SoVote

Madam Chair, my questions are for the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions. The minister's department approved an open drug use policy in public places, including parks and playgrounds in British Columbia, in 2023. Does the minister believe children seeing drug usage normalizes drug usage for children?

48 words

Context: House Hansard - 312 - May/9/24

Mrs. Tracy Gray (Kelowna—Lake Country, CPC)

May/9/24 2:54:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, according to the most recent data, since the NDP-Liberal Prime Minister took office nine years ago, sadly, opioid overdose deaths across Canada have increased 166%. In B.C., overdose deaths are now the leading cause of death for youth aged 10 to 18. Addiction doctors came out saying that legalized drugs were being diverted to youth. Unbelievably, today, the Minister for Children refused to answer if she was standing up for children against her government's wacko drug policies. The Conservatives are calling to end taxpayer-funded narcotics, which are being diverted to our children. Will the Minister for Children stand up for children and vote for our Conservative motion?

113 words

Context: House Hansard - 284 - Feb/16/24

Mrs. Tracy Gray

Feb/16/24 12:59:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, first of all, what the member is referencing is not factually correct. Statistics Canada actually shows that female participation is down, so I am not sure what old statistics he might be looking at. We just have to look at the headlines over the last month. What we have seen is that the child care system is in crisis and that the policies the government has put together have not made a substantial difference. In many ways, when we look at the numbers, we see they are actually worse. I will also note that I just find it incredibly interesting that the spokesperson whom the government has speaking to this very important child care bill today, which basically affects families and especially women in the workforce, is someone who does not have children himself.

136 words

Context: House Hansard - 284 - Feb/16/24

Mrs. Tracy Gray

Feb/16/24 12:58:07 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, certainly it is all about what is best for families. Every family will be different, whatever its choice is going to be and whatever its situation is. I know there have been a lot of references to Quebec's system being the model. In fact Quebec has a different system than other provinces have, but I do recall hearing testimony at committee that said there are still a lot of children on wait-lists, even in Quebec. Therefore we need to work toward having the maximum amount of availability and flexibility, not only within the child care system but also for families.

104 words

Context: House Hansard - 284 - Feb/16/24

Mrs. Tracy Gray (Kelowna—Lake Country, CPC)

