Wage Justice for Early Childhood Education and Care Workers (Special Account) (Extending Support and Strengthening Safety) Bill 2026

Senator COLBECK (Tasmania) (12:10): I want to make a couple of quick comments with respect to the Wage Justice for Early Childhood Education and Care Workers (Special Account) (Extending Support and Strengthening Safety) Bill 2026 and also deal with a procedural matter as a part of that. Can I say that, in listening to the contributions from colleagues around the chamber, I don't think there's anybody in here that would not agree with the sentiments that are being expressed with respect to the importance of early childhood care and development.

I think that's a universal perspective that is supported across the chamber. But there are also some elements of this bill, as Senator O'Sullivan explained in his contribution, that I think are of concern—also the comments of Senator Hodgins-May with respect to the cycle of this funding that's supporting the wages of early childhood workers and the fact that it has to be continuously extended rather than being a part of the way the system works.

In my view—and I'm not expressing anyone else's view here—this is the wrong way to manage an issue such as this. It should be part of the way the system works rather than having to be continuously extended. It was obvious to me when the legislation first came into place that it was only there for a year.

Something was always going to have to be done about it at some point in time. Here we are, at the eleventh hour, doing that but for a period of two years, and somebody's going to have to come back and deal with this again in 2028. I particularly want to reinforce the comments of Senator O'Sullivan with respect to family day care.

There's no point in claiming or saying that family day care qualifies and then writing rules that make it difficult for it to do so. In that sense, I very much support Senator O'Sullivan's second reading amendment to this bill, which I foreshadow. I want to reflect on the circumstances of family day care in my local community, where the Abracadabra Childcare Services family day-care centre at Spreyton has had to close because the person who was running, owning and operating that facility just couldn't handle the stress of the government not supporting a structure for that particular facility that would make it economically viable.

There's a lot of talk about the importance of the various types of family day care that operate within the country and ensuring that children get the opportunity for access. But, in this circumstance, you had a family day-care centre that was actually loved by its local community—they've said that to me in those terms: it wasn't only valued; it was loved—and that's had to close because the government hasn't followed its own Productivity Commission's review and allowed for the centre to operate in the way that the Productivity Commission recommended.

The minister could change this with the stroke of a pen and work with state colleagues to ensure that dual-application facilities could operate, but the minister refuses to do that. That drives up costs. It drives these businesses out of business.

Similarly, Addisons Family Day Care at Latrobe is facing a similar situation. They are looking at having to spend something in the order of $500,000 or $600,000 to modify their facility so that they can stay in operation, but they're not getting the support from the minister that they should get for these vital, valued and loved services in these local communities.

The government might say that they're putting a whole heap of money into other facilities within the community, and they are. That's appreciated, but it shouldn't be at the expense of those that have been operating there for 15, 20 or 25 years. They should not be doing that at their expense, particularly not because these facilities don't follow their desired industrial relations policy, which is exactly what's happening here.

If you don't have the industrial relations policy that they want, you're not going to get supported by the government. That's the wrong way to be operating, in my view. The minister should be supporting these small, family based services to provide the quality of care that meets the quality of care in any other facility.

We all agree on the importance of that. But, because you're not union based, you're not supported by the system. I think that's a real flaw in the way that this government is operating the system.

We all need to see more capacity in the system. Both Abracadabra and Addisons Family Day Care operate in areas that are currently regarded as childcare deserts. Why would we be forcing these facilities to close while we're waiting for others to be developed?

It doesn't make sense to me. I can tell you, having spoken to the families who've used this intergenerationally, they're not happy about it either. They are not happy about the circumstance either.

They would like to see these valued and loved facilities continue to operate. Sadly, for Abracadabra, that time has passed. But, hopefully for Addisons Family Day Care at Latrobe, it can continue.

I again note Senator O'Sullivan's foreshadowed second reading amendment for procedural purposes in the chamber.