WeRise · Policy platform
Early Childhood
Key findings
- 23.5%Nearly one in four Australian children were developmentally vulnerable in at least one area when they started school in 2024. Source: Australian Early Development Census · National Report 2024 · 2025 []
- 26 weeksAustralian Government Paid Parental Leave now reaches 26 weeks for eligible families, but it is paid at the minimum wage rather than a parent’s normal wage. Source: Services Australia · Parental Leave Pay · 2026 []
- 1.4 millionMore than 1.4 million Australian children aged 0–12 attended Child Care Subsidy-approved care in 2025, showing that childcare is already essential national infrastructure. Source: Productivity Commission · Report on Government Services 2026 · 2026 []
- 43% higher wagesIn a randomised Jamaican early-childhood stimulation trial, disadvantaged children who received structured play support had 43% higher wages at age 31 than controls. Source: Gertler et al. · Jamaica Early Childhood Stimulation Follow-up · 2023 []
Part 01
The Case for Change
Why Early Childhood matters
The Start That Shapes Everything
Development begins before birth – and public policy determines how much support families have when it matters most.
Australia does not lack affection for children. It lacks a system built around the conditions children need to thrive before disadvantage becomes visible at school. The first thousand days – from conception through a child’s second birthday – are when pregnancy health, birth safety, nutrition, attachment, language and emotional regulation develop at extraordinary speed. WHO’s nurturing-care framework identifies the essentials: good health, adequate nutrition, safety and security, responsive caregiving, and opportunities for early learning.1 These are not private luxuries. They depend on income, housing, parental time, accessible care and trusted community support.
In 2024, 23.5% of Australian children were developmentally vulnerable on one or more AEDC domains when they began school, while 12.5% were vulnerable on two or more domains.2 The figure is not a judgement on children or parents. It is a measure of whether the social and service systems around families have provided the health, stability, opportunity and support children need. The proportion on track across all five domains fell from 54.8% in 2021 to 52.9% in 2024.2
The current system provides valuable supports, but it is hard to navigate and unevenly available. From 1 July 2026, eligible Australian families can receive up to 130 days of Government Paid Parental Leave, equal to 26 weeks based on a five-day week; 20 days are reserved for the partner or other parent.3 This is a substantial improvement and an important recognition that care in infancy has public value.
But the payment is set at the national minimum wage – $1,004.70 per week before tax from July 2026 – not a parent’s normal wage.4 For many households, this creates pressure to return to paid work sooner than is best for family circumstances.
Childcare reform is also underway. More than 1.4 million children aged 0–12 attended CCS-approved care in 2025, and government recurrent expenditure on ECEC was $20.4 billion in 2024–25.5 These figures show that early education and care is already a major public system. But access and affordability are not enough. Research repeatedly finds that benefits depend on quality: stable relationships, qualified educators, appropriate ratios, inclusive practice and play-based learning.6
A serious First Thousand Days policy would join the dots: universal antenatal and postnatal support; accessible maternal and parental mental-health care; paid leave that enables genuine care; home visiting and parenting support from pregnancy; quality early learning; secure housing; and additional, voluntary help for families under pressure. For First Nations families, this must include sustained investment in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-controlled early-years services, designed through culture, language, Country and self-determination.7
The strongest early-childhood policy is not one program. It is a guarantee that no family has to reach crisis before help arrives.
- WHO, Nurturing Care for Early Childhood Development, 2018.
- Australian Early Development Census, National Report 2024, 2025.
- Services Australia, How Much Parental Leave Pay You Can Get, 2026.
- Services Australia, About Parental Leave Pay Payments, 2026.
- Productivity Commission, Report on Government Services: Child Care, Education and Training, 2026.
- ACECQA, National Quality Standard; Productivity Commission, A Path to Universal ECEC, 2024.
- Arabena et al., An Australian Model of the First 1000 Days, 2016.
