Bill C-35

Canada Early Learning and Child Care Act

An Act respecting early learning and child care in Canada

This enactment sets out the Government of Canada’s vision for a Canada-wide early learning and child care system. It also sets out the Government of Canada’s commitment to maintaining long-term funding relating to early learning and child care to be provided to the provinces and Indigenous peoples. Finally, it creates the National Advisory Council on Early Learning and Child Care.

[Sheila Olan-MacLean, Chief Executive Officer, Compass Early Learning and Care]

Thank you very much for this opportunity.

Compass Early Learning and Care is a not-for-profit charitable organization in central Ontario caring for over 3,300 children, from birth to the age of 12. We are led by the values of trusting relationships; safe, caring, joyful spaces; diversity, equity, inclusion and justice; collective intelligence; and lifelong learning.

We recently began a visionary strategic planning process. We began by asking children what kind of world they wanted to live in. Here's what a couple of them said.

Justin, age 7, said, “I want to live in a world where everyone has a job and enough money for a safe place to live and enough food to eat with no worries, and people have to say kind things and not just what they're thinking when they think it.”

Oliver, age 3, said, “I want to live in a world where there is a big city with lots of buildings and houses. My mummy would live there, and my daddy would live there too, and me. My whole family, like my grandma and my grandpa; Debbie, too.” Debbie is their caregiver. “I like flowers, so there would be flowers, and there would be lots of bees. If they sting you, you would be able to fly because they'd put a special spell on you with their stinger.”

These are just two examples of the comments we gathered that demonstrate children's connections to family, community and their caregiver; their empathy and kindness; their connection to the natural world; and their understanding of justice and equity.

Bill C-35 has many parallel values to Compass and to the children that we interviewed. It is a strong beginning, a foundation to embed accessible, affordable, quality early learning and child care as a right for Canadians. To bring them to life, there must be solid structures that will nurture each of these concepts and inspire a groundswell of people to come together and work for the ends and the goals outlined. To create such a system, we will need three things: a stable and sustainable workforce; accessible, affordable child care; and quality programming.

For Bill C-35 to have the impact that it proposes, federal and provincial governments must understand the impact that this child care staffing crisis has, not only on child care but on every other sector in our society. Right now, Compass is working with a group from central Ontario looking at how we can increase child care for medical staff. There's a crisis. We're having hospitals call us to say they need more child care so that they can have their staff. They're all so interconnected, and it starts with child care. People can't work without child care.

A stable and sustainable workforce means that we would need to increase our professional compensation starting at $30 an hour, having a pension plan and benefits. In previous federal government initiatives for workforce strategy, funding was rolled out in Ontario with the provision that not one penny could go to compensation of any kind. It was very explicit. Much of this money went to colleges for free tuition for an ECE diploma. Colleges are now reporting that these graduates are not going into child care. In fact, they are going into higher education. They are going to school boards. They're going to Costco and even to Tim Hortons, because the wages are higher and the responsibility is less.

CWELCC has made a great contribution toward affordable child care. Our families report that they can financially breathe again—a very good thing. Accessibility will be an issue, and it's not an easy issue to address right away. It will take all of us working together to expand our system to accommodate the many families currently on our wait-list and those who are going to join shortly. Every expansion dollar will be needed for quality programs, beautiful spaces and sustainable funding.

We must send a message to for-profit corporations, shareholders and entrepreneurs that Canada is not open for child care business and that, in Canada, children are not for profit. Working together as a child care community, along with the federal, provincial and municipal governments and community partners, we can look back in 20 years and see that our vision is coming to reality.

To do this, the not-for-profit and public sectors will need access to infrastructure loans, support from groups such as Building Blocks for Child Care and support for our home child care expansion, as well as high-quality—

[Dr. Susan Prentice, Duff Roblin Professor of Government, University of Manitoba, As an Individual]

Good morning. Thank you.

I submitted a brief by the March 17 deadline, and my comments today draw on it. My brief is more comprehensive than what I will have time to speak to today.

