October 25, 2016 HAMILTON – Cardus welcomes a report by the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC) calling for better consumer education about payday loan costs. The issue is especially important given that the FCAC found Canadian households’ use of these high-cost loans doubled between 2009 and 2014. However, consumer education alone will not solve the issue. “The FCAC’s focus on educating Canadian consumers about payday loan costs is laudable,” says Brian Dijkema, Cardus Program Director of Work and Economics. “But that will make a limited difference since many payday loan users are in desperate situations and financial alternatives simply aren’t available to them.”. The Cardus report Banking on the Margins shows practical measures can help consumers:Reforming the payday loan industry. Colorado passed a law in 2010 that required all loans to be repayable over at least six months, established a new fee structure, and provided consumers the ability to pay back loans early without penalty. With more-affordable payments, borrowers’ risk of falling into a cycle of repeat borrowing is significantly reduced. Municipalities can freely promote and encourage low-cost microfinance alternatives that are often available through community organizations. Governments, community foundations, churches, or charitable organizations could help decrease the risk for financial institutions to make small-dollar loans available by offering funds to backstop loan losses or by providing market-based incentives for new alternatives.While there is no silver bullet for the problems associated with payday loans, there are ways to help consumers. Action and collaboration among governments, banks, credit unions, and community groups would go a long way toward developing new and innovative small-dollar credit products. To arrange an interview with Brian Dijkema, contact Daniel Proussalidis, Director of Communications.-30- About Cardus Cardus is a think tank dedicated to the renewal of North American social architecture. It conducts independent and original research, produces several periodicals, and regularly stages events with Senior Fellows and interested constituents across Canada and the U.S. To learn more, visit: www.cardus.ca and follow us on Twitter @cardusca. MEDIA INQUIRIES Daniel Proussalidis Cardus - Director of Communications 613.241.4500 x.508 dproussalidis@cardus.ca 905-528-8866

HAMILTON, October 11, 2016—As debate rages across Canada over the role of independent schools within the public education system, major think tank Cardus has released its latest national education survey. "The Cardus Education Survey (CES) is the only national survey commenting on the contribution of graduates from religious and independent schools to the public life of the nation," says Dr. Beth Green, program director of Cardus Education. CES 2016 confirmed findings from 2012 that undermine the stereotype that public school graduates are more civically minded than those from independent schools. "Public and separate Catholic school graduates are less likely than evangelical Protestant, Catholic independent, and nonreligious independent school graduates to feel responsible for helping those in need," says Dr. Green. "The data indicate that public school graduates are also less willing than evangelical Protestant and nonreligious independent school graduates to give blood, volunteer, and to donate to charity." Dr. Green adds that the latest survey shows educational diversity and encouraging a role for independent schools within the public education system would benefit Canadian society as a whole. CES 2016 surveyed graduates from 968 public schools and 359 independent schools earlier this year. To arrange an interview with Dr. Beth Green, contact Daniel Proussalidis, Director of Communications. Get the full report at www.cardus.ca/education. Download the media backgrounder at this link.-30- About Cardus Cardus is a think tank dedicated to the renewal of North American social architecture. It conducts independent and original research, produces several periodicals, and regularly stages events with Senior Fellows and interested constituents across Canada and the U.S. To learn more, visit: www.cardus.ca and follow us on Twitter @cardusca. CONTACT INFORMATION Daniel Proussalidis Cardus - Director of Communications 613.241.4500 x.508 dproussalidis@cardus.ca 905-528-8866

FIVE REASONS WHY MARRIAGE IS A PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE OTTAWA, September 29, 2016—Marriage is a private choice in Canada, but a new Cardus report indicates that it also has very public consequences for our universal, taxpayer-funded healthcare system. Marriage is Good for your Health reviews 50 published, empirical medical studies that have established a correlation between marital status and health. In fact, the research indicates that a happy marriage provides five main health benefits to adults, compared to those who are single, co-habiting, divorced, separated, or widowed:A 20 percent increase in cancer survival rates Reduced chances of a heart attack and improved surgical recovery rates Improved mental health Healthier lifestyles and habits Better responses to psychological stressWith cancer, heart disease, and stroke estimated to cost Canadians in excess of $43 billion annually, reversing the declining participation in marriage has the potential to save scarce public healthcare resources. As such, there is a public interest in preventing the failure of marriages and helping couples overcome conflict. And if the medical community took marital status into account in treating patients, they could target extra support to unmarried individuals to improve their health outcomes. Quotes "If marriage was a pill, we would be clamouring for it." —Susan Martinuk, Author - Marriage is Good for your Health "The science is clear that marriage confers tangible health benefits to individuals and that the failure of marriages takes those benefits away. Our public healthcare system can't afford to ignore this reality." —Andrea Mrozek - Cardus Family Program Director To arrange for interviews, contact Daniel Proussalidis, Director of Communications. Get the full report at www.cardus.ca/family and learn about marriage and health here. -30- About Cardus Cardus is a think tank dedicated to the renewal of North American social architecture. It conducts independent and original research, produces several periodicals, and regularly stages events with Senior Fellows and interested constituents across Canada and the U.S. To learn more, visit: www.cardus.ca and follow us on Twitter @cardusca. CONTACT INFORMATION Daniel Proussalidis Cardus - Director of Communications 613.241.4500 x.508 dproussalidis@cardus.ca 905-528-8866

