42% of Canadians between the age of 16 and 65 are functionally illiterate, so says a report issued by Statistics Canada and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in early May.

That’s the same percentage as was reported 9 years earlier.

Literacy is scored by levels. Level 1 means a person is unable to read. Level 2 means the person can only deal with simple printed material and has difficulty dealing with new tasks at work or in the community. Levels 3 and 4, deal with higher measures of literacy proficiency.

The absence of literacy is everyone’s problem because it has a cost. Canadians with the lowest level of literacy skills have an unemployment rate of 26%.

People who score at Levels 1 and 2 are twice as likely to be unemployed for six or more months a year and twice as likely to draw Employment Insurance benefits. Employment Insurance is a tax-funded program that most full time working people contribute to on a weekly basis.

Nearly 1.4 million Canadian children under the age of 15, live in low income homes. 34% of children in low income homes do not complete their high school education. Sixty percent of Canadians on social assistance have not completed high school. People who score at Levels 1 and 2 in literacy are more than twice as likely to be collecting social assistance. Social assistance programs are tax-funded by working people.

It’s estimated that 45% of new jobs that will be created in Canada this decade will require at least 16 years of education. The OECD says that nearly three quarters of Canadian companies surveyed for its report have a significant problem with functional literacy in some part of their organization. They also indicate there is a strong and positive relationship between levels of education achieved and work skills. Adults with higher levels of skill are more employable than adults with low levels of skill.

The level of engagement in literacy activities at home and at work has a significant impact on literacy scores. The literacy scores of people between 16 and 25 who have low-educated parents are lower than people who have higher educated parents.

People classified as being among the healthiest in the Country have higher average literacy rates while those classified as least healthy have the lowest average literacy proficiencies. People, who have difficulty reading, spend up to four times as much time in hospitals as those who don’t. Less healthy people use the health system more often and that costs Canadian tax-payers money.

78% of Canada’s prison population has no high school diploma while 80 % of offenders between 18 and 24 have less than Grade 10 and 65% have less than Grade 8. Imagine the cost savings if literacy improvements could reduce that population by 15 or 20%.

The cost of supporting the under-employed and those on social assistance, the cost of supporting our prison population, the cost of extended healthcare services, the cost of workplace accidents and the cost of lost business opportunities can all be attributed in whole or in part to literacy or the absence thereof. That affects all of us financially.

The PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) 2000 study by 32 nation members of the OECD indicated that New Brunswick has the lowest rate of literacy in Canada. 60% of English speaking adults and 68% of French speaking adults are functionally illiterate in this Province as compared to the average 42% of Canadians between the ages of 15 and 65.

There’s more. The PISA 2000 study also showed differences in reading skills between urban and rural communities with urban communities significantly outperforming rural communities. I’m told the problem is so serious in rural New Brunswick that major employers are already considering expansions outside the Province because they cannot find enough people with the skills and literacy to staff local expansions.

Our Premier wants the National Child Care and Early Learning Program extended without regulation to ‘stay at home parents’ and ‘grand-parents’ living in New Brunswick’s rural communities. The federal government insists those funds will be used only for regulated public care that meets national standards of quality, accessibility and training.

If the OECD studies are correct, the Premier’s approach to early learning might be analogous to funding the blind to lead the blind and could exacerbate the literacy problem in this Province.

So what’s the solution?

At first glance, one could suggest that better schooling is the answer but our educators have been aware of the literacy problem for decades and nothing has changed and or the circumstance has not improved. The real culprit seems to be cultural and familial.

Generations of New Brunswickers have fished, farmed and cut wood without need to read.

Generations of New Brunswickers have served as construction labourers and hospitality workers without need to read. Whole families have survived for generations without need for literacy. Children are brought up in home environments where parents can’t read and role models are macho male non-readers. To break the illiteracy cycle, we have to change the cultural environment that encourages it.

To do that, we need to create an incentive that will attract kids to literacy like nails to a magnet. Mandatory testing might help. Literacy could be a prerequisite for both employment and the collection of Employment Insurance.

High level literacy could be a precondition for high school and university graduation. Adult education and re-training is essential. Literacy funding will be critical. We might even require penalties for illiteracy like the deprivation of driver’s licenses for cars, trucks, boats and recreational vehicles.

Everybody in New Brunswick has a stake in the outcome. It’s time we did something about it.

More later!