Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their attendance. It is very important that two different parts of the country are represented at this meeting and both are reporting very similar issues. No doubt, if we were to look wider, we would find many more young children throughout the country who are affected. The figure that was mentioned was 5,000, but behind that are all the families who will be affected by those cuts, as well as those children's children when they grow up. As I am sure has been mentioned, we need to acknowledge the intergenerational impact of poverty and social exclusion, which brings us to the point of these purposes. Our guests have stressed they are not childcare and the wider role their services play in that equality, deprivation and anti-poverty work is very important.

We need specific and sustainable funding to be put in place without any gaps. If the NCS is not the appropriate place to fund this, that is fine, but we should not cut the funding until the new funding is in place. We have heard of services closing and of the EWSS, as was described, being the sticking plaster that has covered up that issue. We need to ensure, therefore, that there will be funding to keep open all these services in order that they can keep doing the valuable work they do.

Our guests mentioned the administrative burden in respect of sponsorship but, as Senator Ruane is always at pains to point out, many families do not want to go to Tusla. There is a fear of going to Tusla. As a former Tusla social worker, while I might not agree, I can at least understand where these families are coming from. My experience has been on the other side of the table but I understand fully.

Can the witnesses speak about what they view as the problems with the sponsorship model and how it creates an administrative burden on the State and is a burden on families?

The previous group of speakers expressed concern about the monetisation of childcare. I find it quite grim if we view the national childcare scheme and after-school provision simply as a labour activation model. The witnesses have put it best by emphasising that services should be child-centred. I am concerned about describing childcare as a labour activation system because it misses the rights of children and the wonder of childhood, if properly supported. I ask the witnesses to speak about the struggles generated by the sponsorship model. Administrative struggles have been mentioned but I want to hear about the parent and child difficulties in terms of that model.