Judith Adams (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to respond to the motion by Senator Lundy. I think it is very important that those opposite really understand what our government has done. In the 2006-07 budget, the government has committed an extra $120.5 million over four years for the child-care package. This is in addition to the $9.5 billion the Howard government will spend over four years to 2008-09. Compared to Labor, the Howard government has doubled spending on child care, and the number of approved child-care places has doubled, from around 300,000 in 1996 to 600,000 in 2005.

Under Labor, I remember well that mothers did not get too many options or support for child care on their return to work. Under Labor, unemployment was at record levels and real wages were falling. Child care was a very expensive prospect when you were already paying mortgage interest rates at 17 per cent, and the Labor government of the time did not provide a child-care benefit or the child-care tax rebate. Contrast that to the current situation where, under the Howard government, families now receive, on average, over $2,000 per year in child-care benefits.

This government supports families to choose the way they would best like to care for their young children. By comparison, Labor opposed recent legislation to ensure that unused places could be more easily reallocated to areas of need. Their proposed amendment would have locked up places for providers who did not use them for over 12 months at a time, denying parents in need of a place. As well as supporting families with the cost of child care, the Howard government provides other family payments: family tax benefit and the maternity payment. On average, families are receiving $7,700 in family tax benefit.

In other budget initiatives, the government has committed to an additional $120.5 million in the 2006-07 budget to provide an even more responsive child-care system for parents. The government has removed caps on the number of approved child-care places for out of school hours care and family day care. Long day care is already uncapped.

While I am on the subject of caps being removed, I will mention that a young researcher in my office has just given me a copy of an article headed ‘Leak shows Canberra funding delay’. Michelle Grattan wrote this on 7 April 2004 and it includes the following comment:

Yesterday, Victorian Premier Steve Bracks called for federal funding for a shortfall of 3600 outside-school-hours places in Victoria. He urged the Howard Government to lift the cap on after-school care, saying the full level of unmet demand could be 10,000. The northern suburbs of Melbourne were short by more than 1000 places, while the eastern areas needed more than 900 places. The Victorian Government would provide $10 million to the program if the Federal Government lifted the cap, Mr Bracks said.

I will now continue on the budget initiatives. Ninety-nine per cent of places in the sector will be uncapped from 1 July 2006. Services will be able to set up or expand to meet demand where and when it occurs, provided they meet approval, including quality and licensing requirements. Parents using the newly created child-care places will be eligible for subsidised child care through the child-care benefit.

The child-care industry has largely welcomed the moves to uncap the number of child-care places. I quote from the Canberra Times of Wednesday, 10 May which said:

National Family Day Care Council of Australia chief executive, Linda Latham, said she was ‘delighted’ there would be more money in the hands of parents.

Ms Latham said the child care sector would be grateful for the removal of the cap on the number of places.

The Australian on Wednesday, 10 May said:

Mission Australia chief, Patrick McClure, said the childcare reforms would help parents.

‘Removing limits on subsidised childcare places will assist sole parents moving from welfare to work’, he said.

I am also aware that Mr Amgad Botros, the managing director of Western Australian child-care centre Go Bananas in Joondalup, has written to Minister Brough to congratulate him on the news that places will now be uncapped. I would like to read his letter because I think it really gives a very good understanding of how these child-care organisations feel about it. He says:

Dear Minister Brough,

I would like to congratulate you and your department for changing the child care funding structure in relation to Outside School Hours Care (OSHC) Child Care as announced in Tuesday’s Federal Budget.

We at Go Bananas provide a high quality, dedicated OSHC service in a stimulating age appropriate environment for children. This is based on a professional development programme which includes physical activities to curb the emerging obesity problem in Australian children.

The recent changes you have made will provide opportunities for new services to be established which will address a real and significant need Australia wide.

Historically, OSHC child care places were regulated and resulted in limited services being provided from long day care child care services. In many instances, these do not provide an age appropriate stimulating environment (i.e. for children aged 5-12 years).

Furthermore, the regulated funding structure meant that parents could not afford this type of child care. Accordingly, parents were forced to stay home or reduce their working hours to care for their children before and after school and during school holidays.

We believe the changes just announced will reduce the red tape involved in establishing dedicated OSHC services and will enable more mothers, in particular, to enter the workforce.

In particular, we acknowledge the work that Dr Mal Washer did in supporting these changes along with your department.

By all accounts a long term win/win outcome for children, their parents and the broader economy!

