I am very happy to debate the Liberal record versus the Conservative record at any point in time, but it would be an unfair argument.
Mr. Chong raises an interesting question when he talks about a national program and whether you can have a national program when one province is excluded. When Mr. Chong talks about this he speaks from principle, and he has exercised his principle in a way that none of the rest of us have had the opportunity to do, so I admire that. But we do need to keep in mind that Quebec is the model for what the rest of us are trying to get to. In essence, the program already exists in Quebec.
When we talk about child care these days, it seems to me the question at the very basic level is, do we believe that as a country, as provinces and territories, and hopefully including our aboriginal people, we should invest directly in creating spaces? Is that the role of government, or should we give money to people so they can take care of their own? In other words, maybe in health care, we should get rid of the health care system and give people money and say, you're on your own; the private sector will build it, and maybe we'll provide a little tax incentive.
That doesn't make any sense to me. Even if it did, I don't think $100 a month would buy an awful lot of child care.
The reason I raise this is that this is a very fundamental question. How do we provide child care? The UN convention from 1948 indicated that education was a right, not a privilege. It didn't specifically say primary school education. We're now getting to the point where we should have discussions about post-secondary education as well, and we are having a discussion about early learning and child care.
My question is for everybody on the panel. Do you think that giving $100 a month, or any specific amount of money, to parents of children under six will actually make spaces more accessible in this country?
Anybody who wants to can answer that.