Kate Ellis (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the comments and the amendment that has been moved by the member for Indi to the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Omnibus Savings and Child Care Reform) Bill 2017. I thank her for her advocacy and for fighting so hard for not just regional families, but particularly for regional children, who would otherwise be left severely disadvantaged by the proposal that we have before the parliament.

We support the amendment and we support the measures to try and address what is a very deep flaw in this piece of legislation. We have made clear that there are particular problems with the child care reforms. Whilst we support the overwhelming bulk of the measures to try and streamline, simplify and improve the system, all of the experts have pointed out that there is a very big problem in these reforms when it comes to the mobile services that serve regional families. In fact, we know that Anne Bowler, the chair of the National Association of Mobile Services, said:

The funding reform proposal will no doubt ensure the closure of up to 90% of the current BBF mobile children's services across rural and remote communities in Australia.

That is not good enough. That is not acceptable. It is not good enough for the parliament to vote to support these proposals with our eyes wide open about what the consequences will be. If it was not for all of the advocacy through all of the Senate inquiries, we also saw media reports as recently as yesterday about what the impact of these reforms would be on regional families and regional children. Yesterday we saw a media report about the Bogan Bush mobile service in New South Wales pointing out that families using that service will face a 500 per cent fee increase if these reforms go through. That is a service that operates in the electorates of Parkes, Riverina and Page. But do you think we have heard any advocacy or any concerns? Has any member of those electorates, or indeed of the National Party, who purport to represent regional families, actually stood up for the families who will suffer as a result of this? No, they have not.

So we support the amendment proposed by the member for Indi, but we also say that the government needs to do more. It is not good enough for the government to say, 'We will do a review in the future and have a look at what services have suffered unintended consequences.' It is not good enough for the government to say, 'We will release guidelines on 1 July, but just trust us and pass this legislation,' knowing the damning effect that it will have on regional families as well as on Indigenous children and on children who will have their hours of access cut as a result of changes to the activity test.

When it comes to Indigenous children, who we know will be hit the hardest as a result of the attacks on the budget-based funded services in this legislation, this parliament needs to be really clear about the fact that the research is overwhelming: if you really want to close the gap and you do not want to just stand and make nice speeches in this parliament from time to time, one of the most effective ways to do it is to ensure that Indigenous children in those remote communities have access to quality early childhood education. This bill will actually shut that down. It will have a devastating impact on those families—something that the advocates in SNAICC had pointed out when they said:

What is going to happen to our services? In 2018 they will have to close their doors.

I note that the minister did address this in his closing comments, and I thank him for that. I note that in yesterday's matter of public importance debate not a single member of the government could defend what they are doing to Indigenous services, mobile regional services and lower-income Australian families under the changes to the activity test. But I say that the minister's comments are not good enough. It is not good enough to say, 'We will do a review and have a look at what services got shut down as a result of this.' It is not good enough to say, 'We will assess on a service-by-service basis how it is that they might fare.' They are all telling us exactly what will happen. Those services will close, and those children and families will miss out on those vital services.

I do not know how many members of the government have visited Indigenous budget-based funded services, but I will tell you that I have seen them. What I have seen is that in some remote communities they basically are a tin shed, but they are a tin shed where those children can go and be safe, well fed and their families can be supported to learn about healthy parenting and nutrition and escaping family violence, and to give those children the basic first steps to an early education. I support the amendment and I call on all government members, open your eyes, see what you are doing and fix the flaws in this legislation.

See this speech in context