Political influence pays an important role in determining the political outcome for early childhood care and education

Political influence pays an important role in determining the political outcome for early childhood care and education. And as such, the quality of education early children get depends on this policy. The early childhood education in Australia cannot be over-emphasized in terms of scope and its diversity. There have been series of debate regarding the quality of childhood education (Dahlberg, Moss, & Pence, 2007; Brennan, 2007; Fenech, Robertson, Sumsion, & Goodfellow, 2007;Elliot, 2006). Since 2009, focus has shifted to early child hood policy where many advocacies see as an indifference under previous government between the period of 1996-2009. According to (Cox, 2007; Pocock & Hill, 2007; Sumsion, 2006; National Childcare Accreditation Council, 2006). Childhood care were given little attention due to regulatory oversight. It was even reported by OECD (Organization for economic cooperation and Development (2008) that less GDP was spent on early childhood education in Australia. However, early childhood education care has been undergoing some transformation by the new government under the National Quality frame work (NQA) (Productivity Agenda Working Group, 2008). There is a correlation between concepts of childhood, responsibility for the education and care of young children, the objectives of ECEC institutions, and political and practical aspects related to the supply, management, financing, and distribution of services, starting age of compulsory school, age groups, annual school calendar, length of operation during the day and year, types of services, flexibility and accessibility to different groups, staffing (profile and conditions), and parental involvement. Some basic system characteristics have been selected to discuss major challenges and pitfalls facing government spheres (municipalities, states and ministries) in charge of the ECEC system, as they go about integrating care and education within a wider perspective. Another range of argument influencing the early childhood care is the fact that many full-time schools are controlled by the state government education act which often create a disparity between the legislative and the early hood framework. This disparity between the two policy has created a problem on the reform and development of early child hood care. Although there have been series of efforts by the government to institute an early childhood education but the effort has no national agreement between the state and the federal government while there have been some moves by governments to institute a common school starting age. This difference is the main reason for discontinuity in the early child hood curricula in Australia where both state and the territorial government have separate provision for early childhood.According to ( Pocock & Hill , n.d.) These difference was so because of a lack of national goals and collective policy. The results of this place poor children at a disadvantage( Pocock & Hill , n.d.). Therefore, the main aspect of early child care and education had to do with quality, and the quality is observed to be in care of the National Childcare Accreditation council that should be empowered to limit the influence an effective policy towards early childhood education