Give Me a Break, Tom

By:  Ernie Lightman

The NDP has introduced a motion in Parliament calling for a cap on ATM fees. They want a fifty cent ceiling on the charges for use of an ATM machine, in contrast to the current $2-$3 fee, dramatically described by NDP leader Tom Mulcair as ‘sky-high’.

Putting aside the political hyperbole, is there a real issue here? Is this something we should be deeply concerned about? Is this worthy of the NDP?

Evidently Mulcair is pursuing the elusive middle-class voter, widely held to be the key to the next election. He’s hoping to show this group that the NDP shares their daily pain, and is not so scary after all. But Mulcair is entering on crowded terrain. Liberal leader Justin Trudeau has staked out the middle class as the focus of his agenda and campaign, while even Stephen Harper has recognized their importance with his rhetoric on reducing cable charges and cell roaming fees. (Also on board is the Ontario NDP who maintain a monk-like silence on the need to raise the provincial minimum wage, for fear of alienating the small business community.)

We know from long experience that the rich are, and always have been, well-protected by the Conservatives (and, by the Liberals too). Today we see that all three parties are now fighting for the middle-class.

Somebody’s missing.

Hello?

Does anybody care about the poor?

Mulcair could have made his ATM proposal poor-friendly by arguing that there are fewer banks in areas where low-income people tend to live and so they have little choice but to use the ATM’s in milk and convenience stores. They withdraw smaller amounts on average and so are worse affected by the flat usage fees. He could have talked of the ethical imperative to help the poor fight the big rapacious banks.

But he didn’t make these points: instead he talked of the general disappearance of bank branches around the community at large, forcing everyone (ie, the middle class) into the clutches of the ATM. Nor did he recognize that the poor are more likely to function in a cash economy, less likely to have bank accounts in the first place, making the whole discussion moot from their perspective.

The data on income distribution in Canada consistently talks of increasing polarization, the shrinkage at the middle and increased numbers at the bottom. The poor, in both relative and absolute terms, are growing. So, in principle, they should be a focus of increased attention on the part of all our political parties. Their numbers are such that they could have a real impact on the outcome of the next election.

Yet none of the parties seem to care much about the poor, or do much to garner their support. Granted, the poor are less potent as a force because they are an unpredictable group in electoral terms who often vote against their own class interests: note the support for Harper and his fishing pal Rob Ford in

the poorer parts of town. But maybe that’s because the poor can’t figure out just who really represents their interests at ground level, in things that matter to their daily lives. Rob Ford actually shows up at the troubled public housing development (though his voting record is consistently anti-poor).

For the same reason – no one to vote for – maybe the poor turn out to cast their ballots in such modest numbers, compared to the rest of us. Staying home and watching TV on election day becomes a rational act when one sees no differences among the three parties.

All parties acknowledge the only real path out of poverty is a job, quality employment with adequate compensation, benefits and job security. They differ, of course, on how and whether to pursue these goals and the NDP has some constructive ideas in this debate (unlike Justin who is silent and Harper who has always blamed the poor for their own poverty). In a world increasingly dominated by precarious work (at best), there’s a lot of room for creative political thinking.

But this doesn’t mean the NDP can ignore the daily issues that make life so difficult for the poor. Pursue the middle-class if you wish, Tom, but don’t forget the poor and truly marginalized. Bank ATM fees represent relatively minor irritants in the lives of most of us, including the poor. Don’t waste your scarce time on issues that ultimately don’t matter; there is a bigger picture before you, should you choose to look, and this picture must include the poor.

And, by the way, even if you succeeded in getting a cap on ATM fees, the banks would quickly make up the lost revenue by screwing us elsewhere. But more on that in the next blog.

.