Bandaids not long-term solution
The Grand Forks Gazette
30 Aug 2006
Opinion -- Kyra Hoggan

EXCERPT

... voters rarely want to hear about new legislation chapter and verse, instead wanting a snapshot that gives them the general idea without cluttering the view with a preponderance of detail.

A good politician will carefully craft that snapshot, choosing a strategic angle, including the most appealing parts of the landscape and, if they're lucky, cropping out the less pleasant aspects of their agenda.

And so it is, I believe, the case with the federal childcare initiative.

Sending out $100 to every family for each child under the age of makes for a pretty picture - everyone can use the extra cash, right? And for families who have chosen to have a stay-at-home parent or whose grandparents provide childcare, only fair that they get their share the childcare kitty instead of paying into a childcare system they'll never use, right? But wait a minute. Before you click that camera shutter, program your lens to factor in a society that virtually demands dual incomes subsistence wages, the disintegration of familial networks and resources, the growing costs of housing and education. Tell the lens about the pivotal nature of a child's first five years of life, and describe how the quality of childcare is directly linked to the wages of care providers.

Now peer through that zoom lens and take a longer view, get a longterm perspective on the spectre not having a universal, fully-funded childcare system.

What I think you'll see is those very people who, ostensibly, getting fair treatment by being sent $100 a month are actually getting ripped off to an unprecedented extent. If an ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure, how much cure is $100 of prevention worth? Billions, I'll bet. Because guess who'll be paying into the medical system for obesity- and smoking and substance abuse-related illness, into sick leave for employees, the majority of which are stress-related.

Who'll be paying for the added burden to an already overwhelmed penal system, into traffic safety messages to stem drinking and driving, into literacy programs and nutrition education for adults? The $100 doesn't seem like so much anymore, does it? Because to have well-grounded, functioning society members who contribute, rather than detract from, society, one must take best advantage of those first five years - whether it's your kids using the childcare system or not.The connection between the above-listed social expenses and early child development has been clearly established - that snapshot is fine-grained and in tight focus. And so is the picture that, dare we look at it, tell us we're all going to pay, one way or another.

Why not use our money to start out right, rather than to later fix problems that didn't have to crop up at all? Why not, despite political term limits and today's economic demands, look for long-term solutions instead of right-now bandaids? Why don't we do as we originally planned - create a system that benefits all children, giving them all the early childhood development assistance they need to grow strong and productive, creating a powerful Canada and a true North, strong and free? ...