Feb/16/24 12:46:38 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-35

Mr. Speaker, it looks like the Liberals have chosen to not continue speaking to this, so I am very proud to rise to speak on behalf of the residents of Kelowna—Lake Country. I will be splitting my time with the member for Sturgeon River—Parkland. Amendments were brought forward from the Senate on Bill C-35, on child care, which is why we are here today. I would like to recognize the member for Peterborough—Kawartha and her team for all of their work on this bill, as well as for reaching out to parents and child care providers across the country. I would also like to recognize our Conservative members on the human resources committee. They brought forth common-sense amendments on this bill that were not accepted by the NDP-Liberal coalition. I will speak to that shortly. Child care is an issue of great importance to many families in my community and the operators who run these centres, as they are taking care of our most important asset, our children. I want to thank them for the vital and important work that they do. As a working mom, I can say that child care was very important to me and our family. That was back when maternity leave was only six months. I have unfortunately heard from many residents of Kelowna—Lake Country about the shortage of day care spaces, as well as the unaffordability of child care. I have also heard from operators, often young female entrepreneurs, of the challenges they are facing as well. If not resolved, these challenges may put them out of business for good, leaving families struggling to find a child care space that does not exist. As the Conservative vice-chair of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, I am very familiar with Bill C-35, as it came before Conservative colleagues and me at that committee. We have to remember that this legislation is coming after agreements were already signed and implemented with the provinces. Conservatives have also offered several other amendments at the committee stage to correct serious failures in this legislation. These are faults that have been apparent from the beginning of this NDP-Liberal government's approach to child care. Sadly, those amendments were voted down, and as a result, we are now seeing many of the consequences of their approach. Parents are now facing wait-lists that have not gotten better. Child care centres are being forced to close their doors forever. The wealthy are getting access to $10-a-day child care spaces. The Liberal child care plan had no means testing. In fact, it does not even tie to whether the parent who is looking to access the $10-a-day child care even works or wants to work. Let us look at the numbers. A Fraser Institute report, published just this month, showed that 77% of high-income parents access child care compared to 41% of low-income families. It should also be common sense that a high-income household does not need the government subsidy to access the same level to child care that a single working mother would need. Accessible child care should be available to all working women, but many people are questioning how these government programs are good for working women and the families that need access to affordable child care. Despite the claims from the Liberals that their child care plans would allow more women to be in our workforce, that same Fraser Institute study found that labour force participation for women in September 2023 has dropped when compared to participation in September of 2015. This report also said, “There is also little evidence that the federal government is achieving its [second] goal of boosting the labour force participation of women with children.” After eight years of high taxes, high inflation, high interest rates and more debt, we can add fewer women with children working to the NDP-Liberal government's list of accomplishments. Young women have also suffered. The Liberal's most recent labour force survey, published in January of 2024, showed that over the last year, the employment of young women has cumulatively declined by 4.2%. Outside of the pandemic, that is the lowest it has been since the year 2000, which was, interestingly, under the last Liberal government. The young female entrepreneurs in the child care sector have been left behind. These are operators who are often working extended hours and days compared to the many large not-for-profit operators. Even if they are fully licensed from the provincial government, they operate within and follow all provincial regulations. The so-called feminist Liberals have not made them a priority to access the federal funding to bring down costs to the parents they serve. It is right in the Liberal legislation. We have quickly discovered that these female entrepreneurs are not a priority in the NDP-Liberal government's child care plan. What they envisioned was that they could build something for themselves, a child care program that could be flexible for nighttime or weekend workers, better available to rural working families and cater exclusively to children with special needs. These are exactly the types of choices parents are asking for. Ottawa has a role in helping build out child care in Canada, but it cannot do that if it only looks to work against the headwinds of what the real demands are and local situations are of working families. The NDP-Liberal agreements have been opposed to the kinds of child care that often allow more flexibility, such as what women entrepreneurs provide. They may provide different availability and attainability to preferred government-run or not-for-profit centres. If these operations have challenges to staying open, the numbers of child care spaces will actually decline. This is not the fault of any child care worker or any organization in the child care sector, whether it be private, public or not-for-profit. It is the fault of a badly designed government program. I recently met with a well-run, not-for-profit child care centre in my community. This experienced operator was equally frustrated with the system. She talked about the bureaucracy that has been created that is making it very difficult for both her organization and parents to wade through. The fact is that, since the Liberal government started its child care program, we have seen fewer children in child care in Canada. According to Statistics Canada, the number of children under the age of five in child care fell by 118,000 between 2019 and 2023, which is a decrease of 8.5% nationally. Statistics Canada also showed that 26% of parents of children under the age of five who were not using child care reported that their child was on a wait-list, which is 7% higher than it was in 2022. As well, 47% of infants younger than one year not in child care were on a wait-list, which is an increase of 38% compared to early 2022. The Coalition of Child Care Advocates of BC said that there were 130,000 licensed child care spaces in the province and that 75% of children aged zero to 12 are not able to access them. A common-sense Conservative government would bring common sense back to child care policy. Only Conservatives would fight for equal access to child care and choice for parents. We support all forms of child care, and this is something we tried to put in through amendments at the committee stage with this legislation, whether it be for traditional day care centres; centres with extended, part-time or overnight care; nurseries; flexible and drop-in care; before- and after-school care; preschools; co-op child care; faith-based care; unique programming to support children with disabilities; home-based child care; nannies and shared nannies; au pairs; stay-at-home parents; guardians who raise their own children or family members; or friends or neighbours who provide care. The NDP-Liberal government has only brought costs, crime and crisis to families. After eight years of the Liberal Prime Minister, housing prices have doubled, food bank usage is at its highest, violent crime is up 32% and inflation is creating financial anxiety. There are 22 people dying each day by the opioid crisis, and our health care system is in shambles. On top of this, in B.C., with the federal Liberals supporting B.C. drug policies, people taking their children to parks have to deal with open drug use. I spoke with a child care provider recently who told me that they often walk the kids to a local park to play, and though they scan the park before the children play, they are often terrified that they may have missed something because they often find drug paraphernalia. I do have quite a number of articles from over the last month. I will just reference a couple because I know I am running out of time. First of all, Castanet said that the Kelowna child care crisis is being “amplified” and “not helped by government fee program.” Another headline reads “Edmonton daycares closed” due to protest. Another reads, “Child-care costs are dropping across Canada. But some families are still waiting years for spaces.” These headlines goes on on, and these are headlines from just over the last month. Conservatives will honour the existing provincial child care agreements. However, we will work toward fixing what the government has broken, so parents will have the choice and flexibility that the NDP-Liberal costly coalition has not allowed.

