Child Care, Women's Labour Market Participation and Labour Market Policy Effectiveness in Canada

Canadian Public Policy

Child Care, Women's Labour Market Participation and Labour Market Policy Effectiveness inCanadaAuthor(s): Linda A. WhiteSource: Canadian Public Policy / Analyse de Politiques, Vol. 27, No. 4 (Dec., 2001), pp. 385-405Published by: University of Toronto Press on behalf of Canadian Public PolicyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3552533 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 13:32

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Toronto Press and Canadian Public Policy are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to Canadian Public Policy / Analyse de Politiques.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.81 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 13:32:11 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=utp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cpp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3552533?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Child Care, Women's Labour Market Participation and Labour Market Policy Effectiveness in

Canada

LINDA A. WHITE

Department of Political Science University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario

Cet article explore les liens existant entre la protection de l'enfance, les politiques en cours concernant le march6 du travail et la participation des femmes au march6 du travail. Au moyen d'une analyse comparative, il d6montre que la presence des services de protection de l'enfance a des effets positifs sur la participation des femmes au

march6 du travail. L'article examine aussi l'6tat actuel des politiques et des programmes de protection de l'enfance, au Canada,

' la lumiere des effets observes. Ii d montre la faiblesse des liens entre les programmes et services de

protection de l'enfance et les politiques canadiennes concernant le march6 du travail. II offre des suggestions

sp6cifiques sur la faqon dont les gouvernements et les employeurs pourraient am61iorer la distribution et le financement des services de protection de l'enfance, en rapport avec la participation des femmes au march6 du travail.

This article explores the connection between child care, active labour market policies, and women's labour market participation. Through comparative analysis, it demonstrates that the presence of child-care services has positive labour market effects on women's labour market participation. The article also discusses the current status of child-care policies and programs in Canada in light of these observed policy effects. It demonstrates the poor linkages between programs and services for children and labour market policies in Canada. It offers specific suggestions as to how governments and employers could improve the delivery and

funding of child-care services to respond to patterns of women's labour market participation.

The current policy impetus in Canada is to view child care as part of a broader development pro-

gram for children (see Table 1). The federal,

provincial, and territorial governments solidified that vision of child care in the Agreement on Early Childhood Development Services in September 20001 which committed the federal government to

spend $2 billion over five years on "early childhood

development services" broadly defined by the provinces, in addition to the approximately $520 million in foregone revenue the federal government annually provides to families under the Child Care

Expense Deduction (CCED) and small amounts of

funding for child care and early child development for Aboriginal people. While a laudable advance in

developmentally related child care, policymakers

CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY - ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES, VOL. XXVII, NO. 4 2001



386 Linda A. White

TABLE 1 Canadian Federal Expenditure on Early Childhood Education and Care over Time (millions of Canadian dollars)

19931 2000 estimated2 Child Care Programs $ $

Child Care Expense Deduction As of 2000, allows taxpayers to deduct up to $7,000 for each child under age 7 or older children with severe disabilities, and $4,000 for each child age 7 to 14 or older children with moderate disabilities 310 (1992) 520 Child Care under the Canada Assistance Plan Terminated 1996 310 (1994-95 est.) N/A

Dependent Care Allowance Monies given to participants in federally-sponsored training programs 90 203

Aboriginal Child Care4 Through the Ministry of Indian and Northern Development 8.6 (1992) 18 (1997-98 est.)

Total: Child Care Programs 718.6 558

Early Childhood Education and Development Programs

Community Action Program for Children Began in 1993; provides funding to community groups addressing the developmental needs of young children at risk 68.4 (est.) 56 First Nations/Inuit Brighter Futures Program Developmental program similar to CAP-C for aboriginal children 29 (est.) 76

Aboriginal Head Start4 Began in 1994 N/A 37.5 (1998-99 est.) Federal ECD Transfers to Provinces Beginning 20015 N/A 300

Total: Early Childhood Education and Development Programs 97.4 169.5 (2000) 469.5 (2001)

Other Programs

Child Care Visions6 Research and development program - provides no money directly for child care services 5.5 (1994-95 est.) 6 (1997-98 est.) Maternity Leave/Parental Leave 1300 1200 (1998-99) Canada Child Tax Benefit 5100 70007

Total: Other Programs 6405.5 8206

Note: N/A = not applicable. Sources: 1HRDC (1994b, pp. 17-18); 2Finance Canada (2000); 3Ferland (2001); 4CRRU (2000, p. 92); 5Jaimet (2000); 6Bach and Phillips (1997, p. 246); 7HRDC (1999). The portion of CCTB monies devoted to child care under the National Child Benefit: 120.2 million (1999 estimate).




Child Care, Women's Labour Market Participation and Labour Market Policy Effectiveness 387

should not forget the positive labour market effects of child care geared to enhance women's labour market participation.

This paper explores that connection between child care and other labour market and social policies. It demonstrates, through comparative analysis of countries with more developed child-care programs, strong economic grounds for governments in Canada to provide greater financial support to cover parents' costs for child-care services that can enhance women's labour market participation. Do-

ing so would not only expand the pool of produc- tive labour available for employment, but it would also promote women's equal participation in the labour market, since women are most disadvantaged by lack of funding. Indeed, I argue that child care should be seen as part of an "active" labour market

policy, in addition to being part of early childhood

development, as well as a means to prevent family poverty, as past federal support under the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP) and current provincial support under the National Child Benefit (NCB) promotes.

The paper demonstrates the positive labour market effects of the greater supply of and financial

support for child care on women's labour market

participation in many European countries, and the

negative labour market effects of the lack of affordable child care on women's labour market participation in Canada. It then explores the paucity of current federal, provincial, territorial, and employer funding support for child care, regardless of the

funding purpose, and the failure to link child care to other labour market policy initiatives. Drawing on other countries' experiences, the article proposes specific initiatives that would expand child care's

positive labour market effects in Canada.

THE LABOUR MARKET POLICY CONTEXT

A policy consensus has emerged that, rather than direct intervention, governments must explore

measures such as trade, monetary policies, and, in-

creasingly, "active" labour market policies (ALMP) to attract capital and improve their countries' com-

petitive position. In an increasingly globalized economy, labour markets, in contrast to capital, are seen as relatively immobile. Thus, policy experts in-

creasingly argue that the way to attract investment is to improve a country's labour skills and thus make workers more competitive in the world market

(Porter 1990; Reich 1992; Thurow 1992).2 Wilensky and Turner define an active labour market policy as the "direct government action to shape the demand for labor by maintaining or creating jobs; to increase the supply and quality of labor via training and re-

habilitation; and to encourage labor mobility via

placement, counseling, and mobility incentives"

(1987, p. 3). The three main goals of active labour market policy measures are: mobilization of labour

supply, development of employment-related skills, and promotion of efficient labour markets (OECD 1993, p. ix).

Governments in Canada have embraced these ideas, at least at the rhetorical level. The Liberal

government's 1994 Green Book, Agenda: Jobs and Growth, states, for example, "A centrepiece of im-

proving employment prospects is helping people to

gain and sharpen the up-to-date skills needed to suc- ceed in today's job market" (HRDC 1994a, p. 10). Active labour market policies such as training programs allow unemployed workers to build skills to make them better equipped to find jobs. Other programs, such as work experience, wage subsidies to

encourage employers to provide training, and coun-

selling services, help to create a more skilled and flexible workforce in general (Stoyko 1997, p. 87).

