Nanny state threatens nanny with naughty corner

The Childcare Minister, Kate Ellis, believes commonsense will prevail when her new childcare regulations come into force.

Apparently, the huge fines provided for in the draft legislation will only be imposed when "inappropriate forms of punishment" are handed out. Cold comfort for carers that this remains undefined.

This trust me approach raises some interesting philosophical issues.

If the law can't adequately codify good and bad practice, and it seems Kate Ellis accepts this to be the case, how does one justify threats and coercion?

If the regulations perfectly capture the idea of quality childcare then by all means punish those who contravene the pre-emptive standard. But if this isn't the case and there are permanent unquantifiable factors involved, where is the commonsense in applying harsh penalties?

In economics, this dilemma is known as the principal-agent problem.

Parents have an obvious interest in the care of their child, yet are at a distinct knowledge disadvantage compared with the carer.

Did Johnny really deserve to be put in the corner? Only Johnny and the carer really know the context.

While a detailed performance monitoring regime can be established, asymmetrical information is, in the end, unavoidable. We need to trust, at least in the first instance, the professional judgement of childcare staff, given parents and government representatives can never properly appreciate the circumstances in real time.

The parent, as principal, has two mutually exclusive choices on how to deal with incomplete transparency. Accepting the dilemma and trusting the carer can deliver the desired results, but it can also be abused. The alternative is to deny the inconvenient truth, minimise autonomy and pretend punitive regulatory oversight capable of eventually achieving excellence.

As a society, we consistently opt for the latter, a lie.

The language used by Minister Ellis is conciliatory and practical. This is a joint effort with consultation. There is no silver bullet.

In reality, the industry is set to become an angry, vindictive machine grinding towards complete centralised control, neglecting kid's welfare by concentrating all discretionary power with bureaucrats who don't know what's best because they aren't in the room. Any dissent is immediately dismissed as naive or self-serving. The trust, you see, is one directional.

Though emasculated, care centres will remain accountable. Committed, heart-felt carers will get squeezed out, while managerial types will prosper by ticking all the boxes.

Ironically, regulators will also be put in an impossible situation. Of course when the crisis comes because no-one is focussing on what matters, the suggested solution will be more resources and tougher deterrents.

Meanwhile, parents seem content to abrogate their responsibilities by hanging their hat on a government star rating instead of tuning in and assessing if their kids are getting what they deserve.

Industry regulation is fine provided the system explicitly recognises the information gap can only be bridged if there is trust and carers are dealt with as reasonable human beings, not untrustworthy gits who need to be constantly threatened.

Parents are ultimately responsible for assessing the qualitative aspects of the situation over and above the quantitative work of Kate Ellis and her department. True, parents are tired and strung out and just want things to go smoothly. But guess what? Things aren't going well because we lazily accept the lie about government intervention.

A vox pop in any city or town in Australia would record a resounding "No" to the question of whether or not statute can realise community goals, from better childcare to overcoming problem gambling and obesity.

Yet politicians appear on TV assuring us it will be OK and we roll over, voting in anyone promising solutions we know deep down aren't achievable. Andrew Wilkie and his monomaniacal, anti poker machine crusade being the classic example.

Parents are exhausted because of the same counter-productive impositions proposed by Minister Ellis. Modern existence is routine and unfulfilling because life is becoming one big compliance drill. Suffocated by bureaucracy and cowed by threats, we irrationally expect governments to come up with a magical box to remedy our box-ticking malaise.

Something must be done, anything, provided it momentarily assuages our fears that no-one is actually in control and that we, God forbid, might have to do something ourselves. ABC Learning collapses. Yes, tough, new rules are needed. A cockroach is found in a crèche kitchen. Quick, increase the penalties for breaches of hygiene.

The fears of the childcare industry are not ridiculous. The only commonsense way of improving industry standards is to encourage parents to exercise their judgement and to act upon it, using the necessarily limited information generated by regulation.

In a political system devoid of leadership, this will only happen if and when people demand government resume its rightful supporting role. Anything less, and things will continue to get worse, not better.