Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Community Services) Share this | Hansard source

The Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs Legislation Amendment (Child Care and Other 2007 Budget Measures) Bill 2007 relates to a number of the government’s recent budget measures, including those relating to child care, the one-off increase in the childcare benefit and the change of the childcare rebate from a tax offset to a direct payment. Labor supports these initiatives insofar as they go to helping families with the spiralling costs of child care, and we support this bill. However, we do believe that for 11 very long years the government has ignored the concerns of many Australian families, especially when it comes to their difficulties in finding affordable, high-quality and accessible child care. We believe the government has certainly not done enough to support families with the cost of child care, nor to help the early learning and development of those children. Accordingly, I move the following second reading amendment:

That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:“whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House notes that:

(1)

child care out of pocket costs are increasing five times faster than average prices for all goods and services;

(2)

for the past four years, child care out of pocket costs have increased by more than 12 per cent each year;

(3)

on average families will receive $813 from the changes to the child care tax rebate, not $8000 as the Government claimed;

(4)

many parents continue to experience difficulties accessing appropriate child care for their children;

(5)

high quality child care must be assured by a rigorous accreditation process focused on quality improvement;

(6)

despite the international consensus on the benefits of early childhood education, Australia ranks last in the OECD on the percentage of GDP spent on pre-primary education; and

(7)

there are currently 100,000 four year olds in Australia that do not attend preschool”.

This bill implements two of the government’s budget measures on child care. The first is a one-off increase in the childcare benefit; the second will convert the childcare tax rebate from a tax offset into a direct payment administered by Centrelink.

We certainly welcome this extra support for Australian families, and we also welcome the fact that the government have finally acknowledged that there is a crisis in the affordability of child care in Australia—something that they have consistently denied. You would have to say that this is more of a pre-election fix than any real understanding of the many difficulties families face when it comes to the costs of child care.

Australian families are very right to be sceptical of the government’s genuine understanding of the cost pressures that they face, because for too long the government has insisted that there was no problem with childcare affordability in this country. I will illustrate this point by giving a couple of recent examples. Earlier this year, the Commonwealth Treasury said of the Australian childcare system:

... contrary to popular perceptions, there is not an emerging crisis in the sector; supply is generally keeping pace with demand and—

and I emphasise this point—

child care has remained affordable.

That was said by the Commonwealth Treasury earlier this year. The Treasury paper went on to say:

... unmet consumer preferences represent more of a problem for parents than access itself.

In other words, the Commonwealth Treasury is saying: ‘There’s nothing wrong with child care; no problems with access, no problems with cost. It’s really just that parents are too choosy.’ I have to say that this is the most outrageous and arrogant dismissal of parents—a dismissal that we have seen repeated by many government ministers, who really do not understand how critical this issue is for parents. I will come back to this question of parental choice a little later in my remarks.

The Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Mr Brough, claimed recently that paying high fees was not too much for families because, he claimed, few people have more than one child in formal care. Yet figures from his own department show that one-third of families receiving the childcare benefit have two or more children in child care. Plainly, the minister for families does not understand the cost pressures on Australian families who are juggling caring for their children, meeting the costs of child care and returning to work or study.

Of course, we cannot forget the Prime Minister’s remarks just a few months ago, when he said, ‘Working families in Australia have never been better off.’ Plainly, he does not know those working families who are paying very substantial amounts for the cost of child care. The Prime Minister is normally pretty careful with his words. We know this is the case; he is a very, very clever politician. But this was yet another indication that he is slipping. One of the reasons for that is that he has been Prime Minister now for 11 years. I think these comments represent a further example of just how arrogant the government have become. They think that things are just so good for families; that families should not complain. As far as the Prime Minister is concerned, they have never had it so good.

It does seem to be the case—and I am sure many families struggling with the cost of child care would say—that after 11 years in power, this government is more and more out of touch with the realities faced by thousands of working families, who are facing not only the increasing costs of child care but also are struggling to keep up with their mortgage repayments and the increasing cost of petrol to keep their car running. All of these things are putting increasing pressure on so many families.

