A state-by-state look at what Labor, the Liberals, the Greens and One Nation have said and done about early childhood, and what it means for the children, families and educators in our rooms.
Australia is in the middle of a long election season. Victoria votes on 28 November 2026. South Australia returned its Labor government in a landslide in March. Queensland is governed by the Liberal National Party until at least 2028. And New South Wales, my home state, will go to the polls in 2027.
Because so much of this is happening at once, and because the same parties make policy in different ways in different states, I have been looking closely at what Labor, the Liberals, the Greens and One Nation have said or done about the issues that directly affect our work as early childhood educators — not only in New South Wales, but in Victoria, Queensland and South Australia as well.
These include early childhood funding and educator pay; Aboriginal affairs, including cultural recognition, languages and community decision-making; and multiculturalism, anti-racism and social cohesion.
I have chosen to look mainly at New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia because that is where the biggest shifts in early childhood policy are happening right now — and because so many educators I know move between these states and expect the same profession to be treated the same way wherever they work.
Where there is common ground between the states, I have treated it as a national position, because that is how it lands for educators: not as three separate systems, but as one profession trying to make sense of the direction the country is heading.
But I also think we need to look beyond election promises and political headlines.
We need to consider what these policies mean for the children and families who walk through our doors every day, the educators who support them, and the kind of society we are helping to shape.
I am writing as a Wiradjuri woman, an early childhood educator and a mother. I want to know whether educators can afford to remain in the profession, whether Aboriginal communities will have meaningful opportunities to influence decisions affecting their children, and whether every child and family will continue to feel safe, respected and valued.
I also want to know whether our political leaders understand the important role early childhood education plays in strengthening social cohesion and challenging racism and discrimination.
After all, early childhood education is not simply about preparing children for school. It is about helping children develop their identities, build relationships, understand difference and recognise that they belong to a diverse community.
The policies we vote for today can influence the opportunities available to children tomorrow.
What Are the Parties Actually Proposing?
Before comparing the parties, it is important to distinguish between current government programs, historical election promises, published party policies and public comments made by individual politicians.
These are not interchangeable.
A political leader expressing an opinion about Aboriginal languages or multiculturalism is not necessarily announcing a formal education policy. Equally, a government announcing a funding package does not automatically mean that educators or families will experience meaningful improvements.
We need to look beyond what is promised and ask how commitments will be funded, implemented and evaluated. There is also an important distinction between state and federal responsibilities, and it plays out differently in every state.
In Victoria, the state funds and runs its own kindergarten system through the Best Start, Best Life reforms, and sets its own road on treaty. In Queensland, the state designs and pays for Free Kindy and decides its own teacher registration rules. In South Australia, a royal commission reshaped how the state approaches preschool. Across all of it, the Australian Government still controls the Child Care Subsidy, funds a share of educator wages and drives national reform.
Knowing which level of government is responsible for what is not a technicality. It is the difference between asking the right politician the right question and getting a polite non-answer from the wrong one.
Understanding these responsibilities helps us ask the right questions of the right politicians.
Labor: Across The States
In New South Wales
The current NSW Labor Government has announced a $27 million investment in early childhood scholarships, supporting workforce development and qualification pathways. It has also announced changes to community preschool funding for 2027, including a new funding model intended to cover operating costs and support mandated staff pay increases.
However, funding announcements need to be considered alongside their practical implications.
Will these changes genuinely improve educators' wages? Will services have enough funding to maintain appropriate staffing levels? Will educators receive adequate non-contact time for programming, documentation, reflection and professional learning? These are important questions, particularly for community preschools already experiencing financial and workforce pressures.
Labor's First Steps Aboriginal Children's Early Childhood Education Strategy includes a stated investment of $194 million over four years. The strategy supports Aboriginal language and culture programs, Aboriginal community-controlled early childhood services and the growth of the Aboriginal early childhood workforce. The NSW Government has also commenced consultations with Aboriginal communities about the possibility of a treaty or other formal agreement.
For me, an important distinction is whether Aboriginal people are simply being consulted or whether communities are genuinely influencing the decisions that affect them.
Meaningful self-determination requires more than inviting Aboriginal people to contribute their perspectives. It requires investment in Aboriginal-led initiatives, recognition of community expertise and opportunities for Aboriginal communities to determine their own priorities.
The Labor Government has funded initiatives intended to strengthen social cohesion and address racism. The NSW Department of Education's Anti-Racism Strategy implementation plan for 2026–2027 also includes professional learning for the early childhood sector and engagement with multicultural communities. These are important commitments, but educators need to know how this support will reach individual services.
