Is the Harper government doing a good job?

[oreodontist]

Reread my post. I said people can afford it, they are willing to pay for it, but they want programs that are licensed and regulated. That includes child abuse registry checks, first aid certification, health and safety standards, and a basic understanding of child development. It isn't good enough to just park your kid in front of someone's TV for the day.

And as I have stated, the thread is about whether or not Harper is doing a good job, and I keep pointing out that he has dropped the ball on his promises regarding child care. It's not about whether or not you like what he promised, it's about whether or not he has kept that promise.

"they want programs that are licensed and regulated"

What province doesn't have regulated daycares now?

Or do you mean more 'Federal' (ottawa) regulation. Hint...thereare more folks in this country who are not part of the 'they' in your 'they want'. The NDopeheadP doesn't even make a scratch in my riding. Not everyone has their hand out wanting Ottawa to save them from themselves. Most folks believe in being responsible.

[Melanie_]

"they want programs that are licensed and regulated"

What province doesn't have regulated daycares now?

Or do you mean more 'Federal' (ottawa) regulation. Hint...thereare more folks in this country who are not part of the 'they' in your 'they want'. The NDopeheadP doesn't even make a scratch in my riding. Not everyone has their hand out wanting Ottawa to save them from themselves. Most folks believe in being responsible.

I'm not a fan of the NDP childcare platform, either. The liberal plan was going to expand the regulated daycare systems the provinces already had in place - each province had negotiated a deal with the Feds, to receive funding to enhance thier existing programs. The Feds only stipulation was that the care provided needed to follow the QUAD principles - Quality, Universal (as in universally available, not that every child must attend), Accessible (children with special needs, rural and Northern communities), and Developmentally appropriate. There is nothing irresponsible in wanting quality child care for your kids.

[Alta4ever]

I'm not a fan of the NDP childcare platform, either. The liberal plan was going to expand the regulated daycare systems the provinces already had in place - each province had negotiated a deal with the Feds, to receive funding to enhance thier existing programs. The Feds only stipulation was that the care provided needed to follow the QUAD principles - Quality, Universal (as in universally available, not that every child must attend), Accessible (children with special needs, rural and Northern communities), and Developmentally appropriate. There is nothing irresponsible in wanting quality child care for your kids.

If they want to enhance their program the company should do it and charge more for the extra service, if the consumer thinks it is worth it they will buy the service, and it will stay. Simple supply and demand. The government has no role in this. There are plenty of regulations at the municiple level and provincal level, why waste more money on a federal level that will do nothing.

As for licensing and checks it is your responsibility as a consumer to check out your service provider. If there is a problem there are many avenues of resolution from reporting fraduent activity (ie opperating with out proper permits) to reporting abuses of the system. It is your responisbility to look after yourself and your family, not the governments.

[Melanie_]

If they want to enhance their program the company should do it and charge more for the extra service, if the consumer thinks it is worth it they will buy the service, and it will stay. Simple supply and demand. The government has no role in this. There are plenty of regulations at the municiple level and provincal level, why waste more money on a federal level that will do nothing.

As for licensing and checks it is your responsibility as a consumer to check out your service provider. If there is a problem there are many avenues of resolution from reporting fraduent activity (ie opperating with out proper permits) to reporting abuses of the system. It is your responisbility to look after yourself and your family, not the governments.

The Liberal plan wasn't going to change the regulations, it was going to provide money for the provinces to expand the systems already in place. The province licenses and inspects programs, similar to how restaurants are licensed and inspected. They still operate as individual businesses. The province also provides a small operating grant to programs so that parent fees are managable (in Manitoba, parents pay a maximum of $18.80/day for preschool care), and provides supports for children with special needs. The Harper plan rescinded the agreements with the provinces; their promise to create spaces didn't include any money for the provinces to administer those spaces. In fact, I attended a town hall meeting during the last election where the Conservative candidate at the time said that the spaces created would not be part of the "institutional system" already in place. I was left wondering, who would regulate those spaces? Was the Harper government proposing establishing a parallel system? The candidate (Rod Bruinooge) didn't have an answer to those questions.

Edited March 13, 2008 by Melanie_

[Alta4ever]

The federal plan wasn't going to change the regulations, it was going to provide money for the provinces to expand the systems already in place. The province licenses and inspects programs, similar to how restaurants are licensed and inspected. They still operate as individual businesses. The province also provides a small operating grant to programs so that parent fees are managable (in Manitoba, parents pay a maximum of $18.80/day for preschool care), and provides supports for children with special needs.

