Seanad debates

Wednesday, 9 March 2005

5:00 pm

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move:

That Seanad Éireann:

—recognising the huge difficulties faced by working parents in securing child care for their children and meeting the huge costs that the Taoiseach has acknowledged can be as much as €800 per child per month;

—deploring the failure of the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that there are sufficient child care places available;

—expressing serious concern at the threat by the Government to withdraw staffing grant assistance under the equal opportunities child care programme currently provided to community-based/not for profit child care centres;

—calling for the withdrawal of this threat as without the grant aid huge increases in charges will be necessary and many centres may be forced to close; and

urges the Government to recognise the need for a child-centred and learning based system of child care and pre-school education that would respect parents' choices, while allowing them to manage better the demands of both work and home, and that would have as central features:

(i) the introduction of parental leave to provide more time for parents and children,

(ii) better financial support through a refundable tax credit,

(iii) one year's free pre-school education,

(iv) more places, including direct provision by the State, and

(v) more investment to ensure quality child care.

I welcome the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Michael McDowell, to the House to discuss this important motion. As the Minister will be aware, child care is emerging as a key issue in people's lives. It is not surprising that it has also emerged as a major issue on the doorsteps during the by-election campaigns in Meath and Kildare North.

Many young working couples are finding themselves under severe financial pressure due to the high cost of child care and the Government's failure to support working parents in alleviating such costs. In addition, the Government has failed to use investment in child care to tackle disadvantage effectively. Nonetheless, there is a great opportunity to do so, particularly via the equal opportunities child care programme, about which the Minister made an announcement last week.

The amendment to this motion sums up the Government's attitude to child care. It reveals starkly the Government's threadbare approach to the development and implementation of a meaningful child care policy that would reflect our economic prosperity and status, as well as our potential for economic growth. Such a policy would also put in place a network and infrastructural support system to enable every child to meet his or her potential.

The Government amendment refers to "the very significant increase in child benefit" and "the use of child benefit as the most equitable way of giving support to parents towards the cost of rearing and caring for their children, irrespective of the family's employment status". It is clear from this amendment that the Government sees child benefit as a mechanism to put money in parents' pockets which would go towards the cost of child care.

I am in receipt of child benefit which amounts to €131 per month but it does not pay for my weekly child care costs. It falls far short of them, in fact. Child benefit, however, should not be seen as a mechanism to pay for child care; it is to support parents in raising their children, whether or not those parents are at work.

The Minister is a parent himself and knows the high cost of raising children these days. The sum of €131 per month is welcome and one must acknowledge the increase in child benefit in recent years. However, when one takes from that sum the child costs, as opposed to child care costs, it leaves very little for child care. At the rate of €131 per month it cannot be argued that child benefit is an effective mechanism for meeting the cost of child care.

Only last week in the Dáil, the Taoiseach told the Labour Party leader, Deputy Rabbitte, that child care costs are very high. They can be as high as €800 per child per month, which is higher than the cost of many mortgages.

I have encountered this issue much more than I thought I would on the doorsteps in Kildare North, in particular. Currently, a spouse, usually the mother, leaves work because when child care costs are deducted it is not worth maintaining two jobs in a household, along with juggling the responsibilities of caring for small children. There are other issues concerning family-friendly work policies, including flexible working hours and parental leave, which can assist people as they struggle with their responsibilities both as workers and parents.

The Government is failing to bring forward a coherent child care policy. When we see what the rest of Europe is doing in the area of child care, it is evident that Ireland is hardly in the ha'penny place. The average cost of child care to Irish couples represents 20% of income, compared to a European average of 12%. In addition, we have one of the worst parental leave regimes in Europe, so it is laughable that the Government amendment should refer to "the provision of enhanced arrangements for parental leave".

A few weeks ago, this House passed a Bill that increased the parental leave provision so that one now has 14 weeks of unpaid parental leave until a child is eight years old. That is considered to be a major extension but is, in fact, minimal. During that debate, it was clear from the remarks of the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, that the Government has no intention of further enhancing parental leave arrangements. Therefore, people who are considering having children in future should be aware that they are living in a country that has the least favourable unpaid parental leave arrangements in Europe. That is another pressure point for parents because raising children is an expensive option.

Last Friday, the Minister announced additional funding for the equal opportunities child care programme. While the programme is welcome, it is coming from a position of little or nothing. A considerable amount of public money is being spent on the programme but we must look at it in context. It is developing a child care network through the county child care committees which are doing excellent work but they are only just starting and the necessary financial provision is only beginning to emerge.

While capital grants are welcome, they are also essential. Last week, the Minister announced capital grant assistance of €800,000 for a facility at Upper Church, as well over €1 million for St. Sheelin's, Templemore. That is all very welcome but let us be clear that nothing would be happening if it were not for this capital grant assistance. While that assistance is excellent, the main issue concerns staffing grants. I look forward to hearing the Minister's response on this key issue.