I'm a university professor, a sociologist. I have published widely on historical and contemporary child care policy. I actually earned my Ph.D. for a study of child care in Toronto during World War II and the campaign to save the wartime day nurseries.

I appreciate that your job is to scrutinize the legislation and propose amendments as necessary, and I would like to help. I have two main points.

First, the most important step that I believe your committee can take is to introduce a definition of “early learning and child care” early in the act, right after the short title in the definitions section. I propose that your definition should look something like this: “Early learning and child care is a system of regulated and licensed services provided by qualified early childhood educators who have specialized post-secondary education training.”

Yesterday in committee, a member read from a brief that suggests “child care is the care of a child, regardless of who provides the care”, and I urge you to see the folly in this kind of definition for the purposes of legislation. Let me explain why.

In my house, when my spouse and kids are sick, I get out the thermometer, I make them hot lemon with ginger and I provide over-the-counter pain medication. I am of course providing health care, but you would in no way reasonably want to include what I do under health care legislation or funding. In our Winnipeg home, we have smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, and we keep our fire extinguishers fully charged. We're practising fire hygiene, but we in no way belong to public firefighting.

Similarly, early learning and child care does not mean and cannot mean care of a child wherever it occurs. It means instead a very particular kind of out-of-home early learning and child care service, one that is regulated, licensed and provided by qualified early childhood education professionals.

Your bill needs this kind of definition.

I have a second major recommendation on clause 7 on funding. The commitment to public and not-for-profit investments must be strengthened, and in my brief I provide some textual direction.

The current language directs funding in particular to public and not-for-profit providers, and it's much weaker than it should be. Keeping taxpayer dollars out of private pockets is strikingly important. It provides protection for the child care ecosystem. It ensures maximally efficient use of public dollars, and it acts as a bulwark against the negative effects on quality staffing and regulations exerted by a lobby for commercial child care, particularly those parties with obligations to shareholders.

It would be very valuable for your committee to review the experience of Australia, beginning in the 1990s. In Australia, a series of decisions about small policy and funding changes set in motion a massive expansion of for-profit child care, including a virtual monopoly. On November 6, 2008, Australia's largest single child care chain went into receivership.

The bankruptcy of this one national day care chain left more than 1,000 child care centres, over 120,000 children and 16,000 child care educators in the lurch. The Australian government had to step in to keep the lights on until a fire sale could happen. It's been called a spectacular public policy disaster. It was directly triggered by permitting public funds to go to for-profit child care businesses.

Knowing this history makes it crystal clear why Bill C-35 should prohibit public funding of commercial child care operations.

Those are my two main points. There are more in the brief. I look forward to our discussion.

Thank you.

[The Chair (Mr. Robert Morrissey (Egmont, Lib.)), Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

I call the meeting to order.

The clerk has advised that the witnesses' sound has been tested, as has the sound for members appearing virtually.

Welcome to meeting 61 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. Today's meeting is again taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of June 23, 2022. Members are attending in person and remotely, using the Zoom application.

To ensure an orderly meeting, before speaking, wait until I recognize you by name. For those participating virtually, please use the “raise hand” icon on your Surface. Before speaking, make sure that you turn on your mike. For those in the room, the microphones will be controlled by the verification officer.

You have the option of speaking in the official language of your choice. If interpretation services become a problem, please get my attention, and we'll suspend while they're being corrected. Translation is available with headsets here in the room, as well as by using the translation icon on your Surface.

Unless there are exceptional circumstances, the use of headsets with a boom microphone.... I will only recognize those participating virtually if their sound quality has been approved by the translator. For those members appearing virtually, if you're not approved to participate verbally, you can still participate in any votes in the committee by simply indicating, with a thumbs-up or a thumbs-down, a yea or a nay.

Again, should any technical issues arise during the meeting, we will suspend while they're corrected.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Friday, February 3, 2023, the committee will continue its study of Bill C-35, an act respecting early learning and child care in Canada.

