Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this motion. Many would think I would not have an interest in this area because, of course, I deal with justice, customs and a range of other issues. But I can speak from personal experience, as a member of a family with children who have experienced child care. They are now a little older, but let me say from the outset that we went through the range of issues that have been raised today and it disappoints me even more to find that the difficulties that confronted my family then seem to have been continued and exacerbated under the coalition government. We had the opportunity of using day care and other facilities to allow both my partner and I to work. But when you look at the Howard government’s approach to this issue you see that it leaves a lot to be desired.

For those who may have just joined the debate, the motion went to the Senate condemning the Howard government for ignoring in the budget the urgent needs of parents struggling with the cost, availability and quality of child care. It particularly noted the incompetence of the Howard government in allocating $60 million for child-care places that will never be delivered, given there are already 100,000 unallocated places due mainly to the shortages of child-care professionals. The next thing that was noted was the failure to bring forward the 30 per cent rebate on out-of-pocket child-care expenses, despite criticism of the rebate from the government’s own backbench and the fact that the child-care fees are rising at a rate far in excess of that of other goods and services. Of course, parents who cannot find child care clearly cannot work and that adds to the skills shortage. But let me deal with those in turn.

Two days ago in the House we saw this government, which is becoming increasingly out of touch, abandon Australian families and relegate the issue of child care to the too-hard basket. It is now clear that this government has totally run out of ideas and true leadership when it comes to the burgeoning child-care crisis in neighbourhoods across Australia. I think Mr Peter Costello and his government are trying to con Australian families on child care. It is almost like the pea and thimble trick, trying to hide the pea and make you guess where the empty thimble is. But of course this is an issue that hurts working families, and is more serious than that. This tired government has given up on trying to provide safe, affordable and quality child care for Australian families. That is where we are today.

In fact, it has gotten worse under this government, not better. You would expect under this government that there could have been opportunities, because we had continuously pointed out the failings for the last couple of years. It could have taken a leaf out of our book and said, ‘The Labor Party got it right on this issue and we should fix it.’ It has certainly taken many other leaves out of our book, but not on this issue. It seems to be intent on hurting families in this way.

Take a look at the government’s approach to the uncapping issue. The government announced that it will get rid of the cap that currently applies to outside school hours care and family day care from 1 July 2006. It has claimed that this will result in 25,000 new places at a cost of $60.2 million over four years. Figures, figures, figures—that is all we get from this government. This government is becoming out of touch because families do not want figures; families want action out of this government, and they are not getting it. One hand of this government does not seem to know what the other is doing. There are still 67,000 outside school hour places and 30,000 family day care places that were promised in previous budgets but are unused.

This is an obvious failure by the government to show any leadership on this very important issue for working families. The solution that the government came up with is to promise more money, which they say will create 25,000 new places over four years, with a price tag of $60.2 million. But, sadly, this completely misses the mark. This is where they should have followed the Labor Party—we had pointed out the problems—but they chose not to. The short fix was the political fix, which was to say, ‘We are throwing in 25,000 new places at a cost of $60.2 million.’ The unwritten line is: ‘but not really’, because they are not really addressing the real issue. Removing the cap on child-care places is not going to solve the problem when we have oversupply in some areas and chronic shortages in others.

One of the issues that this government has failed to address is ensuring that the age-dependent places are available. For instance, there is no mechanism in place to ensure that early child care is provided. Infants from six weeks to two years old clearly require intensive supervision, which is why two carers are required for eight children. The public expect that; families expect that; I would expect that. Of course it is extremely labour intensive, and rightly so. But none of the subsidies or payments reflects this.

If you compare two hypothetical child-care facilities, both employing two carers, where one centre caters for six-week- to two-year-olds and the other one caters for three- to five-year-olds, the centre with very young infants can offer a maximum of eight places, whereas the centre for three- to five-year-olds can offer 24 places. In this hypothetical example, these two centres have similar overheads, such as rent and wages, which is not unusual in the same area or city. They would also have similar wage structures. But this government treats these centres as the same. It is no wonder, when you look at those types of outcomes, that there are massive shortages of infant care. It is prohibitively expensive for child-care centres to provide infant care. And what is this government doing about it? Nothing at all. Every time a working Australian walks into a child-care centre and is told that there is no infant care available, they have this government to thank for it. Costs go up. Working families find that child-care fees do rise. It is not surprising. Centres have overheads and wages to meet, and their costs increase—just like insurance premiums, petrol prices and interest rates.

Recently, a family in Queensland told my office about the increasing strain on their family budget. This is a middle-income family with both parents working full time, with a combined income of around $100,000. The government has finally provided them with $19.60 a week in tax relief, but this has already been eaten up by the $30 per week in extra fuel costs, $77 each month in higher interest on their mortgage and the like and child-care fees that are rising above the inflation rate. In some respects it is the people on middle incomes who are finding these costs difficult. One would not think that at first blush. Both parents want to continue working and participate in the labour market, they want access to quality, affordable child-care facilities and they want them within reasonable reach of their home or work, depending on their arrangements. They want the child-care facilities to be able to cater to their needs. They do not expect that it is going to be easy and they do not expect child care to be provided while ignoring the associated costs, but they do expect this government to do more than what it has been doing to date. They do expect a little bit more from this government that what it has provided in this budget.