I refer specifically to the departmental letter of November 2004 to child care facilities concerning the review of staffing grant assistance that is being carried out in the Department. I have spoken to people who are running child care facilities not only in my own area of north Tipperary but also in other regions, including areas of severe disadvantage in Dublin such as Tallaght. Such people tell me that if their staffing grant assistance is cut this year they simply will not be able to function. The Minister may be aware that in Tallaght a brand new facility is almost finished but the people who are due to move into it say the staffing grant is insufficient. They cannot manage the facility without a commitment to ongoing increased assistance. One must remember that many of these facilities operate with people on community employment schemes. They are dependent on such schemes to maintain a level of staffing adequate to meet the needs of the children in those facilities. I have no problem with this in principle. From my experience, excellent people have emerged through the training and opportunities they received through community employment schemes.

However, this is not good enough, with which point the Government's own centre for early education and development in Drumcondra will agree. It is not good enough to rely on community employment schemes to maintain high-quality staffing in these usually publicly-owned facilities. It would be a good add-on and give good opportunities to individuals in particular but it is not good enough that these facilities rely on community employment workers to continue in operation.

In the context of the equal opportunities child care programme, the staffing grant issue must be addressed. In particular, the areas of disadvantage must be given an assurance, which I ask the Minister to examine carefully, for ongoing committed funding, rather than having to rely on a hand-to-mouth existence and wonder what will be the position on 31 August next.

Roscrea 2000 is an excellent ADM-funded child care programme which supports parents in training and those in employment. However, if the staffing grant is removed, the organisation will not be able to subsidise such places, which are mostly allocated to lone parents and a number of people on low incomes. The Government must recognise the need for an ongoing commitment to funding in this regard. Otherwise, it points up a lack of commitment to using child care as a very effective way of tackling disadvantage. Evidence from the US and Britain shows that investment in pre-school education and early learning from infanthood, and supporting parents and poor families in particular through the provision of quality affordable child care in the community, is the most effective way of breaking the cycle of poverty, exclusion and disadvantage.

If the Government is really interested in doing this, it will be measured by the level of investment in these child care facilities. It cannot expect lone parents, poorly-paid families and people who are trying to get back to work to do so without support for their child care costs. Otherwise they will have no hope of breaking out of the cycle in which they are trapped. Our words mean nothing if we do not put our money where our mouths are. I look forward to the Minister's reply.

Derek McDowell (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is my pleasure to second the motion before the House in the name of the Labour Party Senators. The Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, spoke in a similar type debate in this House some weeks ago. He gave us a comprehensive description of the Government's policy which also entailed a description of the current problem. He estimated that we needed approximately 220,000 child care places. He freely acknowledged that the current EOCP was providing approximately 30,000 places, of which three quarters had been provided up to June of last year. The Minister will, therefore, not have a problem with my stating that we have a major difficulty in terms of the supply of places and their related cost. This is having an effect on the lifestyles of individuals, has serious labour market effects, which we can explore at some lengths, and has a particularly intense effect on particular categories of people, especially lone parents.

It is interesting to examine the participation by women in the labour market in the past ten years. In a relatively short time, we have come from a position in which our participation rates were much lower than the European average to a position in which, for most age groups of women, the participation rates are approximately equal to the European average. However, there is one single and striking exception which is the case of women who have had two or more children. There is a dramatic and almost immediate fall-off in the participation rates in the labour market in Ireland of women who fall into that category.

The single clearest reason for this fact is the absence of affordable child care. We all acknowledge that we need more workers, which requires more migrant workers coming into Ireland. However, surely the minimum we should do is encourage and facilitate Irish workers, most of them women, who want to remain in the workforce to do so. They should be offered an active choice rather than obliging them to stay at home because of economic necessity.

There are two sides to the problem of child care in Ireland, namely, demand and supply. On the demand side, the Government's response has just one string to its bow, namely, child benefit. As my colleague, Senator O'Meara has stated, the increase in child benefit in recent years is one which has had all-party support and is self-evidently a good thing. However, it was never intended as a child care subsidy. Rather, it was intended as an aid to parents for all of the costs of bearing and rearing children. It was never intended to have a serious impact on the actual cost to parents of child care. Even though the increase has been substantial, the Government cannot come anywhere close to compensating people for the real costs of child care.

This brings me to a critical issue or principle, on which I express a more personal view than that of my party. Nevertheless, it is an issue we must grasp because we have spectacularly failed to do so in recent years. It must be the role of the State, in looking to compensate or assist people in paying for child care, to acknowledge that people who actually incur cost and who pay out money are in a different position from those for whom the opportunity cost is the major cost. In other words, people who pay out money are in a different position from those who choose to stay at home and look after their children.

