Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)

This time last year, the public in Kildare North and Meath put child care firmly on the national agenda by raising the matter over and again with representatives on the doorsteps. I was reminded of this today when I saw the snow because the weather was similar then and it is well we remember it.

Child care is now accepted as an issue of national importance and the Bill is the first attempt by the Government to respond. During the budget debate it was made clear that the total child care package will be introduced incrementally. It is essential that the increment announced be the first of the increments and not the last. It is expected that more will be done, and more needs to be done in this area.

While I welcome the early child care supplement as a centrepiece of the response, the measure must extend to children over six years of age. Many working parents must make arrangements to have their children minded before their children go to school, and after school, before they are collected by their parents. Very often they must be cared for on a full-time basis during school holidays. The expense is also carried by parents with children over six.

The early child care supplement is very welcome but it must be regarded as a beginning. That it is being made universally and disregards the means by which the household income is derived makes it particularly welcome to low-income families.

I will be less than complimentary about the section on child minders. The self-employed are liable to pay a social insurance contribution of €253 per annum. This is to be deducted from €10,000, which is the maximum one can earn under the tax exemption. It applies if one cares for up to three children. It brings no pension or social welfare entitlements because those caring for children in their own homes will be regarded as self-employed. Those doing the caring, who are mainly women, will be expected to mind up to three children, which is a fairly onerous task, in their own homes while earning no more than €195 per week, or €5 per hour. That is substantially less than the minimum wage. They will not be allowed to make claims in respect of expenses, such as extra heating costs, which are associated with their work even though it is termed self-employment. There is a view among child minders to whom I have spoken that their work is being grossly undervalued, essentially by the imposition of an annual limit of €10,000. The threshold needs to be reconsidered because if it is allowed to stand people will not be queueing to avail of this measure. I ask the Minister to reconsider the extent of the limit. The Government is considering making it compulsory to participate in a pension programme, even though no pension provisions are being put in place for people in the group I mentioned.

I wish to discuss the new provisions in the Bill relating to maternity leave, many of which are welcome. It is understandable that some people currently on maternity leave are upset because the extended maternity leave system will not apply to them. The Minister for Finance said in his Budget Statement in December that "the Government is particularly conscious of the importance of the first year of life to a child's development". He went on to refer to the long-lasting benefits of making adequate provision during this time. He promised that from March 2006, "mothers of new-born children will have an additional four weeks' paid maternity leave", but that is not the case for pregnant women who start their maternity leave before the date on which this measure will commence. If they start their maternity leave the day before the new provisions come into operation, they will not be able to avail of extended maternity leave. It is something that could be changed without costing a fortune. I am sure it could be dealt with administratively in the Department of Social and Family Affairs. I understand the argument that it should not apply to women who are nearing the end of their maternity leave, but it is unfair on women who will commence maternity leave just before the relevant date.

I wish to mention a provision relating to paternity leave I would have liked to have seen included in this Bill. I describe myself as a feminist who believes that feminism is about seeking equality. That fathers are not generally entitled to paid paternity leave, in this day and age, is a gross inequality that needs to be tackled. A father is entitled to paid leave only if, tragically, the mother of his child dies. An adopting father is only entitled to leave if he is the sole adopter, which is something I cannot recall ever happening.

The review of the property-based tax incentive schemes showed us the extent to which the Government has been prepared to subsidise bricks and mortar at the expense of people. This issue was not taken seriously until voters raised it on the doorsteps. I welcome the steps which are being taken. I hope the changes which are being made this year will not be forgotten next year. While I welcome some elements of this Bill, much more needs to be done in respect of some of the matters I have specified.

See this speech in context