Our childcare system is facing a 'reckoning'

ABC listen.

Podcasts, radio, news, music, and more.

When big news breaks around the world, we've got the time to get into what's happened.

I've seen lots of robust argument, but nothing like that.

The Kremlin propagandists are very happy.

And we can find out what it means for us in Australia.

I think we're like a kangaroo courting the headlights.

What's perhaps more pertinent for Australia is ensuring that this kind of fracture that we've seen across the Atlantic is one that doesn't happen across the Pacific.

Three and a half hours of Radio National Breakfast condensed into a pop to the shops, maybe a tea break or a walk of the dog.

You can find the new Breakfast Wrap podcast by searching for Radio National Breakfast in the ABC Listen app.

Today the Australian people have voted for Australian values.

Government is always formed in a sensible centre, but our Liberal Party reflects a range of views.

Politics is the brutal game of arithmetic, but no one's going to vote for you, don't stare for something.

We've always been about the planet, but we've got to make sure that people have their daily needs met.

People are starting to see that there is actually a different way of doing politics.

Hello and welcome to the party room.

I'm Patricia Carvellis and I'm joining you from Wurundjeri Country here in Melbourne.

And I'm Fran Kelly on the Gadigal Land of the Eura Nation in Sydney.

And Fran, as the deadline for Donald Trump's so-called Liberation Day tariffs loom, the 90-day pause is coming off, Foreign Minister Penny Wong has been in Washington holding talks with her U.S.

counterpart, Marco Rubio,

a man who constantly looks unhappy.

He's got every, if I can use this term, every shit sandwich in the government.

Clearly, he and Trump have a lot of history, but the Foreign Minister hasn't had any luck trying to get us any lower tariffs, which I think was probably always likely that that wasn't going to happen.

We're going to be joined soon by one of our favourite regulars here on the party room, Anna Henderson, SBS's chief political correspondent.

Yeah, looking forward to that.

We love Anna on this show.

And yes, we don't know yet where we're going to end up on tariffs, but you can't say it's they're doing victory laps, so it's not sounding good.

We're also going to talk to Anna, Piquet, about the findings of Australia's first truth-telling inquiry, the Europe Commission in Victoria.

But before we get to that, every now and then, Piquet, there's a story that cuts through all the noise of our busy lives.

It overshadows any of the political yarns, the stories about wars, the daily Trump reports as we're seeing at the moment, and it just grabs, grabs us.

It grabs the national psyche.

And this week we saw that, and I want to warn all of you listening that we're going to be talking about allegations of serious offences to children that some of you will find distressing.

On Tuesday this week, 26-year-old Melbourne childcare worker Joshua Brown was charged with more than 70 offences involving eight alleged victims across various childcare centres.

These were children aged between five months and two years old.

They were babies, PK, and these were serious reports of sexual offending.

It was a gut-wrenching and deeply disturbing story.

Every parent's worst nightmare, but all of us, I think, absolutely revolted.

Inevitably, this story has awakened demands for scrutiny and change within our childcare sector.

State and federal governments, I have to say, understood this.

It looked to me.

And as the story broke this week, we saw the Victorian Premier come out.

We've seen federal ministers ready to try and get out ahead of this story.

And I think, you know, to give them the benefit of the doubt, not just motivated by political survival, but by the same instincts we all have had to this story, which are basically outrage and disgust.

But PK, outrage is one thing.

Does the government have any answers in terms of how to stop this happening again?

What you can do as a government is take all of the expert advice and implement it quickly.

That's the first obligation on you.

And on that measure, I think it's fair to say that the government has been on the front foot this week.

I'm not saying you know it's a flawless response, but certainly they have been engaging with all of it.

We heard from Jason Clare, for instance, who's been doing the rounds as the minister that's responsible, saying that there are no excuses.

Yes, things have taken too long in terms of childcare reform.

This is serious and I'm determined to act.

It's a complicated system, but people watching aren't interested in bloody excuses.

