Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Child care provides an important service to our society. It allows children to interact with their peers and become more independent from a young age, and it gives parents flexible options with regard to work and family arrangements. It is vital that child care be easily accessible. The bill before us, the Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Child Care Rebate) Bill 2011, goes some way towards supporting that.

The coalition agrees with the measures taken to pay the childcare rebate in weekly arrears. Indeed, we took that promise to the last election ourselves. Such a step, although it will make no difference to the budget bottom line, will make a significant difference to families by reducing their upfront costs by up to half—from $220 down to $110 in some cases. It is reported that up to 630,000 families will benefit from this change. This will also mean that childcare centres will have more certainty in receiving fees. Currently, up to 25 per cent of fees are going unpaid as parents wait for the quarterly rebate payment.

The benefits of such a simple change are clear. The benefits that this change will provide are also necessary. Child care is becoming more and more expensive for families. The myriad changes implemented by state Labor governments are putting increased pressure on both the sector and the families it supports. In my home state of Queensland alone, proposed changes to the DECKAS funding arrangements have caused the largest provider in the state, C&K, to advise its affiliates that they will need to increase their prices. Most are now looking at charging $25 to $28 a day. This is a sharp increase on the current daily out-of-pocket expense and may well price many families out of early education altogether.

These increases are not confined to Queensland. Changes to staff-to-children ratios regulations introduced by the New South Wales Labor government in anticipation of the proposed national reforms have resulted in some Sydneysiders paying up to $100 per day for child care. There have been reports of families being on the waiting lists of childcare centres for up to two years, and the industry fears that these waiting list times will balloon even more under the new staff-to-children ratio changes. Whilst all would welcome improvements to the childcare industry, we must ensure that the industry is not left under-resourced as a result of these rather questionable changes. With no additional funding yet announced, I fear this is what will happen, and that would make it increasingly difficult for families to access child care.

We have heard a lot of debate recently about the number of women in boardrooms. It has been reported that 40 per cent of families believe that child care is so expensive that it is not worth their while to work but that only 12 per cent say they do not need it. Perhaps factors such as the increasingly difficult access to child care need to be taken into account when analysing why there are so few women in senior positions within our companies.

It is worth noting that there have been no new announcements of funding for child care, particularly considering all the hype surrounding child care in the Kevin07 federal election just over three years ago. In fact, other than the steps taken—which only address the timing of payments, not the amount of payments—in the bill we are debating today, the only announcement made on childcare funding has been about a funding cut.

It is fair to say that, when it comes to child care, the Rudd and Gillard governments have both been failures. This was as true when Mr Rudd was opposition leader, then Prime Minister and when Ms Gillard was Deputy Prime Minister and minister responsible for child care as it is now that Ms Gillard is Prime Minister. Yes, it is hard to keep up to date with who is in charge of what area in the Labor government, but it does not matter which minister or Prime Minister we are speaking about—Labor has failed when it comes to child care. They have let down the very working families they always seek to claim as their own.

The government announced under last year’s budget that the childcare rebate would be decreased by $279 per child per year. At a time when the industry and families were expecting to receive at least some compensation for the significant increase in cost that the COAG ratio reforms are causing, this cut was at best disappointing and at worst potentially priced many families out of childcare and early education services.

When you are working full time and child care is costing you huge amounts every week, you quickly reach the $7,500 rebate. Additionally, the national quality framework that is currently being proposed by the government is expected to increase costs from $13 to $22 a day, despite the fact that the 11 per cent of families using childcare services at present are already paying more for child care than they earn.

Indeed, this cut of almost $300 a year is not merely an announcement; after the legislation that provided for the cut passed through the House of Representatives last year, Centrelink adjusted payments to families immediately, so reducing childcare rebate payments before the legislation had passed through the Senate. Should this legislation fail to pass through the Senate, the government will have to reimburse hundreds of Australian families who have unfairly had their payments cut before their time. Additionally, should this legislation not be passed, the government are reportedly facing an $87 million hole in their budget. This tells us a lot about just where ‘government savings’ are coming from: with one hand cutting assistance for services families use while, with the other hand enforces new taxes on them, causing rising basic costs of living.

You would think that, after scrapping the building of 222 new childcare centres around the country and so breaking another Labor promise, the government could redirect some of that $390 million saving towards alleviating cost-of-living pressures on Australian families, particularly in relation to child care. Instead, the government has done the opposite—it has tried to decrease the childcare rebate paid to families and to freeze indexation, which could cost families up to $1,000 per year and result in 72,000 families receiving a lower subsidy by 2014, according to the Australian Childcare Alliance’s President, Gwynn Bridge.

This shows just how out of touch this Labor government is and how they genuinely do not understand how much Australian families are hurting. It is becoming increasingly clear that this Labor government do not care about Australians but care only about political infighting and succumbing to the demands of the Greens.

Let me give you two examples of this. If Labor cared so much about helping families with their living costs, they could have put this weekly payment option into place in June last year. As Dr Sharman Stone said at that time, ‘With Labor support, parents could have had the money in their pockets from July 1, 2010, but will now have to wait a full 12 months to receive this fee relief.’

Why was this amendment not passed last year? The proposal was debated in the winter sitting—in the last week of the winter sitting, in fact. To be exact, the government could have passed this amendment on June 24 last year, but I guess Labor members had other things on their minds that day. Who could forget that on June 24 last year Labor knifed a first-term Prime Minister, replacing the Member for Griffith with the then responsible minister—and now Prime Minister—Ms Gillard. Clearly, the then minister was too busy with internal party fighting to worry about the relief such legislation could have provided for Australian families. This is just another example of how Labor cares more about what is happening in their own political family than about what would actually help Australian families.

There is another interesting aspect to this bill. In June last year, newly appointed Prime Minister Gillard refused to cave in to demands to make the childcare rebate payable weekly. However, the Greens then said, and continue to say today, that they will only support the government’s slashing of the childcare rebate in exchange for a higher frequency in the payments. Lo and behold, here we are speaking about a higher frequency for childcare rebate payments. This is of particular significance now, given that Centrelink has already begun deducting payments from families. So, does Prime Minister Gillard really believe that this is the right thing to do for Australian families, or is she just, once again, succumbing to Green demands so she can cling to power?

The coalition certainly believe it is the right thing to do. That is why we took this promise of weekly payments of the childcare rebate to the last election. Childcare services in Australia provide a vital service for society and our economy; however, the rising costs are beginning to seriously jeopardise its value. Paying the childcare rebate weekly goes some way to relieve upfront costs for parents and families, although there is a lot more that can be done.

I support the bill before the House, but I wish to place on record my extreme disappointment with this government and the Labor Party. Right from the day Labor was elected in November 2007 they have shown no interest in child care and, sadly, that seems set to continue. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context