Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Scullion, the Minister representing the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. Is it true that the Treasury’s analysis of child care used an average weekly cost of just $83.20 as the basis of its claim that ‘child care has remained affordable’? Is it not the case that some families living in our larger cities in fact pay over $100 a day—that is, six times the estimate used by Treasury—to get child care for their kids? Can the minister now explain the basis of the estimate used by Treasury?

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Community Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the senator for her question. When you are looking at the Treasury report it is very important to look at the fundamentals of the report. We have already had one question from the other side that claims that for some reason or other the Treasury was not in support of the government’s position on this matter, which we have shown is absolutely not the case. We now have a question that goes to some of the detail, particularly about the differential cost of child care in regional Australia and child care in urban Australia.

There is a fundamental about the equity in the way that this government has handled the allocation of child care. Rather than decide that we are going to provide child care in this location and in that location, provide this type and for this demographic, we decided that the people most likely to make the very best decision about a child’s future are its parents. It is for that reason that we have provided directly to the parents the childcare benefit—and, as I informed the Senate earlier today, that is an average of $2,000 per family—and, of course, the childcare tax rebate of up to $4,000 for out-of-pocket expenses for each child per year. That is actually how we provide it, because it provides flexibility and choice.

This is a government that is not about dictating to other people how to run their lives. We know that the families are best represented by those in the family hierarchy. They know what is best for their children. They know whether they want child care near work or near home, or after-school care or day care. It is all about choice. This government is very proud of its record because we have continued to look at what families need.

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. My question was simply: what was the basis of the estimates used by Treasury? I would like the minister to answer that very simple question.

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister has a minute and a half left to complete his answer, and I would remind him of the question.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Community Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasury report does go to a number of issues. Not only am I delighted to see the Treasury’s report supporting government policy, but if those opposite had been reading widely about this issue they would also go to the childcare census—another independent group we can look to to get advice about how well the government is doing in the delivery of child care, particularly on availability and affordability. I read in the media—talking about reports—Labor’s interpretation of CPI. The Labor Party have come up with an interpretation themselves. We are not talking about somebody with some credibility in this area—not PricewaterhouseCoopers. The Labor Party decide on these things themselves. All I can say is that this government continues to deliver child care in a way that is flexible, affordable and available. And it is more affordable today than it ever was under Labor.

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I am tempted to re-ask my first question; I just simply wanted to know: what was the basis of the $83.20? But perhaps I will get that with the supplementary question. I further ask: is the minister aware of the Productivity Commission’s report on government services which notes that 189,000 children are currently unable to access the child care that is needed? On top of the $100-a-day fees that some families are paying, doesn’t that massive shortfall reinforce the fact that child care is in fact not accessible and not affordable? Does the minister still accept the advice of Treasury that families who cannot find affordable child care are just too damn choosy?

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Community Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To make a remark in this place about the capacity for parents to make decisions about their own children’s care I think is pretty dangerous. I still contend that families should be the people who make those choices and decisions. With regard to the question, and particularly with regard to both costs and availability, we quoted costs, but the cost is not factored against the subsidy that this government has provided—something that those opposite did not provide. There was no childcare benefit and there was no childcare tax rebate in 1996. And you talk about availability. You can quote the numbers from our hotline, which is actually credible information. There are currently between 100,000 and 120,000 childcare places available in Australia.