Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Lest anyone thinks I am unqualified to speak in this area, I have owned a childcare facility. I built the largest one in the city in 2002. I have been a consultant to the sector and led them through GDPR. I have consulted and been a mentor on county childcare committees. If anyone thinks I do not know what I am talking about, actually I do.

When I speak to and meet with services, I understand their challenges. I have been appointed by county councils throughout the country to go in and troubleshoot where services are in financial difficulty to manage them out of crises. When there have been scandals, I have been asked to go in to fix and regulate it, all in the support of parents and, most important, of the precious children. We have been on a trajectory for a very long time, beginning with the ECCE scheme, of ensuring there is serious State intervention in the funding of childcare because our children deserve to be completely and utterly supported and those early years are precious developmental formative years that need intervention and support. We see that if we have early intervention, so much can change in the trajectory and support of a child in his or her life. We have been on a good programme from the ECCE funding, which was amplified during Covid, and then bringing in core funding.

I completely support core funding. It is fantastic and a huge intervention, which is brilliant. Are there difficulties in it? Yes, there are. Not all services are these huge big ones. Some services are owned by pension funds, and I do not support their profit being increased. However, there are services that have been caught in their 2019 fees, that were then caught by the fee freezes during Covid and under core funding. While I appreciate an intervention will come in September and there is a mechanism coming, there is a sort of a tendency to dismiss the private operators that are claiming their funding. I have tabled Commencement matters on the issue and made repeated queries about how we are dealing with the core funding and the people who are claiming they have issues. In the beginning, I was given briefing notes to go before the media and say that the sustainability fund was the be-all and end-all, but when I went under the hood of that it was not the case. Very few services have availed of it. It has been said that it is just a cranky minority, but that is not the case. There are very real issues that have to be considered.

For instance, there is the ratio reality. We set the ratios of adult to babies in the baby room and toddler room. Those ratios must be adhered to or it is a serious contravention of the preschool regulations. Let us think about that. We have one staff member for three babies in a baby room. Under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997, those staff members are entitled to go on their breaks, their lunch and have their holidays, which means they are missing for 20 days of the year. Those days must be covered. There has to be a second staff member for those three babies to cover all of that. There have to be additional staff members. It is not as straightforward as it looks. That is costly. You have to have people who are covering breaks to make sure that all of these things are done. There is a reality in the provision of childcare. We need to drill down and that granular detail has to be considered in light of escalating costs, such as energy costs and all of these things. We need to do that and engage seriously with the people who are saying they are in difficulty. The vast majority of them are not in it for massive profits; they are in it because they are dedicated to childcare. A neighbour of mine owns two creches and every day of her week, every waking moment is ploughed into ensuring they are the best childcare providers they can be.

We have a challenge in planning and development.There are services being built in some development schemes, and a crèche is put in in response to the regulations. However, the crèche is too small and not viable when someone goes to tender for it. Alternatively, developers are allowed to exempt themselves from the provision of childcare. That exemption should be removed. There should be a minimum size of service in order that it is financially viable to be run and the State should be claiming that under Part V. We should be bringing that in so that it becomes a community service and then we are in control. For as long as we look at it, we will have to be in this hybrid model of public and private. The private sector is not something to be in any way nervous about. They all dedicated people. They are all people who are mad about children and are absolutely dedicated to them.

I have a sympathy for early years having a remit in the Department of Education; that is no reflection on the Minister at all. However, such services cannot be the Cinderella. We want cradle to school-leaving age children absolutely supported and absolutely respected. As for the professionals, children need psychologists and all of these services now. We need to move to that wraparound. If that is secured, I do not care what Department it is under. However, there is a certain synergy for having it in the education remit in order that it can be on the same campus as primary and secondary schools because that campus mentality would be very good. We see that in the likes of St. Ultan's, Cherry Orchard, where children are brought into the crèche and then going to school and secondary school is not a big deal. It was one of the core matters we discussed with the Minister under the care of the child.

I commend Senator Currie. As I was so busy responding, I forgot to do so and so I say well done to the Senator. Senator Currie’s advocacy on core funding, services and the diminution of services' ability has restored my heart because I thought I was alone in this fight for the past three years.