The federal Liberal government under Jean

Chr6tien, upon assuming office in 1993, initially envisaged child care as part of an active labour market policy. The 1994 Green Book, for example, states "the federal government sees child care as a prior- ity in the reform of social security programs, lying at the heart of ... working, learning and security" (HRDC 1994a, p. 53). The report goes on to state




388 Linda A. White

that child care "is a critical support for employment, because it provides working parents with the assur- ance of quality care for their children." The federal Liberal Party as part of its 1993 election platform promised to spend $720 million on child care over three years if elected and to create up to 50,000 new

regulated spaces per year for three years.3 It explicitly pledged that spending in conjunction with pro- posals for other active labour market policy measures (Liberal Party of Canada 1993, ch. 2). The 1994 federal budget also committed $360 million over two years to subsidize current child care or increase child-care spaces across Canada, also with the caveat that the spending would begin only after a year of 3 percent economic growth (HRDC 1994a, p. 53). That growth did not occur in the Liberals' first term in office and thus no monies were

forthcoming.

The government did not renew its commitment to increase child-care spaces after the 1997 elec-

tion, negotiating instead with the provinces to contribute money to provincial early child development priorities which can, but do not necessarily, include child care. In its second and third terms in office, the Liberal government appears to have backed away from promoting child care as part of an overall labour market policy.4 That movement in part reflects a waning of support for active labour market policy measures in general. For example, during the 1993 election, the federal Liberal Party promised a number of other ALMP initiatives, including youth employment, apprenticeship, and workplace train-

ing programs (Liberal Party of Canada 1993, ch. 2). As Haddow (1998) documents, however, the federal

government did little to implement these latter two

programs because of fiscal concerns, and instead devolved authority over labour market programs to the provinces for federalism reasons. Total federal expenditures on both active and passive measures (such as unemployment insurance) declined in Canada from 1994 to 1998; at the same time, the

percentage spent on active as opposed to passive labour market policy measures has hovered around the same levels, not increased (OECD 1999b,

p. 246).5 The federal government's waning support for active labour market measures parallels an overall reduction on federal spending on child-care services and other social programs. Both federal and

provincial funding for child-care services, save for a few provinces, has grown slowly or has shrunk

(see Table 6). Cuts to the federal Employment In- surance program, along with devolution of author-

ity over training programs, have also diminished the amount the federal government provides for De-

pendent Care Allowances, monies given to participants in federally sponsored training programs for care of children or other dependants. While the amount given to individual clients on a needs basis has increased from $20 to $30 per day, overall ex-

penditures on this child-care program have declined from $90 million in 1993-94 to $20 million in 1999- 2000 (HRDC 1994b, p. 17; Bergles 2001; Ferland

2001).

In addition, governments at both the federal and

provincial levels have attempted recently to reduce social assistance "cushions" for those considered

employable through the reduction of federal unem-

ployment insurance benefits and the shift to Employ- ment Insurance (EI) from Unemployment Insurance

(UI) and provincial work for welfare programs such as Ontario Works. The cuts in benefit levels for El were supposed to be reinvested into ALMP measures, but because most programs designed to provide work experience, employment services, training, and so on, have become the purview of the

provinces, "the reinvestment of UI funds toward active measures now remains contingent on provincial inclinations" (Stoyko 1997, p. 104). So too does

spending on child care (more below).

Thus, while government rhetoric focuses on active measures and labour market competitiveness and supporting parents' participation in the labour market, government program expenditure and delivery remain primarily focused on passive measures, along with lack of child-care support, while the percentage spent on passive measures has slowly declined as well.





CHILD CARE AND POSITIVE LABOUR MARKET EFFECTS

While researchers and policy experts see ALMP measures as the best way for governments to meet their efficiency goals, other studies have demonstrated that such programs tend to work best for those who already have the best prospects in the labour market (Haddow 1998, pp. 116-19). Govern- ments need to think more creatively about the

complex array of factors that affect labour market

participation and productivity within a country. Rather than focusing on increasing opportunities for those at the higher end of the educational scale, or

focusing on displaced workers alone, governments should consider the impact for aggregate productivity of increasing the labour market participation rates of women, such as single parents, who, but for the presence of young children, would normally participate in the labour market. Governments should thus broaden their definition of labour market policies to include those programs, such as child

care, that help workers retain their labour market

presence.

This raises the question then, of whether the presence of child care has positive labour market effects in countries with more comprehensive child-care

systems. Does it lead to greater levels of labour market participation for women? If a clear connection exists between the presence of child care and

high levels of women's labour market participation, that would provide good reasons for governments and employers to regard child care as part of an active labour market policy. This section demonstrates that the presence of child-care support has positive impacts on women's labour market participation.

In comparing women's current labour market

participation rates in North America and Western

Europe (see Table 2), the rates are highest in the Nordic countries, followed closely by the liberal welfare states of Canada, the United States, and United Kingdom, then the corporatist or statist countries of Belgium, France, Germany, and the Nether-

TABLE 2 Percentage of Women's Labour Force Participation Rates in Selected Countries, 1998

Norway 75.9 Sweden 75.5 Denmark 75.0 United States 70.7 Canada 69.0 United Kingdom 67.8 Netherlands 62.9 Portugal 61.9 Germany 60.9 France 60.8 Japan 59.8 Belgium 53.8 Ireland 52.1 Spain 48.7 Greece 48.2 Luxembourg 47.6 Italy 43.9

Source: OECD (1999b, p. 227).

lands, and finally, the Catholic and Mediterranean countries of Greece, Ireland, Italy, and Spain (although Portugal's rates are similar to corporatist countries).6 If one looks at the levels of child-care

provision in these countries, however, one finds that

many of these corporatist/statist and Catholic/ Mediterranean countries have comparable or higher levels of child care and early childhood education than the liberal states (see Table 3). For example, Belgium, France, and Italy all have very comprehensive pre-school programs for three- to five-year- olds (Saraceno 1994, p. 63; OECD 1998, pp. 151-53). Women's overall labour market participation rates, though, tend to be lower in these countries than in Canada or the United States.

This presents a problem of seeing child care as a means to encourage women's labour market participation, because one of the immediate conclusions one could draw is that women will work even without child-care programs, and in fact will work more.




390 Linda A. White

TABLE 3 Child Care Coverage in Selected Countries (late 1980s)

Country Year No. of Places Age 3 to Rank Rank Single Rank Married Rank Married per 100 Age of Overall Women's LMP Women's LMP Women's LMP Students Comp. Women's (ages 20-59 (ages 20-59 (ages 20-59 Age <3 Schooling LMP w/at least w/at least w/at least

1 child) 1 child <5) 3 children)

(from Table 4) (from Table 5)

Denmark* 1989 48 85 1 2 1 1 Sweden** 1990-92 29 79 France* 1988 20 95+ 5 111 5 5 Belgium* 1988 20 95+ 7 411 311 411 United States** 1990-92 26 71 -

Japan** 1990-92 21 52 Norway*** 1987 10 50 -

Italy* 1986 5 85+ 9 81 61 71 West Germany* 1987 3 65-70 6 51

9,1 8,1 Greece* 1988 4 65-70 11 7TT 811 N/A Spain* 1988 N/A 65-70 12 101 111 101 Netherlands* 1989 2 50-55 10 12.1 121 611 Luxembourg* 1989 2 55-60 8 61 101 94 Ireland* 1988 2 55 13 13 13 111 United Kingdom* 1988 2 35-40 3

11,11 71 3

Portugal* 1988 6 35 4 31 21 21

Canada*** 1987 4 14 2 911 44 N/A

Note: N/A = not available; arrows indicate direction and strength of change in ranking. Source: *Moss (1990, p. 10); **Kamerman and Kahn (1995, p. 134); ***OECD (1990, p. 131).