1636 words

Context: House Hansard - 274 - Feb/2/24

Mrs. Tracy Gray (Kelowna—Lake Country, CPC)

Feb/2/24 11:54:46 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, children under 18 in British Columbia can now be prescribed fentanyl. It is reported that parents do not even need to be told or agree. Toxic drug overdose is now the leading cause of death for youth in British Columbia. It is also reported that addiction experts have criticized protocols, stating that they are deeply inadequate and do not provide a minimum age for when youth can receive recreational fentanyl. Will the NDP-Liberal government put an end to its dangerous drug policy experiments that are putting deadly fentanyl into the hands of children?

96 words

Context: House Hansard - 189 - May/2/23

Mrs. Tracy Gray (Kelowna—Lake Country, CPC)

May/2/23 3:00:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable that the Liberals think it is acceptable for open drug use where children play. The answer from the minister is completely out of touch with reality, and the reality is that the drug policies of the Liberal-NDP coalition are making our streets and parks less safe for families. Now municipalities across British Columbia, from Kelowna to Campbell River, are having to take action through bylaws and provincial advocacy, just to keep their communities safe. Again I will ask, when will the Liberals take public safety seriously?

92 words

Context: House Hansard - 150 - Jan/31/23

Mrs. Tracy Gray

Jan/31/23 10:31:01 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-35

Mr. Speaker, sure, there have been results, but the reality is that in Quebec the program has existed for over 20 years. As of right now, there are over 50,000 children on waiting lists to get into child care. It has seen some results, but there is still a lot of work that it obviously needs to do because it does not have complete universal child care, and not everyone who needs a child care space has it in Quebec.

81 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 150 - Jan/31/23

Mrs. Tracy Gray

Jan/31/23 10:29:10 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-35

Mr. Speaker, absolutely, there are some people who are able to access this, but it is not universal, and the government is hand-picking the exact types of formats that will work for this. There are many families who do not fit within that traditional format of putting their children in a not-for-profit or government-run facility. There are many people who have their children in smaller locations, such as in families' homes, and all of this is left out. Therefore, it really does not allow for flexibility and freedom, and it is actually likely going to gridlock the current systems that exist right now in the not-for-profit and government systems.

115 words

Context: House Hansard - 150 - Jan/31/23

Mrs. Tracy Gray (Kelowna—Lake Country, CPC)

Jan/31/23 10:22:21 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-35

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of the residents of Kelowna—Lake Country. Just as a reminder, I am splitting my time with the member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek. I will lay out some of the issues with the Liberal child care bill, Bill C-35, that will need to be addressed. I thank those who work in the child care system and who look after our children. To be clear, this is not a child care strategy. In my province of British Columbia, a 2019 survey found that the greater Vancouver area, represented by several cabinet ministers in the Liberal government, had only enough child care spaces for 18.6% of children in the metro region. That is bad enough in urban areas of our country, but in many rural regions of Canada large child care centres do not exist at all. This bill offers rural parents or those who need flexibility nothing. Again, it chooses to ignore the simple fact that low-cost child care is not possible if child care resources are not accessible to begin with. However, the rural-urban divide is not the only issue with this legislation. There is a serious concern about the complete lack of focus on ensuring that child care spaces go to those most in need instead of creating advantages for the already well off. After all, affordable child care should be prioritized for those who otherwise cannot afford it. There is no means test. Under the current Liberal proposal, someone who works on Bay Street with children already in day care will get access to $10-a-day child care the same as a lower-income family. People who do not need to work have the same access as a family who needs to work. There is no flexibility for families who are not working the weekday office job hours and who currently have different types of child care options that work for their shift work or their schedules. That is because this legislation dogmatically preferences not-for-profit and government child care over operators working and running child care centres in the private sector. These are people, most often women, who work in their homes, who have small businesses and who often have young children. When my son was a baby I found someone to come into my home part time. That was back when maternity leave was only six months, and it was hard to work with such a young baby. Having someone come in was expensive, and I was not making a lot at the time. However, it was the only option I had at the time as few child care centres took infants that young or would allow me flexibility with part-time needs and hours. Christina became like family. Anyone who has this type of scenario would not be applicable in this legislation. When my son was a toddler he was in the home of a wonderful woman, Pauline, who had a group of kids. Because I needed flexibility in child care due to the type of contract work I was doing at the time, the larger, structured child care centres did not work for what I needed. The scenario of in-home small business child care does not meet the priorities of the government's legislation. Instead of giving parents freedom to determine what child care works best for their children and their lives, the government has opened the door for a two-tiered framework of child care. Under the government's plan, only not-for-profit and government child care spaces have open access for parents to utilize the Liberals' program as the legislation states is the priority. That is not universal access and the legislation does not include strategies to address spaces or labour. We know there are labour shortages. About a year ago, in Kelowna, it was announced by one centre that they had to say goodbye to about 24 children, because they could not find the staff to meet the government licensing requirements. That left families scrambling with little ability to find a new location with waiting lists being long. A Vancouver operator of 300 spaces said, “In the past two years, we've had to close programs temporarily, whether it's for a day or two, or shorten hours for a week”. A report on child care recruitment published in January 2023 found that in British Columbia, 45% of child care centres are losing more staff than they can hire, and 27% of child care employers turned away children because of a lack of qualified staff. To adequately staff the Liberals' proposed plan in British Columbia, they found that 12,000 new child care employees were required. Still, current recruitment and retention programs are failing with several thousand employees behind target. When the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development put this bill forward, she said its purpose was to enshrine the Liberals' record on children and family into law. However, their record on this file is something that they are not strong champions of. Canada was once ranked 10th among the OECD for the well-being of children, but under the present government, Canada has fallen sharply to 30th place. We will work on this side of the House to try to make this legislation better and more accessible to parents who want and deserve the freedom to decide what kind of child care works for their family. Looking beyond this, a future Conservative government will work hard on ways to increase child care workers and spaces and to ensure there are stable, good-paying jobs for families to keep more of the money they earn in their pockets.

