NON-DISCRIMINATORY CHILD CARE FUNDING AND PAID PARENTAL
LEAVE
I am a former lawyer, now a mother, living in Brisbane. I have been campaigning
for a radical change to childcare policy to end discriminatory funding
against parent care and redistribute all or part of the childcare budget
(incl. daycare subsidies, paid parental leave (PPL), baby bonus, Family
tax Benefit B ) as a voucher to parents.
The voucher funding would be "blind" to parental workforce status
and childcare choice. It would address parent and childcare industry concerns
that the 7 December 2009 Brisbane COAG meeting decision to spend $61 million
between 2010/11 to 2013/14 to support the new daycare industry standards
will add $17-$22 to the cost of caring for each child with little results.
See: http://www.news.com.au/national/childcare-blow-for-families/story-e6frfkvr-1225808019567
Such a policy could be sold to the electorate if we switch from the ideological
feminist-controlled debate about women's roles, home-maker allowances
or stay-home mums to a debate about parents' childcare choices. As long
as we accept a different funding track for parents who "do their
own childcare work" (stay-home mums, dads, however called) we brand
that group as "parental childcare worker" and march them off
into funding oblivion. The debate must be about childcare funding equity
for all parents, regardless of their childcare choice.
At present, the contradictory subsidies mean that some get higher funding
(eg. daycare), some double dip (in 2011 under Rudd's system you can get
PPL, put your child in daycare for the full 18 weeks and get FTB B too
if income low enough) and some miss out altogether (eg. two-income families
using grandparent care once PPL expires).
On the harm issue, the Senate's Provision of Childcare final report, found
that formal early childcare risks stunting children’s social, emotional
and behavioural development. It said: “Infants are typically best
cared for at home by their parents". The senators recommended however
spending more money on daycare (rather than sharing the funding with less
dangerous care) ignoring the Swedish government's own 2004 report and
Quebec evidence that higher spending leads to a decline in daycare quality,
as the system cannot cope with the extra children.
There is a big story about childcare funding that is not being told. It
has an international dimension which I have researched eg. Sweden, UK,
Canada, US, eg. this link to 4 page online interview with Brian Robertson
on his 2003 book "Day Care Deception" neatly summarises US position
and the psychology of this debate at
http://www.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/robinson200310010847.asp
Very few families in any country want or use daycare but are not heard
in the media as few politicians understand the system and the "paid
work" lobby (govt, business, unions) benefits financially from increased
paid work by women, which lines up with feminist-dominated media thinking.
Australian funding for daycare per family is twice on average that for
parent and informal care per our funding figures checked with Parliamentary
Library in July 2009 via Senator Boswell's office - see 3 page document
on our website homepage www.kidsfirstaustralia.com
This discrimination has gone unnoticed by many as "parental childcare"
and "daycare etc." are funded under different systems. We call
for one transparent system.
The figures just quoted in fact omit millions in funding to universities
etc. for daycare research (about as reliable as global warming research)
and industry lobby group funding.
Subsidised daycare does not "pay for itself". Daycare subsidies
just mean a great big tax like the ETS. Quality research in Canada shows
highly subsidised daycare in Quebec was not covered by the extra tax collected
because it forced women into very low income jobs. - see Michael Baker's
economic study on day care in Quebec: Universal Child Care, Maternal Labor
Supply, and Family Well-Being, pp.724-6, says childcare subsidy only 40%
recouped by income & payroll taxes collected.
Canadian research is invaluable as childcare funding is different in each
province. Baker research also found significant harm associated with daycare,
validating the instincts of the majority that avoid it. Other research
shows high daycare spending does not reduce poverty - see Does Daycare
Lower 'Child Poverty' and Get Mums into Jobs? Quebec Experiment Results:
http://www.kidsfirstcanada.org/quebecexperiment.htm
The current Canadian PM Stephen Harper won office in 2006 (again in 2008)
after pledging to re-direct massive daycare funding planned by the then
Liberal government into a voucher system - a Universal Child Care Benefit
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/bnfts/uccb-puge/menu-eng.html - for parents $100
per child per month under age 6.
Our polling of 500 voters in the marginal federal electorate of Ryan shows
77% oppose discriminatory PPL and 74% oppose discriminatory childcare
funding, suggesting Australians would vote for a voucher.
I have support from family groups across Australia and regular contact
with similar groups in UK, Sweden, Canada & US. Two excellent web
sites -
Canada: (Helen Ward) Kids First Parent Association of Canada www.kidsfirstcanada.com
Sweden: (Bo Pettersson) - Children's Right to their Parents http://www.barnensratt.se/index-en.htm
Tempe Harvey
President, Kids First Parent Association of Australia
|