I know this causes upset and that women who stay at home to look after their children feel that they are in some sense being undervalued if they receive less assistance or subvention from the State than those who actively go out to work. However, if we do not accept the practical reality that people who incur real, actual costs are in a different position from those who incur opportunity cost, we will never get to grips with this problem because the State is not in a position to provide an equal measure of subvention to people who decide to stay at home and those who actually incur costs.

If the State provided an equal measure of subvention, it would not come anywhere close to covering the cost of child care, which is the crux of the problem. My preferred option, and that of my party, is where the State gets into direct provision. However, the State is not doing this. The equal opportunities programme has had the same type of approach as that which we have taken on so many other issues. The State would prefer that people sort this issue out for themselves, either in the informal sector or pay well over the odds if they can afford to do so. The Government then looks to plug the gaps. For example, it will assist the community and voluntary sectors to set up child care committees and so on in areas in which there is a need which cannot otherwise be met by the market.

Typically this leads to a messy multi-tiered system, as is the case in so many other areas in Ireland such as primary care centres, legal aid and so on. Therefore, one finds oneself trying to create a false equality between various sectors when we have created an inequality from the start. My preference, and that of my party, is for the State to acknowledge that it has a responsibility to make direct provision, whether it is through using school facilities or constructing and subventing existing facilities. The voluntary sector will not cut it because this will lead to inequality. It relies in terms of the initiative on the voluntary sector itself. The Government states that if a group has a good plan, it will happily subvent it. I readily acknowledge that the EOCP has been good in subventing and assisting people with plans and initiative. Unfortunately, however, it is so often the case that the areas of greatest disadvantage and need, where the children need assistance and child care most, are the areas in which the gaps arise, not by accident but by virtue of social circumstances. Even now, we need to extend State provision by way of direct provision.

In terms of costs, there is a range of options. I am willing to consider possibilities which I would have been reluctant to consider some years ago. While not speaking for my party, there is some merit, for example, in the notion of a voucher system, in which people are provided with an entitlement to buy a certain amount of child care facilities. There is merit in this because it ensures the provision goes towards reducing the cost of child care and does not get lost in a family budget. However, I acknowledge that for it to work would require not only quality control but cost control.

I appreciate that I have just thrown out a couple of not very well linked ideas but this is an issue regarding which the Government has singularly failed in recent years. It has done so not simply because it has failed to deliver but because what it was trying to do in the first place was not adequate. I second the motion on behalf of the Labour Party.

Photo of Maurice CumminsMaurice Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A correction must be made to the text of amendment No. 1. The reference to €1.9 million should be €1.9 billion.

Photo of Tony KettTony Kett (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Seanad Eireann" and substitute the following:

"notes:

—the considerable progress which has been made in increasing the availability of quality and affordable child care places across the country through the equal opportunities child care programme and other Government initiatives;

—the provision of an additional 36,500 new child care places, as a result of funding allocated to date under the equal opportunities child care programme;

—the very significant increase in child benefit which is available to all parents of children under 16, and children under 19 if they are in full-time education, which affords choices to parents in relation to the care of their children;

—the fourfold increase since 1997 in child benefit expenditure, from €506 million to over €1.9 billion;

—the staffing grant assistance which is provided under the equal opportunities child care programme which aims to ensure that these grants target community-based not-for-profit groups which serve families who are disadvantaged;

and endorses this Government's ongoing commitment to

—the development of quality affordable child care to support parents in employment, education and training through the equal opportunities child care programme;

—the provision of considerable current funding support towards the staffing costs of child care services which support disadvantaged parents;

—the provision of early education opportunities for disadvantaged children through the Early Start and other initiatives under the direction of the Minister for Education and Science;

—the provision of enhanced arrangements for parental leave;

—the development of quality early education opportunities for children; and

—the use of child benefit as the most equitable way of giving support to parents towards the cost of rearing and caring for their children, irrespective of the family's employment status."

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to speak to the amendment. I utterly refute the implication of the Labour Party motion and welcome the opportunity to put on record the achievements of the Government in the development of quality child care and the support of families since it first came into office in 1997.

Senator O'Meara inadvertently spoke the truest words we will hear in this debate when she stated the Government's programme was coming from nothing, which is true. However, who was in Government when nothing was happening? It was Fine Gael and the Labour Party.

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should spare us. He can do better than that.

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is no point heckling. I listened politely to the Senator. She should listen to the facts, which are that nothing was done when the socialists were in power.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thought the socialists were still in power.

Photo of John Paul PhelanJohn Paul Phelan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The socialists are in charge.