I would like to inform all members that the witnesses appearing, as indicated, have been checked and we are fine.

I would like to welcome our witnesses today. As an individual, we have Susan Prentice, Duff Roblin professor of government at the University of Manitoba. From Compass Early Learning and Care, we have Sheila Olan-MacLean, chief executive officer. From the Regroupement des centres d'amitié autochtones du Québec, we have Amélie Lainé, director of partnerships and programs, by video conference.

We'll begin with Ms. Prentice for five minutes, please. I will advise the witnesses that, at the end of their five minutes, I will advise them to conclude their remarks.

Ms. Prentice, you have the floor.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Yes, I'm on the amendment. I just think it's important that we acknowledge the witnesses, who are critical because that's actually what we are debating when we talk about the amendment.

It was brought forth by me. There was a motion on the floor to close amendment submissions and clause-by-clause. I said we would discuss this later. I said we could discuss this during committee business and not during witness testimony, which chews up their valuable time. The Liberals and NDP voted no, so here we are, trying to ensure that all voices are heard so that we can ensure that Bill C-35 is done correctly.

I have also put forth an amendment to further this, so that we can actually get to the crux of what we're trying to do as elected officials, which is make sure that legislation is not set up to fail, but that it is set up to serve Canadians.

Witnesses, I will definitely ensure that we can get you back as soon as we can.

The amendment I put forth is, “That amendments be submitted to the clerk of the committee in both official languages no later than 1:00 p.m, EST, Tuesday, April 20, 2023”. It's not far, when you think that we have two weeks of constituency work

It continues, “that the clerk of the committee write immediately to each member who is not a member of a caucus represented on the committee and any independent members to inform them of the study of Bill C-35 by the committee and to invite them to prepare and submit any proposed amendments to Bill C-35 which they would suggest that the committee consider during the clause-by-clause study of the bill”.

The way we're looking at this is that we need amendments. Then we have to go through clause-by-clause to ensure that everybody agrees or disagrees and to strengthen this bill to its absolute strength. It concludes, “and the committee begin clause-by-clause consideration of the bill on April 25, 2023.”

We're back in the same round and round discussion of why we need these dates. The reality is that, as we've heard already, half of the submissions are in. We need to translate all of that. We need time to listen to all of it.

Mr. Chair, through you, the other issue is that we cannot write and create amendments until we have listened to every witness. We have to listen to every witness, listen to every submission and read every submission, so that we know we are listening to what they are saying and we can put forth amendments that strengthen the bill.

Even when we look at one of our witnesses, who never even got to testify tonight because of this circus—

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Absolutely.

The real frustration that I feel regarding the things that I have not been able to access and that I know other Canadian parents have not been able to access is that, if we don't do a thorough job on this.... Really from the 11th to the 20th and then the 13th to the 25th, I just....

We also had this conversation with a speed-up in a previous legislation. I think MP Gray alluded to that in her amendment comment. It's a troubling precedent that I see and that I'm living. I think we're doing a disservice by not giving the time to hear from witnesses and not doing our job thoroughly, as we're supposed to.

Mr. Chair, I do want to say, in response to MP Saks' comment about our having an agreement, at a February 3 meeting, for an end date, that I don't know where that is. When I pull up the committee business from the committee website from the February 3 meeting, it states:

The committee proceeded to the consideration of matters related to committee business.

It was agreed,— That six meetings be dedicated to the consideration of Bill C-35, An Act respecting early learning and child care in Canada, commencing Tuesday, March 7, 2023, including a technical briefing from relevant department officials, an invite to the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development accompanied by department officials, witness testimony and clause by clause consideration of the bill.

