Margaret Cox (Fianna Fail)

Of all issues which have arisen since I entered the House in 1997, none has caused me greater concern or made me feel more of a failure in Fianna Fáil than the Government's approach to child care. Despite attempts on many occasions to solve the problem, I stand here in 2005 to note that we have not done so. I have had two children since becoming a Senator and after the birth of each I thought circumstances would improve. Sadly, they have not, for which I must share the collective responsibility as a member of my party. We have failed and continue to do so. When one listens to fine words like those of the Minister of State this evening, the reason becomes obvious. We have not listened carefully enough to identify the real cause of the problem.

I make my point in recognition of the action which has been taken. Child benefit has been increased on foot of its adoption in the programme for Government as the universal mechanism to tackle child care costs and child poverty. As the mother of four children who receives child benefit every month, I acknowledge how fantastic the provision is. However, it fails to address child care costs. While the essential policies the Government adopted to create more child care places have been successful and I recognise the foresight and effort of Ministers in formulating them, there are still not enough spaces and nothing has been done to reduce costs. I also recognise the role of the Ombudsman for Children and the difference the office will make to the care of children.

Senator Terry's views on parental leave, which was discussed in the House over the past two weeks, were correct. Parental leave is only of benefit to those who can afford to take time off or who work in organisations which can afford to provide them with one or two days off per week over a given period. The economy is based on the success of small and medium enterprises. Until we create a context in which employers can allow people to take 14 weeks off work by providing paid leave, parental leave will be of no benefit to most workers. If one works for the HSE, a local authority or Department, one can take a day off per week per child for the next five years, which is excellent. However, the Government must listen to the pleas of small businesses which cannot afford to make such provision. We must solve the problem by discussing parental leave and providing a payment to cover it. Perhaps it is time to examine the mix of child benefit and parental leave to help people meet the costs involved.

Our talk of family, work-life balance and the creation of a sexy agency to distribute wonderful posters is a waste of time. Those of us who are working mothers do not have the time to think about these matters. We do not know how to deal with the stress of trying to address the work-family balance. If one still has two hours of work to do at 6 p.m., one may wonder if one will get out the door and who will pick up the children. An argument is inevitable when one phones one's husband to say he must collect the children and he insists it must be the other way around. In that context family-friendly policies and the idea of a work-life balance are a joke. We must take real actions, such as the provision of a double-tax relief on the incomes of workers in companies which allow their employees to go home during family-friendly hours.

Additional moneys should be granted to companies to put in place policies to support people who need to work fewer hours or job share. My focus is on support for small organisations as Departments, local authorities, the HSE and multinationals can cope. Small organisations employ people on a daily basis and create the wealth we enjoy which allows us to make choices about how we use our resources. We must cease to make the work-life balance a joke. We all need the Government to make a difference.

While the national children's strategy is wonderful, more needs to happen to follow it through. The children's ombudsman is crucial in this context. I acknowledge that the initiative was put in place by the current Government with the involvement of the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, in one of his previous roles. While county child care committees are great, has the Minister of State ever received a call from someone in the constituency to say his or her facility had been deemed by a committee to have one child too many or to be too small and will, therefore, be closed? Subsequent to such a call, 25 mothers will be on the phone to ask what they will do when the crèche is closed within days. Complete pandemonium ensues. Improved communications and a flexible approach to regulation are required. It may even be time to review the regulations in this area. In a large crèche, does the absence of an additional 6 sq. ft. of space make such a difference that parents must be required to wonder where to bring a child the following week when it is closed?

The real problems are the cost of child care, a lack of recognition and unpaid parental leave. It is very cost effective to employ a child minder if one has three, four or five children and to deduct tax from the salary, pay PRSI and insure the house to allow someone to come in. However, one does not receive a tax-free allowance to do so. As a Senator, I receive a salary of €50,000, which translates to €3,000 per month. It barely covers the cost of a child minder. It is net income on which tax has been paid but then I pay more tax and PRSI for which I get no recognition. All any parent wants is some form of recognition and support to make life easier.

In the good old days we used to laugh at the idea of a double income with no kids, but now it is a case of a double income with kids and it is bloody hard. A couple may have a mortgage and two car loans if they work in different locations, but if they have a child, they must also pay €1,000 per month to a crèche. Senator Terry was right to point out that people begin to wonder if they can afford a second child, which would mean €2,000 per month, and wonder what would happen if there were a little mistake. It goes on and on. We have created a new stratum of social disadvantage which exists not in our local authority estates but in middle-class estates where men and women pay taxes, PRSI, doctors' bills, as they do not have medical cards, and fund activities for their children which create additional facilities and incomes for people. They contribute continually to our economy but we ignore them. We are certainly not making life easy for them.

At issue are recognition and equality for women. If a couple have a second or third child, the question arises as to who will give up work. In many cases it is the mother, not the father, who does so. Fair play to the mother, because she is walking away from a lot. She went to school and college and worked really hard at her job for the first five, six or seven years. She is giving it all up to leave the workforce and come back in five six or seven years' time. It is not easy. I run a recruitment agency in Galway and know what it is like. I know how difficult it is for women to return to work after six, seven, eight, nine or ten years. It is virtually impossible, unless these women can up-skill. That is another challenge for us.

The cost of child care discriminates against women and middle-class families where both parents go out to work and pay child care costs. What can we do? What sort of ideas have we got? It is not about bashing the Government; it is about coming up with a solution. When we asked for this debate, we talked about coming up with a solution. Child benefit is not the answer to child care costs. It is part of the solution but it is not the entire solution. I will say as much at parliamentary party meetings and we need to keep saying it.

We must also recognise the importance of both parents working. We must address the issue of parental leave and ensure that parental leave is available to both parents and that there is some form of payment. We recognise this issue with regard to carers and maternity benefit. Why can we not recognise it with regard to parental leave? We should start small and increase it time by time. If we stop increasing child benefit payments by huge amounts we can perhaps look at how to allocate payments over a broader spectrum. Let us look at financial initiatives for organisations. What additional tax incentives and grant aid supports can be given, particularly to small organisations, to assist them in introducing the type of initiative we seek?

Senator Terry referred to infrastructure. Has anybody tried to get up at 7 a.m., make six bottles, get the children up, feed them their breakfast and get the first child ready for the crèche drop-off at 8 a.m.? Senators must remember that this is what can be involved.