Table 3 demonstrates that in the late 1980s, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Portugal all had very high rates of women's labour market participation, de-

spite having very low levels of child-care provision. Furthermore, a big reason for the higher levels of child care and early childhood education in the

corporatist/statist and Catholic/Mediterranean countries is a state desire to increase natality, rather than a desire to encourage women to work. Thus, these programs are not designed explicitly as labour market policies.

It is important, however, to break these figures down to get a more nuanced picture of women's connection to the labour market. In comparing the data for France, for example, a leader in child-care policy, with Canada and the United States, one must take into account the relatively high levels of un-

employment among youths (under 24) in France, and the early retirement for older workers (50+). Thus, if one calculates the percentage of economically active women ages 25-50, the years that women would likely raise young children and need some





form of child care, one finds a rate of 78 percent in

Canada, 77 percent in the United States, and 81 percent in France in 1997 (ILO 1998, Table 1A). The

higher employment rates for women of these age groups in France, despite lower overall labour market participation rates could speak to the availabil-

ity of child care and other family support services.

In order to test the hypothesis that women's labour market participation is affected by the presence (or absence) of child-care programs, it is

necessary to compare levels of child-care coverage with the labour market participation rates of women with young children. If the labour market participation rates of women with young children are higher in countries with strong child-care programs than

they are in countries with weak child-care programs, and if the labour market participation rates of women with children are higher than women's overall rates in those countries, that would support a causal connection between the presence of those child-care

programs and higher levels of women's labour market participation.

Table 3 demonstrates that this is indeed the case. Table 4 presents the percentage of women's overall

participation rates in selected countries in 1988.7 Ta- ble 5 presents the labour market activity rates for women in those countries in that year by family structure. Table 3 ranks women's overall labour market

participation rates, and rates based on the number of children and family status, and compares those

rankings to availability of child care. In most countries where levels of child-care provision are high, women's labour market participation rates also tend to be high; conversely, in countries where levels of child-care provision are low, women's labour market

participation rates also tend to be low, suggesting a correlation between levels of child-care provision and women's labour market participation rates. The United

Kingdom, Portugal, and Canada are anomalous in their overall ranking according to women's labour market participation. In those three countries, women's overall labour market participation rates are high, even though levels of child-care provision are low.

TABLE 4 Percentage of Women's Labour Force Participation Rates in Selected Countries, 1988

Sweden 80.3 Denmark* 75.9 Norway 72.9 Canada 66.9 United States 66.8 United Kingdom 63.7 Portugal 59.1 Japan 58.3 France 55.7 W. Germany 52.3 Belgium* 52.0 Luxembourg** 44.3 Italy 44.2 Netherlands* 41.9 Greece* 41.7 Spain 39.4 Ireland* 38.5

Notes: *1987 figures. **1986 figures Source: OECD (1989, p. 214).

When we control for family status we find that, in those European countries with high levels of child-care provision, the labour market participation rates of single women with at least one child increased, in some countries quite dramatically, while the labour market participation rates of single women with at least one child in Canada, the United

Kingdom, and the Netherlands dropped dramati-

cally. The only anomalous country is Portugal, where women's labour market participation rates remain high, regardless of whether they have a child, regardless of family status, and regardless of the lack of high levels of child care. The drop in the labour market participation rates of single women, especially with young children in countries with low levels of child care, indicates that, in the absence of state support for child care and a partner, women will not be able to participate in the labour market.




392 Linda A. White

TABLE 5 Labour Market Activity Rates for Women in Selected Countries Ages 20-59 by Family Structure, 1988

Country Without Married (with at least Married (with at Single Children 1 child <5 years) least 3 children) Parent

Denmark 79.5 85.3 80.5 83.3 Portugal 49.4 67.4 55.5 73.5 Belgium 50.2 66.7 43.4 71.3 Canada (1989) 63.5 64.4 France 68.3 62.4 42.6 84.0 Italy 41.8 49.5 36.5 65.6 United Kingdom 74.8 46.7 52.1 54.3 Greece* 45.2 65.8 West Germany 66.1 39.2 36.1 70.5 Luxembourg 45.4 38.4 30.2 69.6 Spain 35.8 38.4 28.6 58.3 Netherlands 58.4 35.4 37.5 47.8 Ireland 56.8 32.8 23.2 39.5

Note: *Figures are from 1986 and for women aged 30-39. Source: Eurostat (1992, p. 76); European Commission (1999, p. 20).

A similar though less dramatic pattern holds for women with partners and at least one child under the age of five. The countries with the highest levels of child care also have high levels of women

participating in the labour market who have a partner and at least one young child. In this case, Canada

(in addition to Portugal) is an anomaly in that the labour market participation rates of women with

partners remains comparatively high, although the labour market participation rates of women with

partners in Canada is lower than women's overall labour market participation rates.

The connection between levels of child-care provision and the labour market participation rates of women with three or more children is less clear, al-

though in countries such as Ireland, Spain, and Lux-

embourg, which have some of the lowest levels of child-care provision in the European Union, the drop in the labour market participation rates for women

with at least three children is quite dramatic (see Table 5).

The data presented reveal that in most European countries, women who are single parents are more

likely to work than women with a spouse or women without children (see Table 5). In Canada, the op- posite is true. Figures 1 and 2 demonstrate that women who are single parents in Canada have lower rates of labour market participation than women with a partner, regardless of the age of the child, although that gap is most significant when the youngest child is under the age of three and has increased over the last ten years. The gap between the labour market

participation rates of women in Canada who are sin-

gle parents and women with a partner decreases dra-

matically, however, as soon as children enter compulsory schooling, indicating that care or

schooling outside the home has a significant impact on single women's labour market participation rates.





FIGURE 1 Employment of Mothers by Age of Youngest Child and Family Status, 1989

Total with children 69.2 < age 16 64.4

Youngest child 75.1 aged 6-15 74


Youngest child 66.7 aged 3-5 60.6

Youngest child 61.7 < age 3 40.1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

* Women in two-parent families " Female single parents

Source: Statistics Canada (1994, p. 52).

FIGURE 2 Employment of Mothers by Age of Youngest Child and Family Status, 1999

Total with children 70 < age 16

60.9



16.


Youngest child 63.1 < age 3 37.6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

a Women in two-parent families 0 Female single parents

Source: Statistics Canada (2000, p. 98).




394 Linda A. White

It is also important to note that labour market participation rates for women in two-parent families have generally increased over the past decade in

Canada, whereas those for women who are single parents have declined, regardless of the age of the child or children. The low levels of labour market

participation by single women with young children in Canada compared to European countries with

higher levels of child care, and the dramatic increase in women's participation rates in Canada when the child or children enter schools speaks to the positive influence of care/schooling outside the home on women's labour market participation.

Combining this cross-national data with country studies also helps to demonstrate the positive correlation between levels of child-care provision and women's labour market participation rates. Wom- en's labour market participation rates in the Nether- lands have increased dramatically over the last

decade, from approximately 42 to 63 percent (see Tables 2 and 4), because of shortages in skilled labour and increases in women's education and quali- fications levels. That rapid increase in women's labour market participation was facilitated by a con- certed government effort to increase the number of child-care spaces. The number of child-care places in the Netherlands for children under the age of four has increased from 2 to 14 percent over the past ten

years, and 98 percent of four-year olds and 100

percent of five-year olds now attend kindergarten classes in primary schools that last for 5.5 hours per day, five days per week (OECD 1999a, pp. 8, 20).

