Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That, in accordance with section 5 of the Parliament Act 1974, the House approves the following proposal for work in the Parliamentary Zone which was presented to the House on 23 June 2008, namely: Construction of a childcare facility within Parliament House.

I have moved this motion at the request of the Presiding Officers—the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate—and I am very pleased to have the opportunity to do so as Leader of the House. The work proposed will provide childcare facilities to all occupants of the Parliament House building. The campaign for childcare facilities located within Parliament House has been a long one. It reflects our growing appreciation as a nation of the need for affordable, easily accessible and quality child care for working families. Australian families cannot do without child care, and it would be hypocritical of this parliament to say to the families of those that work here that they should. There has been significant effort from many on both sides of the House in campaigning for this facility, and in moving this motion today to commence work I would like to acknowledge their efforts.

The facility will be a quality establishment incorporating best practice design features which, from an early childhood perspective, acknowledge and address children’s play and developmental needs. Internal layout of the centre will accommodate up to 22 children in the six weeks to 18 months age range, with individual areas for babies to play and space for toddlers to exercise their new-found mobility. The centre potentially has the flexibility to occasionally cater for older children for short periods. The facility will be located in the former staff bar and adjacent courtyard area. The centre will cost $1.3 million to construct and will open in early 2009.

I acknowledge the results of the staff survey conducted in March this year, which identified the area of greatest need as being facilities for breastfeeding mothers. It has also confirmed that there remains, as mirrored in communities around Australia, a considerable demand for childcare services in Parliament House. The construction of the childcare centre is not a total solution but is a very important and necessary first step.

The facility will be built to the exacting standards demanded of any construction work in a nationally significant building such as Parliament House. The designs for necessary modifications to the building take into full consideration the original design integrity of the building and courtyards. There will be some differences within the centre compared with the rest of the Parliament House. Throughout Parliament House division bells can be heard and numerous clocks indicate the chamber with either the red or green light flashing. Loud bells and sleeping babies are not a good mix so there will be clocks to display the division lights in the childcare centre but no bells.

The two existing hedges in the courtyard are to be removed due to their toxicity and replaced with a vine covered safety fence. A major feature of the courtyard playground will be a sensory garden for the toddlers to wander through, with shrubs of different textures of material and colour finishes to delight and intrigue. The majority of existing paving in the area will be retained with different colour and texture infilled tiles to replace the grass between the pavers. The play areas will be built to best practice standards for early childhood development and two sandpits and grass mounds will provide ample opportunity for toddlers to practise interactive, creative and mobility skills. Unfortunately, heritage considerations rule out using the curved external marble wall as a canvas for budding crayon and chalk artists. Let that be a warning, Mr Deputy Speaker. This is perhaps one disadvantage of having child care here in Parliament House, but a minor one.

I would like to assure members that internal construction within Parliament House is mainly limited to within the former staff bar, and that internal access to the staff cafeteria will be maintained throughout the construction phase and that noisy or disruptive construction work will be carried out after hours and on weekends, with the main heavy construction occurring during the winter recess. I would also like to acknowledge the understanding decision of the florist currently located outside the staff bar in agreeing to move so that the facility can be built.

It is with some satisfaction that I speak on this motion as I have had some involvement in the many calls over the years for the construction of these facilities. In the Hansard record of 12 November 1998 members can find a motion in my name which reads in part:

That this House:

(1)

recognises the importance of affordable, quality child care for Australian parents;

(2)

deplores the lack of childcare facilities available to Members, Senators and staff working at Parliament House, noting that this lack of workplace child care has led to increased difficulties for parents working at Parliament House following the Coalition’s attacks on child care over the past 3 years …

