Child Care

[shoop]

The CPC daycare plan will allow more mothers to stay home with their children, then will the Liberals plan. Why is it a bad thing?

Most mothers would love to stay home with their children.  Unfortuantely, the majority of mothers cannot afford to do so, and have to got to work....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[scribblet]

The CPC daycare plan will allow more mothers to stay home with their children, then will the Liberals plan. Why is it a bad thing?

Most mothers would love to stay home with their children.  Unfortuantely, the majority of mothers cannot afford to do so, and have to got to work....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its not a bad thing, but we are talking spin here. In order to promote a national day care plan, the other view has to be manipulated and demonized. Stay at home parents should be given equal opportunity.

If anyone has seen the sub standard care in state funded, inspected seniors homes, then it would sure give you pause for concern. Imagine,, young kids left in dirty diapers because there's a shortage of staff, and don't forget government centres tend generally only cover the bare mimum standards.

[normanchateau]

I would think that the most cost-effective method that actually produces the intended result would be the best way.  Providing a cheque that is insufficient to pay for a single day out of five will only help people who can afford to pay for the other four days.  Thus, the CPC solution does little to accomplish the intended end, and should therefore be struck from serious consideration (at least by intelligent people).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Since when does CPC come up with cost-effective plans? Even their 2% cut in the GST was condemned by most economists incuding those from the fiscally conservative Fraser Institute. You know and I know that Harper offered $25 a week for one reason only...he thought it would produce more votes. Clearly his plan backfired judging by his current standing in the polls.

[Kiraly]

Quebec Daycare has a Darkside

A big, new study of the Quebec program has found that participating children and their parents are worse off than before, suffering from behavioral and health problems.

Perhaps more important, however, is how the program directly affected the families that used North America's only universal child-care program.

Here's how, in the words of the researchers:

"Finally, we uncover striking evidence that children are worse off in a variety of behavioral and health dimensions, ranging from aggression to motor skills to illness. Our analysis also suggests that the new child-care program led to more hostile, less consistent parenting, worse parental health and lower-quality parental relationships."

[tweedledee]

Not surprised to hear that. The conservative plan is far more democratic and cost effectiive anyway. Would we trust the liberals with another scam, just think how much they could skim off the top of this one. enough I say.

[August1991]

Interesting poll results:

The survey by the Strategic Counsel finds that 48 per cent of those polled would opt for the Harper proposal, under which the government would give $1,200 a year to parents with young children to use as they choose.

About 45 per cent like Liberal Leader Paul Martin's program, which provides funding for licensed child-care centres to create subsidized spaces.

However, when the results are examined by gender, 50 per cent of women prefer the Liberal plan, compared with 40 per cent of men who do. By contrast, 52 per cent of men surveyed like the Harper idea best, compared with 43 per cent of women.

The conflicting numbers make it difficult to say which party gains greater advantage on the issue.

G & M

[scribblet]

Interesting poll results:

The survey by the Strategic Counsel finds that 48 per cent of those polled would opt for the Harper proposal, under which the government would give $1,200 a year to parents with young children to use as they choose.

About 45 per cent like Liberal Leader Paul Martin's program, which provides funding for licensed child-care centres to create subsidized spaces.

However, when the results are examined by gender, 50 per cent of women prefer the Liberal plan, compared with 40 per cent of men who do. By contrast, 52 per cent of men surveyed like the Harper idea best, compared with 43 per cent of women.

The conflicting numbers make it difficult to say which party gains greater advantage on the issue.

G & M

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its too soon really to know, I only believe the final polls.

"The poll found that if an election were held today, 35 per cent would vote Liberal, 29 per cent Conservative, 16 per cent NDP and 13 per cent Bloc. The numbers saw the Conservatives tighten the race somewhat in Ontario, cutting the Liberal lead to seven points from 10. The Liberals, meanwhile, cut the Bloc lead in Quebec from 26 points to 21 points."

[scribblet]

I just had to post this one, its worth a read.

http://www.canadianvalues.ca/commentary.aspx?aid=80

Author: Helen Ward

Date: Dec 09, 2005

Canada's daycare hoax

This week’s announcements, first by Conservative leader Stephen Harper and then by Liberal leader Paul Martin, of their respective party’s approach to daycare has for the first time focused the public’s attention on this important, and yet all too often ignored issue.

It’s about time.

From the outset the daycare lobby, funded not by parents but by government, unions and corporate elites, has engaged in a campaign of misinformation that has deceived politicians and public alike. Such a campaign has been needed to manufacture consent for what can only be described as an ideologically driven, unmarketable agenda on the part of its proponents.

