Human Resources Committee on May 8th, 2007

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Ruby Dhalla]

I would like to call the meeting to order.

I want to take this opportunity to thank all of our witnesses for coming in today. Your perspective and your experiences will provide us with great insight.

Pursuant to the order of reference of November 22, 2006, the committee will now resume its study on Bill C-303.

We are going to be having two panels. We have our first panel sitting in front of us today. After the first panel has finished, we will be deliberating on a few motions that are before our committee, and at that point we will suspend very briefly as we get set for the second panel. We will have individuals join us for the second panel.

I think in light of the timing and the number of witnesses today, we will probably take Mr. Lake's suggestion and use the discretion of the chair and have questioning for five-minute periods.

We will have Mr. Dean Allison, who is the chair of the committee, join us a little later.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of our witnesses.

You may begin.

[Claudette Pitre-Robin, Administrator, Association québécoise des centres de la petite enfance]

Good morning. My name is Claudette Pitre-Robin, and I represent the Association québécoise des centres de la petite enfance [Quebec association of early childhood centres]. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for accepting to hear our views on this bill.

The Association québécoise des centres de la petite enfance agrees with Bill C-303, since clause 4 enables Quebec to continue its child care services program. We feel that it would have been truly unfortunate if this clause had not been in the bill, as it is important to us to be able to continue in the same direction, as Quebec has done over the past decade in developing child care services.

We currently have 200,000 child care spaces at $7 per day. Recent election commitments have led us to believe that another 20,000 spaces would be added to meet the needs of families. We feel that it is important for the Quebec government to be able to continue this approach. We are also pleased that during the course of the coming year, we should not be required to increase the current $7 fee paid by parents.

We do not have a specific brief to support our comments today, but I have taken excerpts from documents that, unfortunately, are not translated. I have left copies on the table at the back. It is a document that we worked on a few months ago to report on public investment in the early childhood development centre network and which shows the impact of these measures in Quebec.

The Quebec government currently invests $1.5 billion in the educational child care services network. That is just under 3% of the government's budget, but in our view, this investment pays huge dividends, economically and socially, and allows for the provision of universal services.

Economically speaking, we were able to measure the important contribution of the early childhood development centres network to economic activity and development in Quebec, as well as the savings generated in terms of long-term social costs.

We also determined that it led to an increase in gross domestic product. In Quebec, the level of economic activity by women of child-bearing age increased by 9% from 1996 to 2005. That increase is twice as high as in the rest of Canada. It means almost 90,000 more women in the workforce, women who are more financially independent and who have often been able to leave a life of poverty.

This has also had a very positive impact on GDP in Quebec and provides an extremely important contribution to the activities of Quebec companies, especially given the imminent shortage of skilled workers.

A Quebec economist, Ruth Rose, did a cost-benefit analysis study of a universal preschool educational program for the Conseil supérieur de l'éducation. She was able to estimate the return on investment for each dollar put into educational child care services in Quebec. Bear in mind that the Quebec government pays 80% of the cost and the parents, 20%.

The document shows many other savings, but I am going to simply tell you about the immediate impact. We have seen a reduction in social assistance spending, since mothers can work, an increase in direct income tax linked to the salaries of the mothers, and there was also job creation in child care, which broadened the tax base.

The federal government also made significant gains, which result mainly from an improved tax base and a reduction in the use of employment insurance.

It is also a critical tool for fighting poverty and social exclusion because it provides affordable educational services of high quality to families, regardless of their socio-economic or geographical situation, because development is done in an equitable fashion in all regions of Quebec.

It also enhances access to the labour market or to education for mothers. It plays a preventative role for children in vulnerable situations. It supports parents in their parental role. It also makes it possible to integrate children with special needs.

We have seen the importance, for children, of increasing income, especially in single-parent families. Poverty indicators produced by Statistics Canada show a spectacular decline, in Quebec, in the number of single-parent families facing poverty where women are the heads of the household, whereas the decrease Canada-wide, although it is significant, is much lower.