The date of that motion indicates, as does the long history of this issue, that child care in Parliament House has been needed for some time. I think it is acknowledged by many in the parliament that it should have been done sooner. The parliament is now more representative of the people of Australia with the entry of more young women, in particular, into the parliament—and I take this opportunity to congratulate the member for Ballarat, Catherine King, on the birth of her first son, Ryan, on the weekend. That is an occurrence that happens now on a regular basis in this parliament and that is a good thing. Previous generations of representatives in this House, on both sides of the chamber, whatever their qualities, did not understand that this was not an issue which should have been negotiable. The fact we have many facilities in this parliament—a snooker room, a pool, a gym, a dining room and many other facilities here that are appropriate in this magnificent building—but no childcare centre reflects the parliament of the last century. It is appropriate that the parliament of this century reflect more adequately values such as ensuring that all parents, whether they be men or women, have access to child care.

I want to put on the record that when I moved that motion in 1998 I did not have an interest in child care. Later on of course I did. I used to bring my son to this House when I could in order to have contact with him. The facilities were not appropriate to keep someone in an office. Indeed, he bears a scar on his forehead from the fact that the offices are extremely unfriendly to children in the way that they have been built and designed. For future generations of not only members and senators but also, and most importantly, permanent staff who are based here and who make such an outstanding contribution, this will help in the work-family balance, and that is certainly appropriate.

I acknowledge in recent times the campaign by many members such as the member for Sydney, and I will also single out the former member for Lindsay, to turn around some of the old-fashioned views that some people—particularly, might I say, of my gender—had on whether childcare facilities were appropriate in Parliament House. That has been turned around. I commend this motion to the House on behalf of the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I join with the Leader of the House in welcoming this motion. I congratulate him on bringing it to the attention of the House and indicate that we on this side of the House strongly support this motion. Since I was elected in 1996 it seems as though this has been an ongoing saga without resolution. It seems quite odd in 2008 that we should indulge in a motion before the House about the provision of child care in this building, but obviously the building has quite extraordinary work practices.

From a historic perspective, when I first came into this chamber in 1996 I occasionally sat next to the last Right Honourable, the last Privy Councillor, who sat in this chamber: Ian Sinclair, the member for New England. In my first division I said to him, ‘How long have you been here?’ He said, ‘Well, I first came here when Ming was at the dispatch box.’ He told me a brief history of some of the former members for North Sydney—one of whom was Billy Hughes, whose life and achievements I am celebrating at Old Parliament House tomorrow. All the members for North Sydney have been men. Another one of my predecessors was Bruce Graham, who was quite a colourful character. He apparently did not mind the odd drink. Of course, that would be unacceptable in the new parliament with the new health minister. But he had the occasional drink and I understand he had a wooden leg, and because he was unable to detach his wooden leg from his body after a few late-night drinks there was a roster system amongst his colleagues to make sure he got to bed and removed his leg.

In those days, because members used to live down here for the entire session away from their families or their families came to live with them in Canberra, it was a very different environment. Workplaces change. The question is whether the legislators keep up with the changes, not only in the workplaces of everyday Australians but, importantly, in the workplaces of the legislators themselves. It was quite obvious to me when I came here, at the same time as the Leader of the House, that I would not in any way be a beneficiary at that time of childcare services, but I thought: one day I might be a father and therefore why wouldn’t you as a parent want to see more of your children if you had the opportunity? This building, with such significant facilities, failed to recognise the fact that members of parliament are also parents. The hours of the parliament have changed dramatically over the years. Governments often start off with long sitting hours and, as governments go on, they tend to narrow the sitting hours, thankfully, to more family friendly practices.

I want to recognise the fact that when I was Minister for Human Services I took a very strong view about child care. As the biggest employer in the Public Service outside of Defence, Human Services, through Centrelink, employs more than 30,000 people, most of them women. If I can just drop the veil of bipartisanship for a moment, I was subject to criticism by the Labor Party at the time because I was entering into a contract through Centrelink for the provision of childcare services at Centrelink offices. One of the reasons we did that—and Jeff Whalan as chief executive helped to drive that initiative—was that overwhelmingly, the workforce at Centrelink is made up of women and you have to have family friendly provisions in Centrelink offices, or any other offices for that matter, if you want to retain good staff. One of the benefits of having low unemployment is that employers are driven to think more about the interests of their staff rather than the bottom line. But I was criticised by the Labor Party at that time for ensuring that we could have guaranteed places for Centrelink workers at childcare centres so that we could retain the female staff.