HAMILTON, September 14, 2016—The consortium of Canadian universities that just lobbied Ottawa for $900 million in funding is poised to expel smaller schools unless they accept membership changes that violate human rights law, Convivium magazine reports.In a story posted today on its website, the magazine says Universities Canada is set to vote in October on amendments to its governing bylaws that could lead to the expulsion of faith-based institutions across the country. The proposed new rules were approved by Universities Canada's board of directors in June. Presidents of Canadian post-secondary institutions have until this week to respond.Michael Van Pelt, president of the think tank Cardus that publishes Convivium, said he felt it was important to go public with the story before the decision is made quietly behind closed doors by the country's university presidents and senior administrators."This kind of thing must be a matter of public debate and scrutiny," Van Pelt said. "Some issues it involves are already before the courts, and in one case are almost certainly going to the Supreme Court of Canada. Universities Canada needs to explain why it's so eager to decide them behind closed doors before Canada's highest court even gets to hear the arguments."Van Pelt appeared on the Evan Solomon radio show in Ottawa today to talk about the story. He went public only hours after the Hill Times newspaper reported on Universities Canada's successful two-year lobbying campaign with the previous Conservative government to get a $900 million research pot. Part of the pitch in the lobbying effort, the Hill Times reported, was the pitch that smaller schools would benefit from the funding announced last week.But while that promise was being held out, Convivium says, Universities Canada officials were putting the finishing touches on a non-discrimination clause in their bylaws that would force faith-based schools such as B.C.'s Trinity Western University to scrap their community covenants under which students and staff agree to live according to Christian moral standards. The rule changes would prohibit dismissal of employees who disavow an institution's Christian character.Documents obtained by Convivium make clear that schools wishing to remain part of Universities Canada must abide by the provision whether or not "exemptions would otherwise be permitted under Applicable Human Rights Law.""Universities Canada says it is a voluntary organization and at the same time bills itself as the voice of Canadian universities," Van Pelt said. "Right now, it seems to be acting more like a private club using the pretext of non-discrimination to exclude those whom some members dislike. Anyone who cares about academic freedom and religious freedom has to be concerned."-30-

OTTAWA, September 2, 2016—Labour Day marks the end of summer holidays and a return to school and work. It's a busy time and new poll results show that Canadians feel this. In a recent Nanos Research poll about one in three (30%) of working Canadians said they are dissatisfied with their work-life balance.Eighty-five percent of respondents said a satisfactory work-life balance is very important to them. That said, only 21% of survey respondents believe that we as a society do a very good job of promoting good work-life balance.Canadians cited an array of challenges in finding the right work-life balance:Work pressure to do longer hours and bring more work home (22%) Financial insecurity (19%) Not enough time with family (16%) Commute and travel time to and from work (5%) Health issues (4%) Want to work more (2%) Cannot find good childcare (1%)It's worth noting that 13% of Canadians had no challenges, and 70 percent of Canadians are satisfied or somewhat satisfied with their work-life balance.Solutions are hard to come by. Canadians cited a desire to work less and earn more. About 18% of respondents suggested shorter workdays, more time off or flexible hours. About 12% indicated that lower income tax and lower taxes in general would be helpful. And one in ten respondents suggested an increase in wages or an increase in the mandatory minimum wage. Only a small percentage (5%) thought the expansion of parental leave or more flexible parental leave would help."When we ask about work-life balance, Canadians are obviously feeling a tension between work and home life," says Cardus Senior Researcher Peter Jon Mitchell. "While hard to get at in a poll, there are deeper questions here about how we view work and our vocations as citizens, mothers, fathers and community members. As a result, solutions are also difficult to come by, but worth discussing on the part of private citizens and government."This release is the fifth of five releases as part of the Canada Family Life Project.For the full release, click here.--30--Cardus Family aims to create a larger body of Canadian family research to show the importance of family to building civil society. We aim to bring existing experienced and reliable academic and think-tank voices together in a healthy discussion. And finally, Cardus Family aims to help create a renewed and informed interest in the strength of the Canadian family for our communities and country amongst decision makers, media and the general public.