According to statistics, in 1997 in Canada, 53% of female-led lone parent families were living below the low-income cutoff, whereas in 2004, it was 40%, or 13% lower. In Quebec, the rate was 60% in 1997 and 30% in 2004, or 30% lower. So there was a 50% reduction in the number of poor single-parent women in Quebec. That is significant, and it is truly one of the fantastic objectives of this policy. Quebec's family policy has therefore had a major impact on the incidence of poverty among children and especially in lone-parent families. We cannot stress enough that this is about supporting the development of all children and that for them, it is a protection factor, especially for those living in a context of vulnerability. You all know that the majority of studies on this topic show that children from under-privileged backgrounds benefit immensely from their child care experience.

As regards universality, social equity is at the heart of the $7-a-day child care network, and often, there is a lot of criticism. On the one hand, if we recognize that it is an essential service, that means that it must be universal. The current system is such that everyone contributes to supporting the family, since a portion of the expenditures are paid by the government. We are asked why parents with higher incomes benefit from spaces at $7. Through the tax system, families that are more well-off are already paying more than $7. Facts show that once tax contributions are applied, parents that are more well-off pay more than $7, as taxpayers in the highest tax bracket account for 60% of individual income tax.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Sorry to interrupt, but you have 30 seconds left.

Thank you.

[Claudette Pitre-Robin]

If you look at our documents, you will see that families in the highest bracket pay, because of income tax, $16.60 per day, whereas families in lower tax brackets pay $7.30 per day. So you see the impact taxes have.

Moreover, we looked at the situation of families with similar incomes. For example, a family without children with employment income of $82,383 would have an after-tax income $59,113. If it is a couple with two teenagers, the after-tax income would be $61,280. If it were a couple with two children, where the mother does not work and the income is provided by a single parent, it is $59,901. If the parents of the two children are both in the workforce, it is $59,057. We see that families with a single income have the same income and are better off, even if they do not have access to the $7-a-day child care spaces, as a result of other tax measures.

That is the data that we wanted to share with you this morning. Thank you.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Thank you.

If you have anything else left, we can perhaps take care of it during questions.

I would please ask all of the witnesses just to keep to our timing. It's because we do only seven-minute presentations, and we have a number of witnesses.

I would next like to go to Ms. Rothman and Ms. Martha Friendly. Ms. Rothman is the national coordinator for Campaign 2000, and Ms. Friendly is a member of the steering committee.

[Laurel Rothman, National Coordinator, Campaign 2000]

Thank you.

Good morning. Thanks for the opportunity to talk with you today.

Campaign 2000 is a broad anti-poverty coalition. It's a cross-Canada coalition, founded in 1991, of more than 120 organizations to promote and secure the full implementation of the unanimous 1989 House of Commons resolution to eliminate child poverty in Canada. Clearly we've not achieved that by the year 2000, but we continue to urge all governments to keep their commitments and meet their obligations.

We're a diverse range of partner organizations in every province and territory, including low-income people's groups, parents' groups, child care providers and advocates, housing and health care providers and advocates, unions, women's groups, social planning councils, food banks, teachers, social workers, faith communities, aboriginal groups, and groups representing immigrants and refugees. Our partners in early learning and child care services include the Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada; the Canadian Child Care Federation; the Childcare Resource and Research Unit; SpeciaLink, the National Centre for Child Care Inclusion; and the Ontario Coalition for Better Child Care, to name a few. There will be a list of partners with the brief we submit.

Since our inception we have been committed to a balance of income supports and high-quality community services that are essential and that evidence indicates are needed to significantly reduce and eradicate child and family poverty and improve the life chances of all children. We seek to raise public awareness and to bring to light evidence-based and reasonable policy solutions. We meet with all levels of government, and we're non-partisan.

Martha is going to address some other aspects of the situation.

We're here to support the legislation, Bill C-303. We're very much in agreement with the perspective that child care services must be accessible for all children, not only low-income children. At the same time, a real system of high-quality and accessible child care services is an essential cornerstone of a poverty reduction strategy. I might add that the experience in Quebec, the only province where the child and family poverty rate has continuously gone down since 1997, is illustrative. I think we have to look at it. Perhaps we can talk about that later.

