Early Childhood Education Funding Review
ECE NOTICE/OPINION
In June 2025, Minister David Seymour announced the formation of a Ministerial Advisory Group (MAG) to provide recommendations for redesigning the early childhood education (ECE) funding system. The Government allocated $3.856 million in the latest budget to cover MAG’s establishment and operating costs. See our press release and related announcement details for more information.
A series of hui – six in-person and four shorter hui online – have been scheduled. To attend you are asked to register, say who you are and provide your details. Unfortunately the timing of the hui appears to favour service providers and operators, making it difficult for teachers and parents to attend hui, especially those with children to pick-up, and manage dinner, play and bath routines. The hui are not advertised as child-friendly which may further limit accessibility.
Hui schedule
- Auckland – Wed 5 November 2025, 4pm to 5:30pm (1.5 hrs)
- Christchurch – Wed 12 November 2025, 4pm to 5:30pm (1.5hrs)
- Online hui – Fri 21 November 2025, 10am to 11am (1hr)
- Online hui – Mon 24 November 2025, 5.30pm to 6pm (30 minutes)
- Online hui -Tues 25 November 2025, 5.30pm to 6.30pm (1 hr)
- Online hui – Wed 26 November 2025, 3pm to 4pm (1 hr)
- Hamilton – Thurs 27 November 2025, 5pm to 6:30pm (1.5 hrs)
- Wellington – Tues 2 December 2025, 4pm to 5:30pm (1.5 hrs)
- Dunedin – Wed 3 December 2025, 5:30pm to 7pm (1.5 hrs)
- Whangarei – Fri 5 December 2025, 4pm to 5:30pm (1.5 hrs)
Is it worth your time?
The Ministerial Advisory Group (MAG)’s recommendations will only shape policy if the ACT Party remains part of the next governing coalition. If ACT is not in government after the election, the review may be shelved – just as previous reviews have been.
However, if ACT retains power and Cabinet accepts the recommendations of Minister Seymour’s advisors (as it did with the Ministry for Regulation review), expect vigorous debate across the sector, along with protests from parents, child advocacy groups, ECE academics and experts, and community organisations.
Past funding reviews have triggered strong responses from providers whose voices were not represented, just as is the case with the current review.
What might you request in your submission that the MAG are unlikely to put forward as recommendations to the Minister
- Increase part‑day funding rates to match full‑day rates so part‑day services and the children who use them are not penalised
- Make funding equitable by:
- Basing rates on service size so small, independent services are not disadvantaged by economies of scale.
- Ensuring funding does not discriminate by service type, setting, or philosophy. Playcentres, Kōhanga Reo, and home-based ECEs deliver early childhood education as do education and care centres, and should be treated equitably with kindergartens.
- Enshrine pay parity in law between ECE teachers and school teachers so it remains a binding commitment regardless of who’s in government.
- Improve 20-Hours ECE rules so parents can reliably access up to 20 hours at no cost and any additional fees are transparently separated. Inconsistent practice creates unfair competition and financial strain on family‑focused services.
- Mandate financial transparency by requiring that every licensed service (private or community) publish its individual financial accounts, rather than allowing aggregated reporting across multiple services or activities.
Scope, limitations and transparency concerns
No additional funding has been allocated. Any redesign will involve redistributing existing funds to meet the stated purpose of ECE supporting parent labour market participation, meaning some services may benefit while others lose out.
The review focuses solely on funding design and does not address regulatory settings such as staff-child ratios, group sizes, or statutory teacher pay. Without regulatory levers, funding changes alone are unlikely to guarantee improved child outcomes or sustained quality.
According to the Ministerial Advisory Group (MAG)’s Terms of Reference, consultation cannot begin until a consultation paper is completed. This is due within three months of MAG’s first meeting (by the end of October 2025). However, no consultation paper has been produced.
It appears the process has already been altered. The Ministry of Education’s website now states that consultation will occur from April to July 2026 on options developed by MAG and approved by the Minister. By that stage, it will be too late for any substantive changes to be made.
This raises serious concerns about transparency and whether feedback from the sector, teachers, and parents will be genuinely sought and meaningfully considered.
Timeline and likely impact
- A final MAG report is expected by September 2026.
- But, implementation depends on the election outcome and Cabinet decisions, making substantive change unlikely before 2027.
- Rewriting the funding handbook and allowing services time to adjust staffing, fees, and enrolments will be essential to avoid disruption.
- Providers facing funding cuts may need time to restructure or sell – poor transition planning could harm children, families, and small providers.
Terms of Reference for the Funding Review
Purpose
The MAG must ensure the following goals are met:
- fiscal neutrality
- labour market participation and improved child participation
- balance quality and affordability.
Role of the Chair
The role of the Chair, Linda Meade, is to lead the MAG, manage the work programme, and facilitate the development of options and recommendations for the Associate Minister of Education and she is able to adjust the timetable, and extend or shorten the time that the review takes if considered beneficial.
