Download Fragment

Wednesday, 24 August 2011
Page: 5310

Senator JACINTA COLLINS (Victoria—Parliamentary Secretary for School Education and Workplace Relations) (10:41): I think I need to differentiate between the discussion that I was having Senator Xenophon, which was in relation to these particular measures, and the issues just raised by Senator Nash, which are more related to the cost impacts of the national quality framework and the assessments of those. I think it might be important to make that distinction.

With respect to modelling associated with the increase in costs likely to occur from the national quality framework, it was the COAG commissioned work from Access Economics that I was referring to. Again, given that this was independent economic modelling commissioned by COAG, I think that the veracity of this modelling should perhaps be considered when comparing work done by particular groups within the sector on the potential cost increases. I am aware of similar figures in the past which were in the order of $22 a day, as we talked about today. There were concerns that families, as a consequence of increases of such magnitude, would reduce their hours by 38 per cent. I think my earlier comments dealt with those matters. We have referred to the Access Economics work. We have highlighted that measures have been introduced from the start of this year in New South Wales without such dire consequences. I think I have also made the distinction between the national quality framework and what we are addressing in this bill, which are the savings designed to assist in the implementation of the national quality framework.

We can go back to the Access Economics figures, going up to the year 2014-15, for the increased costs that families will face. I stress that these are out-of-pocket costs rather than fees per day or per week costs, which do not deal with the significant component of government assistance in childcare support. The Access Economics estimate is that the increases are likely to be 57c per week for a child in full-time care. Again, that is the extreme example; most commonly, it is children in care for two days per week, on average. For a child in full-time care in 2010-11 the increase would be 57c per week. Has the government modelled the likely impact of containing the cap in that respect? I would have to say that the data to do that would obviously be available, but I think I can take it from the nod from my advisor, given what we believe is a reliable estimate of the likely impact, that the 57c per week has not been taken into account in the $7,500 per year cap, nor has the likely impact of that extra 57c per week on the 0.9 per cent of families who are under $100,000 per year been taken into account. I think that just comparing those figures demonstrates that it is likely to be an extraordinarily marginal effect.