After an emotionally charged meeting, Council approved the proposed Children’s Infrastructure Program relocation and ‘decanting’ arrangements. Coventry Children’s Centre will close for two years while Clarendon Children’s Centre is rebuilt, with Clarendon’s children and staff moving temporarily to the Coventry site.
The motion passed despite vigorous opposition from Crs Libby Buckingham and Beti Jay. However, amendments moved by Cr Buckingham were supported unanimously, adding financial and transition safeguards for affected families. Cr Buckingham went on to vote with Cr Jay against the decision.
Concerns over strategy and gender impacts
During the debate, Crs Buckingham and Jay questioned the long-term strategy and the immediate impact on families.
Cr Buckingham expressed “deep concerns about how this has evolved” and said: “I do not want to close Coventry Children’s Centre for two years”. She acknowledged that the council’s one-month delay meant alternative sites, including the former Evoke and Busy Bees facilities, were no longer available, but remained critical of the broader planning process. She argued that childcare management should be led by council strategy, not driven by infrastructure projects or market forces.
Cr Beti Jay questioned why councillors were being asked to make what she regarded as a short-sighted operational decision rather than a strategic one. “This decision will inadvertently affect women. The gender impact is massive,” she said, pointing to the psychological pressure and disruption facing local families. She also argued that a two-year closure represents a significant part of a young child’s life.
Amendments add support for families
To reduce disruption, Cr Buckingham moved amendments intended to strengthen accountability and ease the transition for families. Seconded by Cr Louise Crawford, they passed unanimously and were described by one councillor as “making the best out of a really bad situation”.
The approved support measures for families and staff include:
Extended financial subsidies: Recognising that the disruption will span multiple years, Council extended financial relief to cover the 2027 and 2028 calendar years.
15 per cent fee discount: Families currently using Coventry, including those with younger siblings not yet enrolled, will receive a 15 per cent discount if they move to another Council-owned and operated childcare service.
Private or not-for-profit service subsidy: Families moving to a private or not-for-profit service in Port Phillip rated Meeting or Exceeding the National Quality Standard will receive a Council subsidy covering any increase in fees.
Collaborative consultation: The Chief Executive Officer must work with Clarendon Children’s Centre to support a smooth move to Coventry through regular consultation with parents and staff.
Guaranteed reopening plan: A report must return to Council in late 2027 outlining plans to reopen Coventry in 2029, including initiatives to attract enrolments and staff.
Long-term strategy: The CEO must advise Council on developing a comprehensive early childhood strategy for consideration during the 2027–28 budget process.
Majority focus on the big picture
Mayor Makin and Deputy Mayor Mears supported the motion, arguing that the difficult decision was necessary to renew the city’s early childhood education network.
Cr Serge Thomann said: “…looking at what happened in the last months gives me certainty that we are actually caring for the children. And for me, that’s even more important than just dollars and figures.”
Cr Justin Halliday said: “…we are a council who is tackling these challenges and committing to what is a difficult decision here that has real impacts on real people and real lives, but ultimately will deliver better services over time…”
Cr Heather Consulo said: “If we keep delaying, the cost of building will go up, the projects will be delayed by other things, we need to get on with it. And I’m sorry to the people who are put out by it because I feel for you.”
Cr Louise Crawford said: “I do understand the impact, and I wish there was another way, but there isn’t at this point in time. And in order to ensure the ongoing of great child care in this city, this is a decision we need to make.”
Cr Rod Hardy said: “I’m certainly buoyed by the pressure that the parents have given us in relation to making this decision, which reflects on the standards that the council-run childcare centers have.”
With a transition support officer appointed and licensing under way, Council must now turn the decision into a workable relocation plan while minimising disruption for children, families and staff.
Now the hard work begins
No sooner had the decision been made than the reality of the timetable came into sharp focus. Council later moved into confidential session to decide on awarding the building contract for the Clarendon works.
