Well, today's political rant is going to be brought to you by the proposed National Child Care Program. This might be a tough one for me to write, since (as usual) the Liberals seem to be all talk and no action. Though they have announced (more than once, in fact!) funding for the program, they have very few concrete ideas about what shape it will take, what the scope will be, etc., and that makes it tough to write critically about it.
I think my real problem so far is the term "universal" that gets tossed around every once in awhile. I do not believe we should have universal child care. I do believe that we need good chid care programs for those struggling to make it; single mothers and fathers, and families with low incomes. To have a good child care program could make a big difference for some of these people, and I am a firm believer in a "hand up, not a hand out".
Where I have a problem with the program is that if it is truly universal, it makes value judgements on some families and punishes them through taxation. How is this? Well, Matt and I (and many others) have the opinion that it is a good thing for one parent to stay home with the kids when they are little, beyond the one year of maternity leave. Of course, others may not share the opinion, and may think it is better for both parents to have an income. However, we should be free to make the choice about what works for us and accept the consequences of that choice. For the stay-at-homers, the family income is dropped and they learn to make due with less. For those pursuing their careers, the higher income is offset by the cost of daycare. If a universal child care program were to be put in place, it would mean higher taxation on all citizens, regardless of whether they choose to have one partner home with the children or whether both work. For those pursuing their careers, it would make little difference (and could quite possibly reward them); but those with one partner at home would be penalized for making that choice.
Some might try to argue that universal child care has the same benefit for society as universal schooling, but I don't agree. Schooling provides children with the tools they need to take the next step to become the next generation's doctors, nurses, teachers, lawyers, construction workers, police officers - there is a positive outcome for society from schooling. In some good child care, there is a strong educational component, but not all centers provide this (and I would hate to see the price tag for the government providing it, given the additional bureaucracy it would create). However, there is generally little difference to society if children are at home or in daycare for the early years of their lives. In Matt's and my opinion, children can often get more personal attention when at home with mom or dad than they would in a daycare, which could help their development in their formative years. Of course, there are also benefits to daycare; learning to get along with a wide variety of other children, listening to a teacher's instructions, and learning to share. However, for us, the benefits of keeping our children at home outweigh the benefits of day care. We should be allowed to make our own choice without being penalized either way.
