Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Child Care Rebate) Bill 2011: Second Reading

I rise this evening to make some remarks regarding the Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Child Care Rebate) Bill 2011 and I am very pleased to do so. The shadow minister for child care and early childhood learning, Susan Ley, the member for Farrer, is respon- sible for this in the other place. The childcare rebate is available for families and it covers a percentage of the—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Kroger)—Senator Nash, can we just hold it there. There is just way too much noise in the chamber. Could senators who are leaving the chamber please do so quietly. Thank you, Senator Nash.

Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy President. It is available to cover a percentage of the out-of-pocket expenses associated with approvedchild care. The aim is to assist parents who are work- ing, studying or undertaking training by providing that extra financial assistance that they need. It covers 50 per cent of those out-of-pocket expenses.

Before the last election the coalition committed to change the payments, which currently happen quar- terly, to weekly payments. We certainly believe that a weekly payment is going to be far more beneficial for families who are struggling, as many of them are, to meet the costs of child care. It certainly seemed appro- priate and the right thing to do to support the move to have that rebate paid weekly. This is about affordable and accessible child care for parents. It is interesting to see—and the coalition is very pleased that the govern- ment has followed our lead—that this bill requires the change in those payment to a weekly or fortnightly arrangement. The bill says it can be either a weekly or fortnightly arrangement because that depends on whether the childcare centres’ reporting is weekly or fortnightly. The majority are done weekly.

The rebate under this bill can also be paid directly to the provider. That is an option that has not been avail- able before and one that we support in terms providing assistance to those childcare providers. Of course, if those parents choose to have the rebate come directly to them, that will continue to be the default mechanism and the rebate will still go to those parents. It is about helping parents. It is about ensuring that they have ease of access to that funding mechanism from the government. As I said, we support that from the government and we are supportive of that aspect of the bill.

It is interesting that this legislation to ease the way these payments happen for parents is actually even more necessary for parents because of the government’s changes to the childcare rebate. What we have seen them do recently, through a bill that was debated here recently and is still before the Senate, is to de- crease the childcare rebate from $7,778 down to $7,500. The government has also cut the indexation for that rebate completely.

I did make some comments in the last sitting around that bill on that aspect. I certainly believe it shows that this government is out of touch with the needs of families out there in our communities, particularly our re- gional communities. What we have seen from this gov- ernment is a cutting of the rebate through that other legislation and taking away the indexation completely. This government should be doing more to assist families with their childcare costs and childcare expenses. They should be making it easier, not making it harder. Parents will welcome this speedier mechanism for that childcare rebate because at least it will be one thing— one very small thing admittedly—that will assist to ease some of their childcare burden.

I know many of our families out there in the com- munities have been quite astounded by the fact that thegovernment would actually move to cut the childcare rebate. I know many families in regional areas were quite furious that the government would move to cut that. When the government talks about assisting fami- lies and assisting working families and then turn around, drop the rebate and cut the indexation simply just does not make sense if this government really be- lieves that families need to be better assisted.

The government has said that $86.3 million will be saved by those changes that it has made. The govern- ment claim that they need that funding to fund the na- tional quality framework. It seems quite extraordinary that this government would be identifying funding that is going to make it more difficult for parents to fund the national quality framework, especially when you compare it to some of the waste and mismanagement that we have seen under this government. It was $81.9 million that has been wasted by this government ad- ministering an emissions trading scheme that does not even exist. It is no wonder that families out in our communities are at least perplexed and probably at worst furious with this government where they need to strip $80 million off families by lowering their pay- ments for the childcare rebate when they have wasted around the same amount of money administering an emissions trading scheme that does not even exist.

If this government had any ability at all to manage the economy properly we would not need to see that cut in those childcare rebates to go towards funding the national quality framework. We only have to look at things like the pink batts debacle, the Home Insulation Program—$2.4 billion that has been wasted and mis- managed in that program. Yet here is the government ripping $80 million away from Australian working families to pay for another program because they have wasted and mismanaged so much money in other areas. We only have to look at things like the BER, the school halls, the Building the Education Revolution, Madam Acting Deputy President Fisher. I know you have been very focused on that and making sure that people out there in the Australian community are aware of the waste and mismanagement. It is about a $1.7 billion blow-out on the school halls program. Yet here we have the government—

Senator McLucas—Have you talked to any parents?

