Jane Mercer of the Toronto Coalition for Better Child Care explains Toronto's current childcare crisis, and how the impending budget cuts will only make the problem worse.
The proposed 2012 budget stands to affect anyone who swims in Toronto’s pools, relies on its homeless shelters or frequents its theatres. In the lead-up to council debate this month, we’re speaking to those organizations who will be significantly impacted by the budget—and examining what that means for Torontonians. Today: Jane Mercer of the Toronto Coalition for Better Child Care.
What does the Toronto Coalition for Better Child Care do?
We are primarily an advocacy organization that works with the community of childcare programs and parents. We work with the community to advocate for more high quality, affordable childcare for families in Toronto.
Before any talk of fee hikes or service cuts, how would you have rated the state of childcare availability in Toronto?
Not great. We have 20,000 children waiting for a subsidy. The City tries very hard with really insufficient funds from the province to manage the childcare system, but they are constantly struggling to meet the demand. We have about 54,000 childcare spaces across the city and we have about 24,000 subsidies to help families access those spaces. Many families, because of the age of their child or the area that they’re living in, will never get a subsidy.
And how does the 2012 budget stand to change things?
The city is already in a situation where we have a childcare crisis. The mayor’s task force came out in November and said very, very clearly to the province: We have got to have an infusion of funding or we are going to start to see childcare subsides lost and programs collapse. So to hear that coming from the mayor’s task force in November and then, literally two weeks later, to propose in the City’s own budget that they make cuts to childcare, is really horrifying.
What they have proposed is that they terminate the occupancy agreement they have with the school board. This is an umbrella agreement where the City pays the occupancy cost for childcare programs in schools. And they pay about six million dollars to the school boards, so that about 400 childcare programs can occupy space in the schools. They are now proposing that they cancel that agreement, terminate the flow of dollars, and the childcare programs will have to pay their own rent, and that means, of course, it will be reflected in the child’s fees.
The worst of it is that this is an agreement that was negotiated in 1998, and the rent has been fixed since that time. So they are walking away from an agreement that had us a really good deal.
You seem to think the city’s math doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
It absolutely doesn’t. It’s not in the interests of families at all, but it’s not in the interest of the City because they’re going to have to still pay those subsidies. They’re not going to be saving a dime a year or two from now. But parents will be taking an extraordinary hit.
If, as you say, this doesn’t actually make sense financially, why do you think the City is considering these cuts in the first place?
All City departments were asked to trim their budget by 10%. So the Children’s Services department really had no option but to offer up a cut. They were able to offer it up and it would show a saving for 2012, which is all they’re being asked to do: offer up a cut that shows a 10% saving in 2012.
Regardless of the implications for 2013 or 2014?
I suppose. In order to reduce costs, the mayor and his budget chief have directed all City departments to cut their budgets by 10%. That’s basically the statement that went to departments.
What options does a family have if they can no longer afford a childcare space?
They really don’t have other options. They may go to in-laws, but in-laws, or parents of their own, are usually in the workforce. If you’re a young family in your thirties, the chances are your parents and [your] in-laws are in their sixties or late fifties, and they’re working too. They’ve got a retirement planned for.
With all this in mind, do you think the mayor’s request for a 10% reduction in all city departments is arbitrary?
Well I think 10% across the board is pretty arbitrary. I’m sure that, of course, any responsible government is looking for reasonable savings to make, so that’s understandable. But sometimes they’re not reasonable, the ones that are being offered up. So it’s essential that the politicians then take a very close look at these suggestions.
Original Article
Source: the Grid TO
No comments:
Post a Comment