Families across Australia are being unfairly penalised by a policy that counts public holidays as absences under the Child Care Subsidy (CCS), despite  childcare centres being closed with attendance not even an option.

The Australian Government currently allows 42 absence days per child, per financial year under the CCS. But public holidays (when childcare centres are officially closed) are still counted as absences, eating into that limited quota. Once a family exceeds the 42-day limit, they are forced to cover the full cost of care for any further absences, unless a medical certificate is provided.

This leaves families with two options: send their child in sick, or scramble to get a doctor’s certificate — even for mild illnesses that don’t require medical attention. In reality, obtaining a certificate is often expensive, time-consuming, and inconvenient, especially when GPs are booked out, appointments are hard to get, and bulk billing options are disappearing.

This is an unreasonable burden on Australian families. Public holidays are completely outside our control. We can’t send our children into care when centres are closed... why should we be penalised for it?

Some may think 42 days sounds generous, but consider just a few common childhood illnesses, and note: these illnesses frequently originate in childcare settings, where transmission is difficult to avoid due to close contact and shared environments:

• Chickenpox – 5–7 days (until all blisters have dried)
• Hand, Foot & Mouth Disease – 5–7 days (until blisters dry)
• Conjunctivitis – 1–3 days after treatment starts
• Gastroenteritis – At least 48 hours after the last episode of vomiting/diarrhoea; longer during a centre-wide outbreak (which may require doctor clearance)
• Influenza – While symptomatic (typically 5–7 days)
• Impetigo (School Sores) – Until treatment has started and sores are covered
• Whooping Cough – At least 5 days after starting antibiotics

It is easy to see how families dealing with even a couple of these illnesses, especially when they circulate through multiple siblings, could burn through 42 absence days quickly. Add public holidays into the mix (around 10–13 nationally recognised days per year, depending on the state), and many families are pushed over the limit through no fault of their own.

This burden is especially unfair to families whose children attend childcare five days a week, and even more so for those with multiple children in care. While 42 days may seem reasonable to those unaffected or with part-time care, it quickly becomes inadequate for full-time families, particularly when 10+ public holidays automatically reduce the usable absence days — regardless of a family's actual choices.

Even more concerning, the current CCS absence policy actively discourages families from keeping sick children home, out of fear that they will lose financial support. This only serves to perpetuate the cycle of illness and infection in centres, impacting children, staff, and families across the board.

We call on the Australian Government and the Department of Education to:

• Exclude public holidays from the 42 allowable absence days under the CCS;
• Ensure families aren’t financially disadvantaged for closures that are beyond their control;
• Review and modernise CCS absence policies to reflect the realities of childhood illness, outbreaks, and modern family life.

We Call on the Following Decision-Makers to Act:
We urge the following leaders and departments to review and amend current Child Care Subsidy policies:

• The Hon Jason Clare MP, Federal Minister for Education
• The Department of Education – Early Childhood and Child Care Division
• Senator Katy Gallagher, Minister for Finance and Minister for Women

These decision-makers hold the power to create a fairer, more flexible CCS system that supports families, prioritises children’s health, and recognises the realities of modern working life.

We respectfully ask them to listen to families across the country and take urgent action to exclude public holidays from the 42-day absence cap, and to ensure the policy supports, rather than punishes, responsible care.