Liberals in bid to woo women

[jdobbin]

I whole heartedly argee. This tactic has been used time and time again by the liberals to remove provincial powers from them and attack the constitution of the country.

Transfer payments are entrenched in the Constitution. The Feds have not attempted to run provincial health programs.

National standards were agreed to by the provinces and the Feds.

[jdobbin]

It is not the Federal Government's responsibility to dictate the method of delivering Healthcare as a "one size fits all" for the Provinces.

Actually, the Feds have every right to set up general standards of care as part of equalization. It does not attempt to run programs within the provinces but can withhold money from transfers in Ontario won't allow new citizens to access healthcare anywhere in Canada. That is the portability clause of the funding arrangement.

Do you think that provinces should be able to withhold care from someone in Newfoundland who moves to Alberta?

Each province should explore their own solutions - within the "spirit" of the Canada Health Care Act. Your "Liberal Champion" reminds me of a commercial I saw on safe driving "He was right - dead right!". While your Liberals are supposedly fighting to uphold the letter of the law in the Canada Health Act, healthcare in Canada is going to hell in a handbasket. Times have changed and we have to look at alternatives while protecting the single-payer system.

Each province can explore those options under the Canada Health Act.

If some province wants to end universality, the Feds have every right to withhold transfers.

[waldo]

The Canada Health Act came in during the last year of the Trudea government. It is one extension of a long history of public medicine in Canada.

......."

the Pearson government introduced the Medical Care Act which was passed in 1966 by a vote of 177 to two. These two Acts established a formula whereby the federal government paid approximately 50% of approved expenditures for hospital and physician services. "

However if you wish to speak on the established Canada Health Act in 1984, perhaps this will highlight who did what and when.

The Canada Health Act was passed unanimously by Parliament in 1984, and received Royal Assent on 1 April. Following election of a Conservative government under Brian Mulroney in September 1984, in June 1985, after consultation with the provinces, new federal Health Minister Jake Epp wrote a letter to his provincial counterparts that clarified and interpreted the criteria points and other parts of the new act.

what's your point? The Canada Health Act (CHA) was introduced by the 80-84 Liberal Trudeau government... in transition, as a Liberal government, on April 9, 1984, the CHA was unanimously adopted on third reading by all parties... the CHA became law on April 17, and was first applied in July 1984... all under Liberal government. And in the fall... in came Mulroney.....

in any case, thanks for partially highlighting the Liberal foundations/framework of the CHA

as for your comment suggesting that "without the NDP there wouldn't be a Canada Health Act", I note this, your latest reply, doesn't extend on that pomposity... no mention of the NDP! (ya, ya... props to Tommy Boy, fer sure).

[tango]

nice thread hijack, boys.

[Keepitsimple]

Never said it wasn't. It is why the federal government doesn't run it.

However, anyone who says that there isn't a role for the federal government in healthcare standards, coordination and funding ignores the historic role. We don't need 10 Level 4 labs for infectious diseases. We don't need 10 standards on drugs.

The federal government has an important role in providing these things.

The constitutional role of transfer payments is entrenched and the Feds can set general standards for care before providing the money.

It is why Paul Martin negotiated a deal to build daycare spaces with each province. That program, unlike the Tory unilateral tax credit program that bypassed the provinces, actually built spaces with staff. The Tory program was simply an income supplement that didn't offer enough to help provide actual daycare.

The Tory program on daycare didn't provide any infrastructure money for spaces to be built. In the words of the minister responsible, it failed in that category.

The truth is that Tories don't really believe in daycare.

And yet combined with other transfers was enough to get the provinces off the back of the Feds without going into deficit.

National standards still can have an important role along with stable long term financing.

The Tory program for daycare certainly has not helped the provinces. It bypassed them.

The Tory approach of bypassing the provinces is not helpful in the least.

ASlthough it may not have seemed like it, I don't view Healthcare and Early Education as a Liberal versus Conservative agument and it appears that you and I are not too far apart on this one. Liberal or Conservative - I DO believe there is a role - and it IS an important one - that the Feds can play. I agree with areas that you have pointed out. I still believe that again, Liberal or Conservative - provinces should experiment and the Feds should be there to invest in multi-province initiatives where it makes sense. Daycare on the other hand, is one of those "feel good" terms that confuse people. It is a baby-sitting service - not to be confused with Early Childhood Education which should be strategized and connected to Provincial Education systems so that there is a relatively seamless transition. Which brings us back to Daycare/Baby-sitting and whether the Feds should be the drivers. For the most part, the issue is a big-city problem where single parent and income-challenged families tend to congregate. Let the Provinces and cities work out some solutions and perhaps the Feds can help when and if some common ground develops, it might make sense for the Feds to participate - perhaps on an infrastructure basis. A final warning on Daycare - beware the unions.

[tango]

A final warning on Daycare - beware the unions.

Yes ... watch out for them ... and say "thanks".

The people who look after our children deserve fair wages.

CUPE has 7,000 members in the communications sector, and is the largest

union in the country, with more than 570,000 members working in day care,

health, municipalities, education, libraries, transport, energy and the media.

[kimmy]

I think the main obstacle to women in the HoC is the sexual harassment and otherwise juvenile, bullying bad behaviour of the men. You can see it any day watching CPAC, but you don't always see the sexual harassment women are subjected to away from the cameras, in meetings, etc. "Youre playing with the big dogs now, baby."

