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.

Canada Early Learning and Child Care Act

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I can say that the system we are building is an affordable and inclusive system. I gave the example earlier that in British Columbia alone, the capacity has gone from 6,500 to 12,500 spaces across the province, and I am sure other provinces are following the lead that British Columbia has taken and are creating those spaces.

However, I want to remind my hon. colleagues on the other side that we need Bill C-35 because I know the record of the Conservative government. When Prime Minister Harper took over, Ken Dryden had formed an agreement with all 10 provinces and territories on universal child care and early learning, and what happened? When the Conservatives came in, child care cuts were made. With respect to the Kelowna accord to help our indigenous partners, do members know what happened? It was gone. Regarding Kyoto on the environment, after the Conservatives came in, it was gone.

This is why this bill is even more important, so that our future generations will have a system that is inclusive, affordable and universal.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in September 2020, the Governor General delivered the Speech from the Throne that outlined our government's intention to create a Canada-wide early learning and child care system with provinces, territories and indigenous partners. That was the start of our journey to transform the way child care is delivered in this country.

This is why I am standing in the House today, and I will be sharing my time with the member for Hamilton Mountain.

What we had at that time was a patchwork system that strained family budgets, left early childhood educators underpaid and left many children without proper care.

Our government's vision for a Canada-wide system recognizes that high-quality early learning and child care enrich children's cognitive, emotional and social development, which has the potential to deliver long-lasting and far-reaching positive outcomes throughout a person's life. Child care is also an important support for parents, families and communities as it enables parents, particularly mothers, to reach their full economic potential, which contributes to a strong economy and greater gender equality. That is why we are committed to supporting the establishment and maintenance of a Canada-wide early learning and child care system, including before- and after-school care.

Through budget 2021, we committed a substantial investment of up to $30 billion over five years to build a Canada-wide early learning and child care system in collaboration with provincial, territorial and indigenous partners. We have already seen great results. We now have agreements with all provinces and territories to reduce fees, build high-quality spaces and ensure early childhood educators are better supported.

Since the signing of the Canada-wide agreements, all provinces and territories are seeing child care fees significantly reduced, and we are on track to achieve our goal of an average $10-a-day licensed child care by March 2026. This really is a significant accomplishment. As the hon. Minister of Families, Children and Social Development has said, we want to ensure that future generations of families across Canada can count on the progress we have achieved so far.

Bill C-35 builds on the incredible work that our government has already done. From day one, our government has been making life more affordable for Canadian families.

In 2016, we introduced and implemented the Canada child benefit, which gives more money, tax-free, to nine out of 10 families and has helped lift nearly half a million children out of poverty. From August 2021 to August 2022, in my riding of Surrey—Newton, nearly 28,000 children have been supported through $103 million in benefits due to the Canada child benefit.

Our Liberal government is committed to ensuring that families have access to affordable, inclusive and high-quality early learning and child care no matter where they live.

That leads us to the legislation before the House today. Bill C-35 was first tabled just over a month ago, and today I am honoured to speak in support of this bill.

British Columbia took the first steps with us towards creating a Canada-wide system of child care when it was the first province to sign an agreement in July 2021. Less than two years later, in December 2022, British Columbia announced an average of 50% reduction in licensed early learning and child care fees. Spaces in the $10-a-day program reduce the average cost of child care from $1,000 a month for full-time, centre-based infant care to $200 a month for the same service, saving families an average of $800 per month, per child.

I also want to point out that by the end of 2022, because of federal and provincial investments, British Columbia had nearly doubled the number of spaces in its $10-a-day program, from 6,500 to over 12,500 spaces across the province.

I am also very encouraged to see that more people are choosing to pursue studies in early childhood education in British Columbia. Building on the province’s work to introduce another wage enhancement, I look forward to seeing additional measures under the Canada-wide system that will support the recruitment and retention of this essential workforce.

It is worth noting that cutting child care fees is one way we can put money back in people’s pockets, at a time when inflation is making life more expensive. This much-needed support will dramatically help reduce the cost of living. The relief that these savings offer parents of young children cannot be overstated. It means that thousands of dollars can be used for energy bills, additional groceries for their families every month, or other essential matters.

This legislation makes it harder for any future government to cancel or cut child care and undo everything that we have achieved for children and families, together with the governments and jurisdictions across this country.

Passing Bill C-35 would build on the amazing journey that has seen transformative co-operation between the federal, provincial and territorial governments and indigenous partners. Through individually tailored agreements with the provinces and territories, we carefully stitched together this system and created a Canada-wide early learning and child care system that is accessible and affordable. It is worth building on into the future. That is what this bill will allow us to do, through an ongoing partnership approach. It does not impose any conditions or requirements on provincial and territorial governments, nor indigenous peoples. Bill C-35 is not a top-down approach. It is an act of partnership, building on the collaborative work with provinces, territories and indigenous peoples.

I am keen to support this legislation because it will serve to strengthen the Canada-wide child care.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that you and the other members had a very merry Christmas. I wish all members, and of course the residents of Surrey—Newton, a very happy new year.

