:
That's all the time we have.
I do want to thank you gentlemen for being here today and answering some of our questions. We will release you now.
I have a bit of committee business to take care of. It should take us a few minutes before we break and then hear from our next panel of witnesses.
If you'd like to pull out the 2007 edition of the report on the Centennial Flame Research Award, I could give those of you who weren't on our committee before a bit of background information.
The amount for the 2007 Centennial Flame Research Award was $4,500 last year. We're suggesting that we keep it at $4,500 this year. Although you see that we have some money in the bank, remember that this money comes from the flame in front of the Parliament buildings. You'll notice there was not a whole lot of money collected from the flame this year, part of the reason being that it was closed for renovations for a large part of the winter. As a matter of fact, from October until April the fountain was closed.
As opposed to raising the amount, which we have done in the past and did in fact do last year, the recommendation of the clerk—which I concur with—is that we leave the amount at $4,500. I'm not suggesting we lower it, because it has to be worthwhile in terms of people taking the time out of their days. And we've always had a hard time attracting a lot of people who are interested.
You have before you the three or four motions we want to recommend. Everything is in the package. The first is that we set the amount at $4,500. The second is that the press release be submitted. The third is that the clerk and the chair be authorized to take any means, including members' householders, to give the award some publicity. It's a great opportunity for people on this committee to advertise through their householders and ten percenters. And the fourth motion is that report be adopted.
My feeling is that we're certainly welcome to discuss this all we want. I don't think there's a big need for discussion. This is more of an FYI, as something we've done in the past. It's pretty much standard procedure going forward, but we do need the authorization of the committee to proceed in this fashion. So if that is all right, I don't necessarily see the need for a lot of discussion.
May I just suggest that we adopt the motions before you?
(Motions agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Good morning, Chair, and members.
Thank you for the opportunity to present to you. I wish to express the regrets of Minister Gillan to the table. He had hoped to join you, but I think the Premier may be announcing something in the next two or three days, and he doesn't want to leave home. That's why I'm here.
The Government of Prince Edward Island has worked closely with provincial stakeholders in the early childhood sector to develop a plan for early child development that meets the needs of our children. We have also shown leadership in work with colleagues from other jurisdictions. In fact, Minister Gillan, the Minister of Social Services and Seniors, has been the co-chair of the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Ministers Responsible for Early Learning and Child Care, which created a national vision to guide early child development.
The 2000 First Ministers' Agreement on Early Child Development and the 2003 Multilateral Agreement on Early Learning and Child Care were precursors to this work, and established an important focus in our province on the early years. With funding from these agreements, Prince Edward Island has made significant progress in the support of healthy child development and specific early learning and child care needs.
For example, our province has implemented a universal newborn hearing screening program; financed a province-wide best start home visiting program in collaboration with family resource centres; improved programming for children with special needs in our licensed child care centres; implemented a community-based, integrated kindergarten program; developed curriculum resources, program delivery, and parental engagement supports for all licensed early childhood programs; and enhanced the child care subsidy program so that more low- and middle-income parents can access licensed early learning and child care programs.
The province of Prince Edward Island has unique needs and strengths. We understand the long-lasting impact of quality early childhood experiences for our children. In February, Premier Binns announced details of a long-term plan for investment in regulated child care programs in our province.
Our framework is built on working with our local early learning sector to address the principles of quality, universality, accessibility, and accountability. Our government was successful in advancing the vision for early learning and addressing these principles in concert with our provincial partners. I believe this is the essence of what this bill is trying to accomplish.
However, has a number of features that are problematic for provincial and territorial governments. I would like to highlight those impacts for Prince Edward Island.
P.E.I. has approximately 8,500 children aged five and under, and a high rate of labour force participation among mothers of these children. At 80%, it's the highest in the country. P.E.I. is in an enviable position. We have licensed spaces available for 46% of our children from infancy to age five. Canada has spaces for less than a quarter of our children.
