Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on this private member's motion, at least half of which is based on false assumptions and scaremongering from an opposition who have not quite come to terms with the total chaos that was their previous government.

Not one person in this House, or indeed in the other place, denies the importance of early childhood education. There is no doubt that access to, and participation in, quality early childhood programs significantly improves education outcomes for students in future years, as this motion states. Queensland schools are leading the way, not only with the introduction some years ago of a prep year prior to the traditional start of year 1 but also now with the introduction by many schools of pre-prep to ensure that children are up to a certain standard before commencing prep. This is only for two hours a week but provides a vital stepping stone to help children adjust to the environment of school, as opposed to child care and kindergarten. Queensland children are being well prepared for their exciting future. By creating the habit of learning early, Queensland children are setting themselves up for the future as lifelong learners. This does not happen by accident. It happens because of quality early childhood education.

It is about here that I begin to have trouble with the rest of this motion. It goes from nonfiction to fiction. In fact, it is a rather wonderfully created work of prose. The trouble is that it has as much in common with reality as The Magic Pudding. I understand that those opposite find themselves in a bit of a bind over education in general. They keep trotting out the fabrication that this government has cut, or will be cutting, $30 billion from education, in stark contrast to the actuality—the coalition government being the highest-spending Australian government on education in history. Even ABC Fact Check has investigated the opposition claims and found them to be incorrect. Yes, there was a requirement for the review of the National Partnership Agreement on Universal Access to Early Childhood Education, as was put in place by the then Labor-Greens alliance. If any uncertainty has been created by this review, then the blame for that lies flat at the feet of those who drafted the legislation. As we have seen far too many times in this parliamentary year, the Abbott government has had to clean up the mess left by the previous Labor-Greens unholy union. Repeal bill after repeal bill and amendment bill after amendment bill have been introduced to fix bad legislation.

Here we have just another example of the lack of forethought from those opposite. The funding agreement expires on 31 December 2014, but Labor and the Greens only allowed a six-month window—less, when you realise that parliament rises on 4 December—in which to conduct a review of a new program. Then, of course, review findings need to be discussed and signed off by the states and territories. This takes time, as it should—time which the framers of the bill thought they could just jump into their TARDIS and create. The coalition government offered to expedite the review, which required the states and territories to provide information in a timely fashion. Unfortunately this did not happen, so the process was slowed again. Thankfully for the children of Australia, there is a competent economic manager in charge of the budget now, so there was a contingency reserve to cover funding should the review take longer than expected. Indeed, they usually do.

It also seems odd to me that the childcare rebate and the childcare benefit, both introduced as part of the family tax benefit after the introduction of the GST, have been heavily derided by those opposite. The family tax benefit has been called 'nothing but middle-class welfare' by Labor since it was introduced. This is from the same party that took 86,000 single mothers off the single parenting payment and put them on Newstart allowance, making them and their families $100 a week worse off, while increasing their childcare fees by 53 per cent. As a consequence, while I agree with certain parts of this motion, I find myself unable to support the gross misrepresentations presented before the House by the member for Adelaide. She knows full well that the delay in entering into a formal agreement with the states and territories is the doing of her party. Therefore, I reject this motion.

Debate adjourned.

See this speech in context