Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

[by video link] This is the first time that I'm participating in virtual parliament, from my electorate office here in Bendigo, and it's also the first time that I'm speaking post returning from maternity leave. My little one, Charlie, is almost four months old. So, this bill is quite dear to my heart, as well as to many in my electorate and to many of my colleagues who are participating remotely. COVID has changed how we do things, and I do want to thank the parliament and our presiding officers for making virtual parliament a possibility, because for many of us the ability to be away from our families for five weeks and then the two weeks quarantine is a challenge. Just as all workplaces around Australia are adapting, it's great that our parliament is as well.

This morning I dropped my daughter Daisy off at child care and spoke to the educators about how her morning was. It's the usual thing that families now do when doing their childcare drop-off, 'Have they had breakfast, did they sleep well last night?' That's so the educators and teachers are best placed to know how your little one is going to go today. It's the modern way that families work. Mum, dad or the guardian does the childcare drop-off and then heads into work. Whether our children be in child care at Parliament House or in the electorate, it's what a lot of us are now doing in the modern world.

What disappoints me the most about the Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Child Care Subsidy) Bill 2021 before us is that it actually doesn't go far enough to support the sector. It actually doesn't go far enough to support families navigating not only a changed world because of COVID but the working world of today for working families. It does help families who might have two children in care and it does help families in relation to the cap, but it's not enough to really help the sector navigate COVID and beyond COVID. It's also coming too late. This bill is not being implemented instantly in the new financial year, or even from 1 January. It's not until after the next election, and who knows when that will be? Only the Prime Minister knows that. These reforms are needed now.

Firstly, I want to touch base on the impact that COVID is having on the sector and how the government hasn't done enough to support the sector to get through. I really feel for the sector in New South Wales—for the educators and teachers in New South Wales, and the families. We went through this last year in Victoria and the federal government just messed it up—it made an absolute mess of the sector. As a result, a lot of our casual educators in Victoria—people working casually—have not come back. They've found other work and dropped out of the sector, or they've dropped out of work altogether. That's putting pressure on the sector going forward: will they have the staff required?

The other challenge that we've had in Victoria too is that this government kicked early childhood educators off JobKeeper first. That had a huge impact on the sector. In the end we got there, and in the end our centres are doing quite well now. But every time there's a policy scramble, and chopping and changing, because the government haven't got it right it puts the sector on edge, it puts providers at risk and it has educators and teachers questioning if this is where they can work. They too have bills to pay. That's why the government needs to do better.

An example from last year of how the sector is in crisis and how the measures that the government have put forward aren't going to solve the long-term challenges that we have is Lauren, who is a nurse in my electorate. She had two children in early childhood education. It's a pandemic; we want our nurses to be working if they're able to. She said to me that because of the cost of child care she didn't want to take up that fourth or fifth day of work because it meant that she would have been paying to go to work. The way in which this system is structured currently penalises her for wanting to work extra shifts. The cost barrier becomes the absurd situation where she is actually paying to go to work. That's an economic disincentive for her family and it also has an impact on our health sector: we have nurses choosing not to return to work full-time in the middle of a pandemic because of the way in which the sector is structured.

We've had other examples: a couple—a midwife and a builder—with children in child care for two days a week. If the government were to adopt the Labor reforms that have been put forward and are suggested in our amendments, that couple would save about $2,630 a week. So it wouldn't cost them to go into child care, they would actually save money. That's another example of why these amendments being put forward by Labor—the Labor proposal—would help people in my electorate. A local pharmacist and a teacher with one child in child care for two days a week would save about $2,000 as well. It means that there is that real option of being able to return to work full time if they choose to do so. Here's another example. A police officer and nurse whose son is in child care three days a week would save about $3,300, and they can then look at the real option of picking up those extra shifts. These are three examples of health workers in our electorate whose partners are pharmacists, teachers, builders and police officers. These are people we want and who are critical to our postpandemic recovery, yet the barrier for them returning to participate in our workforce full time or even picking up some extra hours is the fact that we don't have a universal child care system. The reforms that the government has put forward aren't enough to ensure that people will take up the extra hours if they choose to do so.