There are three points that I would like to highlight when discussing the impact of : overlay with provincial jurisdiction, exclusion of private operators, and impact on small jurisdictions.
One, is prescriptive regarding funds provided for programs that are in an area of provincial jurisdiction. A national vision should support our collective effort to enhance the awareness and understanding of quality early experiences, while enabling jurisdictions to respond and evolve based on the specific local needs of children and families. Governments cannot, in good conscience, do anything to further restrict the child care sector. We would be in effect crippling an already fragile system by imposing further funding restrictions such as those described in Bill C-303.
In P.E.I. we are seeing a high rate of turnover in staff and operators, and our centres are operating below capacity, at 67%. Like all provinces, we are committed to supporting and strengthening our early learning sector and need federal support in doing that, but we all have unique features that need to be understood.
Prince Edward Island has just implemented a new direct funding grant program to centres that will be based on adhering to quality principles. We have also enhanced our child care subsidy program and doubled the number of infant spaces available in our province.
Our provincial challenge is to complement planned provincial initiatives for children and families in P.E.I. by encouraging flexibility, supporting new and existing partnerships, and being creative within the existing system. This needs to happen in concert with our local communities and be reflected in our provincial child care act and regulations, policies, and practices.
Second, Bill would limit funding to early learning and child care programs administered by the provincial government or operated on a not-for-profit basis only. Of our early childhood centres in P.E.I., 46% are non-profit and 54% are private.
The majority of our full-day centres--in fact, 74%--which also offer our community-based kindergarten program in a seamless day setting, are also private. This is an enviable component of our community-based program for parents who work. Sixty percent of our licensed early childhood centres that have children with special needs, and 90% of the centres that provide infant care, are private centres.
As you see, private operators on Prince Edward Island provide invaluable services to parents and communities in areas that are not well compensated and that require extensive investment of human and material resources. Private and non-profit early childhood centres are equally distributed across urban and rural communities. Both auspices are viewed as integral components of our communities.
Some communities would feel a significant impact, and our sector would be divided, if funding were allocated according to the criteria of Bill . Prince Edward Island prefers to use the term “private” rather than “for profit” because these centres are not businesses that carry healthy profit margins, if any.
Third, Bill establishes a mechanism for the transfer of early learning and child care funding from the federal government to provinces. Funding levels based on a typically per capita formula do not allow smaller provinces to fully implement systems that realize the obligations outlined in Bill .
In conclusion, we are committed to working with our partners to strengthen an early learning and child care system in P.E.I. that is based on broad availability, accessibility, universality, and the capability of measuring and monitoring quality.
A national vision by the federal government is indeed supported and encouraged. However, the unique circumstances of jurisdictions need to be recognized, and adequate funding should align with provincial planning, priorities, and realities. However, as outlined in Bill , the criteria and conditions required to be met for the transfer of funds to provinces and territories are onerous, inflexible, and without consideration of existing provincial plans. They would result in an erosion of our system, not a strengthening of our child care sector.
Thank you.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Good morning. My name is Judy Streatch. I have the privilege of being Nova Scotia's Minister of Community Services.
I am joined today by a representative from our department to help provide Nova Scotia's view regarding Bill . l would like to introduce Virginia O'Connell, director of early childhood development services. Mrs. O'Connell manages the licensing, monitoring, policy, and standards for all licensed child care centres in the province. She has worked in the field of early childhood development for more than 25 years.
Personally, as a mother of four and a teacher for 15 years, I am passionate about the direction, progress, and diversity of early learning and child care in Nova Scotia. Let me tell you a little about the progress we've been making.
Nova Scotia offers programs that support families and foster healthy child development between the ages of newborn and 12 years, in accordance with the Nova Scotia Day Care Act and regulations.
In recognition of Nova Scotia's commitment to quality child care, my government created a 10-year early learning and child care plan for Nova Scotia last May. In developing the plan we took into account consultation sessions and heard from more than 2,600 Nova Scotians regarding their specific issues and priorities, including from commercial and non-profit licensed child care centres and parents. They told us to increase salaries, decrease the cost of care for all families, increase funding for child care, assist in stabilizing the workforce, provide more accessible child care for children with special needs, and increase spaces in licensed child care centres and family home programs.