It was agreed,—That, in the context of the consideration of Bill C-35, An Act respecting early learning and child care in Canada, committee members submit their prioritized witness lists to the clerk of the committee no later than Friday, February 24, 2023.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I understand how with my intervention earlier.... I was trying to get clarity about where we were, to make sure that we weren't wasting time. I wasn't really afforded that opportunity, so it's disappointing for me. I want to understand. I understand that there was a motion that was moved, which said:

That amendments be submitted to the clerk of the committee in both official languages no later than 1:00 p.m, EST, Tuesday, April 11 2023; that the clerk of the committee write immediately to each member who is not a member of a caucus represented on the committee and any independent members to inform them of the study of Bill C-35 by the committee and to invite them to prepare and submit any proposed amendments to Bill C-35 which they would suggest that the committee consider during the clause-by-clause study of the Bill; and the committee begin clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill on April 18, 2023.

I understand that was the main motion, but I understand there was then an amendment, if I'm correct, to change some dates. I believe it would have been from April 20 to the 25th, if I've understood this correctly.

It's unfortunate for me, because I feel that this is a trend over and over again from the Liberal-NDP coalition to.... We're seeing it in the House right now. Debate is being limited on something that's very important and that we've heard a lot on from Canadians. Now what's concerning to me is that we're seeing this in committee as well.

I don't understand. Through you, Mr. Chair, I understand that MP Saks isn't happy that she's not getting her way. It's not even just her, but this is from the remarks that she has made. This could be the whole Liberal-NDP coalition not being happy that we're not in agreement.

We want to make sure that there is a thorough job done of hearing testimony from witnesses and from as many child care providers as possible. This is a very big country, and I think we would be doing a disservice to parents like me.... I have four young children. I said that in the previous meeting. As someone who has had difficulty finding child care, I know the real frustrations, just like I can't find formula on shelves either. I have a young baby who's not even one year yet—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

I call the meeting back to order.

Committee members, welcome back.

The committee will resume its study of Bill C-35, an act respecting early learning and child care in Canada.

To assist the interpreters in their work, I kindly remind all members and witnesses appearing today to introduce themselves when speaking and to speak slowly. You have the option of speaking in the official language of your choice. Interpretation services are available. Should interpretation services be lost, please get my attention and we'll suspend while they're being corrected.

I'll remind all members and witnesses to direct their questions through, me, the chair, and to wait until I recognize you. Those appearing virtually have a “raise hand” icon at the bottom of their screen. Please use it to get my attention. Again, all comments are addressed through me. I'll remind everybody that screenshots are not allowed in the meeting.

I will introduce the witnesses.

We have appearing now Kim Hiscott from the Andrew Fleck Children’s Services. We have Marni Flaherty, acting chief executive officer of the Canadian Child Care Federation. From the Ontario Association for Independent Childcare Centres, we have Maggie Moser, who is the director and on the board of directors.

Before I turn to the witnesses for their opening statements, the committee was in a discussion when we suspended following the earlier hour.

I see before me Ms. Falk with her hand up.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Yes, that's where I'm.... Yes, of course.

I talked about “universal”. How are we supposed to get all of the feedback in this time frame? I just can't understand how we're going to get all of that done if we're going to include all of Canada and all of the forms of child care, which I referred to earlier in terms of the Child Care Providers Resource Network, a witness that is here today and would like to share their stories with us. Obviously, child care is the care of a child, regardless of who provides the care: parents, grandparents, friends or relatives, in-home nannies and/or home child care providers, both licensed and unlicensed.

We need to ensure that we are doing this. It's two days we're talking about. I think we saw right off the top that there isn't collaboration from the other parties, in particular the Liberals, because, as I said, of course we can talk about this. It was a friendly motion, as you said. It was, okay, no problem, we'll chat about that tomorrow at committee business because we have all these witnesses who have come here to talk about Bill C-35 and how we strengthen this bill, how we fix it and how we ensure that everybody has access.

That's the fundamental part of the bill. That's what's a little frustrating. Is there opportunity here to discuss...? Can we have another amendment to this motion so that we can change the clause-by-clause date to one week later to give us more time? Can we discuss something like that? Is that an option so that we can get to these witnesses, which I think is really important, and so we can ensure that the clerk and everybody can get.... There is so much information, and my colleague across the way doesn't....

