MEDIA RELEASE

Family First strongly supports Virginia Tapscott’s renewed call for genuine choice in childcare policy, published in The Australian this weekend.

She advocates what Family First has long argued: that families must be supported to have the choice to raise their own children, not pressured to outsource them into an overstretched and ideology-ridden childcare system.

“Labor gave me several reasons not to vote for it,” Tapscott wrote, “For a start, I don’t want more childcare – I don’t want to see my kids any less than I do.”

She went on to condemn Labor’s push to get more children into a “broken childcare system” as “sickening”.

Family First agrees. Childcare subsidies should not be designed to pull mothers away from their children in the name of economic participation.

They should exist to support families in ways that they choose, not ways government ideologues dictate.

Virginia is right to say, “To be fair and give people genuine choice it would be necessary to subsidise a broad range of care arrangements,” including grandparent and parent carers.

Now that’s real support for real families.

Family First backs her call for income splitting, extended paid parental leave, and support for those who choose to prioritise time with their children.

It’s not about being “anti-childcare” – it’s about giving parents the dignity of true choice.

Tapscott’s voice is one among many who are waking up to the cultural pressure cooker forcing both parents into the workplace, not by choice, but by economic necessity.

As Liberal leadership contender Sussan Ley once rightly said in Parliament: “If economic participation is attributed to women having no other choice than to go back to work to make ends meet then this is concerning.”

Family First couldn’t agree more. It’s time for policy that puts families first.

Anthony Albanese's $1 billion childcare announcement may appear to champion families, but it discriminates against parents who choose to care for their children at home.

By prioritising subsidised childcare over meaningful support for stay-at-home parents, the Albanese government is imposing an unfair economic disadvantage on families who value parental care during their children's formative years.

Family First’s policy is to allow income splitting for tax purposes to end the “couple penalty” which leaves a stay-at-home parent out of pocket. Family First also believes parents and grandparents caring for children should get the same financial benefits as couples who choose to use commercial daycare.

Virginia Tapscott, a mother and advocate for parental choice who is not affiliated with Family First, captured this sentiment powerfully in her recent address at the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship conference in Sydney.

"I couldn't understand why the most important work of my life—caring for my children and raising them—was considered a waste of my time and education," she said.

Tapscott highlighted the cultural shift that treats parenting as a distraction from economic productivity rather than the vital societal contribution it truly is.

Families where one parent stays at home save the government substantial childcare subsidies but receive no financial recognition for their effort.

Meanwhile, these families pay the same taxes as dual-income households, effectively subsidising a system they do not benefit from.

This imbalance creates immense pressure on single-income families, who face rising living costs and feel penalised for choosing to invest in their children's early years.

Tapscott also pointed out the broader implications of this policy.

"The push for equal workforce participation and economic growth has turned into a ruthless march earlier and earlier into motherhood and childhood," she said, warning that this undermines both maternal well-being and societal resilience.

Evidence supports her claim: as workforce participation rises, birth rates decline, presenting severe long-term economic challenges.

The Albanese government’s reforms perpetuate the false narrative that institutional care is superior to parental care.

Tapscott challenges this idea: "It’s time to stop treating women as a problem to be solved. Parenting is by far the strongest determinant of childhood outcomes."

Instead of championing policies that marginalise parents, the government should explore ways to support them—such as tax relief for single-income families, extended parental leave, or recognising unpaid caregiving as valuable labour.

Family First believes parents must have the freedom to choose what is best for their children without financial coercion.

Albanese's childcare reforms fail to address the real needs of families, instead incentivising economic activity at the expense of the most critical years in a child’s life. It’s time for policies that respect and empower all parents, valuing both paid and unpaid contributions to society.

MEDIA RELEASE

This is a summary of a research paper titled Who Cares? The Real Cost of Childcare which has been prepared for the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship conference in London next week.