Manitoba Child Care Program

Alberta Child Care

Well then the provinces should be raising taxes for this if it is needed and wanted, the people would support it. This is provincial jurisdiction the federal government has no right to intrude. In fact the federal government we have now has removed some federal tax burden so that provinces can raise taxes to fund this themselves.

Define managable. What is managable for me may not be for you. Just another political term that means nothing, but vote buying.

People are smart they can and will find a way to adapt, my family did, so have many others I know that have children. It is not societies responsibilty to provide child care, it is the parents.

Special needs is a different need then daycare space, and can't be lumped into this argument.

[Melanie_]

Well then the provinces should be raising taxes for this if it is needed and wanted, the people would support it. This is provincial jurisdiction the federal government has no right to intrude. In fact the federal government we have now has removed some federal tax burden so that provinces can raise taxes to fund this themselves.

Define managable. What is managable for me may not be for you. Just another political term that means nothing, but vote buying.

People are smart they can and will find a way to adapt, my family did, so have many others I know that have children. It is not societies responsibilty to provide child care, it is the parents.

Special needs is a different need then daycare space, and can't be lumped into this argument.

Sorry, I edited this post and we must have cross posted, so the links aren't actually there anymore (they didn't seem relevent to my edited post).

If the federal government has no right to intrude in child care, which is a provincial issue, how do you respond to the Harper child care plan? The thread really is about whether or not Harper's government is doing a good job, so the question should be about the $100/month and the promised 125,000 spaces. Do you feel he has done a good job with them?

Edited March 13, 2008 by Melanie_

[Alta4ever]

The Liberal plan wasn't going to change the regulations, it was going to provide money for the provinces to expand the systems already in place. The province licenses and inspects programs, similar to how restaurants are licensed and inspected. They still operate as individual businesses. The province also provides a small operating grant to programs so that parent fees are managable (in Manitoba, parents pay a maximum of $18.80/day for preschool care), and provides supports for children with special needs. The Harper plan rescinded the agreements with the provinces; their promise to create spaces didn't include any money for the provinces to administer those spaces. In fact, I attended a town hall meeting during the last election where the Conservative candidate at the time said that the spaces created would not be part of the "institutional system" already in place. I was left wondering, who would regulate those spaces? Was the Harper government proposing establishing a parallel system? The candidate (Rod Bruinooge) didn't have an answer to those questions.

It is called a day home which are licensed and regulated, it is not a parallel system. Again reallly this is no business of the federal government it is under provincial jurisdiction, I suggest you talk to your mla or mpp (depending on where you live). Trudeau started this subversion of the constitution, and people have come it expect it, but it is wrong. Provincial governments need to be held to account for this instead of being rewarded for bad social policy by looking for hand outs from a federeal government that has for years over taxed & low balled surpluses, then spent the excess in one off social policy payouts/bailouts to poorly managed provincial governments.

You really have no idea how much damage has been done to our federal system of government over the last 40 some odd years. It will take years to reverse this, and bring the governments back in line with the Canadian constitution.

[Alta4ever]

Aside from the 100/month Harper has done a good job. I never would have offered anything and responed to those question by directing people to my provincial counter part. But that being said people have been conditioned to accept this through many years of this type of policy and I would not have been elected.

Harpers gov is the best we have seen in many decades, I hope he can keep this up and fight his way to a grand majority.

[Melanie_]

It is called a day home which are licensed and regulated, it is not a parallel system. Again reallly this is no business of the federal government it is under provincial jurisdiction, I suggest you talk to your mla or mpp (depending on where you live). Trudeau started this subversion of the constitution, and people have come it expect it, but it is wrong. Provincial governments need to be held to account for this instead of being rewarded for bad social policy by looking for hand outs from a federeal government that has for years over taxed & low balled surpluses, then spent the excess in one off social policy payouts/bailouts to poorly managed provincial governments.

You really have no idea how much damage has been done to our federal system of government over the last 40 some odd years. It will take years to reverse this, and bring the governments back in line with the Canadian constitution.

The day homes are part of the licensed and regulated systems, and the Liberal plan would have provided money to expand this part of the system along with the rest. Day homes (here they are called family child care homes) are an integral part of the system, because they can provide more flexibility than centres can. The Harper plan was not about increasing family child care homes - their plan was to offer tax incentives to individual businesses to set up their own centres for their employees. Not a single centre has come into being as a result of this. Can you imagine every Canadian Tire across the country having it's own individual daycare centre, for it's employees only?

