THE ACT Government has driven up the cost of childcare to working parents by ramping up rules and regulations, says Opposition Leader and shadow health minister, Jeremy Hanson.

Most childcare centres are run by community sector service providers in Canberra, which is unusual, he says.

“There are no government-run centres and very few private sector providers,” he says.

“The Government’s approach has been to ramp up the rules and regulations, consequently driving up the cost of providing childcare services to working parents, and also creating viability issues for the community sector in particular.

“In addition, Canberra has the highest participation rate in the country for women in the workforce, which also puts pressure on the childcare sector to meet demand.”

Hanson says that the ACT Government’s priorities are out of touch with Canberra families.

While childcare supply and demand is undeniably out of whack, Joy Burch, Minister for Disability, Children and Young People, says there are limits as to what the ACT Government can do as it doesn’t control the sector, but it has looked at ways to increase the childcare spots available for children under two.

“Childcare centres in Canberra are a mixture of community-based centres and private centres, but a number are based in ACT Government-owned buildings,” she says. “We are expanding these centres in areas of demand and we should see the results of these investments within two years.”

The investments include $9 million on upgrading community childcare centres, $42.7 million on building an early childhood school at Franklin, $7.5 million on building an early childhood centre at Holder and the release of five new sites to the market solely for childcare use.

“Through releasing blocks of land for sale with restricted usage for childcare centres, we are increasing supply, and this looks as though it will be a successful, financially viable option over the next couple of years,” she says.

Hanson has trouble with the investments, saying: “The Government spent $4 million on a childcare centre in Flynn, which provided only 10 new places.

“The Government also proposes to spend $7.5 million on a new centre in Holder, which the community sector says it could build for half that cost.

“The Government is looking at upgrading government-owned but community operated infrastructure to help them meet the requirements of the Federal Government’s National Quality Framework, but is not providing assistance to community-owned and operated infrastructure.

“Since signing up to the Framework the government has also imposed tighter staff-to-child ratios and higher staff qualification requirements without a comprehensive plan about how to transition to these new arrangements.

“The ACT Government is now playing catch up and refuses to take any responsibility for the impact this will have on the cost of childcare for Canberra families, who are already paying the highest childcare fees in the country.

“The ACT Government’s approach has been slow, unstructured, reactive and without consultation. The Government only provided budgetary support after being shamed into it by the Canberra Liberals and when the community sector in particular has cried out for help.”

Burch says staff turnover and shortages are related to childcare workers being poorly paid across the board.

“It’s a challenge for the sector, and again the ACT Government doesn’t have the leverage to do much.

“However, we have put money into scholarship programs for free training as an incentive for people interested in joining that workforce. It’s been successful so far and it’s something we’ll continue to fund.”

Hanson is again sceptical, saying that subsidised training provided no guarantees for the sector.

“Promises made to fund the wage increases determined by the community sector national wage case are positive, but ACT Labor has not said where the money is coming from,” he says.

“The tax on community sector funding, which was introduced in the 2012-13 Budget, was to pay for the Government to tell the community sector how to be more efficient. This is at best laughable and, at worst, taking funds away from service delivery to those who need it most.”

NEXT WEEK: Woes of the waiting list