Meanwhile, Coventry parents began formally mapping their childcare and kindergarten needs for the next two years.
Parent Philippa Carr said ‘[parents] are really disappointed by the outcome, closing an essential service like Coventry should never have been an option. However, we are now focused on the next few months and working closely with council to secure continuity of care and smooth transitions for all our children.’
With families facing a critical window of just two and a half months to secure childcare for 2027, parents quickly called on Council for transparency, firm deadlines and a clear, committed timeline.
Almost immediately, parents sent Council a long list of questions and concerns. We’ve condensed the list to give readers a sense of the work still required:
Placement logistics and timelines: Parents need formal confirmation of the relocation period, key dates and the exact process for allocating alternative places—specifically, whether they must join existing waiting lists, submit preferences or have places directly guaranteed.
Clarendon transition details: Families are seeking clarity on whether staying at Clarendon remains an option. They want to know when Clarendon will finalise how many Coventry children it can accommodate by age group and room structure, when it will recruit enough educators to operate all 60 licensed places, and how it will decide which children are offered places and which are moved elsewhere.
Educator Retention and Relationships: Parents want to know what specific steps the Council is taking to retain Coventry educators and whether efforts are being made to preserve vital educator-child relationships by placing familiar staff alongside the children at their new locations.
Financial and Peer Support: Families are asking for the practical implementation details of approved financial assistance, fee reductions, and transition support for both council-run and private facilities. Additionally, they are requesting visibility over where other Coventry families will be placed to help preserve important peer relationships.
Individual Engagement: Parents are calling for immediate, direct engagement regarding their individual 2027 care requirements so they can make informed decisions without the risk of further delays.
Meanwhile at Clarendon, the task is equally daunting
At Clarendon, questions are also likely to centre on recruiting suitable staff to accommodate the additional 20 children in the larger space. Current families may also raise concerns if newly arriving parents pay less after receiving Council’s 15 per cent subsidy, particularly because Clarendon’s fees differ from Council fees.
Clarendon’s preferences were not mentioned in the council documentation, raising questions about whether the centre’s needs were fully considered. For example, was the centre consulted about alternative options, including Busy Bees and Evoke? Did it express a preference to Council? Relocating is demanding enough; expanding capacity at the same time may prove too much. While attention was focused on Coventry, Clarendon’s needs may have been underplayed.
TWiSK contacted Clarendon Children’s Centre, but they declined to comment.
Based on recent experience, parents and educators are likely to face further challanges as the relocation details emerge. Earlier this year, TWiSK heard from many families affected by centres being decanted into North St Kilda by Council. The process was plagued by delays and regulatory problems. (Read the TWiSK report from January 2026).
Hold onto your hats — it’s going to be quite a ride.
Five centres are being renovated, one massive new centre is being built on the St Kilda North site and two council childcare centres will close for at least two years. What could possibly go wrong?
Final word from Cr Buckingham
After a difficult night at Council, during which her amendment to extend the subsidy for an additional year was initially ruled out on a governance technicality, the precarious nature of Council’s early years program was clear.
After a good night’s sleep and time to reflect, Cr Buckingham provided this statement:
“While I understand this is not the outcome parents had hoped for, and that it will be very difficult for many families, I am pleased that we were able to secure additional support, strengthen accountability mechanisms, and establish a pathway toward a long-term early learning strategy for our municipality.”
“A strategy will guide Council in delivering this complex and vital service. It could establish shared principles for the future, including prioritising the needs of children, quality of care, gender equality and accessibility.”
“Our focus now must be on working together—Council, staff, parents and community members—to support the children and families affected and make this transition as smooth as possible. This cannot be treated as ‘business as usual’; it requires genuine collaboration, care and shared commitment as we move forward.”
The debate is over. Now Council must deliver both a smooth transition and continuity of care without leaving families to carry the cost of its decision.
This is more than an infrastructure project, more than child’s play and more than money or politics. It is Council’s chance to show it can bring people together and deliver.