Other studies have demonstrated that the avail-

ability of child care is important to facilitate women's full-time and continuous employment. Joshi and Davies (1992, p. 572) found that the effect on em-

ployment of mothers having two children compared to women who did not was a loss of employment of ten years in Germany (FRG data), eight years in Great Britain, two in Sweden and zero in France. Those figures reflect the relative paucity of child- care programs in the former two countries, compared to Sweden and France, leaders in child care (see

Table 3). The norm for women who participate full- time in the labour force in France, in contrast, is a loss of employment only during maternity leave.

Comparative analysis reveals that regardless of

governments' goal in providing child care, the policy effect of this is to increase the labour market participation rates of women with children in countries with strong child-care programs. While policy goals such as pronatalism or promotion of the male bread- winner can depress women's labour market participation rates overall, as the comparative data reveal, having strong child-care supports in place can increase the labour market participation rates of both women who are single parents and women with partners, even in countries with strong pronatalist policies, such as France and Italy.

THE IMPACT OF LABOUR MARKET POLICIES ON CANADIAN WOMEN'S LABOUR MARKET PARTICIPATION

Levels of child-care provision, especially low levels of child care, thus have a demonstrated effect on women's labour market participation. Barriers to women's labour market participation are important because the impact of women not working can be felt not only in the area of labour productivity, but also in other social program areas.

The fact that single women with young children do not participate in the labour market to the same extent as women with partners in Canada, for ex-

ample, has enormous implications for social assistance programs. Single parents made up approximately 28 percent of the federal social assistance caseload under the CAP in 1993. Of those, approximately 90 percent were mothers (HRDC 1994c, pp. 12-13). Single mothers in Canada with

young children have much lower labour market participation rates than even single fathers or women with spouses. In 1998, the participation rate of female single parents with children up to age five was 54 percent, compared to male single parents at 86





percent, and women with spouses at 69 percent (Chaykowski and Powell 1999, p. S7, Table 1). While the high rate of male single-parents' labour market participation may indicate that it is possible to find ways to balance work and child-care duties on one's own, only a small proportion of single parents in Canada are men (approximately 17 percent in 1999). The vast majority of single parents are women (83 percent in 1999) who obviously find it more difficult to retain their attachment to the workforce and balance work and family life (Statis- tics Canada 1999a, p. 172). Cleveland and Hyatt found that women who are single parents are "much more likely to be pushed out of participation in the

paid labour force than mothers in two-parent families by an increase in child care costs, and that child care costs, the level of expected social assistance benefits and the level of expected wages are all significant factors influencing whether lone parent mothers of pre-schoolers will be earners" (1996, summary).

Being a single mother inhibits one's participation in the labour market, but other factors continue to affect women's overall labour market participation rates. Chaykowski and Powell argue that "the

presence of children (in particular, preschool-aged children...ha[s] a significant negative effect on the

[labour force participation] decisions of women and their supply of hours of work" (1999, p. S3) not just for single mothers but also for all mothers. Betcherman et al. report, for example, "the prefer- ence among women for part-time work is closely linked to their family responsibilities" (1994, p. 18). Nearly 29 percent of women worked part-time in Canada in 1998, compared to 10.5 percent of men

(OECD 1999b, p. 240). While a large percentage of women surveyed (almost 28 percent) stated that the reason they worked part-time was a "personal pref- erence" (compared to 21 percent of men who gave the same reason), 15 percent of women surveyed stated they worked part-time for reasons of child care, compared to 0.5 percent of men (Chaykowski and Powell 1999, p. S12). We can presume then, that a certain percentage of women working part-time

would not continue to do so if governments provided more measures to help balance work and family life, including reasonably priced child-care services.

The higher level of women's part-time employment has implications in terms of wages earned, eli-

gibility for non-wage benefits, job security, and so on, all of which are much more plentiful with full- time positions. Women who do not work full-time are handicapped, not just in terms of income levels, but also in terms of other benefits, such as pensions. This contributes to higher poverty rates for women

compared to men, and especially higher poverty rates for older women who must then rely on social assistance.8

In Germany, government officials are increas-

ingly recognizing the link between women's poverty and their lack of labour market participation and the connection of both to other social policies. Thus, the German government in 1986 implemented a system of insurance credits for child care. A parent caring for a child under the age of one is cred- ited with social insurance contributions based on 75

percent of average earnings, regardless of their em-

ployment status or actual earnings. Since 1992, the

government has extended that provision to enable women to take a three-year break for each child, or to switch to part-time work for three years, usually without any loss to their social insurance contribution record (Ginn and Arber 1992, p. 266). Granted, the German government is not a policy leader in

encouraging women's labour market participation, but the idea behind this policy is to provide a financial cushion for women who are raising young children and to not penalize them for exiting the labour market to care for children.

A lack of affordable child care can create up-front barriers to women's labour market participation, not

just for workers with low incomes (who may be eligible for government child-care subsidies), but also for the vast majority of middle-income workers not eligible for subsidies and not able to afford the up- front child-care costs.9 This creates a huge




396 Linda A. White

disincentive to employment. Research has demonstrated that child-care costs negatively affect the

probability of women's labour market participation if they have young children and purchase child care

(Cleveland, Gunderson and Hyatt 1996; Powell

1997). High child-care costs also act as a greater deterrent to full-time as opposed to part-time em-

ployment (Powell 1998). Cleveland, Gunderson and

Hyatt (1996, p. 145) report that women who earn

high wages are more likely to purchase market forms of child care, as opposed to relying on unpaid care

by a relative, for example, than women with lower incomes, indicating that measures to decrease the

price of care for consumers would lower the disincentive to purchase those child-care services. So far, governments in Canada have done little to lower the

price of child-care services, as discussed below, and thus to lower this barrier to labour market

participation.

In linking these issues to productivity concerns, the higher levels of unemployed, discouraged, and

part-time women workers should be of concern to

governments since these women are a potential source of underutilized labour supply. The gendered aspects of these issues should also be of concern; as demonstrated above, women are more affected by family considerations than men. The number of women who leave the legal profession, for exam-

ple, are similar to men in the province of Ontario. However, one study reports that, of the women sur-

veyed who have left the legal profession, 21 percent ranked family reasons as first or second in

importance, compared to less than 3 percent of men

(Kay, Dautovich and Marlor 1997, pp. 127-28). Governments and employers should be concerned about high rates of attrition, not just in these highly skilled professions, but in any field that requires an investment in training.

The OECD reports as well that in 1991, women made up the larger share of discouraged workers in all countries surveyed. The report states, "if discouraged workers were included in the labour force as unemployed, male/female differentials would widen

in most countries given the relatively higher shares for women" (1993, pp. 9-10). Furthermore, "prime- age workers typically made up the largest share of

discouraged workers." The report states that:

for many women, a lack of jobs or of flexibility in existing job arrangements that allow a combination of paid and unpaid work responsibilities would be consistent with the relatively higher rates of discouragement found among prime-age women. It would also be consistent with the rela-

tively lower share of discouraged women in Swe- den where parental leave provisions allow continuous contact with the labour force although extended period of absences are taken (1993, p. 15).

Policy changes to encourage participation in the labour market, such as access to child-care facilities, could work to lower the number of discouraged workers and allow more women greater choices re-

garding full-time versus part-time work. As Powell (1992) argues, given that women enter and exit the labour market based on familial considerations, their labour supply elasticities are high, which means that measures such as child care could have enormous

positive effects. Powell argues, "if labour supply elasticities are low, then daycare initiatives might result only in windfall gains to those already in the labour market" (1992, p. 164). However, for women who otherwise would exit the labour market, public policies to ensure their retention should be success- ful in affecting both the decision to work and the

supply of hours.

