Sometimes it’s nice to imagine the world in black and white. The shades of gray, the ambiguity that defines our reality, are more difficult to distinguish and evaluate, and this is why, in some cases, people prefer to see things in more absolute terms. Let’s take the debate over how to fund child care as an example.

The common view is that the Conservative Party is anti-daycare, preferring to allow parents to choose how their children will be cared for. This position is particularly concerning for supporters of early childhood education, who argue, with reason, that high quality child care benefits the development of the very young.

In this simplistic interpretation of the facts, the Conservatives are painted as the villains of the piece — disdaining the value of group child care and callously leaving the money in the hands of parents. First of all, it makes a good deal of sense to provide parents with a choice of how to spend their child care dollars. In a community like Jasper, there are limited options, but in larger centres, there is a choice to be made. Furthermore, providing support to stay-at-home parents is better than the Liberal plan, which left these people by the wayside.

However, critics of the Conservative plan tend to ignore a crucial element of the new government’s child care strategy. According to Yellowhead MP Rob Merrifield, his party will devote $250 million to create more than 100,000 new child care spaces across the country. If (and frankly, it is a big ‘if’) this comes to pass, the Conservatives will have achieved something the Liberals had long promised, long discussed, but had likewise long failed to follow through with. For all that the Liberal Party approach to child care funding was celebrated in certain quarters, it did precious little to actually increase the availability of the service for Canadian families.

As Jasper’s growing pains suggest, the demand for high quality child care is substantial, and in many areas of the country (Alberta in particular) the need is growing. Had the Conservatives limited their plans on the file to providing $100 per month per child, they could rightly be chastised for an inappropriate response to the situation. Instead, it appears as if the government plans to take a more complete approach, one that includes those families ignored by previous strategies while also expanding and strengthening the provision of group child care in Canada.

Accepting this plan as a reasonable, nuanced response to a complex situation would be admitting that the Conservative plan has merit. For many of the hardened opponents of the per child payment strategy, this is too much to ask. Interest groups exist on both sides of this particular debate, and if the Conservative’s detractors complain that those who do not see the merits of early childhood care need to consider the facts, then they must feel somewhat uncomfortable when they look in the mirror. Because no matter how convenient it might seem to portray the federal government as an opponent of child care, it’s simply not the case.