Is it just me or have the Liberals around here fallen silent all of a

[Melanie_]

The Liberal policy is the money must encorporate the QUAD principles - Quality, Universality, Accessibility, Developmental. The provinces spend the money as it works in their system, as long as those principles are upheld. The Conservative policy is we don't need a system, or any accountability, just give the money away with no strings attached.

[Hydraboss]

No strings attached? Why would parents need strings? They will spend the money as they see fit.

However, $1200/year is weak. Majorly weak. How many kids under 6 are we talking about? Two million? Three? (I honestly don't know)

Let's see.....$2,000,000,000 / 3,000,000 kids = $666.66 (hmm...weird!)

$1200 + $666.666 = $1866.66 now that's a little more like it.

[Guest eureka]

I think I mentioned earlier that the tax break for corporations has been tried. It doesn't work. Only 4% of daycare spaces were opened by corporations. I also think there is some confusion here. Daycare spaces for corporations means for employees: you are right about that.

That also is unlikely to be of much use since a large number of people commute. They will not bundle up their kids every day for an hour or two's drive to their place of employment.

It would also work against transportation policy if they did by increasing car usage.

What bothers me about all the opposition to a daycare programme - and Harper's proposal is not for daycare - is that it is all centred around a personal experience of middle class workers. What of all those many hundreds of thousands who are not on that bracket and who desperately need childcare in order to have any hope of employment?

The talk of friends, neighbours, and relatives is foolish and shows a lack of understanding of society and relationships. It doesn't happen now and nothing in the Conservative proposal will make it happen. For many, the friends etc. are also in need of childcare. There is no need to go into why it does not happen: it just does not. To try to make it so would be to institute the kind of social engineering that the Conservatives supposedly oppose.

It is tax breaks for corporations to set up daycare spaces *for their employees/children of their employees*. That is a very big part of the policy you have missed.

[Hydraboss]

eureka, we agree. Corporate daycare may or may not work, but what does that do for the single mother that works for a company of 5-15 employees? They aren't going to open a daycare on site. But increasing the CHEQUE that she gets (read: cash) allows her to HELP pay for a daycare space, or pay her mother, or her bilingual, multi-sexual neighbour (who cares!). But the amount needs to be higher than $1200. Concerns that will no-doubt be raised: How do we know she will spend it on daycare? Well, how do we know she doesn't own a Ferrari? What does it matter? Equality is equality.

However, you state that she won't take the monsters on the mass transit to work. Are you prepared to guarantee that there will be a government-run daycare within walking distance of her two room apartment?

[Canuck E Stan]

That also is unlikely to be of much use since a large number of people commute. They will not bundle up their kids every day for an hour or two's drive to their place of employment.

A little bit thick on the hour or two to their place of enployement.I'm sure most Canadians don't spend that much time.

And if they did they would have to leave even earier to get the kids to the daycare.

Does taking them to a daycare not require dressing them up?

Parents would love to take their kids to a daycare at work instead of driving across town in a mad rush to a daycare.

They could still interact periodically with their kids during the day and have them when work is done to head straight home instead of driving to the daycare before closing.

[Melanie_]

Are you prepared to guarantee that there will be a government-run daycare within walking distance of her two room apartment?

Thats the Accesibility piece of the QUAD principles. Child care needs to be flexible enough to meet the needs of all parents, wherever they are. This might simply mean there is a licensing body in place to ensure that the nice lady down the street doesn't have a criminal record, or show up on the child abuse registry.

And CES, there is no reason that worksite child care wouldn't also be an option in the Liberal plan, and it actually might be more likely to occur in smaller towns. Large corporations, the ones most likely to take advantage of tax breaks, don't generally set up shop in rural and northern communities; provincial governments are more likely to look at the needs of all of their constituents and open child care spaces where they are needed.

[betsy]

I don't claim to speak for the entire corporate world, but I can knowledgably speak for one.

Do you think your corporation would take advantage of the tax breaks Harper is offering for corporations to start daycare centres for their employees?

There are already some workplaces that have daycares for their employees. Harper's plan is to encourage more of these.

[betsy]

The Liberal policy is the money must encorporate the QUAD principles - Quality, Universality, Accessibility, Developmental. The provinces spend the money as it works in their system, as long as those principles are upheld. The Conservative policy is we don't need a system, or any accountability, just give the money away with no strings attached.

Strings attached?

We've been giving money to welfare recipients with no strings attached. When someone suggested the government must ensure the money is not spent on drugs and booze...there was a big outrrage about it.

So parents cannot...and therefore, should not be trusted with the money?

If that's the message by the Liberal government....why, I consider that a terrible insult to parents...and to the working public who had been working hard and paying high taxes to support welfare and other social programs!

