Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am in favour of social engineering if you can afford it, Senator Lundy. But you worked out that you could not afford anything more than one free day of child care a week. We have already exceeded, just in this budget alone, the amount of the outlays on child care that you were proposing in the last federal election. And I suspect that we will continue to do so as we make good, prudent use of the money which has been generated by prudent fiscal management over the last 10 years.

The fact is that the 30 per cent rebate provided by the coalition government is far more effective at meeting the cost of child care to Australian families. It is not based on age. It is not based on the cost of a particular provider of child care. It is a flat 30 per cent rebate for all out-of-pocket expenses for every hour of child care that families incur in a given week, and it is provided regardless of age. That is a fair policy. That is an effective policy that makes a big difference.

What is more, incidentally, do not forget that Mark Latham also proposed to scrap the family tax benefit part B; he was not going to continue with that. Stay-at-home parents would have lost that benefit under the family and tax policy announced by Mark Latham. Of course, that would also have substantially eroded the affordability of child care in Australia.

Senator Lundy talked today about sole parents and their access to child care. Mark Latham said on 14 September 2004, during the election campaign, that sole parents would be worse off in the annual calculation under his family and tax policy. So I think we need to see the whites of the eyes of the policy of the Labor Party before we have a chance to judge it. But, on the record to date, there is not much that is worth considering or taking seriously from the other side of the chamber.

We are not failing families, parents and providers, as Senator Lundy has suggested. We are dramatically improving the affordability of child care in Australia. We cannot control all of the circumstances in which child care is provided—that is true—but it is a matter of record that many more Australian families can access child care today than was the case before.

Senator Lundy criticised the decision recently by the ACCC to allow for the merger of the two biggest child-care providers in Australia. I would like to know what Senator Lundy considers to be the alternative to the process, whereby the ACCC would consider such proposals. It seems to me that they are extremely well equipped and well led to be able to make decisions of that kind. If Senator Lundy does not like it, I think she needs to tell us what process she would put in place to ensure that such mergers did not occur. But, as far as I am aware, it is not the policy of the Labor Party to dismantle the ACCC.

We have in front of us a policy which is working; a policy which is delivering affordable child care to Australians; a policy which is doubling and more the number of approved subsidised child-care places in Australia; and a policy which is now freeing up the physical geographical placement of child-care places through uncapping. I think that system is pretty good. It is delivering to Australian families. There are, of course, still problems in delivery of child care, but those problems have been substantially addressed in recent years. When I hear what the alternative is, I will be very happy to take on— (Time expired)