962 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 149 - Jan/30/23

Mrs. Tracy Gray (Kelowna—Lake Country, CPC)

Jan/30/23 6:25:48 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-35

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek. I want to start today by thanking child care workers for the important work they do. In reading the government's new legislation, Bill C-35, I have to say that I am disappointed. Once again, we are seeing the Liberal government choosing to put forward buzzwords and campaign slogans rather than crafting the substantive solutions parents in my community of Kelowna—Lake Country are asking for when it comes to serving their child care needs. To be clear, this is not a national child care strategy and not a national child care program. It is strictly to subsidize, through the provinces, some families already in the child care system using certain types of child care deemed a priority by the Liberals. It is not universal. This bill in its current form is another missed opportunity for Parliament to work toward creating and staffing actual child care spaces where families could place their children. This bill does not seek to shorten long waiting lists. What is particularly disappointing is that it is hand-picking the types of child care that are acceptable to the government. While I am disappointed, unfortunately I cannot say that I am surprised. The promise of universal child care has long been an over-promised and never-delivered commitment of the Liberal Party. How do we know? It is because it has promised it since most members of this House were children themselves. In 1984, the former Liberal prime minister John Turner ordered a national task force to study and implement a federal child care program. It was never created. In 1993, the then future Liberal prime minister Jean Chrétien promised in the Liberal red book a national child care program, and no program was ever delivered. In 2004, after 10 years of doing nothing on child care, the then new Liberal prime minister Paul Martin promised to spend $5 billion on a national child care program in a last-ditch effort to save his government. Despite winning the 2004 election, no program was ever created. Canadians are not fooled by the Liberals' over-promised yet under-delivered way they manage. We will continue to hear from the government that it has lowered the cost of child care in Canada, and it has for some, but there needs to be a number of updates made to this legislation to make child care accessible and inclusive, allow parents the freedom to do what works for their family, and to actually make a difference for many. The Conservatives will be working on these. Just as the Liberals have allowed Canada's once ample supply of children's cold and cough medicine to dwindle to levels so low that parents must now make supply runs to American pharmacies, so too have they allowed a chronic shortage of child care spaces across Canada over the past eight years of their time in government. The Canadian Union of Public Employees studied the shortage and found that, “in many communities there is only one child care space available for every three children who need it, and waitlists are long.” The Quebec child care system, the model from their provincial cousins that the federal Liberals have long said they wish to copy, at last count had a wait-list of 51,000 spaces. We know, listening to those operating private child care centres, that many have the resources and space to take more children, but they are continually hampered by the same labour shortage issues repeatedly ignored by the current government in many sectors of our economy and social support networks. Looking again at British Columbia, we see stories of day cares of all structures reducing their hours and turning away new children because of staff shortages.

646 words

Context: House Hansard - 50 - Mar/31/22

Mrs. Tracy Gray

Mar/31/22 1:46:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that my future grandchildren, which I do not have yet, will be paying off this debt, as will the future grandchildren of other people in this House. We have to be cognizant that someone will have to pay back this debt that we are creating right now. We are not setting up our children and grandchildren very well here. Regardless of what others are doing, we have to focus on Canada and on the fiscal prudence of this country. We need to get our fiscal house in order. Yes, we need to help people who really need help, but at the same time we also need to be looking ahead. We need to look ahead for how we can increase investment in Canada and increase the prosperity of Canadians.

134 words

SoVote

Member of Parliament

Tracy Gray