[betsy]

I think I mentioned earlier that the tax break for corporations has been tried. It doesn't work. Only 4% of daycare spaces were opened by corporations. I also think there is some confusion here. Daycare spaces for corporations means for employees: you are right about that.

That also is unlikely to be of much use since a large number of people commute. They will not bundle up their kids every day for an hour or two's drive to their place of employment.

It would also work against transportation policy if they did by increasing car usage.

What bothers me about all the opposition to a daycare programme - and Harper's proposal is not for daycare - is that it is all centred around a personal experience of middle class workers. What of all those many hundreds of thousands who are not on that bracket and who desperately need childcare in order to have any hope of employment?

The talk of friends, neighbours, and relatives is foolish and shows a lack of understanding of society and relationships. It doesn't happen now and nothing in the Conservative proposal will make it happen. For many, the friends etc. are also in need of childcare. There is no need to go into why it does not happen: it just does not. To try to make it so would be to institute the kind of social engineering that the Conservatives supposedly oppose.

It is tax breaks for corporations to set up daycare spaces *for their employees/children of their employees*. That is a very big part of the policy you have missed.

At least, the option is there. This is what it's all about why a lot do not favor National Childcare. Options.

The right of parents to choose and decide what is best for their children and what works well for their family's needs.

[betsy]

Another important matter too is that sometime before the last election, childcare advocates were saying that they have a big problem. They were losing qualified care providers in public daycares at a fast rate. They want to lure them to stay by raising their salaries.

The National Childcare is not yet here....and yet....the problems are already starting.

How does the Liberal want to rectify this problem?

[betsy]

This fast turn-over of staff is definitely not good for the children. They'll always be adjusting to somebody new. There is no stability.

How will the Liberal government ensure that there won't be a fast turn over of staff?

[betsy]

The Liberal government is trying to create a need when actually the real existing need can easily be remedied without resorting to GRANDIOSE measures.

The Liberal government is deaf.

The main reason why majority of people reject this MONOPOLY is because it intrudes on parents' rights!

As a taxpayer who'll be footing the colossal bill, I definitely do not agree. I see this as another irresponsible way of handling taxpayers money.

As a parent being told by the Liberals, "you do not make decisions how your child should be raised. I do."

I'm fuming right now and all I can think of is an expletive x-rated "up ****" rebutt. (no pun intended).

[Guest eureka]

Stop fuming and allow yourself to think, betsy.

The option is not there and parents will not have right to decide what is best for their children. That is present only when there is daycare as one choice. Without that, how can there be any choice.

[Drea]

I always thought the conservatives wanted LESS social safety net? "Get out there and work yah bum!" has been the mantra of conservatives forever. What changed? Why are conservatives now frothing at the mouth to get their hands on an extra $1200 a year? Even for those who don't need it (aren't poor)?

The provincial govt ALREADY pays for daycare. YES they pay even if grandma is looking after the kidlets.

They pay over $300 per month (at least in BC).

The biggest issue working parents face is finding decent care for their children. Giving everyone $1200 won't increase the amount of daycare spaces.

Pffft... family making $100,000 per year and the cons want to PAY THEM for having children? What a ridiculous idea.

Conservatives will cry: "but the single mom who goes to work gets over $300 from the govt and my stay at home wife should get some money too!"

Never mind that that family can afford brandname Playmobile toys etc and the single mom is going down to the thrift store to buy dirty old toys that she takes home and cleans for her toddler... and the crib she uses isn't quite up to par because she bought the only one she could afford and the wife of the rich guy has gone through two cribs already since the baby was born because she changed the colour of the baby's room again.

Sorry, got to ranting a bit but I am so disgusted with "have" people who figure they "need" the $1200.

[scribblet]

The Liberal government is trying to create a need when actually the real existing need can easily be remedied without resorting to GRANDIOSE measures.

The Liberal government is deaf.

The main reason why majority of people reject this MONOPOLY is because it intrudes on parents' rights!

As a taxpayer who'll be footing the colossal bill, I definitely do not agree. I see this as another irresponsible way of handling taxpayers money.

As a parent being told by the Liberals, "you do not make decisions how your child should be raised. I do."

I'm fuming right now and all I can think of is an expletive x-rated "up ****" rebutt. (no pun intended).

It would be a colossal bill, probably make the gun registry look like peanuts and the largest beneficiary of this will be the unions.

What happened to people being responsible for their own actions, and not having kids if they can't afford them - okay maybe too simplistic. Nationalizing day care centres is just a start of imore intrusion into private lives and decisions, whats next nationalized kids sports and activities? You vill be in soccer, or you vill be in gymnastics cos big brother says you have to be.

