Ms Marian Quinn:

I thank Deputy Dillon. There would need to be a targeted approach. If there were to be a blanket increase to perhaps €100 or whatever, then we know there are some models for which that would prove far more lucrative than to others. We would be concerned about the corporate model in respect of the buying out of small services. That would result in economies of scale but would not necessarily bring an increased scale of quality too. We would have great concerns in this regard.

It must also be mentioned that not every service does ECCE. While a significant majority do so, there are some services that do not because they take the underaged children. We already have providers making decisions, or needing to make decisions, regarding their operational model. If the most viable or profitable aspect is ECCE, then what is already starting to happen, and happened in the past, is the closing of rooms for babies and toddlers. Regarding families wanting and needing to go to work, we know they need to be able to access childcare crèche services for young children. These, however, are the spaces least available. Even now, under the current funding model, without there being any increase, these are the services facing the greatest challenge. These are the services that the majority of educators wish to work in. Regarding the ECCE services, this was a more financially viable model and the wages tended to be higher in those services as well.

What the core funding was trying to do was to equalise things across the board. The higher capitation grant was there only for the preschool, ECCE schemes and for the preschool rooms. It was not there for anything else. This was despite the fact that we had graduates working with babies and toddlers. This situation disincentivised graduates from working with babies and toddlers, even though they might love the work. They would get paid more in the ECCE area because there was a graduate higher capitation rate. I am really worried about this aspect.