Behaviour and knowledge expected of MAG members
The Terms of Reference for the Ministerial Advisory Group (MAG) specify that members must possess:
- Knowledge of the ECE funding system, including ECE funding streams outside of those administered by the Ministry of Education.
- Knowledge, experience and expertise in the ECE sector, which may include experience operating, managing or working in an ECE service.
- Understanding of key stakeholders within the sector and holding relationships that can be drawn upon for effective consultation.
- Knowledge and expertise in economic principles and market dynamics, particularly relating to labour market participation and social investment.
- Knowledge of ECE pedagogy, research, and data that relates to child outcomes.
It is allowed for members to approach their business partners, communities and organisations to inform MAG views.
Importantly, the Terms of Reference do not require MAG members to remain politically neutral or to avoid advancing recommendations that may benefit their own businesses, organisations, or affiliated bodies.
Members are expected to accurately represent the MAG’s views when engaging with the sector or the public.
So who are the members and do they genuinely represent the diversity and expertise that early childhood education requires?
MAG membership and potential conflicts
Of the seven members appointed by the Minister to the Ministerial Advisory Group (MAG):
- Three are from the early childhood sector.
- One is employed by the Early Childhood Council (ECC), which advocates for childcare business interests.
- Two operate centre businesses that are aligned or represented by the ECC.
All three have a financial interest in the for-profit childcare centre part of the ECE sector.
This composition raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest. It risks narrowing the review’s perspective and marginalising voices from teachers, parents, small community-based centres, kaupapa Māori services, Playcentres, home-based providers, and early intervention services.
While it may be argued that Kohanga Reo and Playcentre funding is outside the scope of the review, the recommendations put forward by MAG for the redesign of the funding system will inevitably affect these uniquely Aotearoa ECE services and influence parent choice.
Service providers who are not financial members of the ECC and all other stakeholders may be hesitant to engage, knowing their perspectives are less likely to be heard or reflected in the outcomes. They may also worry about confidentiality and how their input will be used or represented.
MAG has been issued at least one official Ministry email address and MAG members operate within Ministry systems, possibly this may further blur the lines between independent advice, self-interest, and internal influence.
MAG Members: Who’s Advising the ECE Funding Review?
All MAG members are paid fees for their time and their expenses are covered by taxpayers, regardless of any other salaries, earnings, or roles they may hold while serving on the group.
- Linda Meade (Chair) – Co-owner of Daisies Daycare Ltd and Managing Director of Kalimena Advisory, a consultancy focused on financial optimisation. Daisies joined the Early Childhood Council (ECC) in 2023.
- Kelly Seaburg – A licensee of 2 centres under the New Shoots Children’s Centre brand and a new centre opening in Matakana in 2026. In one email in 2024 between Seaburg and Minister for Regulation David Seymour and his office, Seaburg referenced a link” she had discussed with Seymour’s staff—an interview with Dr Sarah Alexander was aired by 1 News featuring Sarah, who had raised concerns about the rising number of centres failing to meet minimum health, safety, management, and curriculum standards in 2023 and that licence downgrades were not something that the Ministry did lightly. Criticising Alexander for highlighting compliance issues, Seaburg told the Minister that the Ministry was “simply imposing downgrades for minor administrative errors.” (View further information on this topic from the Ministry)
- Melissa Glew – Appointed to MAG as Chief Financial Officer of the Auckland Kindergarten Association (AKA), though in July she left the AKA and the MAG Chair has confirmed that she is no longer Chief Financial Officer at the AKA.
- Dr Kane Meissel – Associate Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Auckland; no known publications specific to early childhood education.
- Kylie Eagle – Chief People Officer at Fletcher Building.
- Simon Laube – Chief Executive Officer of the ECC. Positions taken include advocating for reduced regulation and supporting ECE licensing responsibilities to be removed from the Ministry of Education and placed in the hands of a newly created role of Director of Regulation. Laube initiated ECC-funded legal action to challenge the pay-parity scheme.
Dr Michael Fletcher – Adjunct Research Fellow at Victoria University of Wellington and former policy advisor at the Ministry of Social Development. He resigned from MAG approximately a month after its formation.
Recent Appointment
Following Dr Fletcher’s resignation, a new member was appointed, and without an open call for nominations from across the ECE sector and stakeholder groups:
- Sarah Hogan – Economist at the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER).
The bottom line
Unless ACT is re-elected and retains influence over the agenda, this review may result in limited lasting change. If ACT remains in power, expect recommendations that favour large-scale, long-daycare models and market efficiencies over education with uncertain effects on service quality.
Stay informed and contribute
For now, we encourage you to stay informed, share your perspective, and join the conversation on the Funding Review – post your thoughts and comments below.
This page will be updated as more information becomes available.
If you spot any factual errors, please let us know; we’re happy to correct them.
Please note: this article contains opinions and perspectives that may differ from those of the Minister, the Ministry of Education, and individual MAG members.
Last updated: Tuesday 11 November. Thank you to the MAG Chair for making time today to provide updated information and clarifications.
