Suppose you have a man who earns $100,000 and his wife is at home with the children. Indeed, in Sweden, they say that only rich men can afford to have women at home—a wife at home. But if you have income splitting, she would be taxed at $50,000 and he would be taxed at $50,000, meaning that if she goes back into the labour market, she will be taxed at the second level of taxation, which I think is 22% now, whereas in the current situation, she's taxed at the lowest rate, which is 15.5%.
Again, if there are measures giving women at home money for child care, and they go back into the labour market, lose that money and have to pay for child care, that's a major obstacle. The problem, as we know, is that while it's very nice when a woman is living with a man who earns $100,000, if they separate and she's on her own, that's when we get low-income single mothers. So I think we want policy to be directed towards keeping women in the labour market.
Also, there's been a considerable amount of study showing that child care is not only not bad for children, but also that good quality child care is good for children. Again, we want women and men to be able to keep their children in child care, but not for 60 hours a week, but maybe for 30 hours a week, as it's an educational experience for the child and it allows good parenting as well.