Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

Two years ago this month, I stood across there at that dispatch box and announced Labor's plan for cheaper child care in my first budget reply. It was the centrepiece of the first budget reply and the first step which saw those now on this side of the House walk across the chamber and form government. It was a critical commitment that we made to the working people of Australia, and we did it with the support of the business community, with the support of our electorates and, importantly, with the support, particularly, of working families.

Here today we had an opportunity for the 'noalition', who sit over there for a reason, to prove that they were actually capable of listening to the very clear message that consigned them to opposition on 21 May, and yet what we just had from the shadow minister is, again, a statement of objection to expanding child care—objection to expanding the support for working women. I wait for the class war rhetoric to come from those opposite—that we're helping wealthier women in terms of families.

The truth is that this is a policy that will boost productivity, boost workforce participation and boost population: the three Ps. If you're looking at economic growth and how you grow an economy, they are known by all economists as the three Ps: participation, productivity, population. This policy delivers on all three, and it is very clear that we have an absolute mandate for this policy.

I was back in Eden-Monaro this morning with the member, again visiting an early learning centre, talking to the workers there—the fantastic workers who provide such support for our youngest Australians. That is one of many, many dozens of visits to early learning centres that I have made since we announced that policy in 2020. And yet those opposite still have not got the message. They're incapable of actually moving at all. They think that they will just oppose everything, including a policy that we have an absolutely clear mandate for.

This not a welfare policy; this is about economic reform. The bill will boost productivity, lift participation and remove one of the biggest structural barriers to economic equality for working women. When we announced this policy, part of it was to lift the cap. Those opposite said that was economically irresponsible and that would be a disaster for the economy—before they then announced it themselves. It was a disaster, but then they adopted it!

What those opposite are incapable of doing, though, is precisely what is in the title of the bill, the cheaper childcare bill. They're incapable of providing support for the cheaper child care that we will deliver for 1.2 million Australian families, starting in July next year—not a single family worse off but 96 per cent of families better off. Ninety-six per cent of families will be better off, but those opposite are angry about that. They're angry about that. They carry on about the cost of living. Here we have a practical measure that will make 96 per cent of families better off, but they're going to vote against it. That's fine. They'll be held to account for it. The plan we are delivering means significant savings for household budgets around the country. A family on a combined income of $120,000 with one child in care will save $1,780 in the first year of this plan alone. That's $1,780 more in their pocket in the first year alone. This bill helps with the cost of living, it invests in early education and it delivers overdue economic reform.

The greatest untapped resource in our economy is the full, equal and resourceful participation of women, and the childcare system should be all about facilitating that, empowering it, helping parents return to work when they want to and helping mums and dads balance their career and their caring responsibilities in a way that works best for them. Yet at the moment it does the exact opposite. For so many families there's a cut-off, a financial cliff, where one partner—and it usually is the mother—is effectively penalised if they want to work more than three days a week. How does it make any sense at all that, if you want to more fully participate in the workforce and you work a fourth or a fifth day, then you receive very little, minimal, economic benefit from that? Sometimes you can actually go backwards. It can actually cost you money in real terms for you to fully participate in work, and that flows through, because it penalises not just those families but the businesses who don't benefit from having full-time workers. Not only does that impact working families at the time; it flows all the way through the system to lower retirement incomes for working women. Women retire with much less in superannuation and retirement savings than men—much less. One of the things that we're seeing in this country is that the fastest-growing cohort of homeless people, of people really doing it incredibly tough, is older women. They might find themselves by themselves, not part of a family with a male breadwinner or an male ex-breadwinner who is on a higher income. They are left by themselves, and they struggle to get by because they don't have the same retirement income that others do.

