44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 31, 2023 02:00PM
- May/31/23 11:28:44 p.m.
- Watch
Order. Members may have an opportunity to ask another question, so I would ask them to wait until such time.
I will ask the hon. member to finish his thought, so we can get another question in.
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the universal child care benefit was so popular and so successful that the Liberals renamed it, claimed it was their idea and ran on it in every election that they have been remotely successful in.
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, that could not be further from the truth, because the reality is that the universal child care benefit that the Conservatives brought in gave cheques to millionaires. He talks about a one-size-fits-all approach. Nothing more clearly defines that than the universal child care benefit that literally gave the exact same amount of money to absolutely everybody, even those making half a million dollars a year. Of course, a Conservative would think that is a great program, because they are giving—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/23 11:29:42 p.m.
- Watch
The ones who talked about the heckling are doing the heckling on this side now. I would ask members to please hold off. I know the hon. member is able to answer that question.
The hon. parliamentary secretary.
38 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, of course a Conservative would get up and say that Stephen Harper's plan was by far the best, because it was, as they clap right now, the plan that literally sent cheques to millionaires.
Congratulations to the member opposite. He is absolutely right. That is a program that Stephen Harper would love, and I can definitely understand why the Conservative Party of Canada would get behind that program.
71 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, this member is from the party that gave millions to Loblaws to buy new refrigerators; the government loves sending money to the rich and famous.
The Conservative government introduced a universal child care benefit that was taxable, which meant that those who had higher incomes had to pay higher levels of tax on the money they got. We can quibble about the amounts or the proportions—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/23 11:30:58 p.m.
- Watch
Order. We still have debate going back and forth, and it is not the time for that. I only recognized one individual, not two or three.
26 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I must say that I am immensely enjoying this. I wonder if there is unanimous consent to extend my questions and comments for another five minutes.
28 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Why give it in the first place?
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/23 11:31:25 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. parliamentary secretary knows better. He should be setting an example in the House.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/23 11:31:33 p.m.
- Watch
Does the hon. member have unanimous consent?
The hon. parliamentary secretary has a point of order.
16 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the rules of the House do not allow, after six o'clock, I believe, for you to accept unanimous consent motions.
23 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/23 11:31:49 p.m.
- Watch
That is right, so the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan has 12 seconds.
16 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the members opposite may want to quibble about the proportions, but the point is that in 2015, when the Liberals formed government, their policy was to rename and adjust the proportions on a universal direct-to-parents subsidy. They took our policy because it was so popular.
49 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join the debate this evening on Bill C-35, the Canada early learning and child care act. I believe this issue is non-partisan because it concerns the most important element of our country: its children. I want to begin with a quick level set just so that we are all working from the same fact base.
This bill sets out the vision for a Canada-wide early learning and child care system and its commitment to ongoing collaborations with the provinces and indigenous peoples. The bill also delineates principles where public and not-for-profit entities are exclusively called out for a focus that guides the ongoing federal investments established by the National Advisory Council on Early Learning and Child Care, as announced by members of the council on November 24, 2022. Additionally, the bill notes a realization of the right to benefit from child care services, as recognized in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and it contributes to the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Canadian parents have long hoped for the availability of affordable, safe and stable child care. To that effect, the government brought in a national child care program that proposed to cut day care fees by an average of 50% by the end of 2022 and down to an average of $10 per day by 2026. Earlier this year, the minister stated, per the National Post, that Bill C-35 would “enshrine the principles that provinces and territories agreed to in funding agreements with Ottawa, including the pledge to cut parent fees and create more spaces.”
The government had promised to introduce the legislation by the end of 2022 in its supply and confidence agreement with the New Democratic Party. While I wholeheartedly agree that affordable quality child care is critical, it becomes moot if people cannot access it or it simply does not exist. I am concerned that Bill C-35 does not address accessibility, and I am concerned that the government is embarking on a promise that it will not be able to deliver on. Moreover, I am concerned that $10-a-day child care does little to address the serious, real child care labour shortages and the lack of child care spaces.
I suggest that Bill C-35 would be good for families who already have a child care space, but it would not help the thousands of families on child care wait-lists or the operators who do not have the staff or the infrastructure to offer more spaces. Additionally, the bill would increase the demand for child care but would not solve the problem of frontline burnout, staff shortages or access to more child care spaces. Simply put, there are not enough qualified staff to keep all existing child care centres running at full capacity, let alone operating new spaces. The Canadian Union of Public Employees has reported that “in many communities there is only one child care space available for every three children who need it, and waitlists are long.” That is a very sobering statistic.
Bill C-35 is also discriminatory. The majority of child care operators are women, yet the language and intent of this bill would prevent any growth in opportunities for privately run female child care operators. Also, how does the government expect more women to be able to go to work when there are no child care spots available and with wait-lists being years long?
The Financial Accountability Office of Ontario projects that by 2026, there will be 602,000 children under six whose families will want $10-a-day child care. However, the province will only be able to accommodate 375,000, leaving 227,000 children, or almost 40%, without access. That is two in five families that will be unable to access a spot. Government estimates also suggest that by 2026, there could be a shortage of 8,500 early childhood workers. This is another staggering statistic.
In British Columbia, 27% of child care centres turn away children due to lack of staff. One child care director, who oversees 13 child care programs with 350 spaces, stated, “In the past two years, we've had to close programs temporarily, whether it's for a day or two, or shorten hours for the week...in order to meet the licensing regulations”.
