mental health and increased mental health care use; evidence-based policy action to address food insecurity could help improve Canadians’ mental health and reduce the burden on mental health care resources.

The policy brief comes at a critical time. PROOF’s most recent report shows that food insecurity has reached a new record high in 2022, with 6.9 million Canadians living in a food-insecure household. The problem has garnered wide national attention and policymakers are looking for ways to address food insecurity.

We strongly agree with the importance of considering the mental health implications of broader economic and social policy reforms. However, we are deeply concerned by your policy recommendation for federal decision-makers to “promote and invest in an adequate supply of more affordable, safe, high-quality, and nutritious foods for Canadians with low incomes and mental health concerns”. This recommendation suggests that food insecurity is a problem of inadequate food supply that can be solved through community-level responses. Not only is this not supported by evidence, but it also seriously distracts from the policies that matter most.

The root cause of food insecurity is the inadequacy of household incomes to meet basic needs. As highlighted in ODPH’s Position Statement on Responses to Food Insecurity, the kinds of policies recommended and reviewed in the Policy Landscape section do not address the drivers of food insecurity. Canada does not need policy approaches that further perpetuate food-based responses. Instead, policymakers need to recognize that food insecurity is a highly sensitive indicator of financial hardship and pervasive material deprivation.

The policy interventions that matter for food insecurity are the ones outlined so thoroughly in the Financial Insecurity section — making sure that existing income supports align with the cost of living and are indexed to inflation, increasing minimum wage, and pursuing additional benefits and the prospect of a basic income. These recommendations align with those made by ODPH, Dietitians of Canada, and other public health organizations, and are well-supported by PROOF’s policy evaluation research.

The brief could have reinforced the urgency for these recommendations to be implemented, had it acknowledged that they are the same ones needed to address the high rates of food insecurity.

Instead, it reinforces the misconception that food insecurity can be solved through further support of community food provision. It is more important than ever that advocates are aligned on key messaging and policy recommendations that are evidence-informed and income-based.

We welcome the opportunity to discuss why we feel these changes are important for more effective recommendations around food insecurity, as well as the research on food insecurity and mental health.

Thank you for taking the time to review this letter, and we look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Valerie Tarasuk, PhD, DSc hc
Principal and founding investigator of PROOF Professor Emeritus, University of Toronto

Erin Reyce, RD
ODPH Food Insecurity Workgroup Co-chair

Situation

In 2022, 2.82 million Ontarians, nearly 19% of households, experienced household food insecurity.¹ The situation undoubtedly worsened in 2023, as food prices and overall inflation rates have continued to rise.²

The health consequences of food insecurity are a huge burden on our province’s healthcare system. Not being able to afford food has serious adverse effects on people’s physical and mental health and the ability to lead productive lives. Ontarians living with food insecurity are at greater risk for numerous chronic conditions including mental health disorders, non-communicable diseases (e.g., diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular disease), and infections.¹ People who have chronic conditions and are food insecure are more likely to have negative disease outcomes, be hospitalized, or die prematurely.¹ Policies that effectively reduce food insecurity could offset considerable public expenditures on healthcare in Ontario.³

Background

Ontario Dietitians in Public Health (ODPH) is the official voice of Registered Dietitians (RDs) working in Ontario’s public health system. ODPH urges all levels of government to support policies that enhance incomes as the most effective responses to the pervasive and highly prevalent problem of household food insecurity.⁴

Household food insecurity (HFI) is inadequate or insecure access to food due to household financial constraints. HFI is an urgent public health, human rights, and social justice problem that, if not addressed, will continue to have serious consequences to Ontario’s economic progress as well as the health and well-being of Ontarians.

Social assistance recipients in Ontario have an extremely high risk for food insecurity. Seventy percent of Canadian households with social assistance as their main source of income were food insecure in 2022.¹

As stipulated in the Population Health Assessment and Surveillance Protocol⁵ of the Ontario Public Health Standards (2018), public health units (PHUs) are required to conduct surveillance and periodic reporting to the Ministry of Health on food affordability. This is assessed by comparing food and local housing costs to various household incomes. Food affordability monitoring results from PHUs could be utilized to determine the adequacy of social assistance rates, as recommended to the Minister of Health in recent correspondence from the Association of Local Public Health Agencies.