From our point of view, universality means that when a full system has been developed, all children will have access to good services if their parents choose it, whether they're urban or rural, low income, middle income, or well-to-do, have a mother in the paid labour force, or they're aboriginal, Québécois, or a newcomer to the country.

There are a number of reasons we feel that the best way to meet the early learning and child care needs of low-income children is within a universally accessible system. Martha is going to address that.

Thank you.

[Martha Friendly, Member, Steering Committee, Campaign 2000]

Thank you.

I'm the coordinator of the Childcare Resource and Research Unit, and I'm a national partner of Campaign 2000 and a member of the steering committee.

I want to talk first about a couple of the main reasons that a universal system is really the best way to address the early learning and child care needs of children living in poverty.

First of all, poverty is dynamic; it's not static. This is true in Canada and it's also true in other countries. What you find is that who is poor at any given time changes over the years, and you can see that reflected in the child poverty numbers. Over a period of time, more of those children will have lived in a low-income family than the number of poor children at any one time. I think American research illustrates this very clearly also. A family can become poor if a job is lost or if there's a divorce, or through the death of one of the family members. From that point of view, it's really essential to have the support of a robust system of early learning and child care in order to meet the needs of those families if they change.

The other thing, and I think this is really important to keep in mind, is the idea of programs for the poor and universal programs, which Canada has tended to support. The statement that programs for the poor are poor programs is often attributed to Wilbur Cohen, who is one of the architects of American social security. The experience in other countries, particularly the United States, really does show that programs that are aimed at the poor are often marginalized programs in terms of recognition and support, and I think a really good illustration of this is the American head start program, which I got my start in early childhood education working on. In fact, that has never met the needs of even the poor families for whom it's intended. There are real shortages and underfunding. It's a very good illustration of the difference between programs for the poor and universal programs.

So just to pick up a couple of the elements of Bill C-303 that Campaign 2000 supports, in addition to the universal approach, first of all, the objectives of the bill that are stated at the beginning, that the primary objectives are to promote early childhood development and well-being and at the same time to support the participation of parents in employment or training and community life, are very much in keeping with Campaign 2000's principles. We would also go further to point out that there are other objectives for early learning and child care, such as social cohesion and social inclusion of new Canadians and aboriginal Canadians to bring them into a society, and equity objectives. These are very much our objectives.

We believe there is really the need for an act, because this is an issue of national importance, even though it's clearly within provincial jurisdiction, but a place for the federal government to play a role with the provinces and territories.

We support the conditions placed on universality, accessibility, and quality as merely illustrations of best practices for early learning and child care policy, and that's according to the body of empirical research and policy analysis. We very much urge accountability for public money spent, and we think the bill reflects those things in its insistence on not-for-profit services and on reporting.

I would just like to mention that we also would support an amendment, if there is an amendment, about the needs of aboriginal communities. We have aboriginal partners in Campaign 2000 who would really like specific recognition of the needs of aboriginal Canadians.

In closing, we would like to note that today, most of Canada's low-income children do not now have access to early learning and child care. I want to note that the OECD has singled Canada out to observe that, in Canada, only 20% of lone parents and 5% of disadvantaged groups are covered by early learning and child care.

I would like to really emphasize that in most parts of Canada, families of all incomes suffer because early learning and child care services do not exist in sufficient numbers or are of mediocre quality or aren't affordable. Bill C-303 is not the whole of the policy solution to this, but it's part of the policy solution. We know this is not a money bill, but together with adequate financing, a full policy framework, and political will at all levels, this legislation can be part of Canada's beginning to ameliorate the dismal state of early learning and child care.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much, Ms. Friendly and Ms. Rothman.

We are going to Code Blue for Child Care. Ms. Ballantyne and Ms. Colley, welcome. Between the two of you, you have seven minutes.

[Morna Ballantyne, Volunteer, Code Blue for Child Care]

Thank you very much.

I'm Morna Ballantyne. I'm going to share the seven minutes with Sue.

Thanks very much for the opportunity to be here with you.

I'll take a few minutes to explain what Code Blue is. We're actually not an organization; we describe ourselves as a “campaign” that has the support of a number of organizations and a number of individuals.

