SoVote

Jun/8/23 7:12:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this is the most frustrating thing about these bills. We try to divide them. We try to pick a side. At the end of the day, it is families and kids who are going to be harmed the most by this. When we create a bill like this and do not listen to the industry and do not look after the people who actually need the service, there is a problem. That is what I am discussing. That was what my whole speech was about. There are huge holes in this bill and hopefully the Senate can fix it. Right now, we are debating this. Maybe he will have a change of heart when he goes home tonight. Maybe there will be some changes that come up, but right now, this is where it is at.

138 words

Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie (Joliette, BQ)

Jun/8/23 7:13:39 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague raised a number of important issues. I would like to hear his thoughts on some of those issues. He talked about the labour shortage. Is it not true that low-cost child care that enables more women to remain in the workforce does more to reduce the labour shortage than expensive child care that encourages women to stay at home with their children? When a parent stays at home and does not work, there may be other benefits, but not economic benefits. Does subsidized child care not ultimately reduce the labour shortage?

97 words

Mr. Dan Mazier

Jun/8/23 7:14:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the problem with the labour shortage is this bill does not address it. There is such a great need; 3,000 jobs are needed in Manitoba alone. The need is so great and the Liberals did not even address that in here. There are things called “child care deserts” and I did not get to the stats on them. For every province, the stats are broken down here. According to the Canadian Centre of Policy Alternatives, 48% of children live in child care deserts. By province, Saskatchewan tops the list at 92%. Newfoundland, a very rural province, is at 79%. In Manitoba, 76% live in a child care desert. B.C. is at 64%. Then there are Alberta, Ontario. Quebec is at 11%. Funny, it works because you have been there the longest.

137 words

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP)

Jun/8/23 7:15:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I was much younger when I got elected and I have listened, for many years, to Conservatives attacking child care. Now I am an old, white guy and I am pretty good at identifying old, white guys, so whenever it comes to child care, Conservatives get all their old, white guys up there to say why we do not need it, why this is a failure. It has been an ongoing gong show. The other thing the Conservatives say is it is rural against urban. I live in a rural area and it is not the 1950s. It is the same attitude they brought to the fact that we are dealing with a climate catastrophe and not a single Conservative showed up for the forest fire debate. Why are the Conservatives putting up all their rural old, white guys, when we are dealing with what young mothers and young families need? Mothers and women have a right to access. The Conservatives have no plan. They have never had a plan and they would do everything they can to—

181 words

The Deputy Speaker

Jun/8/23 7:16:53 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa.

10 words

Mr. Dan Mazier

Jun/8/23 7:16:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I do not know what to say to that. That is just a pathetic question. It is not even just a pathetic statement; it is untrue. I did not do anything to set up anybody against anything. The Liberals do forget about rural. We have a rural lens and the member knows full well that we have special concerns. Rural Canada needs to be addressed separately. For the NDP member to sit there and say there is nothing wrong with this bill, I would say my whole speech was about holes. Why did that member not sit down with the committee and actually address the holes that were in there so it would be a better bill?

119 words

Mr. Brendan Hanley (Yukon, Lib.)

