How About $500 for Dancing or Music Lessons

With the Harper announcement of a so called $500 tax credit for sports what does that really mean? Sound good on the surface but is it really for all 'sports'? Or just the expensive recreational sports like hockey and sking?

Cause as every soccer Mom knows, soccer is the cheapest sport around. Is it for Tae Kwon Do or boxing lessons? What about gymnastics or swimming or golf lessons? What about Rodeo entrance fees? Dancing is a physical activity, as well as a cultural one so will these fees be covered?Could be. Not sure what the Conservatives define as 'sports'?

Harper says sports builds character. Sure it does but so do music lessons, and learning to paint or sculpt, or to speak a second language, and other aspects of Culture, so why not a tax credit for them as well.

Ethnic dancing while subsidized by community groups still parents have to pay fees for this too. Playing a musical instrument costs parents money, for the instrument and lessons. What about second language lessons outside of the home? While not a team activity like sports, these too build character. And may lead to groups activities like singing in a Choir or being in a dance troupe. Or is this a little too multicultural for the Torys?

While sports are part of a better health program, which the Conservatives are focusing on, they are not the only activity that parents pay user fees for their children to participate in. Why aren't these fees covered as well?

Blogging Tory's Don't Get Day Care

It is obvious that it is Conservative men making the comments about the problem with the idea of publicly funded, certified, non-profit day care centres for being too institutional (subtext it's a prison) and a one size fits all without flexibility for working parents, and it won't work in rural Canada, and, and, and, and......

Tories offer Choice in Childcare says Bill McBeath, Conservative Organizer for Edmonton
Strange as it seems, the tory policy for childcare centres around... wait for it... choice! The fundamental idea that parents are the best people to raise children, and hsould be allowed to choose where government money (tax money, their money) get spent.The tory plan is more generous, more flexible, and more in touch with the many different families in Canada. Unlike the inflexible 9-5 institutional daycare plan of the Liberals, the Conservative plan allows parents who are shift workers, lower-income families, stay at home parents, and all families in general meet their child care needs.

When it isn't the Harper attacking public regulated day care it's one of the male conservatives in the blogosphere. Like my fellow Redmontonian; DazzlinDino of the Blogging Party of Canada. He says the following and it is the oft repeated criticism that the Conservatives are using as their messaging;

Let me make this clear, the federal daycare idea, the nine to five life, does not work for far too many people. How many of you would actually be able to take advantage of this. Can you tell your boss "Sorry, I can only work from 10-4 cause my kid is in daycare."? Think he is going to be looking for a replacement? If you live in a small community, will you benifit from this.....NO YOU WON't. I'm not a big fan of either idea, but there is no way a federal daycare would work, not in a private sector......

Yep he has obviously not sent his kids to daycare or aftercare. Lots of families work around their day care hours, parents adapting their work patterns to their family needs. Many working families who don't have the choice of having a well paid job that can support a stay at home parent, choose work that offers them at least the chance to have one parent off shift at home. Because there ARE NO PUBLIC DAY CARE SPACES FOR THEM.

Hmm I thought more and more employers were being flexible, thats all the rhetoric that unions face when negotiating for shift work. And speaking of the private sector it is Corporate Canada that has been derelict in its duty in providing on site day care for its employees. Been waiting for tax breaks I guess. Wait they have gotten tax breaks, they just didn't use them for day care for their workers. The CIBC got an innovation award this year from the Conference Board of Canada because they actually did create a flexible day care option for their workers. They were one of the only private corporations in Canada to do this hence the award. Whereas many public institutions are ahead of Corporate Canada, especially post seconday education institutions, when it comes to offering its staff and students day care.

Those of the professional classes are the ones who want a tax credit, not out of some wish to help single mothers or working class parents who have two jobs to make ends meet. But with typical conservative aplomb, they can afford to have a stay at home mom who gives up her lucrative career because dad has a lucrative career too, they believe they are being cheated and should have the same advantage of the family of two working parents or the single mother. As if being a member of the working poor or a single mother is a 'choice', like the one they made.