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

From 1992 to 1997, no delivery or provision whatsoever was made in this area. It was a big black hole which the great social reformers failed to consider for one second. Now, Senator Derek McDowell in a de haut en bas tone states that the Government has failed in recent years. He should look in the mirror. Nothing was done when the Opposition had the opportunity. Now, Opposition Members complain about those who are doing something because it is not enough. This is good politics but very bad history.

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Can we have the real debate now?

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats entered Government in 1997, its first act was to establish the expert working group on child care. Its extensive report was the basis of the National Development Plan 2000-2006, which I am determined to implement and, more than that, surpass while I have ministerial responsibility in this matter.

The equal opportunities child care programme has an economic focus and a social inclusion focus. It helps to make available, at local level, centre-based child care at either break-even cost or subsidised cost, depending on family circumstances, to support the significantly increased numbers of women now in the labour market. Another amazing aspect of the success of the Government is that hundreds of thousands of women have been enabled to join the labour market in circumstances that did not apply in the past.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They are forced to work.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not correct.

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not believe anybody is forced to work. I will come back to this point presently.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The cost of mortgages forces them to work.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a choice.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not a choice for many women.

Photo of Maurice CumminsMaurice Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No interruptions, please. The Minister has the floor.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am surprised at Senator Terry. That opinion is very Fine Gael.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Senator White agrees with it. I have heard her say she would like more women to be at home.

Photo of Maurice CumminsMaurice Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Let the Minister speak without interruption, please.

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When the parties opposite were in office, there was such crippling taxation on ordinary families that the complaint was that there was no point in two spouses working because the State took everything off the poor spouse who joined the labour market and it was not worth his or her while. The situation has changed dramatically.

The Government originally made available €317.4 million, including €177 million in European Regional Development Fund and European Social Fund support, for the development of quality child care under the equal opportunities child care programme for the period of the present national development plan. Such has been the immediacy of the Government's response to the pressures to increase that funding that the amount set aside in the national development plan for the equal opportunities child care programme in this period has increased from €317 million to €499.3 million, an increase of 57% from the original allocation. In addition, the Government has made a firm commitment to provide ongoing funding following the conclusion of the national development plan.

The programme aimed originally to increase the number of centre-based child care places by 28,300, or 50%, by the end of the programme period. Funding allocated to date will lead to the creation of 36,500 new places and, most important, of these, 20,500 were already in place by June 2004, two years into the plan. These new places are located throughout the country, with a significant number in areas of urban and rural disadvantage and they serve to make centre-based child care services available at local level.

Last Friday, as Senator O'Meara acknowledged at the time in slightly less charitable tones than in this debate, I announced a major allocation of capital funding because my colleague, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, had made additional capital funding available to me in budget 2005. This brings to over €67 million the amount of large scale capital for community-based projects which I have announced to benefit over 70 capital projects since budget day last December.

The success of the equal opportunities child care programme is a testament to the work of the many community-based not-for-profit groups and private child care providers who responded to the State's invitation to develop quality child care services to meet local need. I expect to announce many further capital grants during this year to continue to build upon the dynamism of the community-based sector. In managing such a major investment programme, some delays are inevitable as projects must be subjected to thorough appraisal. It is also essential to manage appropriately the financial flows of Exchequer and EU funding.

I wish to deal with the issue of child benefit. To help all parents the Government parties in 1997, as part of their child care strategy, considered a number of strategic options. It was not a matter on which there was party division but there was a vigorous debate within Government as to which option was fairer or more socially just. One option was to put all the eggs in one basket and have a series of Government subsidies through the taxation system. However, this would not avail those not paying tax and, because of the tax reform policies of the parties in Government, the tax bills of many families are very low. The alternative view was to put the money directly into the pockets of families through child benefit.

I will repeat again, because it was worthwhile when we were dealing with the Labour Party motion, what has happened with regard to child benefit. Overall expenditure on child benefit has increased almost four times, from €506 million in 1997 to an estimated €1.916 billion, just short of €2 billion, in 2005. During this time, the minimum monthly rate per child has risen dramatically from €36.83, the rate which we inherited from the socially enlightened parties in this House, to €141.60 next month in 2005, a rise of 272%. When those who talk about supporting families with children had the opportunity — and God knows they lecture us about what a wonderful economy they handed over in 1997, how competent they were, how the place was booming, how everything was going swingingly — in 1997 they were giving some children child benefit of €36.83, or the equivalent of that, which is about €9 weekly.

These unprecedented increases make a significant contribution to all parents, not just those in employment, or those who choose centre-based child care. Income tax credits, on the other hand, would naturally only benefit those who pay income tax. Given the progress achieved by this Government in taking low-wage earners out of the tax net, tax credits would be of little or no benefit to the low paid, forgetting altogether about the unemployed. Refundable tax credits, as proposed by the Labour Party motion, would similarly be of no benefit to those parents whose child care needs are met by family members, or through other informal arrangements.

