44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 6, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/6/23 8:52:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded vote please.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
The question is on Motion No. 3. A vote on this motion also applies to Motions Nos. 4 to 14.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
69 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/23 8:53:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, again, we would request a recorded vote.
9 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
The question is on Motion No. 15. A vote on this motion also applies to Motions Nos. 16 to 111.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
69 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/23 8:54:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded vote please.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
The question is on Motion No. 112. A vote on this motion also applies to Motion Nos. 113 to 121.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
67 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/23 8:54:43 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, again, I would request a recorded vote please.
10 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on Motion No. 112 stands deferred.
The question is on Motion No. 122. A vote on this motion also applies to Motions Nos. 123 to 125.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
71 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/23 8:55:32 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, again I request a recorded vote please.
9 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on Motion No. 122 stands deferred.
The question is on Motion No. 126. A vote on this motion also applies to Motion Nos. 127 to 232.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
70 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/23 8:56:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, no surprise, I request a recorded vote.
9 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
The question is on Motion No. 233. A vote on this motion also applies to Motions Nos. 234 to 440.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
72 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/23 8:57:04 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I request a recorded vote.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
The question is on Motion No. 441. A vote on this motion also applies to Motions Nos. 442 to 455, 684 to 689 and 691 to 729.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
79 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/23 8:57:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would request a recorded vote.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
The question is on Motion No. 730. A vote on the motion also applies to Motions Nos. 731 to 749 and 751 to 904.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
72 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/23 8:58:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we would request a recorded vote.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
Normally at this time the House would proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded divisions at report stage of the bill. However, pursuant to order made Thursday, June 23, 2022, the recorded division will stand deferred until Wednesday, June 7, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
59 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, as always, it is an honour to rise here to represent the great people of Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound and speak to a very important bill.
My first question is this: Why are we debating this today? I remind all MPs that funding agreements are already in place and have been signed by all provinces and territories. The money is already flowing, and I would argue, there is a multitude of other higher priority issues around affordability that we could be debating that have yet to be addressed by the current Liberal government. Further, I would point out that Bill C-35 is not a child care strategy. It is a headline marketing plan.
Again, we see the Liberals promising what they cannot deliver. Ten dollars-a-day day care does not address the labour shortage and the lack of spaces. I will guarantee today that, if and when this strategy fails and has not delivered affordable child care for all those in need across Canada in all jurisdictions, the Liberal government will blame the provinces and territories for that failure.
I point out that back in January, during question period, the government House leader had the audacity to call these current agreements universal, as have other Liberal members of Parliament. How can these Liberal MPs say this program is truly universal when the current child care space shortfall is in the hundreds of thousands. It is not universal if hundreds of thousands of Canadians do not have access to it.
We have seen over the past number of years how increasingly difficult it is for parents to obtain child care at all, let alone affordable child care. Therefore, I can appreciate the efforts behind the bill and the idea of actually forwarding or advancing an affordable child care plan. However, if the spaces are not there, it is still not going to work. I further note that this impacts so many families across my riding, but it disproportionately impacts women. The current reality in Canada, which has been exacerbated by the current government's inflammatory and inflationary spending, is that the cost of living has skyrocketed, making all of life's necessities unattainable by many families, as it appears now. In most cases, two parents are required to work just to scrape by.
I am going to focus on three key areas of the bill, based on feedback that I received from over 20 different day cares and child care centres across my riding. The first one, as was already mentioned, centres around the issue of accessing the programs, especially in rural Canada. Number two is the labour shortages, which is an issue that is prevalent across many sectors. Finally, there is the rising cost.
I know I may get a question from the government members about amendments. I would note that our Conservative colleagues, specifically the shadow minister, put forward many great amendments during debate at committee and at report stage and, unfortunately, every single one of them was defeated.
Let us get back to my first point around the issue of access, especially as it pertains to rural communities like Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound. I am not going to use my words. I am going to use the words of those from the child care centres in my riding when they were talking about this program.
They said that the demand for child care has seen huge increases. Every family wants access to a $10-per-day child care space. However, they are confident in saying that they have children on their waiting list who will age out of their programs before a space becomes available. They continued that families cannot go to work if they do not have access to child care. Their local communities are suffering, and having no child care has a far-reaching impact on all rural communities.