A study of the economic effects of 10 Toronto-area religious congregations finds they contribute services valued at more than $45 million to their surrounding communities every year. The study, Valuing Toronto's Faith Congregations, was published today by Cardus, an Ontario-based public policy think tank. "This clearly shows that faith-based groups generate substantial and measurable value for local neighbourhoods. And while this initial study looks only at congregations in Toronto, it's reasonable to expect the findings are applicable to congregations across Canada," said Milton Friesen, Senior Fellow and Social Cities Program Director at Cardus. "The value of religious congregations to the wider community is somewhere in the order of four to five times of a congregation's annual operating budget. For example, if you removed a congregation with a $250,000 annual budget, the very conservative estimates of the study suggest you would need about $1.2 million every year to sustain their economic contribution to the community." Valuing Toronto's Faith Congregations examined 10 Toronto-area congregations: Portico (Pentecostal), University Presbyterian Church, Taric Islamic Centre, St. Andrew's United Church, Masjid Islamic Centre, All Saints Parish and Community Centre (Anglican), Flemingdon Park Ministries (Anglican), Woodbine Heights Baptist Church, Metropolitan Community Church, and Kingston Road United Church. The research approach and methodology builds on work done by Dr. Ram Cnaan at the University of Pennsylvania's School of Social Policy in 2010 but adapts the methodology for the Canadian experience. For the Toronto version, researchers examined a matrix of 41 common economic and market measures broken into seven categories: open space, direct spending, education, magnet effect, individual impacts, community development, and social capital and care. Alongside clear direct spending such as operational budgets and capital projects, and the magnet effect which looks at money spent in a community by congregation members or others attending events (services, weddings, funerals) held at the congregation site, the study dug into other specific, less tangible variables such as availability of garden plots, children's play structures, playing fields, parking, nursery schools and day cares, assistance to refugees and new immigrants, treating substance abuse, youth programs, counselling, housing initiatives, social programs, and volunteerism. "We used established economic indicators such as those used in placing a value on a local hockey tournament. We wanted to know what would happen if a local congregation and all the economic and quality of life contributions it represented suddenly disappeared. What we found was that the loss to the community would be considerable," Friesen said. The study concludes that far from being a drain on local municipalities, faith-based congregations provide critical support for existing municipal investments and are an essential part of healthy, functioning communities. "This is not simply an evaluation of the fixed worth of the respective churches; it's the early development of a tool that can identify what may have been previously hidden economic contributions made by local faith communities. This will help city planners and elected officials when it comes to making decisions on land use development and civic expenditures; they can eliminate duplication of services and seek more creative partnerships with faith communities and other institutions to better serve all community residents," Friesen said. This is the first in a series of studies to measure the value provided by faith-based congregations. In Phase 2 of the project, Cardus will expand the study to include 50 faith-based groups across the Greater Toronto Area. Free copies of the report are available: http://www.haloproject.ca --30-- Media Contact: Milton Friesen Cardus Program Director, Social Cities Phone: 905-528-8866 x124 Cell: 289-880-2200 mfriesen@cardus.ca

Cardus Hosts John Rozema Education AwardsJune 9, 2016 BURLINGTON—Cardus President and CEO Michael Van Pelt has announced winners of the first-ever John Rozema Awards for Teacher Excellence at Ontario Independent Christian Schools. Van Pelt and John Rozema, in partnership with the Christian School Foundation, presented the awards June 9 2016 at a reception in the Royal Botanical Gardens at Burlington, Ontario. Seven teachers were celebrated for their contributions to the Christian vision of their schools and to the flourishing of the community. Kasia Konstanty, Eric Brink, Richie VanderWier, Jonathan Devries, and Harry Blyleven, from Hamilton District Christian High School, were presented the group award. Lisa Eelkema, of Laurentian Hills Christian High School, won the elementary teaching award. David Robinson, of Toronto District Christian High School, took home the secondary school award. "The quality of all the nominees, the strength of the candidates on the shortlist, and the superb professionalism of the winners all attest to a very bright future for top quality Christian education," Van Pelt said following the awards. "As a Canadian think tank dedicated to renewing North American social architecture, Cardus is delighted to be a partner in a process that both rewards and showcases the best of what Christian schools can offer students, the education system, and the wider community." Dr. Beth Green, program director for Cardus Education, emphasized the uniqueness of the John Rozema Award in using rigorous data assessment to identify the winners from the teachers nominated by their respective schools. "I'm proud our standards