They're interested in action.

and that's what education ministers must while this particular hideous unthinkable story is outrageous and I can tell you as rocked Melbourne the broader systemic issues of regulation in this sector have been told told by our own colleague Adele Ferguson told recommendations have been sitting there New South Wales has been specifically looking at their system so there are things that can be done and done relatively quickly and they all have to be dealt with.

Now, one of the things that is definitely going to have to be, I think, on the table, and it is on the table, is the idea of having some kind of independent national regulator, a watchdog that effectively has

the power to close centres that do not meet minimum standards.

There are also critiques about the kind of way that childcare is regulated, where you know you can be working towards, that's one of the metrics.

Then of course there is the Federation.

We know that's a big problem always.

And trying to harmonise, nationalise, working with children checks, making them more vigorous, having a national register of all childcare workers.

But at the heart of this, and this is really so passionately what I believe, we're not being real about the fact that we are dramatically expanding a sector.

We don't have the workforce available for expanding that sector.

And so quality has become an issue.

And while this is one very violent, hideous example, there is a spectrum of

bad behaviour and all of it is unacceptable for the care of our children, Bran.

And so we're coming to a reckoning, I think, really.

This is a reckoning moment.

Families don't have a choice.

This is a false notion, the idea of choice.

They don't have a choice because to live in Australian cities, particularly Sydney and Melbourne, but the others too,

you cannot do it without two incomes.

And so the idea that childcare is a choice is baloney.

It's not a choice for many people.

The onus is now, I think, on all levels of government.

Victorian government's trying to, you know, show leadership around trying to fix this system in Victoria.

But it has to be national.

It has to be harmonised.

It has to be a priority.

And big last point, sorry, I know I've gone on a rant, but I've watched this and I've covered it closely all week.

We have to fund it.

Best line I ever heard this week was from Anne Hollins, the National Children's Commissioner, who made this point.

She said, we keep talking about cheaper childcare, but we're not talking about safer childcare.

That, you know, we've heard a lot about cheaper childcare, which is very important, but I'd like to see more statements made about safer childcare care now and we know what to do.

Let's get on and do it.

And so we need to actually elevate our metrics and not just be so desperate to roll out a system because it helps workplace participation.

We have to talk about all of the angles because families, back to my point, they don't actually have a choice.

It's a false idea.

Yeah, I think all of that is right.

And that comment from Anne Hollands, I think, is really hit the nail on the head.

I mean, Jason Clare, the education minister, came out this week and described childcare as an essential service, which goes to the point you're saying it's essential for so many families just to be able to afford to live and work in our cities, but it's also essential to the government's productivity figuring.

I mean it's a productivity issue, getting more people into the workforce.

We have skills shortages right, left and centre, including in the childcare sector in this country, and we need more people in the workforce.

So the government's factoring this into our sort of productivity aims and goals, our GDP goals.

So that's the first point.

But the other point is, you know, it's also identified a fatal flaw at the heart of our system.

I mean, you mentioned Adele Ferguson, our colleague who's broken story after story this year on the physical and sexual abuse going on in our child care centre.

She's done an incredible job.

And she describes what she calls the elephant in the room here, which is the dominance of the for-profit sector in our early childhood.

education.

To go to Anne Holland's comments, you know, the Productivity Commission did an inquiry into our early childhood, which handed down a report last year, and it talked a lot about childcare being made accessible, equitable and inclusive.

So that's all true, but no mention of safer.

And there was a supplementary report from one of the lead commissioners to this Productivity Commission report, Professor Deborah Brennan.

She went to the dominance of the private sector and the types of care that's led to.

And she notes that three quarters of long daycare centres in Australia are run by commercial providers.

To your point, Pika, getting staff, getting trained staff, employing enough staff is a key to the safety of children in these centres.

Adele Ferguson told RM Breakfast this week the sector is 21,000 staff short.

Childcare shortage is about 21,000 childcare workers who are short in the system and one in four are leaving.

every year.

That's what they're saying.

One in four are leaving.

So there's a real crisis.

There's at least one report of sexual misconduct or serious incidences in childcare centres a day.

The Productivity Commission called for a standalone Early Childhood Education and Care Commission.

