In a startling display of intolerance, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has attacked Queensland LNP Senator Gerard Rennick, labelling him a "cooker" for raising legitimate concerns about the impact of government childcare policies on families.
Senator Rennick’s critique highlights a broader issue—parents being pressured to return to work due to financial constraints, which undermines family cohesion and parental choice.
Speaking to Family First National Director Lyle Shelton on ADH TV this week, Rennick voiced these concerns, questioning the government's priorities in providing a 15 percent wage increase for childcare workers during a cost-of-living crisis, without offering equivalent support to families who choose to care for their children at home.
"I’m not against helping families make ends meet," Rennick stated, "but government support for children should go to the parents, not the unions or the rent seekers in the childcare industry."
This argument is grounded in the belief that parents should have the freedom to choose how they raise their children without being forced into institutional childcare due to economic pressures.
Rennick pointed out the emotional toll this situation takes on mothers, who often feel compelled to leave their children before they are ready, leading to potential negative outcomes for both the children and the family unit as a whole.
Rennick also highlighted the disparity in government support, noting that working couples with one child in care received an average subsidy of $8,181 last year, while families where one parent stays at home receive nothing.
"Why should all the money go to the people who put their kids in childcare? What about the parents who decide to look after their kids at home?" Rennick asked, advocating for a more equitable distribution of government support.
Senator Rennick’s passion for family choice is deeply personal. "I believe it’s vital for children to have the stability of a parent at home during their formative years," he explained. "When parents have the flexibility to stay at home, it allows them to create a nurturing environment, which is crucial for a child’s early development."
The crux of Rennick's argument is that the government’s policies, which heavily favour institutional childcare, are a threat to the family unit and the best interests of children by pushing both parents into the workforce, often against their wishes.
The government is essentially dictating how families should operate by financially incentivising childcare over parental care. It’s an attack on the traditional family structure, where the government, rather than the parents, is increasingly taking over the role of raising children.
Rennick also called for family income splitting, something Family First champions, as a necessary reform to relieve financial pressure on single-income families and provide further flexibility for parents to stay at home if they choose.
"Income splitting would allow families to keep more of their money and make it easier for one parent to stay home, ensuring that children have the support they need during their early years," Rennick explained.
Despite the validity of these concerns, the Prime Minister’s response was to dismiss them with ridicule, failing to engage with the substance of Rennick’s arguments. This reaction not only undermines healthy public debate but also disregards the genuine struggles faced by Australian families.
It is disappointing that, despite his strong defence of families, the LNP has removed Senator Rennick from a winnable position on their Senate ticket for the next election. This decision risks sidelining a crucial voice for families at a time when such advocacy is more needed than ever. It is why the Family First Party will be active at upcoming elections.