15/07/2025
Interesting perspective that child care is not the only option for regional communities. Better balance in the tax systems for couples and rewarding Business and Farming enterprises who add flexibility for workers with children and better options for nannies and governesses with home education are options for exploration rather than a one size fits all child care system with building and other tax payer costs.
Given the sums of money that are being expended by the federal government on childcare fee subsidies – now $16bn, rising to more than $18.5bn in 2028-29 – it is reasonable to question whether some of this money could be redirected to provide greater choice for parents. For some families, the subsidies are close to $40,000 a year per child.
Many mothers may be happy to take that sum and stay at home with young ones. Given that the government has now abolished the activity test that used to apply to the receipt of fee subsidies, there is no reason this option should not be made available.
Providing tax-deductibility for nannies – including a shared nanny model – also should be made available. If this is seen as too generous to high-income earners, a capped rebate for the cost of registered carers is an alternative.
More regulation of childcare centres will be costly and won’t necessarily work. If feminism is to be true to its original objectives, we need a system that allows real choice for women, not just the preferred route of (unionised) centre-based care that the government and advocacy groups prefer.
