Mr. Toby Wolfe:

I certainly will comment on the childminding question and might pick up on some of the other questions that were raised as well, if that is all right. On the specific issue of childminding regulation, I should state clearly at the outset that the expert group's recommendation concerned the regulation of non-relative childminders. It clearly was not making any comment on grandparents and so on, who probably are the most common form of childminding in this country. The context for the expert group's recommendations on the regulation of childminding was that at present, if one is doing voluntary work in any of a wide range of voluntary organisations, one must be Garda vetted. This is accepted as being essential for child protection reasons.

That is not a requirement to be a childminder. I understand the Deputy's comments on the stress that families are under and their need to find solutions. Childminding is regulated in some other countries. Scotland is a good example. It is similar in size to Ireland and is not that dissimilar culturally. Scotland has a fully regulated childminding system, including 6,000 childminders who are regulated and inspected. From speaking to people involved in the Scottish system, I understand that it works. Families like the security of knowing that childminders they turn to are the equivalent of Garda-vetted and have high-quality supports. They like to know that they can trust childminders. Childminders themselves like the extra status they get from being recognised as professionals, rather than babysitters. In addition, it benefits children through additional high-quality supports. We know the system works, which was the backdrop to the expert group's recommendation.

I will briefly deal with a couple of the other questions to add to what Ms Hennessy has said. I agree with what Ms McLoughlin said about the costs to families and the stresses they are under. The reason the cost of early care in education is so high for families in Ireland is simply that the State does not invest in those services to the same degree as in other countries. The expert group's report is clear that if we are talking, for example, about measures to raise the quality of early care in education, parents should not foot the bill for higher quality or tightening regulations. Additional public investment is required, so the Government needs to step in.

A question was asked about how the State could afford a universal approach in a time of tight budgets. Ms Hennessy answered that as regards the evidence. To add to what she said, one of the great benefits of a universal approach is that it reaches all children and one can guarantee that every child benefits. With targeted solutions - particularly in the context that most disadvantaged children in Ireland do not live in disadvantaged areas - solutions for those who are disadvantaged often do not hit everybody who ought to benefit from them.

Concerns about universal provision are understandable in a time of tight finances, but it is worth drawing an analogy with schools. We do not say that the State should stop providing primary school on a universal basis because we are in a time of financial difficulty. We say instead that school is something absolutely fundamental and should be available to every child. Additional resources may be needed, such as through the DEIS scheme in areas of disadvantage, but it is a fundamental universal provision. The expert group is saying that the same applies to high-quality preschool provision.