Will educators have access to practical anti-racism professional learning? Will services receive assistance to communicate with families who speak languages other than English? Will culturally responsive practice be adequately supported?
In Victoria
The Victorian Labor Government has the most developed early childhood agenda in the country. Free Kinder has saved families up to $5,200 per child, and funded four-year-old kindergarten is being lifted from 15 hours a week towards 30 hours a week by 2036 through pre-prep.
The 2026–27 Victorian Budget invests $541 million in early childhood education, including almost $500 million to deliver up to 22 new kindergartens on or near school sites, five new government-run Early Learning Victoria centres and grants for 27 new or expanded kinders. It also funds $3.6 million for bilingual kindergartens through the Early Childhood Language Program, which already reaches around 7,000 children.
For educators, the state offers incentives of $9,000 to attract teachers into funded kindergarten programs. Incentives can help a service fill a vacancy. They cannot fix a career that does not pay enough to stay.
In Queensland
In Queensland, Free Kindy — 15 hours a week, 40 weeks a year — was introduced by the previous Labor government from January 2024 and has been continued by the LNP since. That continuity is unusual in early childhood, and it is worth noticing: both major parties now accept that the year before school should be free.
Labor, now in opposition under Steven Miles, rightly claims to have built the scheme. But the argument the sector is still waiting for is not about access. It is about who teaches those hours, what they are paid, and whether the workforce can keep up with the places the policy has created.
In South Australia
South Australia is the state that took early childhood most seriously on paper. The Labor Government commissioned the Royal Commission into Early Childhood Education and Care, chaired by Julia Gillard, and is acting on its central recommendation: three-year-old preschool.
Flying Start began rolling out in January 2026 across more than 200 long day care services and 45 government preschools, offering up to 15 hours a week of teacher-led preschool, with universal access promised by 2032. The government has committed $27.7 million over four years to speed up the long day care rollout, with roughly three-quarters of those services in metropolitan Adelaide and a quarter in regional South Australia.
Labor was returned in March 2026 with the largest victory in the state's history. On preschool, that gives it both a mandate and a timetable to be held to.
Where The States Align
Across New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and federally, Labor's shared story is the same: more funded hours, more places, more three-year-old preschool. On pay, the common thread is the federal government's 15 per cent wage increase for early childhood educators, delivered through the Worker Retention Payment.
That is real money. A typical full-time educator is around $255 a week better off than in December 2024, and an early childhood teacher around $410. My concern is what happens next. The payment was designed as an interim measure while the Fair Work Commission works through its gender undervaluation review. Interim measures have a way of becoming the ceiling.
I want to know which party will make educator pay permanent, and how.
Liberals: Across the States
In New South Wales
The former Liberal–National Government's 2023 election platform included commitments to universal free pre-kindergarten and an early childhood workforce package.
These were earlier election commitments rather than newly announced policies for the next election. The NSW Liberal opposition has also called for increased community preschool funding to support educator pay.
However, educators need to know what specific funding commitments would be made if the party returned to government. Would these commitments address wage disparities across the sector? Would they support qualified early childhood teachers and educators? How would services experiencing workforce shortages be assisted?
During its previous term in government, the Liberal–National Coalition supported Aboriginal early childhood initiatives, including a culturally adapted early childhood wellbeing program developed with Aboriginal communities. The Coalition Government also passed the NSW Aboriginal Languages Act in 2017, recognising the importance of protecting and revitalising Aboriginal languages.
These are significant parts of its historical record. However, educators should be asking what current commitments the Liberals are making to Aboriginal community-controlled early childhood services, Aboriginal workforce development and language revitalisation.
NSW Liberal representatives have publicly defended multiculturalism and condemned discriminatory rhetoric targeting Muslim Australians. They have also raised concerns about funding for initiatives intended to protect faith communities. For early childhood educators, the question is how these positions translate into practical support.
What resources would be available to help educators respond to racism, support multilingual families and create culturally safe learning environments?
In Victoria
In Victoria, the Coalition, now led by Jess Wilson, is campaigning hard on cost of living, housing and crime. On early childhood, it has not yet matched the detail of Labor's offer, and Labor has begun asking publicly whether the Liberals would keep Free Kinder at all.
The Coalition's main education announcement so far is a plan for around 10 specialised industry colleges for about 5,000 students in construction and engineering. That may be a sensible path for older students. It says very little about the first five years of life.
