Child Care: Seeking Parliament's Consent


View Poll Results: What should occur, in relation to the Conservatives' child care program?
The budget should be adopted. 3 37.50%
The budget should be defeated — an election should ensue. 2 25.00%
The budget should be defeated — Mr. Harper should resign. 1 12.50%
The budget should be amended to change the program. 1 12.50%
Don't know / Prefer not to respond¹ 1 12.50%
Voters: 8. You may not vote on this poll

FiveParadox
Liberal
#1
It would appear that the Right Honourable Stephen Harper , P.C. , M.P. , the Member for Calgary Southwest and the Prime Minister of Canada , and his Government of Canada , are making preparations to seek the consent of the House of Commons , through legislative measures, to start running their hot-button child care strategy in Canada — the program would commence as soon as the consent of the Parliament of Canada has been secured.

Mr. Harper indicated, after a meeting with children and parents in the Province of British Columbia today, that his Government is prepared to bring in legislation to implement the strategy — whether or not the support of the opposition in parties in relation to that strategy can be secured. The Prime Minister has indicated that the strategy is to be embedded in the next budget — the defeat thereof would, by convention, trigger another election.

If the budget were to be passed by the Commons, then it would move on the Senate (which is dominated by sixty-six members of the Liberal Party of Canada ), where the worst-case scenario for the Government would be the rather short delay of the passage of the budget (since Senators do not have the right to force an Act under the recommendation of Her Excellency the Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean , C.C. , C.M.M. , C.O.M. , C.D. , the Governor General of Canada — her recommendation is required for any measures which would appropriate funds, such as the budget).

Therefore, the fate of the Government rests with the Commons (as is the prerogative of the Commons), and I would suggest that the Government is tempting that prerogative by preparing to introduce measures (which they know, at no surprise, could be defeated by the opposition parties). I would suggest that the Government should reconsider its stance on this issue, and recognize that a majority of the citizens of Canada voted for parties who would not have pushed for a taxed direct-payment method of child care program.

Quote: Originally Posted by The Web site for the [color=blue

Office of the Prime Minister of Canada[/color]]During the roundtable with parents and children, the Prime Minister discussed the components of the new government's universal child care plan - an allowance that will deliver a direct payment of $1200 per year, per child under the age of six to parents, and a space creation plan that will seek input from Parliament on how to best produce real spaces for real child care for all Canadians.

Click here to read the entire article in English.
Cliquetez içi pour lire l'article entier en français.

Sources
1. Click here for the Web site of the Office of the Prime Minister of Canada .

Revision : (1) Added a "Don't know / Prefer not to respond" option to the survey.
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
#2
Olivia Chow , M.P. , the Member for Trinity—Spadina and Children and Youth Critic for the New Democratic Party of Canada , today brought to the forefront the truth, in the opinion of her party, of the child care program to be introduced by the Government of Canada in the House of Commons some time in the near future. As per a report from the Caledon Institute on Social Policy , Ms. Chow highlighted the hidden clawbacks that would decimate the direct-payment method.
  • Payment, per child, per year: Twelve hundred dollars (+CAD$1 200)
  • Minus income tax: Three hundred sixty-two dollars (-CAD$362)
  • Minus benefit clawback: three hundred ninety dollars (-CAD$390)
  • Minus Young Child Supplement: Two hundred forty-nine dollars (-CAD$249)
  • Total: One hundred ninety-nine dollars (+CAD$199)
If this information is correct, then the hype among supporters of the Conservative Party of Canada in terms of their child care agenda is, in my opinion, quite unwarranted (and perhaps incorrect). I hope that the New Democratic Party comes through on Ms. Chow's suggestions of enshrining the agreements with the provinces in legislation, and tearing up this new "direct-payment" faux program.
 
I think not
#3
I'm not doubting anything Five, I don't follow Canadian politics that closely, but this sounds too stupid to be true, doesn't it? You're talking upwards of 85% in taxes.
 
MMMike
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by I think not

I'm not doubting anything Five, I don't follow Canadian politics that closely, but this sounds too stupid to be true, doesn't it? You're talking upwards of 85% in taxes.