My wife and I have made made the descision that it is best for our family (and two daughters) if one of us were at home. My wife is a brilliant (and beautiful...hi sweety) person who completed a Physics Degree and Education Degree and gave up a career in teaching to raise our kids.We gave up her salary and day care tax breaks - but we did so gladly. It is our choice and all we ask is for our government to stay out of our business. Stop saying that we are ignorant. Stop comparing stay-at-home parents to people who would choose not to use a doctor for medical care - as if day care professionals can be a better parent. Political Staples

This is the same arguement made by right wingers about abortion. I remember debating a woman who had university law degree, but choose to stay at home and have children. She was a voracious opponent of a womans right to choose, abortion. Her husband was a vice president of a major oil company. She could afford to have a child, and she probably eventually had a nanny to. She insisted that a woman had no right to choose abortion, rather she should 'choose' to have the child and 'choose' to stay home and raise the child, like Ms. Professional did.

Fellow Redmonton blogger Idealistic Pragmatist also commented on Staples arguement and noted that it all comes down to a fetish of making a social issue into a 'personal issue'. A comment to his blog article clearly points out that for the majority of working Canadian families day care is a very real social neccesity, not a matter of personal choice.

But to be fair while many of the bloggers on this topic are men, its not just men who promote this false dichotomy between baby sitting and public day care. Edmonton Spruce Grove Conservative MP and psuedo-feminist, Rona Ambrose, who challenged the Liberal plan in the House as being a plan proposed by 'old white men',again identifies what makes the Tory plan different than the Liberals. It will pay for parents to leave their kids with babysitters, "a relative, a grandparent, or a neighbour" she told Mike Duffy on CTV today.

Conservative MP Rona Ambrose, who represents Edmonton-Spruce Grove, worked with Harper to write the Conservative child-care policy. She spoke with Larry Johnsrude, reporter/editor for edmontonjournal.com.
"We feel very strongly that our plan should be universal and equitable. The Liberal plan is regulated nine-to-five public day care through an public infrastructure and is a small percentage of the total child-care options being used by parents right now and is their last choice. Their first choice is for one of them to stay at home if they can afford to. Their second choice is (to leave their children) with a trusted neighbour or friend and the last choice is institutionalized care."

So it's ok to leave your kids with a stranger, the neighbour but not with trained certified early childhood educators. "Who knows better than parents how to raise their kids" says Rona. Well would you leave the education of your children to "a relative, a grandparent, or a neighbour" ? Of course not, unless like many social conservatives you choose home schooling. But home schooling is not a public education system. And neither is the Tory plan a national day care program.

If there are no public day care spaces then there is no real choice for parents. The choice is "a relative, a grandparent, or a neighbour". Which was the choice my parents had when the worked out of the home forty years ago. I was baby sat by my Baba and Dido, and my parents got their monthly family allowance cheque for my sister and I. Yep the Tory plan could be called Forward to the Past.

Whereas the NDP plan announced today will guarantee, by legislation, the creation of public regulated certified, non profit day care centres. And it will give parents real economic choice by giving a $1000 tax credit per child, while subsidizing child care space to the tune of $9000 per child. Now that is different, as the Canadian Tire ads say, than the Tory or Liberal Policies of non commitment to affordable public day care.

And in one of those twists of electoral fate, the NDP can thank Scott Reid for keeping day care in the news, with his arrogant remarks yesterday about Beer and Popcorn. Otherwise their announcement today would have been swamped by his party's Health Care Waiting Times Benchmark annoucement. Scott did the NDP a timely favour, another reason his boss will be chewing his ass off.


Also see:

Whose Family Values

Day Care

Defend Public Day Care

Giving Buzz da Boot

Straight Goods the first left of centre Canadian on-line journal has launched a humourous if vitorlic campaign against Liberal Luvin Buzz.

Buzz on Buzz:

Take the online
Straight Goods Survey
and qualify for a chance to win Straight Goods gear.

Now what's interesting is the buzzing on the left on line over all this. Rabble has taken an implicitly soft stand on Buzz and, as I reported here earlier, Straight Goods has taken offense over Buzz's finger in the wind politics.