THE CHANGING EMPHASIS OF CHILD-CARE POLICY AND PROGRAMS IN CANADA

Given the demonstrated positive impact that child- care programs have on women's labour market participation in other countries, and the clearly negative consequences that the lack of child care can have on women's labour market participation in Canada, it is most discouraging to see governments in Canada





moving further away from implementing a national child-care system. At the same time, governments across Canada are reducing social assistance benefits and introducing welfare-to-work programs for

single-parent and two-parent families, while women's status in the labour market in terms of earn-

ings, hours worked, and so on remains unequal to men, with implications for women's economic

equality. lo

Before discussing what governments and employers in Canada can do to rectify these problems, I want to first explore what they are not doing. As mentioned above, until 1996, the federal government provided some funding through CAP to low-income families deemed to be in need, or at risk of becom-

ing so, for a variety of services, including child care. The federal government provided funding on a shared-cost basis with the provinces up to 50 percent. That shared-cost funding covered fee subsidies for low-income parents. It also covered

operating grants to regulated not-for-profit or government-operated child-care centres. The amount of federal assistance was not great; child-care subsidies only represented about 4 percent of federal ex-

penditures under CAP by the early 1990s (HRDC 1994c, p. 8). But it was an important source of federal subsidization that allowed low-income families access to regulated not-for-profit child care. It also

encouraged the provinces to spend money on operating grants and subsidies because the federal government would provide part of the funding.

The amount of the federal contribution began to erode in 1990 when the federal government under Prime Minister Mulroney introduced the "cap on CAP" contributions to the wealthier provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, and Ontario. Cost-shar-

ing of child care and other social services ended

completely in 1996 with the introduction of the Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST). The CHST is a block-transfer grant to the provinces to provide health care, social assistance, and postsecondary education funding. Under the CHST, the federal government specifically earmarks no

monies for child care. Indeed, provinces do not have to spend any of the allotted transfer on child-care

programs and may choose instead to direct funds to health care or postsecondary education. Thus, child- care spending, which already depended on the will-

ingness of provincial governments to spend, has become even more discretionary.

This new funding structure has a number of im-

plications. For example, under the CHST, it is likely that the provinces and territories will pursue child- care subsidies which focus on women in the welfare-to-work transition (or those at risk of moving onto welfare), rather than all families with children, because the provinces and territories will benefit 100

percent by moving someone off welfare, rather than

just 50 percent under CAP." And indeed, one area where provincial governments have recognized the need for child care is in order to enable those on social assistance to participate in training, apprenticeship, and workfare programs. The Ontario provincial government under Premier Bob Rae, for

example, implemented a child-care subsidy for those

participating in the Jobs Ontario training programs, in addition to the province's regular funding for child care. Under the leadership of the Conservative Party, the government has only marginally increased overall spending on child care, and instead has concen- trated on providing subsidies for parents participating in the Ontario Works (workfare) program. Even with the subsidies, independent auditing has found the number of spaces to be inadequate to meet the need of parents obliged to participate in the workfare program (Valpy 1999, p. A10). Such subsidies, in addition, do not benefit the large number of single parents who are not on social assistance.

The major federal source of child-care support for working families which remains is the Child Care Expense Deduction (CCED). The CCED allows parents who participate in the labour market to deduct their child-care expenses from their income taxes. The maximum amount that currently can be claimed is $7,000 for each child under age seven, or for older children with severe disabilities, and $4,000 for




398 Linda A. White

children aged 7 to 14, or children with moderate disabilities. While the maximum deduction is high, many parents are unable to take advantage of the CCED. First, families with only one working parent cannot claim the deduction, presumably because the federal government assumes the other parent is

providing care.12 Second, parents must pay the costs

up front and then deduct the expenses at tax time. Thus, the CCED tends to advantage those parents whose incomes are high enough to enable them to shoulder their child-care expenses throughout the

year. It also means that those parents, more so than middle- and lower-income Canadians, can afford to

place their children in the more expensive formal

daycare centres. Many other parents cannot claim the CCED because they must provide receipts and

many independent caregivers refuse to issue receipts to avoid paying income taxes. The CCED does not

encourage the expansion of services, as federal-

provincial funding did under CAP. And it does noth-

ing to help reduce the up-front cost of child-care services. The CCED thus helps those women who would likely remain in the labour market regardless of the subsidy, while lowering their child-care ex-

penses. It can hardly be regarded as part of a com-

prehensive labour market policy, much less a

comprehensive child-care program.

In 1993, the federal government established the Child Tax Benefit (CTB) program. This benefit re-

placed the old family allowance and child tax credit, the former implemented in 1944 and the latter in 1978. The CTB is a tax-free, income-tested monthly payment for children under the age of 18. This tax-

expenditure program does not directly support child care, but can be used to help defray the costs of child care. In 1999, the benefit totalled $1,020 per child

per year under the age of 18 (with an additional benefit of $75 for third and subsequent children), plus $213 per child under the age of seven if the parents did not claim the CCED. Low-income families received additional supplementary benefits of $605 per year for one child and $1,010 for two children. Low- income families with three or more children received an additional $330 per child. The high-income cut-

off for receipt of benefits was set at $67,000 for 1999 and $25,921 for supplementary benefits (Finance Canada 1999). The Child Tax Benefit now is the largest single expenditure by the federal government on family benefits, and it is slated to expand in

upcoming years. Again, though, it does nothing to lower the costs of child-care services and concen- trates benefits to lowest-income Canadians. It is thus not a comprehensive child-care support program.

Federal/provincial/territorial agreements have

proven no better at getting the various levels of government to commit to increased child-care spending. In 1998, the federal, provincial, and territorial governments agreed to implement the National Child Benefit (NCB) program, an anti-child poverty program under the auspices of the Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB). The federal government agreed to increase the amount of direct income support it provided through the tax system under a National Child Benefit Supplement; the provinces and territories in turn agreed to invest in social and labour market

supports and services to low-income families, not as the federal government desired, but rather accord-

ing to provincial or territorial priorities. NCB programs include cash benefits; early childhood intervention programs such as nutrition programs, prenatal screening, and youth and recreation programs; supplementary health benefits, such as pre- scription drug coverage, dental and vision care, for children of low-income working families; as well as child care (HRDC 1999, p. 6). Provincial and territorial spending on these programs and services in the 1999-2000 fiscal year totaled $500 million, with

only $172.4 million in total going toward child care (Federal-Provincial-Territorial Council on Social Policy Renewal 2000). That figure represents one- third of the monies spent on child care under CAP. The September 2000 First Ministers' Agreement on

early childhood development services again did not

require the provinces and territories to spend money on child-care programs specifically, but rather "early child development, learning and care" programs which could but do not necessarily include child care.





Discussions surrounding the development of a child-care system have traditionally centred on the creation of a national child-care plan to be implemented by the federal government. With the federal

budgetary cuts to social service spending over the last decade and the move to block-funding under the CHST, as well as federalism concerns to give back responsibility for social service program de-

sign and implementation to the provinces, the federal government seems to have moved away from

support of a comprehensive national child-care program guided by the federal government. The federal government has devolved responsibility for labour market programs back to the provinces as well, making it difficult to play a leadership role in the development of child care.