No, 85% taxes seems about right in our little socialist paradise! Five, Olivia Chow is full of The $1,200 may be taxed, but the other benefits and allowances will not be clawed back. And she should know better.
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
#5
I hope you are correct, MMMike , if this measure is indeed to go forward. However, it should be noted that, according to the Bloc Québécois , the Honourable Jean Charest , P.C. , M.N.A. , the Premier of Québec , has indicated that his Government of Québec intends to take measures to reduce their own spending if the Government of Canada goes through with this. I hope the other provinces don't follow suit.
 
Said1
Free Thinker
#6
Reduce spending on Child Care?
 
JonB2004
#7
I want the budget to be defeated and an election to follow. I'm not interested in the Conservatives top 5 priorities, especially their child care plan.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by JonB2004

I want the budget to be defeated and an election to follow. I'm not interested in the Conservatives top 5 priorities, especially their child care plan.

I believe you would see the Conservatives gain seats.

Probably not enough for a majority, but enough to scare the Opposition into compliance on this, and probably a couple of other issues.

Edited to say:

Just look at the poll results on this thread, and this a very (small "l") liberal place.

Perhaps a majority!
 
JonB2004
#9
There is the chance that could happen or the voters might not find the Conservatives capable of keeping a stable government and they could get thrown out.
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
#10
Heh, Colpy , you are going off of four votes — and one them (mine) was "Don't know", lol. Nonetheless, I don't think I'd want the budget defeated over this issue. It would only hurt the institution of Parliament at this point, for us to drag people through the drama of another election. (Sure, the Tories might gain seats, but I think that every party would lose some more respect from the electorate.)
 
Colpy
Conservative
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by FiveParadox

Heh, Colpy , you are going off of four votes — and one them (mine) was "Don't know", lol. Nonetheless, I don't think I'd want the budget defeated over this issue. It would only hurt the institution of Parliament at this point, for us to drag people through the drama of another election. (Sure, the Tories might gain seats, but I think that every party would lose some more respect from the electorate.)

Yeah, you're right!

I didn't look, just saw the percentages....never mind!
 
LittleRunningGag
Free Thinker
#12
I don't think that you'd see an increase. I think that we've already seen some of what everyone was worried about before the Conservatives took office.

As for the child credit, I see it as a worthless policy. The biggest problem is that instead of helping struggling families, this is going to give money to people just for having kids. This means that regardless of your income, whether you make a million dollars a year, or a thousand dollars a year, if you have kids you will get twelve hundred dollars.

Personally, I don't feel like giving my money to people who make more than me just because they have kids.

At least the liberal child credits were based off of income.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by LittleRunningGag

I don't think that you'd see an increase. I think that we've already seen some of what everyone was worried about before the Conservatives took office.

As for the child credit, I see it as a worthless policy. The biggest problem is that instead of helping struggling families, this is going to give money to people just for having kids. This means that regardless of your income, whether you make a million dollars a year, or a thousand dollars a year, if you have kids you will get twelve hundred dollars.

Personally, I don't feel like giving my money to people who make more than me just because they have kids.

At least the liberal child credits were based off of income.

I think you have misunderstood.

I agree that I would prefer the payments be made on income, and I would like to see them doubled (and paid out to the lower income 50%)

However, the Child Tax Credit will NOT disappear, at least in my understanding. It will remain the same, and the $1200 is added to it.

As I have repeatedly argued on this forum, direct payments are the only way to help the working poor.

Poor people usually don't work 9 to 5, when day cares are open.

Poor people have transportation problems to and from day care.

Poor people often have one parent stay at home with the kids, and take in friend's or family's kids for a little extra money.

NONE of this is helped by increased child care spaces.

Nor are people who live outside cities helped.
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
#14
It is unfortunate that the direct-payment method is more accessible to citizens, yet simultaneously less effective (or on-target) than "program"-type initiatives. It would be nice if our Members of Parliament could co-operate for a few minutest, and attempt to search for some sort of agreeable compromise, but I think we're going to continue to see this sort of "grandstanding" (from both sides of the House) for some months to come.
 
