Pangnirtung study suggests food program’s end will increase child food insecurity
University of Saskatchewan researcher finds hamlet residents reverting to dependence on school food programs as voucher program ends
Eighty-three per cent of participants in a Pangnirtung survey say their children were eating healthier as the result of a program the federal government recently scrapped. (File photo)
The federal government’s decision to end the hamlets’ universal food-voucher program is “baffling,” says the author of a report on its impact in Pangnirtung.
The program, which was used by 24 of Nunavut’s 25 communities, gave $500 a month for every Inuit child age 18 and under, plus an additional $250 for children age four and under.
Last month, the federal government announced the funding would no longer be universal, but instead would be provided child-by-child based on their needs.
“Funds were used exclusively for purchasing healthy foods, as well as infant formula and diapers, with some modifications introduced mid-point through the program that slightly expanded eligible foods,” Lori Hanson, professor emerita at the University of Saskatchewan, wrote in the May 4 report she wrote for the Hamlet of Pangnirtung.
On Tuesday, Pangnirtung released the findings of that report, which it commissioned to investigate the impacts of the Inuit Child First Initiative-funded food voucher program.
The hamlet received $5.4 million in federal funding for the program intended to cover 14 months, starting in February 2024.
Prior to the start of the food voucher program, 98.4 per cent of survey respondents reported they were unable “to feed their children enough at one point in the last year due to insufficient income.”
And 88.4 per cent said they had resorted to purchasing less-healthy food due to their low income, the report said.
In contrast, the study found that after the program started, “98 per cent of participants [noted] they were able to feed their children foods since the establishment of the program.”
Ninety-one per cent changed their children’s diet, and 83 per cent reported their children were eating healthier.
For non-food related responses, prior to the program, 60 per cent reported having trouble paying bills. That fell to 41 per cent while the program was in operation and they were receiving the vouchers to buy food.
In addition to surveying households, Hanson conducted interviews with what the report called 10 key informants ranging “from elementary and high schools, the police, family services, and the two stores.”
“I see people who I know to be poor, walking out of the stores with, you know, shopping carts full of healthy food and all the things that are allowed under Jordan’s Principle, which is heartwarming … My general sense is children seem happier and calmer,” said one informant, identified as KI 10.
Another, identified as KI 5, said: “It’s making a big difference to have the food-voucher program going because our students are coming to school prepared to learn, not coming looking for food.”
The report summarized what some of the 10 key informants said about life in the hamlet before the food-voucher program.
Back then, child food insecurity was evident in “the consistent numbers of children accessing lunch and other school-based food programs, the number of parents regularly accessing the food pantry, the consumption of cheaper (junk) food, the incidents of youth committing petty food theft crimes, and behavioural issues,” the report said.
“It was heartbreaking” to see it end, said Sabrina Maniapik, co-ordinator of Pangnirtung’s food-voucher program, in an interview. Her job was to administer the program and handle applications.
Maniapik said people personally thanked her when the program was being rolled out.
After it ended, she said, she saw an immediate impact in local social media posts that she read.
“We saw more [posts] regarding children going hungry,” she said. “On social media, either family or relatives were seeking food, just for a few days.”
Lori you could not be more wrong. As a person who has seen the administration of the voucher program anything and everything was passing through. Cigg’s , just loads of beef jerky, pop, chips, etc.
Do you really thing the Hamlets who can barely administer their main functions of water, sewer and roads can actually to any degree maintain administration over a food voucher program with that much verification of receipts required? This can’t be serious. While some hamlets are far better than others, most can’t. In my own community, we haven’t even got water bills in nearly a year because they have no finance staff to administer them.
The program was broken from the bottom up. Municipalities / Hamlet’s don’t have capacity, with some exceptions, it was also not needs based which means you had people getting it who absolutely did not need it.
Bet you didn’t see any immediate facebook posts saying people couldn’t afford their ciggs now though because they had to feed their kids, yet the smoking rate of adults is 75%+ in NU.
This program was a failure of administration and planning. Does it mean there should not be something in the future, no. But it needs to actually consider the impacts, how its going to be administered , who should actually be getting it / needs it and how its actually going to be enforced.
Your assumptions are so ignorant and racist about people living in poverty, they will put their kids first and not buy cigarettes, of course they are going to buy big jerky, pops and other junk food because they are cheaper than fresh produce. People living in poverty don’t need to be judge, show some compassion. IF you are worried about such things than volunteer at a local food bank and set up a program were you and other can send food to communities that need which are majority of Inuit.
” of course they are going to buy big jerky, pops and other junk food”
Are you serious? A 12 pack of pop will go up to 80 dollars in Kugaaruk at times on FB. In store they are nearing 50 bucks. Chips are in excess of 10 dollars a bag now. There’s no Nutritions North subsidy on junk food so it’s incredibly expensive and don’t even look at the price of beef jerky per gram , your jaw will hit the floor if you actually do the math and see what you pay per gram.