The coalition has also promised to tear up the State and First Peoples Treaty to Parliament, signed in 2025, if they are elected to Government in November. A decades-long project that had been a key election promise across 3 election cycles in Victoria.
Support for Treaty is strongest among younger Victorians. Around 70 per cent of those aged 18-24 support Treaty. This support remains high, albeit slightly lower, among those aged 25-34 (61 per cent) and 35-44 (59 per cent).
Support increasingly declines with age, dropping to just 31 per cent among those aged 75 and over. Overall, 53 per cent of surveyed Victorians agreed or strongly agreed that there should be a Treaty in Victoria, with only 24 per cent who disagreed or strongly disagreed.
Only 5% of Victorians surveyed believe abolishing the Treaty is a priority after the election.
In Queensland
In Queensland, the LNP government under David Crisafulli has kept Free Kindy, delivered an Early Childhood Workforce Strategy for 2025–2028, committed $27.5 million for free vision, hearing and speech checks for every child in kindergarten, and legislated mandatory teacher registration for early childhood teachers from July 2028 through the Queensland College of Teachers.
Registration is a meaningful step: it treats early childhood teaching as a profession with the same accountability as schooling. The same government has also repealed the state's Path to Treaty Act, winding up the Truth-telling and Healing Inquiry and the First Nations Treaty Institute, and redirecting that funding into housing, health, education and employment programs.
In South Australia
In South Australia, the Liberals recorded their worst result in history, falling to just five seats in the House of Assembly. In opposition, their most significant move on Aboriginal affairs has been to introduce the First Nations Voice Repeal Bill 2026, which would scrap the state's Voice to Parliament — the first in the country — and reinstate an Aboriginal Lands Committee.
The 46 elected members of the Voice have rejected the bill, describing it as "deeply concerning" and as reinforcing systemic racism. For educators, this is the clearest recent example of a party choosing between consultation and representation.
Where the States Align
Across the states, the pattern is consistent. On early childhood, the Coalition offers fewer new dollars than Labor and leans on cost-of-living and tax framing rather than expanding funded hours. On Aboriginal affairs, it has moved away from treaty and Voice structures in Queensland and is attempting to dismantle the Voice in South Australia, in favour of what it describes as practical, measurable funding.
That is a genuine policy position, and it deserves to be assessed on its outcomes, not its slogans. But it is a shift, and it is happening in more than one state at once. When a party argues that community-controlled structures are a distraction from practical results, the question for us is who decides what counts as practical — and who benefits when Aboriginal communities are consulted rather than resourced to lead.
The Greens: Across the States
In New South Wales
The NSW Greens' early childhood education policy advocates for free universal public early education, professional wages, pay parity for appropriately qualified educators and teachers, professional development and payment for work undertaken outside rostered hours.
These proposals address several longstanding concerns within the early childhood sector. However, as with all parties, educators should examine how these commitments would be funded and implemented, including the proposed timelines.
The Greens support Aboriginal-led early childhood services and advocate for Aboriginal communities to be resourced to shape educational programs. More broadly, the NSW Greens support truth-telling, treaty processes, Aboriginal self-determination and language revitalisation.
This approach raises an important consideration for our sector. Aboriginal cultural knowledge and expertise should not be treated as a free resource that early childhood services can access whenever they need support. Authentic partnerships require time, relationships, reciprocity and appropriate remuneration.
The NSW Greens support the maintenance and revitalisation of First Nations and migrant languages, alongside anti-racism training and reporting mechanisms across government agencies. Their early childhood policy also advocates for children's cultures and languages to be reflected in everyday educational practice.
Educators should consider how these commitments could translate into meaningful professional learning, family engagement and inclusive curriculum development.
Across Victoria, Queensland and South Australia
The Greens hold seats on the crossbench in Victoria, South Australia and Queensland, and their early childhood platform barely changes between them. They advocate free universal public early education, professional wages, pay parity for qualified educators and teachers, payment for work done outside rostered hours, and sustained professional development.
On Aboriginal affairs, the Greens in all three states support Aboriginal-led services, truth-telling, treaty and language revitalisation, and argue that communities should be resourced to shape educational programs rather than simply be consulted about them.
On multiculturalism and anti-racism, they support the maintenance of First Nations and migrant languages, anti-racism training and reporting mechanisms, and children's cultures and languages being reflected in everyday practice.