Having said that, I have to say there has been strong bipartisan support by a new generation of members of parliament for childcare facilities in this place. I agree with the Leader of the House that there was some resistance from an older demographic on both sides of the House, or should I say from Speakers and Presidents, through to party leaders. There was a grudging reluctance to go down the path of having a childcare centre in Parliament House when, in their view, every worksite in Australia could not have the same facility. That is true, but it does not mean that you should not start.

I was reminded of that only this afternoon when I saw the member for Flinders and the member for Ryan at Aussie’s cafe with their wives and their two young children—in the case of the member for Flinders, a three-year-old, and in the case of the member for Ryan, a two-year-old. As I have said to my colleagues on this side of the House, you need to keep in touch with your family and do everything you can with your family in order to maintain some civility in this place and, importantly, to understand the challenges that Australian families go through. Parliamentarians are no different from long-distance truck drivers or defence personnel or many others who might not have the opportunity to have their families in their workplace from time to time. But given that parliamentary life is a matter of years—for some, decades—it is a long time to be away from your family, on occasions for 25 weeks a year, without having the opportunity to spend a bit of time with them. So, without going into the details of this facility, I think this is a symbolic moment: the parliament is suddenly coming into the 21st century and recognising that you have to provide these sorts of facilities to help parents see more of their children.

We tend to moralise a lot in this place about the relationships between parents and children. I remember standing at this dispatch box with a former member for Werriwa asking question after question about whether the former Prime Minister read to his children and whether it is a good thing to read to young children. Of course it is, but if they are in a different city for 25 weeks a year, it is pretty difficult to do. We have the benefit of Skype and we have the benefit of 3G, which I use to try and speak to my two young children under the age of three twice a day. But, at the same time, there is nothing that is going to ever replace the opportunity to spend a little bit of time with them when you can.

I think it is also the case that when the issue was first raised in parliament in 1981 there were only 14 women in parliament. Today—and I welcome this—there are 68 women, representing 43 per cent of all federal politicians. There has been a dramatic increase in the numbers particularly of young women and young men. Just for the record—and it is something that I think is very important—the former member for Lindsay, Jackie Kelly, was the first minister to take maternity leave in the Australian federal parliament. Ros Kelly, at the time when she was the minister for sport, said that she did not feel that she could take maternity leave, which was an indictment on the system at that time.

Jackie Kelly was the first minister to take maternity leave, and I know, because I filled in for her as Minister for Sport and Tourism when she did that. I was the first male minister, obviously, to take paternity leave. This happened in the last 10 years, and to me it was the pretty obvious thing to do. So ministers, shadow ministers and all members, for that matter, should not be afraid to break new ground when it comes to spending time with their families and helping families through some of those difficult times. If you are not compassionate towards your work colleagues, if you are not compassionate to each other, then you are hardly going to be compassionate towards the people whom you represent right across Australia.

For that reason, this is a very good initiative. I congratulate the government on getting it through. I welcome it and, quite frankly, I really look forward to the opportunity, perhaps at another moment, to thank those people who did break new ground. The member for Sydney is one, as is the member for Lindsay. There are a number of senators who also worked very hard on this and I hope that, during the course of all the discussions, they are properly recognised for their pioneering efforts in helping to make this place a little more family friendly.