At the provincial level, government spending on child-care programs has increased greatly in only three provinces, slightly in most provinces and has decreased in Alberta and Prince Edward Island between 1992 and 1998 (see Table 6). Child-care fund-

ing and program support and regulation varies

widely across provinces and territories. In Ontario, the most populous province, in 1998 the government provided $324 million in fee subsidies to low- income families. Those subsidies are paid directly to the service provider on behalf of the parents. In that way, subsidies support child-care service provision. The province also provided $134 million in

wage grants and another $49 million in special needs

resourcing to child-care centres. In addition, the province provided $22 million for child-care resource centres and $65 million to cover child-care costs for those required to participate in Ontario Works workfare

programs and for provincial employment programs. In all, that meant about $238 for each child under the

age of 13 to support regulated child care. While terri-

bly low, this amount is higher than that spent by other

provinces save for Quebec, which spent an average of $256 for each child under the age of 13 in 1998 (CRRU 2000, p. 43 and passim).

Some provinces are taking the initiative to develop their own child-care programs. The Quebec

TABLE 6 Canadian Provincial and Territorial Expenditures for Regulated Child Care over Time (millions of Canadian dollars)*

Provinces and Territories 1992 1998

British Columbia 55.8** 128.911 Alberta 66.6 54.31 Saskatchewan 12.3 15.71 Manitoba 42.2 45.21 Ontario 420.1 535.5***'1 Quebec 140.7 299.91' New Brunswick 3.6 5.51 Nova Scotia 11.4 15.71 Prince Edward Island 2.8 2.61 Newfoundland and Labrador 1.7 3.31 Yukon Territory 2.4 4.81 Northwest Territories 2.3 2.3

Total 762.0 1,113.6

Notes: N/A = not available; arrows indicate direction and strength of change in funding. *CRRU (2000, pp. 104, 124). **Figures estimated as BC subsidies can be used in unregulated care. ***CRRU reports figures of $470,500,000. Stroick and Jenson (1999, pp. 72-73) report an additional $65 million provided for child care under the Ontario Works workfare program.

government, for example, has introduced a $5-per day child-care program for all children from birth to age 12. The BC government announced plans in June 2000 to implement a universal day-care program, starting with before- and after-school care for 6- to 12-year-olds, with parents paying about $7 per day. That program did not receive the endorsement of the Liberal Opposition at the time and will likely not survive a conservative provincial Liberal

government.

Governments at both the federal and provincial levels therefore, save for the province of Quebec,




400 Linda A. White

have done little to improve levels of child-care provision or funding support in the past decade. Nei- ther have employers, however. Very few

employer-sponsored child-care programs exist in Canada. In the United States, the federal government provides a tax exemption for child-care ar-

rangements paid through employee benefit plans of

up to $5,000 per year under the Employer-Provided Dependent Care Assistance Plan established in 1981. This plan covers costs for all dependent care, in-

cluding elder care and child care. The cost of this

program in 1999 was $923 million in forgone revenue (OECD 2000, p. 24). Governments in Canada, in contrast, give few incentives to employers to es- tablish or operate child-care centres, much less support child-care costs,13 and employers generally do not seem interested in providing or subsidizing care themselves. After a flurry of activity in the early 1990s, both academic and employer interest in

workplace-based and employer-sponsored care has diminished. 14

CONCLUSION AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

This paper demonstrates the necessity of thinking innovatively about the connection between social

programs and labour market policies for their effectiveness. It is clear that governments need to consider child-care programs when looking at ways to reduce barriers to women's participation in the labour market, especially as traditional labour market policies, such as income transfers, public works

projects, and labour standards are under attack

(Stoyko 1997, p. 93). Arguments for the need for child care have traditionally been based on increas-

ing the equality of women or supporting child de-

velopment. However, clear labour productivity arguments can be made as well.

Child-care services in Canada need to be more

plentiful and need to be more affordable. Operating grants are necessary to increase supply, and subsidies are necessary to allow low- and middle-income families to have access to quality child-care services.

The first thing governments have to do, then, is

spend more money on child-care programs, either

by directly funding child-care spaces, or encouraging the development of workplace child care through employer-sponsored dependent care programs. A Childcare Resource and Research Unit briefing note

(2001) argues that governments need to contribute $7.4 billion to early child development, learning, and care services, including regulated child care, nursery schools, Head Start programs, and so on. The first ministers in September 2000 agreed to

spend $2 billion over five years on early child de-

velopment services broadly defined, including parental support programs, healthy pregnancy programs, and so on. While all very important programs, the CRRU briefing note emphasizes that overall spending on these programs would then need to total $10 billion to make them truly effective and universal so as not to shortchange the creation of child-care and early child development programs.

The lesson that comparative analysis of other countries' child-care programs teaches is that child care does not have to be drafted explicitly as a labour market policy as long as policymakers consider the labour market effects and ensure that the programs can accommodate parents' work schedules and price concerns. The full-day dcoles maternelles in France, which are free and universally available to all children from the age of three and that run for

eight hours per day, are a good example. If provinces were to implement full-day kindergarten programs for 4-year olds, as many European countries and even some states in the US have done, along with before- and after-school care programs, such

programs would go a long way toward supporting parental labour market participation as well as supporting early child development. Implementing full-

day kindergarten for 4-and 5-year olds, along with before- and after-school programs would relieve the need for child-care services for older children, at least during the school year.

The Canadian federal government has made some moves to expand parental leave benefits for eligible





parents from six months to one year, relieving the

pressure for infant child care for many parents who would opt to stay home. Current parental leave benefit levels would have to be increased, however, in order for parents to realistically take advantage of this program. Currently, a parent is eligible for com-

pensation at a rate of 55 percent of previous earn-

ings to a maximum of $413 per week, with a clawback for high-income earners. Also, to be eli-

gible for maternity or parental benefits, one must have worked at least 700 hours in the previous year. The low compensation level makes it unrealistic for a middle- or high-income parent to take the full year off work. The strict eligibility criteria regarding hours also disqualifies many women in professions that are seasonal or part-time from ever accumulat-

ing the number of hours needed in a year to be eli-

gible for benefits. Those strict hours requirements have already been successfully challenged before a

Winnipeg tribunal, and other challenges are pend- ing (Canadian Press 2001, p. A4).

The biggest expansion of child-care support and services is thus needed for children ages one to three. Human Resources Development Canada (1997, p. 12) estimates that in 1996, 27 percent of children between the ages of 18 and 36 months with full- time working parents in the labour force (including single parents working full-time and two-parent families in which both parents work full-time), and

only 14 percent with mothers in the labour force, had spaces in child-care centres and family daycare homes. Expansion of child-care services for children of this age group is most imperative, especially services (and subsidies) targeted to single parents and not just those on social assistance, given the lack of labour market participation of single mothers with

young children. As mentioned above, that expansion could occur through a variety of programs such as regulated child care, nursery schools, Head Start

programs, family daycares, and so on.

As mentioned in note 4, a variety of factors have

prevented the federal Liberal government from ful- filling its child-care funding promised from the early

1990s. Given the large fiscal surplus the federal

government has accumulated, deficit considerations need no longer hinder the development of child-care

programs and services. The first ministers have also

managed to agree to limited funding for early childhood development programs, waylaying federalism concerns somewhat.

Regarding ideological constraints, despite con- tinued conservative opposition to the idea of care outside the home, child care is very popular among Canadians. Michalski (1999, p. 47) reports, for ex-

ample, the results of a 1998 Environics poll that found 76 percent of those polled in Canada agreed with the statement "A child care system should be available for all families, with the costs shared by governments and families themselves." Furthermore, 92 percent of those polled declared they wanted a combination of "programs like child care or parental leaves to help families balance work and family responsibilities" (ibid., p. 48). In fact, Michalski

reports that "public opinion has not changed sig- nificantly over the years with respect to support for the availability of daycare, with a clear majority viewing the availability of such services as important and roughly one in five Canadians disagreeing" (ibid., p. 41). Indeed, changes in child-care funding in Quebec proved to be so popular among both work-

ing and non-working parents that the services are now oversubscribed (Johnston 1999, p. Al).

