James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

This is a motion about misleading the parliament, so I might make remarks relevant to the actual motion, for a change, for a bit of excitement in the chamber here! But I'll start by firstly acknowledging and paying tribute to all those people who work in the childcare sector and the care sector more broadly. We're very lucky to have such dedicated people working in the sector—and also, indeed, some who volunteer in the sector. I know that any local member would have had similar experiences, of visiting many of the childcare centres in our electorates. We're very grateful for the work that's done there, particularly over some very difficult and challenging years with COVID. The childcare sector, like so many others, really did make an enormous contribution, through sacrifice, to support the varied and necessary responses to that challenging time. So my praise and best wishes and thanks to all those who work in the childcare sector.

I was a member of the previous government, and we were very proud to do so much to assist and invest in the sector and to train for the workforce needs in the sector. That's why I'm very pleased to have the opportunity to reflect on the record of our government in that space.

This indeed is a motion that, in some ways, thanks the ministers in the new government for the inadvertent praise they've heaped upon the previous government. They've accidentally forgotten to accurately link certain achievements to the performance of the previous government, and—accidentally, no doubt!—claimed it all for themselves.

But the good news is: we can now correct the record, because we've got some very clear clarification through the important freedom-of-information processes that we have access to, where we've managed to get some unequivocal evidence from the Department of Education on just what the situation is when it comes to the record and legacy of the previous government, regarding training for important educators, teachers and carers in this sector. Documents produced by the Department of Education under FOI, which were provided to ministers in the new government, made some very good points about what was happening when it came to training in the sector. As public servants in the education department advised ministers, through the FOI documents we obtained, there's a figure of 123,000 training places, which is used by ministers in the new government. Helpfully, the education department has made it very clear that that figure relates to the year 2021 as to higher education data and 2022 as to VET data. That's 123,000. The ministers in the new government were good enough to spruik that excellent outcome, of 123,000, and praised that figure in a number of press releases and even in the parliament—even on the record in the Hansard, subject to all of the necessary requirements of not misleading the House, as we know. While we appreciate the comments from ministers about that figure, they've accidentally neglected to point out that that figure is thanks to the performance of the previous government, and it happened in the Senate—which I won't dwell on, because we're not interested in that chamber here in the Federation Chamber, but we are interested in the people's house, the House of Representatives. A little concerning was Minister Aly's answer to a question on 18 October, where she talked about informing the House:

… that since the Albanese Labor government came to office there are over 14,000 new educators in the sector and 123,000 in training pathways …

Hansard reflects that she indicated that was since the Albanese Labor government came to office. Unfortunately, we find in these document that have been released to the opposition that an email to the minister's office from the department very clearly stated:

Framing this aggregate figure as 'Since May 2022'—

when the Albanese government came to government—

is not accurate.

That's from the dispassionate, independent Public Service. I am sure we have no doubt that they're right. I'm sure no-one would dispute advice from the Public Service. So this is very concerning. We'd like to see the minister reflect on what was advised to her office and what she has advised the House and decide whether or not the record needs to be corrected. We certainly raise it through this motion. I commend my good friend the member for Moncrieff and thank the deputy leader for her comments and urge the minister and this parliament to reflect on that and look for opportunities to correct the record.

See this speech in context