"While families welcome financial support, it is not child care," said Monica Lysack of the Canadian Child Care Advocacy Association.
No it's an allowance for child care that will benefit every Canadian with a child. Not a government program that will benefit a select few.
On second thought, I can see your point. Giving that money to everyone and not discriminating against stay at home parents just MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER....
"Child care is the ramp to equality and a right that women have been fighting for for decades," said Nancy Peckford of the Feminist Alliance for International Action.
Bursting out in laughter is very difficult not to do right now. Though I have this image of the original Canadian Feminist Emily Murphy in my mind saying that not voting rights and not rights to being "a person" are the ramp to equality but a universal socialist styled daycare scheme is?... Yah.... sure....
"For working women, child care is all about equality," said Barbara Byers, executive vice-president of the Canadian Labour Congress.
Working women don't care - or at least they shouldn't. The overwhelming majority won't see a benefit from "universal daycare." Most would see it under Harper's undiscriminatory scheme - but I guess I must be a chauvinistic pig.
She said Harper's promised child-care money falls far short of what is needed: "Help with diapers maybe, but not child care."
I find it hard to believe that anyone could argue that spending less money under the former plan is a better option to spending more. If spending more is "falling short" then spending less should be even worse.
Byers said women will fight for their right to accessible and affordable care.
And I have a right to banana cream pie paid for by everyone else except myself... WHHEEEE!!!
"This government has its focus on the family all wrong," said Byers.
Or is the real problem that Byers has, is that the government has any focus or respect for the family as the fundamental building block of society?