are so exacting," Dr. Green said in her remarks at the awards ceremony. "To lend Cardus's and John Rozema's name to this shortlist is to identify with a group of educators, to point to them and say: 'Imitate these teachers, they are going to keep growing, they are going to keep pursuing education that is excellent and that will support the next generation in Canada to flourish.'" Of the five group winners from Hamilton District Christian High School, principal Nathan Siebenga noted they "exploded the grade 9 timetable to deliver an innovative design block course that worked across curriculum disciplines . . . and stretch beyond what many would consider a 'normal' classroom." To win the Elementary Award, Lisa Elkema made careful use of data and assessment to stimulate her young students to present urban planning ideas to city councillors, partner with adults in the local community in an analysis of dystopian literature, and write editorials critiquing local and global responses to natural disasters. In the Secondary Award category, David Robinson's leadership let his students experience education beyond the classroom walls, and even beyond the hallways and doors of the school. The students built and installed sound proofing panels for the school building, designed Lego robots and ventured into Algonquin Park to deepen their learning experiences. The awards are named for and sponsored by Sarnia business leader John Rozema, esteemed for his commitment to both local and global issues, and for his support of institutions such as Sarnia Christian School. "I'm happy to be associated with recognizing this level of excellence in teaching," John Rozema said. "I'm delighted to join Cardus in celebrating the high calibre work being done in Ontario's Christian schools. -30- Media interviews can be arranged through: Beth Green bgreen@cardus.ca 905-528-8866 x35

Green is the new gold. And the first federal Liberal budget is as much a directive to "grow green" as it is a plan for the country's financial future. If Ottawa's spending is set to skyrocket into a green house gas free stratosphere, it's justified as way to restore middle-class optimism by creating good jobs in clean cities with properly functioning physical infrastructure. Finance Minister Bill Morneau's title for the document is "Growing the Middle Class" (it might just as well have been called "Hope Comes Home") and there is no mistaking its intention to address a time of economic uncertainty for Canada. The energy sector continues to suffer as other resource sectors are also experiencing economic hardship. Morneau's documents note that the 30 to 40 per cent drop in oil and gas investment caused a "negative shock to the economy of $30 billion or more, equivalent to (a drop of) 1.5 per cent of nominal GDP." Alberta, the economic engine of Canada's resource sector, has cooled significantly resulting in 65,000 job losses since October 2014. In its 2016 economic forecast, the Conference Board of Canada looked south to a stronger US economy and the potential for greater trade, in part due to the slumping loonie. Canadians continue to struggle with record household debt, buoyed by low interest rates as concern remains regarding an overvalued housing market. True to their campaign promise, the government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has delivered a budget focused on deficit spending in hopes of stimulating the economy, rather than relying on simply tweaking monetary policies. In contrast to their promised $10 billion in deficit spending during the election campaign, however, the 2016 budget calls for a $29.6 billion deficit this year, 29 billion next year, and $14.3 billion in 2020-21. Overall, the federal government expects to spend $113.2 billion more than it raises during the next five years. The payoff for the first two years, according to the budget documents, will be 1.5 per cent growth in GDP translating into 100,000 jobs "created or maintained" by 2017-18.Ray Pennings | March 22, 2016 Much of that spending will be from delivery on significant promises such as the overhaul of the family benefits system and the new government's plan for infrastructure spending. And there is still plenty left over for making Canada greener than a seasick shamrock seller. Fully 18 pages of the budget itself are dedicated to a "Clean Growth Economy" that comprises everything from investing in clean technology to improving Great Lakes water quality and restoring trust in environmental assessment. Depending on how the pluses and minuses are calculated for programs spread over several budgetary envelopes, total new spending for greening Canada tops $3 billion. For example, the budget proposes that during the next four years, the government will spend $1 billion to support clean technology in primary industries such as forestry, fishing, mining, energy and agriculture. It will allocate another $130 million over five years for initiatives such as the Sustainable Development Technology Canada Tech Fund, and $82.5 million over two years for Natural Resources Canada to support research development and clean energy technologies. Another $62.5 million will be spent over two years to "support the deployment of infrastructure for alternative transportation fuels, including charging infrastructure for electric vehicles…." Atop that, $50 million will be spent over two years to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas sector. The list goes on. At Cardus, our analysis of these budgetary choices considers the government's spending mandate within the larger societal trends. Federal budget decisions are one part of a complex