Yours Sincerely,

Amgad Botros

Managing Director

Go Bananas OSHC Service

As I said, that centre is in Joondalup in Western Australia. This budget measure is one of the most significant changes to the provision of child-care places in Australian public policy history and the most significant change since the Howard government introduced the child-care benefit.

Parents on income support such as parenting payment who are re-entering the workforce will also benefit from this budget through the increased funding to the JET Child Care Program, which pays almost all of the child-care cost gap between fees and the CCB. The budget also funds improvements to compliance checking and further supports the quality assurance system. These changes mean that the full value from the record level of expenditure in child care made by the Howard government goes to support parents who use approved child care. Parents can be assured that there will be more rigorous financial compliance and checking. This will ensure that parents get even more value for the assistance they get through CCB.

The government has also committed to a significant investment to introduce a new child-care management system to ensure that up-to-date and accurate information is available on supply, demand and use of child care. Parents seeking information on available child care in their local area will be able to ring the child-care access hotline on 1800670305 from 1 July 2006.

Long day care places are already uncapped. A child-care centre can set up when and where they want so long as they meet state and territory licensing and regulations. All places at approved child-care centres are CCB funded, so parents will receive subsidised child care. The Australian government’s role is to assist parents with the cost of child care, not to build or directly provide child care. The government supports parents’ choices about which child-care service they use.

Child-care benefit is available to parents who use any type of approved child-care service. Long day care is not the only type of child care. The government has uncapped family day care, which also provides care for children under five years of age. While we acknowledge that there are some inner-city hotspots for demand for long day care, we also get reports of oversupply of places. The government’s child-care management system will give an accurate picture of demand and supply.

The Howard government has doubled the number of funded places to 600,000 compared to 300,000 in 1996. The government is providing a record level of funding to families for child care through child-care benefit and the child-care tax rebate. On average, families are receiving over $2,000 in child-care benefit per year. In addition, working families will be able to receive the 30 per cent child-care tax rebate—up to $4,000 per child per year on out-of-pocket child-care costs.

Low-income families already get the maximum rate of CCB which, on average, covers around 65 per cent of child-care costs. In addition, the government has increased funding for JET child-care fee assistance for eligible parents looking for work, starting work or in training. This assistance covers most of the child-care fees to help low-income parents’ transition to work. Recently published CPI figures do not account for the benefit of the child-care tax rebate. Costs of care rose at twice the level under the previous Labor government. Recent reports show that the cost of care remains lower in real terms than it did under Labor. We have more than doubled spending compared to Labor.

The Howard government has spent almost $16 billion on child care over the 10 years it has been in power. In comparison, Labor government expenditure on child care was less than $7 billion during its last 10 years in government. People often look at the child-care benefit in isolation. Not only does it provide more support than the previous government, but we have also introduced the child-care tax rebate and increased JET Child Care funding. Families also receive further assistance from the Howard government to raise their children: family tax benefit parts A and B, the maternity payment and a range of other services such as parenting programs.

The Australian government has already announced support to recruit more family day care carers. The government provided funding for the ‘Let’s get building’ campaign run by the National Family Day Care Council, which aims to recruit an extra 1,200 carers. The Australian government also announced in last year’s budget the family day care start-up payment of $1,500, which will assist new family day care carers to meet the initial costs of setting up their home based child-care businesses through family day care. With the introduction of child-care management systems there will be more up-to-date data on demand and supply. This information will be made available to potential providers. If necessary we will provide more information if any particular intervention is required in the future. Also, there are a range of payments under the Australian Government Child Care Support Program that help eligible FDC and OSHC services to establish in areas of high need. This unprecedented government initiative, together with other family-friendly funding initiatives announced in the budget, clearly refutes Senator Lundy’s claim that parents’ child-care needs are being ignored.

I would like to continue on Labor’s record. Labor has no child-care plan. Child-care costs rose at twice the rate under Labor as under the Howard government. Labor only provided half the level of funding and places that are provided currently. Labor did not provide a child-care benefit or the child-care tax rebate. Labor opposed recent legislation to ensure that unused places could be more easily reallocated to areas of need. Labor’s proposed amendment would have locked up places with providers who did not use them for over 12 months at a time, thus denying parents in need of a place. Mothers did not get too many options on returning to work or getting support for child-care choices under Labor, when there were record levels of unemployment and falling real wages. Child care was a very expensive prospect when you were already paying for interest rates of 17 per cent and getting a job was very difficult. I hope that some of the issues I have raised will go towards refuting Senator Lundy’s motion.