I will take that interjection. Sena- tor McLucas asked me if I have talked to any parents. I think Senator McLucas would know that I talk to parents very regularly out there in our regional communities, having been one myself. They may well love the program, Senator McLucas, but you know as well as I do that they hate the waste and mismanagement. Interestingly, when we compare the private sector and what they have managed to do and the public sector through the state government, the waste and mismanagement inthe state government sector has been nothing short of appalling. It is no wonder that we see this absolute disaster in New South Wales of a Labor government when they mismanage programs like that so badly.

The point is that the Australian people are absolutely astonished that the government can waste billions of dollars on the one hand and yet on the other hand expect Australian working families, through cuts to their childcare rebate, to pay for the national quality frame- work. I think anybody with any sense and sensibility would see how incredibly stupid that is. If the government had just managed to in any way, shape or form manage the economy properly they would not need to be putting this pressure on Australian families. Next they will be raiding the kid’s piggy banks saying, ‘Quick, we need a bit more money, where can we drag it out of next?’ Instead of focusing on the proper man- agement of the economy, they do as they always do and move to taxes, move to raiding, move to cutting programs like the childcare rebate. It is simply not acceptable.

That leads me to the national quality framework it- self. It is all interrelated in one way or another. It is all about child care. It is all about how government ad- dresses the needs of the childcare sector. With the na- tional quality framework, we believe that it sounds good if every childcare worker has to be qualified and there has to be an increase to staff to child ratios. Sure it sounds good and we all want the best system possi- ble, but the policy needs to be realistic. I made some comments about this in this place recently. There is a critical shortage of qualified workers, and there has been some talk about exemptions—not a lot of detail around that. But if we have a requirement for every childcare worker to be qualified when we have some- thing like three out of 10 alone in Victoria who are not, how on earth are we going to provide the workforce for those childcare centres? We have hundreds of centres currently searching for qualified staff and we are going to particularly see the impact of this on rural and re- gional communities. I was recently up on the North Coast chatting to a lady there. Senator McLucas will be pleased to hear I was again out on the ground talking to people in these centres.

Senator McLucas—I do not doubt it.

Thank you, Senator McLucas, I will take that. For the Hansard record Senator McLucas did indicate that she didn’t doubt that I spoke to those people out in the communities and I thank her for that.

The lady who was in charge of the childcare centre had 15 years experience in this centre and was working 12-hour to 13-hour days and had an amazing connection with and a real love for these children that she was looking after. It was a brilliantly run centre. Yet she has no formal qualifications, so she is in this limbo land atthe moment—and I am sure there are many senators, even on the other side of the chamber, who would agree with me that this is an issue that needs to be addressed—of not knowing if she is going to have a job next year, if she is going to be able to apply for an exemption and how it is all going to work. I think we need to be very clear as to what we hear from govern- ment about how this situation is going to be managed, because we all support improving quality but we have got to be practical and realistic in how we deliver that improved quality. So we will certainly be listening very closely to the government as to how those exemptions are going to be applied and how that is going to impact on those childcare centres.

The National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care is going to put increased pressure on families. That is very disappointing for people out in our communities, particularly those in our regional communities, when what they need is assistance. They need things to be made easier and not harder. The cut to the childcare rebate is going to affect about 20,700 families. While the government have all the arguments up their sleeve about why this is a good thing, it is interesting to note that Childcare Alliance Australia has indicated, from the work that they have done, that about 74 per cent of parents will have some difficulty in meeting the $13 to $22 a day extra cost that is going to be put on their families.

That is something that we really need to be very aware of. If we allow things to get more difficult for our families in terms of being able to access child care then it is going to be harder for parents to return to the workforce, to manage that juggling between work and family. I think many of us in this place know that jug- gling between work and family, and it is certainly not something that relates only to this place. Families right across the country are having to balance their work commitments with their family commitments. Many choose to do it and many have to do it, but we in this place have to be very mindful of that and we need to be mindful that any of the decisions that the government takes and any of the policies that the government wants to put in place through legislation should be of benefit to those families. There should not be policies that are going to make things more difficult. Increasing the costs, so making it more difficult to access those childcare places, is by any stretch of the imagination a step backwards for those families.

