Jillian van Turnhout (Independent)

When we come to section I will elaborate on why I feel so strongly about this. Amendment No. 2 to section 1 offers a good compromise. While I would not be entirely happy with it I acknowledge that it is fair.

Looking at our provision of child care in Ireland, in the past we had a model where we provided child care based on the status of the parent. It was purely a measure to get women back into the workplace. We provided child care because we needed mothers to work. That was the basis of the system and it was rare that the child was mentioned. With the introduction of the free preschool year, we quickly moved the focus to quality child care provision. My fear is that this measure will remove the focus from the child once more.

I am chairman of Early Childhood Ireland, which represents 80% of the preschool, day care, parent and toddler and after school services in Ireland. I know a bit about the provision of child care in Ireland. Today, ECI has called for an additional €5 million just to deal with the baby boom. We have an increasing number of children who will be going into the free school year. The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs has set as her political priority the provision of a second year of preschool education. That will go out the window under this.

A capital fund of €6 million was put in place last month for capital grants in the child care sector. It has received applications for funding amounting to more than €60 million, an indication of the need for building improvements in the sector. That is just for those children who are in the system now; it is not about the additional children.

This amendment is about buying time but that is what we must do. Where will the child care provision come from? I would love if there was a system here based on the Scandinavian model but it took the Scandinavians over ten years to get there. They had to put in place many other measures; it did not happen overnight and we are only asking for a few years. This amendment would allow time for the necessary supports to be put in place, as committed to by the Minister.

I do not question the Minister's vision but there is a difference between legislation and commitment. We are talking about putting this into legislation today and while I take the Minister on her word, I am a realist. There can be Cabinet reshuffles and other factors can emerge. We can be told that we did our best but it did not happen. That has a direct impact on children so I question why there is such haste. Why not accept the compromise that has been put forward? For me it supports everything the Minister has said. It offers the necessary time so I ask the Minister to agree to Senator Zapone's amendment.