Canadian child-care debate
6
The child care debate in Canada has been a hot topic since the last federal election, and I believe it will continue to be in the years to come.
The Conservative Party’s Universal Child Care Plan (UCCP) includes the Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB) which provides $100 per month for children under the age of six. This allows parents to choose whether they would like to stay home with their children, put them in a child care space (i.e. daycare) or bank the funds accessible to them for their child’s future. For example, the money could be contributed to an education fund or even a retirement fund for the child later in life.
According to Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, “The UCCB is designed to help Canadian families, as they try to balance work and family life, by supporting their child care choices through direct financial support.”
Unfortunately, the Liberal Party hasn’t provided much information with respect to their proposed plan. What is almost certain though is that they would spend millions of dollars on child care spaces so parents can send their children to daycare each day.
My Perspective
Personally, I consider the Conservative’s plan to be on the right track. Allowing parents to decide how they would like their children to be taken care of is a wise move. Families want choices when it comes to their children’s care. Whether it is having their children taken care of at a daycare facility or staying home with family looking after them, they would at least have a choice as to the care their children would receive.
In an article written for the National Post, Tasha Kheiriddin states
“Research by the Vanier Institute on the Family, corroborated by work done at the Institute for Marriage and Family, reveals that institutional daycare ranks last on the list of parents’ preferred child- care options. Care by a parent or relative ranks first. So why not empower parents to make that choice?”
I completely agree with Ms. Kheiriddin’s statement; why not empower parents to make that choice?
What do you think?
I completely agree with your view, Stephen. Many parents believe that they are the primary educators of the children, and not the government. It makes good sense for the government to promote options that allow parents to choose what works best for them in terms of childcare. Thanks for your piece!
Do you have children? or are your children raised, not in today’s economy. I would love to see a politician who has young children, then maybe they would really care about children and families. I am currently taking Early Childhood Education and have children of my own, Not all parents can afford to stay at home with their children, and where does that leave women in the workforce, this is not the past you know, we women are gonna get pissed very soon……
I also agree, Stephen and Salvador.
I would add that fairness in the distribution of tax dollars is another important consideration that the UCCP better addresses.
Parents who choose informal care giving (such as relying on grandparents for childcare) or who choose to have one person stay at home should not be penalized financially because they do not “qualify” for subsidized childcare and related tax credits.
Good post!
I realize this is an older post, but I would like to hear if anyone has any counter points to Grace’s comments, as they address questions I had myself. Personaly I have no problem paying higher taxes to support a government inititive that would lower the presure placed on lower income families and aid to socialize and educate children in a safe environment. I’m middle class with no children, I know that an enhanced government childcare program isn’t aimed at me and I’m fine with that because it benifits Canadian who need it.
Hello Mallory:
To respond to you (and Grace, as you requested), I would say the following:
Many parents choose to work… to support the lifestyles they have chosen. They may not view it as such, but when people say “we can’t afford to have one parent at home” but instead have two expensive cars, and live in a huge house, and take one or two vacations a year, etc., they have chosen a specific lifestyle that requires a certain amount of funding.
Of course, that is not everyone and that also doesn’t address the issue of single parenthood.
There are many men and women who find themselves in diificult situations because of the breakdown in marriages. But if we are honest with ourselves, not every divorce is the result of abuse and many people divorce out of selfishness (on the part of either or both parties). Again, we are back to choices.
What is needed with funding is flexibility to help more parents stay at home / be at home for more time with their children. Children thrive in the presence of their parents.
To respond to Grace’s first question: I have five young children. My wife is a stay-at-home mom.
Wishing you all a most blessed Easter!
Jason
marjan