interplay between government and social institutions that build and enhance our social architecture. It's fair game to raise concern over what seems, at first blush, an exorbitant increase in dollars spent over money raised. But prudence also requires analysis of how such an approach affects the institutions that Cardus argues are critical to a healthy and vital Canadian society. Infrastructure spending and the city The federal government has committed $120 billion over 10 years for infrastructure spending, which the budget calls "an historic" investment to meet Canadian needs. The plan, to be rolled out in two phases, will seek to improve the lot of Canadians through everything from reducing urban traffic jams to making trade corridors more efficient to help our exporters. Phase 1 calls for $11.9 billion over five years, beginning immediately. The government pledges it will find new money to spend:$3.4 billion over three years for public transit improvements $5 billion over five years for wastewater and green infrastructure $3.4 billion over five years for such "social infrastructure" as affordable housing, child care centres and cultural/recreational facilitiesAnother $12 billion in existing spending will continue. Phase 2 of the plan is left largely undefined and stretches out over eight years of a "broader and more ambitious" infrastructure plan that will "go hand in hand with the transition to a low-carbon economy" by improving the transportation networks in Canadian cities. Infrastructure spending impacts provinces and cities where the fruit of such commitments will be seen. There is little debate that Canada's infrastructure requires revitalization. The point of contention concerns the wisdom of running substantial deficits in order to pay for upgrades and new projects. And while the budget prescribes a revised formula concerning who pays how much for infrastructure, a larger opportunity has not been seized. Clearly the billions in infrastructure spending are as much about economic stimulus as about renewing infrastructure. In order to maximize the public benefit, physical infrastructure development must consider how it relates to social infrastructure—the relational patterns that give rise to the social fabric of our neighbourhoods and communities. Improved physical infrastructure can enhance our quality of life the most when its relationship to social capital and community institutions are clearly understood. At its worst, poorly envisioned physical infrastructure can perpetuate or increase social isolation and push community institutions to the margins. As program director of Cardus Social Cities Milton Friesen writes, "Changing a policy here and there or embarking on short-term patchwork interventions will be inadequate where the social fabric is getting thin." Advanced data collection can improve our ability to see and understand the patterns of individual and collective relationships that comprise our social infrastructure.Physical infrastructure renewal must consider our social infrastructures. While the budget does tip its hat to the need for "evidence-based" governance, there is a scarcity of detail in its pages about how the federal, provincial and municipal governments will effectively steward the environmental relationship between the physical and the social. Translating infrastructure spending into opportunity The federal government predicts that increased infrastructure funding will translate into new jobs. Not all qualified Canadians have access to public works, however. Provincial labour codes allow only some parties to bid on public projects. If the federal government wishes to invest in a manner that is transparent, fair, and open to all qualified Canadians, it should leverage its influence to encourage provinces to embrace open tendering for public works. Studies show closed tendering increases project cost from 10 per cent to as much as 40 per cent. Open tendering is both economically prudent and fair. Cardus Work and Economic program director Brian Dijkema writes, "Open tendering will provide the federal government with a tool to ensure that municipalities are accountable for making those federal funds stretch to the furthest extent possible. It contributes to an economic culture driven by competition among multiple labour pools chosen by workers—exactly the type of culture which leads to innovations which will increase value." For Canadians who have reached the end of their working lives, the government has fulfilled its promise to restore the retirement age to 65 years old. The previous government, citing cost cutting, had raised it to 67 starting in 2023. The Liberal government is also pledging $2.6 million a year to help retirement age couples who must live apart for reasons beyond their control, and are therefore at increased risk of living in poverty. Curiously, though, a budget built on ensuring middle-class comfort for as many Canadians as possible, the budget adds only a maximum of $947 a year to the amount for the vulnerable seniors reliant almost exclusively on Old Age Security and the Guaranteed Income Supplement. While the increase will require more than $670 million a year from the federal treasury, according to the budget, it will "improve the financial security of 900,000 single seniors across Canada" by a paltry $78 a month. Similarly, the new government's first budget falls short of the $775 million pledged for labour market development at a time when many Canadians, particularly in the energy producing provinces, have been thrown out of work. The 2016 budget proposes another $125 million for its Labour Market Development Agreements