That is not to say that the tax system does not provide reliefs which help taxpaying parents. The Government provides relief through benefit-in-kind taxation, where employees have child care provided to them at a subsidised rate by their employers. In addition, the tax system treats many parents with dependent children very favourably through the one-parent family tax credit, the widowed parent tax credit, the incapacitated child tax credit and the home carer tax credit.

Individualisation was introduced to help those families and alleviate the tax burden on families where both parents went out to work. Such matters are forgotten about because individualisation got the attribute of being a bad thing even though the Irish Congress of Trade Unions had supported it vigorously up to the moment when it was introduced and it then abandoned it, at least as far as public debate was concerned.

The Government also fosters the development of private child care services through tax incentives available to investors and service providers. In other words, the tax system is being used. The Government has continued to develop early education to support disadvantaged children in their early years. The Early Start project has been established in 40 primary schools in designated areas of urban disadvantage in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Galway, Drogheda and Dundalk, making a total of 1,680 places in those centres available to give children from these areas special supports to prepare them for primary education.

I am the first to admit that we could and must do a lot more. I make no pretence otherwise. I admit that during the next general election the child care issue will be one of the battlegrounds on which the election is fought. I have no doubt about that. However, I ask people that when election time comes, and it will be some time yet as far as I can see, they remember who did something and who did nothing in this area. They should attach some credibility to the achievements of those who delivered, even coming from nothing, to use Senator O'Meara's phrase, compared to those who presided over nothing and did nothing in the area. Let us remember that fact.

There is a significant issue of supply to be considered by the body politic and I will be interested to see contending theories developing over the next while. Voucher systems, as canvassed admittedly in a sketchy way by Senator Derek McDowell, could, on their own, if there were no increase in supply, massively increase the cost of child care and be of very little incremental value in terms of social advancement.

There are other ways of looking at increasing child care. If I can, in the same sketchy way as did Senator McDowell, put forward one area where there must be political debate and a careful examination. There are many people who would supply child care services in an informal setting if we were to extend to them the same kind of taxation treatment as we did in income disregard for people who, for example, take lodgers into their homes. Currently, many people accommodate lodgers on an income disregard system because that was seen as one way of increasing supply of accommodation, of sharing it out and encouraging people to do so. If we are serious about increasing the supply of child care, an income disregard system would be well worth considering for those who would be in a position to supply it if it were not for the fact that they would lose social welfare entitlements or be heavily taxed.

I am not excluding the notion that in the future we might go down the road of special taxation treatment for child care expenditure but in that regard, two things must be borne in mind. Unless that system were run in a totally fair way it would tend to benefit the haves rather than the have nots. It may also have the effect of increasing the cost rather than the supply of child care places. We must, therefore, be careful of unintended consequences.

We are a society that has moved from nothing to something and we are implementing, ahead of target, a very worthwhile equal opportunity child care programme. Second, for the reasons I gave earlier, it is not true to say that the taxation system does not assist child care. Third, if as a society we are to commit further resources to the subsidy of child care we must be careful that the way in which we do that does not simply drive up its cost and not increase its supply. Measures directed at the creation of additional capacity are of more interest in the long term to most parents than measures which simply give them the illusion of getting some State help if the effect of that State scheme is to run up prices yet again with capacity not expanding to meet the demand.

I agree that many parents feel that the current burden of child care is a significant budgetary item. Anyone who disputed that would be living on another planet. What we need now are creative solutions to the problem, not old, hackneyed thinking taken down from the shelf. We will have a general election in two years' time and this will be a central issue. Proposals put before the electorate cannot be gimmicks. We cannot do what my good friend Garret FitzGerald once did, namely, propose that £9.60 be taken from the husband's wage packet and given to the wife. We cannot have solutions that rob Peter to pay Paul. We cannot introduce inflationary subsidies for child care which put it outside the reach of those least able to afford it and play into the hands of those who can most afford it. We must have a system based on the notion of increasing the supply of child care of adequate quality.

I am not suggesting that we have yellow pack child care or that we should have houses used as holding pens for children at cut-rate prices. Child care is hugely important in a child's potential development and its quality is all-important. In terms of equality, tackling disadvantage depends on delivering high quality child care.

I ask the House to adopt the Government amendment as it views matters in a fairer light. I also ask the House to note that Senator O'Meara's comment that this Government was "coming from nothing" says more about the party she represents than the Government of which I am part.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister to the House. I wish to share two minutes of my time with Senator John Phelan.

