Summary#
Bill 35, the Education and Childcare (Securing Parental Involvement) Statutes Amendment Act, 2026, would amend Alberta’s Early Learning and Child Care Act, Education Act, and An Act to Remove Politics and Ideology from Classrooms and Amend the Education Act, 2026. Its title states a goal of securing parental involvement; the bill does not guarantee any particular result.
- The statutory director could require safety plans for licensed child care centres and family day home programs. Licence holders and agencies would have to submit approved plans and, for family day homes, ensure they are followed and report on compliance.
- Child care licence holders and family day home agencies would have to report incidents to the statutory director and inform affected children’s parents or guardians. The bill also expands required public postings and allows the director to publish more information and notify parents directly.
- The statutory director could monitor child care premises electronically, subject to regulations, and could collect, use and disclose personal information for listed purposes. The director would also have new powers over child care certifications, including setting terms, expiry and renewal requirements, and suspending or cancelling certifications.
- School boards would have to create a process for unresolved parent concerns and publish information about non-instructional operational days. The Minister could set service standards for the parent-concern process and decide what information boards must disclose.
- School boards in public school divisions would need the Minister’s approval before starting a process to name or rename a school building they own, and approval of the proposed name. If the Minister does not decide within 60 days, the name would be deemed approved.
- The bill changes wording in three Education Act provisions about protecting French-language instruction rights. It does not amend the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms itself.
What it means for you#
- Parents and guardians: If your child is directly affected by a child care incident, the licence holder or agency must inform you as soon as reasonably possible. The statutory director may also contact parents, including if the provider has failed, refused or is unable to give information.
- Child care providers and agencies: They would have new reporting, posting and safety-plan duties. Agencies would also have to ensure a family day home follows an approved plan, monitor compliance and report results or failures to comply.
- Child care licence applicants: The statutory director could decline to consider an application. The director could refuse or not renew a licence based on specified concerns, including financial history or whether the proposed service fits local demand. Regulations may add details.
- Child care workers: The director could set certification terms, expiry dates and renewal requirements, and could vary, suspend or cancel certifications. The bill does not set those details itself.
- School boards: They would have to create a process for parent concerns unresolved at school level, meet any ministerial standards, and publish required information about non-instructional operational days.
- Public school division boards: They could not begin naming or renaming a school building they own without the Minister’s prior approval. If a proposed name is refused, they may submit a new one.
- General public: The bill allows the director to publish child care safety plans, incident information and other notices or records. It does not require the director to publish all such information.
Money#
No cost information is in the available material.
- The bill imposes new duties on child care providers, agencies and school boards, but gives no cost estimate or funding amount.
- It does not state how many staff or resources government would use for added monitoring, notices or reviews.
What is unclear#
- The bill is presented as a bill at first reading, not a law in force. Several provisions say they start on proclamation, and the supplied text does not give a start date for all changes.
- Regulations may set details for safety plans, electronic monitoring, licence applications and child care certifications. Those details are not in the bill.
- The bill does not set a specific format or deadline for most incident reports, or explain how personal information would be protected when information is posted or shared.
- It does not say how the new child care licensing and safety-plan rules interact with existing programs or other oversight.
- The supplied material gives excerpts of current law, not the full amended Acts, so the full current process and legal effects could not be verified.
- The wording changes about French-language instruction remove the earlier reference to instruction in the language of the English or French linguistic minority. The bill does not explain the reason or intended effect of that wording change.
Case for#
- A possible argument for the bill is that faster incident reporting and direct parent notices could help families learn about risks affecting their children.
- Safety plans, monitoring and public notices could give the statutory director more ways to address child safety concerns and make relevant information available.
- Financial-history and local-demand checks could help prevent licences being issued where an applicant’s finances or the area’s existing capacity raise concerns.
- Standard report-card rules and a process for unresolved parent concerns could make some school information and complaint handling more consistent.
- Requiring approval before a school-naming process begins could give the Minister oversight before boards spend money or consult on a name.
Case against#
- The bill gives the statutory director broad discretion to decline applications, require safety plans, monitor electronically and publish information, but leaves many operating details to regulations or the director.
- New reporting, safety-plan and posting duties may add work and costs for providers, agencies and school boards; the bill does not estimate them or provide funding.
- Public posting or disclosure of incident and child care information could affect privacy. The bill permits collection and disclosure of personal information but does not set out detailed safeguards in the supplied text.
- The school-naming rules could delay or limit a board’s ability to consult on names, because ministerial approval is needed before the process starts.
- The bill narrows the wording of statutory safeguards for minority-language instruction to French. The text does not explain why the broader wording is removed or how the change is meant to work.