WITH LUCK, CHAOS WILL GIVE WAY TO A REAL CHILD-CARE SOLUTION
After decades of lagging other developed nations and decades of lobbying, Canadians may finally get universal access to goodquality and affordable child care.
At long last, the political resistance to accessible and affordable early childhood education programs across the country appears to have been overwhelmed with all of the evidence that investment is good for the economy as well as the long-term health, wealth and happiness of the children who receive it.
Earlier this month — 13 years after the federal Liberals proposed a universal child-care program — Justin Trudeau’s government signed an agreement with the provinces to provide up to $7.5 billion over the next 11 years to make it happen. The only provinces missing were Quebec, which already has its own program, and British Columbia, which doesn’t have a functioning government.
But last week, Christy Clark’s near-death experience in the recent election spun her 180 degrees from opposing a universal plan proposed by both the New Democrats and the Greens to promising a $1-billion program she says would create 60,000 child-care spaces in four years and provide full subsidies for families whose income is less than $60,000 and partial help for those who earn under $100,000.
Interestingly, the federal government forecast that its $7.5-billion investment would result in the creation of only 40,000 new spots. But let’s not quibble over Clark’s hyperbole or her cynical about-face on government-funded child care as well as welfare rates, a poverty reduction plan and more money for children in government care.
Although Clark was first elected on the promise of a family-friendly government, she has presided over a province with the dismal distinction of having a child poverty rate among Canada’s highest and the country’s highest housing prices. It invests nearly half the national average in child care and has fewer regulated child-care spaces than the Canadian norm. And, it bears emphasizing, Canada ranks at the bottom among OECD countries in its investment in children.
All of that helps explain why even many young professionals and their families can no longer afford to live here and are fleeing or considering leaving not only Vancouver, but British Columbia.
Despite naysayers’ contention that universal child care is too expensive, an analysis of the socio-economic benefits of a $10-a-day plan proposed by the Early Childhood Educators of B.C. indicates it would pay for itself and even boost the provincial economy.
The study’s authors are not woolly-headed ideologues. Lynell Anderson is a chartered accountant, while economist Robert Fairholm has received the Financial Times award for forecast accuracy five times and in 2001 was named Canada’s best predictor over the previous five years.
By using the same forecasting assumptions used to determine the impacts of other large government spending, the study concluded that at full implementation by 2030, the program would boost B.C.’s economy by two per cent, or $5.8 billion.
That is three times the program’s total cost. In other words, far from being a money pit, a child-care program would pay for itself and make British Columbians wealthier.
It would create 69,000 jobs at an employment multiplier rate of 36.4 jobs per million spent — a multiplier effect well above that of investments in other forms of infrastructure.
Among the reasons for the large multiplier effect is that accessible child care is a huge barrier to women working full time. In Quebec, where there already is a universal program, 93 per cent of women with children under 16 work, compared to 86 per cent in the rest of Canada, according to the Advisory Council on Economic Growth.
Among the changes it recommended were universal access to quality daycare, improved parental leave provisions and more flexible working schedules.
Last week, McKinsey & Co. released a report that suggested that if more women worked, the Canadian economy could grow by $150 billion in 10 years, with B.C. among the four provinces with the greatest potential to benefit.
But children would be the biggest beneficiaries in both the short and long-term. Studies have found those who had access to early childhood education are healthier. They are better educated as adults, less likely to be involved in crime and more likely to have higher incomes, which — put crassly — translates into more and better taxpayers.
Canadian politicians’ failure to acknowledge the reality of contemporary family life is one reason early childhood care has been ignored. The other has been their preference to reduce taxes rather than provide services.
As Janet Austin, the CEO of the YWCA in Metro Vancouver, tartly says, “If you want to build a school library, you don’t give everybody $5 and say, ‘Now, you go figure it out.’ ”
Amid the chaos of B.C.’s hung parliament, all of that has apparently changed. It’s only been 45 years since the Royal Commission on the Status of Women first recommended a universal childcare program.
Regardless of the hows and whys, B.C. children and parents finally appear to be on the cusp of getting some much-needed relief. They have to hope that an early election doesn’t get in the way.