with the provinces and territories, and an additional $50 million for the Canada Job Fund Agreements. Certainly, those amounts are not trifles but are they enough to help in regions where the need to retrain to sustain reasonable living standards can be a matter of both individual and community survival? At the same time, the budget does promise greater vigilance to ensure tax fairness by closing what it calls loopholes for business owners that are not available to ordinary taxpayers. It will prevent business owners from using complex partnership and corporate structures to multiply eligibility for up to $500,000 in small business deductions. These and other measures are justifiable in the name of basic fairness and equity in the tax system, without which a health, sustainable social architecture is impossible. But, inexplicably, it defers promised further reductions in the small business income tax rate and cancels a capital gains exemption where cash proceeds for sale of corporate shares or real estate are donated to a registered charity within 30 days. Surely reduced taxes for small business are consistent with the government's laudable goal of rejuvenating Canada's middle class economy? And, as Cardus has argued consistently over the last number of years, disregard for the contribution of the charitable sector to Canada's well-being is short-sighted at best, and potentially extremely harmful it he long term. Family benefits and parental leave The federal government is creating a new Canada Child Benefit that will combine the existing Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB), the Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB), and the National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS) into a single, non-taxable benefit that is geared to income. To help pay for the $23 billion re-designed benefit, the federal government will cancel family taxation—also known as income splitting—for the 2016 and subsequent tax years. The new benefit is attractive for many families because it is streamlined, non-taxable and puts money back in the pockets of parents. Cancelling income splitting is unfortunate, however, as the policy decreased the tax burden on many families while acknowledging the reality that families function as an economic unit. Overall, the Canada Child Benefit should result in increased funds for most families. The government's claim in the budget is that nine out of 10 families will receive more in child benefits than under the current system. The budget also expresses a "commitment" to making compassionate care and parental leave benefits more flexible to better accommodate family and work circumstances. At the moment, though, the commitment is what one finance department official described as a "work in progress" and has no 2016 budget dollars attached. Again, this seems a case of curious neglect from a social architecture point of view. As Cardus Family program director Andrea Mrozek has written, making parental leave more flexible: "Sensitizes us to the reality that once a baby arrives, care does not stop at one year… When parental leave is over, there are few special accommodations for the needs of working parents. We should be angling for recognition of the power and importance of parenting by acknowledging the responsibilities parents have well past one year." Policy-makers should be reminded that parenting children, while difficult to put a monetary value on, enriches communities now and in the future. A robust family policy can enhance the parenting enterprise by maximizing choices for parents. Supporting natural caregivers at the end of life Likewise, the landscape in end of life care in Canada is undergoing a revolution. The new government will introduce legislation setting the framework for doctor-hastened death. At the same time, Canada is witnessing an increasing awareness of the significance of palliative care. The government had an opportunity to recognize the supporting role of natural caregivers in the end of life care continuum. It seems to have been otherwise occupied, which is not to its credit. Budgets that attempt to do as much as this one still cannot do everything, and that caveat must temper criticism of inaction on compassionate care. Still, it remains a pressing issue that warranted far more prompt attention. Currently the Compassionate Care Benefit is administered through Employment Insurance and provides up to 26 weeks of leave when a family member is gravely ill or at significant risk of dying. Equipping natural caregivers is good for patients and can reduce stress on acute care resources. When considering end-of-life care, public policy must consider the full range of social institutions connecting the range of options available to patients and their caregivers. Education If the 2016 financial plan is about green dreams for happy middle class Canadians in smartly repaired cities and towns, it's also about education from cradle to grave. While the budget almost petulantly cancels a tax credit offered by the former Conservative government for children's fitness and arts programs, it proposes instead up to $2 billion over three years for a new Post-Secondary Institutions Strategic Investment Fund. It also boosts by $95 million a year the amounts available to research granting councils such as:$30 million for the Canadian Institutes of Health Research $30 million for the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council $16 million for the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council $19 million for the Research Support Fund that pays post-secondary institutions to undertake