During my conversation with members of my riding on the ground they were asking me to support a system like this, child care that benefits families that need it. I respectfully ask all my colleagues to ensure the swift passage of this bill, giving Canadian families enduring access to high-quality, affordable and inclusive early learning and child care.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I too have communities in my riding that have very young demographics, and they do not have access to the kind of child care the current government is proposing to fund exclusively.

At a time when families are struggling, when they are already worried about how they are going to pay for their mortgage, feed their families or heat their homes, they should not have to worry about access to child care, which many already are, because this bill does nothing to improve access for people who do not have it right now.

Bill C-35 is providing Canadian families with a single solution to which access is limited. It is critical that we open up not only this debate but our minds to the reality that we need those small, privately owned child care spaces, most of which are operated by women, to meet the demand of young families.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in this place and contribute to the debate on Bill C-35, an act respecting early learning and child care in Canada.

As a mom and a grandmother of 11, I understand the importance of having access to quality child care, and I join my colleagues in recognizing those who work in this sector and the very important work they do, and I thank them for it.

With all of the fanfare that this two-to-three-decade plan in the making to nationalize child care has been given, this bill falls flat when it comes to providing a solution for the issues that currently face families who need these programs. As part of their confidence and supply agreement that sees the New Democrats support the minority government through to 2025, the Liberals promised to introduce this legislation by the end of 2022.

With that deadline fast approaching, the Liberals introduced this bill last December. While the bill sets out to establish a vision for a Canada-wide community-based early learning and child care system, it lacks substance in charting a path to get there. Not only does it not address the problems that already exist, but it creates even more.

In declaring their goal to support the establishment and maintenance of a Canada-wide early learning and child care system, where families have access to affordable, inclusive and high-quality early learning and child care programs and services, regardless of where they live, the Liberals have included one proviso that has many families and child care providers concerned.

That condition is found in paragraph 7(1)(a), to "facilitate access to early learning and child care programs and services—in particular those that are provided by public and not for profit child care providers”.

To start, it favours or gives preferential treatment to public and not-for-profit providers over any other type of child care program that exists. Only public, non-profit child care spaces have open access for parents to utilize the supports of this program. If a family chose a new, privately owned centre or one that has recently expanded to meet the demand, it cannot access the subsidy it needs at that centre, therefore limiting the child's ability to access quality child care.

Families are diverse and so, too, are their circumstances. The federal government should not be dictating what child care is best for families. Conservatives recognize that Canadian families should have access to affordable and quality child care and believe they should be able to choose child care providers who best suit their families' needs.

Second, this bill does nothing to address the wait-lists of thousands of families needing child care. For example, the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario projects that, by 2026, there will be 602,000 children under six whose families will want $10-a-day care and the province will only be able to accommodate 375,000 of them, leaving 227,000, or 38% of those children, without access.

Third, it does not address the concerns of operators who do not have the staff or infrastructure to offer more spaces. Currently there are not enough qualified staff to keep all existing child care centres running at full capacity, let alone staff new spaces. Government estimates also suggest that, by 2026, there could be a shortage of 8,500 early childhood workers.

In British Columbia, 27% of child care centres turn away children due to lack of staff. One child care director who oversees 13 child care programs with 350 spaces says that, “In the past two years, we’ve had to close programs temporarily, whether it’s for a day or two, or shorten hours for the week…in order to meet the licensing regulations”.

There are also concerns of inflation increasing operating costs. Many child care centres that offer food programs are now considering seriously cutting back on the programs or eliminating them all together.

The cost of inflation is putting pressure on child care centres, and they need to lower costs because the funding they are receiving is not reflecting the drastic rise of inflation. They are now faced with cutting down costs in drastic ways.

In a Globe and Mail article, an owner of a child care centre in Calgary stated, “If we've got to start jettisoning expenses...do we start cutting back on our food program, or even eliminate it in its entirety over time?” Once again, the Liberal government is not taking into account the inflation crisis it has fuelled when implementing new policies.

While we would see the demand for child care increase as a result of this bill, it would not solve the problems of lack of access to more spaces, frontline burnout, staff shortages and rising costs. Affordable, quality child care is critical, but if people cannot access it, it does not exist, as I have already stated. Bill C-35 would do nothing to address accessibility.

In the time that I have left, I want to focus on the clause that will create a national advisory council, which has already been appointed. Clause 9 states, “A Council is established, to be known as the National Advisory Council on Early Learning and Child Care, consisting of no fewer than 10 but no more than 18 members, including the Chairperson and the ex officio member.” That ex officio member would be the deputy minister.

The chairperson, and up to 18 members, would be appointed by the minister for three-year terms. The members of this council would, of course, be paid with the remuneration to be set by the Governor in Council. These members would be entitled to reimbursements for travel, living and other expenses incurred for their work on the council, including the deputy minister.

They would also be deemed to be employees for the purpose of the Government Employees Compensation Act, and to be employed in the federal public administration.

Here is the thing. While this bill appears to put a focus on respecting and valuing the diversity of all children and families, and respond to their varying needs, the national council would have zero representation of entrepreneurial providers at the table.

