Angie Bell (Moncrieff, Liberal National Party, Shadow Minister for Early Childhood Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Early childhood education is an essential service that families rely on to study, to work and to pay the household bills. That's how the minister introduced her bill last week. And I must say, I found myself agreeing profusely with that statement, as that is exactly why this legislation should be voted down. When the coalition brought in the biggest reforms to the sector in decades by introducing the childcare subsidy and the activity test, it was because we recognised the very fact that she highlighted in her introduction: it was to strike a balance between targeted childcare support for hardworking families who rely on it, a generous safety net to protect the most vulnerable and, most importantly, ongoing support for high-quality learning.

Labor's proposed changes are a slap in the face for working parents—parents who want to work and those who have to work because of Labor's cost-of-living crisis. Once again, this is what they do, those opposite—they are at war with aspiration. They are removing the priority of access for working Australian families. What Labor is proposing, to remove the activity test for three days, is fundamentally unfair, and it's divisive. It's pitting working families against non-working families—pitting them against each other. And it's pitting those who access early childhood education against those who don't, whether that's by choice or because there are no available options.

Increasing access to early childhood education in this way, without any meaningful policies to address supply, does not equate to quality education. A three-day guarantee means nothing if you can't access a place. Labor has completely neglected this part of the equation, and this policy does not address the current cost-of-living pressures that families face all over the country. But what more could you expect from a Labor government that has been using early childhood education as a political plaything, as its political pawn in the lead-up to the next election?

Let's face the facts. If this is such a good policy, which Labor introduced last week, they could have passed this legislation this fortnight. But they haven't. 'Why haven't they?' I ask Australians. Why haven't they? Because it's all just a political game for the Labor Party. Time and time again, Labor has shown its true colours. It only cares about the headlines and the spin, not the substance and not delivering for Australian families what they need. This legislation is all about Labor's legacy, and Labor's legacy is driven completely by this Prime Minister's ego. What it isn't driven by, however, is what our families, our educators and our service providers need. They need access, they need affordability and they need quality.

Labor is spending around $15 billion a year on early childhood education, and, since the election, they've announced around $8 billion worth of new policies. But, despite that, Labor hasn't delivered a single new place for those families with little or no access. And get this: they've even used the Community Child Care Fund—created by the coalition to address gaps in regional, remote and rural areas—to fund metropolitan and inner-city seats, including, colleagues, the very regional seat of Grayndler! While they say they'll build 160 centres, history tells us not to expect much on that front. They won't deliver on their promise, like so many others. The reality is that there's no point having access to three days of subsidised care if no care is available in the first place. Labor's done nothing to address this—nothing to address access. The vast majority of families accessing the Child Care Subsidy are already eligible for 72 to 100 hours of care per fortnight. While those already in the system may be impacted in a limited way, it's the new working families seeking to enter the early childhood education system that will be forced to compete for new places alongside those who do not meet the top activity test levels.

The coalition has always believed in choice and in flexibility. This policy does absolutely nothing for families who choose something other than child care or for families who need the flexibility. Things don't always happen exactly the way we plan, so it's important—so important—that our early childhood education system can offer some flexibility. But, again, Labor's policy offers nothing for families who work non-standard hours—people like our hardworking nurses, our shift workers, our emergency services, anyone who works the night shift. There are no options for them.

Ultimately, the biggest losers of this policy are families living in those thin markets and childcare deserts. Very many members sitting behind me have communities that cannot find a place in child care because this government has not delivered any new places to them. Increasing their access to 72 hours a fortnight might sound good in a headline, but there's no point if there's no care available in the first place.

The member for Fenner said earlier, which brought me to a giggle, that he was standing up for the regions. This is a slogan that Labor throws at regional Australia, and regional Australia just does not buy it. Labor likes to say it's the party for workers, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Labor doesn't care about what workers need, and it doesn't care about the regions. Labor only cares about what Labor needs.

We're in a cost-of-living crisis, and families are counting every single dollar and trying to make it go as far as possible. But then they see Labor spending taxpayers' money—their hard-earned money—like it's an endless pot of gold. In a cost-of-living crisis, the government must be intentional with every single dollar it spends. Instead, Labor's been on a reckless spending spree with temporary sugar-hit solutions, making the situation simply worse for families. Since coming to power, Labor has added $347 billion in spending. That's around $33,000 per household. But families aren't $33,000 better off—that's for sure. In fact, a family with a typical mortgage has spent $50,000 more in interest on their home loan. Their living standards have collapsed by almost nine per cent. And we're in a deep household recession. Added to that are the soaring out-of-pocket costs for their child care.

That's why it's crucial to make sure that taxpayers' money goes to those who need the support of early childhood education the most. The activity test inherently rewards effort and aspiration. It incentivises people to contribute to society through work, through study and through volunteering. But, under Labor's policy, families who are working hard to create a better life for their children get nothing; meanwhile, families who might spend their days—gosh!—doing an activity like yoga or going to the shops will have the same level of access. Labor continues to punish and disincentivise hardworking, aspirational Australians.

There are also serious questions about the costing on this policy. The bill says it'll cost $426.7 million over five years from the 2024-25 financial year—even though it's not being rolled out until January 2026. No doubt that's a sneaky little tactic to try and make it sound better, because that's what matters to Labor—it's the headline and the spin; it's not the reality. But, more importantly, the Productivity Commission said that removing the activity test completely would cost $2.3 billion a year. So, somewhere in there, something is rotten. The government wants us to accept its modelling that removing the activity test for three days will only cost $426.7 million over four years. It's also worth noting that the vast majority of families are already eligible for 72 to 100 hours of subsidised care, meaning that this policy will barely move the dial on increasing access. Importantly—and this is so very important—exemptions already exist under the current system to assist children and families who are most in need.

Labor wants you to think that this policy is revolutionary—that it's going to change millions of lives. But it's simply not going to. We can't trust the future of our children in the hands of an Albanese Labor government—that's for certain. Over the last three years, they've failed to deliver for the early childhood sector.

The Prime Minister promised cheaper child care for families, and to say the government has failed to deliver on that promise is an absolute understatement. Under Labor, these are the facts. The cost of early childhood education has risen by 22.3 per cent, which isn't surprising when you remember that, the last time Labor was in government, childcare costs soared by 53 per cent in just six years. It appears this Labor government is no better, because, at their current rate of increase, families can expect prices to skyrocket under them, if they keep going at this rate, by 124 per cent by March 2032. While Labor's been patting itself on the back, saying parents have saved over $2,000 thanks to its changes to the childcare subsidy, the reality is that out-of-pocket costs have soared by 12.7 per cent since those changes came into effect. So affordability is a big fail for the Labor government. The very policy that was supposed to bring costs down for families has forced families to pay more. Plus, there's been an increase in services charging above the hourly rate cap as they also struggle to keep up with soaring costs. This is more proof of Labor's utter incompetence and their policy failures in this sector. They're so obsessed with the spin. Australian families and educators deserve so much better.

Let's think about Labor's bungled worker-retention payment. Labor promised that up to 200,000 educators would have a pay rise by the end of last year. It was an early Christmas present, they said. The education minister stood up on 5 December and declared it was 'pay day for hundreds of thousands of educators'. But it wasn't, because we know that only around 15 per cent of educators are employed by services that have been approved for this payment. It's just another proof point that Labor doesn't actually care about early childhood education and is using it all as spin. Labor is failing educators and failing families.

Labor's three-day guarantee is typical of the Albanese Labor government. It has been accompanied by big headlines and big promises by this government. Let's think about the first promise that they still haven't delivered: that $275 electricity bill! They still haven't delivered that. In fact, prices have gone up by a thousand dollars when it comes to electricity. So this is just another broken promise in the litany of broken promises with no detail. Australian families and Australian educators deserve better than another three years of Labor.

The coalition's track record in early childhood education speaks for itself. We undertook the biggest reforms in over 40 years. We locked in ongoing funding for preschool, with increased access to early childhood education for more than 280,000 children. We brought down costs, and we increased women's workforce participation. They are all the measures we should be looking at to make sure we also maintain quality in the sector. They deserve better than a government that only cares about the headlines it can generate, not the impact that its policies will have on hardworking Australian families who need to access early-childhood education and care. That is why the coalition will vote against this legislation.

Emma McBride (Dobell, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In my time in this parliament, I have had the privilege of meeting children and educators and families right across the Central Coast of New South Wales. From The Entrance to Wyong, Long Jetty to Wyoming, Lake Haven to Lisarow and Warnervale to Bateau Bay, I have seen the magic of these early learning centres. I have sat in awe of the educators who bring them to life. I've visited with the minister and with my colleague the member for Robertson, Dr Gordon Reid.

Deputy Speaker Freelander, like you, I have now been here long enough to see many of those children grow up and start primary school and even to see some of them start high school, taking with them the foundational skills and capabilities learnt in those very early years. This stage of education is key to future learning and growth in everyone. It's as much about their education as it is about their personal development and their socialisation. This early stage of education is key. The evidence on that point is well and truly settled.

We in the Labor Party come to this policy area with a simple goal: how do we give every Australian child the best start in life, and the opportunity to benefit from early education and enjoy the life opportunities which flow from it? The answer, like the question, is a simple one: we reduce the barriers to early education for those who are missing out.

In my community on the Central Coast of New South Wales, where many families face these barriers, this legislation presents a big opportunity: the chance for real change. The bill before us offers a possibility for all Australian families to be guaranteed three days of childcare subsidy each fortnight. It will replace the Liberal Party's activity test, with a three-day guarantee to operate from the beginning of next year, from 2026. For First Nations children and those with parents in work, study and training, the guarantee will be 100 hours of childcare subsidy per fortnight.

The activity test didn't work. It didn't work in my community; it didn't work across the country. It did not support parents into more paid work. It just penalised children from low-income families and left them further behind. In the space of one year under the activity test, the number of children from low-income families in early education plummeted from around 32,000 to just 6,500, an 80 per cent decline in young children from low-income families being able to have the best start in life due to early childhood education. It's time to rectify this major policy mistake and the impact that it's had on young children and families.

This bill will increase entitlements to more than 100,000 families across the country, growing education opportunities and easing cost-of-living pressure for families and household budgets. It's a big step towards universal early education, building on our government's cheaper childcare policy and our 15 per cent pay rise for early childhood educators.

I recently visited some educators. I visited Woongarrah Goodstart in my electorate. It was the day after the older children had graduated. They were very excited to have been graduating from early learning and being off to start school. The educators, when I visited, just wanted to let me know the difference that some of Labor's policies in this area are making to them but more importantly to the children and families that they have the privilege of working with. This is what the centre director, Shann Crain, told me: 'The wage increase has had a massive impact for educators. Most members of the team have worked here for 10 years. This increase has meant that they can stay in their roles, continuing to provide the high-quality care and support our families have come to expect. The increase will also help to recruit and retain new staff as our community's needs expand, with a waiting list of over 530 children for our centre alone.' These are the words of the centre director, who I had the privilege of catching up with not long after, as I said, the students had graduated.

It was evident from the young children in that centre the educational opportunities, care, support and dedication provided by the early childhood educators. For a long time, they have been undervalued and haven't been properly remunerated for the contribution that they make. I'm so pleased to be part of a government that's improving that. I know it's been very well received in my electorate.

