It's called the universal child care benefit.
Evidence of meeting #8 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was federal.
Evidence of meeting #8 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was federal.
5:25 p.m.
President, Caledon Institute of Social Policy
It's called the universal child care benefit.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Is it a benefit or is it a program? It says in the document there's $3.7 billion over two years for the “universal child care benefit”, the UCCB.
5:25 p.m.
President, Caledon Institute of Social Policy
I'm using “benefit” and “program” as synonymous.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Okay. Have you done analysis that actually integrates provincial contributions to how the functions of child care are actually delivered in the country?
The finance minister is sitting four seats down from you. I don't know whether you've had a chance to see how Saskatchewan augments the program, in terms of how they deliver child care in their province.
5:25 p.m.
President, Caledon Institute of Social Policy
Well, the difficulty is that this is not a child care benefit or program. It has nothing to do with child care. It's a child benefit, which families can use for whatever they want, whatever their needs are. In terms of child care, this is replacing the bilateral agreements that were negotiated under the federal government, which my organization actually proposed and worked on. Meeting child care needs I think has to be done through developing a child care system.
So I see these as two different parts: a child benefit on one side and child care separately. They're related, but they're different.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Do you think in the last 13 years we have actually made any progress with respect to a program such as you spoke about?
5:25 p.m.
President, Caledon Institute of Social Policy
I think we've made progress on the child benefit side. On child care itself, it's been incredibly slow and arduous; it's taken decades.
In 2000 the federal government did start flowing some moneys, part of which had been cut before, to the provinces. But by cutting the bilateral agreements, which got us on the road to creating a medicare-like child care system, we're not going to be able to build a child care system. So progress is going to come to a crashing halt.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
So you don't have any faith that there is the potential to build a program that hasn't existed in the last 15 years?
5:30 p.m.
President, Caledon Institute of Social Policy
Well, I'm skeptical, but I'm hoping that the other part of the government's child care plan, which is increasing child care spaces through grants--and we don't know the details yet, of course--will do something to increase the supply.
But I'm skeptical. I don't think that's the approach to take. I think it should go through the provinces.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Well, I can see, based on history, why you'd be somewhat skeptical if nothing was implemented before. At least it's only been 100 days. So give us a chance to keep working on it, and I think we'll do just that.
Mr. Peacock, you mentioned in response to Mr. Pacetti's question that it would really change the environment in terms of being able to raise money. Would you perhaps comment in a little more detail on the benefit?
5:30 p.m.
President, Association of Fundraising Professionals
Well, the benefit is that we're going to see a prolific growth in building both capacity and communities. Most communities and most of the 81,000 charities across this country know where the needs are. In fact, having the ability to have that capacity strengthened with, if you will, voluntary action for the common good by philanthropists from all walks, whether they're individuals, corporations or private foundations--and in this case we're obviously just dealing with individuals--provides a greater leverage.
We all would like to think that giving is altruistic, but the fact of the matter is that increasing the gifts of marketable securities through the capital gains exemption has increased philanthropy over the course of the last nine years. And this huge change in the last budget has allowed many philanthropists to think further about what their actions are going to be.
There are other provisions down the road that both the government and all parties can think about. One would be a capital gains exemption for private foundations. Another would be the capital gains for property as well. We're not yet ready for that because there are some issues.
Both the U.K. and the United States are already there. We need to be there too. In due course it will occur, I'm sure.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Thank you, Mr. Dykstra.
I'm just going to continue with a brief line of questioning on this same topic, if I could.
We had Finance officials at committee yesterday, and I was asking them about the dialogue in respect of extending the capital gains exemption for publicly listed securities to donations to private foundations, and of course they alluded to this dialogue proceeding “in due course”. That's code for “who knows when”, as everyone who's dealt with public agencies knows.
Your organization represents professional fundraisers who work with both public charities and private foundations and so on, yes?
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
So you're going to be pushing hard, then, for this to be extended to private charities? Is that an understatement?
5:30 p.m.
President, Association of Fundraising Professionals
That is an understatement, although there are two organizations that are going to champion it. The first organization is Philanthropic Foundations Canada. In fact, they have several meetings in place already over the course of the next two weeks with all kinds of individuals in anticipation of the next budget.
I think the government would have liked to have incorporated it, but they had only 90 days to prepare a budget, and they wanted to make sure...because we are in the era of accountability. Once we make sure we have the accountability right for private foundations, the Association of Fundraising Professionals, the Canadian Association of Gift Planners, and Philanthropic Foundations Canada will all be championing the cause as a coalition. We hope to have all-party agreement, as we did with the capital gains exemption on marketable securities.
In a similar fashion, Mr. Chair, we'd like to be able to have a national philanthropy day. I know that's not your question, but it's very important, because we need to lead, as other countries have, because of the explosion of growth in philanthropy. This is just the beginning.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Thank you.
I can't help but throw out a supportive comment your way, in the sense that I think we are all aware here of the demographic reality of an aging population. We're also aware of the potential for inherited wealth and for philanthropy to really boom in this country. We are behind a number of other countries in respect of the way we have embraced the culture of encouraging this kind of giving. So I guess I'll lobby you to lobby us in respect of expanding this.
Thank you very much to each of you for being here. We very much appreciate your taking the time, and we appreciate your presentations and answers to our questions.
We are adjourned.