In provinces like Alberta and New Brunswick, the majority of stakeholders are private, and there are a large number of them, in fact. It is 67% for Alberta and 80% for New Brunswick. There would be no one who will bring to the table the views of those female entrepreneurs who have stepped up and made investments to meet the need for child care in this country.

The government is not taking into account the realities of families who have access only to private child care providers. The national advisory council should have representation for the different options of child care offered across this country. Canadians need a solution that is flexible enough to fit their varying needs, not an Ottawa-centric, one-size-fits-all solution. That starts with representation on the national council for entrepreneurial child care providers.

In conclusion, I find that this bill is superfluous to the child care issue. It would do little but create a council of bureaucrats with full benefits and compensation to dictate to Canadians the Liberals' view of what the provision of child care should be across this country. This bill needs to be amended, and many of my colleagues have already noted that. It is flawed, narrow in its approach and does not address the issues facing this sector and the families who desperately need it.

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

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.

The House resumed from January 30 consideration of the motion that Bill C-35, An Act respecting early learning and child care in Canada, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

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

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.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague across the way will agree that early childhood educators and other child care workers have been undervalued and underpaid for years and years. This is something in British Columbia that the provincial government has taken some steps to rectify. There is a lot of work left to do, but really what we need is a national approach to ensuring fair working conditions and fair compensation for these educators.

Could my colleague inform the House whether he would support adding an explicit commitment to Bill C-35 to ensure that right across Canada early childhood educators earn the kinds of wages that they deserve for the role that they play in our children's upbringing and development?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, as I rise today, one day after the sixth anniversary of the terrorist attack at the Quebec City mosque, I just want to acknowledge the loss that occurred on that day six years ago, the other five lives that have been taken by Islamophobic attacks in this country and the work that we all need to do as parliamentarians and as Canadians to fight against hatred and intolerance, in particular Islamophobia.

I rise today to participate in today's debate, not just because it is the first day of the session, not just because I am glad to be back in the chamber and glad to be back surrounded by parliamentarians seeking to advance the interests of our country and of our individual ridings, but because it actually reminded me of a conversation I had in 2019. That conversation was on a street in my riding in Roncesvalles Village and I remember encountering a family.

It was election time. It was the 2019 election. I was going door to door, as so many of us do every election period. I was confronted with a family. I had a very blunt conversation with the female lead of that family, the mother of that family.

She said to me that we have done so much work and that we continue to do so much work putting women at the forefront of things like international development assistance, women's reproductive rights and so many different initiatives, including a gender-equal cabinet. She said to me, quite candidly, that if we were really sincere about women and women's empowerment, we need to resolve child care.

I said to her that this was fair. I appreciated that criticism.

She elaborated. She said that we cannot really empower women's full participation in the workforce, whether as an entrepreneur, as a salaried employee in a public or private sector setting, unless we alleviate the disproportionate burden on women that relates to raising children.

My riding has a lot of families, a lot of young families and a lot of young kids, and there is a lot of financial burden that goes along with raising those kids. When I was raising my kids, who are now eight-and-a-half and 12, the fees ranged, per child, between $1,500 and $1,800. It is quite common in Toronto to hear of fees that are $2,000 a month.

What I am pleased about today's debate and the subject of what we are discussing is that, yes, after many decades of discussions, thoughts about it, and hearing about agreements that were scuttled at the last minute, etc., finally, this nation and this Parliament are moving past the obstacles in implementing positive change. I think that is critical.

I also want to acknowledge that it was not just individual constituents like mine who had spoken to me in 2019 that provided an impetus, but there was another impetus, an impetus that has become all too familiar to all of us and that is the COVID-19 pandemic. Let me remind us, there were literally families around the country who were dealing with the difficulties of, all of a sudden, shifting their workplace and their educational place for their children and, effectively, substitute day care, all within the confines of their own home, in a matter of weeks, in March and April of 2020.

That is what faced Canadians. I am being very candid here. I think, all of a sudden, it penetrated the brains, particularly, of men in the country, in terms of what a challenge it is to try to have any sort of career or profession, in a virtual setting or otherwise, and have kids running around at all hours of the day, asking about their math homework, where their history homework was, a geography lesson, name it. It was a struggle. That struggle became manifest, I think, for men like me in this country. All of sudden, the level of people's awareness, including my gender's awareness, about the pressing need for a national child care program became that much more acute.

What I like about what we are doing is that we are creating a system where one does not have to choose between building a career and raising a family. That is a false choice. No one should ever be confronted with that. Thankfully, we are now moving toward a stage where one is not. I think that is really important.

It comes with a large price tag. A massive social change and a massive social program are not inexpensive. We readily acknowledge that. When we prioritize families, children and the women who disproportionately share the burden of raising those children, we need to invest. I think that is exactly what we did when we announced this program in our 2021 budget and the $30-billion price tag that would go along with it over the course of the next five years.

What it is going to achieve is to basically take child care that used to cost hundreds of dollars a day and project it to cost $10 a day, on average, across the country by 2026.

