Page 4858 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 25 October 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
moving this amendment will allow childcare centres an additional 12 months to comply with carer to child ratios for children under 24 months. The president of this childcare centre has written to me, saying:
As you know—
this particular childcare centre—
has 10 children under 24 months. The change in ratios will mean that
the centre—
will now have either 8 or 12 places for children under 24 months in order to remain viable. We feel that moving to 8 children will not be a good outcome for—
the centre—
or for the community, and as such have made the decision to add two places to bring the number of children from 10 to 12 in the nursery. This will be a good outcome for—
the centre—
and a good outcome for the community …
However, the president goes on to say that it is impossible to implement under the current regulations until they expand their floor space by approximately seven square metres, which they cannot do before 1 January. He continues: “While we have been aware of the regulatory changes for a year, the centre needs more time to gather the resources needed to make this change. The centre is a community not-for-profit organisation, which is run by volunteers.” He goes on to say:
Despite our best fundraising efforts (this year has been our most successful on record) and the efforts of our volunteers, we do not have the financial resources yet to make the refurbishments to our centre to add the additional floor space.
The president goes on to say:
I am also concerned that if we rush the implementation that we will end up with a solution that is not optimal, countering the positive outcomes of the reforms. It would be a shame for parents to have their fees raised to add an additional carer only to find that the accommodation for their child is not up to scratch. The reforms are touted as the ‘National Quality Agenda’. If we are forced to accommodate them on a shoestring budget then any additional quality may be lost.
While we have received some financial support from the government to date ($25,000), we still need to fundraise in the order of $50,000. We feel that if we were given an additional 12 months that we could do so, and that we could implement quality changes—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video