Assessment

The table below illustrates the results of food affordability monitoring by seven selected PHUs in May/June 2023, specifically among single adults receiving Ontario Works (OW). These data clearly indicate the deep inadequacy of current OW rates, with the monthly shortfall ranging from $337 in Windsor-Essex to $872 in Toronto.

Recipients of OW across the province do not have enough money to afford two of the most basic living expenses: housing and food. The inadequacy of OW for single adults as exemplified by these results requires urgent policy action to increase benefit rates.

OW recipients experience a state of poverty which has become progressively exacerbated by rates that have been frozen since 2018⁶ coupled with extraordinary inflation in recent years. The effects of deep poverty make it difficult for OW recipients to focus on anything but basic day-to-day survival that takes time and energy away from job searching. Prolonged periods of receiving OW, with its dangerously inadequate benefits levels, often result in a severe decline in mental and physical health. Unaddressed, declining health can lead to serious disability, making gainful employment unlikely or impossible.⁷

In 2022, the Government of Ontario acknowledged the importance of addressing inadequate social assistance rates, as evidenced by the increase to Ontario Disability Support Program rates by 5%, and the commitment to indexing rates to inflation annually.⁸

Recommendation

As a priority for the 2024 Ontario budget, ODPH strongly urges the Government of Ontario to utilize food affordability monitoring data collected by PHUs to inform necessary increases to Ontario Works rates to reflect basic costs of living and index the rates to inflation.

References:

Li T, Fafard St-Germain AA Tarasuk V. (2023). Household food insecurity in Canada, 2022. Toronto: Research to identify policy options to reduce food insecurity (PROOF). Retrieved 19 January 2024 from https://proof.utoronto.ca/.
Statistics Canada. (2024). Latest snapshot of the CPI, December 2023. Retrieved 19 January 2024 from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/2018016/cpi-ipc-eng.htm.
Tarasuk, V., Cheng, J., De Oliveira, C., Dachner, N., Gundersen, C., & Kurdyak, P. (2015). Association between household food insecurity and annual health care costs. Canadian Medical Association Journal, October 06, 2015 187 (14) E429-E436; Retrieved 06 February 2023 from https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.150234.
Ontario Dietitians in Public Health. (2020). Position Statement and Recommendations on Responses to Food Insecurity. Retrieved 06 February 2023 from https://www.odph.ca/upload/membership/document/2021- 04/ps-eng-corrected-07april21_3.pdf.
Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. (2018). Population Health Assessment and Surveillance Protocol. Retrieved 06 February 2023 from https://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/publichealth/oph_standards/docs/protocols_guidelines/Popul ation_Health_Assessment_Surveillance_2018_en.pdf.
Income Security Advocacy Centre. (2023). 22/23 Annual Report. Retrieved 19 January 2023 from https://incomesecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/ISAC_anual-report_22-23_En_Web.pdf.
Hamilton Community Foundation. (2015). Vital Signs 2015. Retrieved 06 February 2023 from https://www.hamiltoncommunityfoundation.ca/vital-signs-2015/barriers-to-employment- 2015/#:~:text=Prolonged%20periods%20on%20OW%2C%20with,gainful%20employment%20unlikely%20or %20impossible.
Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services. (2023). Ontario Disability Support Program. Retrieved 22 January 2024 from https://www.ontario.ca/page/ontario-disability-support-program

December 14, 2023 Via Electronic Mail

Senator Percy Mockler, Chair, National Finance Committee
Percy.Mockler@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senator Éric Forest, Deputy Chair National Finance Committee
Eric.Forest@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senator Clément Gignac, National Finance Committee Member Clement.Gignac@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senator Larry W. Smith, National Finance Committee Member
LarryW.Smith@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senator Jean-Guy Dagenais, National Finance Committee Member
Jean- Guy.Dagenais@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senator Rosa Galvez, National Finance Committee Member
Rosa.Galvez@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senator Tony Loffreda, National Finance Committee Member
Tony.Loffreda@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senator Jane MacAdam, National Finance Committee Member Jane.MacAdam@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senator Elizabeth Marshall, National Finance Committee Member Elizabeth.Marshall@sen.parl.gc.ca

