Political Staples

Those are all pretty dubious.

1. As I recall 64% of voters voted against the CPC so “It’s what the voters want” is a howler. You guys really do think you have a majority government.

2. Is a presenting a supposition as a fact and it’s a pretty insulting supposition to those of us who have had their children in daycare. It is the usual subtle dig about only bad parents send their kids to daycare (read the little woman should know her place.)

3. See 2 above.

4. They are already kicking up a fuss and you haven’t even taken office yet.

5. 25 dollars a week before taxes will improve equity? Pull the other one. It has bells on it.

And yes I know about the 66% who said they love free money. Big deal. When push came to shove, 64% still voted against the CPC.

I don’t recall any average man on the street coming up with this disastrous daycare plan. It was a Liberal-NDP invention.

Whaaaaa, Whaaaaa, Whaaaaa!!! Get over your loss Greg.

Regarding your dismissal of point #2. The word out of Quebec is that universal daycare produces overly aggressive children and depressed mothers. Don’t have a link but I’m sure a report like this will make the nightly news.

Go to Tricky Fifth part 1, the link is there.

I read the report and it was much more cautious in its conclusions than you folks are making it out to be.

1) It’s what voters want. True, more people voted for other parties than the CPC, so it’d be hard to argue that ‘voters want’ the CPC choice in childcare plan. OTOH, how many voters made their decision based primarily on this one policy (from whichever party)? Those with children would probably be most likely to base their vote on one or the other plan. Is there any data at all on how these votes broke? Right now I’d love to have reliable exit-polling for this one particular answer. Given that more people would benefit under the CPC plan, my strong hunch is that their plan is preferred, for those who cared enough to vote on this issue.

2) Univseral day care is bad for the health of the child and the parents It’s not laying a guilt trip on anybody to make the above statement - although, to be fair, something like ‘less good’ would be a better formulation. I think only those fairly ideologically-bent would argue that getting kids out of the care of their parents even earlier than they do would be better than them staying with a parent at home (where that’s possible).

3) It is fiscally irresponsible No argument or qualifying of this one. We’re talking childcare, not medical care. There is zero need for any national program (I’m saying this as a father who has 3 children under 6 years of age, so we’d receive $3600), including the CPC one. If people are going to insist on something (and I certainly am not), I’ll fight a plan tooth and nail that rewards double income families (like some of my co-workers), while taxing mine (single-income) to pay for their child care.

4) The Provinces won’t put up much of a fight I’ve no clue about this one.

5) It will improve the equity of Canadian family See #3. Oh, and while they’re at it, they could get rid of the marriage penalty and allow families to file household tax returns, so we can split our income. That would make the biggest difference of all.

Here is what the op-ed actually said about 1).

“It’s what voters want. Giving child-care money to parents rather than funnelling it through an institutional sieve was almost as popular with non-Conservative voters as it was with Harper supporters. According to polling firm Decima Research, 66% of voters opposed to the Conservatives considered the child payment to be an important personal priority. That means a clear majority favours the new plan.”

IF - and this is a big IF - you Liberal/NDP supporters would actually try to understand what the Conservative childcare plan is all about-you MIGHT just by OK with it. Yes the $1200/child/year is given to the parents. Do you realize how many people live in small towns (as I do) and do not have any hope of using a “subsidized daycare” but would welcome the opportunity to be able to pay a neighbour or to take their child to a childcare facility at my place of work which was the result of the Conservatives plan to support business developed childcare spaces.

The problem is that the majority of the country who live outside the major cities have no ability to make use of a Liberal plan so once again (just like the tax cuts that don’t benefit 32% of the population who do not pay taxes) this is NOT a universal plan but a big city plan for those that work 9-5, monday to friday.

And to the blogger who thinks that they want to keep women at home - boy you are sure living in the 50s’ aren’t ya.

It’s nice to see an acknowledgement that the majority of Canadians soundly rejected the Liberals in 2004, even though they tried to push through all these programs of their own.

63.3% of those who voted, voted against Martin in 2004. And with a voter turnout of 60.9%, that represents less than a quarter of Canadian voters (and an even smaller fraction of all Canadians) expressing support for his program in 2004.

While I was digging around to see if MB had created any spaces yet (having signed in Apr/05), which they haven’t, they bumped up salaries instead, I discovered Alberta’s “Kin Care” plan - I didn’t look to see what you need to do to qualify, but apparently Ralph will pay up to $300/month for qualified families using a family member (or friend coming into their home) to provide care for them. This is specifically targetted at rural and/or student/low income from the looks of things.

That’s a cool plan. That’s probably also why Ralph is okay with the CPC plan. AB wasn’t getting THAT much cash (given the surplus, it’s moot) anyway.