Folks, l'm happy to say that we're doing all of this. The early learning and child care plan provides a foundation for licensed child care in Nova Scotia that will promote a more inclusive, accessible, and equitable system. To achieve this, we are focusing on the needs of Nova Scotian families by investing more than $137 million in our plan. The recent federal budget provides an additional $7 million per year to support the creation of child care spaces in our province, and it complements our made-in-Nova Scotia child care plan to further help our families access quality care for their children.
We will provide the opportunity, through capital funding, for the creation of at least 1,000 child care spaces. We are creating 550 more portable, subsidized spaces for low-income families. Funding for children with special needs will double.
We recently announced the child care operating grant funding. It provides funding per occupied space for children and infants, and is a key component of the plan to help stabilize the system and facilitate enhanced recruitment and retention of staff while allowing centres to consider future expansion.
We have also made available $1 million in repair and renovation funding across the province to make energy-efficient and accessibility improvements to centres.
We have embarked on our long-term vision for quality and sustainable child care in our province. As you can see, Nova Scotia has a plan, and our plan is well into the development of a child and youth strategy that will address the needs of children, youth, and their families by improving the accessibility of a range of supports and services. Our vision is this: that all Nova Scotia children enjoy a good start in life and are nurtured and supported by caring families and communities.
Bill presents a serious intrusion by the Parliament of Canada into an area of provincial responsibility. Although Bill does not compel the federal government to transfer funds to provinces and territories for the purpose of providing early learning and child care programs, it does establish criteria and conditions that provinces and territories would be required to meet related to the expenditure of these transfers.
The provision of early learning and child care is a provincial responsibility. Bill defines the means by which child care is delivered within each province and territory.
The bill refers to specific criteria. Nova Scotia's plan is built on a set of principles that includes each of the bill's criteria. In fact, these principles have their basis in the word CHILD--comprehensive, high-quality, integration, longevity, and developed on the basis of evidence and accountability.
As you can see, Nova Scotia is not standing still. We are already on the path of implementing a range of services and programs that reflect the diverse needs of Nova Scotian families.
, as federal legislation, would be used as a policy instrument to implement a one-size-fits-all approach to child care. Folks, one size does not fit all in Nova Scotia.
In order to access the funding that would need to accompany the bill, each province or territory would have to abide by all components of the bill's criteria and conditions. This approach would strictly limit the design and delivery of our current and future programs. This approach would require that all funded programs be regulated by provincial governments, and that all new programs or services be delivered by a non-profit agency or service. This would stifle provinces and territories in the creation of new and innovative programs that do not meet these restrictive requirements.
In order to meet the requirements of the bill, taxpayers' dollars would have to be invested in additional administrative and infrastructure costs rather than enabling the development and implementation of programs to best meet the needs of the young children and families of our province. Its administrative and reporting requirements would hamper Nova Scotia's current efficiencies and effectiveness with respect to the initiatives we already have under way and that already envelop the requirements of .
Nova Scotia is moving forward. We are doing so in respect of our families, our children, our early childhood sector, and our diverse cultural and geographic environments. We are currently amending our day care regulations and creating new family home regulations, heightening the standard for care and early education.
We also know that some services needed to support families, such as family resource, parent education, and early intervention programs, require further funding allocations to grow and reach out to the community if we are truly ready to provide comprehensive integrated programs and supports to families. would severely limit this work.
Our hope as a province is to partner with the federal government to make those initiatives that are respective of Nova Scotians and that enable the flexibility to truly make a difference in the lives of children and families.
In closing, I would like to say that Nova Scotia wishes to continue to be an equal partner in the implementation and development of programs that will best serve the young children and families of Canada and Nova Scotia. We do not need to do this.