Part 02
Evidence and Experience
Early Childhood: what other countries show
What Works Elsewhere
United States · Jamaica · United Kingdom · Global maternal and newborn systems
International comparisons require care. Countries differ in baseline poverty, health systems, population composition, workforce capacity and data collection, so it is rarely valid to lift a foreign outcome figure and promise the same result in Australia. But several programs and systems have sufficiently rigorous evidence to identify transferable lessons. The strongest findings come from randomised trials of nurse home visiting and early stimulation, long-term follow-up of intensive early education, and global evidence on integrated maternal and newborn care. Together, they support a practical conclusion: early investment is most effective when it combines trusted relationships, developmental support, health access and material security rather than relying on a single service.
United States – Elmira, New York; Memphis, Tennessee; Denver, Colorado · Trials launched 1977, 1987 and 1994; follow-up studies continued over subsequent decades
Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP): voluntary, intensive home visits by registered nurses to first-time mothers facing socioeconomic disadvantage, beginning during pregnancy and continuing until the child’s second birthday. No cash payment was made to participants. Three foundational randomised controlled trials included approximately 1,877 first-time mothers across the three locations. []
- 33% fewer child injuries treated in emergency departments or hospitals from birth to age 2 in projected pooled trial estimates. []
- 39% reduction in language delay in pooled trial evidence used for program modelling. []
- One trial reported 48% lower verified child abuse and neglect over 15 years. []
- One trial reported 59% fewer child arrests at age 15. []
- Effects differed across trial sites and outcomes; not every measured outcome improved. []
Australia should not import the NFP brand uncritically, and Aboriginal-controlled or locally led adaptations are essential where services work with First Nations communities. The transferable lesson is that voluntary, relationship-based professional support beginning in pregnancy can reduce preventable injury, improve early development and strengthen maternal capability when it is implemented with fidelity and backed by wider services.
Jamaica – Kingston · Intervention 1986–1989; 20-year and age-31 follow-ups
Jamaica Early Childhood Stimulation Study: weekly home visits for two years by trained community health workers, who coached mothers of stunted children aged 9–24 months in play, conversation and responsive interaction using simple homemade toys. No cash payment was made. 129 stunted children were enrolled in the original randomised study; 105 participants were re-interviewed approximately 20 years later. []
- At the 20-year follow-up, treated participants had 25% higher earnings than controls. []
- The intervention group caught up to the earnings of a matched non-stunted comparison group. []
- A later age-31 follow-up reported 43% higher wages and 37% higher total earnings than controls. []
- Follow-up evidence found gains in education and social-emotional outcomes. []
- This was a small trial in a low-income setting; it demonstrates causal potential, not a plug-and-play Australian effect size. []
The program is highly relevant to Australia’s interest in parent support because the intervention was simple: structured coaching in responsive play and language, delivered consistently at home. It supports embedding developmentally informed parenting support in child-and-family health, community organisations and home-visiting services, particularly where material disadvantage or developmental risk is high.
United Kingdom – England · Recruitment 2009–2010; linked-data follow-up to age 7
Family Nurse Partnership (FNP): up to 64 nurse home visits from pregnancy to a first child’s second birthday for mothers aged 19 years or younger, delivered alongside usual health and social care. No cash payment was made. 1,618 teenage mothers and their firstborn children were recruited into the Building Blocks randomised trial. []
- Children offered FNP had higher odds of achieving a good level of development at Reception age: adjusted odds ratio 1.24. []
- Children offered FNP had higher odds of reaching the expected reading standard at Key Stage 1: adjusted odds ratio 1.26. []
- The trial found no difference in the primary child-in-need outcome: adjusted odds ratio 0.98. []
- It found no clear reduction in other maltreatment outcomes or healthcare costs. []
- The evidence therefore supports modest education gains, not broad claims that home visiting alone solves child protection or disadvantage. []
This is an important caution against overselling home visiting. Australian programs should set realistic outcomes, use high-quality evaluation, and combine home visiting with housing, mental-health, income and early-learning supports. Program success should be measured against the counterfactual of usual care, not against an idealised narrative.