Edited March 13, 2008 by Melanie_

[Alta4ever]

The day homes are part of the licensed and regulated systems, and the Liberal plan would have provided money to expand this part of the system along with the rest. Day homes (here they are called family child care homes) are an integral part of the system, because they can provide more flexibility than centres can. The Harper plan was not about increasing family child care homes - their plan was to offer tax incentives to individual businesses to set up their own centres for their employees. Not a single centre has come into being as a result of this. Can you imagine every Canadian Tire across the country having it's own individual daycare centre, for it's employees only?

There are no tax incentives that would ever put enough money back into the pockets of business owners that would get them to invest in childcare, it would have to be dictated by the free market, when the need is great enough the markets will respond.

[Melanie_]

There are no tax incentives that would ever put enough money back into the pockets of business owners that would get them to invest in childcare, it would have to be dictated by the free market, when the need is great enough the markets will respond.

I agree with you to some degree, tax incentives aren't enough to get business owners to invest in child care. Good child care is expensive, and it is detrimental to children's development to have a revolving door of caregivers. The free market hasn't worked very well for child care; in fact, there has been an argument put forth for market failure with regards to child care (just google it, there are too many articles to link to). The fact is, many families with young children are just building their careers. Giving them some support early on, to help them juggle family and work responsibilities, will pay off with huge dividends in the long run. And children shouldn't just be warehoused - licensed care is more likely to deliver quality care.

[Alta4ever]

I agree with you to some degree, tax incentives aren't enough to get business owners to invest in child care. Good child care is expensive, and it is detrimental to children's development to have a revolving door of caregivers. The free market hasn't worked very well for child care; in fact, there has been an argument put forth for market failure with regards to child care (just google it, there are too many articles to link to). The fact is, many families with young children are just building their careers. Giving them some support early on, to help them juggle family and work responsibilities, will pay off with huge dividends in the long run. And children shouldn't just be warehoused - licensed care is more likely to deliver quality care.

There is a solution that has worked for many years, and that is friends and family. When I was growing up, my mother worked part time, I spent on her days off she would look after me and a couple of the neighbor hood kids, when she worked I went to a neighbors house. It worked great. Solutions are all around, but people have to think for themselves instead of expecting the government to take care of them. Society has become lazy and most of the people don't want to take responsiblity for their lives, they want the various governments to do it.

People fail to realize that this costs more in an economic sense, a moral sense, and then the huge cost in the loss of freedom.

1. Economic loss services cost more with ever hand added to the jar. When the government is added through hand outs and industry incentives. It means the money has to be collected and filtered through taxes, very ineffecient, costly and indirect.

2. Moral loss - When you children are placed in dayhomes, they are picking up their ethics and morals from influence outside your home, and no amount of regulation will ever be able to police this.

3. Loss of freedom, government invovlement means loss of choices. With the higher taxes required to fund the system you many not be able to afford the better childcare facility on top of the taxes, you will have to make due with the bare minimum offer by the nanny state.

To quote my favourite personality of all time - "I contend that a nation trying to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket trying to lift himself up by the handle." Winston S. Churchill.

[Alta4ever]

The time that you have the most influence over the development in a childs life is in the first five years, and I beleive it is worth every sacrifice, even career development for one parent to make sure they are spending as much time with that child that they can in the first five years.

I realise that this isn't always possible, but it is the most noble of sacrifices.

[Bryan]

So are you saying that privately run day cares are better? Or are you saying as Mr. Harris propsed that people should rely on family and neighbours to look after their children, or should mothers just stay home?

All of the above. In each of those cases, the parents can take a direct hand in how their children are raised. It doesn't matter what your idea of proper care is, the standard of care still needs to be directed and managed by the parent, not the government.

[Melanie_]

Special needs is a different need then daycare space, and can't be lumped into this argument.

Apologies for the thread drift, this isn't directly about whether or not Harper is doing a good job, but I wanted to respond to this idea.

Children with special needs are very much part of the argument about child care spaces. Their parents need to work just like everyone else, but they are faced with a much more difficult time finding child care for their kids. Many private homes won't take them, because of the increased challenges they bring, or they want to charge families much higher rates, which makes them unaffordable. Many families with children with special needs already have extra costs that the rest of us are barely aware of, so exorbitant day care costs are a further burden. Often these kids really just require an extra set of hands to help them through the day, someone who understands their condition and can help them be included as much as possible. Kids with autism, Down's Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy, ADHD, FAS, etc. can all be accomodated in child care settings. Licensed and regulated programs can get grants to help offset the extra costs, but the Harper plan rescinded the money that would have gone into these grants. The $100/month won't help these parents find the kind of care their kids need.