The 2001 ECD and 2003 multilateral ELCC agreements are good examples of how governments have negotiated to provide additional funding to early childhood development, learning, and care programs and services. Nova Scotia would prefer to negotiate agreements like this with the federal government rather than having conditions imposed upon us.
I thank you very much for the opportunity to provide you with an overview of the great strides we are making on child care in Nova Scotia, and for listening to our views on .
Thank you. Merci.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning, committee members.
I'd like to thank the committee for providing the opportunity for the Government of the Northwest Territories to make a presentation to you this morning in respect of Bill .
We're concerned by the manner in which this bill will insert federal influence into an area of jurisdiction that is exclusively provincial and territorial in nature. That this is proposed with no consultation with our territory is unacceptable. Just as our government consults with aboriginal governments when appropriate, such as when considering a wildlife act, we expect and deserve the same consideration from the federal level.
It is especially frustrating when this bill comes forward with no expectation that there will be new money attached. Right now, the lion's share of money expended in the early learning and child care field in the Northwest Territories comes from the Government of the Northwest Territories' coffers. This year, we have increased the funding in our early childhood programs by 20%.
We are concerned that, should this bill pass, it will make it difficult for us to renew the funding agreements we have with the federal government, which, while being minor parts of our total spending for early learning and child care, are nonetheless important to the operation of our system.
Before I get into some specific comments on Bill , I would like to provide some background about the Northwest Territories. I hope this will help explain the implications that Bill C-303 would have on the way we support the delivery of early learning and child care programs and services in the Northwest Territories.
I would like to begin by giving you some of the demographics of the Northwest Territories.
We have 32 communities in the Northwest Territories. The largest is the city of Yellowknife, with a population of approximately 19,500, and the smallest is Jean Marie River, which has a population of 70 people.
It may interest you to know that the school in Jean Marie River has seven students this year. Given that, I'm sure you'll understand that it's very unlikely we'll see a child care centre developed in that community or in others that are similarly small.
There is no or very limited road access to the majority of communities in the Northwest Territories. Many are only accessible by road during a brief winter ice road season. The remoteness and isolation have a great impact on many things in a community, including the availability of program materials. Facility development or activities requiring resources require detailed planning well in advance in order to place equipment orders for arrival by barge once a year, or residents must face the high cost of flying in materials.
The NWT population is approximately 50% aboriginal, with our smaller communities being primarily aboriginal. There are 11 official languages in the Northwest Territories, and we are seeing significant declines in aboriginal language use by our young people in many regions.
The Northwest Territories has a very healthy employment rate and a very low unemployment rate, but the territories-wide nature of those numbers masks the sometimes very high unemployment rate in our smaller communities.
Currently the Northwest Territories has 110 licensed early learning and child care programs operating. These include child care facilities, part-time preschool programs, family day homes, and after-school programs. From these programs, we have access to 1,711 licensed spaces for families.
There are licensed early learning and child care programs in 28 of the 32 communities in the Northwest Territories. The majority of full-time early learning and child care programs are within the city of Yellowknife.
Right now, the individual needs within each community determine the type of program that is required. Many small communities deliver programs on a part-time basis, recognizing the needs and hours of employment in a small community. A lot of our programs are offered by family day homes.
We believe fundamentally that early learning and child care programs in the north must be community based. This means programs are developed and operated by community groups or individuals to meet community needs. They know what's best for their children.
Locally determined and locally driven programs not only provide the opportunity to reflect the individual community needs but also allow a focus on language and culture of the community. In recent years, we've been working to help revitalize aboriginal languages by providing young children with opportunities to learn their language. Following the Maori and Hawaiian examples of language nests, in 2003 the Government of the Northwest Territories began investing funds to assist existing early learning and child care programs to develop their program into a language nest.
Aboriginal children who attend these language nest programs have daily interaction with elders and speakers in the language and culture of the community. Traditional practices and ways of learning are used in the centres, and operators ensure that a variety of learning styles are addressed.