Photo of Maurice CumminsMaurice Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with the Minister that child care is a huge issue for working parents today and needs to be tackled. It is unfair of the Minister to pick on the observation made by Senator O'Meara that we are "coming from nothing". We do not need to remind the Minister that times have changed. Many more women and mothers work today than did in 1997. Although there were difficulties in 1997, many child care providers who were in business in 1997 have been obliged to go out of business since, as I was myself. I used to run a playschool at one time but with increased regulation and other complications that arose, like many other women I left the business. Services were more affordable in those days and most of the children who came to my playgroup were from homes in which only one person worked. Cost was not then such a major issue. The issue now is that child care costs rather than supply have increased in the meantime. The Minister was unfair to pick up on the point.

Many more women are in the workforce today and Ireland is close to the EU average of 56%, an increase of 140% since 1971. The number of women in the workforce is expected to grow by 218,000 by 2011. We have a rapidly changing society with a well educated workforce in which women tend to be as well educated as men. Some women wish to continue working while others want to spend more time at home. In a recent survey of parents, 62% of mothers and 86% of fathers stated they wanted to spend more time at home with their children. In 1997, in many cases, both parents were not obliged to go out to work. Today, however, the cost of a mortgage for young families dictates that both parents must work and a very high percentage of their income is spent on child care. Anything up to 32%, and sometimes more, goes on child care costs. If one combines that with the cost of a mortgage, some people have little disposable income left over.

I wish to draw Members' attention to some statistics from a report on the issue published by ICTU. It states that of approximately 500 respondents who took part in a survey, 25% had not applied for promotional opportunities because of child-minding responsibilities. Of those stating they had not applied for promotional opportunities for this reason, 90% were female. Other effects of child-minding responsibilities included leaving the labour force altogether for a period or moving out of an urban area due to child care costs.

All of us, probably the Minister included, accept that responsibility for child care still falls primarily on the mother. An increasing number of mothers avail of work practices that allow shorter working hours, be it flexi-time, shift work or job-sharing. As this survey demonstrated, mothers tend not to apply for promotional opportunities or leave the workforce altogether. There is a huge demand for supply. I do not agree with the Minister that child benefit is the best way to deal with child care costs. The money available in child care is very good. While the Government has failed in its promise concerning the amount of child care support that was to be paid out by 2005——

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not true.

Photo of John Paul PhelanJohn Paul Phelan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government has failed.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes it has. However, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Brennan informed this House yesterday that the Government will live up to its promise next year. There is no way that child benefit will pay for child care costs. I favour tax credits as a way of extending assistance for child care costs to more people. For example, if one takes a round figure cost of €100 per week, it actually costs most people nearly €200 to pay for it when one takes income tax into account. The provision of tax credits is a reasonable way to alleviate child care costs or extend child care facilities to a greater number of people. A method should be established to ensure that those on low incomes or who are unemployed can be provided with affordable child care facilities. We are all aware that the children of lone parents can live in greater poverty than children of employed parents. Therefore, it is important that child care is provided in the locality from an early age for them.

Although the equal opportunities child care programme is providing additional places, a danger exists that the funding may run out. The national development plan only runs for five years. What will happen to these crèches then? Increasing the supply is the answer and this will also keep down costs.

Photo of John Paul PhelanJohn Paul Phelan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with my colleague Senator Terry and support the Labour Party motion. A notion has crept into the debate that all couples where both partners are working do so voluntarily. This bears no resemblance to the truth. Many people with young children are forced to work because they have to pay huge mortgages. From time to time, the Government tries to wash its hands of the problem by saying that their decision to work is voluntary. However, this is not a voluntary decision for most families with young children and the Government should face up to that.

I am sure all Senators could outline different examples in their own constituencies of voluntary groups that have not received or are having difficulty receiving funding from the Department regarding the establishment of child care facilities. I can cite an example from Kells, a village which has undergone extensive development in the past few years, in my constituency in Kilkenny. A local voluntary committee in the village has raised €60,000 or €70,000 locally to establish a community resource centre, the main plank of which is to be a child care facility. In the past two or three years, all of the committee's applications for funding from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform for that child care facility have been refused. Yet before the end of 2004, it received a grant of €10,000 from the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs to provide kitchen and other facilities in the new building when it is built. That money will have to be handed back in June 2005 because, yet again, the committee has failed in its attempt to get funding for the child care aspect of the resource centre. That example could be replicated in most parts of the country. We all know of community groups like the one I have cited. These people come together voluntarily, give their time and see their efforts strangled mainly by an over-bureaucratic approach by the Department. Certainly, decisions are not properly explained. In many places, these groups end up dissolving in failure because of the obstacles they face. The attitude the Government has adopted here tonight is one that does not bear any resemblance to the situation on the ground. I would urge that a new approach be adopted by the Government.

Photo of Tony KettTony Kett (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister to the House. I wonder why we are again having this debate, having debated the issue two weeks ago. Having the debate again diminishes what has gone before because we had a very constructive debate previously.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Playing politics.