The government hasn't acted on that yet.

Now the minister has said they will consider it.

But, you know, it hasn't happened yet.

And this goes to the point Jason Clare has admitted this week, things aren't happening fast enough.

The response hasn't been good enough.

You know, I just think that's writ large really in what we're seeing this week.

It's horrific.

The truth is that the response, it's very natural to go, oh, we don't, you know, we want our kids to be safe.

And now, because of the fear over this perpetrator, and of course there are other perpetrators, he's not the first.

There is a response which is quite visceral.

And I'm not underestimating or undermining that the response.

And the statistics show men are more often perpetrators than women.

I mean, that is a fact, right?

But Fran, if we ban men, firstly, it's

discriminatory, right?

Like if you're a nice guy who just wants to work in a childcare centre, why should you not work in a childcare center?

We also don't have enough workers to do this work.

So it seems to me insane that you would do such a thing.

But equally.

Others are warning there will be an exodus of men from the sector because how could you want to work there if you're being seen suspiciously as a potential perpetrator?

Now, this is a difficult thing to even talk about, right?

A change in the way the culture in the workplace works as well, not just going, oh let's ban men.

I don't think it's a realistic option and I don't think it's a good option.

Yeah, and the minister, Jason Clear, the federal minister, was asked about it today and he said the government is not considering that and will not consider that.

And you're right, it's not a realistic option, nor is it equitable.

And for all those reasons you said, but it all goes back to better regulation, better care, better safety standards.

And that's really the bottom line here.

Shall we bring Anna in?

Let's do it.

Anna Henderson is the Chief Political Correspondent for SBS.

Welcome to the party room.

Thanks for having me back.

Hi Anna, it's great to have you.

Anna, Piquet and I have been talking about this horrendous story of the childcare worker charged with these serious offences.

This has really hit a nerve across the community.

How do you judge the federal government's response so far?

The government's saying all the right things in terms of being incredibly sympathetic to all the parents out there who either have kids in childcare or even just more broadly members of the community who are just aghast at this kind of news.

But I think where the rubber hasn't necessarily hit the road is that sense of like what is the framework that the government has in place and that it has pressured potentially the states and territories to also enact to ensure that not just this particular horrific incident but more broadly in the system that you know when people take their kids into this environment before they have a chance to be able to speak for themselves when they're that young that they're safe and I think there are still holes in the system there is still a sense that you know the government could be doing more to ensure that people are adequately vetted that across different states and territory borders there is more of an understanding and passing on of knowledge around investigations.

I think Jason Claire has been suggesting that on some areas that movement will happen very quickly.

But, you know, every parent in the country who's had a kid in daycare or who currently does will be looking for federal leadership here.

I don't think there's a more important reason to make decisions quickly.

Yeah, I think that's absolutely right.

Look, Anna, just changing the topic, want to get into where we're at with Liberation Day 90-day

pause

and where that all leads.

And I think it's leading in one way.

The Foreign Minister, Penny Wong, Wong, has been in Washington this week.

She's been hanging out with her US counterpart, Marco Rubio.

Her visit was part of that wider quad meeting with her counterparts.

Now, the quad, to remind you, is Japan, India, the US.

But her bilateral with Marco Rubio was basically focused on a couple of issues.

AUKUS, of course, there's a review in the US, which is a quick one.

And these tariffs.

These tariffs are set to kick in next week.

And earlier this week, the Prime Minister declared he was pursuing zero tariffs with the US.

We'll continue to put our case forward that it shouldn't be 10, it should be zero.

That is what a reciprocal tariff will be.

I don't know.

Like, I thought the foreign minister's comments were pretty muted.

They didn't sort of suggest to me that there was about to be some sort of breakthrough with the administration.

And mainly the reporting is that the government has privately accepted that, you know, we're not really going to get a deal.

And they're not prepared to offer, you know, the House, if you like, on getting a deal because we have have the lowest tariffs anyway this is a an exercise in expectations management from the government now like it's better for them to say look 10 is the lowest tariff and we're in the lowest category and we should be welcoming that it'd be nice to have zero we should have zero because look at our you know free trade environment with the us

but if they set themselves the zero standard then you know they set themselves up for a fail if they set themselves up for look we're working this through 10 is the lowest amongst other nations.

