7. KATHERINE RICH (National) Link to this
to the Minister of Education
Is he concerned by the Early Childhood Council’s latest survey, which shows that only 23.9 percent of its centres will offer the policy of 20 free hours; if not, why not?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) Link to this
This survey, which represents the views of 300 providers out of a potential 2,600, told us that 23.9 percent of centres have decided to come to the scheme, as we speak today; that 46 percent are making up their mind; and the others feel that they will not. I spoke at the early childhood conference this weekend and talked to a wide range of providers, all of whom are very enthusiastic about the policy. So I remain optimistic that on 1 July we will have a very good muster. Of course, I remind the member that centres cannot actually enrol for the programme until May.
How can the Minister deliver access for all 3 and 4-year-old children to his 20 free hours policy when only 12 percent of Auckland centres and only 19 percent of Christchurch centres say they are going to opt in—just 3 months before the whole policy goes live?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
As I said, I remain optimistic. But I do think one of the problems we have is that, I understand, the National Party is going to meetings at the moment saying it will run its own monitoring of the scheme in the future, and if it decides that centres do not comply with the rules the way National interprets them, it will sue. That might actually scare a few people.
Does he regret his very first promise to New Zealand parents that 92,000 children will definitely get 20 hours free—when, based on a minority of centres that say they are going to opt in, he has not got a hope in hell of delivering that level of access to those children?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
It is colourful language, but, as this member always misquotes everybody, I have to go back and say we have repeatedly said that up to 92,000 3 to 4-year-olds will be eligible for this policy. I have said to the member, I do not know how many times, it is a voluntary policy. People come into the policy if they want to, but up to 92,000 young people will be eligible.
Why does the Minister not admit that centres will continue to reject his 20 free hours policy unless he allows them to charge fees to cover the full cost of providing a basic but quality service of early childhood education?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
Because that is wrong. Why does the member not admit that National would scrap the policy—and let National be honest with people when its members are travelling round the country?
Paula BennettIf the funding for 20 free hours does not cover basic costs, how does the Minister suggest a centre make up the shortfall?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
I will explain to the member for the 600th time that this cost was figured out by talking with centres right across the country. We have now got what we believe is the average cost of the regulated level of quality early childhood education. That is what we are paying for. If a centre decides that it wants to provide more than that, then it simply talks to the parents and says: “You may be pocketing $80 for the regulated level of early childhood education. We would like to provide you with more teachers. Would you like us to do that, and a charge can be established?”.
If by the very definition of average there is 50 percent under and 50 percent over, how can a centre pay the mortgage and teachers’ salaries on optional charges and donations that might not get paid, when the centres clearly need certainty of income?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
As has been explained numerous times, many centres charge for more teachers, hot lunches, and travels around the community, which means they have set fees considerably higher than the average across the country or the regulated level of early childhood education. If they wish to continue that, then it is fine. What they will do is talk to the parents and establish an optional charge.