[Oleg Bach]

Apologies for the thread drift, this isn't directly about whether or not Harper is doing a good job, but I wanted to respond to this idea.

Children with special needs are very much part of the argument about child care spaces. Their parents need to work just like everyone else, but they are faced with a much more difficult time finding child care for their kids. Many private homes won't take them, because of the increased challenges they bring, or they want to charge families much higher rates, which makes them unaffordable. Many families with children with special needs already have extra costs that the rest of us are barely aware of, so exorbitant day care costs are a further burden. Often these kids really just require an extra set of hands to help them through the day, someone who understands their condition and can help them be included as much as possible. Kids with autism, Down's Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy, ADHD, FAS, etc. can all be accomodated in child care settings. Licensed and regulated programs can get grants to help offset the extra costs, but the Harper plan rescinded the money that would have gone into these grants. The $100/month won't help these parents find the kind of care their kids need.

No thinking person is interested in Harper and his silly government that is akin to some puppet operation run by a few dark and sneaky rich old guys in Toronto and Washington - it will take more than a charming boyish persona and a well tailored power suit to impress me.

[mcqueen625]

The conservatives are the absolute worst party for Canada to have in power, especially with an authoritarian weasel like Harper as leader. I can't stand them. They will ruin our economy like conservatives do every time they get power. Then it will be up to the Liberal to spend the next 10-20 years repairing the damage the conservatives have done. AS long as the Conservatives are in power we will be nothing but America's little bitch. When we remember that we are CANADIANS who have a right to make our own laws and enforce them how WE see fit, we will send these raptureists packing, and their "the world is 6000 years old" followers can follow behind them, thumping their bibles to the tune of the stars and stripes forever.

Boy, did you ever get that right when you said the Liberals will spend for 10-20 years, because that is the one thing they are really good at spending OURmoney. The part that upsets me is that they have a bad habit of steering that money in Liberal friendly pockets. The last thing Canada needs is an incompetent like Dion, God would this country ever be in trouble. The corruption was bad under the Cretin, and even worse under Mr. Dithers, I can't imagine I would want to ever live in a country led by another of the Chretien team of incompetents. Just remember for all of Dion's blabbering about the environment, he was Environment Minister when Kyoto was mistakenly sign and it was under his watch that allowed the emissions to grow by more than 30% since it's signing. And you want to make him what, Prime Minister?? You have got to be kidding, right?

I hope the Liberals are stupid enough to defeat the government so we can elect a majority Conservative government to allow Harper to make the changes that need to be made in this country.

Edited March 15, 2008 by mcqueen625

[normanchateau]

This minority Conservative government has been very busy. To illustrate this, I borrowed the following list of things accomplished from the blogosphere:

(7) ON LOWERING TAXES

Here is what the Conservative government has done

• Moved the lowest personal income tax rate to 15 per cent from 15.5 per cent, effective Jan. 1 2007, undoing a change made in the first Conservative budget;

In other words, the lowest personal income tax rate was 15% in 2005 before the Conservatives were elected. Bizarrely, the Conservatives increased this rate in 2006 then moved it back to 15% in 2007 so that they could claim that they reduced the lowest personal income tax rate.

This is an accomplishment? They should be ashamed that they've not reduced personal income tax rates below what they were in 2005 but instead squandered a record surplus into the largest increase in program spending in the history of Canada in 2006 and 2007:

http://andrewcoyne.com/columns/2007/03/fla...ig-spenders.php

[Sean Hayward]

"AS long as the Conservatives are in power we will be nothing but America's little bitch. When we remember that we are CANADIANS who have a right to make our own laws and enforce them how WE see fit, we will send these raptureists packing, and their "the world is 6000 years old" followers can follow behind them, thumping their bibles to the tune of the stars and stripes forever."

Whoever made the above comment disgusts me. They represent exactly the ignorant, simplistic attitude that threatens to destroy Canada.

In my opinion, this government has been very good, and if they are able to gain a majority, they have the potential to be one of the greatest governments in Canadian history. I have many good things and very few bad things to say about the current Conservative government.

