Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs to the Seanad and, like others have said, I know she has her finger on the pulse when it comes to the importance of investing in early intervention in child care and learning. Many other Members spoke about the studies that support investment in this area. The Minister will recall when she was in the Seanad in 2011, I did a study on early school-leaving. One key conclusion to reduce early school-leaving was to invest in the early years zero to seven age group. Another conclusion was to set up a special Department with a focus on this area which this Government has done.

All the evidence points to the benefits we can gain from early intervention. When we ask how we can reduce crime and impact on challenging behaviours such as autism, ADHD, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, early school-leaving and unemployment, all of the evidence points to investing early in child care. As part of my study, I visited Mountjoy Prison with John Lonergan who identified two male and two female prisoners for me to interview. What struck me was so many of our inmates have ADHD but it is not understood. As well as providing for the early years, we must provide for the carers and educators to be trained to deal with the symptoms of challenging behaviour from children in their early years. I was a primary school teacher myself.

I worked with infants from four to seven years of age for a number of years both here and abroad, and I also worked in teacher education. I suggest it is critical for the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs to link in with the Minister for Education and Skills and with the teacher education colleges so that the early years strategy is understood and the privileged role those working with young children have in identifying behaviours and ways of assisting is noticed and developed. There is evidence to support this suggestion. In her paper on the role of early childhood education and care, Noreen Hayes talks about evidence from countries with low levels of child poverty. She suggests more success is experienced when macroeconomic and social policies are closely aligned and when there is an integrated approach that places children at the centre of child poverty strategies. We are familiar with this approach and we always speak about child-centred policy. I found it interesting to read in her paper that Sweden's per capita GDP is lower than that of the US and comparable to that of the UK, yet comparisons of child poverty show that of the countries surveyed, the US has the second highest level, the UK has the fourth highest level and Sweden has the lowest level.

We must look at the countries that are succeeding in this area. I like the recommendation made by Ms Hayes that we move away from targeted measures and towards a universal early childhood education and care policy, such as the early childhood care and education scheme. We are aware that subsidising early childhood services will make them more accessible and affordable for poorer families, but in the context of the times we are in and in the context of the squeezed middle, we need universal services more than ever. Last week, the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, was here in the House, and we know there is talk of reducing child benefit. However, I strongly recommended to her that the moneys saved should be put into structures that will benefit everybody. It should not just go towards providing an extra ¤35 to individuals. How much of a difference can a person make to his or her life in a week with ¤35 compared to having free access to early childhood care or after-school care? Youth centres and creative centres for young people should also be supported.

I would appreciate an indication from the Chair when I have one minute left.