Maxine McKew (Bennelong, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Early Childhood Education and Child Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also commend this motion moved by the Leader of the House tonight and indeed many of the comments made by the member for North Sydney. As he said, some things do take a very long time, and I am delighted that this proposal is being put before the House this evening. It is long overdue. When this building was first occupied in 1988 it opened with a gym, with dining facilities and with many other facilities for MPs and senators, but no child care. In fact, I remember when I was first in this building as a member of the gallery remarking on that. It was a live issue in the early nineties. And, as we have just heard, it goes way back with a long history.

Despite the prominence of women in the workforce today and their growing representation in government, a quick survey of other countries indicates that provision of childcare centres in parliaments still lags. Indeed, the Commonwealth parliament now has an opportunity to set an example both here and to assemblies elsewhere, internationally, by providing accessible, high-quality child care for the workplace within the parliament—for parliamentarians and, indeed, for other occupants of the building.

The location of this childcare service also sends a message, I think, about the importance for working women of having access to convenient onsite care. The provision of facilities for nursing mothers particularly highlights the need to assist women in meeting the needs of their young children while they are at work. A survey of Parliament House occupants in March 2008 found that of 221 respondents, 124 indicated their interest in using a childcare centre within Parliament House. A total of 16 children were indicated at that stage by members and senators as requiring some form of care. Ten members and senators indicated a requirement for care from January 2009. This is a welcome reflection of the increase in female participation in parliament as well as something that reflects the increase in the female workforce in the broader community.

Responsibility for the Parliament House childcare centre is a matter for the Department of Parliamentary Services and has been promoted through a joint House committee, with deliberations on this issue now spanning—wait for it—almost 16 years. It is wonderful that now something is happening. Through this motion, from January of next year Parliament House facilities can expand to include a childcare centre which will initially provide spaces for 22 infants and toddlers aged from six weeks to at least 18 months. It is a small start but a very welcome one. It is phase 1 of the provision of child care. Phase 2 will be to provide child care for children up to the age of five.

As the Leader of the House indicated, the former staff bar area is going to be refurbished for the childcare centre. I hope that does not send too many incorrect signals! In the design, the Department of Parliamentary Services is giving full consideration to the heritage values of this national iconic building. The preferred service provider, Anglicare, will manage places in the centre so as to accommodate the children of senators, members and non-Canberra based staff during sitting periods while providing year-round places to the children of Canberra based parliamentary staff and other building occupants.

This local change is being proposed in the midst of a broader agenda of change across the country. The Prime Minister has identified early childhood education as the starting point for the education revolution. The government has delivered on its election commitments by investing a total of $2.4 billion over the next five years on integrated early childhood initiatives that will provide high-quality services and deliver better educational opportunities and outcomes for Australian children. These initiatives are all about improving accessibility and affordability and, importantly, the quality of care and learning. It will be pleasing to see Parliament House showing leadership in this endeavour.

Our children’s early years of course are of the utmost importance. Parents, policymakers, business leaders and the general public increasingly recognise the importance of these years for promoting healthy physical, emotional, social and intellectual development and ensuring children are more successful in their school years. A major budget item this year has been the investment of $533.5 million, over five years, to provide all Australian children, including Indigenous children in remote communities, with access to affordable preschool programs delivered by a qualified teacher. By 2013, children will have access to 15 hours of early learning programs each week, for 40 weeks a year, in the year before formal schooling.

So the Australian government’s focus on quality early childhood education and care will now be seen within a few steps of this chamber. At last, after many years the need for child care at Parliament House is being acknowledged and met. My thanks to all those many, many members of parliament who over these 16 years have pursued this enterprise and who have not let it lie idle but kept at it and made this initiative happen.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Families, Community Services, Indigenous Affairs and the Voluntary Sector) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am extremely happy to support this motion, which, as other speakers have pointed out, is long overdue. As all of us know, this fine Parliament House, this marvellous facility, contains a bar, a gym, a pool, a theatre, a billiards room and a clinic but it does not yet contain a childcare centre even though most modern workplaces with some 3,000 staff would have one. We here in this place on both sides of the parliament have always prided ourselves in providing a best practice workplace because we are best practice employers.

