Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The blame game is back. It is back bigger and better than ever. We were going to see an end to the blame game in 2007. We were going to have the states and the Commonwealth cooperating together. Now we have an issue—an issue of bungling and mismanagement. And what is the response of the government? 'We are going to blame the states. We're back to the blame game. We'll throw financial figures around: $900 million we're giving to this, $210 million we're giving to that, to try and put a huge smokescreen up, to get around the issue.' Yet it is a very simple and commonsense issue. It is an issue on which the government, if it could take a step back, could say, 'We can stop three-year-old kindergarten programs and four-year-old kindergartens closing in country areas.'

Let us hear from a couple of the practitioners. I am going to quote the North Hamilton Kindergarten director, Chris Wildgoose, who said that the 15 hours could result in reduced hours for three-year-old sessions. I will quote her directly, from the Hamilton Spectator of 26 May:

"I think it's a good thing for children to have that much kindergarten but it's just a challenge to fit it into the timetable with the three year-old groups and the playgroup as well," she said.

"Our committee hasn't really made a decision about how the timetable will look. It's possible our three year-old sessions will be cut back to two hours."

Ms Wildgoose said that currently parents had the option of extra kindergarten hours for their four year-olds.

"The Government has mandated that this year children do 10 and three quarter hours, so that's the basic level," she said.

"We've got another session on top of that, so parents can choose if they want to do the extra hours."

Ms Wildgoose said they had the option of introducing the 15-hour weeks next year but were still unsure if that would go ahead.

What Ms Wildgoose would like is the ability to say, 'Maybe we will have the flexibility to bring this in over three, four or five years, so that it can suit the needs of the individual kindergarten.'

I would now like to quote Sarah Millear, quoted in the Ararat Advertiser of 26 November 2010. The Willaura kindergarten wrote to the government on this issue, so they have had plenty of warning. What did she have to say? She said that the government's universal access to childcare reforms would seriously strain the over-stretched community.

"The further increase in 2013 will leave us with an insurmountable fundraising requirement, forcing us to seriously consider closing the centre unless government funding is made available.

"If the Willaura Kindergarten is forced to close, there would inevitably be a drop in enrolments for the local primary school. The community playgroup and maternal and child healthcare centre, which rely on the support of the kindergarten community, would have to look [at] their long-term viability as well. Three key services could be lost and the long-term future of the school put at risk."

That is what this motion is about. We are going to see three-year-old kindergarten programs close, we are going to see four-year-old kindergarten providers in country areas potentially close. All we need to see is a tiny bit of flexibility from the government. As the motion clearly states, what I and the member for Aston are calling on is for the government to provide flexibility for kindergarten operators to deliver kindergarten services according to the needs of their own communities and in line with local infrastructure and staffing capacity, or at the very least provide flexibility on the start date for the implementation of universal access.

We all agree with the concept that we should move to 15 hours universal access. What we do not agree on is how we should go about it. Should we mandate from Canberra that you have to do a compulsory 15 hours by 2013? When individual circumstances are not suited by mandating 15 hours, why can't you say, 'All right, in your particular circumstances you can keep it at 10 or 11 hours.' If you are the Willaura kindergarten and you are forced to close, there would inevitable be a drop in enrolments to the local primary school, the community playgroup, and the maternal and child healthcare centre, which rely on the support of the kindergarten community, would have to look at their long-term viability as well. Three key services could be lost and the long-term future of the school put at risk. That is quite clear. Given that, why would you not allow them to say, 'Yes, look, you aspire for 15, but your circumstances at the moment mean that if you have to mandate it and you have to introduce it by 2013, you are going to lose in that community all those services.' Why would you not say, 'Leave it at 10. Then when you can afford it, then more to 15.' Why do we have to mandate from Canberra, which is going to cause this hardship for the township of Willaura? The same thing is going to happen in my electorate, in the township of Cavendish. Dunkeld potentially can be left without a kindergarten teacher, all because this government has to mandate, has to be prescriptive and will not let an individual circumstance dictate how a kindergarten should run.

We have heard from the member for Aston the impact it is going to have on three-year-old programs in urban areas. Devastating. In country areas it is going to have a broad impact on whole communities. Kindergartens closing. Schools, in the future, closing. And all the services that go with it, especially your maternal primary healthcare, being threatened. All because you will not provide a tiny bit of flexibility. You want to mandate from Canberra, from here, without having thought of what the consequences on the ground would be. I see the member for Corangamite here. I am sure there are kindergartens in his community which will be suffering as a result of this.

The government needs to stop. They have been warned. They were written to by the Willaura kindergarten in 2010 raising this issue. So they knew about it. So why has the minister not acted? What we have put here, in this motion, is a very sensible, positive approach to fixing this problem. It is not a problem that is saying the government has got it completely wrong. We are saying, 'Yes, aspire to 15 hours, but do it in a way where kindergartens can adapt to it in their own individual circumstances.' Here is a positive response to an issue that needs to be fixed, needs to be addressed. The government continues to harp about negativity. Here is a positive response to a problem which they have created because they have not thought through the issue. Why not look at it? Look at it. Read what we are calling on. Provide flexibility. It is not too difficult. Instead of saying, 'We know best—this is how it will be. Canberra on high: this is how you should act,' why not say: 'Generally this is what we would like, but when your individual circumstances are different then, sure, you can have some flexibility. If you want to do 11 hours of teaching next year and then move to 12 and then to 13 and by 2018 get to 15 hours, we are fine by that'? We would prefer that to communities having the guts ripped out of them, which is what this motion has the potential to do.

I call on the government. I call on the minister. I have written to the minister on this issue. The Willaura kindergarten has written to him. The Dunkeld and Cavendish kindergartens have written to him. They have all stated their case. It is not necessary to change the whole policy. Just show flexibility—a tiny bit of flexibility—in how you are going about doing it. That will save kindergartens, it will save three-year-old programs and it will potentially save communities. I call on all members of the government to have a look at this motion. It is a good motion; it is a common-sense motion. An urban representative and a country representative are saying: this is going to cause problems. Fix the mess. (Time expired)

See this speech in context