Thank you.
My name is Monica Lysack and I am the executive director of the Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee. I commend the members who have initiated these hearings with the goal of better understanding the programs and the impact of the cuts. I do apologize. We were one of the last-minute changes, so you don't have my notes.
I want to be very clear at the outset that the CCAAC is both an advocacy organization and a policy shop. We are almost 25 years old, and our vision has not changed, though it has become more refined and more clearly articulated over the years as we have developed policy expertise, learned from research, been informed by citizens, and collaborated with various levels of government to examine the child care policy and funding approaches that the evidence shows are most likely to advance an effective child care system.
The CCAAC works for a child care system that is high quality, inclusive, affordable, publicly funded, non-profit, and that serves as a cornerstone for progressive family policies.
Our membership reaches more than four million Canadians, including parents, caregivers, researchers, and students, as well as women's, anti-poverty, labour, social justice, disability, and rural organizations at the provincial, territorial, regional, and pan-Canadian levels. We are working together to bring about that which most other industrialized countries already have: an early learning and child care system that supports children's healthy development and parents in all of their roles, at work, at home, and in their communities.
Our contracts with the social development partnerships program advance specific areas of child care research and policy analysis of interest to both government and our membership. Currently, we have a citizen engagement project that supports communities to analyze child care policy and funding changes under the federal-provincial and territorial agreements and works with governments to advance effective, accountable child care policy in the future.
On the other hand, our advocacy activities are funded through membership fees and donations. The CCAAC has survived many challenges over the years and will continue to advocate for our vision, regardless of the actions of government that may hinder our work or attempt to silence our voices.
It is not the CCAAC as an organization that will be most hurt by potential cuts to SDPP projects such as ours. It is the citizens of Canada who will be the real losers. Those child care experts, Mum and Dad, will have fewer resources available to support them in the most important role of their lives. Children with disabilities will be turned away from programs that can't meet a range of developmental needs. Rural communities won't have the opportunity to develop models that address the special challenges of isolation and small, sparse population bases. We will lose the opportunity to learn of the economic impact of applying different policy options, and, most significantly, Canada will lose the opportunity to advance public accountability for the expenditure of child care funds.
I could go on and on with examples of what will be lost, but in the short time available, I want to move to higher ground. How do governments make policy decisions? Certainly decisions are influenced by political ideology, but when we look around the globe, particularly focusing on the member countries of the OECD, we see that the most progressive countries engage in research and analysis to inform their policy-making.
The Government of Canada, under the former administration, volunteered to participate in an OECD review of early childhood education and care. Canada, as it turns out, came in dead last out of twenty countries for our spending on children's programs, which was lower even than Mexico. By international standards, Canada's policy decisions put us behind every industrialized nation in the study. Why would a government voluntarily expose itself to such scrutiny when it is clear that we lag behind? I hope it was to learn how to strengthen and improve future investments to ensure that they are made wisely and that they achieve the outcomes we all strive for: healthy, happy, well cared for children and support for our economic productivity as a country.
Countries that operate in the most democratic way are most likely to engage in research; research and public dialogue are valued the least in autocratic countries. Is this where Canada is heading? Do we have a government that knows so much that citizen and community engagement is seen not only as unnecessary but as interference when government knows best?
Important research happens at various levels, from peer-reviewed work to community action--research that takes academic findings and turns them into practical, real-life models. The CCAAC has engaged in both of these forms. Our benefit cost analysis falls into the former category. Our strategy document, “Patchwork to Framework”, builds on research findings along with a pan-Canadian consultation to provide a practical working document that puts research into practice.
Our benefit cost analysis was done by two prominent economists, one whose previous work supported our position and one whose position was in opposition to ours. We're not afraid to have our policy recommendations scrutinized. Our goal was to learn from the experience. Incidentally, in this case it was the opposing economist whose position changed once the evidence was examined.
To summarize, the CCAAC is both a policy shop and an advocacy organization. Successive federal governments have contracted with our organization to carry out research and policy analysis, and Canadians from coast to coast to coast rely on us to advocate for the quality universal child care services so common to our peer nations.
We're a frugal group. The CCAAC is very good at stretching a dollar, and our own accountability is above reproach. If our project funding is cut, it will be because we are too effective--compiling solid evidence on best investments and practice that this government is choosing to ignore--not because we are wasteful or irresponsible with public funds.
I'd like to close with a plea on behalf of those who can't appear before you--children and parents who have benefited immeasurably from this program. I urge this government to reverse the decision on the cuts and challenge them to give up their “government knows best” approach by continuing to allow the engagement of citizens in public policy dialogue.
Thank you.