One issue this raised I would be interested to discuss - I was reading some of the reader comments on another site about this and there was a lot of debate whether this funding should come from the government, or directly from the user of the service (eg parents), and I was surprised to read that many people stood by the stance of "You had the kids, you pay for them" and that parents should pay much higher fees to cover the higher wages. It's really not as black or white as this. IMO a high proportion of people using childcare have two wage earners contributing taxes to the ecomony. Why are they less deserving of having tax payer funding benefiting/returning to them in some way. The same argument "You had the kids, you pay for them" could be said to parents that choose not to work and stay home but are happy to receive Family Tax Benefits etc - its all government money being shared about. Working parents are contributing more money via taxes to the economy than non working parents, why are they not deserving of tax spending? And where do we stop funding aimed at children? Close all public schools and make all parents pay full tote for education, after all, "you had them, you pay for them"
Just in response to this - these are some of the statistics I found around this (from makecarefair)

Impact on a woman’s career

48% of women said the cost of childcare negatively hit their career but not their partner’s career
71.6% of women said their partner’s career had not been held back at all
24% of working mothers say working isn’t viable however they remain in the workforce due to independence and the necessity for career progression
Leaving the workforce for cost of care reasons has a compound negative effect. After leaving the workforce 52% of unemployed carers feel that their skills have been reduced whilst off work, and 49% have reduced confidence in their ability to return to work.
The relationship between the cost of care and employment choices affects employees on all incomes, i.e. from those on relatively high incomes (AUD$90K and upwards) to those on relatively low family incomes (AUD$50K and below).
Hence strategies to address all incomes groups will have a significant impact upon choice and workforce participation for all employees.
Impact on workplace participation and the Australian economy

51% say one parent would have to quit their job if the costs of childcare increase
For every AUD$1 the Government spent on childcare, the Government get back AUD$1.86 in revenue from improved workforce participation rate
50% of parents would increase their hours of work if care was more affordable
46% of parents say the cost of childcare for their children under school age is too high relative to their income. 36% are considering leaving the workforce
26% have already reduced their hours of work because of the high cost of care for children under school age.
Strategies to reduce the cost of care will have a direct impact on employment outcomes as there is a strong casual relationship between the financial cost of care and employment choices, and affordability is a key issue for all employees with caring responsibilities
In 2006, affordability of care influenced the departures of 64% of employed carers from the workforce, and 60% of unemployed carers would return to the workforce if care was more affordable.
The bit in bold is particularly interesting and is not a bad return really.

I actually despair at most of the comments that you see on media sites on the issue - a lot of them show no grasp of the economics of work and childcare - the whole you had kids you pay for them argument is ridiculous and almost always ends up with a comment about we don't need children because we can just allow migration - well I am sure quite a few of those migrants will want children too. I hope that people who actually make decisions don't spend too much time thinking that is what 'real' people think - I am sure that people who post on media sites maybe are less than 1% of the actual population.