federally-sponsored researchAt the individual student level, the government is pledging a package of assistance programs that will cost $1.53 billion in 2016-17 and $329 million every year after that. The Canada Student Grant will increase to $3,000 from $2,000 for students from low-income families, up to $1,200 for middle-income families and up to $1,800 for part-time students. The budget says such measures will help about 247,000 low-income families, 100,000 middle-income students, and 16,000 part-time students complete their education. There is also a promise to create, during the next three years, a total of 105,000 additional jobs for young Canadians through the Canada Summer Jobs program. Beyond a better-educated citizenry and work force, though, the budget's goal is to restore what the government says is a lost sense of optimism among Canadians. As Finance Minister Moreau put it in his budget speech: "We act for our children and our children's children. We act so that they may inherit a more prosperous and more hopeful Canada." Of course, every action has an equal and opposite reaction, sometimes referred to as its price tag. In this case, the five-year projected cost is $113.2 billion that Canada does not have in its federal treasury. That is significantly more than Canadians were told during the election campaign that they would be on the hook for if the Liberals were elected. Still, voters took the risk of turning out the government they knew for a new government promising a brighter and more optimistic vision. Whether Canadians are left feeling green around the gills when the multi-billion dollar bills come due remains to be seen. Notes 1 While this contradicts Liberal campaign literature, a Liberal online calculator shows benefits up to approximately the $200,000 level of income. Employment and Social Development Canada did not respond to numerous requests for clarity. Retrieved online at https://www.liberal.ca/realchange/canada-child-benefit-plan/?shownew=12 A Liberal online calculator shows a family earning $200,000 with two children under six receiving $825 annually. In another example, a family earning $200,000 with four children under six, is allocated $9200 annually, tax-free. Three children under six at the same income level receive $2800. 3 "But even the new family assistance policies have shortcomings. A recent study indicates that 72 percent of Quebec families are worse off under the new family assistance program than under the earlier pro-natal one, despite government promises that 95 percent of families would benefit from the new policies." Retrieved from http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2001/QuebecsAlternativetoPronatalism.aspx4 Ibid.

Poking our opponents in the eye has never seemed to us a very productive posture. Cardus just turned 15 years old, which means that for a full tenth of Canada’s formal history, we’ve been speaking into its public square. Our donors and supporters will recognize the troika of adjectives to which we’ve always aspired: to be a public, credible, Christian voice. But the world of open discourse and rigorous debate is shrinking, especially for those holding minority opinions. As Cardus takes stock and plans for 2020 and beyond, we’ve identified that how we behave has been as important as who we are and what we say. Our acceptance is due in large part to our ability to accept. Over the years we’ve consciously cultivated hospitality—engaging honourably with those who disagree with us, even if wedges and labels would make for useful fundraising. It was a different world when Cardus was born in the fall of 2000. For Canada’s Liberal government, under the leadership of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, environmental issues were hardly a blip on the radar. The growth of the oil sands and an energy economy looked very promising. The right was divided politically, and it seemed the Liberals would be in power for a very long time as Canada’s natural governing party. There was vigorous debate about society’s understanding of marriage. And, pre-9/11, only a curtain separated most airplane cabins from the cockpits. It was a different time. Michael, who was about to become Cardus’s first full-time employee, was working as the president of an Ontario chamber of commerce. Ray was immersed in the labour relations world. We had been friends since childhood, and our conversations at the turn of the century were beginning to reflect our frustration with the worlds of business and politics. Some of the voices, which were purporting to reflect our convictions for public life, seemed a bit off tune.Rejecting the Culture War There was too much thinking that was individualistic and celebrity-based, and not enough that was institutionally focused. We too had our heroes, but we realized that in the long-run, institutions are more influential than individuals. And so over years of conversations with hundreds of collaborators, we began to hatch the vision that still animates us: a think tank, representing the go-to reliable voice of 2,000 years of Christian social thought on the issues of the day. At the time, think tanks weren’t very common in Canada when compared to the United States, but no matter—an institution that was public, credible, and Christian had captured our imaginations. We set out (back then as “Work Research Foundation”) to be the articulate voice for faith that might infuse and inform public policy and public life. But from day one we sought a unique niche: we consciously decided that the “culture war” approach, in which supporters would rally around divisive, hot-button social issues, was