Some provinces were very early adopters of this program. It is staggering in terms of its magnitude, in terms of what it could achieve. Some were a bit late to the game and maybe manipulated the electoral cycle for their own purposes, but I do not want to wade into that. We are now at a stage where, of 13 provinces and territories in this country, literally every square kilometre of this country is covered by a child care agreement.

In my own province of Ontario, which I am proud to call home, fees have been reduced, on average, by 50%. Something that might have cost people, doing simple math, if they had their child in child care for 10 months of the year, $17,000 to $20,000 has been cut in half. Thousands of dollars are being saved by Ontarian families in my own riding of Parkdale—High Park. That is staggering, given the number one issue that we all hear when we go door to door now, which is about the cost of living and the crisis of affordability.

If we could return thousands of dollars to families in this country in one single fell swoop, that is reason enough on its own to get behind this kind of legislative initiative. What we are doing is reducing fees in every province and territory. British Columbia, Alberta, Newfoundland and Labrador, P.E.I., New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and NWT have all reduced their fees by an average of 50%.

Saskatchewan, and there were some speakers from Saskatchewan earlier in today's debate, has gone beyond that target, and it has already reached, on average, a 70% reduction of the fees. I was chatting earlier with the member from Winnipeg, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader. In his province of Manitoba, the fees are currently reduced by 30%, and they are on track to achieve a $10-a-day child care early in the new year. This year, Manitobans will reach $10 a day on average for their child care.

In Yukon and in the province of Quebec, which is really at the forefront of all this in terms of an initiative, regionally, many decades ago, they have had $10-a-day child care. Nunavut joined them in November 2022, three years ahead of schedule.

These are truly incredible results, and they point to what we are doing. I will give one statistic that I am perhaps most proud of. In the speech by the member for Newmarket—Aurora, he talked about labour force participation. He talked about what Quebec had done, where they were about three decades ago, about 4% below the national average for women's participation in the workforce, and that now they are 4% above the Canadian average.

What we know as of right now, in the nascent days of this fledgling program, for women aged 25 to 54, is that 85% of those women are in the workforce right now, and that is 9% ahead of our southern counterparts in the United States of America. That number is only going to grow, which puts proof to the point that was made by my constituent in Parkdale—High Park, when she said to me that if we want to fully believe and allow for women's participation and their economic potential to be increased, we need to implement this kind of program. That is what we are working towards.

It is not just about the women. It is about the children who are going to benefit from earlier formative education. Again, when I struggled with that grade 4 math class, such as it was, I realized my own limitations as an instructor. As great as parents are in this country, we do not have that formalized training and certification that early childhood educators have.

What are we doing to remedy this? As part of that funding that I articulated, nearly half a billion dollars is dedicated to the training of early childhood educators, to their certification so they are providing more, better, higher-qualified training to our young people. That is a win-win. It is great for the children's development, and it is great for the early childhood instructors, who have a better certification and higher wages as a result. Most importantly, it is better for the women, who can now make not a false choice but a real choice. Some may choose to stay at home, and that is their choice. Some may choose to start that business. Some may choose to return to work. Some may choose to stay at work.

What we are doing in this one fell swoop is empowering and unlocking incredible economic potential on the part of literally half of our country. That is to the benefit of this country. That is to the benefit of our economic output. That is to the benefit of Canadians. That is why I hope that, by legislating this initiative, we concretize it, we solidify it and, I dare say, we make it permanent in this country on a go-forward basis.

That is what Bill C-35 is about. That is why I am happy to stand in support of it.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments.

As my colleague knows, there will be so many benefits from the passage of this legislation, but I would ask him to provide his thoughts in terms of the historical meaning of passing Bill C-35 and putting into place a truly nationwide program that is going to benefit children from coast to coast to coast.

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to advise that I am sharing my time with the member for Parkdale—High Park.

I am very pleased to have the opportunity to address this House on Bill C-35, what we hope will become the act respecting early learning and child care in Canada.

As the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development indicated in her remarks earlier, we now have in place a Canada-wide early learning and child care system that aims to ensure access to affordable, high-quality and inclusive child care for families across the country. The purpose of Bill C-35 is to strengthen and protect that system by enshrining its principles into law. This is a commitment from the Government of Canada to support access to affordable child care for families in Canada, no matter where in Canada they live. In fact, the new Canada-wide system is already benefiting tens of thousands of people from coast to coast to coast with fees for regulated child care having been reduced in all jurisdictions across Canada, outside of Quebec and Yukon, which already had affordable child care systems, and we are just getting started.

Bill C-35 is the result of engagement between the Government of Canada, provinces, territories, indigenous governments, and organizations and stakeholders. It builds on our collaborative work with provinces, territories and indigenous peoples. It also builds on the agreements negotiated with every province and territory to establish a Canada-wide system. The collaboration that delivered this remarkable system was detailed, and sometimes challenging, but held in an atmosphere of respect, commitment and a willingness to succeed. For sure there are similarities in the agreements, but we never expected a one-size-fits-all model that conveniently served all of our partners. We succeeded because we agreed on one fundamental principle, the thing all Canadians care about most deeply, giving children in Canada the best possible start in life.