And so we should be quite happy if that's where we land in the short term.

And it's always a continuing negotiation.

And then they get a better deal.

Well,

that's probably their hope.

But I think there is a moderating of the language from Penny Wong.

She's the one who just sat across the table from Marco Rubio in the same room.

This is a very layered relationship at the moment.

It's very complicated.

You have the same two people sitting down to talk about tariffs and trade and obviously critical minerals and all the things that Australia is hoping to put on the table to sweeten the deal around AUKUS and defence.

But then layered on top of that, you have the broader question about defence spending, whether Australia is being seen to do enough.

And on top of that, something which I think hasn't really gotten a lot of airtime, but don't forget.

The White House is very annoyed that Australia was involved in announcing sanctions directly on members of the Netanyahu government in the Middle East.

Like there are a lot of other elements to what Australia's been doing internationally with other like-minded countries, which will fold into the general tenor of the alliance beyond just the question of whether or not the US is giving Australia a fair deal and on the other hand, whether, you know, Big Macs in New York are going to be more expensive as a result.

Like it's gotten a bit didactic and I'm sort of at a point where I don't really want to keep writing the headline about whether or not there's been a meeting between the US President and Anthony Albanese.

But at the same time, we know that's the critical juncture that hasn't been met.

We know that's the critical moment that hasn't been met.

And after going to Calgary and, you know, the sense of anticipation around getting up into the Rockies and the meeting happening and the grizzly bears around us.

And then it was just a nothing.

It was a chasm filled by Scott Besson, you know, on the US side and a meeting that we incidentally found out about through Ben Fordham getting information from the Prime Minister's office, not us on the ground slogging it out through the media centre.

I think it just shows that there's a lot of moving parts and at this point in time, there's probably a lot more at stake in the broader relationship than the 10% tariff.

Yeah, I mean as you say, a nothing burger as that turned out rather than any kind of Big Mac burger.

But there is a lot at stake and the U.S.

President, I guess it's fair to say too, has had bigger fish to fry lately.

On Wednesday, he took to his truth social media platform to declare, again in capitals, that Israel has agreed to conditions to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas and end the war in Gaza.

Now, you know, that war, I just remind everyone, has claimed close to 60,000 lives.

That's the figures coming out of the Gaza Health Ministry.

I actually did an interview this week on the Radio National Hour speaking to a specialist in conflict death tolls, an independent survey that found much higher death toll than that.

If you're interested in that, it's there on our website.

But we don't know what these conditions are.

We do know, as far as I've heard anyway, that Hamas hasn't agreed to anything yet.

But obviously, if this came to fruition, Anna, it would be incredibly significant and would overshadow even that Liberation Day tariff deadline.

Absolutely.

I mean, you know, how long has this been going on for now?

There's been a sense amongst the analysts I speak to who cover the Middle East and who've watched this over decades that the protracted nature of this is sort of hand-wringingly awful and shocking and horrific and the no end seems in sight.

Now, if this does hold,

if the Trump administration is able to be the brokering point for this as well, you know, that is something that Donald Trump can stand up and say that he has managed to achieve.

And that will be...

And then he might get the Nobel Peace Prize in there.

I think that's still a ways off, isn't it?

He's made no secret of his desire, that's for sure.

That's true.

That's true.

But I do think when you actually look at the realities of this,

that

for Donald Trump to get this agreement would still be of huge value,

but the fact that we have no understanding of the detail is still very concerning to those watching this closely.

And it doesn't solve the broader problem between the Netanyahu government and at the moment, many other countries in the world.

Yeah, and that, you know, Benjamin Netanyahu's coming to the US next week and, you know, there'll be more on all of that.

Look, I want to move, if we can, Anna, to a story story that, you know, has got a bit of, definitely got a bit of traction in Victoria, but I don't feel like it's gotten the kind of traction it should have this week.

Nowhere near it, Pikachu.