The individual stories I have heard are backed in by substantial evidence and expert advice, including through the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee report from last year and the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce before that. Going further back, the Lifting our game report of 2017 by Sue Pascoe AM and Professor Deborah Brennan offered the then government the platform to push this work forward. It's worth reflecting on. I'll quote from some of this report. It says:

Children who participate in high quality early childhood education are more likely to complete year 12 and are less likely to repeat grades or require additional support.

It goes on:

High quality early childhood education also has broader impacts; it is linked with higher levels of employment, income and financial security, improved health outcomes and reduced crime. It helps build the skills children will need for the jobs of the future.

Quality early childhood education and care is best considered as an investment, not a cost. Investment in early childhood education provides a strong return, with a variety of studies indicating benefits of 2-4 times the costs.

I know, Deputy Speaker Freelander, as a paediatrician and someone who represents a community not dissimilar to mine in terms of families and their circumstances, your strong push for the first 100 days—

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The first thousand days.

Emma McBride (Dobell, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The first thousand days, sorry—and the difference that makes to young people and families. This report goes on to say:

Significant fiscal benefits flow to both the Commonwealth and state and territory governments.

This is clearly good for young children. It's very beneficial to their families. It makes an incredible difference to communities. But it also helps the budget. This drives the economy. It helps the budget bottom line. There are so many benefits of this type of policy. Recently we had the minister, Dr Anne Aly, come and visit the Eleanor Duncan centre in my community of Wyong and speak about the work they're doing, particularly with First Nations young people, where they're combining the benefits of early learning with health. We know that bringing these two together will make such a big difference in addressing the social determinants of health and education. I was so pleased to be able to have the minister in my electorate and to be able to talk about this, including in preschools like Wyong Preschool where this is being introduced.

Leaders from across the early education sector support this change. The experts support it, the educators support it and families welcome it. I believe parliamentarians across a broad range of backgrounds representing electorates from across the country also support it. I ask the Liberal and National parties to put Australian children first, to show their support and to help our nation grasp this opportunity for our future. I commend the bill to the House.

Zoe Daniel (Goldstein, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have a real opportunity to transform early childhood education and care in this country. I cannot overstate how important this is for children, women, families and the economy. What could be more important than giving every child the best start in life? The early years are critical. They set the foundations for a child's development and learning trajectory. By the age of five, 90 per cent of a child's brain is fully developed. The barriers some children face, socioeconomic disadvantage, unstable homes and limited access to education and care can lead to gaps in learning that become increasingly difficult to bridge as children grow older. Early childhood education and care can level opportunities from the start, with lasting economic and social benefits.

Children who attend quality care are twice as likely to reach their development targets when they get to school. Quality care also leads to reduced crime rates and improved health, which ultimately reduces the costs to society. Unlike interventions aimed at addressing inequalities later in life, early childhood education and care is a cost-effective way to close these gaps before they widen. All the evidence is there. 'Early childhood education is the golden ticket for children', as the Parenthood describes it.

It also unlocks the economic potential of women. Early childhood education and care is the centrepiece of my work to accelerate women's economic security in Goldstein and Australia-wide. Women in Australia are among the most highly educated in the world and have similar levels of labour force participation to men until they have children, when they begin to fall behind and never catch up. The differences are most pronounced in families with children under the age of five. The extent to which child care is available and affordable has consistently been found to lift rates of female participation. The Impact Economics and Policy 2023 report found that if labour force participation rates for females in families with children under five were to increase to match male participation rates, there would be an additional 301,000 women in families with children under five in the labour force. More women working boosts economic growth and tax revenue.

Our job as policymakers is to remove this barrier of returning to work for the sake of women and families, many of whom are facing real cost-of-living pressures. The cost of early childhood education and care in Australia is among the highest in OECD countries and is often the second-highest expense in a household after the mortgage. For a lot of parents, the cost of care means they simply can't afford to work. It's often referred to as a 'cost-of-working crisis'.

The HILDA Survey collects data on spending from more than 7,000 households every year. It found that about 83 per cent of families spend more on child care than on utilities or clothing for all members of the household. Seventy per cent spend more on child care than transport, and 30 per cent spend more on child care than groceries. Unaffordable child care often results in parents, usually women, deciding not to work. This begins lifelong gendered financial disadvantage. According to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency, more than half of Australian women reported turning down a new job or promotion because additional childcare costs made it not worthwhile. The latest ABS data shows that 140,000 women in 2023-24 cited the cost and lack of availability of child care as the reason they either don't want to work more or are unable to work more.

All the arguments for accessible and affordable early childhood education stack up. The Women's Economic Equality Taskforce put it firmly on the political agenda when it stated that Australia should move towards adopting a universal childcare system. The Productivity Commission explored the path to universal early childhood education and care and recommended that every child have access to three days of quality child care per week. It's a position shared by the Parenthood, the Centre for Policy Development, Early Childhood Australia, the Business Council of Australia, chief executive women and others, and the Prime Minister has given his commitment to working towards a universal system. In his words:

… child care isn't a luxury—it's an essential service for modern families.

The Prime Minister gets it. He understands the power of early childhood education, but I urge him to be bold. I urge all members of parliament to zoom out and see the big picture—healthier and happier children, women engaged in the workforce, cost-of-living relief, higher productivity and a stronger economy. The case for reform is strong. This is not women's policy, as some like to suggest. It's economic policy.

The three-day-guarantee bill is a small step on the path to universal care. It replaces the existing activity test with a three-day guarantee in early childhood education and care. All families will be guaranteed three days, or 36 hours, of child care subsidy each week. Removing the activity test is long overdue. I've been calling for this for several years now. It's a barrier to women's economic participation and prevents children from accessing early childhood and care, especially vulnerable children. The focus should now be on replacing the subsidy system with a timely pathway towards a universal system with a low-cost fee. As a nation, this is where we need to get to.

Universal early childhood education that is affordable would be life changing for so many children, and it would take cost-of-living pressure off families. According to leading economist Dr Angela Jackson, the impact of female participation in the workforce would provide the biggest immediate economic benefit. In her report, Time to stop throwing good money after bad: delivering universal child care through market reform, Dr Jackson identified several limitations in the modelling approach used by the Productivity Commission in its recent report, which stopped short of recommending a flat, daily fee. The commission's modelling shows that a universal system with a flat $10-a-day fee would only lift labour force participation by 7,200 people. If this modelling is correct it would mean that female participation would only increase one day for every eight additional days of child care. But Dr Jackson says that these findings are not consistent with current childcare use or stated preferences of mothers to look after their own children. As a result, the modelling underestimates the benefits of universal early childhood and care.

For now this bill is a small but important step; however, I am disappointed that this legislation in the last days of this parliament is being referred to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee. It should be debated and passed this week. This is too critical to get caught up in delaying tactics and political games. There is no need for a Senate inquiry. The weight of evidence is there. From leading economists to experts from the early childhood sector, support for replacing the activity test with three days of access to early childhood education is strong. In fact, the only negativity seems to be coming from the opposition. Again I ask: where is Labor's courage? Early childhood education and care is supposed to be one of the government's signature policies. I urge the Minister for Education and the Minister for Early Childhood Education to secure the passage of this bill as soon as possible. This bill will help give children the start they need by increasing attendance, especially for those experiencing disadvantage. What could be more important? It will alleviate cost-of-living stress for families, and it will advance gender equality by getting women back into the workforce. I've said it so many times in this place: affordable and accessible child care is good for children, families, women and the economy. It ticks all the boxes.

I promised the women of Goldstein I would fight for their economic security, and I will continue to do so. I will continue to push the government to be more ambitious with its pathway to universal care and to keep things moving in the right direction.

I move:

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1) notes that universal high-quality, accessible, low fee Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) would improve childhood outcomes and equity, enable more women to work, boost productivity and support families with one of their biggest household costs".

We must be bold. As businesswoman and now Governor-General Sam Mostyn said last year, universal early childhood education and care is as important as public schooling and as transformative as Medicare. As a nation, we must embrace this opportunity for real change.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the amendment seconded?

Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.

Peter Khalil (Wills, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Labor Party has been a party of fairness and equality of opportunity, a party that supports working people and their families. In less than three years the Albanese Labor government has put forward what I would consider to be transformative policies to build a universal early childhood and education system accessible to all Australian families.

I will tell you about a specific example of these transformative policies and their impact on people. In my electorate of Wills a young family, recently migrated to Australia, have a young daughter who didn't speak a word of English when she came to Australia with her family. She started at a childcare centre in Brunswick, in my electorate of Wills; as soon as she came to Australia, that was the beginning of her education. She gets a fair bit of fairy bread—hopefully not too much because there's a bit of sugar in that—and the sandpit is her favourite place to play; that's what I was told by her. Within six weeks of her arrival she was speaking fluent English. She was even saying 'mate' and 'g'day', so she had a bit of Australian slang as well. That is the power of early childhood education. It is not just child care. The people that work in this sector are early educators. They are trained and have specific qualifications—tertiary qualifications and diplomas—that go to the very important development of young children and their early education. That's why we respect the work they do and why we supported pay rises for those workers.

I can't remember the last time those opposite, who are resisting and opposing this bill, advocated for families, for equality of opportunity, for choices for women or for an equitable and open education system to give every single child the same start in life; I don't think they ever have. In contrast, this is a Labor government, the Albanese government, that is building Australia's future, and the Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025 is an important part of this. We want to make sure every child gets the best possible start in life. That's why we've introduced the three-day guarantee for all families. This is to guarantee all families three days of the childcare subsidy each fortnight, with 100 hours guaranteed for families caring for First Nations children and families who work, study or train.

This three-day guarantee will increase entitlements for over 100,000 families across the country, with more than 66,000 families expected to be better off in the first full financial year of implementation—and, importantly, no family is worse off. That's at least 100,000 children—probably more, because parents sometimes have more than one child; I don't know why because it's a lot of work having two and a lot more work having three!

The member for Fremantle is saying how much work it is! But it is a great joy of our lives to be parents, despite how challenging it can be. We are talking now about well over 100,000 children that are going to benefit and access this transformative benefit of early learning.

Think about the ripple effect of that for a moment—the young girl who learned English within six weeks and how that impacts her engagement with her parents, who are also learning English. Think about the ripple effect of over 100,000 children getting access to early education. If one child in my community of Wills has the potential to make a difference to the lives of her family and the community around her, each of those people will do the same and contribute positively to the world around them. Times that by over 100,000. It's such a positive and wonderful thing for the members of the community across the country.

This bill is another step in our plan to build a universal early education system and—an economic point here—it saves parents around $1,370 in the first financial year. It replaces the former activity test put forward by the former coalition government, the Liberal government, with a new three-day guarantee in early education. When the former coalition government delivered their 2018 childcare package, they actually halved the number of subsidised hours of care that low-income families could access. That went from 48 to 24 hours. The number of low-income families accessing care went from 32,000 down to 6,500. That wasn't an accidental policy; it was built on the ideological position of those opposite, which led to increasing inequity and excluded communities of people from accessing early education and care. That also has a ripple effect—not a very good one; a negative ripple effect. That is what is most disappointing about their opposition. In government they can do things like that and have a negative impact, but, when we try and do something positive, they still stand in the way of that and they still say no.

This bill builds on the Cheaper Child Care reforms, where we cut the cost of early education and care for more than a million families and introduced a 15 per cent pay cut—pay rise, I should say—for early educators. I spoke earlier about the importance of early educators, the work that they do to teach young children. That very formative part of their development in the early years is so critically important. That 15 per cent pay rise—I had a slip of the tongue earlier because I was looking over at the opposition. I think they might have cut if they had the chance. We supported a pay rise for early educators, and that is so important. These reforms are all part of our expansive commitment to early education across the country.