I have listened to thousands and thousands of families—thousands—and this bill is not ready to go to the floor.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The motion, as I have it in front of me, is:

That amendments be submitted to the clerk of the committee in both official languages no later than 1:00 p.m, EST, Tuesday, April 11 2023; that the clerk of the committee write immediately to each member who is not a member of a caucus represented on the committee and any independent members to inform them of the study of Bill C-35 by the committee and to invite them to prepare and submit any proposed amendments to Bill C-35—

Mr. Chair, can I have clarification on what you mean by, “the clerk of the committee write immediately to each member who is not a member of a caucus represented on the committee”?

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.

I'm pretty dumbfounded, actually. I'll be honest. I can't believe we've brought these witnesses here, who are ready to testify and who are here to represent the welfare of the child, and now we're having this discussion when we could have easily done this in committee business. Now we have to make all these people who have waited to testify wait. It's quite embarrassing, if I'm going to be honest.

I'm the critic, as some people may or may not know, for families, children and social development. It has been a huge undertaking for me and my team to take all of the correspondence, because there are so many families, parents, child care workers and ECEs who are deeply impacted by this bill. If we're not listening to them and talking about this, I'm not sure we are doing what we were elected to do.

I know we have the Child Care Providers Resource Network here today. One of the things they have said is that the Child Care Providers Resource Network, CCPRN, is committed to and focused on the well-being and safety of all children. Isn't that the truth, Mr. Chair, that we should be focusing on all children when we look at a child care plan?

They are a non-profit charitable organization with a network reach of more than 4,800 parents and caregivers across the province and beyond. It is their mission to provide information, training, resources and support to those providing child care in a home setting. This part is really important, Mr. Chair. I want everyone to hear this, because this is what we should be listening to right now.

Child care is the care of a child, regardless of who provides the care: parents, grandparents, friends, relatives, in-home nannies and/or home care providers, both licensed and unlicensed. That's a lot of people.

There are two million children under six in Canada, and if we are not listening to all of these people, we cannot get this bill the way that it should be so that it doesn't collapse on itself and fail Canadians.

When we look at Bill C-35, it is supposed to be this universal child care bill, but there's nothing universal about it. In fact, it is set up for winners and losers right now the way it's currently written. We on this side of the House, the Conservatives, are fighting to ensure that everyone is a winner and that we have access for all Canadians so that all these families who are on wait-lists that are thousands of people long get access.

If this is legislation that, quite frankly, is already in place with the provinces and territories, as my colleague Mrs. Gray has pointed out, why are we rushing through if we need to listen to all voices to make sure all voices are included? What are we doing here?

I want to talk about this email that came in today. It says, “Thank you so much for speaking out for all Canadian parents of young children following the recent self-congratulatory announcement of $10-a-day child care in Newfoundland by the leader of the Liberal-NDP coalition government.

These are not my words. This is an email, Mr. Chair.

It continues, “As a retired systems analyst, it begs the question of whether anyone in the coalition spent more than five minutes developing this misguided debacle. Did no one ever consider the all-important impact on child care providers, when those services were clearly known to already be in short supply, or was this just another clumsy virtue-signalling attempt rushed to completion, hoping no one but those mothers requiring child care would understand how poorly thought out it was? I have a daughter in Newfoundland who began looking for a child care provider immediately after giving birth, 10 months ago, since she is or was planning to return to work in June and resume her engineering career. She's still looking.

“There are no doubt tens of thousands of other working mothers in the same position all across Canada, and even more women considering joining the workforce if the prospect of spending the greater portion of their income on child care expenses is no longer an issue. Did no one ever think of that? Help wanted signs abound all across Canada, but with the current inflation, minimum wage earners can hardly afford to drive to work, let alone pay for child care. How does the Liberal-NDP plan help those families?