We're finding that language nests in the north are inspiring parents and other adults in communities to learn their aboriginal language.
Mr. Chairman, family day homes can also support immersion in the language and culture of the community through exposure to traditional language, ways of learning, and culture.
The proposed bill would require the Northwest Territories to meet certain criteria to be able to access federal funding supports. We agree that it is important to strive to achieve programs and supports that promote quality, universality, accessibility, and accountability. In fact, we already have well-established standards and reporting processes in place.
We know these reflect the realities of our jurisdiction and support the development and operation of culturally appropriate child care spaces. We are concerned that new federal standards developed as a result of this bill may impact on the mandate of the Government of the Northwest Territories for early learning and child care and may remove the flexibility that is inherent in the way authority and jurisdiction are divided among provinces and territories and the federal government.
Mr. Chairman, a national early learning and child care act will be hard pressed to deal with the diverse needs and circumstances across the country. The factors involved in providing early learning and child care opportunities in rural, remote, and isolated communities are quite different from those of large urban environments.
Bill stipulates that funding be linked to a requirement for service to be provided through not-for-profit individuals or groups. While the bill proposes to grandfather for-profit service providers that are in the place prior to the coming into force of the act, new for-profit individuals or groups will not be included. This causes us significant concern.
Right now, family day homes provide 40% of licensed child care in the Northwest Territories. Family day homes are not registered not-for-profit organizations and they fill a valuable need in our small communities, where there's limited infrastructure and little need for larger programs.
As you would expect, there is turnover in family day homes over time, so if this bill proceeds we fear that when it comes time to renew the agreements we now have with the federal government, we will find that we are unable to equitably support a vitally important part of our day care system. That result would greatly impact the flexibility we have in using a range of service providers. In turn, this will impact the availability of services to children and their parents.
As well, since family day homes are run for profit, this would also limit the opportunities for individuals in our smallest communities, where employment prospects may be limited from setting up a for-profit service as a career choice.
Mr. Chairman, the fiscal reporting that the bill calls for would also cause problems in the north. Clause 8 calls for a report to Parliament within 60 days of the end of the fiscal year. Meeting such requirements will be a challenge for small operators. We don't require reports from operators that quickly now, and ensuring that they could meet that sort of deadline so we could report to the federal government would require more support. Funding to support administration to comply with such reporting would be better used for programming to support children.
In conclusion, early learning and child care is clearly a provincial and territorial jurisdiction, allowing provinces and territories to meet child care needs in this diverse country. We take that responsibility seriously.
I don't think this bill is necessary. We already cover these matters through our existing territorial legislation that reflects our unique situation in the Northwest Territories. We have the NWT Child Day Care Act, which lays out the requirements for child care programs in the NWT, including licensing, operating requirements, and offences. Regulations further lay out the duties of child care operators, physical requirements for child day care facilities, daily programming, nutritional standards, health care, hazards and emergencies, and staff qualifications and training.
We can't help but note the clause referring to the unique circumstances of Quebec when it comes to delivering early learning and child care programming, and respectfully suggest that all provinces and territories be recognized similarly.
We don't need more rules to deliver quality programming in our territory, Mr. Chairman, we need more money. While we would welcome a meaningful federal contribution to assist us in supporting quality early learning and child care in the north, it will not be meaningful if it's done in isolation, with no input from the territory.
I encourage you to scrap this bill and press the federal government to continue discussions with the provinces, territories, and early childhood stakeholders to ensure that decisions about investments in early learning and child care support the diversity of Canada--its geography, communities, and families.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'd like to thank the committee for the opportunity to participate in your deliberations on Bill . I'm pleased to be here in person to represent the City of Toronto and to express, on behalf of city council, our full support for the provisions of Bill C-303.
I'm a member of Toronto city council, vice-chair of our board of health, vice-chair of the community development and recreation committee, as well as the children's advocate for the city of Toronto.
I'm here with Petr Varmuza, the director of Toronto Children's Services.