The lesson from observing child-care policies and

programs in European countries is that governments can develop comprehensive child-care programs to address broader policy goals that at the same time can support women's labour market participation. Thus, while governments in Canada should continue to pursue their early child development goals, they should not neglect to consider the positive effects on women's labour market participation of providing high quality child care that responds to the needs of working parents. Expanding funding for the development of child-care spaces, and providing subsidies to make child care more affordable to working parents should result in higher levels of women's




402 Linda A. White

labour market participation, as well as labour force retention, lower levels of absenteeism, higher levels of full-time employment, and higher income levels for women overall. The gender implications of these programs, in addition to positive implications for child development, should motivate governments to act.

NOTES

The author gratefully acknowledges the support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada grant no. 752-94-2271, as well as the comments of Steven F. Bernstein and the anonymous reviewers for this journal. The author also thanks Ruth Roach Pierson for comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

ISave for the Government of Quebec, which shares the other governments' concerns with early childhood

development, but believes that such federal/provincial/ territorial agreements infringe on its constitutional jurisdiction on social matters.

2For an alternative perspective, see Krugman (1994).

3The pledge came with two caveats: first, the spaces would only be created in a year following a 12-month

period of 3 percent growth; second, the expansion would

only occur with the agreement of the provinces (Liberal Party of Canada 1993, pp. 38-40).

4In part, this waning support occurred because of bud-

getary concerns, although these concerns have disap- peared with the era of budget surpluses. In part, it reflected federalism concerns and the desire to move out of areas of provincial jurisdiction (White 2001 la). Finally, because of conservative ideological pressure in the form of the Reform Party and then Canadian Alliance, it reflected a

hesitancy to support child care as a labour market program that would encourage women to abandon their traditional roles as caregiver in the home (White 2001b).

5Unfortunately, the OECD reports data for federal ex-

penditures only, not provincial. Thus, since 1997, and the shift from direct federal expenditures to transfers to the

provinces, the OECD data does not accurately depict overall spending on labour market policy measures in Canada.

6By liberal and corporatist welfare states, I am refer-

ring to the welfare state regimes identified by Esping-

Andersen (1990). Leibfried (1993) proposes the fourth

regime of "Latin Rim" countries.

7I compare labour market and child-care data from 1988 because, while researchers compiled a host of good cross-national studies on levels of child-care provision in the late 1980s and early 1990s (see, e.g., Moss 1990; OECD 1990; European Commission 1995; Kamerman and Kahn 1995), no organization has yet collected that cross- national data for the late 1990s (partly because the Euro-

pean Commission Network on Childcare was disbanded in the late 1990s). The OECD is in the process of com-

pleting a number of country studies from which that data could be extracted which will help test whether this ar-

gument holds across time. At this point, however, that data are not available.

8Men's poverty rates are slightly lower than women's in general, but greater disparities exist between single women and men, especially single women over the age of 65. In 1997, 49 percent of single women over age 65 had incomes below the Statistics Canada low-income cut- off, compared to 33 percent of men (Statistics Canada 1999b, pp. 16-19).

9The latest report of the Childcare Resource and Re- search Unit (2000, p. 107) indicates that child-care services can range in price from $360 to nearly $800 per child per month.

o1Drolet reports that, as of 1997 in Canada, the wage ratio for full-year, full-time workers was 72.5 percent, mean-

ing women on average were paid 72.5 percent of men in

full-year, full-time occupations (2001, p. 22). The gender wage gap for all workers was 63.8 percent. This gender wage gap in part reflects the fact that women and men still do not

participate in the labour market to the same extent. As mentioned above, a lot more women than men are employed on a part-time rather than full-time basis.

"lMy thanks to an anonymous reviewer for this insight.

12In 1998, the Ontario provincial government introduced a child-care supplement for working families for low- and modest-income families with children under the

age of seven whose parents were either working or study- ing, or for families with one stay-at-home parent (CRRU 2000, p. 44).

13Some exceptions exist. In 1998, for example, the Ontario government introduced a workplace tax incentive





"to encourage businesses in building and renovating on- site and community-based child care facilities. Corpora- tions may receive a tax deduction of 30% of qualifying expenditures, and unincorporated businesses may received a 5% refundable tax credit" (CRRU 2000, p. 46).

14See, for example, Mayfield (1990) and Beach, Friendly and Schmidt (1993). For a follow-up report of the CRRU 1993 study, see Schmidt, Friendly and Beach

(1996).

REFERENCES

Bach S. and S.D. Phillips. 1997. "Constructing a New Social Union: Child Care Beyond Infancy?" in How Ottawa Spends 1997-98. Seeing Red: A Liberal Report Card, ed. G. Swimmer. Ottawa: Carleton University Press.

Beach, J., M. Friendly and L. Schmidt. 1993. Work-Re- lated Childcare in Context: A Study of Work-Related Child Care in Canada, CRRU Occasional Paper No. 3. Toronto: Childcare Resource and Research Unit, Cen- tre for Urban and Community Studies, University of Toronto.

Bergles, R. 2001. Supervisor, Employment Counselling, Etobicoke Employment Counselling Centre, telephone interview, 9 April.

Betcherman, G. et al. 1994. The Canadian Workplace in Transition, Final Report of the Human Resource Man-

agement Project. Kingston: Industrial Relations Centre, Queen's University.

Canadian Press. 2001. "Women Cheated by El Rules, Tribunal Rules," Globe and Mail, 6 April, p. A4.

Chaykowski R. and L.M. Powell. 1999. "Women and the Labour Market: Recent Trends and Policy Issues," Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de Politiques 25(Supplement):S 1-S25.

Childcare Resource and Research Unit (CRRU). 2000.

Early Childhood Care and Education in Canada: Prov- inces and Territories 1998. Toronto: CRRU.

2001. Early Childhood Development Services: How Much Will They Cost? CRRU Briefing Note. To- ronto: CRRU.

Cleveland, G. and D. Hyatt. 1996. Child Care, Social Assistance and Work: Lone Mothers with Preschool Children, Working Paper No. W-96-2E. Ottawa: Ap- plied Research Branch, Strategic Policy, Human Re- sources Development Canada.

Cleveland, G., M. Gunderson and D. Hyatt. 1996. "Child Care Costs and the Employment Decision of Women:

Canadian Evidence," Canadian Journal of Economics

29(1):132-51. Drolet, M. 2001. The Persistent Gap: New Evidence on

the Canadian Gender Wage Gap, Research Paper 11F0019MPE No. 157. Ottawa: Analytic Studies Branch, Statistics Canada.

Esping-Andersen, G. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.

European Commission. 1995. A Review of Services for Young Children in the European Union, Report of the

European Commission Network on Childcare and Other Measures to Reconcile Employment and Fam-

ily Responsibilities. Brussels: Commission of the Eu-

ropean Communities. 1999. Employment Rates Report 1998: Employ-

ment Performance in the Member States. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Com- munities.

Eurostat (Statistical Office of the European Communi- ties). 1992. Women in the European Community. Lux-

embourg: Office for Official Publications of the

European Communities.

Federal-Provincial-Territorial Council on Social Policy Renewal. 2000. National Child Benefit Reinvestment

Report 2000. Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services. At <http://socialunion.gc.ca/ NCB-2000/summary-reinvest2000.html>, accessed 7

April 2001. Ferland, L. 2001. Financial Advisor, Employment Pro-

grams Branch, Human Resources Development Canada, telephone interview, 20 April.

