Mal Brough (Longman, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

Hypocrisy! Now there’s a word we have heard today in question time: hypocrisy. Here she goes. On one day the member for Sydney says that we should uncap outside school hours places, and we do. Two days later, because she could not deliver it—the Labor Party could not deliver it, would not have any capacity to deliver it, particularly when they were running deficit budgets—she turns around and tries to tell the public it is some sort of a sham. The reality is that I can prove to her how already there are providers out there turning their minds to the very issue of how to handle and how to provide additional outside school hours care and family day care.

Here is a question for you. The member for Sydney asked why it is that there have not been enough family day care workers. Unlike long day care, which has expanded exponentially—and that is a good thing, I am sure those on both sides of the House would agree, because it means more places for family—the one sector of child care that has been capped and has been monopolistic has been family day care. It is a part of history that we have allocated artificial boundaries, which go back to the Labor Party days, that say that one operator, and no-one else, can provide family day care and, if they are not able to attract anyone, too bad.

One of the problems that we had that this government fixed was not the mum out there providing the care—she gets paid for what she delivers—but the family day care coordinator who has a monopolistic control over a particular area. There are 250-odd of them around Australia. They actually got paid on the number of places that were allocated to them, whether or not they filled them. So they had no real reason or motivation to get extra people.

The federal government recognised this, worked with the National Family Day Care Council and came up with a policy—which the shadow minister was part of—championing the fact that we are out there to get 1,200 additional workers. I do not recall the member for Sydney, when we were at Luna Park in Sydney, saying to the family day carers there, ‘This is a load of rubbish, there’s no chance this will succeed; you people are wasting your time and effort.’ She triumphed it and said, ‘This is a good thing.’ I will tell you why, Mr Deputy Speaker: because the coalition government is going to assist 1,200 additional workers to access $1,500 to start their own business, to be able to help adjust the needs in their houses. So there will be safety provisions and appropriate learning facilities in their own homes so family day carers can start their own business.

We also had two more contrary arguments, as we have had consistently from the member for Sydney. Today she mentioned child care of $400 a week, but then she bemoaned what a family day carer gets paid. A family day carer gets paid by the parent and child-care benefit. The figure that the member for Sydney quoted was $4 an hour—$40 a day, $200 a week. The federal government, with its CCB, will pay more than $3 of that $4, which means the parent will be out of pocket by less than $10 a day. Ten dollars by five is $50—nothing like your $500. And she wonders why the federal government wants to be responsible and say, ‘Let’s uncap it; let’s get rid of the red tape; let’s allow people to operate where and when they want to operate and let’s meet the market.’ But am I on my own? In fact, first and foremost: is she on her own?

The member for Sydney said back on 14 April that she would welcome new places. Today she tells us that they are a scam. On budget day she said, ‘It would be good if we lifted outside school hours places.’ Now that we have done it she says that it is no good. We also have the member for Lilley, the shadow Treasurer, referring to outside school hours places, saying: ‘It’s still capped; they should be uncapped.’ When did he make that statement? It was 9 May, budget day. They are not uncapped anymore.

In Nundah, a part of the member for Swan’s electorate, or in any suburb of Sydney, when a parent came to their local member and said, ‘Look, I am struggling; I want to go back to work and I need an after-school-care place,’ there would have been a round six months down the track and you would have to go through a lot of red tape. The government has removed the red tape. Now the member for Sydney you can sit there with some confidence and say: ‘Not a problem. I will get the money, we can make this happen. We can operate. Let’s get the school to work with us’—communities working with government, hand in hand, to deliver places where and when they are needed and supported by the federal government.

Before this announcement we completed a round and we asked the Australian public, through advertisements right around the country, who would like additional outside school hours care. If, as the member for Sydney carps on about, 175,000 places were needed out there, we may have 175,000 applications—maybe a few more, maybe a few less. But, no, we got in the order of 19,000. Do you know what, Member for Sydney? As a result of this policy initiative, every single one of those places that meets the safety criteria—which I am sure you would never argue with—and is an appropriate learning facility will be funded from 1 July. They will not have to wait for another six months. Isn’t that a good thing? Guess what, Member for Sydney? They all have staff. Those places will happen, and that is a good thing.

See this speech in context