Nationized day care means its open to all regardless of income and will result in long wait lists cost overuns as in health care and neither doen't take mothers' and caregivers' concerns into account.

[Drea]

Get real.

My tenant operates a little daycare... do you think she is going to have to "institutionalize" it?

Pffft.

It's about SPACE. Daycare space and the LACK thereof.

NOT about putting babies in little nazi uniforms and endoctrinating them.... talk about tinfoil hats! LOL

Under Harper's plan there is no increased space. As I've stated before THE GOVT ALREADY PAYS for childcare for those who CANNOT AFFORD to pay it themselves.

Why in the hell should MY tax dollars go to Mr. and Mrs. One Hundred Grand A Year? So they can repaint the babies room? So they can give gramma $100 when the wife is going out for her facial and can't watch the baby?

Pfffffft. Talk about a culture of entitlement! Am I entitled to $100? My family makes over 100 g/yr?

[Hydraboss]

And why the hell should my tax dollars go to a daycare space so that poor, single mom can drop the monsters off and go to bingo? Oversimplified? Of course it is. The danger of generalizing people into income brackets is that it does not allow for individual circumstances.

Point in fact:

My wife and I have always both worked. WE HAD TO. When my wife went to find a daycare for our kids...they ask how much you make! Guess what??? WE MADE TOO MUCH and were told that we did not qualify for spots at the daycare one block away. We would have had to take them to the daycare about 30 blocks away (which I didn't trust).

Solution?

We paid OUT OF OUR POCKET for the monster-in-law to watch them. Can we receive funding for this? No chance.

Equality my ass.

[BubberMiley]

I've never heard of a daycare that only takes kids from low-income families. And that's the only one you trusted?

[Drea]

You may want to crank at your provincial govt for this... After all it is a provincial responsibility (currently).

I've never heard of a SPACE being denied. I've heard of people being denied the govt subsidy because they made too much money.

BTW, the single mom is not playing bingo (the govt does not pay for babysitting for "outtings") -- she is working at Walmart for minimum wage.

Conservatives have always bitched about the "nanny" state and now you want to become part of it?

As a liberal myself I don't believe I (should I have a baby) am entitled to recieve money for daycare because I make decent money. I don't work at Walmart, but many do.

The woman (single mom) who makes $40 grand a year does not get daycare subsidy, nor should the family who pulls in that amount.

Would you rather see that single mom stuck on welfare for the rest of her life?

[Hydraboss]

In what world does Walmart pay minimum wage? Try $12/hr to pump gas, $11.85/hr as A GREETER at Wally World. If you follow the news in Edmonton, you would have seen the story where daycares bill the government more than individual parents. People have been denied spots (I know) because those same spots can bring in more money if they are billed to a subsidy program. (Global News, Edmonton, approx Jan 8/06)

You want to hear bitching? Ask that woman that starts making just over the tax threshold amount, and watch her eyes when she realizes how much she is now paying in tax. That same mom (and I speak from personal experience) will scream and holler about "welfare bums" etc... that are getting her money.

[Drea]

Just on the news... CTV

$40,000 per year to work at Superstore in Alberta. They are recruiting people from Atlantic Canada. No one tells these people that there's a housing shortage tho and that they'll be paying $1500 a month for a studio apt.

Here in the Fraser Valley (BC), Superstore and Walmart pay minimum wage. I worked at Liquidation World previously and I made minimum wage -- and yes, my daycare was fully subsidised. As was after school care once my son was in school. If Liquidation world could've paid me $40,000/yr I would've stayed on...

BTW, What's going on in Alberta does not reflect what's going on in the rest of the country.

[Hydraboss]

Alberta may be different, but I can get a one bedroom (approx. 1400sqft) apt in the river valley in edmonton for $1500. Average two bedroom in edmonton runs about 600-750.

[betsy]

Another important matter too is that sometime before the last election, childcare advocates were saying that they have a big problem. They were losing qualified care providers in public daycares at a fast rate. They want to lure them to stay by raising their salaries.

The National Childcare is not yet here....and yet....the problems are already starting.

How does the Liberal want to rectify this problem?

Eureka, I'd really like to hear your opinion on this. Please answer.

[kimmy]

I suspect that Drea has assumed that conditions that are true of the far north boom-towns-- Fort MacMurray, High Level-- apply elsewhere in the province.

-k

[betsy]

This fast turn-over of staff is definitely not good for the children. They'll always be adjusting to somebody new. There is no stability.

How will the Liberal government ensure that there won't be a fast turn over of staff?

Eureka, I'd also like to hear your input on this. Please answer.