Tony Kett (Fianna Fail)

——after listening to Senator Cox's in-depth, realistic life experiences and knowing that Senator White has made this one of her main issues since becoming a Member of the House. Not having the in-depth knowledge or the hands on experience of these ladies, I am thankful at this stage that my family is almost reared.

There has been massive social and economic change in this country, particularly for women, in the past 30 years. My wife worked in the Civil Service, as did Senator White. They had to give up their jobs when they got married. It was only in the mid-1970s that women started to remain in the workplace after marrying. Even then, the majority more or less disappeared when they had their first child. They did so for different reasons. One was undoubtedly the shortage of child care, the subject of our discussion this evening. Many of the women who remained in the workplace — I am sure most of them needed to do so — did so because they probably had a family member or a good neighbour to assist them with child care.

I was struck by some of the information in the document on the Equal Opportunities Childcare Programme 2000-2006, particularly on the participation of women in the workforce. The survey showed that participation rates for women had increased to 49.5%, as distinct from 71% for men. That is a considerable increase since 1997. The relevant growth was 8%, which masked growth in absolute terms of 31%. The number of women in the workforce increased from 588,000 in 1997 to 770,000 at the end of December 2004.

It is significant to look at the number of women in part-time and full-time employment in those figures. In the period 1997 to 2004, the number of women in full-time employment grew from 406,000 to 530,000, an increase of almost 31%. In the same period the number of women in part-time employment increased from 182,000 to 240,000, an increase of almost 33%. There is another interesting statistic in the document. A total of 13,000 women deemed themselves to be under-employed in 1997 but only 1,900 deemed themselves under-employed in 2002.

This appears to suggest that women are quite happy to work part time. In my place of employment, women comprise between 75% and 85% of the workforce. I talk with them and deal with their requests for job sharing. An increasing number are seeking job sharing opportunities. There are a number of reasons for that. From the financial point of view, they probably consider it a better proposition to work part time and pay half the child care fees than to work full time and pay the full amount of fees. Although they lose in their net pay, they gain more by paying half fees for child care. That is a simple fact. My colleagues suggested that some assistance be given, whether it be as a tax break or in some other financial guise. Without doubt, in certain circumstances there is a need to give serious consideration to that issue. Our job as legislators is not to question whether people should work but it is our job to make choices available to them.

The situation of lone parents has been discussed at length. I read in an article some time ago that, according to the 2002 census, there are 150,000 lone parents in the country, 85% of whom are lone mothers. Statistics show that lone parents are over-represented in the category of families living in poverty. Apart from families headed by somebody with a disability, lone parents are most in need of targeting in that regard. Despite what Kevin Myers might have thought, relatively few people decide to become lone parents. While people become lone parents for a variety of reasons — death, separation, divorce, unplanned pregnancy, a member of the family being put in jail, or otherwise — it is traumatic whatever the circumstances. Moreover, lone parents are at high risk of falling into the poverty trap. Employment may be available but it may not be feasible for a lone parent to work, for a variety of reasons. I am sure not many employers would allow a lone parent to leave work to collect a child at school, for example. Serious consideration is required in this regard.

Although I do not say this in a broad, sweeping way, many female lone parents would have less education and, hence, would probably find themselves in insecure jobs. It is impossible for such women to consider paying child care fees. In 1994, one-parent families accounted for one in 20 of those in consistent poverty; that figure in 2003 was one in five. Much work remains to be done to bring about a situation where lone parents can feel that we, as legislators and as a country, are in some way concerned with their well being.

It is heartening to see the changes brought about by the equal opportunities child care programme. This is due in no small way to the great efforts of community based, not-for-profit organisations working in every corner of the country, trying to make it possible to deal with local child care needs. The number of new child care places being created under the programme is on the increase and, as a consequence, women can make their own choices in this regard.

We are moving in the right direction. In recent months, the House passed the Maternity Protection (Amendment) Act 2004 and debated the Parental Leave (Amendment) Bill 2004. The latter Bill was much maligned by some but, whether one likes it, it is not a regressive but a progressive step. While we may in future find a way to encourage Government to make some form of payment or to lengthen terms, we are moving in the right direction in this regard.