This legislation respects provincial and territorial jurisdiction and upholds indigenous rights. All our partners in this Canada-wide effort can look forward to benefiting from the long-term federal financial commitment.

Let us talk about funding. In budget 2021, the Government of Canada made a transformative investment of more than $27 billion over five years. If we include related investments, including in indigenous early learning and child care, we have committed nearly $30 billion over five years to make quality early learning and child care affordable and accessible. Combined with previous investments announced since 2015, a minimum of $9.2 billion a year ongoing will be invested in child care, including indigenous early learning and child care, starting in 2025 to 2026. These investments are already having an impact. To date, fees have been reduced in every jurisdiction across Canada. Further, Quebec, Yukon and Nunavut are providing regulated child care for $10 a day or less.

Let us take our agreement with Saskatchewan. The province has been one of the early leaders in fee reductions. Over a year ago, Saskatchewan announced a 50% reduction that it made retroactive to July 2021. That was a year and a half in advance of our December 2022 target. Saskatchewan followed with another fee reduction, effective September 1 of last year, where fees were lowered by a total of 70% compared to March 2021 levels. This is a huge saving for families across the province.

While the province is lowering fees, it is continuing to ensure that early childhood educators are kept at the heart of the system. Last September, Saskatchewan announced that federal funding from its Canada-wide agreement is being used to establish an ECE wage enhancement grant, which will result in increased wages for the workforce that is critical to the success of the Canada-wide system, and there is more.

In early 2022, Saskatchewan announced the creation of over 1,200 new licensed child care spaces on top of the over 600 spaces the province announced in December 2021. That is more than 1,800 new child care spaces providing more children with a better start in life.

This is the Canada-wide early learning and child care system in action: lowered fees, a supported ECE workforce, more child care spaces and real results for making life more affordable. For all these families across Saskatchewan, and the thousands of others like them across Canada, this system means hundreds of dollars more each month to put healthy food on the table and to sign up kids for music, sports or after-school activities.

The federal investment not only benefits families and young children, it also benefits the economy as a whole, which means it benefits all Canadians, and here is how: It will grow Canada’s economy. Economic studies show that, with each dollar invested in early childhood education, the broader economy receives between $1.50 and $2.80 in return. The federal government's estimates predict that the Canada-wide early learning and child care system could raise the GDP by as much as 1.2% over the next two decades. It will grow Canada’s labour force. As we have seen in Quebec, at the time the Quebec Educational Childcare Act was instituted in 1997, the women’s labour force participation rate in Quebec was four percentage points lower than the rest of Canada. In 2021, it is four points higher.

The figures are telling us that investing in increased access to high-quality, affordable and inclusive early learning and child care is not only the right thing to do for families, but it is also the smart thing to do for Canada and our economy. It is a win for all of us.

Our colleague, the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development, has many times said, “access to high-quality, affordable, flexible and inclusive [learning and] child care is not a luxury—it is a necessity.” As the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance put it, “child care...is as much a piece of critical infrastructure...as a bridge or a road”.

It boils down to this: All parents and caregivers have an opportunity to build both a family and a career, and all children should have the best possible start in life.

This legislation comes with the twin federal commitments of respect of jurisdiction and a reliable funding partner. We are creating a great system together, a system we can all be justifiably proud of, and I respectfully ask that my colleagues give rapid passage to Bill C-35 so we can put this last piece in place.

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

Mr. Speaker, for young families across this country, child care is a principle concern. When a child is in their care or with another, parents want to feel confident that their child is being well cared for, and that they are safe and in a healthy environment that supports their development.

Canadian families across the country should have access to affordable and quality child care. Parents should also be able to choose a child care solution that best suits them and works with their family's own unique needs. The reality is there is no one-size-fits-all child care solution.

Not only is the issue of child care important for families, but it is also a significant consideration in workforce participation. Access to child care continues to be a large barrier to workforce participation, and it cannot be overlooked as we look into addressing the labour shortages we are experiencing across industries in this country.

While there is presumably a consensus on the viewpoint that there should be accessible, affordable and flexible child care for parents throughout our country, this legislation offers no real assurances to Canadian families that there will be. The families that will benefit from this legislation are those families who have already secured a child care space in a public or not-for-profit program.

However, this legislation does nothing to help the thousands of families on child care wait-lists and those whose child care needs require more flexibility. It does nothing to help those families whose child care needs fall outside the standard hours of operation. In fact, the primary problem with this legislation is that it fails to ensure that demand can be met and that supports are flexible enough to meet the needs of all Canadian families.

Affordable, quality child care is a great concept. It is a wonderful concept, but if a parent cannot access it, then it is ultimately worthless. In laying out a vision for a Canada-wide, early learning and child care system, Bill C-35 offers Canadian families a single, just one, child care solution, and by its own design, the access is limited.