Jun/8/23 7:17:37 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-35

Mr. Speaker, for too long families in Canada have struggled to find high-quality, affordable and inclusive early learning and child care. Bill C-35 is a really important step to changing that once and for all. I am pleased to speak to this bill and to give a bit of a northern flavour. Bill C-35 will replace that unnecessary struggle with access to affordable, high-quality and inclusive early learning and child care. For families, access to child care is not a luxury, but an absolute necessity. It will give children, whoever they are, wherever they live across the country, a chance at the best start in life. It will give parents the peace of mind that comes with knowing their children are in safe, skilled and caring hands. It will give thousands more parents the opportunity to join the workforce, pursue their professional ambitions and contribute to the Canadian economy. I have a special interest, ever since being the chief medical officer of health in Yukon over a dozen years ago, where I got to learn the value to not only public health, but also the economy of subsidized early learning and child care. Therefore, this is not hyperbole, but an area where we are already seeing results. Of course, we already have the overwhelming evidence from Quebec, which has long established its own affordable child care system. Experts agree. TD Bank has been saying since 2012 that this should be a top spending priority of a federal government. The Ontario Chamber of Commerce talked about the disproportionate effect on women and participation in the labour force as a result of the pandemic and the necessity to invest in child care. We know now that, because of the early learning and child care agreements the Government of Canada has signed with all provinces and territories, parents have already seen child care fees decrease and child care spaces increase. Also, we have made crucial investments to support our early childhood educators, who are the cornerstone of a high-quality early learning and child care workforce. Every single one of those agreements includes commitments that will support provinces and territories in making improvements to benefits and wages, and access to ongoing, leading-edge training for early childhood educators. As much as time permits, I would like to focus on the territories and how the early learning and child care agreements are benefiting families in Nunavut, the Northwest Territories and Yukon. I know my colleague from Nunavut is here to participate as well in this debate. While certainly there are many indigenous communities across the north with a pressing need for child care, the Government of Canada is working in a coordinated manner, through jointly managed partnerships with first nations, indigenous communities and the Métis Nation, to expand quality and culturally based service delivery based on indigenous priorities for indigenous families regardless of where they live. This is a separate track, funded through a dedicated indigenous early learning and child care commitment, and listeners should know this is outside of the scope of my remarks today. Nunavut really deserves high praise for becoming the first jurisdiction to achieve $10-a-day licensed child care under the Canada-wide early learning and child care system. The territory achieved this milestone 15 months ahead of its own action plan schedule and, more remarkably, three years ahead of the March 2026 federal goal for Canada-wide implementation of $10-a-day early learning and child care. It means Nunavut families began accessing $10-a-day child care as of December last year, and joined Yukon and Quebec in achieving that goal. In dollar terms, it means families in the territory could save up to $55 per day for each child in care. For a territory experiencing a significant rise in the cost of living, as we know how real that is, this saving provides tangible benefits. In January last year, the Government of Nunavut and the Government of Canada signed an agreement that secured $66 million over five years to support early learning and child care in Nunavut. This investment is in addition to the nearly $13 million we announced in August 2021. That agreement include $2.8 million to support the early childhood workforce. Nunavut will create 238 new, licensed, not-for-profit spaces by the end of March 2026, and is already moving toward reaching that target. We may not be surprised if Nunavut gets there well ahead of 2026. Yukon achieved the target of an average $10-a-day fee in the spring of 2021 through its own universal child care program. I am very proud of the progress Yukon made early and ahead of this federal program. Since then, with the help of federal investment, the territory has been making great strides in creating spaces and developing its educator workforce. Since the signing of the Canada-wide agreement, Yukon has created over 200 new spaces to support parents' access to high-quality care. Federal investments of $1,200,000 have also supported the enhancement of early childhood educators' wages in Yukon, resulting in the highest median wage for this sector in Canada. I can see how much of a difference that makes when I talk to childhood educators and day care operators. That helps in recruitment and it helps in quality, and the kids and the families are happy. Funding of $800,000 provided by the Government of Yukon and the Government of Canada supports the early learning and child care benefits program, which offers comprehensive benefits to early childhood educators working in licensed early learning and child care programs in Yukon. With the help of Yukon University, the territory is increasing access to quality education for early childhood educators, who may enrol in the university's professional diploma pathway program, which is offering accelerated training. Just last weekend, I was there for the university convocation to watch some of those graduates at convocation proudly walk across the stage. With the help of $120,000 in federal funding, Yukon University has also embarked on an early childhood education program for educators working in rural areas. This focus on educators is a recognition that they are the heart of any successful early childhood education program. In the Northwest Territories, the Government of Canada and the Government of Northwest Territories announced almost a year ago that child care fees for families with children up to five years of age in licensed child care would be reduced on average by 50%, and the reduction was retroactive to January 1, 2022. Since its implementation, all eligible licensed child care programs across the territory are participating in this reduction initiative. It was one of the benefits of the federal-territorial agreement signed in December 2021. The Government of Northwest Territories has a well-defined 10-year early learning and child care strategy, and the goal is the total transformation of its early learning and child care system. As Northwest Territories Minister of Education, Culture and Employment R.J. Simpson said when he launched the strategy document, the Northwest Territories is moving toward “a robust, mature and sustainable system.” Minister Simpson uses the word “sustainable”, and that is at the core of Bill C-35. We have all the early learning and child care pieces in place, and this proposed legislation really is the glue that will bind those pieces. In passing the legislation, we will be promising the best possible start in life to future generations of children in Canada. This will be no idle promise. We know we can do it, because we have the proof. In the years to come, when families are enjoying the benefits of Canada's fully functioning early learning and child care system, I believe we will look back on the agreements we have made and the legislation before us today and say, “What a great system. How did it take us so long to get this?” Therefore, I urge my colleagues to give quick passage to Bill C-35.