Since we came into government there have been 1,083 new services, including 325 in regional and remote Australia; and more than 90,000 additional places in early education and care. This is part of a package establishing the $1 billion Building Early Education Fund to build and expand childcare centres in areas of need, including the outer suburbs and regions, as I mentioned. Under our government, with Cheaper Child Care, we increased the childcare subsidy, meaning a family earning $120,000 with one child in care three days a week saved around $2,140 last financial year.

This is thousands of dollars back in the pockets of parents, back in the budget for families, to provide vital cost-of-living relief so that they can invest in their children's future. We know that investing in child care has that ripple effect. It's about early education. It's about the children's development. It's about the ripple that they will cause and their positive impact across community. It's about the economic impact for families and their ability to relieve some of the cost-of-living pressure but also re-invest in their children in many other ways.

We invested around $3.6 billion to make the wage increase for early childhood educators happen. That was a serious commitment because we value the work of those educators. It is a largely feminised workforce. I think around 90 to 95 per cent of workers in that workforce are women. They were seriously underpaid for the work that they do. If you look at the equivalent tertiary diplomas in education, the cert IVs and so on, in other sectors where it isn't as feminised, they were getting paid more. They were really underpaid. This was a real correction—an absolutely necessary correction, given the importance of the work that that sector does. Typically a full-time early educator was paid an award rate. They will receive a pay rise of at least $103 per week, increasing to at least $155 per week from December this year. We know this is a feminised industry. We know there is a serious challenge with the gender pay gap. This was the Albanese government taking real action, $3.6 billion worth of action, to try to address that gender pay gap, which still exists in many sectors. It certainly was the case in the early education sector.

I hope no-one here undervalues the work of these early educators. They're not just babysitters, which was a prevalent view or a stereotype. The work they do in the development of a child's learning and education is of critical importance, and so many studies have shown how important that baseline is in those early years. The work they do is professional, it is informed by evidence and it is critical to the development of our children.

Our commitment to these workers is also a commitment to women, given the very high percentage of women in that workforce. We are also committed to giving all children equal opportunity. I mentioned the Labor Party being the party of equal opportunity and fairness, and this is about equal opportunity for early childhood education and care. We're also committed to giving families the choice to work out childcare arrangements that work for them.

Some of us who have smaller children know how difficult it is to juggle their schedules and taxi them around, to be a taxi or Uber driver for your kids; but, more than that, there's the emotional investment we make, the planning and the investment we make in children's education. That is so important. Parents of families need choice to be able to manage this and to have flexible arrangements. We understand more choice and support for families, particularly for women, is so vital, giving them that ability to be flexible and to make their own arrangements.

Unlike those opposite us, we are working towards a universal early childhood education so that families choose rather than feel compelled to stay home with the kids or send them to child care. It should be up to the families. We all know how vital it is for parents to have time to care for and bond with their child. This is for the wellbeing of children, their parents and the broader community. That's why we expanded the Paid Parental Leave scheme to a full six months by 2025. That's why we added superannuation to that scheme as well. We have made it more flexible to support parents in the transition back to work and made it much easier for parents to share care by creating a single gender-neutral entitlement that both parents can access. I think that's great for dads—and, again, we're removing stereotypes about that because it is important that families have that flexibility to choose their arrangements.

We've heard before about needing a village to raise a child and having a community to raise a child. It might be a cliche, but there is great truth to that. It does take a multitude of different members of the community and the environment that our children develop in and learn from in so many ways across the community. It takes good policies as well to give that scaffolding and that framework for the development of children and raising them in the best possible way.

The transformative policies we have put in place in a very short time under the Albanese Labor government, in early education and child care with respect to families and flexibility and with respect to health as well, are so important in that respect. That is why a re-elected Albanese government post this election—I don't know when it's going to be, but post this election—if we are re-elected, is going to establish the $1 billion Building Early Education Fund, which will build and expand on more centres in areas of need, including outer suburbs and in parts of regional and remote Australia.

All of this is important to us. Many of us who are either parents or have nephews and nieces or whatever it might be understand how significant it is to have quality early education and development for children in those early years. That's why this government is so committed to it. We care about this. We are doing the work to put in place policies that make a difference for families, for children, for parents, to give them flexibility in their arrangements and in their commitments. We value the work of early educators and we're putting real money on the table, as far as wage increases go, because we care. We care about these things because we know how important the start that our children have is for our society. That's why the Albanese government is working to build this universal early childhood education and care system. It's something that we will always be committed to because it's in our DNA. As I said at the start of this speech, Labor is the party for fairness and for equality of opportunity—that means something to us—and for support of working people and working families, and for giving families the best start in life and their kids the best start in life.

Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In October last year, I hosted the North Sydney Deliberative Democracy Forum on early childhood education and care. The event brought together 35 randomly selected but demographically representative members of our community, with experts from academia and industry, to discuss the affordability and accessibility of early childhood education and care services right across our country. Their goal was to arrive at a consensus on a policy approach that they wanted to see the federal government pursue to ensure these services are affordable and accessible to everyone. There were lots of ideas that participants supported, including equalising the pay of early childhood educators with primary-school educators and requirements to build early childhood education and care centres alongside new public primary schools. But the core of their final recommendation was that the government should provide universal free or low-cost early childhood education and care services to all children from birth, regardless of their families' financial circumstances.

I can't tell you how pleased I am, then, to say that, with the Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025, the government is moving Australia towards my community's final recommendations and aspirations, and we could not be more pleased with this reform. I want to thank everyone who has fought so hard for it over many years. Indeed, when I first announced that I'd run as the independent candidate for North Sydney, it was people who were advocating in this area who were among the first to approach me to ask for my support, and, as a consequence, it was one of our key policy platforms during that campaign. This win, then, is not just for parents but specifically for all children right across the country.

That's because this bill does two really important things. Firstly, it winds back the activity test to ensure that all families have access to 72 hours of subsidised care a fortnight, regardless of how many hours they work, study or volunteer. This is what is known as the three-day guarantee. At the same time, it allows families caring for Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander children, or those who work, train, study or volunteer for more than 48 hours a fortnight, to have access to 100 hours of subsidised care.

It's not an understatement to say that this reform is incredibly important, as we've known for a long time that, rather than acting as a stimulus for workforce participation, the activity test has been acting as a barrier, particularly for many lower-income families and families with irregular patterns of work. Indeed, the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee itself called the test 'poorly designed' and 'punitive', highlighting the barrier it creates for many parents wanting to participate in the workforce, while research by the Australian Institute of Family Studies found no evidence—no evidence—that the test had increased workforce participation. The minister herself noted in her speech that in 2021 only 54 per cent of children in the most disadvantaged areas were enrolled in early childhood education and care, compared with 76 per cent in the highest socioeconomic areas, whilst an Impact Economics and Policy analysis found removing the activity test could allow around 126,000 children from lower-income families to access early childhood education.

Ultimately, although ostensibly designed to encourage work, the activity test has failed, instead excluding many struggling families from access to early childhood education and care for no substantial gain. For this reason, countless researchers, peak bodies, committees and, indeed, many on the crossbench have been calling for the end of this test for years. As Georgie Dent, the CEO of The Parenthood, said:

Removing the Activity Test is the most significant step towards creating truly universal early education and care.

At the heart of the problem with the activity test is the fact that it places the focus on the parents, when, ultimately, many—including myself—argue the focus should be on children and on ensuring every child, regardless of their circumstance, has the same opportunities from the earliest days of their life.

With all that said, I acknowledge some people are struggling to understand why those who ostensibly can afford to pay for it will not be charged under this new reform. But I'm comfortable the reform is absolutely the right thing to do as it essentially aligns our attitudes and the attitudes we have always espoused as a nation when it comes to public education.

As someone who was educated through the public system, I am so proud of that attitude and I will defend it to the death knell as, ultimately, I do not believe a level of education or care a child receives should be based on an accounting declaration, nor should we as a society aspire to create a two-tiered system where those that can afford to pay get access to some form of high-end silver-plated service, while those relying on a public assistance are only offered a white-label experience. As I said, as someone who was public school educated through the seventies and eighties, I think that is what we have created on other levels of education and we should wind that back and get it right for early education and care.

No public school asks you how much your parents work before letting you in the door; rather, it is accepted that no matter where you live or what you live in, or what your parent does, every child in Australia needs and deserves access to an education without having to crunch numbers about their parents' circumstances. But this does represent a major philosophical shift in our approach to early childhood education and care, and some who may have made a lot of money in this space or who just think some people have too much and, therefore, should be paying for it, will be uncomfortable with what I have just said, so I accept it may take time for everyone to convalesce around the idea, even though I think it is brilliant.

Having grown up in a regional community and now representing a wonderfully vibrant and diverse community, I believe communities are their strongest when environments that surround our kids expose them to all sorts of people—to those who have and those who do not have. In addition to all of that, however, this bill will bring us further in line with countries like Italy, Sweden, South Korea, Germany and others, who already operate more universal systems for early childhood education and care, and we know their systems work. In Germany, for example, researchers found the expansion of the government's childcare system to children aged one to three significantly improved the socioemotional development of less advantaged children. In the Nordic countries, which have generous and robust early education and care systems, they consistently rank as the best places in the world to raise children.

But of course, the bill doesn't fix everything. For one thing, the sector has and is still facing a workforce crisis, losing workers to primary education and other careers due to the fact this work is historically poorly paid and supported. While the recent pay rise legislation is a welcome improvement, we do still need to ensure we are investing in workforce training and development, and improving working conditions on an ongoing basis. As it currently stands, around one in four Australians live in a childcare desert, with services few and far between. This leaves many families completely unable to access care for their children, which adds to their overall struggles. This inequity is stark in some regional areas. In this context, I support the efforts to build early childhood education and care centres, especially in rural and regional areas, and to work with communities and not-for-profits to ensure every town has access to the services its citizens need, regardless of whether there are five, 15 or 500 kids in the area.

Finally, although subsidies are important, the out-of-pocket costs for many families, including those in my community of North Sydney, continue to be far too high and often prohibitive. Moving towards a truly universal system with a low out-of-pocket cost for five days of education and care without any form of activity requirement will take some work but it is work that is worth doing. Ultimately, I am only one of literally thousands of voices that have been calling for these changes to early childhood education and care, and I feel for the families that have been struggling to afford these services for years while they waited for the government to act. I was also so drawn to this point of argument because, as a mum of three kids of her own, I really struggled when they were young to get them into the services that they needed. Whether it is here in this place or in the wider community, I will continue to fight for this reform, and, while this is an excellent start, we should go further.

In closing, I want to thank everyone who has engaged so passionately with this issue over the past three years. To my community, who know all too well the challenges of high costs, thank you for sharing your stories and for being prepared to advocate for a program that sought to remove barriers for any child or family based on income, location or class. I encourage you to see this as a positive reform, and to ensure that, no matter the way the election goes in 2025, you back the people who are prepared to deliver this.

To the participants of the North Sydney Deliberative Democracy Forum on Early Childhood Education and Care, thank you for transforming the community's values into policy recommendations. To the researchers and advocates, thank you for fighting so tirelessly for the reforms. This win is yours. You deserve to bask in it. But, finally, to the Minister for Early Childhood Education, the Minister for Youth and Minister Assisting the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme, the Hon. Dr Anne Aly, thank you for finally bringing this to life. I have no doubt that having a cabinet that finally has equal representation of both men and women has been instrumental in getting this reform done, so please keep up the good work. Thank you.