Therefore, as I noted, the primary issue around this program is that, while the government can artificially lower some of the costs through its funding arrangements with the provinces, the demand is so great that many families will not be able to achieve or get access to those subsidized rates.
I will give one example about the limitations around this program. My brother and his wife both work for a living. One works for Bruce Power. My sister-in-law works in the health care system. They have to commute 30, 40 or 50 kilometres one way. They have two young kids, who are now in elementary school, but playing sports and trying to go everywhere. They did not have access to a program. They depended upon family members or local privatized child care opportunities to get the necessary support they needed.
The second point I want to address is labour shortages. For quite some time, all the child care centres in my riding have been raising the alarm over the issue of labour shortages. While the lower cost of child care would definitely help the families who are able to access the program, increasing the program itself is becoming out of reach due to staffing shortages. One centre in my riding offered that expansion is impossible without qualified staff. Early childhood educators are in very short supply. This child care program is very administration heavy. As well as the extra work needed in centres, there are numerous government employees being employed to monitor and manage the plan.
This program is hindered not only by labour shortages of child care educators, but also the bureaucratic burden that is being put on the program itself through the additional administration required to meet the compliance and ensure the standards.
Here is another key issue and one that I can relate to personally. It is the shrinking of the before and after school programs. What I got from my local YMCA is that workforce shortages have reduced the number of school-age programs operators can deliver, resulting in a lack of enrolment fees in school-age child care, i.e. before and after school care, and in addition to workforce shortages for this age group, there have also been program reductions as a result of ongoing school closures, the pivot to online learning and a greater population of parents working from home and managing before and after school care differently.
This is something that, as a single parent, I am concerned about. As this program develops, access to the before and after care for many single parents across my riding is going to be an issue because, again, of the lack of labour.
Another issue is the nature of the jobs themselves, which makes life much more difficult for the current employees when there is already a labour shortage. Another child care centre said that, not to mention, it is a very selfless and exhausting job, often without breaks. The burnout rate is high. It is a woman-dominated field, and the paradox is that is an essential service for parents to be able to re-enter the workforce with a young family.
My final key point is around the rising operating costs. Many of these child care centres confirmed to me that the funding set out by the current child care program does not cover expenses, with many organizations in my riding stating that the funding afforded for the program does not cover current expenses. Their utilities, food and insurance have increased by double digit percentages, and every other cost has increased. Their compensation to cover these increases was under 3%, but the math does not add up. Funding rural and urban centres equally is not equitable. They are operating with huge deficits every month, and it cannot continue.
As I mentioned earlier, Conservatives have put forward common sense amendments at the committee to ensure program flexibility, so that the families and child care centres are not punished for adhering to an “Ottawa knows best” approach. Families in my riding are increasingly demanding better access to quality child care services that fit their schedules, and it appears as if the Liberals do not understand that they cannot simply lower the price of a service that does not exist.
In conclusion, affordable quality child care is critical, but if people cannot access it, it does not exist. Bill C-35 does nothing to address accessibility. All Canadian families should have access to affordable and quality child care, and should be able to choose child care providers that best suit their family needs. This is especially pertinent in rural Canada. Bill C-35 is good for families that already have a child care space, but it does not help the thousands of families on child care wait lists or the operators who do not have the staff or infrastructure to offer more spaces.
Finally, again, we see the Liberals promising what they cannot deliver. The $10-a-day day care does not address the labour shortages and the lack of spaces.
1500 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development, I would like to thank my colleague for his comments.
As a matter of fact, the premier of Ontario and the Ontario government signed agreements with us, and this is in the member's own province. Since these agreement were signed, 33 licensed spaces have been created in Ontario, and there is a commitment for a build-out of another 53,000 spaces during the next few years.
Prior to these agreements, there were no new spaces. As we know, the former Conservative government ripped up previous agreements. Is the member suggesting that the Conservatives would not support Bill C-35 because they do not believe in building out a system that they had previously prevented from being built?
My question to the hon. member is this: Will the Conservatives be supporting Bill C-35?
150 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