Where the States Align
The Greens are the most policy-consistent of the four parties across the states. That consistency is a strength when it comes to sending a clear signal to the sector, and a limitation when it comes to the question every voter eventually asks: how would it be funded, legislated and delivered, and over what timeline?
One Nation: Across the States
In New South Wales
In June 2026, Pauline Hanson questioned the need for degree-qualified early childhood professionals, stating: "I didn't have a university degree to look after my children."
While parenting and professional early childhood education both involve caring for children, they are not the same responsibility. Early childhood teachers and educators undertake professional qualifications to develop knowledge of child development, pedagogy, inclusion, assessment, safeguarding and educational practice.
Reducing early childhood education to simply looking after children risks overlooking the complexity and importance of our profession. Hanson's comments do not, by themselves, constitute a formal NSW policy to change qualification requirements. However, they raise important questions about how One Nation NSW views professional qualifications, workforce investment and the value of early childhood education.
In September 2026, Hanson questioned the value of teaching Aboriginal languages, stating: "We're teaching [kids] Aboriginal languages that no longer is going to give them a job." These comments were made in a broader political context rather than as a formal NSW early childhood education policy.
Nevertheless, I find the suggestion that the value of learning an Aboriginal language should be measured primarily through employment outcomes deeply concerning. Languages are not simply tools for obtaining employment. They carry histories, cultural knowledge, relationships, identity and connections to Country.
For Aboriginal children, opportunities to hear, learn and maintain their languages can contribute to cultural identity and belonging. For non-Aboriginal children, respectful engagement with local Aboriginal languages can support their understanding of the world's oldest continuing living cultures. Educators should ask what One Nation NSW would do to support Aboriginal language revitalisation, Aboriginal community-controlled education and partnerships with local communities.
At the National Press Club in June 2026, Hanson stated: "We are a multiracial society, but we must be monocultural." She also described multiculturalism as "utterly flawed". These are public comments expressing her political position, rather than a specific NSW early childhood education policy. However, they raise questions that are particularly relevant to educators working within culturally and linguistically diverse communities.
What does a monocultural society mean for children who speak different languages at home? What does it mean for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children whose cultures and identities predate colonisation? What does it mean for families who want their children to maintain meaningful connections with their cultural heritage while also participating fully in Australian society?
These are questions educators should consider when evaluating political positions and their potential implications for children and families.
In Victoria
In Victoria, One Nation is contesting the November 2026 election with a campaign built on crime and cutting government bodies and major projects. Its polling has risen enough that its preferences may matter to the Coalition's chances, and the Premier has begun framing the contest as "only Labor can stop the risk of a Liberal–One Nation government".
In Queensland
Queensland remains One Nation's strongest base, and Pauline Hanson sits in the federal Senate from Queensland. The party's influence here has largely been to pull the wider political conversation on immigration, language and culture to the right, rather than to legislate its own early childhood policy.
In South Australia
South Australia is the clearest sign of how far this has moved. At the March 2026 election, One Nation, led in the state by Cory Bernardi, won 22.9 per cent of the primary vote and four seats — outpolling the Liberal Party, which recorded its worst result. Four seats is small. Outpolling a major party is not.
Where the States Align
Until recently, Hanson's comments about early childhood qualifications, Aboriginal languages and multiculturalism could be read as one politician's opinion. That is no longer quite true.
Between Hanson's federal platform and One Nation's growing parliamentary presence in South Australia, Victoria and Queensland, these views now have a seat at the table.
That is precisely why it matters that we take them seriously rather than dismissing them as noise.
When Politics and Pedagogy Collide
One of the issues I think we need to discuss more openly is the relationship between political rhetoric and our professional responsibilities as educators. Across Australia, conversations about Aboriginal education, multiculturalism, immigration and diversity are becoming increasingly politicised. We are seeing it in the repeal of Queensland's Path to Treaty laws and the push to dismantle South Australia's Voice and the commitment to abolish Victoria’s Treaty.
These are not abstract debates happening somewhere else. They are decisions about whether the children in our rooms will grow up in a country that recognises their cultures or one that asks them to set them aside.
Early childhood educators are not immune to these debates.
We may encounter families who question why Aboriginal perspectives are embedded in the curriculum, colleagues who feel uncomfortable discussing racism, or community members who believe children are too young to learn about cultural differences. Some may argue that educators should remain neutral and avoid these topics altogether.
But there is an important distinction between respecting different political opinions and neglecting our professional responsibilities.
