Jillian van Turnhout (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I also wish to welcome the officials from the three Departments who have attended the meeting. Deputy Conway's initiative is very welcome.

I refer to Deputy Ó Caoláin's final point about the Department of Health. The delegates are not in a position to answer the question but that Department does have a direct role in dealing with the issue of child poverty. I support what Deputy Ó Caoláin said. The committee found out - if that is the appropriate term - about who is responsible for child and family services. The public perception is that Gordon Jeyes is the person responsible, but in fact it is Tony O'Brien who has delegated the responsibility within the HSE to Brian Kirwan. That is the current position until the new agency is established. I believe more information about who is responsible should be in the public domain.

I welcome the establishment of the new agency and I also welcome the high-level national policy framework, which is long awaited. I look forward to seeing it. Ms Moira O'Mara said it would be available at the end of this year. I ask Ms O'Mara to assure us that the Department of Health is co-operating in the development of that policy along with the other Departments in attendance today.

The policy framework will be particularly important in an examination of the issue of child poverty across all age groups. The early years are very important but, equally, we have seen how the issue of teenage poverty continues into adult life and sets a life path for a young person. We must remember to include teenagers in our examination of child poverty because a person is a child up to the age of 18 years.

I welcome the free universal preschool year, although I acknowledge it is only three hours a day for 38 weeks of the year. It is a relatively short period of time. I have been talking to providers dealing with certain categories of children such as special needs children. Recently I visited the direct provision centre in Athlone where the free preschool year is being provided to children of asylum-seekers. It is a very small provision for children who need to be integrated and included in society. I suggest that this category of children be considered in any plans to expand the service. The universal preschool year is provided as part of the plan for helping working parents and is based on sound educational models.

The model for funding of after-school care was referred to by Ms O'Mara. I ask her to outline whether there will be guidance on what constitutes after-school care. From my observations around the country, there are different interpretations. I am afraid that an ad hoc system may develop and in some instances it may be interpreted simply as keeping children occupied, while there may be a planned programme of activities in place in other centres.

DEIS is an important initiative. Will there be a linkage between the experience of DEIS and the policy of an area-based response to child poverty? Ms O'Brien raised some very important issues about learning from DEIS. Can the information about DEIS be used in the policy of area-based responses?

It is important, when looking at the new areas and the current areas, that whatever policy is funded should be mainstreamed and replicated in other areas. Is it a case of having to wait for the pot of money to come to an area? What is needed are clear programmes that can be adapted and are flexible, but that address issues such as rural isolation and care for certain categories of children who are particularly isolated and vulnerable.

Access to third level is an issue that hit home to me when I visited the centre in Athlone. Children in such centres are literally on the edge of a cliff because the supports are not available to them once they finish the leaving certificate. The programme stops for them at that stage. I think back to my leaving certificate and the incentives I had to work hard. I knew that my parents would encourage me to go to third level and that they would provide for that. However, if one knows there will be no support, that incentive to do well and to go further in education or training or employment is not present. Those linkages are vital and they should be an important element of the national policy framework for those aged 12 to 25 years.

On the issue of child benefit, I will not repeat what I said during a very good debate in the Seanad on the advisory group report. Mr. Bohan attended in the Visitors' Gallery for that debate. Part of my frustration with the system is that very often each Department can only look for solutions within itself rather than looking for solutions through connections with other Departments.

The Department of Social Protection often can only look at solutions that are linked to other areas and that is the reason we have a decision on the mean testing of child benefit rather than considering a universal payment plus services and developing out those services. I followed part of the proceedings of a committee yesterday during which this issue was discussed. If we are serious about tackling child poverty, we should examine measures such as the provision of free health care and school books, which are areas that directly impact on a child's well-being. We could then ensure that all children have the opportunity for positive outcomes. How do we empower such co-operation among the Departments who engage in these areas? That is where the new agency and the new policy framework will come into play, but are they the answers or do we have to look elsewhere?