by Marcel Lauzière

The CCSD's national conference on child care this November in Winnipeg is a sign of the times.

More than 600 people will gather for discussion and debate on an issue that has largely been on the political sidelines, with the exception of Quebec and Manitoba. This will be a conference that affects the future of Canadian families.

But getting to this point has not been easy.

In Ottawa, the recent Speech from the Throne may have recognized the importance of early learning and child care, but for more than two decades, federal politicians and planners have been reticent to take it seriously.

It has been more than 20 years since the last major child care policy conference in Canada. This is the perfect opportunity to ask a very straightforward question: "What has changed?"

Back in the 1980s, parents were clamouring to get their children into quality, affordable daycare. Now those grown up children are having – or thinking of having – children of their own. But they won't face anything like the same child care problems as their parents did, or will they?

Despite repeated electoral promises and a flurry of government reports, the child care situation in most parts of Canada has not changed much since the early 1980s. This year, we mark the 20th anniversary of the first federal announcement of a national strategy for child care – yet as I write this, no strategy is in place. Martha Friendly, founder and coordinator of the Childcare Resource and Research Unit, puts it bluntly: "It's been pretty much a lost two decades for child care in Canada."

It's true that some child care spaces have been created over the years. But the number pales when compared to the quadrupling of child care spaces that occurred in the 1970s. Growth slowed in the 1980s, then practically ground to a halt in the mid-1990s, when the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP) was dissolved. The one exception was in Quebec, which took advantage of the new federal matching funds system to build up their child care system, while the other provinces took the opportunity to cut back.

This means that parents outside of Quebec still must scramble to find regulated child care spaces for their children. In 1981, there were only enough regulated child care spaces to serve about 10% of the children of working mothers. In 2001, regulated child care spaces served about 12% of children of working mothers.

Financial barriers have not diminished either over those 20 years – quite the contrary. Eligibility levels for subsidies have dropped in seven provinces, and in many others, they have not been adjusted to the rising cost of living. A 2001 survey found that the financial burden of child care was 14% of average family income in Newfoundland, and 20% in British Columbia.

And the economic situation has gotten a lot tougher for most parents of young children. They are the "under 35" generation who entered the labour market during the 1980s and 1990s – and they make less on average than their counterparts of the 1970s. They are also more likely to have higher expenses, as cuts to social spending have resulted in user fees for many of the services young families count on.

"The decline in earnings for young workers is cited as one of the major explanations for their delay in having a family," concludes CCSD Vice President of Research, Katherine Scott.

For those who do opt to become parents, child care costs can push them below the poverty line. The financial squeeze is particularly painful for the growing number of single-parent families, which increased from 8.2% to 12.5% of all Canadian families with children between 1980 and 2002. Immigrant families are also vulnerable. The poverty rate among children of two-parent immigrant families was 39% in 2001 – more than twice the national average of 18%. And this at a time when many European countries have managed to keep their child poverty rates in single digits.

The silver lining in this rather bleak scenario is that the federal government has finally acknowledged that it is time to act. Child care was prominent in the federal budget and throughout the spring election campaign. And the most recent Speech from the Throne promised "a truly national system of early learning and child care." The appointment of former hockey star Ken Dryden as social development minister has created high expectations as he stick-handles what was once considered to be a "motherhood issue."

There are more reasons than ever for the federal government to invest in child care, and the need for provincial commitments is equally important.

First, there is the growing national and international consensus. A 2001 poll done by the Canadian Child Care Federation found that 90% of Canadians agreed or strongly agreed that we should have a nationally co-ordinated child care plan. In addition, 86% agreed or strongly agreed that there can be a publicly funded child care system that makes quality child care available to all Canadian children. This is in stark contrast to a Gallup poll done in 1982 in which almost half of Canadians surveyed (49%) felt that working mothers and their families should be responsible for their own child care arrangements; only 41% thought the government should share this responsibility.

Second, there is the example of Quebec. Internationally, Sweden and France have been recognized for creating quality, affordable child care. Now Quebec has managed to establish a universal and affordable system, despite the fiscal constraints familiar to all provinces.

Internationally, all members of the UN General Assembly committed themselves in 2002 to the development and implementation of national early childhood development policies and programs. Many developed countries are already well on their way: A 12-country survey by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in 2001 found that all aimed to publicly fund at least two years of preschool programming. Among the countries surveyed, governments typically paid the largest share of program costs, with parents covering 25% to 30%.

Finally, there is the wealth of research data which identifies new ways in which early childhood education and care (ECEC) benefit society. Two participants in the CCSD conference, University of Toronto economist Michael Krashinsky and his colleague Gordon Cleveland, measured $2 of benefits for every $1 the government spent to enhance child care. Half the benefit of the investment was realized in mothers' increased labour force participation. That kind of evidence helps make the case and policy-makers are starting to pay attention. Canadians have come to understand that ECEC makes an invaluable contribution to their children's development. Study after study has shown that quality early education and care enhances development both in the long- and short-term. The more attention, education and care that children get, the more positive the effect. Quality ECEC particularly enhances the development of children who face adverse conditions at home. It has even been shown to decrease eventual crime rates and increase income potential.

With these kinds of findings available, policy-makers are starting to pay more attention. Twenty years ago, they knew that child care could help women enter the workforce and improve their chances of gaining equality. There is now a better understanding that ECEC can help meet other desirable goals as well. The child care conference being organized by the CCSD is an opportunity to celebrate the great strides that researchers and advocates have made. This large gathering of policy-makers, activists, frontline workers and researchers is a testimony to the drive and determination of Canadians who truly believe that children are our future.

Marcel Lauzière is President of the Canadian Council on Social Development.

Canadian Council on Social Development, 190 O'Connor Street, Suite 100, Ottawa, Ontario, K2P 2R3