“Think of how many women could return to the workforce, provide for the welfare of their families and contribute to the economy if only this government had been more diligent in developing a sensible child care plan. Instead, all the Liberal-NDP plan is offering mothers is a $10 coupon to shop at a store with empty shelves. If this Liberal-NDP coalition government sincerely intends to help young families, they need to address how to stock those shelves and not just hand the store keys to provincial governments and walk away congratulating themselves for a mission accomplished.”

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Having just arrived on the committee specifically for Bill C-35, I don't really have a point of reference on Bill C-22. I have noticed that chunks of testimonies and submissions are coming in. I'd like to ask the clerk if these submissions in translation were after the March 17 deadline date, the ones that are being submitted now.

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I believe the clerk has received what I have and that it's in order.

For the case of housekeeping, we lost two meetings because of the budget and the visit of President Biden. Making sure that we're moving along well, I'd like to propose:

That amendments be submitted to the clerk of the committee in both official languages no later than 1:00 p.m, EST, Tuesday, April 11 2023; that the clerk of the committee write immediately to each member who is not a member of a caucus represented on the committee and any independent members to inform them of the study of Bill C-35 by the committee and to invite them to prepare and submit any proposed amendments to Bill C-35 which they would suggest that the committee consider during the clause-by-clause study of the Bill; and the committee begin clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill on April 18, 2023.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Okay. If you can let me formally get into the meeting, I will come to you.

Welcome to meeting number 60 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of June 23, 2022. Therefore, members are attending in person and virtually using the Zoom application.

To ensure an orderly meeting, I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members.

Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. For those participating virtually, please use the “raise hand” function. Before speaking, click on the microphone icon to activate your own mike. For those in the room, if you wish to speak, please raise your hand. Your microphone will be controlled by the proceedings and verification officer. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order.

You may speak in the official language of your choice. Interpretation services are available. If there is a loss of interpretation services, please get my attention by raising your hand. We'll suspend while it is being corrected.

I would like to remind all participants that screenshots are not allowed to be taken and are not permitted.

Should any technical issues arise, please get my attention by raising your hand. We'll suspend while they're being dealt with.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Friday, February 3, 2023, the committee will continue its study of Bill C‑35, an act respecting early learning and child care in Canada.

I would like to inform all members that the witnesses appearing virtually today have completed the technical tests to check their connectivity and equipment.

I would like to welcome our witnesses to begin our discussion with five minutes of opening remarks, followed by questions. I'll introduce the witnesses, and then I'll go to Ms. Saks.

In the first hour, we have Julie Bisnath, program coordinator. We have from the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, Alain Dupuis, executive director, and Jean-Luc Racine, representative. From the Fondation Lucie et André Chagnon, we have Dr. Christa Japel, representing on screen, and we have Fannie Dagenais, director, but we're still working out communications issues.

Before I get you to begin your five-minute comments, I will go to Ms. Saks.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As a reminder, these are the supplementary estimates and the main estimates, so this covers a wider range than just one of those. We have to remember, too, that, yes, we have had ministers here, but ministers have been relating specifically to legislation. That was appropriate. They came. It was their legislation. It made sense.

We also had a Liberal motion on housing. That was a great study that we did.

Everything that we've done here has been.... We had the estimates ministers, as well.

This is just normal practice. It's very reasonable to have them. This committee just happens to have this many ministers. There are other committees that might only have one. That's the way this is. Perhaps we can even look at scheduling extra meetings if we need to, but this is just a normal course of business.

I am open to an amendment to potentially move this to May 12 to give us a bit more time. Of course, we don't want to do anything to delay the work that's being done at the committee on legislation like Bill C-35, but that's something we can look at that would allow more scheduling time for ministers.

Those are my comments. Thank you.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

It's just because I have limited time and I have one other question for Madam Farris.

You mentioned in your brief that transparency is vital so that public funds are being spent wisely.

Do you support amending Bill C-35 to add stronger reporting requirements so that people know what advice an advisory council is providing the minister and for the minister's report to include a detailed summary of all information regarding how federal money is being spent?