1350 words

Mr. Tom Kmiec (Calgary Shepard, CPC)

Jun/8/23 7:26:10 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, at the committee there were amendments moved by the Conservative members of Parliament to try to improve the bill and make it better. In my riding, there are many shift workers and people who work off-hours who will not be covered by the agreement that would be entrenched into legislation through this bill. I wonder if the member could explain why the Liberal members on that committee refused to even consider reasonable amendments by the Conservative side to improve this bill.

84 words

Mr. Brendan Hanley

Jun/8/23 7:26:43 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would point out that dozens of amendments were in fact passed and that there was vigorous discussion, I know, at committee to achieve the best possible legislation and agreement toward that. I also know that really what we are looking at is a framework, and it is up to the implementation and agreements with the provinces and territories to make it work.

65 words

Territories

Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie (Joliette, BQ)

Jun/8/23 7:27:11 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague, the member for Yukon, which is an amazing place. I would like to hear what he thinks about the implementation of this bill, which will support subsidized child care. The member spoke at length about the rural nature of his riding. How can we ensure that this program serves both the city of Whitehorse and the more remote communities equally?

67 words

Mr. Brendan Hanley

Jun/8/23 7:27:47 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his comments and his question. Rural-urban equity is very important. I know that is a factor the Yukon government is considering in the implementation of this program. There are always challenges when it comes to recruitment in rural areas. Nevertheless, in general, it works because the needs have been accurately identified so as to ensure appropriate implementation.

65 words

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Jun/8/23 7:28:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have some concerns, and I think my colleague from the Bloc just addressed some them. It is the access and the workers that I am most concerned about. What would the member suggest should be done for northern and rural communities where access to child care staff is not available, where child care workers are not available and where we have seen that there is a lack of access to quality child care?

76 words

Mr. Brendan Hanley

Jun/8/23 7:29:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we also have to recognize that we are in an era when there are labour shortages in general all around the country, in all sectors. That is one of the challenges we are seeing with implementation. At the same time, we have set the framework for high-quality education. The other aspect I would briefly point out is that in Yukon, early childhood educators are well paid, and that is a real benefit for both recruitment and retention.

80 words

Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.)

Jun/8/23 7:29:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have four kids who have benefited from the Quebec day care, what was called in those days the $7-a-day day care program. Some studies in Quebec have shown that this program has allowed 70,000 mothers to go back to the workplace and that this has contributed to an increase in the Quebec GDP of more than $5 billion. Yes, everyone heard me right: $5 billion. I wonder if the member would like to comment on that.

82 words

Mr. Brendan Hanley

Jun/8/23 7:30:37 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I could probably comment for an hour on that, but I think a couple of key aspects are that we knew Quebec had set the standard years ago and that this was really the standard to aim for with nationwide early learning and child care. It also brings out the point of what a fantastic investment quality early learning and child care is. It is not just a public health investment, but an economic investment.

