Marie Sherlock (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for coming into the House. I will start by offering my support to all those providing an early years service in this country, and pay tribute to all the providers and staff who go in day in, day out to do their very best for the families that they look after.Many services are distressed about the necessity and expense of requiring a chartered accountant. With regard to these new changes that have been introduced, many are frustrated about the way a day's absence is recorded and how they are penalised in the early years system, unlike in the primary and secondary school systems. There are huge issues with regard to the qualification requirements of AIM workers relative to SNAs in the primary or secondary systems. Even with those frustrations, they continue to go in day in, day out and do their very best by the children, by their staff and by the families.

Today I want to ask about the oversight procedures and the powers of investigation in place for those in receipt of core funding. Core funding is now very substantial, at €287 million. Is it enough? Absolutely not, but it is substantial nonetheless. Any organisation in receipt of core funding, whether in part or in full, has responsibilities towards fairness. I ask about this issue because I want to draw attention to what is sharp practice on the part of one early years provider that I have become aware of. In early May of this year, I came to learn that a number of families who had intended keeping their children in the childcare facility until the end of the summer were told their place would be terminated early, in June. The reason for that termination was because those families had decided not to send their children to the ECCE within that crèche, but to send them to an alternative ECCE from September. I have had contact with six families this happened to, but I am aware there are more.

Even more troubling is that the places of the older children are linked to the places of younger siblings. Specifically in one case, the family was asked if the child would be attending in September. When the parents said they were not sure, there was an impact for the younger sibling. The eight-month-old baby, who had just commenced their settling-in period in the crèche, had their settling in period put on hold until a decision was made about the older sibling. When the decision was made that the older sibling would not be continuing to the ECCE in September, the crèche rescinded the baby's place. Anyone with a small baby at the moment knows that trying to find a childcare place for a child under one is nearly impossible across the northside of Dublin and in many parts of the country. Because of that precise shortage, I know of another family who felt pressurised and forced to keep their older child in that crèche to preserve and keep the place of the younger sibling. I asked for the written documentation that was furnished to the parents, such as the handbook, the contract and the calendar, and none of those makes provision for the unilateral cancellation by the provider for the reasons set out above.

What protections or oversight procedures are in place for these practices? We know the sector is very tightly regulated in terms of physical infrastructure and staffing, and yet I see little or no guidance by way of what should be in place for an admissions policy and what are the grounds for termination. Furthermore, I note the national childcare scheme enters into a 12-month contract with providers, yet that same security is not afforded to parents. It appears there is nothing in the guidelines to ensure that once a child is enrolled, their place cannot be terminated by the provider at any time outside of the national childcare scheme eligibility requirements. Is it fair that a sibling’s place is tied to that of an older child? We have under the Education Acts very clear admissions policies and requirements for the primary and secondary school systems, but I am not sure those same requirements exist for the early years sector. I spoke at the start about the significant State funding that is now going into early years services. Obviously it does not wholly fund early years services, but there is a significant chunk of funding going in. The provider in question made a net profit of €1.3 million in 2022 and has €2 million in cash reserves. Of course, that is not all due to State support but it is part of it. The Department might say it has no responsibility over who a crèche decides to take on or dispense with, but that is not good enough.The vast majority of crèches want to do right by families but I believe that these sharp practices are not good enough and should not be stood over by the Department.