What is this agenda? One need only read the OECD paper An Integrated Approach to Early Childhood Education and Care to find the answer. According to this astonishingly frank document, the goal is to fashion a “new order… (involving) deep changes in societies in general and in the families structure in particular…a review of the family-state relationship regarding the responsibility for the care and education of children.” ( USSR anyone ... my words)

To justify imposing this “new order” in Canada, it is first necessary to Canadians that there is a child care crisis in this country. The evidence, however, is otherwise.

-snip-

If the daycare lobby cared as much about children’s well-being as they do about the economy, they’d be advocating a set of government policies that respects parents and strengthens families. Instead they are pursuing an ideological agenda that threatens to set back equality rights for women as mothers and for children for years to come.

[August1991]

Its too soon really to know, I only believe the final polls.

"The poll found that if an election were held today, 35 per cent would vote Liberal, 29 per cent Conservative, 16 per cent NDP and 13 per cent Bloc. The numbers saw the Conservatives tighten the race somewhat in Ontario, cutting the Liberal lead to seven points from 10. The Liberals, meanwhile, cut the Bloc lead in Quebec from 26 points to 21 points."

In my post, I referred to a poll about women's and men's opinions of day care, and their relative support to the Liberal and Conservative proposals. In response, Sriblett, you quote a paragraph about party votes. I think you're missing my point.

I just had to post this one, its worth a read.

http://www.canadianvalues.ca/commentary.aspx?aid=80

Canada's daycare hoax 

What is this agenda? One need only read the OECD paper An Integrated Approach to Early Childhood Education and Care to find the answer. According to this astonishingly frank document, the goal is to fashion a “new order…

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Scriblett, Paul Martin, Stephen Harper and Jack Layton are not discussing a new order.

They are discussing ways to make the lives of ordinary Canadians better.

Many ordinary Canadians have young children they love. Many other ordinary Canadians want to help. The discussion here concerns how best to do this, the best for all, and for future generations.

Is the purpose of life to be the richest cadavre in the graveyard?

[justcrowing]

Sociologist Reginald Bibby of the University of Lethbridge, directed a study* entitled "The Future Families Project" and it was done in conjunction with the Vanier Institute of the Family in Ottawa, Ontario.

They published the study on February 10, 2005, and it offers some very eye opening facts. It must be noted that the Vanier Institute is held in high esteem as a reputable think tank and research institute, and works on a non-political basis studying trends and the needs of, and is a national, charitable organization dedicated to promoting the well-being of Canadian families.

In their study, Vanier "found that 90% of Canadians feel that, in two-parent situations, ideally, one parent should stay home and take primary responsibility for raising children." The study also found that, in their perfect Canada, the number one choice of Canadians would be one's partner, followed by a parent, then another relative. Rounding out the top five? Home-based child care followed by daycare centres. At the bottom of the list were friends and sitters.

If this is true, then why do so many parents seek childcare? Working class families with one stay at home parent making the same amount as a family with two wage earners pays almost double the income tax. Simply put, many parents find that they are unable to raise their own children because of an unfair tax system.

Thus, the Conservatives have also offered up an income splitting scheme allowing families where one parent raises the children to split the income between both parents. This will allow many more parents to stay home, and will eliminate the need for another bloated bureacratic program. What a concept. Women's groups, who for years have been decrying the worth of the work a woman does at home, have been strangely silent.

Knowing full well the information that is found in this study, as it is disseminated to all political parties, why is there only one party willing to do the will of Canadians? Why is the media negligent on publishing this angle of the child care debate?

After all, don't we all want what is best for our children? Perhaps it is time to start considering the answer to that question. Perhaps we should also ask if there are any political parties willing to use our children's best interests as political capital.

[Guest eureka]

That is one stay at homeparent where the income is equal ti the combined income of the family where both must work. That brings an entirely different set of questions.

One of these is which family is better of. The two income family cited must spend more of their income on transport and other work related necessities. It would still not be better than that one income famoly and the tax break would widen the inequality.

[hiti]

So the CPC child care plan is to bring back the baby bonus or family allowance that dad and mom can spend on goodies. So what good is $1200 per year per child under six years????? And what happens when this child turns seven and the CPC allowance check dries up as the childs expenses rises?

What about the parents who's children are older than six years and need after school child care? With Harper they are out of luck.

And how is $1200 per child under six going to compare with the wage of a mom who wants to work and needs real subsidized day care.

$1200 per year is an insult to the intelligence of working Canadians.

[err]

The CPC daycare plan will allow more mothers to stay home with their children, then will the Liberals plan. Why is it a bad thing?

Most mothers would love to stay home with their children.  Unfortuantely, the majority of mothers cannot afford to do so, and have to got to work....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And the big $25/week will replace the earnings... or supplement the husband's income sufficiently to allow the wife to stay home.... The only people this will really help is those who don't need it that much... get real... For most people who need the assistance, this is a joke.....