Steve Georganas (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure and pride to be here supporting the Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025. I do so because we on this side want to make sure that every child gets the best possible start in life, and we believe that every child has the right to go to early education, to help make sure they don't start school behind. This Labor government is going to make that possible. The bill replaces the old activity test with a new three-day guarantee in early education, starting from 5 January 2026. The activity test requires that parents meet a minimum level of approved activity, such as work or study, before qualifying for the child care subsidy. This has created some barriers, and we've identified so, for families accessing the CCS, for example, where a parent needs educational child care in order to look for work, or before they can commit to study. The bill will provide that all families will be guaranteed three days, or 72 hours, of childcare subsidy each fortnight.

Families who work, study or train will continue to be eligible for the 100 hours of childcare subsidy each fortnight. The three-day guarantee will increase entitlements for over 100,000 Australian families, with more than 66,000 families expected to be better off in the first full financial year of implementation, and absolutely no family to be worse off.

The reform is part of the next steps to building a universal early education and care system, expanding access to quality early education across the country. It does a number of things. It builds on cheaper child care, which will cut the cost of early education and care for more than one million families, and, on top of that, our 15 per cent pay rise for early educators. This pay rise has been a critical achievement for early childhood education and care workers, who have traditionally been some of the most important workers in the country, who are dedicated to looking after our children in those very early formative years and those very early years of their education in and around the country. They're also important for our economy, and they deserve to be paid fairly. This government recognises that and pushed for it.

Achieving quality outcomes for children relies on a highly skilled, well-supported and professionally recognised early childhood education and care sector. Decent wages are absolutely critical for this sector to reversing the attrition and growing this crucial workforce. Everyday Australians trust early educators with the most important people in our world, and that is the next generation of Australians and our very young children. We ask our early childhood educators to do some of the most important jobs imaginable, and they desperately deserve that pay rise and to be paid accordingly.

That's what this government has delivered—a 15 per cent rise for childcare workers, a 10 per cent pay rise from December 2024 and a further five per cent pay rise from December of this year. A typical early childhood educator receives an additional $103 extra a week from last December, and that will increase to at least $155 from this coming December. So, wages in the early childhood education and care sector—a heavily female dominated workforce—are amongst the lowest in the caring professions, with award rates for professional qualified educators often comparable to rates of pay for unqualified workers, such as those in retail and hospitality. An effective supported bargaining process will lift pay and conditions for the workforce and contribute towards the government's ambition for that universal, high-quality sector.

This is important because what happens in early education and care is important. It's not just babysitting; it's early education, and 90 per cent of brain development occurs in the first five years of life. Research and experts and professors around the world all have one common thing to say when it comes to early education, and that is that the earlier you start the better off that person's education will be. That is a proven fact. It's not just about babysitting or caring for kids while parents are at work—which are also very important for working families—but also about the development of the child's education for the rest of their life.

This pay rise will encourage more people to stay in or come back to the industry and more people to think about becoming educators—and having more educators means that more children and more parents can benefit from the life-changing work these educators do. The Wage Justice for Early Childhood Education and Care Workers (Special Account) Bill 2024 also supported affordability for families by establishing the fee increase cap in the terms and conditions of the worker retention payment grant. This means that providers are not able to raise their fees by more than 4.4 per cent in the first year. This will put downward pressure on fees, helping to make education and care more affordable for families.

Why am I saying all this? It is because all of it is part of a package to ensure that we have a professional early education industry that provides the utmost and best for our children, our grandchildren and our great grandchildren so that they can develop and have the best education possible to them, which will then benefit the nation as a whole. We're committed to a package that establishes building an early education fund to build and expand childcare centres in areas of need, including outer suburbs and regions, where perhaps people are not as able to access these centres as we are here in the cities. As part of this package the government will also develop the early education service delivery price to help better understand the cost of delivering the services around the country and to underpin future reform.

Going back to the bill: the bill provides that all families will be guaranteed three days, or 72 hours, of subsidised childcare each fortnight, and that is a great start. We hope we will build on and future governments will build on those three days. Families who are caring for First Nations children will be guaranteed 100 hours each fortnight. Families who work, study or train will continue to be eligible for 100 hours of subsidised care each fortnight. This is extremely important across the nation. For example, ABS census data showed that 2,280 childcare workers were working in metropolitan Adelaide in 2021, which compares with 862 in 2011. This is an increase of 1,418, or 164.5 per cent—a huge increase. As at July 2024 there were 157 early childhood education and care services in my electorate of Adelaide. These include centre based day care, outside-school-hours care, family day care and preschools. There were 70 centre based daycare services and 50 outside-school-hours services in the Adelaide electorate—all playing a crucial role in early education and educating the next generation of Australians. There are 9,800 families benefiting from cheaper child care in my electorate alone.

As many of us do in this place, I have had the privilege of visiting quite a number of childcare centres. I always enjoy going along and seeing the work that the early educators do and the activity of the children. I have always been received with open arms wherever I have gone. In the electorate in recent times, I know how well the news that I have just explained is being received in such centres. I'll just name a few of them. One that has been there for many years and which my own children attended is the Lady Gowrie Child Centre. My kids, by the way, are now 40 and 36. That's how long the Lady Gowrie Child Centre has been at Thebarton. They do amazing, incredible work, and they have educated thousands of children in their early years. I've seen the benefit to my kids and my grandkids on top of that.

I visited the Goodstart Early Learning at Plympton about six months ago. There is the Goodstart Early Learning in Prospect, which I am visiting again next month. They've invited me to go down. There is the Parkside Community childcare centre and the Unley Community Childcare Centre, where I had a great meeting with parents, educators and the committee of the centre. They told me about their trials and tribulations a couple of years ago. I fed all of that back to the minister. I hope those discussions that I had played a role in developing some of these policies. Other great ones are Precious Cargo and Little Oxford Montessori early learning centres.

When you visit these centres, you get a great sense of the importance of their work. As I said, I met with the parents, the committee members and some of the early childhood educators who work there. I sat and spoke with them, and they showed me the centres but also told me about their work and how hard their work is. A few years ago, we had a program through the childcare centres and their union. They ran a campaign saying, 'Walk in their shoes,' where they gave us the opportunity to go to a centre and sit and actually do the work of an early educator for just one hour. I went to Camden Park back then when I was the member for Hindmarsh. I recall it clearly. Part of the role was lunch, reading a book and then playing some games. So I sat there with the childcare worker who was guiding me. I was absolutely exhausted after one hour. It is not as simple as you think having 15 to 20 young toddlers in front of you, reading the story, making sure they all eat their fruit and carrying out the activities. I recall that I left exhausted after just one hour. So the work these early childhood workers put in to looking after our kids is very important. They do it because they are so committed to it. They do it because they love it. They do it because they're passionate about it. I really appreciate, as we all should, the work that early childhood educators do for our children.

About a year ago, I met with staff, advocates and parents at the Unley Community Childcare Centre. They also told me about their trials and tribulations. They told me about the long hours of work, their difficulties in recruiting staff and the difficulties in running a family household with such low pay. All of these policies that we have put in place will ensure that they attract more staff, that they are paid a decent wage and that we continue to offer education in the early years of our children.

I am also looking forward, as I said earlier, to attending the official opening of the Prospect Goodstart Early Learning childcare centre next month. Goodstart employees were among the first early childhood workers to receive a pay rise. I know they appreciate the support that they and their families and the children they care for are receiving from this government. Indeed, the management of the centre had this to say: 'The past year has been an immensely exciting one for the early learning centres, with major policies and investments from the Labor Malinauskas and Albanese governments paving the way for improved access to high-quality early learning for children and families. So Goodstart is excited to be a part of the ECEC reform process and we deeply appreciate your ongoing support for high-quality, not-for-profit early childhood providers, which helps ensure quality and affordability remain at the heart of early learning.'

It's clear how critically needed this government's reforms to the childcare sector are and how important it is to retain childcare workers and help parents and carers struggling with cost-of-living pressures. These important reforms ensure that not only will children get the early education access they need to help develop them and improve their entire educational life but parents will get cheaper childcare services, ensuring that we're putting downward pressure on the cost of living.

Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We all recognise the importance of quality education, but that of early childhood education has historically been undervalued. As businesswoman and now governor-general Sam Mostyn said last year, 'Early education and child care are as important to Australia's economic future as the introduction of public schooling and of Medicare.'

In this parliament the cheaper-childcare reforms of July 2023 improved childcare affordability for all types of care and for households across the income spectrum. That reduction was proportionally largest for the lowest income families, but they do still continue to spend the largest proportion of their disposable income on child care. I note that the affordability benefits from those changes to the childcare subsidy were unfortunately quickly eroded by price hikes in childcare centres.

Providers' profit margins are higher in the major cities and in more advantaged areas. There are more services in those areas, where demand is generally higher and households generally have a greater ability and willingness to pay for them. The availability and quality of educators and staff have a significant impact on the quality, reputation and profitability of childcare services.

Stable staff tenure and community also contribute to the viability of those childcare centres. We know that labour shortages are affecting childcare services across Australia but particularly for those in rural and regional settings, for First Nations communities and for children with a disability who have complex needs or those experiencing disadvantage, as well as children aged under two.

In a time of stagnant productivity, access to child care remains the most significant barrier to workforce participation in Australia. Child care is unaffordable for as many as 40 per cent of Australian families. The average family with two children in early learning spends 16 per cent of its income on childcare fees. Twenty-four per cent of Australia is considered a childcare desert, in which there are at least three children fighting for every available spot. Only eight per cent of the country currently has enough access to centre based day care to provide at least three days of care for all children aged zero to five.

This is the result of decades of policy failure by successive Australian governments. As a result, for many parents, usually the mothers, it's just financially not worth it to go back to work. Others have to choose to work fewer hours. That costs them doubly. Mothers who are out of the workforce or underemployed while raising young children have slower career progression and lower salaries even after they return to the workforce. This impacts their financial security and their accumulation of superannuation. It exacerbates financial stress on families. It decreases national productivity and it perpetuates gender inequality and the gender pay gap. There is ample evidence of not only the substantial economic benefits of investment in early education but also the benefits for children.

As the only paediatric neurologist ever to occupy a seat in this parliament, I can tell you that children's brains develop more rapidly in the first five years than they do at any other stage in their life. Children develop better when they're stimulated. Quality early childhood centres don't just babysit children; they educate them. They help them gain early numeracy, literacy, problem-solving and social skills. It's really important to note that the disadvantaged children who might not be benefiting from a rich learning environment at home are those who benefit even more from quality early childhood education.

The current activity test determines the number of subsidised childcare hours that Australian families can receive based on their engagement with recognised activities like work or study. It effectively limits many Australian families access to ECEC, particularly those with lower incomes and those with irregular work patterns. Families with fewer than eight hours of such activities per fortnight currently can't access subsidised care unless their income is below $83,000. Those with an income over that income threshold currently receive no subsidised care. It's good, therefore, to note that the bill now before this House modifies the childcare subsidy activity test so that now all Australian families can access at least 36 hours of subsidised care every week, regardless of the time spent in recognised activities. The bill also guarantees 50 hours of subsidised care a week for those with more than 24 hours of recognised activities per week, as well as families caring for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children.