This is much-needed reform. The productivity agenda: if you speak to anyone in the business community—those opposite used to say that they represented the business community, but on climate no, not so much; on productivity no, not so much; on this area, not so much either. The Business Council of Australia, the Australian Industry Group, ACCI, every local business chamber will tell those opposite that this is about productivity for their business. This is about boosting productivity as well. As the Minister for Education noted when he introduced this legislation, Treasury estimates that in the next financial year our plan for cheaper child care will mean up to an extra 1.4 million hours of paid work per week for women with young children—1.4 million hours of paid hours worked additional. Those opposite might not have got the memo, but there are skill shortages in this country. There are businesses crying out for workers. Here we have a measure that will produce up to an extra 1.4 million hours of paid work per week. But those opposite say, 'no, not good'. It's the equivalent of finding an extra 37,000 full-time workers.

So it's about assisting families; it's about productivity; it's about economic reform. In the course of campaigning over the last two years for this reform I have spoken with a lot of families about this issue. It's my experience that nearly every Australian parent with a child in child care tells you the same two things about the system. The first thing they say is that the people working in it are remarkable. I have met some more of them again today. The Minister for Education proved that he was much better at art than I was today—the teddy bear that he drew there at the early learning centre will hang with pride of place; my bunny rabbit not so much. Parents trust early childhood educators with the most precious thing in their world, and across Australia they perform the vital work with love and care and creativity and a seemingly endless supply of patients. I do want to give a shout out to them.

So if the first thing that any parent tells you about child care is how great the educators are, the second thing that every parent tells you about child care is that it keeps getting more expensive. The figures are there—it's not a feeling, it's not a vibe. Costs have gone up by 41 per cent in the past eight years; 41 per cent on the former government's work. Let's be very clear. Childcare bills are not going up because educators are suddenly being paid a lot more. The rising fees vastly outweigh any increase in wages. That's why we have put the ACCC on the case, to make sure our investment gets prices down and keeps them down. That's why a key part of this legislation is about increasing transparency, making sure that the big providers in particular are reporting their profits and revenues to the Department of Education and are being upfront with parents about where their fees go. We're making child care more affordable and accessible and providers more accountable.

Our Labor government is helping families with the cost of child care because we know the value of early education. Education opens the doors of opportunity for individuals, and it makes us a smarter, more productive, more future-ready nation. That is the third element to this as well: it's not only good for families, it's good for the economy, but it's also good for the young children themselves. All the experts tell us that over 90 per cent of human brain development occurs in the first five years. That is why it's astonishing that we are so far behind most of the OECD when it comes to providing this support. Education is a lifelong journey, and early education gives you such a great start. That's why it's important to note as well that this bill gives more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children access to child care—to help close the gap in education at the very outset.

Labor's plan for cheaper child care benefits two generations of Australians simultaneously. It gives access to early education for a great start in life, flexible support for families, and a multibillion dollar boost to productivity and participation without adding to inflation. That is why we see this bill as the foundation, a hugely important first step—because in this term of government we are tasking the Productivity Commission to chart a course for universal, affordable child care. Just as universal Medicare guarantees every Australian the right to quality and affordable healthcare, just as universal superannuation ensures every Australian can know dignity and security in their retirement, we want universal child care to guarantee every Australian family the support they need and every Australian child the opportunity that they deserve.

I'm very proud we're delivering for families who voted for cheaper child care. You'll see it there in tonight's budget along with the other commitments that we have a mandate for—that Australians voted for in May. And there is nowhere a policy that we talked about more. This is the biggest single on-budget commitment that we made, and we made it in my first budget reply, so it isn't like they didn't see this coming. It isn't like Australians didn't have an opportunity to scrutinise this policy. We made it very, very clear from the outset, and Australians voted for it. That's because this is economic reform which particularly benefits working women. It was one of the themes, of course, of the Jobs and Skills Summit, held just a short time ago in this parliament, that those opposite couldn't be bothered to attend, with the exception—the honourable exception—of the leader of the National Party.

I'm determined for this to be the beginning, not the end, of making early education affordable for every Australian family that seeks out the opportunity. I encourage those opposite to wake up to themselves and go and talk to working parents and ask them if they support cheaper child care. Go and talk to businesses about whether they support the position. They're saying now, having moved an amendment condemning it, that they might vote for it! Now, that's the sort of consistency that I expect from those opposite! I commend the bill to the House and I encourage this parliament to vote for this legislation.

See this speech in context