The Early Years Learning Framework V2.0 identifies cultural responsiveness, equity, inclusion and respect for diversity as important elements of early childhood practice. The National Quality Standard also expects services to provide inclusive environments, build respectful relationships and engage meaningfully with families and communities. These professional expectations do not disappear because political opinions differ.
Educators have responsibilities to uphold children's dignity, support their identities and respond appropriately to discrimination. This does not mean telling families how to vote or promoting a particular political party.
It means understanding that respecting diversity, challenging racism and supporting children's cultural identities are professional responsibilities, not partisan political positions.
What Are Children Learning from the Conversations Happening Around Them?
Young children are constantly making sense of the world. They notice differences in language, skin colour, family structures, cultural practices and ways of living. They also notice how adults respond to those differences.
When children hear particular languages described as less valuable, or cultural identities presented as something that should be abandoned in favour of a dominant culture, these messages can influence how they understand themselves and others.
This is why anti-bias education is so important.
Our role is not to prevent children from noticing difference. It is to help them develop the language, confidence and understanding to engage respectfully with diversity, recognise unfairness and challenge exclusion. I often return to the metaphor of windows, mirrors and sliding doors.
Children need mirrors that positively reflect their own identities, cultures, languages and family experiences. They need windows that introduce them to perspectives and ways of living beyond their own experiences. And they need sliding doors that invite them to move beyond observation and develop meaningful relationships with others. These experiences contribute to belonging, empathy and social cohesion.
They also remind us that cultural responsiveness is not an optional extra or a special event on the educational calendar. It is part of how we build inclusive learning communities.
What About Educator Pay, Professional Recognition and Workforce Conditions?
While debates about culture and identity are important, we cannot overlook the workforce challenges facing early childhood education. Educators continue to raise concerns about wages, workload, staffing shortages, professional recognition and opportunities for career progression. The Independent Education Union's community preschool campaign highlights the challenges experienced by educators working in a predominantly female workforce.
In February 2026, the Fair Work Commission recommended that NSW review and increase preschool funding to support improved wages. The NSW Government has announced changes to its 2027 community preschool funding model, including a mandated pay increase.
However, the Independent Education Union has raised concerns that the proposed model could place some services, staffing arrangements and wages at risk.
Nationally, the pay picture shifted in late 2024 when the Australian Government funded a 15 per cent wage increase for early childhood education and care workers — $3.6 billion over two years, delivered through the Worker Retention Payment, worth around $255 a week for a typical full-time educator and around $410 for a teacher. The payment was later extended to 30 June 2028 while the Fair Work Commission works through its gender undervaluation review.
This is the most significant national investment in our pay in a generation, and it deserves to be acknowledged. It is also time-limited, tied to fee caps, and available only to services that meet the conditions. For educators in Victoria, Queensland and South Australia, the question is the same one I keep returning to: is this a floor we build on, or a ceiling we will be told to be grateful for?
These competing claims need to be examined against the final funding arrangements and their effects on individual services.
When evaluating political promises, I think educators should ask whether proposed funding will genuinely improve working conditions.
Will educators receive paid time for planning, documentation and professional reflection? Will qualified teachers and educators be appropriately remunerated? Will services be able to attract and retain experienced professionals? And will rural, regional and remote communities receive the support they need to address workforce shortages?
We cannot continue to advocate for high-quality early childhood education without also advocating for the people responsible for delivering it.
Aboriginal Self-Determination Must Be More Than Consultation
Another issue I believe deserves greater attention is the distinction between Aboriginal consultation and Aboriginal self-determination. Across the early childhood sector, educators are increasingly recognising the importance of embedding Aboriginal perspectives in meaningful and respectful ways.
However, these efforts cannot be separated from the broader political decisions that affect Aboriginal communities. There is a difference between a government funding programs about Aboriginal culture and a government resourcing Aboriginal people to determine what those programs should look like.
There is also a difference between inviting an Elder to participate in a consultation process and creating opportunities for Aboriginal communities to exercise genuine influence over policy, funding and educational decisions.
For early childhood educators, these distinctions matter.
We know that meaningful partnerships with Aboriginal communities require relationships built on trust, reciprocity and respect. They also require appropriate resources. Aboriginal Elders, educators, artists, language holders and community organisations should be recognised and remunerated for their expertise.
When political parties discuss Aboriginal education, I want to know whether their commitments will strengthen Aboriginal community-controlled organisations, support language revitalisation and create sustainable opportunities for Aboriginal people to lead educational initiatives.