It strikes me as very hard for the mothers of young children to be physically separated for long periods of time from their children and without accessible child care it is very hard for new mothers to hold down significant jobs. If we are serious about giving women real choices—if we want women to have the choice of being both mothers and workers rather than just one or the other—we have to encourage the provision of accessible child care.

It seems to me that those who regard motherhood as the highest possible vocation should particularly support accessible child care lest its absence keep motherly women from the workforce or even, in the case of parliament, disenfranchise motherly women—or perhaps disenfranchise conservative women, which is the last thing that I would personally want to see happen. I would hate to see conservative women decline to serve in this parliament because they feel that it is impossible to be a member of this parliament and also to give their children the care and attention that they deserve. Good quality child care is not an issue just for mothers. It is certainly not an issue just for women; it is an issue for everyone and, if we want this society of ours to be fair to everyone and to offer as many opportunities for everyone as it should, accessible child care is absolutely critical.

I certainly would want to acknowledge the very good work of so many people in bringing things to this happy pass. I particularly acknowledge the work of the member for Sydney, who has been a long-time advocate of child care in this building. I would also like to acknowledge the work of my friend and former colleague the former member for Lindsay. This childcare centre almost certainly will not be named the Jackie Kelly centre, but I rather feel it should be because it was her ceaseless badgering of the coalition party room, even to the point of threatening to vote against the budget if this measure did not go ahead, that finally brought us to this happy pass. Of course, she would say that the centre should be larger and should offer a wider range of facilities to a greater number of families; nevertheless, as she would acknowledge from her political retirement, it is a very significant step in the right direction.

I have to say, I am very pleased to be at one with the government on a childcare issue. I think child care has been a bit of a difficult issue for the government over the last few weeks because of the significant increases in childcare fees, notwithstanding ‘child care watch’ as promised by the government. Nevertheless, this is not an occasion to quibble over wider policy. This is an issue to celebrate the fact that things do change and, even in this building, they do change for the better. I know that the member for Lindsay often felt when talking to senior colleagues in the former government that getting them to focus on this issue was like pulling teeth without anaesthetic; nevertheless, eventually they relented—they agreed to this and thank God it is now happening.

I am all in favour of grumpy old men. I think they have a place in the wider world and I think they do much good, but they should not be allowed to stand in the way of good women having a go. That is why it is so important that the parliament is doing what it is tonight. I defer to no-one in this building in my general conservatism and in my support for traditional role models, but, if we want modern women to be mothers and if we want modern mothers to make as much impact on the world as we would like, we need to have facilities like the one that this motion is going to bring about. I commend the motion to the House and again I commend all those people who have striven so hard and for so long to bring this about.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Housing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a wonderful opportunity to rise with members on both sides tonight and commend this motion to the House. We are not always in agreement on these issues, but there is a great deal of agreement across both sides of the chamber tonight that this is certainly a wonderful step forward. There really have been, I think, too many people involved in this struggle over the years for all of them to be named. I certainly agree with the member for Warringah, however, that Jackie Kelly, the former member for Lindsay, was particularly prominent among them. The member for Grayndler, who spoke earlier, and the member for North Sydney—both before they became fathers but particularly after they became fathers—have been very supportive of child care in the parliament. We have had a number of senators who have been particularly involved: Senator Kate Lundy and Senator Trish Crossin have both played very active roles over the years. I know you, Madam Deputy Speaker Burke, have been a great supporter of this initiative over very many years as well.

As I say, there are too many people to name all of those who have been involved, but I think I can safely say that one thing unites all of those people. It has not been an issue of self-interest for those people. It has been an issue of principle. It has not been an issue about child care for members of the House of Representatives and for senators; it has been an issue of work based child care that would serve the whole of the population of this Parliament House—which in a sitting week is, of course, as substantial as 3½ thousand. It has always been the argument that this centre would benefit all of the inhabitants of this House who needed it.

