By Susan Laszlo and Bernadette Mullholland
The federal government's 1996 and 1997 budget cuts to community child-care make clear its intention to dismantle the not-for-profit sector, now in its 25th year. The attack is accompanied by the lie that it is simply offering consumers more "choice".
The most far-reaching impact may come from the cut of $40 million in operational subsidies to 1191 community long day care centres, which came into effect on July 1. It was the focus of that day's national protest action, organised by child-care, women's, community and trade union groups.
This federal grant, in the form of a direct payment of about $40,000 per year per centre, made council, church and community-based centres more affordable than private centres (which currently account for about 70% of the long day care centres).
Now, community centres will be forced to compete with private centres, something, the minister responsible, Judi Moylan, says is "more equitable".
The community child-care sector disagrees. Alana Ball, director of the Community Child Care Cooperative in Sydney, told Green Left Weekly that the government seems more interested in lowering the high standard of affordable child-care.
Because community centres are usually run by parent-based committees, whose main interest is child education, they won't find it easy to compete with private centres, which are used to marketing child-care as a commodity, she said.
With community centre fees now more on a par with private centres, and the former requiring parental involvement, overworked and stressed parents are more likely to choose the private option, Ball said. "The big losers in all this will be the children and the parents."
Moylan denies that the government has given private centres a boost. She says that community centres are not being forced to raise their fees, but to increase their efficiency! The government even allocated $8 million in the last budget for consultants to advise on how to do this.
Staff costs account for some 80% of centres' budgets, so it's clear where the "savings" will most easily be found.
A recent Queensland Child-care Coalition survey of 50 community centres found that 78% have been forced to increase their fees because of federal policy changes, notably the loss of the operational subsidy.
It revealed that centres were also planning to change programming, combine groups, decrease staff hours and not replace staff, as a result of the cuts.
It also found that working parents — predominantly women — are being forced either to cut down work hours or to leave their jobs altogether because the costs of child-care are prohibitive.
The convener of the National Association of Community Based Children's Services, Lynne Wannan, said, "You have to ask why [the government] is doing this and whether they want women back in the home to make the unemployment [figures] look better."
More than a third of the QCCC survey's respondents said children were being removed from care because of the fee increases. More than 70% said families had decreased their hours of care.
Similarly, a survey of 25 council-provided long day care centres in Victoria conducted revealed that 71% increased their fees as of July 1 and 81% have implemented cuts including: reducing the hours of work for part-time child-care workers and the cook; reducing the food budget; making the centre coordinator's position redundant; stopping payment for after hours staff meetings and asking child-care workers to perform cleaning duties (prohibited under the regulations).
As child-care for 3-5 year-olds is cheaper than that for 0-2 year-olds, around 35% said they would expand places only for the 3-5 age group.
The survey also found that 81% of participating councils reported a marked increase in some or all of the following: demand for part-time care; families seeking alternative, cheaper care such as family day care, unregulated care and reliance on extended family; women forced into part-time work and forced back home by the cost of child-care.
Community child-care centres in Victoria are also reeling from the state Liberal government's decision to cut its grant of $200-3000 a year to community centres.
In South Australia, six community child-care centres have closed, and the closure of several others is imminent. In low-income areas parents have withdrawn their children from community care in favour of cheaper alternatives. One community centre has even sought the help of a local radio station to ask for donations of sand, toys and woodchips.
Another example of the impact of the cuts is the closure of Children's House, a community child-care centre in a low-income area in western Adelaide. This centre was unique in providing relief for single parents, many of whom had returned to study.
Many saw the centre as an opportunity to voice their concerns about their children to caring employees and for their children to have a healthful meal. It also provided a circuit breaker for parents and children who could no longer be left alone together. The employees became a counselling service, "surrogate mothers" and in many instances a part of the families.
In other attacks, billed by the federal government as "saving" $800 million, the 1997 budget included a cap on respite care for non-working parents, a tightening of the rules for financial assistance to parents and a redirection of funds away from centres directly to parents.
The government also allocated $11 million over four years to supply 2500 more family day care positions. With no overheads — family day care involves a mother caring for children in her own home — and workers receiving, on average, $3 an hour, the government is obviously promoting the cheapest form of child-care.
But the issue is not just costs. This option incorporates a reactionary ideology that the government is keen to promote — that women's "role" is to care for children in their own homes.