Yeah, nowhere near it.

This is Australia's first truth-telling inquiry.

It's handed down its final report earlier this week on Tuesday.

It is basically the culmination of four years of work.

painstaking work.

It's had Royal Commission level powers, the Europe Commission in Victoria.

It's got a hundred recommendations, healing, reconciliation, and

the most powerful statement that Indigenous Victorians had experienced a genocide.

And that is, of course, a very

big word with big international meaning.

It found systemic racism was at the heart of injustices continuing to face First Nations people, which we talk about all the time.

This report though, the Victorian government is yet to respond.

Already, if you have seen any of the commentary, you're kind of, you're hearing from the Victorian opposition leader language that I quote and call Peter Dutton light.

I feel like it's the sort of similar rhetoric we heard from that after the referendum and before from certain people in the Liberal Party.

Where does this leave us?

The only truth-telling commission?

I asked the Prime Minister this week on Monday, feels a million years ago now, but about whether there'll be a federal truth-telling commission.

He's not interested, it seems.

He's abandoned that.

This is the only one.

Where does it leave us?

Well, he did put it back onto the states after the referendum failed and said, you know, this is something that could be carried forward at a state and territory level.

This extraordinary report, which lays bare

very confronting findings for a lot of Australians, but no more confronting than it is for the people who gave evidence and whose historical record is now being seen through this lens and feel that they are now seen by the system and that their experience, their history, their families are now recognised and what they went through in Australia's history.

Where it also leaves us is that question of is there

now a move towards compensation and do other states and territories look at this as an example of what they need to do to try and move reconciliation forward in Australia?

We've got NAIDOC week coming up.

The Garma Festival in Arnhem Land is not too far away either.

There are forums now to take these findings away and try and radiate them more broadly in the Australian community and look at what can be considered by other governments in terms of trying to reconcile.

But that lack of federal

overlay here is significant because this isn't a federal government that's necessarily wanting to take what's happened here and very strongly encourage similar types of processes in other parts of the country.

And the Minister for Indigenous Australians, Malanderi McCarthy, as well, has been talking about this in a sense of it being a Victorian matter.

And that's not to say that she's not recognising what's happened here is really important, but we're not seeing the federal government take this up in a really strong, robust, public way, in my view.

Yeah, but what we are seeing, which is interesting, you know, you both mentioned NAIDOC Week next week.

It's the

50 years of NAIDOC Week.

The theme is the next generation, strength, vision, and legacy.

And so I think what we are seeing here is First Nations people wanting to work out how to move it forward post-the failure of the voice referendum.

And I just want to draw attention to a big speech given by Indigenous elder Arnie Pat Anderson a couple of weeks ago in which she called this out and she, you know, as an elder said it's time for generational change in Indigenous leadership.

She made the point that a lot of senior people like her have been in high positions for many years and the dial isn't shifting.

In fact, things are stuck as you've just been talking about.

She's saying it's time to make space for the new generation of Indigenous leaders.

You know, some of these are lawyers, economists, Harvard graduates, let them have a go.

There's been quite a reaction to it within the First Nations community.

But, you know, the reality is, the truth is, First Nations policy is at a change point since the voice.

There's been this despondency, this stagnation you've been talking about.

And, you know, something needs to happen to kickstart the dialogue.

And NAIDOT Week, I think, is, you know, the First Nations people are hopeful that that might be a platform to get things moving again.

I think so, Fran.

And, you know, talking to my NITV colleagues who sort of live and breathe these stories every day, that sense of purpose and ownership of the space, young people coming through

and positivity and having a platform to try and make change is probably,

in many ways just so important right now because it is such a tough job to keep on engaging with these terrible death in custody and other justice system issues that are just permeating.

And

if you're engaging on a regular basis as a First Nations person in Australia with First Nations media, it is an incredibly bleak time.

And so there is a really strong

keenness

to see that kind of like what's the future planning for the community?

Where are the light spots to lift us up?

That's a big part of the hoped conversation going forward.

And the federal government is trying to find ways to

give hope.