These changes are a definite improvement on the existing arrangements such as they are, but they still fail to accord with the advice of the experts, which was to abolish the activity test altogether. The activity test is inconsistent with international best practice, which is for the universal provision of early childhood education for all preschool aged children. The contemporary labour force requires flexibility, and the activity test is a poor fit for its needs. Impact Economics and Policy has reported that at least 126,000 Australian children from the poorest households are currently missing out on childcare because of the activity test.

Reviews by the Productivity Commission, the ACCC, the Interim Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee, the Australian Childcare Alliance and the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce are unified. They have all called for the removal of the activity test. They found those families which need more childcare than they are currently able to access with the existing activity test, particularly the lower income families, are being disadvantaged and actively stopped from accessing the best-practice childcare. The test has significant administrative complexity for little benefit. It makes it harder for parents to access the support that they need when they're actively looking for a job or when they're struggling with variable shifts, and irregular and unpredictable working hours. Both the ACCC and Early Childhood Australia have also recommended a minimum entitlement to three days of quality ECEC for all Australian children. The Centre for Policy Development went a bit further and suggested we create a single legislated national entitlement for all children which includes both childcare and preschool.

The legislation before the House will improve affordability of childcare for a small proportion of families, but its settings for subsidised care remain complex and will still act as a barrier for many Australian families. We should work to the abolition of the activity test. A universal access model in which every child is entitled to a minimum number of subsidised hours per week, regardless of their parent's activities or income, would reduce administrative burden, and it would make the system easier to understand. We could also streamline the subsidy calculation process by using a flat rate or a simplified sliding scale based on income alone without considering activity levels. It would make it easier for all Australian families to understand their entitlements.

There is, of course, a cost to all such measures. Abolition of the activity test and provision of universal access to subsidised childcare would carry a significant cost. The childcare sector is chronically short of staff. Increasing demand will only exacerbate that issue. We'll also need to increase the number of childcare places to meet the increased demand generated by these changes. But, if something matters to a country, it finds the money for it. This is such an important issue for our economy, for Australian parents and for Australian children.

The ACCC has found that the current one-size-fits-all policy approach cannot meet all needs across the childcare centre. They said:

… the highly localised nature of childcare markets; the way parents select services based on availability and informal assessment of quality; and providers' supply decisions mean … that market forces alone are not meeting the needs of all children and households.

We need a mix of different regulatory measures to improve outcomes for households in diverse circumstances and in locations across the country. As Gina Cass-Gottlieb, the chair of the ACCC, has said:

Market stewardship roles can be effective in care-based economies where competition-driven market dynamics do not always achieve the desired outcomes,

The ACCC recommended that:

… the Government consider providing funding or grants directly to providers to assist with the costs of supplying services in areas that are considered unprofitable, or supplying services to groups within the community where costs of providing care are higher …

We know that First Nations children are less likely to be enrolled in child care. There are a number of reasons for that. The burden of the administrative process can discourage carers from using formal childcare services, but also many families are hesitant to provide the information required because of their previous negative experiences in dealing with government departments. In addition, the childcare subsidy system doesn't always recognise First Nations kinship care relationships in a timely way, and that can deter families and carers from seeking to access the subsidy. The subsidy also has limited influence on reducing childcare fees or prices for family day care, outside-school-hours care and in-home care.

Family day care is an important alternative childcare choice for many families as it may offer more flexible hours of care and adjustable session lengths, and sometimes it better caters to cultural and linguistic needs. Despite that, since 2018 the number of family day care and in-home services has declined in this country; 116 family day care services and 19 in-home care services have closed. This decline in family care services has disproportionately affected culturally and linguistically diverse households, low-income households, those living in very remote areas and carers working non-standard hours.

Offering universal childhood education and child care is not as simple as merely making existing centres free or nearly free. We have to have an overarching vision for best practice child care. My colleague the member for Goldstein, in her amendment today, which I supported, called for the establishment of an early childhood development commission. Such a commission, which was recommended by the Productivity Commission, could play a crucial role in enhancing the quality, accessibility and equity of early childhood education and care across this country. It could offer many benefits.

Firstly, a dedicated commission would provide centralised oversight and coordination of early childhood education and care, policies and programs. It would ensure consistency and quality across the country. It could address disparities in access to and quality of care, particularly for disadvantaged and vulnerable children. It could set and enforce high standards for early childhood education, developing and implementing best practices and professional development for educators, leading to improved outcomes for our children.

The commission could analyse data on early childhood development, providing valuable insights to inform policy decisions and improve practices. This evidence-based approach would help identify gaps and areas for improvement. The commission could offer resources and support to families, helping them navigate the ECEC system and access the services they need. This would include providing information on available programs and subsidies. With a focus on long-term planning, the commission could develop strategies to address future challenges and opportunities in early childhood education, ensuring sustainable and ongoing improvement.

The quality of our early childhood education has to be high. Workforce issues and barriers to access must be addressed; the sector must be valued. We need to have a concerted effort to ensure that all disadvantaged families can access the services and support that they need and deserve. It's a lofty goal, but it's worth pursuing.

Universal early childhood education has the potential to be a game-changer for Australian children and families, and for our economy now and into the future. Universal early childhood education has the potential to benefit children through quality learning environments, to reduce financial pressure on parents, to reduce gender inequity and to enhance economic outcomes for Australia. For that reason, I commend this bill to the House.

David Smith (Bean, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to speak on the Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025. The member for Adelaide reminisced about the 'Walk in their shoes' campaign, and it brought back memories for me. I recall a similar experience, working for a day at the magnificent Wonderschool in Conder. That work wasn't limited to the soft stuff. It included some of the dirty work too, and it was a reminder for me of what amazing work our early educators do right across the country.

As the member for Bean, which is home to thousands of young families, I'm pleased to speak in support of this bill. But let's be clear. The Liberals won't support cost-of-living relief for early education and care or kids need access to ECEC, but they will support free lunches for bosses. We know that these legislative changes will be on the chopping block, but they won't be on the menu after the election if the Leader of the Opposition gets his way.

Like all my Labor colleagues, I want to make sure that every child gets the best possible start in life. I know the benefits that my family have received from access to early education, particularly at the Jenny Wren Early Learning by Busy Bees centre in Mawson, in the electorate of Bean. I'd like to thank those early educators who did so much great work for my family, as well as all early educators right across Bean. As a government, we believe every child has the right to go to early education to help make sure they don't start school behind, and our Labor government is going to make this possible.

This bill will replace the activity test introduced by the Liberals with a new three-day guarantee. The three-day guarantee will deliver additional cost-of-living relief for more than 66,000 families after the changes commence in 2026. The young families and children who live in Bean will benefit from this move. This reform is just part of Labor's next steps to building a universal early education and care system, expanding access to quality early education right across the country. It builds on cheaper child care, which cut the cost of early education and care for more than one million families across the country, as well as our 15 per cent pay rise for early educators.

Child care is of critical importance to the residents of Bean. Availability, cost and quality are issues that are raised with me as I do my job listening to the views, concerns and aspirations of local residents right across Bean. I believe that all those involved in the early education and childcare sector—state and territory governments, which regulate the industry, the private and public bodies which participate in the industry, and the national government, which provides considerable funds into the sector—have a duty to update the rules and arrangements to meet the needs of today.

For many, family life in Australia—and no less so in Bean—is changing. The nature of work is also changing, with more and more workers not having regular hours or work patterns. Consequently, the rules around child care and early education need to be adjusted to make sure that all kids, particularly those in disadvantaged groups, get access to the services that are available. As outlined by the minister and previous speakers, the bill provides that all families will be guaranteed three days, or 72 hours, of childcare subsidy each fortnight. Families caring for First Nations children will be guaranteed 100 hours each fortnight, and families who work, study or train will continue to be eligible for 100 hours of subsidised care each fortnight.

The background and context to the changes are important, and I'll now address the background to what we're discussing today and cover some of the other essential actions being taken by this government that are complementary to the bill under consideration. As reflected on by the minister when introducing this bill, when the Labor government came to office in 2022, we came with a commitment to make early childhood education and care more affordable through our cheaper childcare programs. We quickly turned that commitment into progress, with more than a million families benefiting from those changes. Recent data shows that an Australian family on an income of $120,000 a year, paying the average quarterly fee for 30 hours of child care per week, has saved approximately $2,768 since September 2023. This is of great assistance to the young families of Bean and throughout the nation.

We also commissioned the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and the Productivity Commission to each do a review, providing guidance on how we can achieve our vision of a universal early learning system—a system where every child, no matter who they are, no matter their background and no matter where they live, has access to quality early childhood education and care. The Productivity Commission inquiry, in its interim report, told us that the early childhood education workforce should be the first priority for reform, including through better pay and conditions. The Productivity Commission made it crystal clear that the workforce is fundamental in addressing any changes in availability.

Last year, we passed the Wage Justice for Early Childhood Education and Care Workers Act, supporting a 15 per cent pay rise for early childhood education and care workers—increasing the wages of up to 200,000 early educators—and addressing exactly this issue. Significant, momentous, historic, a monumental moment, proof that early learning matters and life changing—these are just some of the descriptive words that early childhood education advocates and workers have used to describe this government's 15 per cent wage increase. We know that the foundation of a universal system relies on a stable, secure and valued workforce, and this wage rise will help achieve that by retaining our existing early childhood educators and attracting new workers to the sector. Recent Jobs and Skills Australia data indicates that workforce vacancy rates in the early childhood education and care sector have plummeted over the last 12 months, with internet vacancy rates down 22 per cent since December 2023. But that's not all. The wage rise is linked to caps on fees. For providers to be eligible, they must not increase their fees by more than 4.4 per cent in the first year and 4.2 per cent in the second year. This is putting wages up for workers and keeping costs down for families.

Over the last 2½ years, we have made significant progress in building these foundations for a universal early childhood education and care system, but we know that there is still more work to do. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission inquiry recommended that the government consider removing, relaxing or substantially reconfiguring the current activity test. In their final report, the Productivity Commission recommended all families who to choose to use early childhood education and care 'should be able to access at least 30 hours or three days a week' of high-quality early learning. The Productivity Commission also noted that ensuring that all children aged zero to five years have access to some form of high-quality, subsidised ECEC for at least three days a week, or 30 hours, for 48 weeks per year, would accommodate the needs of families and deliver the benefits of ECEC participation to children.

Again, the government is acting in introducing the Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill, guaranteeing families at least 72 hours of subsidised care per fortnight. The three-day guarantee is about making sure that every child can have the best start in life—that all children are ready to learn and ready to start school. It's about making sure that every child, no matter their background and no matter where they live, has access to the transformative benefits of early childhood education and care, and that's as important to the families of Bean as it is to families right across the country. We know how precious the first five years of a child's life are. It's a time of extraordinary growth—of emotional and intellectual development. In these years, children learn foundational skills. They learn to socialise and develop emotional skills that they can then build on when they start school.

Replacing the Liberals' activity test, which locked out children and families, with Labor's three-day guarantee is such a crucial step in delivering on our commitment to universal early learning. When the Liberals introduced the childcare-subsidy activity test in 2018, they stated that it was designed to encourage workforce participation. But, as Thrive by Five's Jay Weatherill states, while the activity test was intended to encourage parents into work, in fact it has done the opposite. It has limited choices and made it harder for parents, especially single parents, to make an income. An evaluation by the Australian Institute of Family Studies found no evidence that the introduction of the activity test caused any increase in workforce participation. The Productivity Commission—that well-known socialist organisation!—found that the effects of the activity test on workforce participation were, at best, ambiguous. Instead, the activity test has made early learning harder to access for many families. It has disproportionately affected those families that may be experiencing disadvantage—possibly the families that could benefit most from this access. The children who'd benefit the most from high-quality early education and care are, right now, the least likely to attend—this is what we're aiming to address.