Global – low-, middle- and high-income settings through WHO member-state health systems · Every Newborn Action Plan launched 2014; global mortality trend monitored to 2024
Every Newborn Action Plan (ENAP): a policy and health-system package rather than a cash-payment program. Components include skilled care at birth, emergency obstetric care, newborn resuscitation, care for small and sick newborns, postnatal care, stronger midwifery and health-system accountability. Global framework adopted through WHO and implemented through national maternal, newborn and child health systems; not a single trial population. []
- Global under-five mortality fell by about 60% since 1990, reaching 37.4 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2024. []
- Global neonatal deaths declined from 5.0 million in 1990 to 2.3 million in 2022. []
- WHO identifies skilled attendance at birth, quality maternal/newborn care, newborn nursing and care for small and sick newborns as central high-impact interventions. []
- The mortality decline is attributable to broad social and health-system change, not ENAP alone. []
- Progress has slowed since 2015, demonstrating that gains are reversible without sustained investment. []
Australia has much lower mortality than high-burden settings, so the direct mortality effect cannot be transferred. The lesson is institutional: preventable newborn harm falls where maternal care, midwifery, newborn care and follow-up are treated as integrated public infrastructure, and where equity is monitored rather than assumed.
Part 03
Costs and Trade-offs
The cost of Early Childhood
Pay Early or Pay Later
The fiscal question is not whether early support costs money, but which costs Australia chooses to carry.
A precise national price for a comprehensive First Thousand Days package cannot be stated responsibly without a defined service specification, workforce model, eligibility rules, state–Commonwealth cost-sharing agreement and independent costing. Australia already spends heavily in this area: total government recurrent expenditure on ECEC was $20.4 billion in 2024–25, while the existing service architecture also includes Medicare-funded maternity and primary care, paid parental leave, family payments, disability support, housing assistance and child protection. The relevant policy question is therefore the marginal cost of integrating and expanding effective services, not the gross cost of “starting from zero.”
The strongest fiscal case is prevention, but it must be described carefully. Many benefits – better school completion, lower chronic disease risk, reduced child-protection involvement and improved parental employment – arrive over years or decades and do not necessarily accrue to the same government that funds the intervention. Returns estimated from particular trials or models cannot be assumed to apply unchanged to Australia. The Productivity Commission’s 2024 universal-ECEC inquiry nevertheless concluded that significant reform is necessary to move toward a universal system and that current settings leave access and affordability gaps.
The budget should be developed in stages: cost universal foundations first; target intensive supports where evidence and need are strongest; publish outcome measures; and independently evaluate implementation and fiscal effects. The ledger below separates known current-system expenditure from items requiring formal costing.
| Item | Amount | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Current government recurrent ECEC expenditure | -$20.4 billion (2024–25) | Existing national and state/territory ECEC expenditure; not the cost of the proposed policy. |
| CCS-approved services | 15,158 services (2025) | Existing delivery base that can support reform, although service availability is uneven. |
| Children attending CCS-approved care | 1.4 million+ children aged 0–12 (2025) | Existing scale demonstrates ECEC’s role as national social infrastructure. |
| Universal postnatal home-visiting expansion | Cost not yet reliably published | Requires service design, nursing workforce modelling, state/territory negotiation and Treasury costing. |
| Earlier universal, free high-quality ECEC | Cost not yet reliably published | Gross cost depends on eligible age, hours, provider model, wage policy, capital build and phased implementation. |
| Avoided downstream expenditure | Not reliably quantifiable as a single Australian figure | Likely channels include reduced remedial education, health, child protection and justice expenditure; evaluation must measure realised savings. |
| Net cost estimate | Cannot be responsibly estimated without independent costing | A policy-grade figure requires a defined package and dynamic costing that separates Commonwealth and state/territory impacts. |
The strongest objections to Early Childhood
The strongest objection is fiscal: a universal, integrated early-years guarantee could be expensive, particularly if it includes expanded paid leave, free or low-cost ECEC, home visiting and workforce reform.
That concern is real. ECEC already involved $20.4 billion in recurrent government expenditure in 2024–25, and universal expansion needs educators, buildings, rural service models and administrative capacity – not merely a funding announcement. The evidence-based response is not to claim that all early investment instantly “pays for itself.” It is to stage reform, publish costs, target intensive supports where need is greatest and evaluate benefits over the appropriate time horizon.