This legislation intentionally ignores an entire section of the child care landscape, which is critical to meeting demand. The Liberal-NDP government is shutting private operators, who tend to be women-owned small businesses, out of its plan. It fails to even ensure them a seat at the table.

There is no representation for these women-owned small businesses in the makeup of the proposed national advisory council on early learning and child care. In addition to public child care programs, these women-owned small business operators are critical to meeting the growing demand for child care spaces, not to mention that, by limiting supports to public and not-for-profit child care programs, this will drive up the demand for child care spaces in these programs where the wait-lists already exist.

We know that wait-lists already exist because there is not necessarily the staff or infrastructure put in place to offer more child care spaces. This legislation does not solve the issue of recruitment or that of retention in the early learning and child care sector. It does not answer the pressing question of who will staff these programs.

Report after report indicates that early childhood educators are overwhelmed and burnt out, and that there is a steady stream of early childhood educators leaving the profession. There have been operators who have had to close their doors at times because there was not necessarily enough staff to operate.

To ensure that the government is delivering more than just announcements to Canadians, the government needs to deliver a tangible plan, in partnership with our provinces, to recruit and retain labour. That plan should engage all child care providers.

With limited resources, it does not make sense to shut out these women-owned small businesses from this solution, nor should the government be putting these entrepreneurs at a disadvantage. These child care providers should be able to operate in a fair market.

Without a real plan to address the existing challenges in child care, access to child care will never really be achieved. If the goal is truly to deliver universal access to child care, child care policy also needs to be comprehensive.

However, the government's vision for child care policy is limited. For one, it fails to acknowledge that not all parents have a standard work schedule. The reality is that standard child care operating hours do not meet the needs of most shift workers. Parents who work early mornings, evenings, nights, weekends, statutory holidays, casual shifts or any other irregular shifts are largely being left behind. By focusing child care supports on programs that do not offer any real kind of child care solution to families with non-standard work schedules, there is a massive gap in the NDP-Liberal government's child care policy. It is not a universal solution.

The NDP-Liberal government also purports to be addressing affordability through the creation of a $10-a-day child care program, but that is not entirely accurate either. As I have mentioned, the only families who are benefiting from the cuts to child care costs are those who already have child care spaces in eligible public and not-for-profit programs.

We are now hearing reports of operators who are struggling with the skyrocketing cost of living in the country. These operators, like all Canadians, are seeing the cost of everything climb. Many who offer food programs are now having to consider whether they are going to cut these programs entirely or charge parents additional costs to keep them running.

Either these parents are getting fewer services from their child care providers or some of those savings will ultimately be lost. Of course, for those parents who cannot access a child care space, they are not benefiting from these savings, but are still struggling under the pressures of the rising costs.

In fact, I was listening to the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development's speech earlier in the debate today. She highlighted that she had heard from parents who could now afford their mortgage payment because their child care fees were reduced and other parents who could afford groceries for their family because of the reduction in child care fees. Well, she was quite proud of that achievement, and it really points to a bigger problem, a problem that is her own government's doing. Canadians are paying the price for this costly coalition's tax-and-spend agenda. The NDP-Liberal government needs to take affordability seriously.

Canada's food price report has reported that the average family of four is expected to spend $1000 more than it did last year on groceries. Meanwhile, surveys are already reporting that 52% of Canadian families are concerned that they do not have enough money to feed their families. We are now seeing record usage of food banks across the country.

The cost of basic necessities is becoming out of reach for more and more Canadians, and the Liberal government's addition of half a trillion dollars in federal debt has led to the 40-year-high inflation rates that we are seeing now. Its continued deficit spending is fuelling inflation and Canadians are paying more in taxes than ever before.

We know that parents are stretching their dollars as far as they can go, but that is becoming less and less fruitful. Those parents who are shut out of the child care program because they cannot access it or because it does not meet their needs do not share the minister's elation.

The driving force behind the skyrocketing cost of living crisis needs to be addressed to really help Canadian families who are struggling to make ends meet and, ultimately, if we want to help Canadian families with the cost of child care, we need to ensure that child care is first available. Child care is unique to each family, and a federal child care policy should reflect that.

Bill C-35 is a flawed piece of legislation. Its approach to child care is narrow and it does not provide Canadian families the assurances that their child care needs would be met. I hope that the NDP-Liberal government is prepared to make some amendments and listen to this—

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise today on behalf of my constituents of King—Vaughan.

Bill C-35, an act respecting early learning and child care in Canada, sets a vision for a Canada-wide early learning and child care system committed to ongoing collaboration with provinces and indigenous people to support efforts to “establish and maintain”. Just over 52% of Canadian children younger than six years were in licensed or unlicensed child care in 2022. This bill proposes to cut day care fees by an average of 50% by the end of 2022 and down to an average of $10 per day by 2026.

Bill C-35 is a step in the right direction. However, it is too generic and does not consider or address many obstacles that parents face when accessing child care. Affordable, quality child care is critical, but if it cannot be accessed, it does not help families. Bill C-35 is beneficial 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.

I forgot to mention that I will be sharing my time with the member of Parliament for Battlefords—Lloydminster.

