Ivana Bacik (Independent)

I take issue with the Senator's comments about rush and undue haste. If the Senator looks carefully at the wording of the section he will see that, as the Minister has said, it is intended that changes be made on an incremental basis and, therefore, with time to ensure adequate supports are in place. From the constructive debate earlier on the two amendments, I considered it was a useful debate and that we were all in agreement on the need to ensure better outcomes from the spend and on the need to ensure that children are lifted out of being at risk of poverty. That is the real challenge. I supported the free preschool year, an important initiative introduced by the previous Government. It was a good example of how better outcomes can be achieved by spending less, simply by targeting it better. That is the model we are looking at.

In terms of child care, Senator van Turnhout referred to costs. Of course, there is a cost. The after-school model I am talking about is rolled out not only in Dublin but in primary schools all over the country on the initiative of parents who have taken it upon themselves to organise the provision of after-school child care. Generally it is on a much better value basis because the hours are fewer and the children are older and require less supervision. It is different from the preschool model with which people are more familiar. As Senator van Turnhout said the capacity is there and the Minister gave clear figures. We are all conscious of the enormous increase in the provision of child care places across the country. There is, perhaps, a misapprehension that the State will have to build new crèches or provide new legislation in order to ensure adequate provision of child care places for lone parents affected.