Childcare staff say dropping funding for qualified teachers ‘harmful for kids’

Wednesday, 15 July 2026

A proposal by a minister-appointed advisory group to scrap funding incentives for childcare centres employing 100% qualified teachers has sparked strong opposition from educators, who warn it could force centres to increase fees and ultimately harm children’s learning.

Karanga Mai Early Learning Centre manager Jacinta McInerney said the proposals, if adopted by the Government, would slash her not-for-profit centre’s funding.

“We have 100% trained staff and these proposals would take away a quarter of our income, at least.”

Recommendations by the Early Childhood Education (ECE) ministerial advisory group (MAG) include removing the highest certificated teacher funding bands, which were introduced in 2004 to incentivise centres to employ more qualified staff.

Associate Education Minister David Seymour appointed the group in June last year to review the complex $2.7 billion financing of the ECE sector, with the proviso that any changes would not increase overall funding.

The review has a budget of $3.9m, which includes daily fees for MAG members of $974 a day for the chairperson, and $616 a day for members.

Currently, bulk funding to ECE centres is based on bands according to the percentage of hours qualified teachers work directly with children.

Removal of the 100% certified teaching band would slash funding for about 78% of kindergartens and one third of childcare centres that have 100% of teaching staff certified, the MAG’s consultation document says.

“These services may need to change the way they operate or to increase fees to maintain 100% certificated staffing.”

McInerney, whose centre serves children of students at the teen parenting unit in Kaiapoi and is supported by the North Canterbury Wellbeing Trust, said the review document was “extremely disappointing”.

“We went to all the consultation meetings with the ministerial advisory group and it feels like they just simply have not listened to the sector. They’re listening to business.”

The MAG document identified three key problems with the ECE sector: access and supply of services; variation in quality; and poor information.

It acknowledges the benefits of quality ECE but asserts there “is no single definition of quality in ECE”.

A survey found parents identified a wide range of characteristics in an ideal service, including a caring environment, safety, learning environment, good adult to child ratios, and cost.

“Having a flexible and diverse ECE sector is therefore important for meeting different children’s needs and parental expectations,” the review document says.

Kindergartens Aotearoa chief executive Amanda Coulston said decades of research in New Zealand and overseas had established the indicators of high-quality early childhood education.

“This is just a cynical attempt to undermine quality. If you say, ‘there’s no real definition’, then that means you don't actually have to work to that definition, do you?”

She questioned why there was no mention of capping fees or more transparency about the profits of large ECE businesses.

“While looking for savings in one area at the expense of another, the group failed to mention or explore the amount of funding corporate ECE service providers take out of the system as profits and returns to shareholders.”

The review includes a proposal that centres be required to publish fee schedules online and the ministry provide a web page with ECE options and fee assistance available.

The review also proposes scrapping the pay parity opt-in scheme. Under the scheme centres match qualified staff pay with that of primary school teachers, over time.

The review found there was support for benefits of pay parity including reducing staff turnover, but pressure on financial sustainability was highlighted by centre owners.

The group considered funding incentives to encourage lower adult to child ratios but concluded this would likely be unaffordable within a fiscally neutral review and may have limited impact as many centres already have above minimum ratios.

NZEI Te Riu Roa national committee ECE representative and ECE teacher Zane McCarthy said the sector was on a “scary path”.

“We know that having qualified teachers working in education results in better learning outcomes for children and so taking away the incentives is just going to be harmful for kids.”

The group includes chair Linda Meade, who owns two ECE centres and is managing director of an infrastructure consultancy; Kelly Seaburg who owns two ECE centres; NZIER chief economist Sarah Hogan; chief people officer at Fletcher Building Kylie Eagle; former chief financial officer Auckland Kindergarten Association Melissa Glew; education researcher associate professor Kane Meissel; and chief executive of the Early Childhood Council Simon Laube.

Meade said the group held 56 meetings with more than 700 people, and combined with targeted research and email consultation, heard from more than 2000 people.

Seymour said the focus of the review was funding formulas which determined the makeup of the group.

“Teachers do valuable work at early childhood centres, but it is generally the managers who deal with the Government’s funding formulas and have the most insight into how they could be improved.”

He said it was “a pity” not every type of centre could be incorporated on the group.

“However, we look forward to seeing feedback on the proposals from across the early childhood sector.”

The review document was released for consultation last week, with feedback open until August 6. A final report will be released to the Government by the end of the year.