[shoop]

The CPC will make sure elementary schools teach children to correctly conjugate their verbs!

And what happens when this child turns seven and the CPC allowance check dries up as the childs expenses rises?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Guest eureka]

Might even teach them not to split infinitives!

The CPC will make sure elementary schools teach children to correctly conjugate their verbs! laugh.gif

[lovecanada]

Shish, backword thinking makes my eyes blur!

What about the parents who's children are older than six years and need after school child care? With Harper they are out of luck.

With the Liberals they don't get anything anyways from their proposal. Can you seriously tell me that STATE daycare is better than a stay at home Mom? If you think that, where have family values gone? What happens when the STATE daycare workers strike..where do your children go then?

The Montreal Gazette this mourning has more.

Quebec family-policy expert Pierre Lefebvre found last year that among the children enrolled in $5-a-day daycare, the largest group, 58 per cent, came from families earning at least $60,000 a year. These families, more able than others to pay more, are benefiting from annual subsidies varying, depending on a child's age, from $11,528 to $15,720 a year, Lefebvre said.

This is a big issue with me because I paid full price to put my child in a dayhome (never daycare). Other Moms were subsidized, no one talks about that! The lower income families/single Mom's are already getting a huge break here, so I love the Conservative proposal because finally I am getting a break! And remember that lower income families also get a child tax bonus cheque that most middle income earners don't qualify for or if they do they are getting $20 per month.

[Montgomery Burns]

Even Ken Dryden admitted that only 1 in 7 (14%) of working women have pre-school children.

What about the other 86%?

[lovecanada]

Even Ken Dryden admitted that only 1 in 7 (14%) of working women have pre-school children.

What about the other 86%?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Government is already sticking their noses into to much of our business...Stay out of my decisions for my children! Another black hole has been born if we elect the

Liberals..let's throw money at medicare and daycare! :angry:

[err]

Even Ken Dryden admitted that only 1 in 7 (14%) of working women have pre-school children.

What about the other 86%?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Government is already sticking their noses into to much of our business...Stay out of my decisions for my children! Another black hole has been born if we elect the

Liberals..let's throw money at medicare and daycare! :angry:

Except to make sure that our kids don't have to put up with any queers or blacks or lesbiens or pay for abortions for those wefare sluts who get pregnant...

[sharkman]

When you stoop to silly responses like this err, you reveal your hate, but it has no place here.

[justcrowing]

When you stoop to silly responses like this err, you reveal your hate, but it has no place here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My thoughts too - I found the comment rather disgusting by err.

[Canuck E Stan]

I'm not, I'm surprised he didn't mention Mike Harris or Corporations in the same sentence.....this is not like him.

[err]

When you stoop to silly responses like this err, you reveal your hate, but it has no place here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well I'll apologize for using such derogatory terms for describing the kinds of people that your precious CPC party wants to discriminate against... on moral grounds of course.... I though I'd use the words that you'd identify with, as you discuss such people amongst your CPC-type selves....

[justcrowing]

When you stoop to silly responses like this err, you reveal your hate, but it has no place here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well I'll apologize for using such derogatory terms for describing the kinds of people that your precious CPC party wants to discriminate against... on moral grounds of course.... I though I'd use the words that you'd identify with, as you discuss such people amongst your CPC-type selves....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your so-called apology is still an insult. What do you mean that you used words that CPCers would identify with? Take some time out and look in the mirror.

[hiti]

The Conservative plan for "Child Care" does not only provide a gift of $1200 a year per child be given to the parents of all children under 6, but the plan is to eliminate the Liberal Day Care Plan. Rona Ambrose says that the $1200 will replace the Liberal agreements with the province.

I remember raising children with the "family allowance" that amounted to $25 per month per child and it was a slap in the cost of what a child needed. It was pin money that was spent on "beer and popcorn" to provide some relief from all the bills of raising children. There also was no "means test" to determine that those who really needed the hand out were the ones who got it. The middle and upper income earners received the same "$25 beer and popcorn" money that the lower income parents did, except when the lower income parent bought "$25 beer and popcorn", the family may have gone without dinner or lunch.

The Liberal Plan, while I have some concerns about its effectiveness, at least is focused on the problem: the lack of quality day care at a reasonable cost for those who need it. The Conservative Plan is based on ideology and will do nothing to solve the problem. This idea that there should be no programs offered to the less fortunate to give them a "hand up" reflects the rejection of "progressivism" in the new Conservative Party.

I would prefer to see my tax dollars spent on helping the children of the less fortunate get a good start in life than provide a free gift to the more affluent.

Quebec's $5- (now $7-) dollar-a-day, open-to-all daycare program is the model being used in the Liberal Plan. At least here lower income parents have a chance to make a difference in their children's lives.