After all of these statements, after months—in fact, years—of families being told by the Prime Minister and his ministers that there is no problem with childcare affordability, that they have never been better off, families are right to be sceptical when, just moments before an election, we see the government scrambling to do something about spiralling childcare costs. I want to take a moment to recall just how much families have been paying for child care in Australia over the last four years. Let us look at how much their childcare costs have risen, so that we can put this pre-election childcare benefit increase into perspective.

The average cost of child care in Australia is $240 a week. However, we know that in some cases fees are as high as $350 per child per week. Childcare costs have been rising five times faster than the average cost of all other goods and services. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, out-of-pocket childcare costs for families in the past four years have increased by 12.7 per cent, then 12 per cent, then another 12 per cent and almost 13 per cent last year. Independent analysis by Saul Eslake from the ANZ Bank undertaken for the Taskforce on Care Costs shows that childcare affordability has declined by 50 per cent in the last five years. We have had year-on-year increases in childcare costs of more than 12 per cent and then moments before an election, when the government is under some political heat, a pre-election 10 per cent bonus appears. Parents understandably will be very sceptical about it. Juliet Burke, the chair of the Taskforce on Care Costs, whose own research indicates that costs are rising on average by 13 per cent per annum, said after the budget:

Increasing the child care benefit by 10 per cent takes parents back to the position they were in a year ago.

Of course the opposition supports this increase in childcare benefit, belated as it may be. Any help that the government provides for families is welcome, even if it is long overdue. Like parents, however, we are sceptical about the government’s sincerity and doubt, given its many statements on in these issues, that it has any real understanding of the pressures on families when it comes to the cost of child care, largely because it keeps denying that there is any problem.

The opposition’s other concern is that this one-off increase will not make a real difference to affordability for families if it is swallowed up by increased childcare fees. An article in today’s Queensland Courier Mail quotes the Tigger’s Place Preschool and Kindergarten at Logan announcing to parents that it is already increasing its fees by 10 per cent. The legislation has not even been passed by this parliament and a childcare centre is increasing its fees by 10 per cent—the same amount as the government’s childcare benefit bonus. The centre wrote to parents recently to explain the increase and stated:

The government has increased the CCB rate from $2.96 to $3.37 an hour. This will make our fee increase a lot more affordable to families.

As the headline in the Courier Mail states, ‘Fee rise to slice childcare rebate’. This is even before the legislation has been passed. Already the benefit of the increase this bill is seeking to implement will be eaten up by higher fees for families using this childcare centre. The newspaper article went on to say:

The nation’s largest child care provider, ABC Learning, is also set to increase fees.

The newspaper does not report what the increases will be, but we on this side of the House are concerned that families across the country will miss out on the benefits of the childcare benefit increase because childcare operators will use this one-off bonus to net a windfall gain and parents will be left with the bill.

I raised this issue with the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs during consideration in detail of the appropriations bill in the Main Committee last night. He said last weekend that he would not be a ‘casual bystander’ if centres increase their fees in this way. The minister is now saying that he will publicise the fee increases in an attempt, I suppose, to name and shame operators. I would certainly like to ensure that all parents are informed of these increases. I call on the minister to honour the commitment that he gave last night and release all details of childcare fee increases that he or his office is aware of. As he becomes more aware of these fee increases I ask that he make it publicly known. Parents have a right to know if their childcare fees are increasing and by how much. Of course they also want to know what the government is going to do about it.

Another report in a newspaper today also puts paid to yet another claim by this minister and the government. The minister has been very quick to claim that there is no problem—he is absolutely definite about this—in finding a childcare place in Australia. Parents know the reality and they do not believe for one minute these denials by the minister. The minister said in the parliament two days ago:

There is no shortage of child care for the zero to two age group, preschool age or any other age.