And through the structures that it's trying to put in place around economic purpose and even things like making it cheaper to buy groceries in remote communities.

These are little things we might sit here and say, you know, given the state of play, there is so much more to do.

But there are areas where I think governments are trying to act.

But that point that Pat was making around the need to lift up the next generation to be able to speak on a public platform and advocate for the future seems like a, you know, a really important development.

I think the point you just made about all the practical things is very much true and should be acknowledged, even though, yeah, you're right, it doesn't get the kind of attention.

But there does appear to be a real lack of enthusiasm at trying to do things at a national level on this issue, which go beyond those practical measures.

And I've spoken, I just want to say this, to lots of Aboriginal people

in leadership roles who say to me that the current agenda of the Albanese government is essentially the same as the Howard government's, which is this idea of practical reconciliation, yeah?

This idea of economic, just economic development.

And I think that does worry people.

Yeah, I mean, I think that's a bit rough to say it's similar or it's the same as the Howard era because John Howard really did, you know, change everything in this area.

Yes, I think the Prime Minister has been scared back, if you like, by the referendum result into focusing on practical issues

and actually delivering service delivery, you know, with the money they've invested in the Northern Territory for education and better policing and all that sort of stuff.

Not that we're seeing very good results there yet in housing.

But

they wouldn't go so far as banning the symbolic, like the, you know, welcome to countries and things like that.

So.

But there are also the measures themselves, this, oh, we're just going to, you know, jobs in remote Australia.

Yeah, I've heard all of that before.

That's all I'm saying.

I mean, so have you, Anna, right?

Like, it does.

Look,

my coverage closely of the Howard era was, you know, being in the NT for the intervention and seeing the impact of that.

And then coming to Canberra and seeing Tony Abbott and Nigel Scully and really focusing on economic empowerment and how that looked in remote communities.

Look.

I think the important point for the Prime Minister coming forward is the Garma Festival.

He's expected to go.

He's expected to give a speech.

And there is a huge amount of anticipation in the community that he's going to go beyond last year, which was disappointing.

He was welcomed, but what he had to say felt underwhelming.

Disappointing is another word, definitely, Fran.

And people have different views on this within the Indigenous community.

There are some who, you know, were quite happy to have the focus shift back on to practical change.

But this time around, the PM is going to have

just come back from his trip to China.

He's just been over to canada and he's got sitting weeks coming so i think the community is very hopeful and the those i spoke to before coming on today just to get a sense of how they were feeling very hopeful that enough time and attention is being put into this speech and this visit to make it meaningful to make it important and to make them feel heard and like there is um some positivity to come out of this in terms of government uh addressing the critical issues one of the biggest ones though in the nt is the state of the nt justice system and that's a democratically elected government that's come in and imposed those extremely draconian measures that have led to a huge increase in particularly youth incarceration.

Like what do you do in that situation?

Because a democratically elected government has come in and imposed measures they said they were going to impose before they came in.

So

it's certainly challenging.

Oh yeah, I'm so glad you made that point because we've had two now elections, Queensland and the NT, where essentially the public have elected a tough on crime strategy from these governments, you're right, democratically elected.

And the wicked problem is that the policies will lead to more incarceration of black kids.

And so...

And they seem popular in the broader electorate.

Exactly.

And you know what?

This is that, this is what Noel Pearson described as the mouse.

3% of the population.

The muscle, the political muscle isn't there.

And guess what?

That's why, of course, Aboriginal people wanted a voice.

Yeah, exactly.

That's right.

Look, Anna, just before we go, I just want to touch briefly on there.

Seems to be some kind of rekindling of the internal push for the Liberals to launch a court challenge on the results in the electorate of Bradfield in Sydney.

A quick reminder, the Teal candidate, Nicolette Buller, beat the Liberal candidate, Giselle Capterian, by a measly 26 votes.

This was once a very, very safe Liberal seat, Liberal heartland.

And now there's some pressure coming from within the Liberal branch of Bradfield for people to get behind and push for a challenge.

And is there any hope at all?

I mean, I can't see any chance in hell that Susan Lee would want to have a by-election in a seat that has such a set tight margin.

