Conservative posturing not a child-care plan
Prince George Citizen
24 Apr 2006
Opinion -- By Paul Willcocks
EXCERPT
VICTORIA -- Stephen Harper is busily talking tough about
the Conservatives' plan to send $1,200 per preschooler out
to Canadians.
The money's going to be in the budget, Harper vows. If the
opposition votes against it, we'll have another election.
It's Harper's right to spend your money this way. He campaigned
on the promise.
But the opposition parties have no intention of waging a
fight to stop the payments. What politician in his right mind
would take a stand aimed at keeping parents from getting money?
Once Harper is through posturing, he needs to recognize
that it's ridiculous to call the payments a child-care plan…
It's a weird notion. The idea that the government will take
money from a low-income senior in Duncan and hand it to a
millionaire parent in West Van makes no public policy sense.
Still, for many parents the money will make a useful difference.
A single parent with two small children on welfare in B.C.
receives up to $555 for rent, and another $573 a month for
all other expenses. It's tough life, and children suffer.
The extra $1,200 a year will make a real difference. (Income
Assistance Minister Claude Richmond has promised the province
won't claw back the money.)
But it's not a child-care plan.
It's not enough money to come close to allowing parents to
pay for child care, which typically would be about $550 per
month. And it will not stimulate entrepreneurs or non-profits
to provide more spaces.
The Harper government says it will eventually unveil a plan
to create child-care spaces. Companies will be offered $20,000
per space in tax credits. The government says it will offer
a total of $250 million in credits, enough to pay for 125,000
spaces.
But Ontario and Quebec have tried similar tax schemes, without
success.
Companies don't want the headaches of becoming responsible
for a child-care centre, even one run by a contractor….
Nothing Harper has talked about replaces the $5-billion federal-provincial
child-care agreement negotiated by the Martin government…
Child care is a real problem.
Parents can't find it, and many can't afford it even if they
do. If they are fortunate, a friendly neighbour or relative
can provide care. Otherwise the lack of child care becomes
a serious barrier to employment.
Children who would benefit the most from quality care are
often from families least able to afford it. They lose out
on a chance for a fair start at life.
And the problems are yet another drag on productivity.
People who could be working aren't, and companies suffer
as employees book off to handle the latest child-care crisis.
Sending $1,200 cheques out to parents isn't going to take
us closer to solving the real problem. It was politically
effective, and is highly popular among parents campaigning
for their right to subsidies even if they stay home to care
for their own children.
But it's not going lead to better care, or more spaces,
or real help with what is a serious crisis for many families…
It would be a wise decision.
Footnote: The child-care debate has focused on costs. What's
also needed is a serious consideration of benefits. What's
gained if we can offer a three-year-old a safe, educational
and stimulating social environment, especially a child who
would otherwise start school at a significant disadvantage?
For many children the cost would be an investment with lasting
benefits.
|