I too am a parent of two children who were fortunate to attend excellent regulated child care from infancy to school age, and who have benefited as a result.
Toronto is Canada's largest city and sixth-largest government, and home to a diverse population of 2.6 million people. The City of Toronto manages the largest child care system in Canada outside of the province of Quebec, with a budget of $336 million in 2007. As you know, in Ontario municipalities have a legislated role in the delivery and management of the child care system.
Toronto recognizes the significant contribution that high-quality, accessible, and affordable child care and early learning programs make to the healthy development of young children and the economic and social well-being of families and communities.
Toronto's child care system provides a range of services for over 65,000 children, including directly operated and community based licensed group child care, family home child care, after-school and summer programs, family resource centres, and special needs programs for children from infancy to school age.
Currently the city provides child care fee subsidies for 23,844 children in 16,000 families. Of those who receive subsidies, 50% pay no fee. Despite the size of our programs, Toronto still only provides services for about one-quarter of the children who need child care, and there are over 10,000 children on our waiting list for subsidized child care.
As you can see, Toronto has made a major commitment to child care and has a critical interest in the future of child care legislation and funding in Canada. Toronto's child care system is guided by a comprehensive service plan and operating criteria with established principles, service levels, program priorities, and program standards to ensure quality.
Toronto's service plan is focused on providing equitable access to services, high-quality programs, and planned growth in underserved age groups and communities. However, the city has been unable to make any significant progress, as the public policy environment and financing of child care and family programs has shifted dramatically over the past 12 years. Federal and provincial governments have changed program and funding priorities, forcing the city to change policy directions, fund services beyond its legislated cost-sharing levels, and often struggle simply to protect rather than expand services.
This has made the municipal role in service delivery and management challenging and unpredictable. Under ECDA, the previous Ontario government invested all the federal transfers in programs other than child care. This became known as the “ABC” policy--anything but child care.
Under the federal-provincial early learning and child care agreement signed in 2005, the Province of Ontario developed the Best Start plan to expand child care and early learning programs for children under six. As required by the province, the city developed a three-year service and infrastructure plan in partnership with school boards and other community service providers to develop new integrated models of service delivery.
Our plan is here and I've brought copies for you, if you're interested.
Toronto created over 3,000 new licensed spaces and 2,000 fee subsidies in 59 centres in the first year of Best Start. This was funded through the federal transfers, of course. An additional 3,400 spaces were planned, and provincial transfers were slated at $125 million annually. All expansion under Best Start or any new future funding program in Toronto will be delivered in the not-for-profit sector, or delivered by our municipally directly operated sector.
In 2006, when the federal-provincial early learning and child care agreement was cancelled, Ontario chose to distribute the final year of funding over four years. As a result, funding for Toronto was reduced from $125 million to $27 million per year.
These funding changes have meant the cancellation of further expansion under our Best Start plan, and a serious funding shortfall for the remainder of our child care system. Toronto is now facing a shortfall of $35 million, which, if not solved by the end of 2007, will result in the loss of 3,500 subsidized spaces.
The 2007 federal budget allocated $97 million to the province of Ontario for child care. The 2007 Ontario budget allocated $25 million for child care this year, and $50 million next year. Toronto has been allocated $6.8 million in 2007, and $9.1 million in 2008, far short of the $35 million needed to prevent service cuts, and far short of its per capita share of the federal funds. The remainder of the federal funds transferred to Ontario have not been allocated, and there is no indication whether they will go into child care or into other government priorities. The Ontario finance minister told the Toronto Star that the funds did not have to go to child care because they were unconditional transfers.
Toronto and other municipalities in Ontario, the level of government responsible for delivering programs, want and need a national legislative and regulatory framework to ensure that funds slated for child care go to child care.