BitWhys
#15
I'd rather see a costing of the failed provincial programs before I cast a vote. My support of day care programs is only marginal at this point. By the same token I wouldn't call for a governments fall over its implementation, either.

I'm ambivalent about the program but am surprised at how quickly some people downplay the art of successfully getting all the provinces to agree on ANYTHING. and now its going to get thrown away.
 
BitWhys
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy

As I have repeatedly argued on this forum, direct payments are the only way to help the working poor.

Poor people usually don't work 9 to 5, when day cares are open.

Poor people have transportation problems to and from day care.

Poor people often have one parent stay at home with the kids, and take in friend's or family's kids for a little extra money.

NONE of this is helped by increased child care spaces.

Nor are people who live outside cities helped.

I'm always fascinated by predictably timely Conservative concern for the poor when acknowledgement of their very existence serves to add some questionably marginal benefit to otherwise dubiously justified programs.

a clawed back tax credit (once again the Cons are playing the wrong side of the supply/demand curve) and a brand new committee.

what an embarrassment.
 
MMMike
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys

I'd rather see a costing of the failed provincial programs before I cast a vote. My support of day care programs is only marginal at this point. By the same token I wouldn't call for a governments fall over its implementation, either.

I'm ambivalent about the program but am surprised at how quickly some people downplay the art of successfully getting all the provinces to agree on ANYTHING. and now its going to get thrown away.

Ask Quebec about the costs... it is costing them some $2 billion a year for their daycare program, with costs rising rapidly and huge waiting lists.

As for getting provinces to agree... they will take the money no matter what strings are attached. I think it is a mistake, as there was no guarenteed long-term funding, and no analysis of the longer term costs.

I agree with Colpy... direct payments to parents are better, and they should be increased and targetted more to the lower income earners.
 
BitWhys
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by MMMike

...As for getting provinces to agree... they will take the money no matter what strings are attached...

oh bullocks. signing on to an unsubstainable program is political suicide, and so is changing agreements on the fly. Harper is SO letting the premiers off the hook with this one its actually funny.

good thing its not a program I'm sold on or I'd be upset.
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#19
It looks to me like Harper

is going to force another election when there is no clear indication that there will be anything but another minority government. This would be the third election in a year. Since federal elections cost in the region of 300 million dollars each, do we want another stupid election? Another minority government, either party, would also be just as prone to defeat and yet a forth election would be in the offing. I think Harper is being awfully generous with our money. A better bet would be to hold off on the day care thing and try to reach a compromise with the other parties. I don't think Harper has overwhelmed anyone with his performance so far, certainly not enough to win a majority.
 
MMMike
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan

It looks to me like Harper

is going to force another election when there is no clear indication that there will be anything but another minority government. This would be the third election in a year. Since federal elections cost in the region of 300 million dollars each, do we want another stupid election? Another minority government, either party, would also be just as prone to defeat and yet a forth election would be in the offing. I think Harper is being awfully generous with our money. A better bet would be to hold off on the day care thing and try to reach a compromise with the other parties. I don't think Harper has overwhelmed anyone with his performance so far, certainly not enough to win a majority.

I agree. As a matter of fact, let's get rid of these pesky elections all together. They are expensive, and force us citizens to walk all the way down to the local school to cast our ballots. Geez! That's the system Juan, and we should be thankful we live in a democracy and embrace every opportunity to cast a ballot.
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by MMMike

Quote: Originally Posted by #juan

It looks to me like Harper

is going to force another election when there is no clear indication that there will be anything but another minority government. This would be the third election in a year. Since federal elections cost in the region of 300 million dollars each, do we want another stupid election? Another minority government, either party, would also be just as prone to defeat and yet a forth election would be in the offing. I think Harper is being awfully generous with our money. A better bet would be to hold off on the day care thing and try to reach a compromise with the other parties. I don't think Harper has overwhelmed anyone with his performance so far, certainly not enough to win a majority.

I agree. As a matter of fact, let's get rid of these pesky elections all together. They are expensive, and force us citizens to walk all the way down to the local school to cast our ballots. Geez! That's the system Juan, and we should be thankful we live in a democracy and embrace every opportunity to cast a ballot.

