David Gillespie (Lyne, National Party, Assistant Minister for Children and Families) Share this | Hansard source

Hypocrisy, thy name is Labor. There is $2.5 billion extra for our new childcare subsidy system. That's on top of the $1.2 billion safety net that we have in the system. Some of the biggest beneficiaries are in electorates that those on the other side represent. In fact, Lalor is the electorate that will benefit the most out of this—with 13,303 new beneficiaries of this system. Over one million families will benefit as a result of this government's reforms to the childcare system.

We saw under the previous Labor government a massive spike in costs. That amounted to a 53 per cent cost increase. Child care is not affordable when you have increases of that magnitude. We will provide the greatest subsidy. We will remove the cap for those on low and middle incomes. Unless you're earning over $187,000, there will be no cap on the number of hours you can claim as long as you are meeting the activity test. The subsidy will be paid directly to the childcare centre, but there's an hourly rate cap to prevent that exponential increase in the cost of child care. For those with an income of under $67,000 per year the subsidy will go up from 72 per cent to 85 per cent. They're the people that need the most support. A family on a $60,000-a-year income whose childcare centre charges $100 a day will be up for only $15 a day. As the income increases up to $351,000, it drops down from that 85 per cent to 50 per cent, 20 per cent and so on, then to zero. That's because we feel that people earning $351,000 per year should be able to look after themselves. The biggest subsidy goes to those most in need.

The member for Kingston has mentioned in public that she will not upset the new system but will observe it for a year, and I'm very pleased to let the member for Kingston know that in her electorate 7,160 more people will benefit from the system. The beneficiaries are far greater than those who have adequate income to put their children in child care. In my electorate 4,300 will benefit. In nearby Paterson 6,900 will benefit. North of me in the seat of Cowper 5,800 will benefit. In Braddon 3,000 will benefit.

The other criticism put up is that vulnerable people and children will suffer. We have an additional childcare subsidy that provides extra subsidies to families with children at risk of serious neglect or abuse, those experiencing temporary financial hardship, grandparent carers and people moving from income support into work. In fact children at risk of serious abuse will qualify for up to 50 hours of child care a week at 100 per cent of the subsidy rate and up to 120 per cent of the hourly rate cap. Families moving from income support will get a subsidy of 95 per cent of their childcare fees. That is encouraging them into work. The activity test is quite reasonable: volunteering, working or studying will easily be reasonable activity to qualify for the subsidies.

The other criticism the member for Kingston brought up was that patients with health conditions will be left short. In the childcare safety net are conditions and additional childcare subsidies for people who are undergoing cancer treatment and have medical conditions or hospitalisations, and they're excused from the activity test. The member for Kingston needs to read the policy. At the moment they don't even have a policy. We just have a failed policy that we're trying to correct, and 950,000 people have registered for it. I encourage any of those that haven't to go onto the myGov website and enter their details. A moderate, middle-income family working full-time, earning $80,000 a year, with two children under the age of six in long day care will be $8,000 better off a year. For those earning $150,000 a year the benefit won't be as great, but they'll be $1,000 better off. We also have our commitment to universal access to early learning of a quality nature in the first year before school. That's $870 million over two years. It goes on and on.

As I said before: 'hypocrisy, thy name is Labor' applies to the comments about changes to weekend penalty rates. The decisions were made by the Fair Work Ombudsman and the Fair Work Commission, which is a creature of the Labor Party. They dreamt up the scheme. They appointed all the current officers in there. Hypocrisy—you only have to look at how so many workers were so short-changed by changes the Leader of the Opposition brought in when he was working at the AWU. At McDonald's, young people lost all their weekend penalty rates. If you had worked at McDonald's for three years you would now be $15,000 worse off. At Big W, where penalty rates were cut to zero, they'd be $13,400 worse off. As I said: hypocrisy, thy name is Labor.

There are plenty of small businesses that are suffering because they have to pay uncompetitive penalty rates. There was a modest change in hospitality, retail and pharmacy that was gradually brought in. There are still very generous penalty rates on weekends, but they are just more affordable for small businesses. Some of the small businesses in my electorate actually can't operate at the moment. The penalty rates were so deleterious to these small businesses that the big unionised employers had a strategic advantage. They can't operate because the unions organised a worse deal for them. That's where the Fair Work Ombudsman came to this decision. It wasn't a government decision. And it was the Labor Party that created the Fair Work Commission and the ombudsman. It's hypocrisy, again. We are committed to supporting the independent umpire.

We have such a good childcare system coming in. Almost one million people will be so much better off. The rate is dependent on how much work is being done—the more you work, the more you can claim. Those on low incomes are getting the greatest support. Those with incomes under $67,000 are getting the greatest subsidy. There is a childcare safety net so that those who can't work because they are ill or because they are grandparents who are no longer in the workforce are excused from the activity test. Those who are coming off income support and getting back into the workforce get a larger subsidy.

Looking at these figures, the biggest beneficiaries are the electorates that are represented by members on the other side. My good friend the member for McEwen is going to have 10,200 families that are better off. The members for La Trobe and Lalor will get big increases, and I've mentioned Kingston. Child care became unaffordable with this rebate cap and increasing the subsidy from 30 per cent to 50 per cent, which they brought in. The Productivity Commission said they were the architects of the increase, because there was no capping of the hourly rate. It just gave a free kick. There was criticism that quality assurance wasn't happening. In the last year there have been 4,500 visits to childcare centres in the compliance— (Time expired)

See this speech in context