Comments on: Socialised Childcare?

By: E.D.

E.D. — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:47:18 +0000

Re: #4, you can add:

3) there is a shortage of child care workers. (mostly due to point 2).

And the Govt agrees, there are shortages in every State, except the ACT:
http://www.workplace.gov.au/workplace/Publications/ResearchStats/LabourMarketAnalysis/SkillsInDemand/

If child care were fully privatised (as suggested) then fees would obviously rise and presumably act as a disincentive for mothers to return to the workforce.

I imagine such a policy would be attacked as being discriminatory against women.

By: Ian

Ian — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 04:43:16 +0000

The reason for the share price drop in ABC Childcare is pure politics, many leading Liberal Party members were involved in the establishment of it and shareholders are nervous this goverment will punnish them. a talk given at the lefty “Politic in the Pub” called on them to do just that prior to the election I can find the transcript in full but the details are

“02 Nov 2007 CHILDCARE – PROFITS BEFORE KIDS? Prof. Deborah Brennan, Sydney University, author Politics of Australian Childcare; Frances Press, Faculty Education, Charles Sturt University”

By: Mark Hill

Mark Hill — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:03:34 +0000

I actually don’t care if the centres are run for profit or not, but the whole system works better if we remove the subsidies, lessen regulation on both occupational licensing & development, and increase disposable income.

By: Club Troppo » Missing Link Daily

Club Troppo » Missing Link Daily — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:13:13 +0000

[...] hard to disagree with Fleeced’s sentiments about those Rudd-coddled working families after the PM promised to protect them from any fallout from ABC childcare [...]

By: Terje Petersen

Terje Petersen — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:54:39 +0000

If the prices rose and we saw lareger profits, there would be more of an incentive to get into the industry.

Not to mention a re-evaluation of whether a second income was really worth it.

By: Mark Hill

Mark Hill — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:53:29 +0000

Related to, and a similar argument against, can be made for compulsury maternity leave. It should be left up to the market. There is a very good reason why.

If you are financially better off without sending your children to daycare or taking maternity leave, then why in aggregate is society better off subsidising a lifestyle choice?

Many of the arguments as to why such services will be provided for voluntarily are also used by those who favour socialised systems. If businesses want to retain women and want childcare etc, it is not a reason to socialise it. If a firm favours socialised services, then credibly the firm is receiving some kind of wage subsidy. Again, how is society in aggregate better off by subsidising one firm and picking winners?

By: Mark Hill

Mark Hill — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:46:43 +0000

Raising the price would work if not for subsidies. If the prices rose and we saw lareger profits, there would be more of an incentive to get into the industry. Instead you are likely to see more inefficiency and higher costs substitute better outcomes or more profit.

1. Cut income taxes and subsidies to the industry.

2. Relax planning regulations.

3. Move away from the trend towards accrediation and education of carers of very young children (it might be great but it shouldn’t be absolutely necessary). If we didn’t have overly rigid privacy laws, a similar check to “Working With Children Check” could be done privately.

What we need is more childcare centres. That is how it will happen with the necessary staff. Profits will be higher for two reasons: greater efficiency (less subsidies) and lower costs (less regulation). With less market power and higher profits, the demand for staff and therefore wages will be higher.

That’s idealistic and not a full blown policy, but it is a start with a decent rationale.

By: Brendan Halfweeg

Brendan Halfweeg — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:19:47 +0000

My sister is in childcare. The unfortunate thing about education, nursing, childcare is the whole entitlement issue. Once a service becomes a right, the workers in that service become semi-slaves to the service provider, unless there is sufficient mystique about what they do, like doctors. She shares the same attitude of more government subsidies. Part of the problem is that the people attracted to these industries are themselves egalitarians to begin with.

By: Terje Petersen

Terje Petersen — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:54:46 +0000

Opps. On closer inspection thats one smart neighbour, one dim neighbour and clever old me.

By: Terje (say tay-a)

Terje (say tay-a) — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:39:27 +0000

Only 33% in my postcode. Smart neighbours.

Perhaps a better question would be “do you think it would be better if childcare centres were unprofitable?”.