Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the particular issues I’d like to continue on the early childhood education matter, and Ms. Bisaro was wading into the particular area of concern that I share as well, which is the stabilized funding. Has the department put a lot of resources in the sense of attention and identification as to why certain early childhood centres or, certainly, programming doesn’t succeed?
One of the constant complaints I hear, of course, is stabilized funding. I often wonder has the department taken an initiative to analyze the actual cost of what some of these centres would cost the government to run and realize what a break we’re getting by them running it for us. I mean, this is the constant observation made by NGOs, that if the government paid the true cost of the services
provided. But, yet, as I think was just mentioned and as we all know, one of the problems these facilities has is if a few kids are sick, then all of a sudden their funding erodes quite quickly. A lot of them, their funding is based on, quite literally and figuratively, 90 or 100 percent attendance, and once that starts to erode or become unstabilized, the whole program becomes unstabilized, and then it trickles down that slippery slope, which basically means they get behind on being able to pay staff, their power bills, and then they make the tough choices they need to make just to stay open. In the end, they get into a lot of trouble.
We’ve had a couple of facilities that have run into trouble and I will say, to the department’s credit, they have worked very hard, from a diligent manner, to keep those doors open. I think the department certainly needs a good pat on the back for that, which they don’t get enough recognition for what they do from a departmental point of view. But that said, the real problem, I believe, comes down to what the core cost of running these programs is and the fact that the government has fortunately escaped those true costs. The burden on these facilities, as I’ve pointed out, and these programs is the fact that stabilized funding tends to be a significant focus that is being overlooked.
Has the department looked at just funding them from what I would safely call as an example of an 80 percent of cost when it comes to costs of heating, lighting, whether it’s the rent or mortgage costs, and their staffing costs, and allow that per student fund to, sort of, be the extra gravy that puts them over the top as opposed to relying on such a high capacity of attendance? Because as I pointed out earlier, and it’s no surprise to the Minister or the staff here, that once you start missing a few students and you start losing funding, that is a big problem. Thank you.