Why is the B.C. government silent on child care?
Nelson Daily News
10 May 2006
Editorial – By George Heyman, BCGEU President

Just hours after the Harper Conservatives tabled their first federal budget on May 2 scrapping signed provincial-federal child care agreements, over 150 parents and their children, grandparents, early childhood educators, child care operators, advocates and concerned citizens jammed a public forum in Victoria. They clogged the aisles and spilled out into the hallway, craning to hear someone-anyone-answer their biggest question: Why has the BC government remained silent on this critical issue?

Unfortunately, there was no one in attendance who could explain the provincial government's inaction, despite an Ipsos-Reid poll last month that showed two-thirds of British Columbians disapprove of scrapping the federal-provincial child care agreement.

Earlier in the day, B.C. Finance Minister Carole Taylor publicly applauded the federal budget, calling it "very positive" despite the elimination of a $5 billion, five-year commitment to a national child care program that would have provided almost $200 million a year for additional child care spaces.

Other provincial governments have spoken out against the scrapping of the national child care plan, including Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Quebec. And these squeaky wheels have managed to get some oil, squeezing additional federal child care monies for themselves, but not B.C.

This is no time for our government to be silent.

Child care in B.C. has reached critical mass. There are simply not enough affordable child care spaces to meet the needs of families. In the past three years, the B.C. government has cut $40 million from child care funding and reduced subsidies for low-income families. The cuts have forced child care centres to close or reduce spaces, lay off early childhood educators, and raise parent fees by as much as 30 per cent.

Early childhood educators have seen their wages and benefits cut, some by as much as 50 per cent-in many cases, voluntarily, simply to keep their centres from closing.

The $1,200 a year taxable family allowance (but only for children under six) -- the federal government's answer to a national child care system -- doesn't come close to covering the real cost of child care, nor does it create child care spaces. After taxes, the $100 a month per child amounts to significantly less. Try finding quality child care for less than some people spend each month at Starbucks. It just doesn't exist.

Just ask Jennie, mom of five-year-old Jake. Never in a million years did Jennie ever think she'd wake up one day a single parent without a nickel of child support from her son's father, no family support, and in desperate need of child care. She works three jobs, including overnight shifts, weekends and days. One job pays $10.50 an hour. After deducting $10 an hour for overnight child care, she's earning 50 cents an hour. That's $4 for an eight-hour shift. And it gets worse: the provincial government recently cut her child care subsidy by two-thirds because she apparently makes too much money.

Believe it or not, Jennie is one of the lucky ones. She's found a caregiver for her son. But it's a far cry from the licensed child care centre that Jake is used to, where he was greeted by hugs and affirmation, where he developed empathy and was known as the "ambassador" for helping other children, where he learned to build a volcano, and read. And where he was safe, and happy.

But it's a place Jake can't go to anymore even though he loved it and misses it terribly.

Even if they could afford it, Jake has lost his space in the child care centre. He'll be in kindergarten long before he makes it through the long waitlist to get another space. The truth is, when it comes to licensed child care, it's a dog-eat-dog world out there. Savvy parents know to put their names on waitlists at more than one child care centre as soon as they become pregnant.

Funding child care is elementary. Study after study has shown that children who receive quality, licensed early childhood education do better in school, have fewer behavioral problems, and are less likely to end up in poverty and more likely to succeed as adults.

The Vancouver Board of Trade supports publicly funded child care for its economic benefits, citing studies that show a 2 to 1 economic payback for investment in children aged 0-6 years.

Fortunately for Jennie, little Jake spent most of his pre-school years in licensed child care and will reap the benefits when he starts kindergarten next year and for years to come. Says Jennie: "All that nurturing, support, and non-punitive learning prepares a child for school. From there, they can just fly."

So why is the BC government sitting silently by while our country's dreams of a national child care system are dashed with the stroke of a pen?
Premier Campbell was unequivocal in his criticism of Harper Conservatives for reneging on the Kelowna Accord on First Nations and I commend him for it. Speaking in the legislature, the premier called on the federal government to "respect the letter, spirit and content of the undertaking of 14 of Canada's 14 first ministers only five short months ago", and vowed his government will "stand up strongly" to ensure the federal government's honors its commitments.

Where are the strong words in support of the signed federal-provincial agreement on child care?

It's a question we should all be asking government MLAs and MPs. Right now. Because Jake and other children depend on the answer.

George Heyman is president of the B.C. Government and Service Employees' Union (BCGEU) representing 55,000 workers across the province, including many early childhood educators.