Toronto supports because it enshrines in legislation the critical elements of a Canadian system of high-quality early learning and child care services. This important piece of legislation will provide a legislative and regulatory framework to ensure that federal funding is transferred to provinces and service providers for high-quality child care and early learning programs; it will create a funding framework that requires provinces and service providers to meet criteria and standards that ensure programs are accessible, high-quality, universal, and developmental in nature; it will ensure that programs are delivered on a not-for-profit basis--and that is important, and we support it; it would require provinces and service providers to develop plans for a system of service; it will provide, through new reporting requirements, transparency and accountability for spending, which is also important to Toronto and to other municipalities in Ontario; and it will establish an advisory council to monitor and report on the operations and effectiveness of the act. We support this as well.
This is important legislation that will assist in protecting and enhancing early learning and child care in Toronto and in every province in Canada. Toronto is not alone in supporting federal child care legislation. Other municipalities, as well as provincial and local organizations, fully support the establishment of a national child care program entrenched in legislation and will be submitting letters of support to your committee.
In closing, I want to say that Toronto’s ability to succeed depends on the ability of our residents to contribute to the economic and social life of our city. Toronto’s future also depends on our ability to ensure that all children have the best chance possible to succeed. Investing in high-quality early childhood programs achieves both these goals.
In closing, I wish to urge members to support .
:
Thank you for coming to meet with us today in order to discuss this very important issue. I am from Quebec. I therefore view the situation differently. I would however like to share with you the objectives that led us to wanting to establish a universal program. The idea was to ensure that the greatest possible number of children be able to benefit from it.
It is important for you to know that when we finally did obtain our program, we had been working on it for more than 30 years. Parents, and especially women, were demanding this service. Before the advent of this universal program, we of course were using all sorts of means to fill this gap, so as to be able to go to work, to access the labour market, etc. These were solutions that clearly did not satisfy the majority of people and that many women could not afford, because of low-paying jobs, etc.
The purpose of this program was not only to fill this need but also to ensure that children develop in the best possible conditions. These best conditions, in our view, involve the hiring of qualified staff to offer this service, and that there be not only an educational program, but also a program taking into account the social aspect, in other words the ability of children to interact amongst each other, and taking into account the fact that the workers in this field are often women. If they are paid minimum wage, we cannot expect a high retention rate and improvements in the service offered over time. Thirty years also means that we did not achieve everything overnight. However, today, the program is operating to the satisfaction of the majority of people and is very well accepted.
I need to understand. Is the provision of a universal program a valid objective for each and everyone of you? We hear a lot of talk about money. The funny thing is that when it is war that we are talking about, money is less important. When we are talking about children, all of a sudden, it becomes an insurmountable obstacle. However, it seems that with what we are providing to the children of today who need this program, we cannot tell them to wait 10 years in order for us to find the money needed. If there were a program that allowed you to access additional funding, the idea being to provide access to the majority of people, would that not be a valid objective that everyone could rally around?
I want to read a couple of letters that I received. The reason I want to take some time to do this is that the Action Coalition for Early Childhood Education and Care Nova Scotia, as well as the Nova Scotia Coalition of Non Profit Directors have both asked to be witnesses, and they were unable to be witnesses here. Knowing that the minister was going to speak, I'm going to just read some of the comments they sent me.
This is to all members of the committee:
We are writing on behalf of the Action Coalition to let you know that our Coalition strongly supports Bill C-303. This bill, when passed, will be the first step toward building the child care system that Canadians need and want—In the 37 years since the Royal Commission on the Status of Women's recommendations, far too many Canadian children and parents have had to endure haphazard, questionable quality and at times even dangerous ECLC arrangements.
We understand that the government of Nova Scotia is speaking against this bill. We want you to know that we do not support their position.
We strongly urge you to support Bill C-303.
I note that it is signed by Sue Wolstenholme, who has fought for child care for probably four decades in Halifax, and Theresa Griffin.