In 2021, only 54 per cent of children in the most disadvantaged areas were enrolled in early childhood education and care. This compared with 76 per cent of children in the highest socioeconomic areas. These same children are more likely to be developmentally vulnerable. The most recent Australian Early Development Census report found that only 42.7 per cent of children experiencing the highest level of socioeconomic disadvantage were developmentally on track upon starting school, compared with 54.8 per cent of all children. These changes are critical to address this disadvantage.

In conclusion, as the member for Bean, which is home to thousands of young families, I'm pleased to speak in support of this bill. I know how critical the work of our early educators is right across Bean. I'm fortunate in that my family has benefited from access to early education for each of our children, and I want to see that access provided to families right across Bean. I want to make sure that every child gets the best possible start in life.

But the truth is that the benefits of these reforms are at risk from those opposite. Free lunches for bosses take priority over cost-of-living relief for early education and care. We know that this is likely to be one of the areas that will be part of the $350 billion of costs that, maybe, the constituents of Bean and the constituents of every electorate across this country will find out about the day after the election.

But that's not good enough for the people of Bean. It's not good enough that we put such critical reforms at risk. The new three-day guarantee meets the needs of families today. It will benefit many families and children in Bean and right across Australia. Don't put these critical reforms at risk. Make sure that they don't go on the chopping block. Support early educators, not just across Bean but right across the country, for the extraordinary work that they do now and for the extraordinary work that they can continue to do across some of the most disadvantaged communities in the country.

Jenny Ware (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025. As has no doubt already been highlighted, the opposition will be opposing this bill for some of the reasons I intend to set out. If we just go back to the background of this legislation, the bill's intended to amend the A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act 1999, and replaces references to the childcare-subsidy activity test with a new three-day guarantee. The legislation, at this point, is set to commence in January 2026, and the three-day guarantee is intended to provide all families that have up to a combined income of $533,000 with access to 72 hours a fortnight of subsidised childcare. That all sounds absolutely fabulous as a motherhood statement—no pun intended—but this legislation does not guarantee or prioritise access for working families over non-working families, and it's absolutely crucial, when parents return to work, that they are able to access and have choice about the type of childcare and early learning that is most appropriate for their family.

The government estimates the cost of the measure is $426.7 million over five years, despite the policy not rolling out until January 2026. That's $426.7 million over five years from 2024-25. The Productivity Commission's report on this, though, estimated the cost of the full removal of the activity test, which this legislation would do, as being over $2 billion per year. As usual, the Albanese Labor government love to spend money, splash money around and make headlines, but, as always, the proof is in the pudding and whether or not this will actually deliver any additional assistance for working families is really completely questionable.

To highlight the finances of this, the explanatory memorandum to the legislation states that the activity test changes will cost, as I said, $426.7 million, but the MYEFO outlook for 2024-25 stated the measure would cost $291.2 million over three years. The Productivity Commission did some preliminary modelling of a similar change to the activity test for its 2023 draft report, and, in that report, the commission found that relaxing the activity test so that all families could access at least three days or 30 hours of subsidised universal early childhood education and care a week would increase cost to the government by $1.1 billion per year. So it's really unclear. We actually don't know how much this policy is in fact going to cost. The amount splashed around by Labor is completely at odds with the Productivity Commission's detailed work on this proposal.

Personally, I know that I relied very much on the kindergarten model when my boys went to preschool. They went to a community preschool, and the community preschool was run by a parent board. I was very grateful that I had the ability to make a choice. I live in a metropolitan area and we do have shortages, but, at the time in 2009, when my children turned three and could start preschool, they went to Gymea Community Preschool. It was a great experience, and it was right for my family. That's what childcare and early childhood education should be about. It should be about ensuring that families can make the right decision for them because each family has different needs, different priorities and different circumstances.

The reason that the coalition opposes this legislation predominantly is it does remove the priority access for working families. In that way, we say it disincentivises aspiration and increases access without addressing supply issues. I know that's a very big issue out in the regions particularly, and I know many of my colleagues on this side who represent those electorates will be speaking about that. The legislation also does nothing to increase access or flexibility for families, and it doesn't attempt to address the current cost-of-living pressures. That is a summary of why we on this side will be opposing this legislation. We are relieved to see that the bill has at least been referred to a Senate inquiry, with a reporting date of 21 March this year.

On the background to this, the Prime Minister first announced this policy on 11 December last year. At the time it was described as the next steps in the Albanese Labor government's plan for a universal early learning system. In some of the commentary that went with the introduction of the legislation, Labor estimated that over 100,000 families will have access to more subsidised care and more than 66,000 families will be better off overall. But 66,000 families represent only about six per cent of all families that are currently engaged and utilising the childcare subsidy system. This is a big cash splash with very little return for the majority of parents and families who are using this system.

One of the other important reasons that we oppose this legislation is that we say this guarantee is fundamentally unfair and divisive. A three-day guarantee will only increase access for a very small number of families—as I said, about six per cent—but will have a wide-ranging impact on all families. Families who need access to early childhood education so they can work—and many, many Australian parents are in that position, particularly with the cost-of-living crisis we are subject to because of this government—will be competing against families who now have extra subsidised access but may not be working, studying or volunteering at all. That is the unintended impact and implication of this legislation. Families already in the system are unlikely to be impacted, but working families about to enter the system, or trying to enrol a new child, will be greatly impacted. This appears to be, once again, Labor simply at war with aspiration, with working families and with working parents.

The other, and the biggest, problem with this bill is that it simply fails to address the supply-side constraints. We've heard Labor championing, particularly, cheaper child care. But what is the point of cheaper child care if you cannot access a spot for your child when you need to return to work or study or other obligations? Modelling from the Productivity Commissioner shows most of the children affected by the activity test changes live in major cities. Families in what we call thin markets and childcare deserts who have little or no access at all to child care will be the most disadvantaged. They're already disadvantaged, and this is going to make them more disadvantaged. There is no point bringing in legislation that states, 'Yes, you've now got three days guaranteed care' if there is no actual child care available where you live.

I think this legislation shows the divisive nature of this government; we've seen it over the almost three years that they've been in power. This is pitting working families against non-working families, and metropolitan families against regional families. This is inherently unfair and not the Australian way. It doesn't reflect Australian values. The Prime Minister should be here bringing the nation together and governing for all Australians instead of continuing this divisiveness that started back in May 2022, when he was elected.

This legislation also does not provide sufficient choice for families. It does nothing for parents who need flexibility, families who do shift work, for example, or who work non-standard hours. There is no provision whatsoever for those. Those families will see no benefit from this change. But we on this side of the House well and truly believe that families need a choice as to the sort of care and the type of care that they can access to suit the individual needs of their families. This legislation, we say, will reward families who already access child care at the expense of families who are unable to access it or who choose not to access it.

To conclude, we on this side of the House are absolutely committed to assisting families to access child care and early education. However, we say that this legislation, for all of the reasons that I have just set out, will not do the job that it is intended to do.

Kate Thwaites (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Early education is so important. The evidence is clear that children benefit from access to early education and care, and that it sets them up for the best start in life, so it is confounding to hear those opposite, including the last speaker, try and paint the making sure that all Australian children get the best start in life as being divisive. In what world is that divisive? It would only be in a world where you're prepared to stand against the best interests of Australian children. It does seem that is what those opposite are prepared to do because they are opposing this bill that gives all Australian children the best start in life. That is the hill they've chosen to die on and that is their choice. But, I must say, I am very, very surprised.

Our government started this term delivering on our commitment to deliver cheaper child care to Australian families, and families across Australia have saved up to $2,768 since our government's childcare subsidies took effect. This is real cost-of-living relief that's going back into the pockets of Australian families. Now we are once again delivering reform in early education. We are replacing the activity test introduced by the previous Liberal government. We're introducing the new three-day guarantee from January next year, guaranteeing 72 hours of childcare subsidy each fortnight. We do believe that every child has the right to early education, to the best start in life, and this reform will help make that a reality right around the country.

From early education through to school education, university and TAFE, our government has been delivering the investments we need to make sure that Australians are set up to get quality education, to get the education they deserve right through life. Of course, we have been opposed by those opposite, who do not share our belief that the best way to support Australians is to support them with education, with the best start in life, all the way through to a tertiary degree and their best start into a career.

Early education is the starting point. It does set children up for their educational journey. I have seen this in my community, where I get to visit childcare centres from Watsonia to Bundoora to Eltham North, and talk with the wonderful educators there about the difference they are making in those children's lives, and see the many special moments that add up to giving those children the skills they need for heading on to school. I also get to see it in my own life. My four-year-old is a strong participant in the early education system, and every evening I get to come home and hear from him about what he's learnt during the day. Sometimes it is a fact or a figure, sometimes it's a new letter or number, and often times it's learning some of those other skills he gets in this setting—who he played with, how he worked out the disagreements with them, and how he worked out his relationship with the early educators who do a fantastic job with him. It makes me aware of how much growth he and other young children get through that system.

No Australian family should be shut out from that because of an unfair activity test. Yet that is what those opposite are doing by opposing this bill. They are saying that my child should have the privilege of having that best start in life because I can afford to pay for it but that others should be locked out of a system that gives their child the best start in life. Well, I am proud to say that our government has brought an unprecedented focus to early education over the past 2½ years. We know how important it is to get the building blocks in place for a child to be ready for school and for what comes next. It's why we took to the last election our commitment to cheaper child care—a measure to help families with childcare costs. But we also did it because we want to support families to make the most of early childhood and care.

As I said, this is good for children. It gives them the chance to learn and grow in an environment alongside other children, with the guidance of those fantastic educators. But it is also good for families, helping them to save costs on child care and providing more choice for parents, particularly women, who may want to return to work or pick up more hours—and, of course, it is good for the economy and for our country as a whole, encouraging more parents back to work and allowing them the flexibility to do more hours, setting up our next generation for the future. All of this brings economic benefits.

Alongside the work we have done to support families in early education, we have been supporting early educators, because we recognise that this environment, where our children are being set up for the best start in life, does not just happen. It happens because there are qualified, wonderful and dedicated staff who are in there every day, thinking about creative ways to teach our children, to guide them on their journey. I am sorry to say that for far too long those wonderful early educators were underappreciated—and they were certainly underpaid. This is a heavily feminised industry, and like many highly feminised industries, such as our aged-care industry where we have also raised wages, for too long it wasn't recognised through its wages as it should have been. I am very proud to say this government is fixing that. We are raising the wages for those who are taking our next generation on the path that is going to set them up for a quality education and a quality start in life. So we are respecting those educators while also making sure that we are keeping costs down for families. This is really important.

The next part is what this bill does, which is replacing the activity test and introducing the three-day guarantee. This is another part of our government's ambition to make our early education system the best it can be. I did say I wasn't surprised that those opposite are opposing this, because they regularly come into this place and oppose measures that are good for Australian women and for Australian families. In fact, in responding to this announcement, some of the rhetoric from those opposite has been—I wouldn't say 'unhinged'—

Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Some could say that.