Do I detect a note of sarcasm....

The elections cost as much as they do because we taxpayers give each party a rather generous stipend to help pay election costs. We also pay for enumeration and other things that run up the price. I think the taxpayer is sorely used by these buffoons who think elections are toys they are entitled to use whenever it suits their wim.
 
BitWhys
#22
Harper's got the fundie gay marriage war chest and being forced to call an election before that little number makes the floor plays right into his hands.

our opposition has no gonads.
 
MMMike
#23
Sarcasm? Who me? :P I agree to a certain extent that election timing is manipulated for the benefit of the parties. I fully support fixed election dates for majority governments. But in a minority situation, all bets are off. It's a delicate balance though, and decision about forcing an election can come with some backlash.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys

Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy

As I have repeatedly argued on this forum, direct payments are the only way to help the working poor.

Poor people usually don't work 9 to 5, when day cares are open.

Poor people have transportation problems to and from day care.

Poor people often have one parent stay at home with the kids, and take in friend's or family's kids for a little extra money.

NONE of this is helped by increased child care spaces.

Nor are people who live outside cities helped.

I'm always fascinated by predictably timely Conservative concern for the poor when acknowledgement of their very existence serves to add some questionably marginal benefit to otherwise dubiously justified programs.

a clawed back tax credit (once again the Cons are playing the wrong side of the supply/demand curve) and a brand new committee.

what an embarrassment.

Spare me your righteousness.

I've actually raised kids. My son was born in 1980, when I was unemployed. My daughter was born in 1984, when I was working about 60 hours a week for $7.65 an hour. We kept my wife home for a time, and went without, because she wanted to stay home. When she did go back to work, we paid her sister to care for our kids, as her family was also working poor, and she wanted to stay at home with her young son.

Our best friends had the mom stay home as well. He worked as a custodian in a school, her only income was as a bass player in a rock'n roll band.

My son works as a bar tender. Currently his wife is home watching their two kids. When she does go back to work, it will be in the evenings. He works nights.

The four families I have known best........all working poor.......all completely left out of the NDP/Liberal child welfare plan for latte-drinking, SUV driving, upper-middle class professional Torontonians.

Just look at that idiot Olivia Chow and her attack on the Conservative plan. Yes, you could pay back that much money to the government IF YOU MADE ENOUGH TO PAY THAT IN TAXES! The people I give a damn about don't pay much income tax. They also don't have cars, houses (they live in apts), cell phones etc. They also DON'T VOTE LIBERAL!

If you want to find a bunch of upper-middle class arrogant professional "I've come down from the upper class to mend your rotten ways" dickheads, just go to an NDP meeting, or a Liberal meeting. They are taking care of themselves, while making noises about helping the people that need it.

In case you haven't noticed, this issue drives me a little batty.
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy

Spare me your righteousness.

I've actually raised kids. My son was born in 1980, when I was unemployed. My daughter was born in 1984, when I was working about 60 hours a week for $7.65 an hour. We kept my wife home for a time, and went without, because she wanted to stay home. When she did go back to work, we paid her sister to care for our kids, as her family was also working poor, and she wanted to stay at home with her young son.

Our best friends had the mom stay home as well. He worked as a custodian in a school, her only income was as a bass player in a rock'n roll band.

My son works as a bar tender. Currently his wife is home watching their two kids. When she does go back to work, it will be in the evenings. He works nights.

The four families I have known best........all working poor.......all completely left out of the NDP/Liberal child welfare plan for latte-drinking, SUV driving, upper-middle class professional Torontonians.

Just look at that idiot Olivia Chow and her attack on the Conservative plan. Yes, you could pay back that much money to the government IF YOU MADE ENOUGH TO PAY THAT IN TAXES! The people I give a damn about don't pay much income tax. They also don't have cars, houses (they live in apts), cell phones etc. They also DON'T VOTE LIBERAL!

If you want to find a bunch of upper-middle class arrogant professional "I've come down from the upper class to mend your rotten ways" dickheads, just go to an NDP meeting, or a Liberal meeting. They are taking care of themselves, while making noises about helping the people that need it.