And to say people are putting their kids nutrition first over their own harmful habits is just ignoring statistics and being willfully ignorant. If 75% of the population smokes, they are buying smokes, but food insecurity for kids is in excess of 50%, thus you can easily conclude people are buying smokes while their kids suffer from food insecurity.
Please don’t just toss the racist card around, it loses all meaning when you toss it around like that when its not racism, its clearly a fact that adults are picking smoking, booze and gambling over their children’s health.
Ignorance is ignoring what is right Infront of you because you don’t like the truth and the truth gets deemed racist.
There it is, it was just a matter of time till the race card comes out! The people that use the race card are the real racists! I see my people use that way too often at work, like complaining that the white man is taking all the good jobs! Our people get free education and should take advantage of it, it took me 4 years to get where i want to be with no excuses!
Junk food is excessive in the north because its not covered under Nutritions North, so that’s not true at all. Milk, eggs, etc. provide significantly more nutritional value at a better price with NNI. Pop for a 12 pack is well in excess of 40 dollars everywhere now, pushing 45-55 in most communities. A 12 pack of pop is 1800 calories for 45 dollars lets say, that’s $0.025 per calorie consumed with zero nutritional contents.
A 4 liter of 2% milk which is now 7-8 bucks is 1600 calories at that’s $0.005 per calorie and offers significant nutritional benefit. Same math can easily be done with 18 eggs vs buying chips or cookies.
So the premise that junk food is better on the wallet when we have NNI is totally false and just an excuse made to eat poor food rather than having to do any food preparation yourself. Happy to do the math on buying flour, yeast, sugar and water and making your own pizza dough as well as the toppings compared to the fat packed frozen ones.
Now onto your second comment about it being racist to say that people don’t prioritize their kids.
over 75% of age people in NU smoke. There’s over 50% of kids suffering from food insecurity. Right there you can clearly see people are prioritizing their own vices over their kids health. That is not racist, that is a fact. Please don’t use the word racist so willy nilly, it diminishes its meaning.
Junk food are not covered by they are cheaper, if you are in poverty you don’t know that in the long run it’s cheaper to buy food, but eggs and stuff but they have kids too feed. I grew up in poverty, my parents did their best bought what they felt they could afford for all of us. Have you ever lived in poverty and ever worry about where your next meals going to come from, like I said parent will not eat, they will make sure their children eat first. Maybe you should volunteer to run a program to teach people about budgeting
I just gave you clear evidence that junk food is not cheaper. See, this is the issue. Some people need to be straight up spoon fed everything or will just sit there and make complete excuses to consume it.
You are clearly happy making excuses so the world around you seems “racist” rather than actually trying to better anything. You are obviously using an electronic device right now typing comments which means you have the world of food preparation at your fingertips for budget friendly recipes using ingredients that are covered by NNI.
Does my comment mean that everything NNI covered will provide the best calorie per dollar ratio. Clearly not since greens and fruits have lower calorie content , but that’s not the bulk of your plate, those are there for nutritional value, grains, oats, lentils, make your carbs, not processed ready to go meals, meat you have to prepare and cook over frozen ready to go chicken nuggets, etc.
Stop making excuses and making people sound useless you are not doing any favours to nunavummiut, you make us sound so incapable, stop.
You are correct that there is a lack of knowledge on finances and non country food. and this should be addressed. but the parents also have a responsibility to learn and search out the information. it is available. also because your kid looks happier when eating chips then a baked potato with butter.
Also families that have had a hard time feeding there 4 kids when they are young should be doing what they can to discourage (instead of encourage) there kids to shack up with someone and have there own family at a young age.
Yes, I have lived in poverty, like dirt poor. Drinking juice or pop was rare, not a normal occasion as it was expensive. I have seen people “beg” for juice on fb. Kids do not need juice. We had beans (cheap protein) instead of meat (expensive). Some parents in NU are kids themselves or have no clue of nutrition. Perhaps there should be a home economics and life skills classes in all school in Nunavut to educate people about this. You are making excuses instead of trying to motivate people to pull themselves out of poverty. The current system guarantees generational poverty for some Nunavumiut.
BINGO
Lucretius you got it background on
Water and sewage bill is pretty simple to make using fluid manager, if they use that I can help them if they pay my way lol
Of course, I am going to bring the race card, because most of the comments are assuming Inuit parents are at fault, and most of the people who live in poverty are Inuit. If most non-Inuit were living in poverty, I am pretty sure this would not be an issue. Look at the so-called protest from right-wing people complaining about the high cost of everything in the south, a protest that largely ignores the even higher costs and poverty rates in the north, where most of the Maple MAGA in Canada are white.