77 words

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay (South Surrey—White Rock, CPC)

Jun/8/23 7:31:13 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-35

Mr. Speaker, I will note at the outset that I am sorry to disappoint the member for Timmins—James Bay, but I am not an old white guy. I am a Conservative, but I am not an old white guy. I would also like to point out that the NDP and Liberals have once again used the draconian tool of closure to shut down debate on the bill we are debating tonight, Bill C-35. It is unfortunate that they lack the courage to have an unfettered debate on child care. They fear that parents will choose the Conservative approach, which emphasizes choice and freedom. They must fear that their one-size-fits-all, Ottawa-knows-best approach will be rejected once again. I spoke on this bill at second reading in January before it went to the human resources committee for study. At that time I laid out four key principles that I thought the committee should use to strengthen the bill. First, the legislation should find solutions that help parents in the modern economy, not just those working in nine-to-five industries; second, the bill should empower parents to make whatever child care choices best suit their needs; third, the legislation should refrain from dictating to provincial governments about how to deliver their child care services; and fourth, the committee should make recommendations to give families more financial freedom to support any child care choice they make. The government could have started by cancelling the carbon tax and reining in inflationary spending that is driving high interest rates, with another hike yesterday's, and inflation. With that, I supported sending the bill to committee, where Conservatives brought forward several amendments to enshrine some of these concepts into legislation, but the NDP and the Liberals, as they usually do, used their coalition to shut down common-sense Conservative proposals. Those two parties ignored the call of parents who have to hope for a day care space to open up on a lengthy wait-list. They silenced shift workers, who need child care beyond the hours of operation of regulated day cares. They turned a blind eye to parents who prefer to rely on family members for child care, including many new Canadians. They forgot that indigenous parents often prefer alternatives to state-run child care institutions, given their family and historic experiences with residential schools. They ignored parents in rural and remote communities, where regulated child care is often not available. It is true that the NDP-Liberal child care plan has helped some parents, but it is also true that the plan is leaving far too many people behind. Thankfully, there is one party in this House that represents the common sense of the common people. Only the Conservative Party supports a child care plan that is parent-driven and child-focused. The Conservative vision flows from our belief in small government and big citizens. We respect the right of parents to make child care decisions that meet their individual needs. That begins by ensuring families have the financial flexibility they need to create the life they dream of for themselves and for their children. To do that, we have to make life more affordable with lower taxes, lower interest rates and more powerful paycheques. I was part of the previous Conservative government that promoted income splitting for families and implemented a child care tax credit and the universal child care benefit, and we did so with a balanced budget. Do members remember those? The benefit was universal and supported the needs of every child in Canada. Unfortunately, the vision of the NDP-Liberal government fails to meet that standard. Its legislation reflects the core belief of left-wing politicians that government is the best solution to societal problems. That is why this bill gives more power to the government to decide who gets child care support and who will provide those services. That is why the government is encroaching on provincial jurisdiction, forcing provinces to give the federal government more control. For example, the child care agreement with B.C. will direct $3.2 billion into the child care system with one key condition, that those dollars only be allocated to run regulated day cares. I expected a more inclusive and modern child care approach from the Prime Minister, because it is 2023. His Deputy Prime Minister promised better, when she introduced this child care plan in her budget. She said: This is women’s liberation. It will mean more women no longer need to choose between motherhood and a career. This is feminist economic policy in action. This is so typical of the Liberal government: big promises, no follow-through. Instead, the Liberal government implemented a program straight out of the 1970s, when women were generally limited to typical nine-to-five office jobs. Listen to the words of Melissa, an Ontario mother of three, an entrepreneur, who is at her wits' end trying to find day care: “I have had my son on a wait-list for three different day care spots since before he was born, so I can return to work, but I have had no success.... My husband and I both work shifts, and I have a goal of starting up my own foot care business. I would like to have full-time child care so that I can pursue that goal, but at this point, I am looking for any care that I can get. For now, I will have to work around my husband's shifts, which is fine but it makes our budget much tighter with the constantly increasing cost of living.” If Canada really had a feminist economic policy, then striving entrepreneurs like Melissa would be able to find child care that meets their needs. Speaking as a woman who raised a family amid a career in law and politics, I can say that this program is not modern feminist economic policy. I do not know where the Liberals have been for the past 50 years, while women have been breaking the glass ceiling of every industry and every realm of life. Women are leaders in the military, policing, medicine, aerospace, engineering, mining and resource extraction. They are on the cutting edge of research and development. They are bolstering our food supply chains as agricultural producers. They are manufacturing the cars we drive and designing the transit systems we rely on. Many women are taking up jobs in the skilled trades, helping to construct the homes and highways that we need to build up our great country. Women are thriving in industries that were once male-dominated, and they need flexible child care options that meet their needs. Instead, the Liberals and the NDP implemented recycled Liberal election promises from the 1980s, which fail women working in today's economy. To make matters worse, the program fails to live up to the standard set by the courts. In 2010, as an administrative law judge with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, I presided over the Johnstone case. Fiona Johnstone worked shifts as a border services officer. Her child care preference was to rely on family, only available three days a week. She sought accommodation from her employer, requesting that she work full time with extended shifts. Her employer refused. After hearing testimony from child care experts, I made a precedent-setting decision that found the CBSA discriminated against Fiona Johnstone by failing to accommodate her child care choices and needs. My decision, later upheld by the Federal Court of Appeal, protected child care choice as a right for working parents on the ground of family status in the Canadian Human Rights Act. A modern national child care program should reflect the court ruling by supporting the child care choices of all Canadian parents. This a half-hearted effort. Most of it is inconsequential. The one thing it does is establish an advisory council. Conservatives sought to strengthen this section by including private child care service providers on the council. We also tried to include mandatory reporting on labour shortages in the child care sector to Parliament. Both of these common-sense amendments were rejected by the coalition partners. I look forward to a day when a Conservative government will better align child care strategy in a way that respects the choices of all Canadian parents.