A second objection is that formal childcare may displace parental or kin care during infancy.
This concern can be reasonable where parents lack genuine leave or financial choice. But the appropriate policy response is not to treat formal ECEC as inherently harmful or parental care as universally available. Quality, stability, responsiveness and family choice matter. Strong policy supports parents and kin with leave and income while ensuring that children who use formal care have access to high-quality, relationship-rich settings.
A third objection is that home-visiting programs are often oversold.
The English Family Nurse Partnership trial found modest gains in Reception readiness and Key Stage 1 reading but no difference in the primary child-in-need outcome and no clear reduction in maltreatment or costs. This is a serious finding. It suggests that home visiting should not be presented as a stand-alone cure for poverty, violence or service failure. It works best as part of a broader package, with clear targeting, trained staff, voluntary participation and robust evaluation.
A fourth objection is that cross-country success stories may not transfer to Australia.
This is correct. Jamaica’s stimulation trial and US Nurse-Family Partnership were conducted in contexts different from Australian health, welfare and service systems. Their value lies in showing causal mechanisms – responsive play, relationship-based support, early professional contact – not in providing an exact Australian savings forecast or outcome guarantee.
A fifth objection concerns state power and family surveillance.
Early intervention can become coercive if it is tied to punitive child-protection responses, culturally unsafe assessments or intrusive data collection. This risk is especially serious for First Nations communities given the history of child removal. The response must include voluntary universal entry points, informed consent, strong privacy protections, independent complaint pathways, Indigenous governance and a clear distinction between supportive services and statutory intervention.
The evidence is strongest for the direction of travel – earlier, more integrated, higher-quality support – not for every proposed funding mechanism or exact service dosage.
A trustworthy policy should preserve that distinction.
Part 04
The Australian Design
How Early Childhood would work in Australia
A National Guarantee, Delivered Locally
Universal foundations for every family, with deeper support wherever pressure is greatest.
The Australian design should be a phased, intergovernmental First Thousand Days Guarantee spanning conception to age two, connected to a “next 1000 days” pathway through age five. It should not replace effective state, territory, Aboriginal community-controlled or local services. Its function is to establish common national entitlements, sustainable funding, shared outcomes and clear accountability while allowing delivery to reflect local conditions.
The Commonwealth should lead where it has clear fiscal and policy leverage: Paid Parental Leave; Medicare and primary care incentives; the Child Care Subsidy; national ECEC funding agreements; data; workforce funding; and long-term grants to Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations. From July 2026, Paid Parental Leave is already 26 weeks for eligible families, with 20 partner-reserved days. The next design question is whether payment adequacy, eligibility and flexibility are sufficient to allow real choice for low-income, casually employed, self-employed and culturally diverse families.
States and territories should lead delivery through maternity hospitals, midwifery, child and family health nursing, developmental screening, public mental-health systems, family support, child protection and preschool. Existing ECEC services operate within the National Quality Framework, which provides a national approach to regulation, assessment and quality improvement. But reform must address the gap between a quality standard on paper and the workforce, funding and service availability needed to meet it consistently.
The first delivery layer should be universal: early antenatal contact, culturally safe maternity care, postnatal contact, child-health checks, developmental support, infant-feeding help, parent mental-health access and simple referral pathways. The second layer should be intensive but voluntary: pregnancy-to-age-two home visiting, multidisciplinary family support, housing and family-violence navigation, disability and developmental-intervention pathways, and specialist perinatal mental-health care. International home-visiting evidence suggests benefits are possible but not automatic; program effectiveness depends on target group, quality, local service context and fidelity.
For First Nations families, a dedicated funding stream should be governed through Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-controlled organisations and co-designed with communities. Services should integrate maternal health, family wellbeing, early learning, language, cultural connection and practical assistance. The national objective should not be identical service delivery everywhere; it should be equal access to effective, culturally legitimate support.
A realistic timeline is five to ten years. Years 1–2 should establish a national agreement, local needs mapping, workforce plan, First Nations governance arrangements and a public outcomes dashboard. Years 3–5 should expand universal postnatal supports and targeted pregnancy-to-two home visiting in high-need areas. Years 5–10 should scale earlier universal ECEC access only in step with educator supply, service quality and infrastructure capacity. The objective is durable capability, not an unfunded announcement.