I was going to print out a list of all the individuals who support our campaign. I actually have a printout of half of our supporters--and it's here, but I'm not going to unroll it, because it's 85 feet long--just to give you a sense of who we represent and that we are representing large numbers of Canadians who are concerned about the state of early learning and child care in Canada.

We're very excited that Parliament and your committee are once again addressing a piece of legislation regarding early learning and child care. It's of course not the first time. This issue has been on the political agenda for many years.

I'm a parent of two children. I consider myself to be one of the relative newcomers to this issue, having been involved for 22 years. I got involved when I was pregnant with my first son.

This is an issue that is not going to go away until we have a system of early learning and child care, not just in Quebec but in all of Canada.

We want to make it clear that Bill C-303, in our opinion, which we support, does not in fact give Canadians everything that we need and want with respect to child care policy and programs. In fact, it's only one government instrument that's required. There are lots of other instruments that are required to be put in place by different levels of government, community, and individuals.

We've been following your committee deliberations very closely--I've been in attendance at every one of your hearings--and we are incredibly impressed with the attention you're giving to this issue, to this legislation. We're also impressed with the excellent submissions made by other witnesses.

But we think that there is still a lack of clarity about what this bill does and doesn't do. We've tried to summarize in a handout--in case you're wondering where that handout came from, that's from us--in a chart, some of the aspects of the bill. We hope that will help to clarify some of the myths and some of the realities.

One of the things we want to make clear is that we think this piece of legislation is actually very simple and straightforward. In fact, the representatives from the justice department testified to that.

It's certainly not advancing anything new. There's been a suggestion that it's not right or it's not proper for a piece of legislation to try to deal with this very complex issue. But in fact this legislation deals with issues that have been on the table, the subject of public and political debate and the subject of very complex federal-provincial negotiations, for many years.

Bill C-303 in fact represents a consensus of what the federal government needs to do. It also reflects what we know are the best practices in early learning and child care.

Sue is going to emphasize some of the other aspects of what the bill does and what it doesn't do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

You have about three and a half minutes. You divided your time very well.

So there you go, three and a half minutes.

[Sue Colley, Volunteer, Code Blue for Child Care]

I won't take that much time, I think.

Good morning. My name is Sue Colley. I am the executive director of Building Blocks for Child Care, B2C2, which is a community not-for-profit development agency for child care, and I'm also a steering committee member of the Code Blue campaign for child care.

I really can't add very much to what Morna has said. I think that what we wanted to do.... Actually, Morna has given me copious notes about what's been going on in these hearings that she attended every day, and we thought it would be nice to try to simplify what we think the bill represents and why it's important to pass this bill, and present it in a simple table.

Simply, I would like to suggest that we just go through this list of what it does and what it doesn't do. First, it does not create a national program of early learning and child care. It does not direct the choices that families make for child care. We think that those are completely independent of this act. What it does do, however, is create a small number of conditions to any federal funding that Parliament decides to transfer to the provinces and territories for early learning and child care services. It does not authorize any spending or any increase in federal or provincial or territorial funding for early learning and child care, but what it does do is it makes provinces and territories accountable for any funding that they receive.

For example, if Bill C-303 became law, the $600 million in federal transfers would be directed only to those provinces and territories with plans providing comprehensive early learning and child care that are of high quality, universal, and accessible. These transfers to the provinces would have to satisfy criteria related to accountability. And I do believe that with the federal government now spending $2.65 billion that is really dedicated to early learning and child care, taxpayers would be pleased about the fact that there would be accountability for this.

It does not prevent any additional allocations. It does require that governments publicly report on how they spend federal funding. It doesn't venture into areas of provincial jurisdiction, as confirmed by the justice department in an earlier submission. It does require provinces and territories to consider the needs of children who are frequently excluded from programs; so children with special needs and children who live in rural, remote, and northern areas would be covered by this legislation. It doesn't limit federal funding only to the children of parents in the workforce. It makes programs open to all parents, whether the parents work or not. It does not address all the needs of Canadian families or children, nor does it preclude the federal government from giving children and families other supports, such as income supplements and enhanced parental leave, which we also think would be a good thing. It does require provinces and territories to address the high costs of early learning and child care, and it does require provinces and territories to address the uneven quality in early learning and child care, which means taking steps to ensure that every child attending receives a program that supports their well-being and development.

