Pearls and Irritations

The federal government recently released a Productivity Commission’s Report on children’s services. It found too many changes were needed for the government to say more than that they were “looking at it”. The report is significant and was passed to the Government to guide possible reforms to its role in funding of services to deliver effective children’s care services.

Childcare services go back a long way, with a few community care services established early last century and offered to poor children and their families needing support and education. The Kindergarten Union started in the late 19th century and the Sydney Day Nurseries started in the early 20th C. Both still continue to offer care in multiple locations.

These examples show the longevity of the need for families in delivering children’s community services. The services will always be needed. More such services would continue the spread of places of care, learning and social skills and connections beyond the limits of nuclear families. By the second world war, the need for women workers created government funded care for young children. Many women had used those services to find jobs needed for the war and stayed in paid work after. So child care became an ongoing effort.

My personal experiences in childcare were early. At just 3 years old in 1941, after some months in an aged couple’s care as my mother had a job, I was returned to my mother’s care because she had found me a place in a kindergarten. I arrived fascinated by the other children and fun activities. I had my first feminist experience there as we were asked to choose our instruments for the band. The drum was the instrument I wanted. The teacher frowned, said no it was for boys only and gave me a triangle. This was my feminist intro as I decided I would NOT be told a girl couldn’t choose what I wanted! My experience created a lifetime interest in changing the evils of unfair childcare.

So when my feminist engagement in the early 1970’s continued with the newly established Women’s Electoral Lobby, it reminded me to use my political and social intentions of ensuring that childcare services were funded and not sexist. By then, feminism had stated women could be both able to earn, mother and be politically active in good new policy development. My interest increased as the Whitlam government started funding services as part of fair employment access by women. Then my skills and ideals on this area became personal. I was then a sole parent and in politics and policy developments. This left me with a desire to ensure policies that benefit both children and mothers. The Productivity task was upgrading the many flaws and unmet needs. The Australian Labor Party (ALP) was at that time aware of unmet needs, plus other quality issues.

I had worked hard under post war ALP governance, and shaped by my sole parent experience. For example, I had a 6-year old who needed (then non-existent) after school care. So I devised and succeeded to gain a grant for researching the model that would be used to set up the first Out of School services.  The funding research grant was used to offer the first after school centre at Glenmore Rd School, Paddington. The centre worked, and Public services took it as a model for funding Out Of School Hours (OOSH) and it served my daughter till High School. Many other sites followed with real Government grants. . .

I mention this because it illustrates both the longevity of continuing needs, and the need to still push for expanding services. My interest and advocacy in children’s services has developed its social contributions to good societies and meeting working mother’s needs.

I am interested in the ALP’s responses to the report, it’s long and complex and has gaps. The government has not endorsed any part of it. Below I raise one NOT addressed needed change.

Action is needed urgently, for instance, on the roles and growth of privately owned for-profit centres, which are the biggest current growth numbers. This became obvious after the ABC scandal of centres’ misused fees. However, the issues of their roles worry me and others. Is this an area of business that merits public funding of private profits?

The expansion of for-profit centres undermines the broader social roles of providing community non-profit services, by making profits for shareholders. This report fails to address the issue of commercial expansion which is undermining the basically public service.

I expected the release of the children’s services Productivity Report would address ways and means of restricting or banning the commercial centres’ growth. Their profit driving limits the choice of needs based locations and programs because their purpose is profits not social wellbeing. By neglecting community-based services, we are not prioritising the roles of adding to the rearing needs of the young and their carers. The report had some data on the high growth of the for-profit centres, but no mentions of the needs to limit or stop their spread.  This is a major flaw.

We need funded services that are responsible for the multiple and complex needs of users as priorities!

Share and Enjoy !

SHARE TWEET SHARE COPY EMAIL PRINT