That was a very categorical statement from the minister. However, his claims have been shown to be completely false in an article in today’s Daily Telegraph with a headline that speaks for itself: ‘Yes, there really is a crisis—waiting lists refute government’s childcare claim’. The article describes the situation faced by residents in Sydney, particularly in the electorate of the member for Wentworth. The article describes the situation best, so I will quote directly from it:

ALMOST 900 children trying to squeeze into fewer than 70 places, an average waiting time of more than two years and parents on the phone in tears but the Federal Government says there is no childcare crisis here.

This is the Waverley Child Care Centre, the face of Sydney’s childcare crisis and possibly the most in-demand daycare centre in the country.

A total of 895 children are currently waiting for just 68 places. Most will have to wait at least two years, many will simply never get a place at all.

And it is not alone. The other two centres operated by Waverley Council have about 50 places and waiting lists of about 700 children each.

“You actually have people on the phone crying,” children’s services coordinator ... told The Daily Telegraph.

The children’s services coordinator also said:

... the situation for places for newborns to two year olds was desperate.

So we have direct evidence that contradicts Minister Brough’s statements in this House just two days ago when he said that there was no shortage of child care and, in particular, emphasised—demonstrating just how out of touch he is—that there was no shortage in the nought to two age group. I hope for his own sake that the member for Wentworth does not share Minister Brough’s arrogant view that there is no childcare shortage, certainly in the Wentworth electorate.

The minister makes these claims at his own peril. Firstly, he admitted in the Main Committee yesterday that his information collection does not break down vacancies by age group, so he does not actually know whether there are vacancies in the nought to two age group, nor is he able to make the claim that there are no shortages at all. He is misleading parents in many places who are desperate for high-quality care. The second problem for the minister is that he makes these claims that there are no shortages based on his own decision that parents should take whatever child care is available even if it is not what they want for their child. The minister admitted in the Main Committee yesterday that when he says there are childcare vacancies in a particular area he refers to availability in both family day care and long day care. So when he says that there are vacancies in any particular part of Australia and insists that there really is care available, he is ignoring the preferences for family day care or long day care or for a particular type of care that parents might want. Minister Brough’s claims about vacancies are premised on ignoring parental choice. In contrast, Labor supports parents’ choices as to the type of child care they want for their children.

We believe there should be a range of care settings available and that all should meet the highest quality standards. Unlike the government we are not in the business of telling parents that they should take one option for their child if they prefer another or if they think that a different form or place of care is better for their child. We are certainly not in the business of denying the reality for many parents that they cannot find the child care they need. Labor, in contrast to the government, have committed to addressing the shortage of child care in Australia. We have committed to a $200 million investment to build up to 260 new high-quality childcare centres, on either primary school sites or other community land, because we want child care to be affordable, accessible and of the highest quality.

The other childcare measure from the budget that is in this bill is to change the childcare tax rebate from a tax offset into a direct payment administered by Centrelink. These amendments to the childcare rebate are simply the government finally delivering on a promise made at the last election. The coalition’s 2004 election childcare policy document said:

Legislation will need to be passed to enable families to receive payment of the 30 per cent child-care rebate from 1 July 2005.

But after the election, as parents in particular know, the Treasurer reneged on this promise. He made families wait until 1 July 2006 to receive their childcare rebate for the 2004-05 financial year. Parents have had to wait up to two years to get some relief for their childcare costs through this childcare rebate. These amendments we are debating today are only delivering on the coalition’s original 2004 promise rather than leaving families in limbo for up to two years. The government should also be more honest with families who are accessing the rebate about the number who are likely to receive the payment of $8,000—some people might remember that banner headline screaming at everyone one Sunday morning just before the recent budget. In the recent Senate estimates hearing, officials from the families department admitted that the average rebate would be $813, not $8,000. Minister Brough admitted a few days ago that many families would only receive between $300 and $500 from the rebate. Very few families are likely to receive payments of the order that the government claimed before the budget. Not $8,000 a child; $800 a family—that is the reality, stripped of the spin. I have tried a few times to get the government to own up to how many families will get the $8,000 and, not surprisingly, the government has not been able to tell us how many families will get that extraordinary figure. The reality is that the average is around $800, and I think families will be sorely disappointed when they see that at the end of the financial year.