The construction of the facility is due to commence shortly, in July 2008, and, as a number of speakers have said, the initial focus is for children under the age of two. Of course, it would be lovely to have older children as well—in a facility that is larger and caters for more children—but having that group of very young children close to where their mothers are working is so very critical in supporting the establishment and maintenance of breastfeeding. I think it is terrific that all of those staff in Parliament House will be able to not just have the security of work based child care but to also have the additional benefit of being able to continue to breastfeed their children for longer. Of course, the staff of the parliament, members and senators, will pay childcare fees—like all other Australians. We can hope that this establishment of a childcare facility here in parliament will motivate other workplaces and employers to consider the establishment of other work based childcare centres around the country.

Mothers who return to work often stop breastfeeding their children younger than they would like to. We know that the benefits of breastfeeding are very well established, and it is essential that we support mothers’ choice—where they are able to—to continue to breastfeed their infants. As I say, this will be a wonderful benefit of this childcare centre. I am not sure that it will be as useful for parliamentarians, in fact, as it will be for the staff. For many of us who brought our children to Canberra with us in those early months and years it was absolutely essential to have someone with us. It is not suitable, I think, for children to be in child care over the length of the very long hours that we sit. On the other hand, for Canberra based staff and for staff travelling with us who do not have to be here until 9.30 or 10 o’clock at night, this childcare centre will make an enormous difference. It will mean that some of our very valuable staff—the hardworking, intelligent staff that we depend on to do our work—will be able to return to us sooner. They may perhaps be part-time, or they may job share, but they will be able to return to us sooner.

We know that breastfeeding rates in Australia are low by some international standards. While 71 per cent of infants are fully breastfed at the age of one month, only 56 per cent are fully breastfed at three months and just 14 per cent are fully breastfed at six months. Obviously it would be wonderful to increase those figures. The National Health and Medical Research Council Dietary Guidelines for Children and Adolescents in Australia, released in 2003, called for breastfeeding to be encouraged and supported in recognition of the positive effect on immediate and long-term health of breastfed infants. The World Health Organisation recommends exclusive breastfeeding for six months, and breastfeeding with complimentary foods for up to two years—and even beyond. We thought that the National Health and Medical Research Council’s initial target of exclusive breastfeeding for six months or more in 50 per cent of infants would be very easy to achieve, and the goal was to achieve exclusive breastfeeding for six months or more in 80 per cent of infants within a decade. We were not able to do that, and the challenge is for us to do that more broadly in the community.

This childcare centre has been the subject of debate, surveys and questionnaires. I believe that we even had employees of the Joint House Department asking—in order to assess whether a childcare centre was needed—female members of parliament, at one stage, whether they were thinking of having any more children. It has had a very long—I am not even going to make the joke about a gestation period—period of deliberation.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think you just made it.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Housing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I intentionally did not make the joke. It has had a very long period of deliberation. It is a very important step forward to be doing it now and to be making our workplace here in Canberra—and hopefully our workplaces back in our electorate offices as well—more family-friendly, and also more breastfeeding-friendly, with the provision of child care.

Of course, the government supports the choice of many women with young children to return to the workforce, and construction of the childcare centre will provide an immediate benefit to those parents who want to return to work while their children are very young. It will provide a good model for other workplaces. It will make it easier for people to continue to breastfeed. It will make our relationships with our children much easier when we work such long and difficult hours.

I think there is one potential problem. It will be that those of us who are missing our own children at home will perhaps have to be banned from the childcare centre or we will be giving cuddles to strange children. That is the only potential drawback I can see. I think having children in Parliament House will be a very humanising thing for all of us. I think it will encourage us all to behave better and to remember that even our opponents and the journalists in the gallery—each and every one of us—have another side and other responsibilities. It will improve the way we treat each other and the feel of the parliament to have more children around.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would just like to take a few moments to endorse pretty well all of the remarks that we have heard in this debate and to welcome the new childcare centre, which will, I understand, appear over the next few weeks and be, hopefully, fully operational with its 22 places when we return after the winter break.