The states give us three different answers to the same question. Victoria has legislated a Statewide Treaty that came into effect in December 2025 and established Gellung Warl to carry the relationship forward, now under threat. Queensland had a Path to Treaty and repealed it. South Australia built Australia's first Voice to Parliament and is now defending it against a repeal bill.
That is what self-determination looks like in practice: not a single national settlement, but a set of decisions made state by state, all of which shape whether the Aboriginal families in our services are partners in their children's education or simply consulted about it.
These are not simply matters of cultural representation. They are matters of self-determination, equity and responsibility.
Who Is Missing from The Conversation?
When political parties promise universal access to early childhood education, we also need to ask what universal access means in practice. Those barriers look different in each state — the long distances and thin workforces of regional Queensland, the growth corridors of outer-suburban Melbourne, the vast remote distances of South Australia — but the children who miss out look much the same.
A preschool place is not necessarily accessible simply because it exists.
Families may face barriers relating to cost, transport, disability, language, location or the availability of appropriate support. For some children, accessing early childhood education requires additional educators, specialist support, flexible enrolment arrangements or culturally responsive communication with families. For others, the greatest barrier may be living in a regional or remote community where services are limited, or workforce shortages are ongoing.
When assessing election commitments, educators should consider whether policies address these barriers.
Are children with disability and additional needs being adequately supported? Are Aboriginal families able to access culturally safe services? Are families who speak languages other than English able to communicate meaningfully with educators? Are services in rural and remote communities receiving equitable investment? And are governments considering the needs of children who are most likely to experience exclusion?
A commitment to universal early childhood education is only meaningful when it considers the children and families who may otherwise be left behind.
What Does This Mean for Educators?
For me, comparing political parties is not about giving any party credit for saying they value children, families or educators.
It is about examining what their commitments would allow us to do in practice.
Would their policies enable services to employ and retain qualified educators? Would they provide the resources needed to build meaningful relationships with Aboriginal communities? Would they support children to maintain their cultural identities and home languages? Would they help educators respond confidently to racism and discrimination? Would they improve access for children who currently experience barriers to participation? And would they recognise the important role early childhood education plays in strengthening relationships across our communities?
Those questions do not change much between the Murray and the Brisbane River. That, to me, is the point.
These are the questions I believe deserve our attention.
Five questions every early childhood educator could ask their local candidates
As Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia move through their election cycles, I encourage educators to look beyond campaign slogans and ask candidates to explain how their policies will support children, families and the early childhood workforce.
1. Educators pay and professional recognition:
What specific commitments will you make to improve early childhood educator wages, working conditions and professional recognition, and how will these be funded?
2. Aboriginal education and self-determination:
How will you support Aboriginal community-controlled early childhood services, language revitalisation and meaningful partnerships with local Aboriginal communities?
3. Multiculturalism and anti-racism:
What will your party do to support culturally responsive early childhood education, protect children and families from discrimination and strengthen social cohesion?
4. Professional learning and inclusion:
What resources will be available to help educators meet their responsibilities under the Early Years Learning Framework and National Quality Standard, particularly in relation to cultural responsiveness, equity and inclusion?
5. Equitable access:
How will your policies ensure that children experiencing disadvantage, children with disability, Aboriginal children and families living in rural and remote communities have genuine access to high-quality early childhood education?
Importantly, I encourage educators to ask candidates for more than statements of support.
Ask for funding commitments, implementation timelines and ways that governments will be held accountable for delivering on their promises.
Early Childhood Education Has a Role in Shaping the Future
I believe early childhood education has an important role to play in the kind of Australia we are creating.
Our services are often among the first places where children and families from different cultural, linguistic and socioeconomic backgrounds come together. They are places where relationships are formed, differences are explored and children begin developing their understanding of fairness, identity and belonging. This gives our profession both an opportunity and a responsibility.
We cannot control every political debate taking place beyond our services, wherever we are.
But we can advocate for policies that recognise the value of qualified educators, respect Aboriginal self-determination, support cultural and linguistic diversity and ensure that every child has opportunities to participate and belong. We can also make informed decisions about the political commitments that will shape our profession.
As educators, we are often encouraged to advocate for children. I believe that advocacy also means paying attention to the political decisions that affect their lives. Because decisions about education funding, cultural recognition, workforce conditions and inclusion are not abstract political issues. They have real consequences for the children and families we work alongside every day.
And if we want to create early childhood spaces where every child belongs, we need to pay attention to the policies shaping the world beyond our classroom doors.