The topic was designing policies to appeal to women voters, not attempting to recruit more female candidates.

Nonetheless, I highly doubt that the women who reach the House of Commons are in any way intimidated or "put in their place" by the men. They have to be bloody tough to make it to Parliament Hill; they're not going to turn demure once they get there.

-k

[jdobbin]

UM.. without the NDP there wouldn't be a "Canada Health Act" and ever since its implementation a large segment of the Liberal Party have been frothing at the mouth to abandon the principles of it by any means necessary.

What segment wants to abandon the five principles?

Elimination of Public Health Care by Stealth, while preaching protection of the Canada Health Act.

All hat and no horse.

Who? Which MPs? Which policies?

[Oleg Bach]

We will increase the mortgage rates - make it that it takes two incomes to sustain a family and home - we will stress out the woman with work at home and in the work place - and she will become a drunkard just like the males of old - and we will call this woman free!

[tango]

The topic was designing policies to appeal to women voters, not attempting to recruit more female candidates.

You are right.

And they have to have more in the House too.

Nonetheless, I highly doubt that the women who reach the House of Commons are in any way intimidated or "put in their place" by the men. They have to be bloody tough to make it to Parliament Hill; they're not going to turn demure once they get there.

-k

Oh you bet they're tough.

But it gets tiresome 'playing' like "the big dogs".

(Dog eat dog.)

It's a friggen waste of time and human efficiency, in fact.

We pay them for that posturing crap, when they could be thinking and doing.

And the sustainable economy definitely needs the undistracted attention of women, imo.

[jdobbin]

ASlthough it may not have seemed like it, I don't view Healthcare and Early Education as a Liberal versus Conservative agument and it appears that you and I are not too far apart on this one. Liberal or Conservative - I DO believe there is a role - and it IS an important one - that the Feds can play. I agree with areas that you have pointed out. I still believe that again, Liberal or Conservative - provinces should experiment and the Feds should be there to invest in multi-province initiatives where it makes sense.

I believe they do that now and to Harper's credit, he maintained the stable funding of the previous government.

Daycare on the other hand, is one of those "feel good" terms that confuse people. It is a baby-sitting service - not to be confused with Early Childhood Education which should be strategized and connected to Provincial Education systems so that there is a relatively seamless transition.

I think people are well aware of a daycare is. It means care for children when many parents are away working.

Which brings us back to Daycare/Baby-sitting and whether the Feds should be the drivers. For the most part, the issue is a big-city problem where single parent and income-challenged families tend to congregate. Let the Provinces and cities work out some solutions and perhaps the Feds can help when and if some common ground develops, it might make sense for the Feds to participate - perhaps on an infrastructure basis.

I believe that is the deal that the Feds worked out with the provinces in 2005: It was a way to create spaces for child care, a major concern for parents in rural and urban areas.

A final warning on Daycare - beware the unions.

I know very few unionized daycare workers. You have many in your area?

[tango]

I am under the impression that the Liberals already have a lead among female voters; those not already on board might not be the sort for whom a national daycare program is a deciding factor. We're not a monolith...

Absolutely.

One policy that women from coast to coast would rally behind would be taking away Oleg's computer. Please consider bringing it up at the next town hall.

-k

Absolutely.

[August1991]

I know very few unionized daycare workers. You have many in your area?

You obviously don't live in Quebec where day care workers are unionized. (At issue is whether fewer highly paid day care workers will lead to better day care when competent day care workers are left unemployed.)

It's a friggen waste of time and human efficiency, in fact.

We pay them for that posturing crap, when they could be thinking and doing.

We pay people (whether women or men) to sit in parliament to debate and argue. I hope never to live in a country where political parties co-operate or collude or, to use the American term, "reach across the aisle" and are "bipartisan".

I prefer an Official Opposition, such is one element of democracy.

nice thread hijack, boys.

Good point.

From the OP:

"Liberals cannot win a government unless they have a significant gap in their favour with women voters," said Peter Donolo of the Strategic Counsel, a national polling firm. "They've got issues to overcome [such as] in Western Canada, so they have to find advantages where they can and a key one is women voters."

Why are the Liberals worried about wooing women voters? They have a majority of women's votes now...

[jdobbin]

You obviously don't live in Quebec where day care workers are unionized. (At issue is whether fewer highly paid day care workers will lead to better day care when competent day care workers are left unemployed.)

How many are uniounized in Quebec?

I'd say there is very few here.

Why are the Liberals worried about wooing women voters? They have a majority of women's votes now...

I think the link says they need more to make inroads in places like the west.

[Molly]

The notion that daycare is an urban problem misses by a mile. Providing suitable daycare options in an urban setting is a piece of cake (with icing) compared to the challenge rural parents face.

It's one of those basic things that, in choosing a rural location, you enter knowing you will just have to live without.

Attempting to diminish its importance by calling it a 'baby-sitting service' just exemplifies the need for more feminine input into law-making/program design. The lack of acceptable daycare crushes opportunity for women, and by extension, their children. The functional availability of childcare is one of the major reasons people- economically challenged people, who want not to be so challenged- congregate in cities!

Edited April 16, 2009 by Molly