Under this government, childcare fees in the Bendigo electorate have increased by 34 per cent. That's not just a statistic; that's an impact on household budgets. That's when we see families dropping out of early childhood education altogether or pulling back their hours. That places pressure on the family unit, but it also places unfair pressure on the children. We've created a system in Australia where child care is not universal, so that young people—our littlest people—can't get access to early childhood education because of what their parents earn or because of the career that their parents may have. We're not talking about millionaires. We're talking about teachers and nurses. We're talking about builders and police officers. Right now in Victoria, because of the health crisis and because of the rolling lockdowns and restrictions we've had for the past year and a half or two years as this has rolled out, we have a generation of what we've called 'COVID babies' or 'COVID toddlers'. The only way that they can get access to genuinely engaging with their peers, week to week for an extended period of time, has been organised early childhood education. With restrictions comes the cancellation of playgroups or the cancellation or pausing of any organised activity like Tumble Tots or mothers groups. They're happening via Zoom, and it is good for mum or dad to participate that way, but the little ones aren't getting together peer to peer.

Victoria is an example of how critical the early years are. We already knew that the science is in, but, for the government, here is another example. We have a generation of little people who will have gone a year or two years, in some cases, without having that consistent activity week to week, catching up with peers. Whether it be swimming lessons or a playgroup, those activities have not occurred regularly. In not even a generation's time, these children will start to go into kindergarten and into school and be having to do early skills development around sharing, being conscious of others, language development, working with others—the informal skills that they get by being around children their own age. There's going to have to be a catch-up period, but it's not even on this government's radar. All we've got before us in this bill is a little bit of relief for families.

All we've got in this bill is, again, the government still in an old mind-set that access to early childhood education is all about women's workforce participation. It is not. We need to move beyond the idea that this is just about women's workforce participation. Yes, it will help, but we need to move ourselves into a place where early childhood education is about education. It's about education and care. That's where we need to start getting towards a model which is universal, and that's where Labor's model is going. It's about reducing the costs for the vast majority of Australian families. It's about removing those tough conversations: 'Will I go to work three days a week or four days a week? If I go four days a week, it's going to cost us to have our children in early childhood education.' We know the benefits are there. We're seeing the benefits roll out in a different way in Victoria, as I've demonstrated. This is an opportunity for the government to actually move us into a space where we're saying we really believe that early childhood education should be universal, rather than just tinker and make some minor adjustments. It's about stopping the out-of-control fee increases.

I do have to say that the providers are trying to do their best. The cost of early childhood education is expensive. But they don't have a partner—a genuine partner—in the federal government helping to meet the costs. At the same time, our educators are on minimum wages. These are teachers and educators—people who have skills, who have diplomas, who have certificates, who do a remarkable job and yet are not being paid for the value of their work. And I'm not just saying this because I'm a mum with two children under two, saying, 'I don't know how educators can manage three.' That's the ratio for this age group: one to three. All of us who have been parents know what it's like, and all of us who aren't parents can appreciate the importance of what our educators do. But, if we truly want to value the work that our educators do, then we need to increase funding to the sector and to look at wages. Yes, we need to look at fees, and, yes, we need to look at the subsidy. The government have started to do that work, but they need to pick up Labor's plan too, about pushing this off to the Productivity Commission, or at some way to link wages into the sector.

Why is it that we can get it right when it comes to primary school funding and when it comes to independent school funding, and not get it right for the early years? It's long overdue for us to be looking at how we value early childhood education, as well as the people who are teaching and caring for our children in those early years. Every Victorian family, every family in Australia, who's going through this pandemic and who has children in early childhood education understands and appreciates and thanks the educators for what they're doing. The previous speaker, the member for Shortland, highlighted a really challenging time for his electorate and for New South Wales. I really hope the government listens and learns from Victoria and that they get on board and fix the challenges that are happening. It's long overdue that we have a sector that is focused on the educators and universal childhood education.

I strongly encourage the government to take on board and support the amendments Labor is putting forward, particularly in relation to fees. The sector in New South Wales could be on the brink of collapse if they don't act quickly. If people start to withdraw their children, if people can't afford to pay fees because they've been stood down, and if centres can't pay a predominantly full-time, permanently engaged workforce and a part-time workforce, then the sector is in trouble. Don't repeat the mistakes of Victoria. Fix this now. I strongly urge the government to support the amendments that Labor is putting forward. We want our little people to have the best start, we want our educators to be paid properly, and we want families to have real options when it comes to accessing early years education. It shouldn't be about penalising doctors and nurses and pharmacists. It shouldn't be about penalising people who are doing their job. Their little people should have access to quality years.

See this speech in context