Kate Thwaites (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Some might say 'unhinged', but I probably wouldn't—so detached from the reality of the lives of Australian families and Australian women's lives. We saw Senator Simon Birmingham, in an opinion piece at the end of last year, making an incredibly out-of-touch and frustrating claim, suggesting that changes to the activity test would mean that women would be dropping their children off to child care so that they can go and play golf or do Pilates. That is not the reality of Australian women's lives. They are not thinking: 'I've got two hours. I will pop off to Pilates.' They are thinking: 'How do I hold down a job? How do I support my family? How do I do all the other things I need to get done?' And I hope they do get a bit of time for some Pilates and some exercise, but certainly they are not thinking, 'Well, I'll just pop my child into child care for two hours now, because the government has taken away the activity test, to go to Pilates.' I would encourage those opposite to get in touch with some Australian women, to get in touch with some Australian families. It is concerning that someone who, up until very recently, was such a senior member of the Liberals frontbench team would show such disrespect to Australian women and Australian families.

This is a benefit for Australian families, and, in particular, it is a benefit for those families who can get locked out of our early education system—not because they're going to Pilates but because they have other strains and pressures on their lives that make it difficult for them to access early education. This is actually about making sure those children who most need that support to get the best start in life are able to access it. Again, it is something that those opposite should be able to bring themselves to support, but, once again, they are saying no to Australian families and no to Australian women. They are diminishing the value of this really important service for all children in our community and diminishing the value of the work that our early educators do. Of course, it's not, as I said, just in this area, when it comes to the difference that this government is making for women, where we see opposition from those opposite. We see time and time again that, when this government brings forward measures that are designed to support the lives of Australian women, what we get from those opposite is a no.

Just last week, again in the Senate, Senator Canavan was targeting the Workplace Gender Equality Agency, suggesting it was a form-filling agency that was taking away from businesses judging people on merit. Gee, I wonder who he's been listening to. For someone who was a minister in the last government, it is surprising how little Senator Canavan understands not just about a government agency but also about women's lives. Through WGEA our government has been driving forward gender equity in Australian workplaces. Again: this is good for Australian women, it is good for Australian families, it is good for Australian business and it is good for the Australian economy. This term, we have worked and we have closed the gender pay gap to its lowest level ever. There's more work to do, but that's the achievement we have already made. We have helped employers make their workplaces more flexible for staff with caring responsibilities, through our reforms to paid parental leave. We are working to remove barriers to workforce participation, with measures like this three-day guarantee. We're collecting the data, through WGEA, that lets us know that we are making this progress. This is not a form-filling exercise. This is about making sure that Australian women are supported, that Australian businesses are better off, and that Australian children get the best start in life. Those opposite should really have a look around, read the room, talk to some Australian women, find out what's going on in their lives and get behind these measures.

Our government has taken a deliberate view that education in this country does need to be looked at from all levels—from early education, through to primary and secondary schooling, and up to university and TAFE. We are investing, across all of these levels, to give Australians the best education they can have. As a Victorian, I am particularly pleased to say that last month we reached a historic funding agreement with the Victorian government to put all public schools in Victoria on the pathway to their full and fair funding. Through this agreement, our government will be increasing our funding to Victorian public schools by $2.5 billion over the next 10 years. This is the biggest ever investment in Victorian public schools by an Australian government. We will see this play out in our schools in an incredibly positive way for students in my community and in schools right across Victoria.

It goes to all those things that I know parents want to see in our local schools—more individualised support for students, mandated evidence based teaching practices and more mental health support in schools. Coupled with these broad reforms that we're delivering in the early education sector, this full and fair funding for public schools in Victoria is a massive win for children in my community and for students in my community. Right across Victoria they will be getting the support and quality education that they need, all the way from those early childhood years right up to year 12.

Wait—it doesn't stop there. At the tertiary level, our government is making significant investments to support both university students and TAFE students. We have, of course, already delivered cost-of-living relief to students with HECS debts, cutting $3 billion worth of HECS debt through our changes to the student loan indexation formula. Around 22,000 people in my community saw credits on their HECS balances last year. We've been clear that, if our government is returned at the coming election, we are taking HECS relief even further by cutting 20 per cent off of all student loans. This will wipe $16 billion in student debt, benefiting three million Australians. Of course, today, the Treasurer has also announced that he is making moves to make sure that HECS debts don't get in the way of students being able to apply for a mortgage and their first home, and that is a very important reform.

Thousands of students in my community continue to benefit from the fee-free TAFE, enabling access to courses in important industries, like early education and like construction, nursing and technology. At every level, we are doing the work to allow Australians to access quality education. Again, I come back to the fact that this is what this particular bill is all about—making sure that every child in Australia gets the best possible start in life. Every child in Australia does have the right to the best possible start in life, to a quality early education. The activity test introduced by those opposite has been a barrier for those families who most need that access, and we are taking it away. We are supporting Australian families. We are supporting Australian women. We are doing the work to build our country, to make sure that there is a positive future, and we are doing it while supporting early educators. We are doing it while bringing costs down for families. This is the work we will continue to do in the face of opposition from those on the other side, in the face of an opposition that cannot see when a measure is good for Australian families and good for Australian women and, in fact, that actively works against our efforts to support the lives of Australian women and Australian families. We won't be deterred. We will continue the work up, and I am very pleased to support this bill.

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was interesting to listen to the government now saying that the Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025 will actually support every child in Australia. Well, if they're going to get the best start possible—it's supposed to be a Labor guarantee—that's, of course, except for rural and regional families, where there actually is no child care available today and won't be in the future. This will guarantee 72 hours a fortnight of taxpayer subsidised child care but certainly not if you're in a childcare desert, where there is no child care available at all. It's supposed to be three days for all families. Well, it won't guarantee that for those families in rural, regional and more remote areas, where there's actually no child care at all. What this bill does not guarantee is that it will actually prioritise places and access for working families or single parents over non-working families. What will a single mum do, one who has to work to keep her children, especially during a cost-of-living crisis? What does she do if she cannot access child care at all? How does the government think she will feel when she looks in the door at the childcare centre and sees children from families where the parent or parents are not working or not having to work because they are earning up to $533,000, which this bill actually allows subsidised child care for? What are her options? Not only is this unfair; it is divisive in communities.

Removing priority access for working families is a terrible decision by Labor. I can only imagine how this will pit family against family where there are and where there will be no childcare places available for the families who need it most. This is divisive, not only for family against family but for metro verses rural, regional and remote. Where is the child care for those in our regional and rural areas that don't have access to any child care at all? How can this be for each and every child in Australia when there's no child care available in our communities? That's how out of touch this side is. I look at the divisive nature of this. For the ones for whom there is no childcare centre or places available because there's no child care or no workers and no accommodation, especially in our smaller regional towns and communities, this bill does absolutely nothing. Why not? I don't know why not. Why does this Labor government continue to ignore regional communities that don't have any child care available at all? And what do these families do right now in the midst of Labor's cost-of-living crisis, where both parents have to work probably more than one job because the interest on their mortgage has gone up by thousands of dollars? The cost of their energy, their fuel, their food and their insurance has gone through the roof under this government.

Many of these people don't have family living close by who can babysit for them. When you live in a regional and remote community—or you're a farmer, and you've got to get on a tractor because it's hay season—what do you do if there's no child care? That's what's happening in our communities. There are so many childcare deserts in Australia where there is no child care available at all. This bill does nothing for them, and it's a false claim to say that every child in Australia will benefit from it. What do you do where there is no child care available? What are they supposed to do when they haven't got family living close by? And why do they have to continue begging for the government to act on their behalf—to actually look at the childcare needs in their small communities?

Keep in mind that these people, who don't have access to child care, work in the regions where Australia's wealth comes from—in the mining and ag sector, often in remote locations. What good is a three-day guarantee for families living in a regional and remote area where there are no childcare centres or services available? What do you do? It's obvious that Labor is only interested in supporting inner-city and metro areas, because they've completely ignored this fact. Come and live in regional, rural and remote Australia, and see how you go with a three-day guarantee when there is no childcare centre or facility available, and you've got no family, and you have to work because you can't make ends meet. It also does nothing for parents who need flexibility, for the families on shiftwork or for those needing out-of-hours child care. Only Labor would think that taxpayers on a modest income of just over $45,000, who are paying 30c on the dollar in tax, should be subsidising child care for families earning up to $533,000. How on earth is that fair?

I've got a prime example of a childcare desert that's been in my electorate. For several years, I've been working with a wonderful but desperate group of women in the small town of Augusta in my electorate. They've been working their hearts out constantly to provide Augusta parents, families and small businesses with access to child care. They know how important this is. Prior to their efforts, there was no child care available at all in Augusta. How good is this 'every child in Australia' promise when it ignores this fact? There was no child care without these women getting busy, and this group of amazing. persistent women have never given up. Recently, they finally secured some funding to renovate a building and, with the previous federal approvals, have successfully run a vacation program for three years now.

Unfortunately, they were not successful in their application to the current government for a Community Child Care Fund grant in 2024. They were classified as inner regional, when they're well over 300 kilometres from Perth, 3½ hours away. They've told me there are many regional areas in the same predicament regarding lack of child care and resourcing, because others are getting in touch, saying, 'We've got no child care—we can't work, we can't support our local businesses and we can't support our families.' But, in spite of their setbacks, they're hoping to open their early childhood project in mid- to late 2025. Good on them. After all these years and all this work, they cannot wait to see the impact that a childcare centre has on their small town of Augusta and its littlest residents. They've said they're hoping to inspire other country towns to keep speaking up.

I'm speaking up in here for those country towns that don't have child care. So don't come in here and say that every child in Australia is going to benefit from this, okay? They are really focused and hoping to inspire other country towns to keep speaking up regarding the importance of child care for their towns to thrive. They have also said, 'We hope that, in the years to come, childcare deserts are a thing of the past.' They won't be, with this bill. There's nothing in it for these small communities. They said, 'Rural children and families deserve equal access to early learning, regardless of their postcode.' What help is this bill to them? These are the words of Kylie Lucas, the Augusta & Districts Community Childcare Inc. Treasurer. She's the local pharmacist, and she's been desperate for child care in Augusta. That's what she's been saying.

It should not be this hard or take this long and take so much effort for rural and regional families to have access to what people in metro areas often take for granted. Why are the people, the families, the small businesses that desperately need these workers in these areas and the families that are doing it tough less important and less valued and not covered under this legislation? It's an absolute disgrace. It should have been a priority for the Labor government. Why doesn't the Labor government fix the childcare deserts before offering subsidised child care to families earning $533,000? What a disgraceful slap in the face for those of us who live in the regions. Equally, how fair is it that Labor are subsidising child care for families earning up to $533,000 while at the same time capping access to independent youth allowance at a parental income of $160,000? How fair is that?

Once again, this affects students and families in regional and remote parts of Australia—the areas Labor clearly does not care about. These are the young people in our electorates who often have no choice but to leave their homes to go to university, because the courses they need to study—in our case, in Western Australia—are available only in the city. These are courses such as medicine, law, pharmacy and engineering. But Labor applies the $160,000 threshold for access to independent youth allowance while at the same time providing taxpayer subsidised child care for families earning $533,000.

In every instance it is regional and rural and remote families and children and the small businesses that are desperate for these workers and these professionals who are missing out under this government. It should not be forgotten that since Labor came to government the cost of child care—for those who can get it—has increased by 22.3 per cent. Since Labor's cheaper child care policy came into effect, actual out-of-pocket costs have increased by 12.7 per cent, and one in three services are charging above this fee cap.