I would just add that the rest of our concerns about this bill are articulated in our brief and we also have a few other sheets that we have handed out. I just would like to add that we are very supportive of the two amendments that we believe have been proposed. One is an amendment that would incorporate language about aboriginal peoples being included in the act explicitly. And secondly, because we have never believed that family home child care is a for-profit service, we think that this should be clarified in the act so that it can be embraced within the act and within the funding.

I hope the members of the committee will see it in their wisdom to embrace the simplicity and the importance of the accountability provisions in this bill and enact it into legislation.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

And I thank you, Ms. Colley, as well as Ms. Ballantyne.

We're now going to move over to the Region of Peel. I believe we've got two groups. The Region of Peel, represented by Ms. Reid, who has seven minutes, and we also have another group, Success by Six Peel. Is that correct?

How do you pronounce your last name, Mr. Huether?

[John Huether, Volunteer Member of Executive Council, Council of Champions, Success by Six Peel]

Heater, like a hot water heater.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Okay, Mr. Huether. I like that. That's all right.

Ms. Reid, you have seven minutes, so you're on first and then we'll go to Mr. Huether.

[Lorna Reid, Director, Early Years Integration, Children's Services, Region of Peel]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm Lorna Reid, and I'm currently the director of early years integration in the children's services department in the Region of Peel.

I'm privileged right now to lead Peel's Best Start strategy, which is part of Ontario's implementation of federal funding under various agreements. In this role, I served on the quality and human resources expert panel that submitted its report to the Minister of Children and Youth Services in March 2007. I believe this report will be of interest to this committee when it is released, as it speaks to many of the clauses in this bill.

Early learning and child care services have been integral to my life, both personally as a parent and professionally for over 30 years. The Region of Peel is a large upper-tier municipality of more than 1.2 million residents immediately to the west of Toronto. Peel experienced a growth rate of 17% between 2001 and 2006. Close to 50% of Peel's residents are immigrants, and 33% of the region is rural. In Ontario, the child care service system is led by consolidated municipal service managers, and Peel is one of 47 across the province.

This bill aligns well with the Region of Peel's position statement on early learning and child care services. The current council is on record supporting the creation of a national strategy. In fact, on March 8 a resolution regarding the development and funding of a national early learning and child care strategy was adopted by council and forwarded to Minister Solberg. Our previous council also endorsed a national vision for early learning and child care based on the principles that are outlined in this bill: quality, universality, and accessibility.

While Bill C-303 is not the national strategy that council envisioned, it is a beginning measure that sets some national standards.

Peel's position statement also aligns with the provisions in the bill that address quality, accessibility, and accountability. Peel Social Services is committed to ensuring that the early learning and child care programs of the department are fully accessible to all residents of Peel and support inclusion of all families in effective child development. It is committed to playing a leadership role in planning collaborative strategies with others and is committed to designing innovative services that meet the needs of families of diverse backgrounds and that are responsive to the changing needs of the community.

It is very important, from the region's perspective, that criteria and conditions for funding for early learning and child care programs are established, and that provinces and territories and their programs are held accountable. Peel welcomes accountability measures to ensure, for example, that the $250 million for child care spaces announced in the federal budget will be allocated to local communities by our province. Communities know the needs and service gaps, and integrated service plans are under way.

The Region of Peel holds its own programs accountable through quality assurance processes and through annual financial audits when funding amounts of $20,000 and greater are allocated. Peel welcomes accountability measures at all levels.

Peel's position statements comment specifically on quality and accessibility, specifically stating that everyone benefits from quality early learning and child care. Quality service contributes positively to a child's development and learning; it compensates trained early childhood professionals fairly; it recognizes the primary importance of a child's home environment and of his or her relationship with parents; it partners with parents; it promotes parents' employment; it provides economic benefits to the community, families, and the children.

