Childcare Sector Changes, page-17

It's about ECEC (Early Childhood Education and Care) not BSFWM (Baby Sitting For Working Mums). I'm disappointed that Scott Morrison's delivery so far has focused on the parent rather than the child. It is possible to strike the correct balance between both. All children, regardless of whether both parents are employed or not, should be entitled to access government funded childcare, at a time of their choosing.
Some of these parents, who may return to employment or study will opt for the smaller setting of family day care, some will select preschools with shorter hours that suits their part time employment, others will select long day care because of the ten to twelve hours of care offered for five days for fifty two weeks of the year and others will opt for the nanny programme. SM has distanced himself from the 'quality of nanny debate' by giving parents the choice of whom they employ.
If the government figures of anticipated increase to the workforce of 16,000 people are correct, and those people are willing to enter the workforce, are there employment opportunities for them? Sixteen thousand people in the workforce from all over Australia, sharing care between all the options listed above, probably won't even create a ripple in increasing profits in the corporate childcare sector.
It's about achieving profits by organic growth, not by accumulation, it's about taking the time to find out why some centres have low occupancy levels, not purchasing prime centres to mask the unsatisfactory performance of others.
January 2016 ratio changes will be the biggest challenge facing childcare centre operators profits for many years. There is no way around it, there are ways to minimise it - let's see justification for those high (and possibly higher) directors salaries.