1401 words

Mr. Chad Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, Lib.)

Jun/8/23 7:41:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I heard the term “Conservative approach.” The Conservative approach has been to threaten to rip up these agreements, much like Prime Minister Harper did in 2006, when we had a deal in place with the provinces. I would remind the member opposite that Conservative premiers across the country have signed these agreements with the federal government. Why does she not see the merit in these agreements like her Conservative cousins in all provinces across the country?

80 words

Harper
Merit

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

Jun/8/23 7:41:42 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think my friend across the way is a little confused. He says “some Conservatives say this and some Conservatives say that” and then he says what the Conservative approach is. I will tell the member what the Conservative approach is. It is freedom. It is choice. It is respecting parents in their child care choices and giving them the flexibility to meet their very real needs. The modern working woman is not a nine-to-five clerical worker all the time. They are entrepreneurs. They are professionals. They are shift workers. They are people doing all kinds of work in all kinds of industries, and they need to be respected.

115 words

Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie (Joliette, BQ)

Jun/8/23 7:42:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, one element of my hon. colleague's speech caught my attention and that is the issue of jurisdiction. We know that one compromise of a federation is equally sovereign levels of government, each with its own areas of jurisdiction. However, what we have seen in recent years, with increasing frequency, is Ottawa interfering in the provinces' areas of jurisdiction. Social services and child care are not Ottawa's responsibility, but that of the provinces. By taking half the taxes, Ottawa takes those resources and then chooses to use them to interfere in the provinces' areas of jurisdiction by attacking their sovereignty, which is supposed to be on the same footing as Ottawa's sovereignty. What does my hon. colleague think?

123 words

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

Jun/8/23 7:43:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question. Conservatives respect provincial jurisdiction. Our country, quite rightly, is based on a confederation that has both provincial and federal jurisdiction, sometimes overlapping a bit. We reject the idea that the federal government should impose national programs and put conditions on the money it sends when it is not in its jurisdiction to do so. However, we do believe the federal government has a role to support provinces and support their choices, just like we believe in the freedom of parents to choose their child care for the needs that they have, particularly those who also want to use family members, which is very common, particularly with new Canadians. We need to give parents choice when it comes to raising their own children.

135 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 209