In case you haven't noticed, this issue drives me a little batty.

Good morning, Colpy .

I have noticed that this issue is of particular interest to you — and has tended to be of a somewhat sensitive nature — so I am going to attempt to keep my comments as light and respectful as possible (I mean, I try to do that anyway, but sometimes particular attention is due).

In terms of your criticism of members of the New Democratic Party of Canada and the Liberal Party of Canada , I would not quite agree with you. Notwithstanding my membership with the Grits, I would not consider my family "well-off" by any stretch of the word — my dad got quite sick a while back for several years, and he couldn't work, so my mom was attempting to support us unilaterally. Things are finally starting to look up, but keep in mind that overgeneralizations serve little purpose in the sphere of politics (and serve, in my opinion, only to cloud proper debate and discussion, with all due respect).

In terms of the child care issue in particular, however, I don't think that this plan is the best way to do it, personally. I mean, if the Government of Canada insists on taking this sort of "you're going to do it how we want to do it, or you can pay the price" mentality, then I suppose there's no choice. I would hope, however, that we can change this program to ensure that the resources are concentrated toward those who need them, instead of distributing them to everyone (however, in a press conference yesterday, the Prime Minister responded to a question like this, and stated unequivocally that the Government would sooner be defeated than accept any such amendment).

Sucks when you feel helpless to do anything. I wish I was an M.P., lol.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#26
You Five, are ALWAYS respectful.

I would also like to see resources aimed at the people that need them.

Edited to say:

Good Morning to you too.

School bores you to death, doesn't it?

Or at least doesn't challenge you at all.
 
BitWhys
#27
blah blah blah

If you bothered to pay attention to Chow instead of instinctively slagging her in a rush of false indignity you'd have realized her solution (echoing the Caledon study) delivers the direct payment to the working poor you're so concerned about instead of only pretending to as it will under the Conservative plan. so you spare me. thanks.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys

blah blah blah

If you bothered to pay attention to Chow instead of instinctively slagging her in a rush of false indignity you'd have realized her solution (echoing the Caledon study) delivers the direct payment to the working poor you're so concerned about instead of only pretending to as it will under the Conservative plan. so you spare me. thanks.

All I saw of Chow, and about all of her I can stand, is the post at the head of this thread.

Yeah. She is mightily concerned about those that pay 37% federal income tax after deductions.

How many kids have you raised?
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy

School bores you to death, doesn't it?

Usually no; however, everyone else in this class is away getting work experience credit. My friends and teachers conspired against me to have me placed at the school, though; some of my friends said that they wouldn't have felt right letting me go into downtown Vancouver by myself — apparently they didn't think I'd be safe. And my teachers agreed with them.

The sentiment is sweet, but God , I'm so freakin' bored!

BitWhys , I agree with Ms. Chow in terms of her suggestion that the amount promised by the Government is going to be significantly decreased by taxes (while perhaps not, on average, as much as she contends). However, I think it's important that we be realistic. This Government has said that it's either their way, or election time.
 
LittleRunningGag
Free Thinker
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy

I think you have misunderstood.

I agree that I would prefer the payments be made on income, and I would like to see them doubled (and paid out to the lower income 50%)

However, the Child Tax Credit will NOT disappear, at least in my understanding. It will remain the same, and the $1200 is added to it.

As I have repeatedly argued on this forum, direct payments are the only way to help the working poor.

I agree, I voted to take this budget with ammendments. I fully support giving direct payments to the working poor (I'm a student, do I count? ). What I have a problem with is giving money to everyone, regardless of income.

Even with the clawbacks on the wealthy, they are still gaining money that they have no need for. Not to mention that there are plenty of millionaires in this country that qualify for GST rebates through the miracle of good accounting. And these people will also receive these payments, in full, on top of not having to pay a dime in taxes.

Once again, the middle class gets screwed.
 

Similar Threads

11
0
Child Care Program Wanted
by FiveParadox | Mar 22nd, 2006
3
Child Care Protest in Ottawa
by FiveParadox | Mar 7th, 2006
7