Peel's programs and policies are designed to be as flexible as permitted within the funding envelopes and guidelines, thereby ensuring that as many families as possible can access programs. Despite these efforts, families wait for fee subsidy, for special needs resources, and for family supports. Only 12% of children age zero to twelve can access licensed child care programs, and only 3% of Peel's children have access to fee subsidy. In our Ontario early years programs there are waiting lists and lineups for the programs that are provided.

Peel's position statement calls upon the government to adopt the OECD recommendations regarding investment in early learning and child care to increase accessibility.

Clause 10 of the bill outlines the creation of a broadly based advisory council. Peel council uses this model effectively to hear from those directly impacted by its programs and services.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

You have two minutes left, Ms. Reid.

[Lorna Reid]

Thank you.

Peel uses this model to validate the reports of departments. This clause of the bill will further strengthen accountability. However, the timeframe of 60 days may be too ambitious, as programs in Peel report their successes to Peel, Peel reports to the Province of Ontario, and the province reports to the federal minister. Ninety days would be more achievable.

Clause 7 references withholding of payments when a province or territory does not satisfy a criterion or condition set out in clauses 5 or 6. Another option could be to work directly with municipalities or other entities in instances when the province or territory does not comply. Communities and families have been severely impacted when provinces did not use early learning and child care funding for its intended purpose.

In summary, Bill C-303 aligns well with the Region of Peel's social services position statement on early learning and child care in all clauses except clause 6, where consideration of the matter has not taken place. Peel's council has repeatedly asked for a national approach to early childhood development and well-being and is very encouraged by the progress of Bill C-303 to date. This legislation will support council's goal of providing high-quality, universally accessible early learning and child care services, from which everyone in Peel benefits.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Ms. Reid, for that presentation.

We're now going to our last witness, Mr. Huether. You have seven minutes for the Success by Six Peel.

[John Huether]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I'm very honoured to be able to make this presentation on behalf of Success by Six Peel. My name is John Huether and I'm a volunteer member of the executive of the Council of Champions of Success by Six Peel. In the past, I was the executive director of the Peel Children's Aid Society.

Success by Six is a collaboration of more than 40 partners from different sectors of the community, including business, labour, and human services. We are dedicated to ensuring that all children zero to six will thrive in Peel. We are committed to research, public and professional education, and community capacity building. Success by Six provides coordinating support to a variety of early learning and child care programs, including neighbourhood parenting programs. Our strength is in our multidisciplinary approach.

There are over 100,000 children in Peel under the age of five. A recent study of school readiness using the widely recognized early development instrument revealed that more than 27% of the children entering school in Peel Region were not ready to learn in one or more of the domains covered by the EDI.

In Peel, one in seven children live in poverty. Only 4,000 children have access to fee subsidy for child care within the 22,500 licensed spaces in the region. Therefore, there is a great need to increase the number of licensed and subsidized spaces within our region. To address the gap in Peel and in many other regions of Canada, significant investments must be made by both the provincial and federal governments in early learning and child care.

We're very pleased that Parliament has passed Bill C-303 through second reading for review by this committee. We believe that, if passed, this bill can make a positive contribution. It is extremely important that much-needed additional investments in early learning and child care are made consistent with the principles of quality, accessibility, universality, and accountability. Therefore, we support the express purpose of the bill as outlined.

We are supportive of the definition of early learning and child care service, which includes parent support and child drop-in centres. We are strongly in favour of the provision of substantially more child care spaces for parents and families, and support the range of options listed. We are also cognizant of the value of high-quality parenting support programs, which teach parents strategies to promote healthy development. Programs such as the Ontario Early Years Centres in neighbourhood hubs have demonstrated their value to children and parents. These parenting support services can well be combined with core child care services and programs so there is flexibility to respond to the needs of families. A full range of child care programs and parenting support programs should be supported by this bill.

We're supportive of the provisions in the bill that address quality. The reference to standards related to compensation in subclause 5(3) is welcome. The provision would support the need to increase the salaries of many professionals in the early learning and child care field who are not fairly compensated for their contributions to the well-being of children and society. In Peel, for example, the average salary of early childhood educators is in the neighbourhood of $18,000.