What do you think?

Is it a good idea?

I mean, it's.

I've spoken to a couple of people on this front who say, what have we got to lose?

Like, let's just throw some money at it and see if we can get another Liberal woman in the parliament.

Like, we desperately need every seat we can get and every woman we can get to represent communities.

And they obviously think Giselle Kapterian is the kind of woman that they want to be in the Liberal Party going forward.

So yes, it'll be costly.

Yes, it could expose divisions around net zero.

They're going to be exposed anyway.

I think there's a sense maybe just roll the dice and see what comes of it.

But at the same time, yes, I think there's probably some

real talk around what the likelihood is of spending money and getting nothing significant out of it and exposing wounds.

But they've already lost the seat.

They've They've already had another reckoning and another seat that's turned away from the libs in old school heartland.

But it's a bit crazy brave, isn't it?

Crazy brave.

Well, you're a bit crazy brave yourself.

Thanks for coming on the podcast.

It's a pleasure.

Thank you.

That was great, Anna.

Thank you, as always.

See ya.

We'll move to questions without notice.

I'll give the call to the Leader of the Opposition.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

My question is to the Prime Minister.

Order.

The bells are ringing, that means it's time for question time, and this week's question comes from Dylan.

G'day, my questions are hypothetical.

Is there a chance that in 18 months, after Albo has kept his promise of only implementing policies that he took to the last election, and roughly around the same time, say the Liberals changed leader, ousting a woman and replacing her with a man, is there a chance that Albanese could potentially take a leaf out of Hawke's book in 1984 and call an early election and take big, bold reforms to that election, completely catching the libs off guard and going into the next parliament with a real reform agenda.

Interesting question, Fran.

It is and Dylan you'll be pleased to know that I went and got a briefing from Mr.

Election Data Anthony Green himself so I knew what I was talking about a bit.

The difference with Bob Hawke back in 1984 was that he had to call a half-senate election because the 1983 election had been a double dissolution.

So the houses were out of whack.

So he needed to do it to realign the House of Reps voting pattern and the Senate.

And he had to do it.

There was a deadline in May 85.

So he called the election for November 84, which as you say was only 18 months after the first election.

But a salutary note here, Dylan, Labor seriously went backwards in that 84 election.

They still won, but Bob Hawke had his majority cut from 25 to 16 seats.

There was a 2% swing against them.

And there was a very, very high informal vote, apparently.

So that, you know, presumably was a protest vote about being called back to the poll so quickly.

People don't like that.

They get cranky.

So I'm not sure.

In fact, I'm pretty sure that Anthony Albanese won't be pulling that lever this time.

But, you know, it's worth asking the question.

I think it comes from the point where a lot of people are hoping that the Albanese government will

come out a bit braver and bolder in this term than they did last time.

The Prime Minister says repeatedly,

we've got a mandate for these policies.

That's what we're going to do.

But there there are signs, coming from the Treasurer in particular, early on, that they might push that out a bit in terms of bold reform.

We'll see.

Yeah,

we'll see is kind of the key thing there, right?

Like, let's see where they go with that.

Oh, you've been around too long, Piquet.

The old leap.

Let's see.

Look, Fran.

What a heavy podcast this one has been, right?

Oh, it has.

It has.

It's a heavy time in the news cycle, Piquet, as if the sort of the wars in the Middle East, the ongoing war in Ukraine, as if all that's, you know, not enough.

And then we had that whole childcare story.

It's just been, you know, a really heavy time in the news cycle, I think.

It's one of those, you know, hug your loved ones moments.

Keep sending your questions in because they're excellent.

We're fond of the voice notes.

You can email them to the partyroom at abc.net.au.

And keep following us.

Subscribe.

Get your friends to subscribe.

Rate us in your podcast apps because that really helps more people to come to it.

We're in the Politics Now Now feed on the ABC Listen app.

That's where you'll find this Party Room podcast.

They're in the Politics Now feed.

And that's it for the Party Room this week.

Insiders on Background will be back in your feeds on Saturday.

See you, Fran.

See you, PK.