Evidence of meeting #35 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 40th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was women.
Conservative
Conservative
Research Fellow, C.D. Howe Institute
No. I agree that there should be both, so the current level should remain as it is, but we shouldn't be trying to increase it and provide more and more cash transfers.
Research Fellow, C.D. Howe Institute
Yes, but we should try to allocate those resources to in-kind transfers so that we're guaranteeing, for example, that children have the education that they need, have the child care that they require, or have certain goods that they require. I'm not proposing to eliminate it or to get rid of it.
Conservative
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
No, I understand. You're just saying not to increase it.
Research Fellow, C.D. Howe Institute
No. I think we need to try to understand better ways to allocate those resources, in the sense that sometimes when we simply transfer the money, we're not always sure of how that money is going to be spent. I'm not trying to say that parents do not necessarily know how to spend it, but sometimes certain strategies are better to obtain a certain goal.
For example, if we want our children to be healthier and more educated, there are certain strategies to obtain that goal. We should try, as much as we can, not only to inform parents and families but also to influence their consumption behaviours so as to achieve that goal. Obviously this is based on quality research with solid findings.
Conservative
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
It's a fairly frank discussion. Without getting too fancy around the wording here, you're saying that because it's discretionary, we may not have a sense that it's being used to get the outcomes we want. Basically, it gets down to your saying that we don't necessarily trust--that difficult word--that those people would either know how to use it or that they would use it appropriately.
Research Fellow, C.D. Howe Institute
That's not necessarily the case, because sometimes, for example, low-income families may not have the resources available to them. That's where the community, as some of my colleagues have mentioned, has a very important role. Sometimes they will play that role by informing them and telling them what they should probably do. A lot of times low-income families, or even marginalized families, don't have access to that, so at the community level we need to make sure they're integrated so that they're informed. Basically what I'm saying is that sometimes they don't have the information, but it's not because they don't want it; many times it's because it's not accessible to them.
Conservative
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Women's Foundation
May I please have a quick comment there?
Conservative
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Women's Foundation
It also depends on whether or not the service is available. That's a very big part of it. Even if a family has resources, there may be no child care available in their area because there's a two-year waiting list. There may be no affordable, accessible child care, or not enough of it. That's a very big part of it. It's not just about the choice that parents make; it's also about the choices they make based on what's available or not available.
Conservative
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
Right. Yes, and I was curious in terms of the health care, the pre-natal care, and so on--those kinds of things.
I'll wrap it up here very quickly. Others may want to have a quick response, but I'll direct the question to Claire.
Under the universal child care allowance, a family with three children who fit that category will be receiving $300 per month. This is nothing to sneeze at. It is a great and significant help to that family--to the working poor, if you will. Are you saying or suggesting that once a government has provided something like that, which is of great help to a family, it should now be pulled back?
Research Fellow, C.D. Howe Institute
No, I am saying to keep that, but to not be.... They'd have that money, but some have been advocating to increase it, and I'm saying to keep it at what they have. Alongside cash transfers we should have in-kind transfers, but not complete--
Conservative
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
You don't mean we'd necessarily take that $300 per month back from them.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Thank you.
I know Ms. Minna wanted to follow up with one quick question.
Liberal
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Actually, I was going to do that with Ms. Campbell, but now that we've got this other discussion going, I want to clarify something that I think is important to our work, and I want to be a little more blunt.
It's obvious that for some time the debate among some of us around this table has been as to whether we support the transfer of $1,200 as opposed to creating new child care spaces.
My question to you is very simple, because I don't want to play around with these things anymore. The $1,200 is taxed. It's not $300 a month; it's taxed in the hands of people, so they don't get the full amount. We know that. That's number one.
I want to ask a question of Ms. de Oliveira. Are you saying that the child benefit, as recommended by many others in the last several days, should be increased by up to $5,000, and that a national child care program should be established as well? Those two pieces are interdependent with one another, quite apart from what happens to the $1,200.
Moving forward, are you saying you would not increase the child benefit, you would simply establish a national child care program, or neither? I'm not clear on what you're saying.
Research Fellow, C.D. Howe Institute
In terms of increasing that amount and by how much, I'd rather not pronounce on how much. Based on my own research and what I understand, I'm not sure. There has been some work, actually, and I've discussed this question with other people. What the optimal amount should be is something I would rather not say or give a--
Liberal
Research Fellow, C.D. Howe Institute
Yes, I would, specifically for low-income families, to guarantee the child care. Studies by other economists looking at whether there should be universal child care found very mixed and conflicting results, but it has been shown that having child care specifically for low-income families is beneficial.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
I want to thank our witnesses for being here and for taking time out of your busy days to give us evidence today.
With that, the meeting is adjourned.