Finance Canada. 1999. Canada Child Tax Benefit: Up- date. Ottawa: Finance Canada. At <http:// www. fin.gc. ca/budget99/pamphe/chilpae.htm>, accessed 19 January 2000.

2000. Budget 2000. Ottawa: Finance Canada. At

<http://www.fin.gc.ca>, accessed 13 April 2000. Ginn, J. and S. Arber. 1992. "Towards Women's Independ-

ence: Pension Systems in Three Contrasting European Welfare States," Journal of European Social Policy, 2(4):255-77.

Haddow, R. 1998. "How Ottawa Shrivels: Ottawa's De-

clining Role in Active Labour Market Policy," in How Ottawa Spends 1998-99. Balancing Act: The Post-

Deficit Mandate, ed. L.A. Pal. Toronto: Oxford Uni- versity Press.

Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC). 1994a.

Agenda: Jobs and Growth. Improving Social Security




404 Linda A. White

in Canada: A Discussion Paper. Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada. S

1994b. Improving Social Security in Canada, Child Care and Development: A Supplementary Paper. Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada.

S1994c. Improving Social Security in Canada, Reforming the Canada Assistance Plan. A Supplemen- tary Paper. Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada.

1997. Status of Day Care in Canada, 1995 and

1996. Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada. 1999. The National Child Benefit: What it Means

for Canadian Families. Ottawa: HRDC. At <http:// socialunion.gc.ca/ncb/ncb_e 19.html>, accessed 19

January 2000. International Labour Organization (ILO). 1998. Yearbook

of Labour Statistics, 1998. Geneva: ILO.

Jaimet, K. 2000. "Agreement Targets $2.2 Billion for

Children," Ottawa Citizen, 12 September, p. A4.

Johnston, D. 1999. "Has Success Spoiled $5-a-day Daycare?" The Montreal Gazette, 8 March, p. Al.

Joshi, H. and H. Davies. 1992. "Day Care in Europe and Mothers' Forgone Earnings," International Labour Review 132 (6):561-79.

Kamerman, S. and A. Kahn. 1995. Starting Right: How America Neglects Its Youngest Children and What We Can Do about It. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kay, F.M., N. Dautovich and C. Marlor. 1997. Women in a Changing Legal Profession: A Longitudinal Survey of Ontario Lawyers 1990-1996. Toronto: Law Society of Upper Canada.

Krugman, P. 1994. "Competitiveness: A Dangerous Ob- session," Foreign Affairs 73(2):28-44.

Leibfried, S. 1993. "Towards a European Welfare State?" in New Perspectives on the Welfare State in Europe, ed. C. Jones. London: Routledge.

Liberal Party of Canada. 1993. Creating Opportunity: The Liberal Plan for Canada (Red Book). Ottawa: Liberal

Party of Canada.

Mayfield, M. 1990. Work-Related Child Care in Canada. Ottawa: Women's Bureau, Labour Canada.

Michalski, J.H. 1999. Values and Preferences for the "Best

Policy Mix" for Canadian Children, CPRN Discus- sion Paper No. F/05. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Re- search Networks.

Moss, P. 1990. Childcare in the European Community 1985-1990, Report of the European Commission Childcare Network. Brussels: Commission of the Eu-

ropean Communities.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Develop- ment (OECD). 1989. Employment Outlook, 1989. Paris: OECD.

1990. "Child Care in OECD Countries" in Em-

ployment Outlook, 1990. Paris: OECD. 1993. Employment Outlook, 1993. Paris: OECD. 1998. Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators

1998. Paris: OECD. 1999a. Early Childhood Education and Care

Policy in the Netherlands, OECD Country Note. Paris: OECD.

_ _ 1999b. Employment Outlook, 1999. Paris: OECD. 2000. Early Childhood Education and Care Policy

in the United States of America, OECD Country Note. Paris: OECD.

Porter, M.E. 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: The Free Press.

Powell, L.M. 1992. "Toward Child-Care Policy Develop- ment in Canada," in Social Policy in the Global

Economy, ed. T.M. Hunsley. Kingston: School of

Policy Studies, Queen's University. _ 1997. "The Impact of Child Care Costs on the

Labour Supply of Married Mothers: Evidence from Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics 30(3):577- 94.

1998. "Part-time Versus Full-time Work and Child Care Costs: Evidence for Married Mothers," Applied Economics 30(4):503-11.

Reich, R.B. 1992. The Work of Nations. New York: Vin-

tage Books. Saraceno, C. 1994. "The Ambivalent Familism of the Ital-

ian Welfare State," Social Politics 1(1):60-82. Schmidt, L., M. Friendly and J. Beach. 1996. "Work-Re-

lated Child Care Centres in Canada: Private Solutions to Public Policy," Canadian Journal of Research in

Early Childhood Education 5(1):47-58. Statistics Canada. 1994. Women in the Labour Force, Cat.

No. 75-507E. Ottawa: Industry, Science and Technol-

ogy Canada. 1999a. Annual Demographic Statistics, 1999, Cat.

No. 91-213. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. 1999b. Low Income Persons, 1980 to 1997, Cat.

No. 13-569-XIB. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. 2000. Women in Canada 2000: A Gender-Based

Statistical Report, Cat. No. 89-503-XPE. Ottawa: Sta- tistics Canada.

Stoyko, P. 1997. "Creating Opportunity or Creative Op- portunism?: Liberal Labour Market Policy," in How





Ottawa Spends 1997-98. Seeing Red: A Liberal Re-

port Card, ed. G. Swimmer. Ottawa: Carleton Univer-

sity Press. Stroick, S. and J. Jenson. 1999. What Is the Best Policy

Mix for Canada's Young Children? CPRN Study No.

F/09. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks.

Thurow, L. 1992. Head to Head: The Coming Economic Battle among Japan, Europe, and America. New York: Morrow.

Valpy, M. 1999. "Consultant and Premier at Odds Over

Daycare" The Globe and Mail, 5 October, p. A 10. White, L. 2001a. "The Child Care Agenda and the Social

Union," in Canadian Federalism in the New Millenium:

Performance, Effectiveness and Legitimacy, ed. G.

Skogstad and H. Bakvis. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

_ 2001b. "From Ideal to Pragmatic Politics: Na- tional Child Care Advocacy Groups in the 1980s and

1990s," in Changing Child Care: Five Decades of Child Care Advocacy and Policy in Canada, ed. S. Prentice. Halifax: Fernwood Press.

Wilensky, H. and L. Turner. 1987. Democratic Corporat- ism and Policy Linkages. Berkeley, CA: Institute of International Studies.

Canadian Evaluation Society/Soci6t6 canadienne d'6valuation Congr. s de 2002 Conference

Evidence for Better Decision-Making Une prise de d6cision plus 6clair6e

May 5 to 8, 2002 / Du 5 au 8 mai 2002 Halifax, Nova Scotia / Halifax,

Nouvelle-.cosse The Themes

The continuum of evidence for decision- making Evidence-based decision-making in a political and organizational context

Methodology - friend or foe of "usable knowledge" Case studies of program evaluation in use

Les th6mes

Le continuum de donnees pour las prise de decisions

La prise de decisions plus eclair~e dans un contexte politique et organisationnel La methodologie: amie ou ennemie des ((connaissances utilisables) Etudes de cas sur l'utilisation de l'valuation de programme

For More Information/Pour plus de renseignments

Heather Perkins Tracy Fiander-Trask [email protected] [email protected] (902) 423-7021 (902) 422-9243




Documents

Child Care, Women's Labour Market Participation and Labour Market Policy Effectiveness in Canada