In examining subclause 5(3) on quality and in keeping with the above comments about parent support programs, we would urge that the criteria be written in such a way that does not preclude parent support programs being funded using federal dollars. We are concerned that the current wording of paragraph 5(3)(b) may have this result. Perhaps an additional provision related to parent-child programs in this section might be added.

Universality, in our view, is important to an effective, accessible early learning and child care program. We agree with the interpretation that this means these programs should be available to every child whose parent or guardian wishes to avail themselves of them.

There is a danger that the words “equally entitled to early learning and child care services that are appropriate to their needs” will continue to mean having equal access to waiting lists, unless greater investment is forthcoming.

We wonder if consideration could be given to setting targets for funding for early learning and child care. This could lead to Canada's investing 1.25% or 1.5% of GDP in early learning and child care, instead of our appallingly low current contribution of 0.25%.

We are encouraged by the specific reference to children with special needs in subclause 5(5). In making this provision a reality, the contributions and supports provided by specialized services to young children with special needs must be recognized. Speech and language specialists, public health nurses, mental health workers, occupational and physiotherapists all contribute to quality programming for special needs children in early learning and child care programs. Therefore, it is important to include the funding of these kinds of supports for integration, as well as appropriate teacher–child ratios within the purview of this legislation.

We welcome the accountability requirements outlined in clause 8. It is important that Canada have the ability to track the impact of its investments in supporting children in their early years.

We are also supportive of the provisions for the creation of the advisory council on early learning and child care. We know from the growing body of research in neuroscience and other sciences that the early years are crucial to the healthy development of all children. It is therefore important to support investment in early learning and child care.

Parents and families have the primary responsibility to care for and make sound decisions about their child's development. They should be supported in their responsibilities. To the significant extent that this bill supports this policy direction, it is worthy of support.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Huether.

I know that it was suggested by Ms. Dhalla that we have two five-minute rounds so we can get more questions in. We're going to start right now with the opposition.

Ms. Dhalla, you have five minutes, please.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Thank you very much.

I'm glad that our chair is back, because it gives me an opportunity to ask questions.

First, I want to say thank you to all of you.

I know that many of you are distinguished in your particular field, in terms of advocating and ensuring that as a country we have a national program for early learning and child care.

Thank very much for coming, in particular to Lorna and John, since they're from the Region of Peel in my constituency of Brampton.

First, I want to start off by congratulating Code Blue on the tremendous work you have done as an organization. I think the report card you published, I believe in February, really hit home. For anyone on the committee who hasn't seen it, it allocated five major areas and gave Prime Minister Stephen Harper a grade. I believe that on universal child care, you gave him a grade of F; on parental choice, it was a D; on balancing work and family, it was an F; accessibility was an incomplete; and I believe on honouring agreements, it says that Stephen doesn't play well with others. He said that he would honour agreements, and he went back on his word. You gave him an F.

I know that many parents across this country have really used—

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Did he get anything for doubling the funding?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

No discussion here

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

No, but I will make sure that I table this, so that all members of our committee can see this great initiative that was done by Code Blue and organizations such as the Child Care Advocacy Association and others.

I think all of us really feel the pain that the provinces have in terms of the fact that they were left in disarray, and parents were left scrambling to find child care spaces.

Today we realize the importance of this bill, due to the fact that the early learning and child care agreements were cancelled by the Prime Minister.

One of the unfortunate parts about the bill that we're discussing and is before us today is that even though the NDP brought it forward, it requires a royal recommendation.

We always say that hindsight is 20:20. I don't think the NDP realized when they formed a coalition with the Conservatives to defeat the Liberals that the first act of the Prime Minister would be to have this particular important piece of legislation ripped to shreds, and there would be a completely different approach.

So going on to some of the questioning, I want to find out from the Region of Peel in particular.... You spoke about the struggle that parents are facing—especially in Peel, I think—which is so indicative of many of our constituencies across the country. It is multilingual, multi-ethnic. There is a combination of urban and rural as well, in terms of the demographics.

How many parents are waiting to enroll their children in some of the spaces? What is the wait list like?

[Lorna Reid]

Currently we have over 2,000 children waiting for subsidized child care.