Part 05
People and Transition
Who Early Childhood affects
Who Carries the Cost of Inaction
Children bear the earliest consequences, but families, educators and public systems carry them for decades.
Every child is affected by the quality of the first thousand days, but risk is not evenly distributed. Children in families experiencing low income, insecure housing, family violence, parental mental ill-health, disability, rural isolation, racism or limited service access are more likely to encounter developmental risks. The 2024 AEDC found that 23.5% of children were developmentally vulnerable on one or more domains and 12.5% on two or more domains at school entry. These are not fixed traits in children; they are signals that more support is needed earlier and more equitably.
First Nations families are particularly affected by the legacy and continuing effects of colonisation, removal, discrimination and unequal access to services. In 2024, 107 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-focused early-years services – 64.5% of those identified – were operated by Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations. This is evidence of an existing community-controlled delivery base, but not proof of sufficient national coverage or funding. The policy should strengthen this capacity rather than duplicate it through externally governed programs.
Case study
A first-time mother on the Gold Coast develops significant anxiety in late pregnancy while living in insecure rental housing. She has a GP, a hospital booking and access to Paid Parental Leave, but no single worker has responsibility for helping her connect mental-health care, infant-feeding support, tenancy advocacy and postnatal follow-up. Under a First Thousand Days Guarantee, a voluntary perinatal and family-support pathway would connect these services before birth rather than waiting until parenting becomes unmanageable.
Case study
A young family in a regional community has a child born preterm, an older sibling requiring developmental support and no nearby grandparents. The parent returns to work early because income is tight and local ECEC availability is limited. The child’s needs may be identified eventually, but delays can compound stress. A coordinated system would provide early child-health follow-up, flexible support, developmental screening and a clear pathway to specialist services, with high-quality care available where the family needs it.
Parents and carers benefit through reduced administrative burden, time to recover and bond, improved access to help and greater capacity to remain in education or paid work when they choose. Educators, nurses, midwives, GPs and family-support workers benefit if reform invests in stable staffing, manageable caseloads and clear referral systems rather than creating new compliance layers.
Some providers and employer groups may oppose elements of reform because of increased public expenditure, wage expectations, regulatory requirements or worries about labour supply. These concerns require serious design responses: phased implementation, predictable funding, support for small and regional services, and transparent evaluation. The policy should not frame providers or employers as enemies; it should make children’s development, family choice and service quality the non-negotiable outcomes.
Part 06
Related policies
Early Childhood sits within a wider set of WeRise policies.
- Foundations of Dignity: more WeRise policies in this pillar
- WeRise: all 29 policies across seven pillars
Notes
Sources and Supporting Documents
- World Health Organization. Nurturing Care for Early Childhood Development. WHO. 2018. www.who.int
- World Health Organization. Improving Early Childhood Development: WHO Guideline. WHO. 2020. www.who.int
- Australian Government Department of Social Services. Early Years Strategy 2024–2034. 2024. www.dss.gov.au
- Australian Government Department of Social Services. Early Years Strategy. Updated 2026. www.dss.gov.au
- Australian Early Development Census. AEDC National Report 2024. Department of Education. 2025. www.aedc.gov.au
- Australian Early Development Census. AEDC Key Findings 2024. Department of Education. 2025. www.aedc.gov.au
- Services Australia. How Much Parental Leave Pay You Can Get. Australian Government. 2026. www.servicesaustralia.gov.au
- Services Australia. About Parental Leave Pay Payments. Australian Government. 2026. www.servicesaustralia.gov.au
- Productivity Commission. Report on Government Services 2026: Child Care, Education and Training. Australian Government. 2026. www.pc.gov.au
- Productivity Commission. A Path to Universal Early Childhood Education and Care: Inquiry Report. Australian Government. 2024. www.pc.gov.au
- Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority. National Quality Standard. 2026. www.acecqa.gov.au
- Australian Government Department of Education. National Quality Framework. 2026. www.education.gov.au
Record