Senator Kim Pate, National Finance Committee Member
Kim.Pate@sen.parl.gc.ca

Mireille Aubé, Clerk, National Finance Committee
Mireille.Aube@sen.parl.gc.ca

National Finance Committee
NFFN@SEN.PARL.GC.CA

Dear Chair, Deputy Chair, Members, and Clerk of the National Finance Committee of the Senate of Canada

Ontario Dietitians in Public Health (ODPH), the independent and official voice of Registered Dietitians working in Ontario’s public health system, is writing to urge your support of Bill S-233, An Act to develop a national framework for a guaranteed livable basic income, currently being considered by the National Finance Committee of the Senate. Since 2015, ODPH has strongly supported the concept of a guaranteed livable basic income (GLBI) as an effective policy lever for reducing the pervasive problem of household food insecurity in Canada.¹

Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF) defines household food insecurity (HFI) as, “the inadequate or insecure access to food due to financial constraints,” and further states it is a serious public health problem, a marker of pervasive material deprivation, and a matter of public policy.²

In 2022, the rate of HFI in Canada reached an all-time high since its measurement in Canada

began nearly two decades ago. The percentage of households in Canada’s ten provinces

experiencing HFI increased significantly to 17.8% in 2022 from 15.9% in 2021.³ This represents

6.9 million people, including 1.8 million, or 1 in 4, children.³ These estimates do not include people living on First Nations or the territories where rates of HFI are typically high, particularly in Nunavut. The provincial rates of HFI in 2022 varied significantly from a low of 13.8% of households in Quebec to a high of 22.9% of households in Newfoundland and Labrador.³

It is important to examine HFI within the context of household income. Seventy per cent of households with social assistance as their main source of income in Canada report experiencing HFI.³ However, having a job is not necessarily protective, as the majority of households experiencing HFI report employment as their main source of income (60.2%), and these households represented the largest increase in HFI from 2021 to 2022.³ A recent survey by Food Banks Canada found that one of the top reasons people cited for going to a food bank was “low wages or not enough hours of work”.⁴ Other research has highlighted the rise of lower quality employment opportunities, precarious employment and lack of benefits as significant challenges within today’s workforce.⁵ This information provides clear evidence that income policy in Canada must be enhanced to protect working age adults from HFI.

Households struggling to put food on the table also struggle to afford other basic needs. HFI, originally perceived as a “food problem,” is now understood to be a potent marker of material deprivation, rooted in inadequate and unstable incomes that have not kept pace with the costs of living. In 2022, Canadians felt a heavy impact of inflation, as prices for basic needs such as transportation (+10.6%), food (+8.9%) and shelter (+6.9%) rose the most.¹ Prices for food purchased from stores rose 9.8%, the fastest pace since 1981 (+12.0%), after increasing 2.2% in 2021.⁶

Extensive Canadian evidence demonstrates HFI is tightly linked to adverse physical and mental health outcomes above and beyond the influence of other social determinants of health.

Research linking HFI data from population health surveys with administrative health records, has provided strong evidence that food-insecure people are more likely to be hospitalized for a wide range of conditions, stay in hospital longer, and die prematurely (before the age of 83) from all causes except cancer.⁷ A particularly strong relationship exists between food insecurity and poor mental health. The risk of experiencing depression, anxiety disorders, mood disorders, or suicidal thoughts increases with the severity of food insecurity for both adults and youth.⁷ The health consequences of HFI are extremely costly to Canada’s publicly funded healthcare system.⁸ Policies designed with the aim of reducing HFI have potential to offset considerable public expenditures on healthcare for federal, provincial and territorial governments. Health care cost savings estimates need to be considered in the proposed national framework for a GLBI.

For more than three decades, food banks have been the primary response to HFI in Canada. Despite massive investments in a secondary food system for people who cannot afford to obtain food in a socially dignified manner (i.e., buying from food retailers or growers), food banks are struggling more than ever to meet demands as more and more Canadians are unable to afford the basic costs of living. In March 2023, there were almost 2 million visits to food banks across Canada, representing a 32% increase compared to March 2022, and a 78.5% increase compared to March 2019, which is the highest year-over-year increase in usage ever reported.⁴ While food banks can provide temporary food relief, they do not address HFI which is a result of a persistent underlying problem of inadequate income.⁹ Only about one-quarter of households experiencing HFI go to food banks, and for those who do use them, HFI is not resolved.