In Ontario alone, the Financial Accountability Office says that demand for the program will exceed the number of available spaces. The FAO estimates that by 2026, approximately 600,000 children under the age of six will have potential access to $10-a-day child care, but only 375,000 licensed child care spaces will be available. Therefore, approximately 227,000 children under the age of six will be left behind, not able to access the $10-a-day child care.

Canada needs far more child care spaces than it has, and Bill C-35 would not address the need for increased child care infrastructure. The Liberal government simply offering up grants and subsidies through Bill C-35 does neither initiate nor promote operators to step up and start up centres where they are needed.

Bill C-35 also fails to address the child care labour shortage. There is currently not enough qualified staff to keep all existing child care centres running at full capacity. Child care workers in Canada continue to leave the sector due to the low pay and poor working conditions. The majority of child care professionals are overworked and suffer burnout. The shortage of workers means that in many communities there is only one child care space available for every three children who need it and wait-lists are long.

According to the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Bill C-35 fails to address the shortage of early childhood educators and child care workers. Until the child care staffing crisis is resolved, the promise of affordable and high-quality child care for every family in Canada that needs it will remain unfulfilled.

One of Bill C-35's commitments is to provide more accessible child care to indigenous people and contribute to the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Indigenous early learning and child care programs that focus on the languages and culture identities of first nations, Métis and Inuit communities have been found to contribute to better educational outcomes for indigenous children and help to build their language ability and sense of cultural pride. However, there is a shortage of indigenous workers trained in early childhood education in Canada, particularly because of challenges they face in acquiring training, such as cost, entrance requirements and residence in remote areas with restricted technology.

According to Statistics Canada, indigenous childhood educators and assistants and child care providers are less likely to have post-secondary education compared to their non-indigenous counterparts. Although claiming to support indigenous child care, Bill C-35 would do nothing to address the shortage in indigenous child care workers or the disparity of education between indigenous and non-indigenous child care workers.

The guiding principle of the framework for Bill C-35 heavily gives preferential treatment to public and non-for-profit day cares over small business models. This piece of the bill opens the door to a two-tier framework of child care across Canada.

Quality child care comes in all shapes and sizes. In Canada, options for child care range from nannies and home day care to day care centres, preschool programs, and before- and after-school programs. By giving preferential treatment to public and not-for-profit child care, Bill C-35 discriminates against women. The majority of child care operators are women, and the language and intent of this bill prevent any growth and opportunities for private female operators.

How would Bill C-35 assist single parents who do not have regularly scheduled nine-to-five jobs? This issue is not addressed in the bill. How does Bill C-35 address child care for children with disabilities? In British Columbia, children with disabilities are continuously left behind when it comes to child care. There is no official count on how many child care sites are accessible for kids with disabilities, because there is no provincial definition of what makes a child care site inclusive. How about grandparents who have stepped up and put their retirement on hold for their grandchildren?

The 2021 federal budget pledges $30 million in new spending on the national child care system over five years, with another $9.2 billion annually. These stats are coming from the Liberals' numbers.

Morna Ballantyne, executive director of Child Care Now, told CBC News, on the implementation of Bill C-35:

...we'd like to see...a full report on what progress has been made with respect to the system building in each jurisdiction. How many spaces have been created, where have they been created? Who's operating the spaces that have been created, what are the ages of the children being served by the new spaces?

We really think there needs to be a proper and full public accounting of how the money, the public money, has been spent.

The minister is on record saying that providing the federal government with details of the provinces' child care plans is a condition of their deals with Ottawa, but how can we trust that? This is coming from a government that has eight years of failed Liberal policy and does not hold itself accountable for it.

This is coming from the same government that spent $54 million on an ineffective ArriveCAN app and refuses to supply Canadians with a full list of all the contractors who got the money. This is coming from the same government that has $28 billion of suspicious spending and another $4.6 billion of outright waste. This is coming from the same government that failed to keep children's medication on the shelves.

Can Canada really trust the government to implement a quality child care system and ensure this federal funding is properly used? From the lack of detail in Bill C-35, I am not so trusting. Amendments need to be made to ensure all Canadians have access to quality child care.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, I want to begin by thanking and congratulating my colleague from Elgin—Middlesex—London on her speech. I also want to thank our shadow minister for families, children and social development, the member for Peterborough—Kawartha, for the excellent and extremely important work she has done on this file.

Over the next few minutes, I will have the chance to talk about the reality facing Canadian families. I wanted to speak to Bill C-35 because my wife has been working in child care centres in Quebec for many years now, so she is very familiar with the system. She witnessed its creation. Unfortunately, she has also witnessed the deterioration in services over the last few years. I think it is important to share her experience of this public system, which has existed in Quebec for over 20 years.

It is important to identify the flaws in the system, to recognize that there are still problems and look at how this Parliament can work to improve the child care situation across the country and in every province. It is also important not to put all our eggs in one basket, as Quebec has done in recent years. This would allow more families, more single mothers and fathers, more people to have access to appropriate child care across Canada.