I and many others in this place including, I am sure, Senator Hanson-Young, who is down at the other end of the chamber, have all faced the issue of having children in child care. It is vitally important that we get it right. On that basis, the coalition certainly believes that the government should reconsider the national quality framework to put some practical common sense into it, to put some realism into the requirements of that framework. As I said, we are all supportive of improving quality right throughout the childcare sector, but it has got to be sensibly done. There have got to be measures that improve opportunities for families and parents and in the meantime do not place a greater burden, an unnecessary burden, on the operation of child- care centres. We certainly believe that indexation should be reinstated immediately. To cut indexation simply to find some money to be able to fund the national quality framework, given that this government has wasted billions and billions of dollars, is simply absurd and quite abhorrent to many of the Australian families out there in the community.

It is interesting to note as to that national quality framework that the bill has not yet been passed but apparently Centrelink has already enacted the reduced rebate, which means a lowering of those dollars being paid to parents. It is really quite extraordinary, and I stand to be corrected if that is not the case but I do understand that indeed it is the case, that the government would move to have Centrelink do that before the legislation has actually been passed. I am sure colleagues on the other side will correct me if I am wrong about that. If I am right, I think it is an extraordinarily arrogant act of government to move down that path, to enact this before this place has even had the opportunity to deal with the legislation.

As for the bill before us and the related childcare measures, the government made promises before the 2007 election that they simply have not kept. The government said that they would make child care more affordable. We can see from the fact that the rebate is being cut that that is simply not the case. There is no way anyone can argue with that. Before the election they said they were going to make child care more af- fordable. Now they have cut the rebate, which is going to make it harder. Senator Williams, you do not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that is going to make it more difficult for families.

Senator Williams—Not at all.

So that is a promise that simply was not kept by this government.

Senator Williams—Another one!

Yes, thank you, Senator Williams, and I will get to that. The government also promised an additional 260 childcare centres. I think we all remem- ber the Kevin07-version Prime Minister. Are we going to go to a Kevin11-version Prime Minister? Who would know? The Kevin07-version Prime Minister promised to fix the double drop-off and have 260 more childcare centres.

Opposition senators interjecting—

That woke up everybody on the other side, didn’t it, Senator Williams?

Senator Williams—Yes.

So what have we got? Two hun- dred and sixty? No. Two hundred and forty? No. A hundred and fifty? No. Eighty? No. Seventy, do you think, Senator Williams?

Senator Williams—No.

We have got 38—another broken promise from the Labor government. While we are on broken promises the best one—I cannot let this one go by, Senator Williams—is about the carbon tax. What was it that the Prime Minister said? Let me refresh my memory: ‘There will be no carbon tax under any government I lead.’ What do we have now? This has really woken the other side up, Senator Williams.

Senator Williams—It is so embarrassing for them, isn’t it?

I know they defend it. It relates to the issue of government not being trustworthy when it comes to child care, because they have a track record. I think it relates perfectly, Senator Williams, because the government has a track record of this and cannot be trusted to deliver a decent environment, a decent framework, for the childcare sector, which is what we are seeing.

The cutting of the rebate is obviously going to create real difficulties for families. We support the legislation before us today because, as I said, it was our policy going up to the last election that we would change the payment arrangements to weekly rather than quarterly. I am happy to say it: that is a good thing. But when you compare this with the other measures that the govern- ment has in place for child care, it is clear that the government simply does not understand the needs of families in this community. It simply does not understand the pressures that families are under. It cannot possibly understand, because it is going to make it harder for the families, not easier. Certainly those families out there, particularly in the regional centres, are incredibly dis- appointed that this government has not recognised the needs of the families and has not recognised that the lower rebate is going to be a very difficult impost for them. This government should simply reconsider all of that as it moves forward.

But I will commend the government. The bill before us today is a good move forward. We have seen the move to weekly or fortnightly payments under this leg- islation, which I am sure will be appreciated by fami- lies. We will look to see the government reconsider some of the other measures they have in place for the childcare sector and for families and children right across the country.