not for us. Of course we had our opinions on social issues. But we neither wielded them as wedges nor hid them to get along or gain influence. We wanted to serve the public good, and it seemed to us that embodying Christian service in our approach, as well as our positions, was both more prudent and more faithful. Early on we decided that engagement and partnership with those who disagreed with us was an important metric of success. Fast forward to today. Canada is changing. Although a country with a distinct Judeo-Christian heritage, Canada has embraced a policy of multiculturalism, where people of many ethnic and faith traditions live alongside each other. It may not be the Canada our grandparents imagined, but we are learning what a respectful pluralism looks like. And the legacy of our Christian tradition provides us with meaningful tools to continue shaping the public space in such an environment. We describe Cardus as a Canadian think tank operating in the whole North American space because where Canada goes socially, the United States typically follows after a decade or two. Ours is a time in which articulations of orthodox faith are deemed marginal or even anathema to polite public conversation. This month our media are making a big deal of 9% or 10% of the Canadian population watching a Blue Jays baseball game. It may come as a surprise to some, but 11% of Canadians attended a place of worship last week, most of them orthodox Christian (6% Catholic and 5% Protestant) and other devout followers including Jews, Muslims, and Sikhs. None of these are second-class citizens, and none should need to hide their identity as faithful believers in order to be meaningful contributors to our shared public life. Cardus’s task is to promote and protect the space to make that a reality. This hospitality is hardly a straight-forward task. There remain some who nostalgically look back to times when the Judeo-Christian heritage of our nation was the unspoken framework within which public discussion could take place. Their agenda is one of “returning” to foundational principles that they hold dear, and so they cannot help but see those perceived to be undermining this (which today, they’d admit, would be the majority of the powerful) as enemies. And, yes, those in positions of leadership today typically view themselves as tolerant secularist champions. Protection of conscience is taking a back seat to enforced tolerance. Marching in a gay pride parade is becoming every bit as much a requirement for mainstream public square acceptance as church membership was a generation ago. So accepting a culture war paradigm and being forced to pick sides seems like a natural response. Cardus has taken a different tack. It’s not about us and what we believe, or you and what you believe. We all believe in something, whether we admit it or not. And so Cardus’s convictions have always been oriented toward encouraging the public good through protecting our shared public spaces and playing host to free and open discussions where competing visions and beliefs can move forward together.Not Simply “Passing By” We are convinced that the insights that emerge from 2,000 years of Christian social thought contribute to our life together. And our research areas (work and economics, education, social cities, health, and law) are designed to prove it, using standards common to think tanks across North America. We are rooted in two beliefs: that this world is not what it was meant to be, and that the cross of Jesus Christ is the central defining event of human history. But from that starting point, we seek to contribute to our life together for the common good and also to benefit from those who do not share our foundational convictions. We understand that Sikhs, Muslims, Jews, and secularists (only to mention the most prominent, not to exclude any others) may not share our why, but none-the-less may appreciate our what and how. Our argument is one for a principled structural pluralism. We are working towards a healthy place for people to live out of their most deeply held convictions civilly and with respect for their neighbours. And yes, we mean neighbours—not strangers simply passing by and indifferent to each other’s needs, but neighbours concerned about each other and fellow citizens committed to providing each other the opportunity to flourish. Our commitment to pluralism should not be confused with relativism. We do not believe all foundational principles or faith commitment are equally valid. We come to our conviction as an expression of our own understanding of the world and how it was created; of brokenness and how the world has been disrupted; of the reality and presence of evil; of the hope that is provided by redemption; of a God who did not abandon creation but offered a way of salvation; and of a future in which the original purposes of creation will be restored. This is a Christian confession and by its very nature, lives alongside other confessions in contradiction. Yet we respect (and even fight for) the space for other articulations of faith to live alongside each other in this pluralistic present, not as the ideal ends, but as a meaningful way for human flourishing in the present even as we look forward to a better future that is promised. And so we proceed. Our employees, fellows, board, and donors have transformed a small dream into an institutional expression of the Christian faith in public life that can contribute to a conversation about Canadian pluralism, with lessons that will extend south of the 49th and well beyond. Our efforts are imperfect, but we press on for a better public life.