On the economy, they are reducing taxes, especially business taxes, and this will help to make Canada one of the most competitive and prosperous countries in the world. They have launched a massive infrastructure program to renew and expand national infrastructure. They are looking at ways to strengthen Canada's economic union.

On the environment, they have proposed emissions reductions, and made progress on creating and expanding national parks. They are investing in green technologies and introducing new environmental standards for things such as consumer products and vehicles. Too bad the opposition parties blocked the Clean Air Act from being passed.

On foreign affairs, they are asserting Canadian sovereignty over the Canadian Artic and rebuilding the military after its destruction by the Liberals. They are committed to the mission in Afghanistan, which is important in the global struggle for freedom. The suggestion that they are selling out Canada to the Americans is a ridiculous attempt by leftists to provoke a reaction from the Canadian public, who they know would be outraged if the allegations some of them are making were true.

On governmental reform, they have set fixed election dates, passed the Federal Accountability Act, and recognized the Quebecois as a nation within Canada. Senate reform has been delayed and sabotaged by the Liberals. These and other reforms are what this country needs so desperately in terms of reforming our government. On the issue of Quebec, my greatest hope is that Harper and Charest can succeed where Mulroney and Bourassa failed, and finally achieve a constitutional arrangement acceptable to all parts of Canada, including a recognition of the status of Quebec.

[Topaz]

Of course if you are/were a alliance /conservative you would think Harper's the best thing but I don't think most of Canadians think that and that is why he only has a minority government. If there were an election he may only still have a minority government because Canadians know exactly what this guy is all about and don't trust him 100% yet! It all talk about the environment and they chose the "court jester" to talk and talk about what they are going to do. Harper is finding out what happens to PM when he doesn't watch his office staff conduct business and how many scandals do the Cons have now, reminds me of the Mulroney years. Remember a minority government can't do much without the help of the opposition party. When Harper was in the opposition he didn't care what was good for Canada all he wanted was the PMO.

[normanchateau]

In my opinion, this government has been very good, and if they are able to gain a majority, they have the potential to be one of the greatest governments in Canadian history.

Gain a majority? Certainly not while Harper leads the party.

History is not on Harper's side. In the entire fifty years since John Deifenbaker was elected, only one conservative has ever won a majority and that was Brian Mulroney. Mulroney did so by winning more than 50% of the Quebec vote. Harper is third in the polls in Quebec. Mulroney also captured more than 50% of the Ontario vote. Mulroney was and still is a centrist. His environmental credentials are well-respected. The Conservatives remain saddled with an evangelical, social and religious conservative:

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/st...96-76f3db32808e

[DrGreenthumb]

"AS long as the Conservatives are in power we will be nothing but America's little bitch. When we remember that we are CANADIANS who have a right to make our own laws and enforce them how WE see fit, we will send these raptureists packing, and their "the world is 6000 years old" followers can follow behind them, thumping their bibles to the tune of the stars and stripes forever."

ACtually whoever made this statement has it pretty much right. I hope it was me. Sounds like something I would say. Definitely a statement I agree with.

I just wanted to say that normanchateau always seems to get it pretty much right too.

[DrGreenthumb]

The conservatives are the absolute worst party for Canada to have in power, especially with an authoritarian weasel like Harper as leader. I can't stand them. They will ruin our economy like conservatives do every time they get power. Then it will be up to the Liberal to spend the next 10-20 years repairing the damage the conservatives have done. AS long as the Conservatives are in power we will be nothing but America's little bitch. When we remember that we are CANADIANS who have a right to make our own laws and enforce them how WE see fit, we will send these raptureists packing, and their "the world is 6000 years old" followers can follow behind them, thumping their bibles to the tune of the stars and stripes forever.

Ha i found it , and i'm proud to say that it WAS me who wrote it. Damn fine work, i must say.

[M.Dancer]

Ha i found it , and i'm proud to say that it WAS me who wrote it. Damn fine work, i must say.

Perhaps tomorrow you can practise running with scissors....

[DrGreenthumb]

Perhaps tomorrow you can practise running with scissors....

Perhaps tommorrow your authoritarian dictator, Harper can introduce a bill that would criminalize running with scissors? That should carry a mandaTORY minimum of what ? 2 years? or would the 6 months that a person gets under the tory drug laws for growing a single pot plant be enough to deter running with scissors? I'm no expert on the proper way to control other people's lives so maybe one of you conservatives could suggest the proper cookie cutter solution, the ideal jail term that running with scissors should be met with?