The only interventions proven to reduce household food insecurity are those that improve the incomes of vulnerable households.⁹ Research on federal and provincial income policies, including public pensions for seniors, social assistance, child benefits, and minimum wage, has documented reductions in food insecurity when these interventions improve the incomes of low- income households.⁹ Research on the impact of Canada’s public pension system for seniors provides the strongest parallel to a GLBI. Reaching the age of eligibility for collecting public pensions has been shown to reduce the risk of food insecurity for low-income, unattached adults by almost 50%.¹⁰

Establishing an income floor for working-aged Canadians and their families, similar to that provided to seniors through public pension programs, would help address the vulnerability of households reliant on employment incomes but still unable to make ends meet, and ensure that working-aged adults not in the workforce also have sufficient incomes to meet basic needs. A recently released report¹¹ outlines a proposal for a province-wide Guaranteed Basic Income (GBI) for Prince Edward Island residents aged 18 to 64, recommending a maximum benefit of 85% of the official poverty line, estimated to be $19,252 for a single adult and $27,227 for a family of two adults in 2022. PEI’s report recommends the GBI be a collaborative federal- provincial program, delivered through the income tax system and jointly financed by both governments, complementing the other income-tested basic income benefits that exist for children (Canada Child Benefit) and seniors (Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplement).

Given the magnitude of HFI in Canada and the significant health consequences and costs associated with it, income-based policy solutions specifically targeting the reduction of HFI in Canada are urgently needed. ODPH urges you to support Bill S-233 as an important step toward framing GLBI in Canada. Thank you for reviewing this information.

Sincerely,

Laura Abbasi, RD
Co-Chair ODPH Executive

Erin Reyce, RD
Co-Chair, Food Insecurity Workgroup

cc. Loretta Ryan, Executive Director, Association of Local Public Health Agencies

1 Available (in English and French) at: https://www.odph.ca/odph-position-statement-on-responses-to-food-insecurity-1.

Accessed 11 December 2023.

2 Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). Understanding Household Food Insecurity [webpage online]. https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/. Accessed 11 December 2023.

3 Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). (2023).What are the implications of food insecurity for health and health care?

[webpage online]. https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/what-are-the-implications-of-food-insecurity-for-health-and- health-care/. Accessed 11 December 2023.

4 Food Banks Canada. (2023). HungerCount 2023. Available at: https://foodbankscanada.ca/hungercount/. Accessed 11 December 2023.

5 Martin JC and Lewchuk W. (2018) The Generation Effect: Millennials, employment precarity and the 21st Century workplace. McMaster University and PEPSO. Available at: https://pepso.ca/publications. Accessed 12 December 2023.

⁶ Statistics Canada. (2023). Consumer Price Index: Annual review, 2022. Available at: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/230117/dq230117b-eng.htm. Accessed 11 December 2023.

7 Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). (2023). What are the implications of food insecurity for health and health care? [webpage online]. https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/what-are-the-implications-of-food-insecurity-for- health-and-health-care/. Accessed 11 December 2023.

8 Tarasuk V. (2017). Implications of a basic income guarantee for household food insecurity. Northern Policy Institute – Research Paper No. 24. Available from: https://www.northernpolicy.ca/upload/documents/publications/reports- new/tarasuk_big-and-foodinsecurity-en.pdf. Accessed 13 December 2023.

9 Food Insecurity Policy Research (PROOF). What can be done to reduce food insecurity in Canada? [webpage online] https://proof.utoronto.ca/food-insecurity/what-can-be-done-to-reduce-food-insecurity-in-canada/. Accessed 11 December 2023.

10 McIntyre L, Dutton D, Kwok C, et al. (2016). Reduction of food insecurity in low-income Canadian seniors as a likely impact of a Guaranteed Annual Income. Canadian Public Policy. 42(3), 274-86. https://doi.org/10.3138/cpp.2015-069. Accessed 11 December 2023.

11 A Proposal for a Guaranteed Basic Income Benefit in Price Edward Island. Available at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6414a3fa59a0c71ae167601e/t/655e0165319bf92e4ef6cbd5/1700659869270/fi nal-report. Accessed 12 December 2023.