Look at the other side of the coin and at how many people out there who are care givers and who could otherwise be in the workforce—I dare say that that is a substantial number. In many cases, those parents who cannot find child care also then cannot find work. It is not that they cannot find work, but they cannot find the opportunity to participate in the labour market, because they are primary care givers.

The ABS reports that up to 160,000 women—although of course there are men who are child-care providers—want to work but cannot, because of a lack of care for their children. This country, as we have said, has no plan for skills. This country is not even looking at how it maximises its use of currently available skills in those that are locked into care but who otherwise want to participate in the workforce. And why? It is because the government does not have a plan to address this issue—to ensure that there are skills. I was shocked today to hear Senator Vanstone in question time seeming to blame the government of some 15 years ago. The problem is that the government of the last 10 years has had the responsibility of dealing with this and has not. It has failed to adequately address the broader issues. It has chosen not to. When you look at the government’s approach, you see that in 1996 it had the opportunity of continuing programs to ensure that there was skills development and to ensure that we would be able to meet our needs for a range of apprentices who would ultimately become tradespersons in trades ranging from mechanical to electrical to bakers and butchers and all the other areas. But the government has not put in a plan to ensure that this issue is addressed.

One area where the government could help is child care. Many of the Australian mums and dads looking for child care are skilled workers temporarily out of the labour market. They could return to work if there were adequate child-care facilities. The government could ensure that those mums and dads were skilled to meet needs in areas that are currently there and available but, as I have said, it has chosen to make it more and more difficult for them to enter the labour market.

If you hold this issue up to the light, you can see that the lack of child care is contributing to this country’s skills shortage right when we need skilled workers the most. Last week, the Reserve Bank identified the shortage of skilled workers as one of the significant constraints on our economy; it is putting pressure on inflation and upward pressure on interest rates. There are good examples of skilled workers who want to work but cannot because of the unavailability or lack of affordable child care. To see that brings shame on this government. We have a government that has managed—quite adeptly, when you think about it—to bring about a shortage and a surplus at the same time. It is quite an achievement for a government to be able to do both at the same time. Looking at the overall picture you could take the view that it is humorous, but this is deadly serious. Parents who want to work are finding it really tough not on one but on a number of fronts, and the child-care shortage just adds to their problems.

Turning now to the 30 per cent child-care rebate, the Howard government grows more arrogant every day. The only money from the budget that is guaranteed to be spent is the $2.3 million earmarked for advertising the 30 per cent rebate on out-of-pocket child-care expenses. This is the same rebate that the government has been talking about for years and still has not addressed. The advertising campaign should highlight the fact that many parents are not eligible for the rebate and that few families are going to receive anything like the promised $4,000. Let us have another look at that Queensland family. It is not going to receive the promised $4,000—probably nowhere near it. Depending on how much the child-care centre charges, they will probably receive just over half that amount. The government has demonstrated that it lacks leadership and direction when it comes to this important area of child care in Australia.

Does the government’s so-called solution provide more guaranteed places? I think that argument has been well and truly made, and the answer is no, it does not. The government has not been able to address that issue. Has the government made child care more affordable? The answer, again, is no. Has the government improved or brought about better quality child care? The answer is no; it is as simple as that. Has the government committed money to planning to ensure that there are no shortfalls? The problem in child care of course is that there is a surplus in one area and a deficit in another. Has the government sought or planned to make sure that there is child care available? No. Despite a range of promises, it has not been able to fix it, and this budget does not fix it.

Child care is the government’s responsibility. Senator Vanstone would like to blame others. I think that is the problem with this government: it is actually starting to believe its own rhetoric. It is starting to believe that it is not its fault when things go wrong and that it is somehow the opposition’s fault for when it was in government 10 years ago. The government fails to take responsibility for its day-to-day management and for its future plans, which it should have started on in 1996 when it came into government but did not. That is when the government should have started its planning, but it failed.

Now the government are turning around asking, ‘Who is to blame because we have failed to plan for our future needs and for the future needs of our children?’ The government say, ‘We have to find an excuse and blame someone.’ That is what the government would easily do; they sought to blame the Labor Party, as it was the closest thing they were able to latch on to. It is about time the government let go of that crutch and started to take responsibility for their own failings, because Australia cannot afford for the government to sit on their heels and do nothing. Australia cannot afford for the government to start and continue the blame game. Australia cannot afford for the government to not take seriously the inequities, the difficulties, the oversupply and the undersupply in this area and to not put in a plan to fix them. The government cannot continue to simply say: ‘Management is not our prerogative. We will leave it to the invisible hand of the market to sort out.’

It does not need to go to the other extreme of a planned economy. No-one is saying that. However, it does need to take a strategic view and plan and recognise that it does have a role to play in the market, it does have a role to assist the market, it does have a role to provide incentive in the market, it does have a role to ensure that the market does in fact work and, where the market fails, it does have a role to ensure that it can correct that failure. This government has failed to recognise those issues and rather left them to that old, invisible hand and hopes that works.

Of course, as I have said the government has not committed any money to planning, even in child care. Despite promising to expand the existing access hotline so parents can find out what vacancies exist in the area, no funding has been announced for the phone line. You have to ask yourself: ‘Where is that going to come from? Where is the phone access to a hotline going to actually be implemented from?’ The government has also announced it would introduce a child-care management system, which appears to be a start to collecting data and better managing child-care places, but strangely there is no money for that. Why is there no money for that? The government is now in position which only reinforces what I have said—that there is no plan. The government is going to promise a plan and blame the Labor Party for its failures. (Time expired)