Photo of Tony KettTony Kett (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On that occasion, the Minister showed a great willingness to take on board the points of view expressed. I am at a loss because the Labour party has many good issues that it would wish to bring to the House during Private Members' business.

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This issue is a priority for us.

Photo of Tony KettTony Kett (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will this issue be a priority every fortnight?

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a priority now.

6:00 pm

Photo of Tony KettTony Kett (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister took up the point that we were coming from nothing and it reminded me of someone stopping to ask another person for instructions and that person saying to him or her "Well, I wouldn't start from here". It is necessary to start somewhere when dealing with something as important as this issue. This debate at least gives us the opportunity to congratulate the Minister on the additional €32.5 million he announced would be provided in child care grants since we last spoke on the issue. That announcement gives effect to the commitment given by the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Frank Fahey. We are also to have an increase of 2,500 places, which brings the total to 36,500. The equal opportunities child care programme committed itself to having 28,000 places by 2006. We have surpassed that figure and, as the Minister said, more than 21,000 of those were in place by 2004. While this may be the result of the equal opportunities child care programme, it was a programme that was agreed by both the Government and Europe. Even since the programme's inception, we have increased our commitment from €318 million to approximately €500 million and that will continue to the end of 2006. The Minister also stated before and again this evening that he intends to continue to support this endeavour after the current envelope of money runs out. I welcome his commitment.

There has been massive social and economic change in Ireland in the past 30 years. It was only in the mid-1970s that women began to remain in the workforce after marriage. The majority of them would have left the workforce after the birth of their first child. Only those women who were fortunate enough to have family members or neighbours to mind their children could remain in the workplace in those days. As the Minister said, we need to put in place a pre-education network where children are stimulated prior to going to school rather than dumped in day care. Children need stimulation in some kind of preschool setting. One speaker said that it is estimated that up to 220,000 children need pre-school education at any given time. We know now that more women are going back to work for a variety of reasons — training, education, etc.— which is also bringing about increased demand in this area. It is incumbent on us to make it possible for these women and these families to have choices because they women have contributed in no small way to the current economic situation. We all want these women to be able to continue in work so that the economy can continue to flourish.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about fathers?

Photo of Tony KettTony Kett (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have had the opportunity to work, now it is the mothers' turn. Despite the investment and successes of the EOCP, there is no doubt we still have a long way to go in the challenges that face both the development of child care and child care itself. The EU, under the Barcelona Summit, requires us to reach a specific ratio of child care places by the end of 2010. These targets differentiate between the younger child, in respect of whom there should be one place for every three children by 2010, and children requiring early education. Regarding early education, we must provide for 90% of children between the ages of three and the statutory schoolgoing age. I was struck when I read the document on the equal opportunities child care programme 2000-06 by the number of women who are now working as opposed to the number of women who were working in 1997. The figure has increased by 32%, from 588,707.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That proves Senator O'Meara's point.

Photo of Tony KettTony Kett (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It means that women are managing to go to work; they are not trapped at home because of this terrible Government. The number of women in full-time employment has increased by 32% and the number of women in part-time employment has increased by 33%. Women are making a massive contribution and childminding facilities are available. I accept there are too few of these facilities and perhaps they are not the right type in many cases. The document interestingly suggested that the total number of women who considered themselves underemployed had declined from 13,000 in 1997 to 1,900 in 2002. That suggests that maybe more women are leaning towards part-time employment. One can be in no doubt about this if the financial aspects are considered. I examined this issue with a young lady who has left full-time employment for part-time employment. She told me her joint salary with her husband fell by €300 by virtue of going half-time but that her child care costs were reduced from €1,100 to €730. This constitutes a net gain of €70 and carries with it the benefit of an additional two and a half days with her child per week. A part-time scenario can be equally as beneficial to women. I welcome the manner in which the Government is addressing this issue and I acknowledge Senator O'Meara's statement on how far there is left to go. However, we are going in the right direction.

Photo of Feargal QuinnFeargal Quinn (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister. I cannot agree with Senator Kett that this issue should not have been raised again so soon after the previous discussion on it because I have learned something today. For instance, the Minister told us that the problem is not solved by pumping more money into this if the supply and demand situation is such that the price goes up. I also learned that child benefit is the most equitable way of giving support to parents. These are interesting debates but I cannot agree with the Minister for the same reason put forward by Senator Kett in his criticism of Senator O'Meara's statement on the situation in 1997. The demand that exists today did not exist in 1997. In less than a decade the social structure of the country has changed, a change to which we have not yet adapted. I welcome the debate because an effort is being made.

