Roundup: Flexibility and red lines on child care negotiations

Posted on by

A day out from the federal budget, we are getting some reaction to the centrepiece proposal of a massive expansion to early learning and child care, particularly from provinces with whom this all needs to be negotiated. It sounds like several of them are welcoming the new funding, and Chrystia Freeland has signalled some willingness for flexibility, but is drawing a red line around keeping fees low, because the whole point of this is to reduce barriers to women getting in the workforce, and high fees are very much a barrier, even when there are available spaces (which is often not the case). And yes, there are already recalcitrant provinces, looking particularly to Alberta and Ontario, and some of their objections are grounded in the fantasyland that there is no such thing as constrained choice. Of course.

For some more context, here is a good interview with Don Giesbrecht, CEO of the Canadian Child Care Federation, which gives a good lay of the land of the current system of bilateral agreements that the federal government has in place with provinces around childcare funding, and yes, there are strings attached to that funding. This new funding will build on those agreements, which is why it’s not entirely out of the blue and building something from the ground-up, but simply taking things up an order of magnitude from where they exist currently.

Meanwhile, my social media has been flooded with salty New Democrats who think that they’ve somehow caught me out in previously pointing out that this is an area of provincial jurisdiction whenever Jagmeet Singh would performatively demand “concrete action” on childcare or the like. For starters, at no time did I declare this Liberal plan a done deal – it has always been presented as being contingent upon negotiation with the provinces, but this time they’ve put money on the table that the provinces will find hard to refuse, especially because we have all seen the effect that this pandemic has had on women in the workforce. That’s a fairly unique set of circumstance that creates a hell of a lot more political pressure than could be applied previously. More to the point, Singh’s rhetoric, and those of his MPs, is largely grounded in Green Lantern Theory, that it’s simply a matter of willpower to overcome jurisdictional interviews, while they will only admit the need for negotiation in written releases or backgrounders and never out loud. This especially goes with making promises that they will “get it done,” as though they can put on their Green Lantern rings and just willpower it to happen, or drafting a federal bill and expecting the provinces to clamour to the sound of free money rather than doing the hard work of negotiation. Real life doesn’t work like that, which is what I have consistently pointed out. If New Democrats can’t understand that criticism, then I can’t help them.

Good reads:

  • Justin Trudeau is trying to get an appointment for an AstraZeneca shot now that he is in the age range (but supplies may already be spoken for).
  • Maclean’s has a great recounting of what happened with the science advisory table in Ontario over the weekend, and the threat of mass resignation because of Ford.
  • The Canada-US border will remain closed at least another month.
  • Victims of sexual assault in the military spoke of it being treated like a joke by the “old boys club,” as the government pledges new money for independent oversight.
  • The Conservatives in particular are dragging their feet on the UNDRIP bill because they are convinced it’s an Indigenous veto to future resource projects.
  • The budget contains at least five non-fiscal measures.
  • There are mixed reviews to housing measures in the budget by advocates.
  • Student groups are applauding changes to federal student loan repayments in the budget.
  • There is a line in the budget that says that future health transfers will be contingent upon access to abortion services – looking particularly at you, New Brunswick.
  • Here is a look at some of the opposition parties’ objections to the budget.
  • A tie for a seat in the Yukon election had to be determined by drawing lots.
  • Kady O’Malley’s Process Nerd column previews what the budget debate process will look like, and the places where confidence votes will happen.
  • Kevin Carmichael sees the budget as the end of the era of austerity, and walks through how the government plans to spur growth to get out of their deficits.
  • Heather Scoffield similarly notes that even two years ago, a budget like this would have been political suicide.
  • My column looks to the larger narrative of the budget and how it is about breaking down barriers for women and minorities to fully participate in the economy.

Odds and ends:

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

One thought on “Roundup: Flexibility and red lines on child care negotiations”

  1. If Ford and Kenney get turfed in their respective re-election campaigns, and the federal Liberals are able to square an agreement with Del Duca and Notley, the NDP will claim credit again and hand-wave away jurisdiction while blaming Trudeau for the process taking in upwards of two years. Never mind that the Ontario and Alberta elections aren’t scheduled until 2022 and 2023 respectively, it’s Trudeau’s fault for why Singh had to pressure him to “rethink space and time.” And Singh’s victory over quantum physics.

    Honestly, he should go back to playing pretend video games with AOC.

Comments are closed.