Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Early Childhood and Child Care, Senator Kim Carr. Given the cost of child care has risen by more than 20 per cent since Julia Gillard became Prime Minister, and according to Australia's largest childcare provider—

Government Senators:

Government senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Wait a minute, Senator Nash. Resume your seat. I am entitled to hear the question on both sides.

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Given the cost of child care has risen by more than 20 per cent since Julia Gillard became Prime Minister and that, according to Australia's largest childcare provider, Goodstart, Australian families can expect to be hit with an extra $2,000 in childcare costs as a result of Labor policies, does the minister concede that Labor has made it more expensive to raise a family?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Nash for her question. This is the first question we have received for some time—in fact, I think it might be the first question ever—on child care—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is certainly the first I have received. We had today an announcement from the opposition that when it comes to new policy they will have an inquiry. They will inquire into whether or not they need a new policy. They will go to the next election with a proposition that says they have got the mirror out; they are going to look into it. That is essentially the policy we are looking at today: a policy of looking into the mirror.

When it comes to the question of whether or not it is in fact more expensive for child care under a Labor government, of course that is one of the great myths that the coalition pedals. It is a myth that Labor's reforms have in fact made it more costly. Take, for example, the classic case of a family on an income of $75,000 a year. In 2004 child care would account for some 13 per cent of a weekly budget. By 2011 it was just 7.5 per cent. This is a direct consequence of the Labor government's commitment to quality child care. We raised the childcare rebate from 30 per cent to 50 per cent. We have increased the maximum limit by more than $3,000 per child. We have also allowed parents to receive the payment each fortnight rather than wait all year for the money to arrive. I understand that is part of your suggestions at the moment—that is, we put some sort of tax deduction system in. Of course we know who that advantages; it advantages high-income earners.

It is true that childcare fees are rising and quality does have a price, but the net rise has been no faster than we saw under Prime Minister Howard. Over the last four years— (Time expired)

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I remind the minister that under Labor the childcare rebate has been slashed from $8,179 to $7½ thousand; the baby bonus has been slashed, making it more expensive for a family to have more than one child; and the promise to make child care more accessible has been scrapped, after Labor broke its promise to build 260 new childcare centres. Why does the government continue to break its promises to Australian families when it comes to child care, putting further strain on household budgets already under pressure from the rising cost of living?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When it comes to the question of investment, this government has a very, very proud record. Over the next four years this government will invest more than $22 billion in child care and early childhood education—$22 billion. That is more than triple the funding of the coalition in its last four years.

We have had to make that investment for a number of reasons. We want quality of education for every Australian child, and we expect that the education of our children will begin in childcare placements. That is why we are working in partnership with the states and territories to ensure that every childcare provider is delivering for this nation's children. That means better staffing, better childcare ratios. It means better staff training. It means a transparent rating system for parents. It also means we are able to ensure that we can sustain quality— (Time expired)

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Will the minister now concede that the government has failed to make child care more affordable, failed to make child care more accessible and has completely lost touch with the cost-of-living pressures facing Australian families?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I think I have already indicated to the chamber, child care has declined as a percentage of income. We have seen it decline from 13 per cent of weekly earnings for a family of $75,000 a year, down to 7.5 per cent. We have seen this year alone more than 600 services open. Accessibility is actually improving under this government.

We are spending $22 billion in new investments. We have 20 per cent more children in child care than there were in 2007. So in terms of reach, the policy positions of this government are working, they are effective and they enjoy a higher level of quality for the parents of this country than occurred under those knuckle draggers on the other side of the chamber that pursued a policy of reducing standards, limiting access and limiting the benefits to the high income in this country. (Time expired)