When Kathleen Waxer saw the report, she was excited. 

“When I got it I thought that it really spoke to the concerns that we were seeing here and also the concerns we have with the plans in Ottawa,” she says.

Waxer, the Director of Community and Family Services for the Municipality of Jasper, is speaking about “Fact and Fantasy: Eight myths about early childhood education and care”.

The report, written by University of Toronto economists Gordon Cleveland and Michael Krashinsky, presents a series of beliefs and misconceptions about group child care and analyses how reality varies from these commonly-held positions. They present an economic counterargument to the concept that parents should pay for their own children’s care, oppose the belief that child care costs too much for society to afford and challenge the conception that stay-at-home mothers are discriminated against by public policy. Since their arguments were first published, Cleveland and Krashinsky’s work has been widely cited by supporters of early childhood care — those who argue that the federal government should be funding group care facilities, and not, as the Conservatives propose, providing money to parents directly.

“These are economists speaking to the evidence that is showing the benefits of early childhood education,” Waxer says. “They say that the economy shrinks in the absence of high quality child care and it funding it should not be looked at as an expense, but as an investment, much like education.”

Waxer hopes that those making the decisions about funding for child care have a close look at the economic analysis presented by the two researchers.

“It really illustrates where the struggle comes from,” she says. “It shows that there still is a lack of understanding. They haven’t thought this through.”

Jasper is an exceptional situation, Waxer says, given that the municipal child care centre is the only option on offer for parents who choose not to remain home with their children. While expanding enrollment at the Meeting of the Waters Centre would seem to indicate a solid level of support for early childhood education in Jasper, Waxer acknowledges that some parents consider it to be what she describes as a “second-best option”. 

“You do hear comments like that,” she says. “I think it was an underlying issue prior to the integration of the services and it’s still a piece that makes people uncomfortable when they’re dropping off their children.”

Concerns of this nature would seem to fit in the the first two categories discussed by Cleveland and Krashinsky, specifically that children need full time parental care, and that child care harms children. On the contrary, the researchers claim. They argue that high quality early childhood education and care is vital to the development of healthy, socially well-adapted children.

The report emphasizes that early childhood education involves a great deal more than simple supervision. There’s no babysitting going on at places like Meeting of the Waters, the authors suggest, and Waxer is quick to agree.

“Some parents can provide what is necessary, but we assume that it is nothing to provide a child with early care and education,” she says. “Not all parents are capable of home schooling their children, but yet we leave responsibility for early childhood care to parents. Nothing magical happens at the age of six.”

Other researchers, such as Dr Bruce Parry, have argued that having professionally-provided early childhood care can set a child on a certain course for the rest of their life. Waxer cites statistics from the National Crime Prevention Centre that suggest that investment in early childhood education can reduce the likelihood of criminal behaviour in the long run.

“The research tells us that it is a lot more than babysitting,” she says.

With a high degree of support from parents, the municipality and the business community, Waxer is pleased with the way Jasper has responded to the need for high quality care. She worries, however, that her department’s capability to provide that care could be challenged by the new federal government’s approach on child care.

“There will be too many barriers if the Conservative plan is put in place,” she says. “The previous plan had had a fairly hefty investment... I don’t see the taxable benefit for families replacing that in any way shape or form.”

The Conservatives promised to provide $100 per child, per month in order to give parents the a choice for child care options. While Waxer sees nothing wrong with allowing people to pursue options, she worries that in some cases, this approach might lead to parents making a choice based on cost, and not quality.

“What comes through loud and clear from Diane Finley (the Conservative Minister of Social Development) is that she is looking at child care like a service to parents. She suggested that maybe groups of parents could form ad hoc daycare centres, and that’s not really considering early childhood learning,” Waxer says.

Waxer hopes that by discussing the myths and realities of child care and its impact on society, she can convince more people to bring pressure to bear on the federal government. To hear Jasper’s representative in the House of Commons tell it, that hasn’t been happening so far.

Yellowhead MP Rob Merrifield is well aware of the perception that his Conservative Party is not supportive of child care. People who believe that are only looking at part of the picture, he says.

“Beyond the benefit, what we laid out very clearly was a $250 million investment that would see more than 100,000 new child care spaces created,” he says, the frustration evident in his voice. “This was what was troubling during the campaign, that no one wanted to notice this part of our plan. The amount of money we’re putting into daycare is double

what the Liberals did. It’s not that we’re against daycare itself — we are going to deliver and we are going to create those spots.”

So far, the local response to the Conservative approach has been remarkably positive, Merrifield claims.

“We haven’t had an awful lot of feedback,” he says. “Those who did respond to it like our plan, particularly those who live in rural areas, because in those places, the Liberal plan would have done next to nothing.”

When he’s asked how he responds to claims that $100 per month isn’t enough to allow parents to choose high quality care options, Merrifield’s frustration reappears with some bite.

“$100 per month isn’t enough? Enough for what? It’s not the state’s responsibility to provide daycare.”

Whether or not those who tout the arguments of Gordon Clevland and Michael Krashinsky succeed in convincing Merrifield and his party that it ought to be the state’s responsibility to ensure a certain amount of quality care, Waxer is glad that child care is in the spotlight.

“We’re on the threshold of lots of discussion,” she says. “Five years ago you didn’t hear about it. Now it’s making the news, locally, provincially, nationally, and it’s not likely to die as silently as it did 20 years ago.”

Ultimately, Waxer believes that attitudes about child care are changing. She saw it happen in Jasper after the creation of the Meeting of the Waters centre, she says.

“I feel that in September we underwent a real shift in perception. Changing the name made a difference. Early childhood learning is important, it’s as important as the school system... Five years ago it would have been a dream to have people support that position, but now we have a very vibrant and enthusiastic crowd.”