What then are worthy policy options to consider? I have three that I hope the government will seriously think about.
First, we must enable families of varying incomes to benefit. Based on the guiding principles of the child care framework, the government should support families that need child care most, based on their income, which in many cases is outlined within the individual provincial agreements. As well, the government should not be subsidizing child care of wealthy families that can already afford it.
Second, we should address the so-called “Matthew effect”. This is the increasing of the public provision that actually ends up advantaging higher-income families rather than lower-income groups. Even in the Quebec model, despite the gains in access, quality levels remain low when compared to the rest of Canada, with lower-income children in lower, rather than higher, quality settings.
Third, we should resolve the labour shortage. There are not enough qualified staff to keep all existing child care centres running at full capacity, let alone operate new spaces. I think that is a point that is important to reiterate. The reality is that we cannot create new child care spaces without staff. Not enough students enter the ECE programs across Canada to support any growth, and it remains difficult to retain staff without the financial incentive to work in the field. The reality is that in British Columbia in 2022, 45% of employers reported losing more staff than they could hire, and 27% reported turning away children because of a lack of staff.
The lack of child care spaces across our country is considerable. In Ontario, the percentage of zero to 12-year-olds for whom full-day or part-time day care space was available was 25%. For children zero to five years, it was 21.3%. There are also so-called “child care deserts”. This is where there is a lack of, or inequitable distribution of, child care spaces or an FSA, or postal code region, with a coverage rate of less than one third of the child population. According to a Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives report that was published in May 2023, 48% of children live in child care deserts, and the percentage of children living in child care deserts in Ontario is a considerable 53%.
What are the financial implications?
The 2021 budget pledged $30 billion over five years on a national child care system with an additional $9.2 billion annually coming after that period. The bill before us is about children, the future of our country, and we owe them a duty to ensure that we are getting the best value possible for them when it comes to our hard-earned taxpayer dollars.
In terms of stakeholder considerations, the major comments coming from child care providers suggest that Bill C-35, while a step in the right direction, is however too generic. The bill does not go into specifics. Additionally the private sector is cut out of the equation. There are also significant major labour shortages, with the majority of those who are working being overworked and understaffed. Bill C-35 would be good for families that already have a space but not for workers. The bill also would do nothing to address the long wait-lists for care across the country.
There are ways that Bill C-35 can be improved. In my province, the Association of Day Care Operators of Ontario suggested the following four amendments. First was to make the bill more inclusive by deleting the reference to public and not-for-profit child care providers. Second was to consider an addition that provides some guidance to advisory council members about avoiding potential conflicts of interest or the appearance of impropriety arising from their involvement on the council. Third was that advisory council members may also require guidance about avoiding any paid consulting or volunteer work related to political parties or candidates during their term on the council. Finally, fourth was to add additional specificity surrounding the composition of the advisory council with respect to regional representation as well as representation by female entrepreneurs and those involved in the direct delivery of licensed child care services.
In conclusion, I hope that Canadian families needing reliable, safe and affordable child care are able to access a national system that provides a viable program for generations to come.
1477 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I listened to the member and his critique of the bill.
I am wondering whether he is supportive of the bill or whether he will be voting against it. We know the Conservatives are very critical of it, but they will end up voting for it at the end of the day because they kind of have to and they know that. I am just curious whether this member would follow suit and still vote for it, despite his critique, or whether he will actually vote against the bill.
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is interesting that the focus of the question is not on how we can make the bill better and on the very many constructive recommendations we have heard this evening from Conservatives, NDP members and many individuals who spoke, but instead focuses on what is, unfortunately, so partisan.
This is about an issue that is about our future, which is children. I wish it were not a partisan line of attack that the member is trying to take here.
82 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, we have heard so much in the House this evening, and the member brought up so many great points. I know he could probably share some stories, and he did, about his own riding.
I have four reports here from the last few weeks about people ringing the bells, alarm bells, on this disaster. This is one from Matthew Lau, and it says, “Government-funded media details governed-funded child-care disaster”. He goes on to say, “Canada’s child care sector continues to go poorly. This should not surprise anyone familiar with Canada’s government-run health-care system (which is a shambles), Canada’s governmental management of agricultural output (which deliberately creates scarcity) or the track record of government economic control in general."
My question to the member would be, how can he trust the Liberals to manage child care when they cannot manage housing prices, affordability and public safety?
160 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my Conservative colleague for her question. She does raise valid points.
I want to use this opportunity to actually discuss the previous point of the member who had spoken before me, with regard to the council. I think one of the best indications of one's future actions is how they have conducted themselves in the past. I think about the housing council, which was immediately dismissed, along with recommendations by the housing minister, when it was no longer politically convenient and in alignment with what the government wanted.
That is a point of concern. I am worried about whether or not the Liberal government would truly listen to experts and their advice, and I think that is something many Canadians are worried about.
130 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member mentioned, several times in his speech, the critical shortage of staff as one of the reasons people cannot access child care in Canada.
When I talk to child care advocates in my riding and elsewhere, what comes up again and again is that staff need to be properly paid, with decent wages. Many of these staff workers are well-trained early childhood educators, yet they are not paid wages that reflect that and they are not allowed time for professional development.
Would the member not say that this is something that should be part of this agreement: that staff must be properly paid in order to retain them and grow the industry?
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