The Nova Scotia Coalition of Non Profit Directors says, among other things:
We write to you in order to express our strong support for Bill C-303 and to express our shock that our province does not support such a landmark piece of legislation. Currently, in Nova Scotia, the reality is that families do not benefit from a comprehensive early childhood education and care system. Most families, more accurately, struggle with a collection of programs and services which are costly and not accessible to all those in need—Families need services they can depend on, irregardless of socio-economic status or geographic location. Life long learning and education for all is a right, not a privilege. Nova Scotia needs the leadership and accountability that Bill C-303 would provide.
I didn't read everything because it would take some time, but I'll make the letters available. Mr. Lake, I know, will want to study these, and other members will have the opportunity as well.
In light of the fact that the minister was presenting, the child care community in Nova Scotia was very excited on that day in May when we signed these agreements. They almost unanimously, in my view, were excited about it.
It is a new day. It's a slightly darker day than the one we had, in my view, a couple of years ago. I do hope the Government of Nova Scotia is able to make some steps forward on child care. I know the minister has indicated some of the steps they're taking, but we lost an awful lot when that agreement went down the tubes, and I think it's a real shame.
Do I have time for a question?
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I too wish to thank you for being here this morning. Your opinions, especially those of the provinces, are for us very revealing and enriching.
I understand the intent, but I would like to understand the way of doing things. Ms. Streatch spoke of her love of Canada and of her desire to work with Canada. I understand. It is a choice that your provinces also make.
Mr. Dent also well expressed your opinion, that is to say that we each have our own characteristics and that it is the provinces that will be managing these characteristics. For example, with regard to the management of child care centres, the city of Toronto, which has tremendous weight in Ontario, is equivalent, in itself, to two or three provinces. We therefore must deal with all of that.
In Quebec, you know to what extent we too are concerned with conserving our characteristics and of assuming our laws and our societal choices, just the way you do, as a matter of fact. We see that within the federal dynamic, given the way the money is presently distributed, people are very conditioned within the federal government.
In the case of transfer payments for health, for example, we have seen that your provinces, just like Quebec, have been penalized over the years. The fact that the federal government has contributed less and less to health care, most notably, has imposed an additional burden on the provinces.
What I am trying to get at is that we are politicians, and you are too. I would like to know, with regard to the will of each one of you to establish a child care system, universal or not — and I know that the will is there —, if it would be preferable, instead of having transfer payments, that there simply be a transfer of tax points to the provinces in order for them to govern themselves properly? In this way, no one would be dependent upon the federal government, and everyone would be free to make his or her own decisions.
Who would like to respond?
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Actually, accountability is a big issue. Each order of government in Canada is actually sovereign to its own area of responsibility. There's a bit of a misconception out there that somehow provinces in their own sphere of responsibility are accountable to the federal government. That is not the case constitutionally. As a matter of fact, it's not the case under the social union framework agreement. As a matter of fact, the social union framework agreement, which was a multi-party agreement signed by the Government of Canada and the various provinces, explicitly states that each order of government is responsible to its respective constituency.
I just want to set that on the record here, because I think it's a very important point to make in terms of fiscal federalism.
Our government acknowledges the need for child care. We acknowledge the need for early childhood learning programs. We also acknowledge the need for federal leadership in certain areas of provincial jurisdiction, whether that be health care, infrastructure, or post-secondary education and training. There may be other areas in which the federal government may decide to take leadership in utilizing the federal spending power. However, child care is not one of them.
I believe in strong federal governments and I believe in strong federal leadership in various areas, but I believe child care is best delivered by the provinces because child care and early childhood learning are really extensions of the public education systems. No federal government and no parliament would think of telling provinces how to run their public education systems; a similar argument can be made for early childhood learning programs.
Quebec has a certain system that's admired by people throughout the country. Ontario has the Early Years Centres. Ontario has the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. A lot of these are provincially driven in collaboration with provincial ministries of education or through the Council of Ministers of Education that meets from time to time.
What our opposition to the bill is really about is that this is a service best delivered by municipal and provincial governments. Maybe Madam Streatch and Mr. Dent could tell us how they are working in collaboration with their provincial ministries of education in terms of early childhood learning strategies and indicate how they see that unfolding in coming years.