Now Straight Goods , despite being it's predecesor, doesn't get the same buzz that Rabble does ,in the left and MSM, with its high profile owner Judy Rebick, and her pals like Jim Stanford of CAW. Nope they are the little on-line mag that could. So do I detect some political and commercial rivalry over this?

Rabble has attempted to be less partisan by running a Buzz commentary defending himself, while publishing columnists opposing Buzz, and its babble forum where all hell broke loose.

Straight Goods on the other hand has always identified itself with 'The Party'.They have columnists like Watkins and Tielman (who worked for the BCFL and the BC NDP),representing the old guard of the NDP. They sniffled over the upstarts at Rabble, Rebick and Stanford, who were the voice of the NPI, New Politics Initivative, which despite their support from Buzz, flamed out when it tried to reform the NDP.

This could be described as a classic confrontation between the old left and the new left in Canadian social democratic politics. Except I am not sure which is which. Since Mel Watkins founder of the left wing Waffle is onside with Straight Goods and Rebick and Stanford the NPI are on side with Buzz.

Both groups were the new left in the NDP in their day. And the NPI folks with the support of Buzz and the CAW disolved in favour of Jack Layton. See what I mean, its confusing without a program.

And while Jack is keeping tight lipped about all this, smart thing too, the NDP rank and file and their supporters have declared war on Buzz. Both the old left and new left. Should the NDP not gain seats in this election both will unite in blaming Buzz, no matter what they say or do now. And blaming Buzz will be giving him too much credit and it will be just the ego-boo he wants.

You see Buzz is all about, well Buzz. He loves all this attention he has been getting. He has become the ISSUE for the NDP in this election.He wants to be King Maker, whether in the Labour movement or the NDP, and failling that he would love to be King on his own island.

So if his overtures to Paul work out he can position himself against both Georgetti of the CLC and Layton of the NDP. Oh what a tangled web he weaves with nary a care for the result as long as it benefits Buzz.

More Buzz Stories

There is no I in Team

What a strange thing for a self professed Libertarian to say;"Harper said sports encourages teamwork"

There is no individualist "I" in team, specially sports teams. Its a, 'gasp', collective effort. No one 'star' can win the game, unless it's tennis. Suddenly Harper has mellowed, he believes that the cooperation and collectivism of sports "builds character".

Gone is the rabid individualist ideology of the past. No longer the anti-state liberaltarian, he is calling for more money from the State to go to parents to pay for user fees; which is just another form of taxation. Tories promise tax credit for kids' sports fees

My how the New Harper has changed from the Old Harper.

On being ‘libertarian’
“But I'm very libertarian in the sense that I believe in small government and, as a general rule, I don't believe in imposing values upon people.” (National Post, March 6, 2004)

Gee and wouldn't character building and team work be considered 'values'?

Economic conservatism, Harper says during an interview in his Calgary office, is libertarian in nature, emphasizing markets and choice. Libertarian conservatives work to dismantle the remaining elements of the interventionist state and move towards “a market society for the 21st century.” (Toronto Star, April 6, 1997)

Paying for user fees is the state intervening in the marketplace isn't it?

Scott Reid Conservative Commentator

"Duh' Oh"

Oh boy did the blogoshpere heat up yesterday when Liberal Party Communications (sic) Director, and the right hand of PM, Scott Reid came out with his comment that all the Harper Baby Bonus plan would do was provide for beer and popcorn for working parents. He probably thought he was being clever. I think he meant beer and peanuts. It was one of those gaffes that makes elections exciting on slow news days.

Anyways the off the cuff remark has caused a swirl of controversy, mainly fueled by the hypocritical Bloggin Tory's and our favorite 'f****ing moron'; Warren Kinsella. Yep much ado about nothing here folks.

Reid just sounded like a Conservative, or neo-con pundit many of whom have said similar things about the poor, folks on welfare, gays, the homeless, single mothers,women in general, immigrants, union folks, etc.etc. After all Ezra Levant has told us that 77% of Canadians are 'stupid'. So there. Take that. Those who live in glass houses........



View Related Articles