Hi Transversal,
Firstly, let me state that I am against the introduction of any type of Activity Test. It should be the right of all children to access early education and care, regardless of the working status of their parents.
Currently all children, regardless of the working status of their parents have access to 24 hours of subsidised care per week, working families have 50 hours of care and a small number (in exceptional circumstances) are able to access 60 hours.
That 24 hours for many families will now be reduced to 12. You are correct, families who fail the activity test earning over $65,000 will receive no rebate at all. My thoughts are that those families will not pay full fees, they will reduce their days in care and utilise the services provided by their local playgroups and the free children's activities provided by local councils.
The government mention slashing red tape so services can be more flexible in the hours they deliver instead of the current system where families who routinely need and use only four, six or eight hours are charged for ten or twelve hours. Simon Birmingham has mentioned on more than one occasion this week that it would be acceptable for children, who qualify for twelve hours care per week, to seek two six hour sessions per week, 9am - 3pm he thinks is a good window of learning, just like school he said. If the flexibility involves charges for hours attended rather than sessions, it will affect providers by a reduction in the number of subsidised hours being paid, to them, by the government.
G8 mentioned they have 75,000 children attending in any given week, that would suggest a large number of one and two day attendees, which is usually an indicator of families, where there is either no employment or a one income family.If that is correct, and you compare it to Goodstarts figures, there is a high probability that Goodstart have more working families than G8. However, if G8 have been paid the enrolment advance for every child attending, and you calculate that advance with the amount being held, the children attending is closer to 55,000, which would be a more favourable indicator than 75,000.
Those families with high earnings who will receive no assistance at all, will imo look at the possibility of hiring a nanny, especially those in a city like Sydney who will be paying $825 per week for one child in care. They will reduce centre based care from 5 days to 2 and employ a nanny for the other days.
I called four senators offices today to enquire about the compliance and monitoring of the activity test, they are still working that out I think.
The above are my thoughts and opinions of the downside of the Activity Test. There will be over 70% of families better off under the new subsidies, but will they use those savings to increase their days of attendance in early learning and seek additional working hours, will there be employment opportunities for them or will the extra savings be transferred elsewhere?
It is now up to providers to educate parents on the importance of child development in the early years and improve those enrolments.
Islay
Expand
(20min delay)