Labor supports the decision to pay the rebate through Centrelink to make sure that low-income families will be able to get this assistance in accessing childcare benefit. Nevertheless, it will still be the case that families will have to wait until the end of the financial year to get the new childcare rebate. We know that since the budget the minister has said that he hopes that by 2009—a couple of years away yet—the new childcare rebate will be paid fortnightly. Of course, what Labor wants to know is whether or not the childcare management system that is being put in place will in fact enable this to occur. Parents certainly would welcome this rebate being paid fortnightly rather than having to wait until the end of the financial year. Given the government’s history on the childcare tax rebate, parents are understandably just a little sceptical of any promises that the government makes in this area.

What is blatantly clear in both of these areas is that we have a government that really only bothers to do something about childcare costs in an election year. And, true to form, in this election year the government is planning yet another round of taxpayer funded advertising, on child care. During recent Senate estimates hearings, officials from the Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs admitted that a print and electronic media advertising campaign is planned to sell the government’s childcare changes and that this campaign would be up and running by the end of July. The officers also admitted that whilst they:

... have not had a program approved yet—

they also admitted that—

... letters to families are already starting to be mailed out ...

So the advertising program was not approved but they were in the process of mailing letters out to families. We have heard this before, no doubt we will hear it again from this government. There will be more taxpayer funded advertising, coming on top of the near $2 billion this government has spent on ads promoting itself since coming to office.

I ask the minister to actually come into the House during his summing up and provide the full details of the planned advertising campaign that is now, as we understand it, underway to sell these childcare measures to the public, including the full costs and the expected duration. If the government holds true to form, it will be more taxpayers’ money going on a political advertising campaign. That is sadly what we have all come to expect from this out-of-touch and increasingly arrogant government.

In addition to the two childcare measures I have previously mentioned, the bill also amends the Social Security Act to allow all students who received the carer allowance child healthcare card at the time they turned 16 years of age to continue to have access to a healthcare card while they are full-time students until they reach the age of 25. At present only those students who qualify for a low-income healthcare card or an alternative income support payment, such as the disability support pension, have access to a concession card after they turn 16 years of age. This measure will help about 25,000 full-time students who are ex-recipients of carer allowance child, and we certainly support this extension. We believe fundamentally that all Australians should be able to get an education, and this measure will help more young people with a disability to remain in education beyond the age of 16. We do think that it is a very good measure.

One area where the government failed to move in this recent budget was to provide a comprehensive agenda for early childhood education. Labor want a future for Australian children where their care and development are matters of national importance. I have spoken many times on the value of early childhood education, and I will not repeat here today the volumes of very well documented research that support Labor’s arguments in this area. But I will remind the House that, under this government, Australia spends the least in the OECD on preprimary education. We get the wooden spoon. We only spend 0.1 per cent of GDP, compared to the OECD average of 0.5 per cent. And according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, 100,000 four-year-olds in Australia do not attend preschool. There is no coherent policy agenda from the government, no clear direction, no desire by this minister to actually make sure that these Australian children attend preschool.

By way of contrast, the Labor opposition are providing the fresh policy ideas needed in this area. We do believe that early childhood programs are an opportunity for foundational growth that all Australian children should have, and we intend to provide it to them. We have committed to providing all four-year-olds with 15 hours of early learning a week for up to 40 weeks per year. We will provide $450 million each year in new Commonwealth spending to make sure that this occurs, and also to make sure this service expansion does not increase fees for parents.

We do want a fresh agenda for our young children. We want to make sure that child care is accessible and affordable for parents and is maintained to the highest quality standards. We also want to see early learning and development integrated with high-quality care to make sure that our children are set on a path to future health and prosperity.

See this speech in context