Childcare providers have also been hit by increased operational costs and increased regulations. Labor has estimated that more than 100,000 families will have access to more subsidised care and more than 66,000 families will better off. Well, that is not every child in Australia, as we keep hearing about here. It represents only about six per cent of all families currently engaged with the childcare subsidy system. What happens to the rest? And where will the extra staff need to come from? Even with this commitment, we are so short of childcare staff.

Once again, I want to reiterate that if the government thinks that every family in Australia that needs child care currently has access to child care then the government is certainly out of touch with rural and regional Australia. The number of childcare deserts that exist, where there is absolutely no child care: I wonder whether the government has that list and whether they've actually looked at it, and looked at the numbers of small communities in rural and regional areas that have no access to child care. Why wasn't that part of the consideration in this bill, if we're talking about every child in Australia? That's what we just heard: every child in Australia—except if you live in a childcare desert, where there is absolutely no child care. What do they do, and what does this bill do for them?

Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Every now and then in our lifetime there comes a moment when we have an opportunity to change the course of history. In the years leading up to my coming to this place, I never thought such a moment would happen for me, but today I am proven wrong. Today, the text of this legislation gives me, along with every other member in this place, the opportunity to change the course of history and the opportunity for every young person to have a better future as they continue to grow. The reason I say that is that the research is very clear around the positive impacts of early childhood learning. Those years, from zero to five, are some of the most important years that a child can be exposed to the benefits of an education, to ensure that they have the basis for a successful learning pathway throughout primary school, secondary school and then VET or university. I'm the benefactor of a VET qualification. Many in this chamber have got one, but probably a much larger number have got a university degree. They were probably, for the most part, set up because of the learning that they were exposed to when they were between the ages of zero and five.

We know that it has become harder for parents to be able to look after or raise their children, with the pressures of keeping a roof over their head, putting food on the table and paying for the cost of an education. That's where the role of government comes in: to level the playing field and provide opportunities for everyone to have access to a fair education and a fair level of care. That's what this legislation goes to; it's at the very heart of this legislation.

I want to address some comments made by previous members who have come into this place and have had their moment behind the microphone. I want to start with the member for Forrest and her conversation around the childcare deserts. It's important we do address that, and I don't for one second contend that there aren't concerns and issues with remote and regional areas where we're having difficulty with the provision of childcare and early learning centres. But I also want to be very clear on this front that, for the nine years before those in this government came to find ourselves on this side of the chamber, there was another government. It had an opportunity to change the course of history and the direction that our early learning centres took and the opportunities provided for our youngest citizens, and that was not taken. It is why this government has had to put so much emphasis into training early childhood educators. It's why we've had to fight to lift early childhood educators' wages by 15 per cent because we had a retention issue. I want to let the House know that, because of our measures, there are 1,083 new services, including—the member for Forrest should take note of this—325 in regional and remote Australia and more than 90,000 additional places in educational centres across Australia. It is an important point. Yes, we know there is an issue, but we are getting to work and we are getting it done and we are making sure that we fill those gaps. That's what good governments do. That's what this government is doing.

The member for Moncrieff came in here earlier, and disappointingly—I say 'disappointingly' because I know the member for Moncrieff has a personal connection to my electorate. She knows my electorate probably better than most people in this chamber. She knows the level of disadvantage that exists in my electorate, the electorate of Spence—specifically, around places like Elizabeth Vale, a place I speak about on a regular basis, Davoren Park and Elizabeth Downs. There are numerous suburbs I can list off in my electorate. Deputy Speaker Georganas, you know this all too well; you reside in Adelaide and not too far from my electorate. We have significant challenges, and one of those is equitable access to early childhood education for our youngest people.

This removes barriers and gives you, regardless of your socioeconomic background, an opportunity to provide your child with the early education they deserve, to give them the best start, so that they, one day, very well might be standing here in my place, giving a much better speech than I am right now. It wouldn't be hard.

The member for La Trobe and the member for Casey are aptly chiming in here. I think we all know that there are much better orators than I, but it starts in those early years. There's a great quote from the former premier of South Australia. He talks about one of the things that this bill removes—that is, the activity test. He says, 'It has always been punitive and unfair.' I think that's what makes Labor governments so distinctively different from other governments—that is, we take the 'un' out of 'unfair'. We make sure that it is about fair and is about equity for everyone in our community so that they aren't left to the side.

I want to get into the actual content of this bill, the Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025. I spoke about the activity test. That is part of the core function of this legislation. It removes the activity test from the childcare subsidy. It is something that came about in 2018, introduced by the opposition, which, in fairness, did limit the scope of two existing childcare affordability schemes. They were the childcare benefit and childcare rebate schemes. It merged them together and put in place this activity test. For those who don't know what the activity test is, it refers to the hours a caregiver will need to work, study or look for work to determine the amount of hours childcare is subsidised under the CCS, the childcare scheme.

We've taken that away because we see that as a punitive measure, as the former premier of South Australia has said. We want to put the fair back into equality for early childhood education. The Liberals' approach via the activity test has the minimum childcare hours for a family at up to 24 hours per fortnight or two days per fortnight for families under $83,000 per annum or zero hours for families over that threshold. The member for Forrest came in here and talked about fairness and how it's unfair for people in the regions and remote Australia, but here we have legislation currently in place that says, if you earn under $83,000 a year, you are able to access 24 hours a fortnight of subsidised care, but, if you're over $83,000, you get nothing. I just don't understand that. If you look at what we are proposing in this bill, it is 72 hours guaranteed, three days, for every family in Australia. That's improving the lives of over 100,000 young Australians and putting the fair back into equality. That's what good Labor governments do.

In 2019, the Department of Education told us that low-income families accessing care went from 32,000 in 2018 to around 6½ thousand in 2019. That implies that, without that help, nearly 30,000 children would've been left worse off. The approach that, if something's free, you don't value it has left childcare unaffordable for families in Spence, where people are already disadvantaged. It goes to a lot of what I've said. As of 2021 there were over 13,000 single parents in Spence, with 6,000 of those parents listed as either not in the labour force or unemployed. Those parents not only had their children's education cut short by the activity test; they also didn't end up in the workforce as the Liberals promised, further entrenching the challenges we face in the north.

As I said earlier, we are scrapping the activity test and we are guaranteeing every Australian family 72 hours a fortnight, three days a fortnight, regardless. It's fair and equitable. That will benefit over 100,000 families directly affected by the text before the House today in the most crucial stage of their development. Beyond that, it is estimated that more than 66,000 of those families will be better off in the first full financial year of implementation. Moreover, this policy leaves no families worse off. That's why we are retaining the measure to provide 100 hours per fortnight to families who record more than 48 hours of activity. Families that are relying on child care for their work need to be assured that these subsidies will remain.

Also, families caring for First Nations children will be guaranteed 100 hours each fortnight to help close the gap. I think this is very timely given Friday this week marks 17 years to the day since the formal apology to Australia's Indigenous peoples by Kevin Rudd. The previous system made it harder for low-income families to access the childcare subsidy. We are making it easier. We are making it easier because it's the right thing to do to ensure that our youngest people have the best opportunity at a better future, an opportunity that has been afforded to every person in this House, an opportunity that was afforded to every person that has been able to get ahead and can consider themselves thankful for the place where they find themselves.

In closing, I refer back to my electorate of the northern suburbs of Adelaide. In our community in the north, which, again, is one of the most disadvantaged metropolitan areas in the country, there are very young children who worry about the cost to their parents when they go to the shops. There are children who turn down the chocolate bar, the bag of lollies or whatever it may be they want when their parents offer it because those children have developed in a household in Elizabeth Park, Davoren Park, Salisbury North or many other areas north of Adelaide where the financial pressures felt by their parents have filtered down into the character and behaviour of their children, where kids of a single-digit age have the household budget at the forefront of their minds, feeling their parents' stress, because they have developed under the sheer stress their family is under to provide. No child in Australia should ever have to feel that way, and I fight to correct that record.

The three-day guarantee helps do exactly that because, by guaranteeing 72 hours of subsidised early childhood and care and giving families unconditional and affordable access to these essential services, no matter who they are or what they earn, we take another step towards ensuring families can live without those pressures, towards ending cycles of poverty in the north and towards ensuring our children can live the way they should. I commend this bill to the House.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We all want to see adequate and affordable childcare services available to Australian families. That's not the debate that we are having here. The question we are talking about is how we do that and the best and most efficient use of taxpayer funds to achieve that objective. Child care is crucial to allow parents to work, to make an income and to contribute to their communities. Unfortunately, like so many bills we debate in this House, this is another bill by Labor with a catchy headline but that underneath the spin will make accessing early child care even harder for working parents and all parents. Those opposite use the phrase 'guaranteed access'. Every speaker is talking about guaranteed access. Well, the problem with that in my community is that there is not guaranteed access to child care because my residents are not able to get into a childcare centre, because we, like so many other communities, particularly regional, rural and peri-urban communities, have a childcare desert. I know many members on this side and on the crossbench get frustrated when our comments are construed as anti-childcare, because they're not.

Being in government is about choices and priorities and where you invest those taxpayer dollars. This three-day guarantee will provide all families, up to a combined income of $533,000 a year, with access to 72 hours a fortnight of subsidised childcare. As I said, that guarantee is only there if you can find a place. This initiative won't achieve its goal without increasing access and supply, because it's only going to be harder for working families to find a childcare place if more people are trying to put their children into childcare without more places being available. That's supply and demand, demand and supply. That's economics 101, which we know is not the strong suit of this government. And, in addition, there are several issues with the bill, including the removal of priority access for working families. It does nothing to increase flexibility for families and it does not address the rise in childcare costs under the Albanese Labor government.

Earlier this week, I had the opportunity to speak about the childcare desert in my community. Finding child care has become one of the biggest concerns for parents of young children in Casey, especially in this cost-of-living crisis. Families have been prevented from any attempts to provide additional income, at a time when interest rates and living costs are through the roof, due to their inability to find child care. For these parents, there is little point in having access to three days of care when there's no care available. Many residents in my community work outside our region, with an average commuting distance of 28 kilometres—significantly higher than the Victorian average of 16.7 kilometres. For these families, access to long day care hours is essential to account for their commute times, and limited access to long day care in my community is leaving families without adequate care for their children. It's leaving parents to make that difficult compromise between career advancement, additional income for their family and their family obligations.

According to data from the Mitchell Institute, in Coldstream there are still nine children for every one long day care place available. The towns of Silvan, Monbulk, Sassafras, Wandin and Seville have ratios ranging from 10 to over 50 children per childcare place, making placements highly competitive and leaving many parents without options. In Ferny Creek, there are between three and seven children per childcare place, and between seven and 18 children per long day care place. In Olinda, there are between two and five children per place, and between eight and 30 per long day care place. Belgrave, Warburton and the surrounding areas are also facing ongoing shortages in this access to child care.

When families in my community are experiencing such difficulties, it's hard to support this legislation, because it does not guarantee or prioritise access for working families who need early childhood care so they can work. But those who are not working, studying or volunteering will also be subsidised, and, over the last three years, Labor has failed to meaningfully address supply-side constraints. Families in childcare deserts who have little to no access to childcare at all will be the most disadvantaged by this policy. This is despite the ACCC's final report into early childhood education finding:

A single approach to government regulation and intervention ('one size fits all') is unlikely to deliver government objectives or meet community expectations across all childcare markets in Australia.

Debate interrupted.