According to a 2022 report by the National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health, the poverty rate for Inuit in Nunavut was estimated to be as high as 62%, compared to 29% for non-Indigenous people in the territory. It also states that income support is essential to fight poverty. No one ever wishes to live in poverty, poverty leads to a lot of social issues, including low attendance, poor grades, and a lack of opportunities. That’s why we need a socialist system, which is another story. Yes, racism plays a role in poverty. Don’t pretend it doesn’t, just because you live a privileged life. I grew up in poverty and do my part with the work I chose to provide opportunities for Inuit to get out of poverty. But the real change needs to come from a systemic level, and that’s where our hope lies.
Ima, you’re insisting poverty makes parents exempt from responsibility. I provided you clear evidence and you still said poor people will just buy junk food. That means you’re not holding those people accountable and you’re happy to just make excuses for peoples bad decisions and habits because they are poor.
Your numbers also indicate that yes those I have poverty are choosing cigarettes and other poor habits over food for their children given food insecurity rate and the rate of poverty. Again you’re happy though to not hold people accountable for their poor decisions because oh poverty.
Not a everything is systematic racism. You need to be able get over that bump to actually better yourself or its just always going to be a fallback.
And if we really want to hit it home you should be asking why Inuit have the highest provety but also insisit on having the most amount of children per family unit in Canada. Is there no responsibility to determine if you can financially support said children before having them or do you just give e everyone a pass on decision making?
Responsible decision making isn’t racist.
The area that the GN is at least partially at fault is the education system. we have a socialist education system. where the only thing that is really cared about is everyone feels equal. that is why the classes are taught at the level of the lowest students so they dont get left behind. but then parents dont force the kids to school everyday so the lowest gets further behind. and the kids who do show up get board and cause problems. because there is no point trying to learn what is being taught right now because even if it should only take a day or 2 to understand it they will be working on it for over a month. and then you end up with kids in Highschool that dont know basic Math. so how can they budget and understand the $/gram to find which food is the most economical.
The report suggests that a lot of Inuit families in Pangnirtung aren’t able to pay all their bills. And despite the characterizations made in most of the comments above, I’m sure that most of those folks are decent people who want the best for their kids.
.
I too have a problem with the fact that the JP food program wasn’t ‘means tested’ – i.e. that all parents of Inuit children received the support, not just those who really need it. But think about it: how would the government decide who would qualify and who wouldn’t?
.
In my community the program was very efficiently run by the Hamlet. Invoices were checked, and people who initially managed to slip ‘non-healthy’ items past young store clerks soon received a letter from the Hamlet stating that the amounts in question would be deducted from their next payment. Abuse stopped pretty quickly. And the number of children showing up hungry at school dropped to almost none.
.
Let’s be clear: poverty is still a huge problem in Inuit communities. This report is proof of that. Now that the evidence is clear that the need is there and that a support program can make a huge difference, will the shiny new Liberal government allow children from poor families to go hungry again?
I refuse to believe in a society that is built on the exchange of X for Xyz we cannot come up with a reasonable system. We do it all the time be it simple employment determining who is eligible for what compensation, we do it for housing, for welfare, for many tax credits, etc.
But what we have is opperunity. I never said it should be removed entirely in my first comment. I said it needed reworking.
Kids hers have horrendous school attendance, by a quarter way into the year you’re looking at 50 % attendance rates in many communities and to not surprise thats very close to Inuit graduation rates.
You have the opperunity go distribute money based on a posative prerequisite. For instance a simple requirement for people getting the benifit is their child maintains 90% school attendance if they’re of school age.
You can get creative with this and I think have a pretty posative impact. It’s earned in a positive constructive way. There’s lots to be thought of. Parents under x income attending post secondary, or skills training programs.
Just having kids and that’s it. Well that’s never been a constructive requirement.
As a parent who lives pay to pay, this allowed us to purchase more fruit, veggies and try some of the expensive stir fry from the frozen section. Yogurt and wiigo was a rare treat, under the program we were able to purchase monthy.
I do not smoke. I didn’t abuse the funds. But because others did, we got cut off.
After 15 years of construction and operation, the regional mine in Baffin provides an average wage of $86K a year (and with unionized seniority, much higher after several years). However, only 13% of the workforce is local, and the annual turnover in local staff is 30%.
It is glaringly apparent that the local population in Baffin has been slow to take up these opportunities, and quick to reject them.
$86K is way more than SA for an individual, and $4K more than the median territorial income for a whole household. Such a wage would appear to be adequate to put food on the table, or at the very least, much more food secure.
It is indeed strange that a premise of a food security survey and discussion would be that if the government did not fork out the money directly whichever way they choose, there is no other options for people to gain income and feed themselves.
It could very well be very few people in Pang may absolutely need a permanent food program. What most people in Pang may need instead is to take and keep available work so they can feed themselves.
It may be assumed by the researchers that local people are incapable of becoming independent self sufficient citizens which is the core dream of the Nunavut Agreement. However, I would view that as highly prejudicial.