Ms Denise McCormilla:

I thank the committee for the invitation to address it on the child care issue. The National Childhood Network is conscious that many organisations interested in early childhood education and care have already presented on the issues in the sector and the need for investment in it. We have submitted six proposals that we believe would make a significant difference in this area for the committee to consider.

Working in an area close to Northern Ireland, we have observed developments there and in the Republic and learned from them. One particular project stands out as being a model that could be replicated successfully throughout Ireland. This project in the southern Border counties and Northern Ireland was funded by the International Fund for Ireland and worked in delivering high-quality services. It is from that project that we are taking many of our recommendations.

Our first recommendation is on improving the ECCE, early childhood care and education, free preschool scheme. It has been a wonderful scheme with many benefits gained from it. It has been revolutionary but there are many issues in it that need to be addressed. The committee will be familiar with other schemes such as the childcare education and training support, CETS, programme, and the subvention schemes. Our proposal is that all current funding for schemes would actually be deactivated by September 2016. They are cumbersome and take up much administration, not just on behalf of providers but also for Pobal, the Department and the county child care committees. Much of the administrative paperwork could be got rid of if the schemes were changed completely.

We suggest the funding is alternatively put into a central pot for either staff salaries going directly to the services or actual payment of salaries to services in the same way that our primary and secondary schools are funded. While the committee might be more familiar with the term “private providers”, we refer to them as independently managed services. Funding should be made available to both independently managed and committee-managed services. They have to comply with the same regulations, meet the same quality standards and employ the same staff. Community services are more likely to be in more disadvantaged areas so they have additional needs. The system is the same, however.

I am sure the committee has heard much about payment for non-contact time and that the payment to the ECCE scheme is just for direct contact with children. There is so much more non-contact work required to be done from planning to evaluation of work to working with parents. Now, the education-focused inspections will require much more work on behalf of the services. While we are pleased with the involvement of the Department of Education and Skills in this, much work must be done to ensure all services are able to cope with their responsibilities.

We suggest funding should be for a 42-week period rather than a 38-week period. This would allow more continuing professional development, CPD, to take place and pay staff holiday pay, meaning they would not find themselves having to go on the dole during holiday time. We also suggest a small annual capitation grant should be made available in the same way it is to primary schools. Another key measure that needs to be in place is the development of new supports system, particularly for committee-managed services, to alleviate the pressure on volunteers. In the main, committee-managed services are managed voluntarily by parents. There is a phenomenal amount of legislative responsibilities, never mind other responsibilities, involved in this. Governance in the committee-managed sector is poor and needs to be supported and improved. In considering this model, we were influenced by the introduction of free secondary school education in the 1960s by Donogh O’Malley and how community and private schools became managed by committees.

In return for the provision of salaries, the services must commit to achieving quality standards required by Aistear, the early childhood curriculum framework, and Síolta, the national quality framework for early childhood education. Certain requirements should be in place to ensure all early childhood services meet these frameworks by 2020. To do this, the sector must be willing to engage in a national quality development training programme. Some providers have already done so and achieved those standards. The reality is, however, very few have and are not in a position to do so. There is a significant amount of workforce capacity building to be done. It needs to be borne in mind that accessing qualifications and having the bit of paper does not guarantee a service meets the requirements of a quality service. A graduate having level seven or eight qualifications does not necessarily guarantee delivery a service that will meet national quality standards. A programme of CPD is what worked within the International Fund for Ireland project I referred to earlier and would work in the future.

There has been much talk about the provision of a second preschool year with the recent announcement that there is no funding for it.

We suggest that it be introduced step by step, and it does not have to be introduced to every child who might be eligible for it within the next year or two or three if the funding is not there for it. At least if funding was made available for staff salaries to deliver a second preschool year in the existing services, which can accommodate children who would be aged two years and ten months by September of the year they would be in the service, there would be the possibility of reducing the high cost of child care for many parents who are struggling with the cost of that service at the moment. The staff working within the services would be obliged through service level agreements to meet the criteria that would need to be laid down to ensure measurable progress over a period.

With proposal No. 3, we recommend a registration system for childminders similar to that which has operated for many years in Northern Ireland. That was introduced on a phased basis and it is working very well. We cannot see why that could not operate within the Republic of Ireland. Regulation of childminders has always been avoided, and it is time to stop that and see what can be done. We only have to look up the road across the Border to see how this system is working really well. In that way, one would be able to ensure greater access to good quality and affordable services for parents where there is no crèche facility or where parents choose not to use the facility.

There should be development of a school-age child care strategy with appropriate legislation on policy development, investment and quality standards, similar to the Síolta and Aistear frameworks. That really needs to happen. There is much focus on school-age child care at the moment, and we need after-school services. Some parents need breakfast clubs and some need summer play schemes, but there is no overall strategy for this to take place. Over the past few years, through Government funding, so much work has been done in this area by voluntary child care organisations, partnership companies and county child care committees that could be used to build a foundation for a really good school-age child care system within the country.

There should be development of a comprehensive support system for services provided for children with additional needs. We agree with everything the previous speakers have said on this. A new strategy needs to be devised in order to ensure that children with a variety of additional needs have their needs met. It is not just about those with a disability, as services see children with all kinds of additional needs. They come from homes with problems due to the recession or marital problems. There are children coming from war-torn countries into many services. It is not just the community services that are taking these children, as the early childhood care and education programme means all children in an area can access this service. It could be provided by an independent provider as opposed to something managed by committee. I reiterate what my colleagues have stated in this regard, and the submission sent to the committee has more specific recommendations.

Funding has to be made available for the delivery of affordable services that meet our national quality standards. These are our brilliant standards, and we know that where services meet them, the needs of children are being met. They support health, well-being, learning and development. The bottom line is that the taxpayer must pay. There is a widespread lack of awareness within the public, among parents and certainly in the media about the value of high-quality early years and after-school services. We advocate that the Department of Children and Youth Affairs, in conjunction with the Departments of Health and Education and Skills, take responsibility on an annual basis for having a public awareness campaign. In the US there is the Week of the Young Child, and in the UK they have Sure Start weeks; why would we not have something similar on an annual basis, led by the Department of Children and Youth Affairs, so that parents, grandparents, the sector and the public can recognise why it is important for Ireland to have a really good early years and after-school service?

I have mentioned that we see the Department of Children and Youth Affairs as needing to take the lead on this and we absolutely welcome the involvement of the Department of Education and Skills, which is responsible for many elements, including Síolta, Aistear and the Quality and Qualifications Ireland system within which trainers deliver training. That is not working well and needs to be improved, and we could speak for another five minutes about that, although we will not do it today. All of this is essential. I ask the committee to do whatever it can to influence our civil servants to re-establish the national child care co-ordination committee, which was established in 2000 by Ms Sylda Langford. It worked for many years but, unfortunately, it was deactivated last year. That was the only place where civil servants met those of us working on the ground, through the voluntary child care organisations, the city and county child care committees and education and training boards - all the different people and players who have an impact on the sector. It provided support for the new groups that have been established, such as the interdepartmental group, to improve co-ordination. People on the ground could help that process.