Let us talk about the current reality for Canadian families. The cost of living has skyrocketed. We are facing interest rates that are making it harder and harder for young families to access home ownership. Food prices went up nearly 12% in just a year. That far outstrips the rise in inflation. We hear that many women would like to go back to work, especially young women who just had their first child. Young women who still do not have access to a child care system could be on a waiting list for several months, even a year.

In Quebec, in particular, when a person no longer has access to parental benefits, they may have to wait another year before they get a child care spot. It is unacceptable. This prevents many women from going back to work and thriving. More importantly, it also denies children the opportunity to access a public system that could help in their development.

At first, I was against a public child care system like the one that was implemented in Quebec in recent years. However, I must now admit that such a system improves the living conditions of many children. An educational child care system helps children be better prepared for school. Sometimes, these children come from disadvantaged backgrounds and their families do not necessarily have all the tools to help them develop before they go to preschool and kindergarten.

These services are good for children who manage to get into the system. Unfortunately, there are still many children who are unable to do so. Eight years after the Liberals made their promises, they are now introducing a bill that proposes access to that kind of system in the future. Unfortunately, based on what we have seen from the Liberals over the past eight years, we are worried that this bill is all about good intentions and that the results may not be up to par.

The Liberals want to move too quickly. They are grandstanding and trying to win political points. They are implementing a fine program to help families, but once again, they are realizing a little too late that they may not have done their homework properly and that, unfortunately, thousands of children will not have access to child care.

Why will they not have access to child care spaces? First, there is already a shortage of spaces in the system, especially in Quebec, and second, there is a dire shortage of specialized educators, so the centres cannot provide services to these children.

Day cares lack money for food. I was surprised to learn that in some day cares in Quebec, they no longer give meat to young children under the age of five because they cannot afford it. Non-profit centres can no longer afford to buy meat to feed the children. Instead, they serve plant-based proteins in the morning.

All sorts of other products are being used to try to adequately meet people's needs, but meat has been banned in the day care centres because there is not enough money, because everything costs more. There is also a glaring lack of choice. Families would have had the opportunity to access child care services, but unfortunately, Quebec has favoured subsidized non-profit day cares as currently proposed by the federal program. As a result, we find ourselves in a situation where, 25 years later, needs are still not being met.

I have some stats here about children on the waiting list. These numbers are from the Government of Quebec's ministry of families. There are 286,817 spaces in the system according to data from May 31, 2022. Quebec currently has 101,244 children in early learning centres, or facilities. There are 50,444 children in subsidized child care. There are 68,431 children in non-subsidized care, the so-called private day cares. Lastly, there are 66,698 children in home-based child care.

These child care services are offered by women, entrepreneurs who decide to open their own home-based child care service but are part of the network subsidized by the Government of Quebec. These female entrepreneurs are subsidized by Quebec to provide services to children. Unfortunately, this approach will not be allowed in all provinces, which do not all have the same agreement. This means more choice.

The big problem, despite all this and after 25 years, is that there are still 33,829 children waiting for a child care space. Some 30,295 spaces are being created, so there is already a shortfall. There are 2,500 subsidized spaces to be allocated. The facilities have not yet been developed to ensure that young people can access these child care centres or spaces. The number of children with “pending” status is 50,000. After more than 20 years of the public subsidized system, there are still 50,000 children who do not have a child care space. If you multiply that number by one for the number of mothers and by two for the number of parents, it is quite clear that there is a problem with putting all your eggs in one basket and taking just one path forward.

Fortunately, the Quebec government is providing subsidies to stay-at-home mothers who decide to open their own home-based child care. This is a way out. However, we deplore certain aspects of this bill, which is why we have some requests. We will be proposing amendments in committee to allow for more choice and to achieve the ultimate goal of accessible child care for children, and particularly for mothers who need access to a child care system.

We also have concerns about cost. If we cannot even create the number of spaces promised, will the government be able to keep its promise of creating $10-a-day spaces? That is the second big question. Based on past experience and different programs presented and adopted by the Liberal government in the last eight years, there is reason to have doubts and to ask questions.

The government does have an area of expertise that could help Quebec. Quebec is currently trying to fill 18,000 educator positions and the Quebec government would like to recruit abroad to fill these 18,000 positions. I believe that the federal government has a very specific role to play to help address the shortage of child care staff. It must work with the Quebec government and the governments of all the other provinces to expedite the arrival of these educators so that an increasing number of children, families and single parents can access quality child care services.

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Madam Speaker, my colleague across the way knows well that I am happy to talk about child care all day long.

Bill C-35 is really legislation that encompasses the agreements that have already been put in place. If we look province by province, much work was done to identify and register a wide array of child care. While, yes, there are caps on private, there is private child care that has been grandfathered in Ontario, but the idea is to create more spaces, because the market demand for spaces is there. Each province gave us a list of how many spaces it needs, and the partnership with the federal government is to commit the funds to build those spaces. I was just in Manitoba announcing $70 million for rural spaces.

I would ask the member this. Does she not understand that this is really a set of agreements under this legislation so that we continue to work together with provinces and families?