Parliament House has changed a great deal even in the time I have been here, having joined as a new member in 2001. At that stage, my children were certainly no longer babies. They have grown up to be an adult and two teenagers in the meantime. There is no doubt that Parliament House and our job is extremely unfriendly to families. I still remember, when it was all happening and life as a member of parliament was beginning for me, my middle daughter saying, ‘What happens to me?’ She was about eight at the time. I can still remember, looking back, when my three children had chickenpox at home in Albury and I could not be there. Obviously they were being looked after, but the feeling of being even four hours drive away was awful. I can look back further to being a mother of three toddlers on the family farm and not having any child care at all. Having to cart the children down to the dairy and park them out in the cold on a winter’s morning while I tried to run between them, the milk house, the dairy, the cows, the yard and the dogs on a foggy morning made it all incredibly chaotic. I am very pleased that over the last 10 years we have seen the introduction of good child care for farms. In many cases that child care is mobile, which allows women in farming partnerships to contribute to the farm’s operation in the way they really need to.

I think this is a terrific initiative and I know that it will make a difference for those who use it. We as members of parliament are each just one tenant in this place. The childcare centre is just as important for those who come from elsewhere for different reasons. They may be members of staff or members of the press or people who find themselves here on temporary work contracts. It is very easy for us as members and senators to forget that there might be some 3,000 to 4,000 people here on a sitting week and about 2,000 people on a non-sitting week and that a lot of children belong to those people.

This is a big step forward for the parliament in terms of addressing work-family responsibilities. But, having drawn attention to the drawbacks of being a mum and a member of parliament, it is still very apparent to me that I am extremely lucky with the services that are provided. We will be lucky, as many are who have workplace provided child care, so we must not forget those who, for whatever reason—they may be in low-paying jobs or in extremely rural and regional areas—cannot find child care and have unacceptable arrangements that they continually struggle with because they need the income. If they cannot manage to take the children to work, they may have arrangements with grandparents, neighbours or after-school care where older children look after them, arrangements which they are never quite happy with. That can create enormous tension, stress and emotional uncertainty in the hearts and minds of women who find themselves in this position.

Last night at this time I talked about International Cleaners Day. We recognised the good work that cleaning staff do in every building across Australia. At that moment, the young woman who cleans my Albury office was doing that and her 10-year-old was in the car doing his homework. I use that as an example. While we take great steps forward, we must not forget those who are still struggling on low incomes or managing family pressures, possibly as a single parent, that make it almost impossible for them to achieve what they want for their children. This is what it comes down to: you want the very best for your children. If you are determined to breastfeed while they are babies—and that is very much encouraged, of course—this will make all the difference. You want to give your child the best start in life. You have a great need as a young mother, I know, for it all to go well and for it all to be perfect, and when things start to go off the rails or go downhill because of the stresses and strains of life it becomes extremely difficult to get yourself back into the picture.

This childcare centre will be of great help to women in Parliament House. This will be of great assistance in leading the way for other workplaces that may be thinking about implementing such a measure. I congratulate all those involved. Mention has already been made of the member for Sydney. I would like to mention the member for Lindsay. I was, of course, present in our government party room when Jackie Kelly would ‘bang on’, if I can use that expression, about the subject of child care. She would stand up and everybody would take a deep breath knowing that she would be talking about child care in Parliament House. It took people like her to be driven in the way that she was to actually make this happen. I know that there were members of both sides. I want to mention the late Senator Jeannie Ferris, who was an advocate for child care, and my colleague the member for Mackellar, who talked very much about tax deductibility in child care—a different but related issue. I look forward to the opening of the new childcare centre and congratulate all those involved in it coming about.

Question agreed to.