How Labor's new bill to strip unsafe childcare centres of funding would work
It is one of the re-elected Albanese government's first items of legislation, accelerated in the wake of the shocking allegations against former childcare worker Joshua Brown.
It could lead to the effective forced closure of childcare centres that cannot guarantee child safety. Here's how that would work.
Like many sectors in Australia, responsibility for child care is split between federal and state governments.
States are largely responsible for monitoring the quality and safety of centres, which are mostly run by for-profit companies and not-for-profit organisations.
But the federal government provides the money via parents, in the form of the Child Care Subsidy — effectively a "voucher" parents can use on accredited providers.
This bill does not propose a federal takeover of quality or safety regulation — that will continue to be done by state auditors in line with their own existing rules.
But it does give the secretary of the Department of Education broad discretion to deny or revoke subsidy eligibility from providers if they fall short. Given the centres' business model relies on receiving the subsidy, that would effectively force them to close. For large providers, it could also prevent them from adding new centres.
In making such a decision, the legislation would allow the secretary to consider past and present assessments from the states, including whether they meet national quality standards or are graded as "working towards" them.
The secretary can also consider any serious incidents or allegations, complaints, or anything else deemed relevant. The legislation sets out a process involving warnings and infringement notices, leading up to suspension of funding.
A similar process already exists to strip funding from centres for reasons like fraud, but not for quality and safety — although state regulators can currently shut centres when there are serious threats.
The bill leaves significant room for discretion and does not detail the thresholds the secretary must use to make a decision or directly define circumstances where funding must be revoked.
It does not specify whether multiple breaches or just one breach are required, and in fact leaves open the possibility a centre could be denied funding on the basis of potential harms rather than past breaches.
Education Minister Jason Clare told the ABC's News Breakfast his intention was to focus on centres "that are repeatedly failing to meet [the] minimum standards" and that withholding funding would have significant consequences for non-compliant centres, but also said an action "could be as simple as one" breach.
"It is the biggest weapon that we have got to wield here," he said.
"Taxpayers provide about $16 billion to childcare centres every year. That represents about 70 per cent of the funding to run a centre … They cannot operate without [subsidies]."
The bill also gives the secretary of education greater powers to order spot checks and unscheduled visits to childcare centres.
Consistent with their current role, federal auditors visiting sites will focus on fraud rather than quality or safety, which remains the purview of state regulators, but the federal auditors will be able to pass on to the states any safety concerns they observe.
Mr Clare said Labor had been working "really professionally and constructively" with the opposition and had also briefed the Greens, signalling hope for broad co-operation to pass the legislation.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

ABC News
7 minutes ago
- ABC News
Federal politics live: Government says it will not be 'bullied' to exempt YouTube from social media ban
The government says it will not be bullied by Google after the tech giant threatens to take legal action if YouTube is included in a social media ban for children under 16. Follow our live blog below.


7NEWS
37 minutes ago
- 7NEWS
Albanese government pushes forward with prescription medicine cap at $25
Medicines listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) will be capped at $25 per prescription from the start of 2026, down from the current $31.60, with the Albanese government to introduce laws confirming the changes this week. The major federal election promise will also see the price of PBS scripts frozen at its current level of $7.70 for pensioners until 2030. The changes will cost taxpayers $200 million per year, but are likely to be popular with voters. The Coalition matched the policy during the election and is likely to see the bill pass through parliament relatively quickly. However, Labor used the policy during the federal campaign in April and May to run a scare campaign accusing Peter Dutton and the Opposition of being 'Trump-Lite' and wanting a US style health system. The Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, says: 'The size of your bank balance shouldn't determine the quality of your healthcare'. 'We said we would make cheaper medicines even cheaper - that is exactly what we are doing,' Albanese said. 'This is another example of cost of living relief that helps every Australian. The Health Minister, Mark Butler, says the last time PBS medicines cost no more than $25 was 2004 – more than 20 years ago. 'The Albanese Government has been focused on delivering cheaper medicines for Australians,' Butler said. 'Cheaper medicines are good for the hip pocket and good for your health.' The Albanese Government has started the first two sitting weeks of its second term trying to keep the focus on its election promises. Last week it introduced bills to cut HECS debt by 20 percent, entrench penalty rates in workplace agreements, and safety reforms for the childcare sector.

ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Bill to criminalise AI child abuse apps to be introduced to parliament
A bill to criminalise the use of AI tools purpose-built to create child sexual abuse material is set to be introduced to parliament. Independent MP Kate Chaney, who will introduce the bill, says the urgent issue cannot wait for the government's wider response to artificial intelligence. While it is an offence to possess or share child abuse material, there is no criminal prohibition on downloading or distributing the wave of emerging AI generators designed to create the illegal material. The tools are becoming easier to access online, with some of the most popular visited millions of times. Their spread is diverting police resources and allowing material to be created offline, where it is harder to track. A roundtable convened last week to address the issue recommended swift action to make the tools illegal, prompting Ms Chaney's bill. "[This] clearly needs to be done urgently and I can't see why we need to wait to respond to this really significant and quite alarming issue," Ms Chaney said. "I recognise the challenges of regulating AI — the technology is changing so fast it's hard to even come up with a workable definition of AI — but while we are working on that holistic approach, there are gaps in our existing legislation we can plug to address the highest-risk-use cases like this, so we can continue to build trust in AI." Ms Chaney said she had met with Attorney-General Michelle Rowland, who she said recognised there was a gap in the law. The MP for Curtin's bill would create a new offence for using a carriage service to download, access, supply or facilitate technologies that are designed to create child abuse material. A new offence for scraping or distributing data with the intention of training or creating those tools would also be created. The offences would carry a maximum 15-year term of imprisonment. A public defence would be available for law enforcement, intelligence agencies and others with express authorisation to be able to investigate child abuse cases. "There are a few reasons we need this," Ms Chaney said. "These tools enable the on-demand, unlimited creation of this type of material, which means perpetrators can train AI tools with images of a particular child, delete the offending material so they can't be detected, and then still be able to generate material with word prompts. "It also makes police work more challenging. It is [getting] harder to identify real children who are victims. "And every AI abuse image starts with photos of a real child, so a child is harmed somewhere in the process." The federal government continues to develop its response to the explosion in the use of AI tools, including by enabling the tools where they are productive and useful. It is yet to respond to a major review of the Online Safety Act handed to the government last year, which also recommended that so-called "nudify" apps be criminalised. Members of last week's roundtable said there was no public benefit to consider in the case of these child abuse generators, and there was no reason to wait for a whole-of-economy response to criminalise them. Former police detective inspector Jon Rouse, who participated in that roundtable, said Ms Chaney's bill addressed an urgent legislative gap. "While existing Australian legislation provides for the prosecution of child sexual abuse material production, it does not yet address the use of AI in generating such material," Professor Rouse said. Colm Gannon, Australian chief of the International Centre for Mission and Exploited Children, said there was a strong consensus that the AI tools had no place in society and Ms Chaney's bill was a "clear and targeted step to close an urgent gap". In a statement, Attorney-General Michelle Rowland said the foremost priority of any government was "to keep our most vulnerable safe". "As Attorney-General, I am fully committed to combating child sexual exploitation and abuse in all settings, including online, and the government has a robust legislative framework in place to support this," Ms Rowland said. "Keeping young people safe from emerging harms is above politics, and the government will carefully consider any proposal that aims to strengthen our responses to child sexual exploitation and abuse." Ms Chaney said regulating AI must become a priority for the government this term. "This is going to have to be an urgent focus for this government, regulating the AI space," she said. "Existing laws do apply to AI, and so we need to plug the gaps in those so they continue to be fit-for-purpose. "We do also need a coordinated approach and a holistic approach so we can balance individual rights with productivity, global governance and trust in information and institutions. "The challenge is the technology moves fast and government does not move fast, so we need to get it right but we also need to plug these gaps as they appear. An inquiry established by former industry minister Ed Husic last year recommended the government take the strongest option in regulating AI by creating standalone laws that could adapt to the rapidly shifting technology.