One means of adapting is by providing universal child care. In France, where working mothers have been the norm for generations, we can get a taste of how we could adapt. Any French person looking at Ireland would find it incredible that such a situation would be allowed to exist. Public schooling starts there at the age of two years and the first four years take place in what they call the maternelle. This is more of a kindergarten than a real school as we know it but regardless of whether they attend a maternelle or a school for older children, the youngsters are first delivered to a garderie. This is a childminding service that looks after children before and after school hours and also takes them to and from the school. As such, a parent can leave his or her child at the garderie on his or her way to work and collect the child on the way back in every commune. This could be as much as 12 hours later. It is a universal, low-cost service.

The challenge is putting this into operation in Ireland without supply and demand creating other problems, but it remains an example of how we should adapt now that working mothers have become the norm since 1997. Putting in place such a system would certainly be expensive but this is not a reason for refusing to bite the bullet. We have adopted one aspect of a new society while trying to escape from its inevitable consequences. The result is untold misery for parents and we can only guess what consequences there will be for their children in the future.

We need, therefore, a national child care system. More is required besides this, such as making it easier for mothers to reject the new norm if they so wish. Money is the key. Most working mothers of young children do not work by choice but have no other economic option, as we heard previously from Senator Terry. It should not be beyond the wit of our ingenious banks to devise a special parents' mortgages scheme. This would allow house owners a special holiday period of up to ten years, for example, in which their mortgage payments would be drastically reduced if one of the parents was not working. The repayments would be rebalanced so that the house owner would pay more later, as I am not suggesting that the banks should do this out of charity. If the banks charged less in the case of a working mother who stopped working to look after her young children, the State could row in with a special tax allowance that would reduce her outgoings even further. Between the banks and the State, the financial position of young families could be transformed overnight.

Such an arrangement would not suit everyone, as not everybody is in the position of paying a mortgage. However, it would provide an option to many people who currently have no choice as to whether they go to work or stay at home to look after their young children. I urge that we look closely at creating this choice as a creative way of responding to the new situation we have created in our society. There was not a need for this seven or eight years ago but there is a need now. We must be innovative in our thinking and I propose this as an option for consideration. It would require a joint effort by the banks and the State and it would be good business rather than charity.

Before I became a Senator I was approached with the problem that when children are growing up is the time when young parents need money, yet the mortgage is at its highest then despite being spread over many years. They do not need the same amount of money when they enter their 50s and 60s but must not make the same mortgage repayments. The ideal way of addressing this is to rebalance the repayments, particularly if child care is taken into account. I urge the Government to consider this. May I share my time with Senator Norris?

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Senator Quinn for this opportunity to make a small contribution to this debate. I admire his handling of the subject because, unlike the tweedledum and tweedledee of the Government and the Opposition, he did not spend time in carping negative comments and tried to put forward a sensible and practical suggestion that addresses the real social situation. The House should always operate in this fashion. I find myself in a difficult situation because I would prefer to abstain on this issue and say "a pox on both your houses". However, I must vote one way or the other.

Senator Quinn raised the subject of change. The moment I saw the figure of €800 per month I thought of how things have changed and the rocketing price of houses immediately came to mind. I agree with the Senator that the crippling burden of mortgages is something that is driving women who do not necessarily all want to work. I am in favour of choice. Young women should have the choice to go out to work if they want but being a full-time mother is a reasonable, decent, professional and multifarious occupation. It is not right that people are squeezed in this way. The Government should listen carefully to Senator Quinn.

The motion and amendment reflect the way in society has radically changed. One issue I will raise again falls under the umbrella of securing child care and its enormous costs. Senator Maurice Hayes referred to an issue I raised on 8 March 2005 and I ask the Minister to examine the case of the four autistic children without prejudging it. Their parents have tried for a long time to get access to services for them. I know it is difficult. Four our five years ago I did battle in this House on an Adjournment matter regarding the parents of two autistic children who had access to some services, including speech therapy. These services were withdrawn because of a bureaucratic redrawing of boundaries and the parents had the awful and tragic experience of watching their children regressing. If autistic children are not constantly kept up to the mark, they tend to go backwards, particularly if they are at a certain stage of development. We fought to get something done in the past and Senator Ross has raised the issue of autistic children repeatedly.

This debate is extraordinary. Senator Maurice Hayes dealt with the matter in an economic setting, claiming that it would cost €500 to keep a child in care. I would have thought the figure to be €800 or €1,000. He made the point that if this money were given to the parents they could look after their children much better. The sequence of events worries me. I have personal experience of Ireland's child care services, though not as a parent. In other circumstances I have been involved directly in regard to the welfare of children and their parents. I found the service providers to be caring, professional and competent. I have also found them to be arrogant, bullying and ignorant. They are more interested in their status than the welfare of the child. I have had direct experience of this.

I am bewildered. I do not know whether in this situation we are meeting the arrogant, bullying face or the caring, professional, competent face of the authorities. We, as legislators, should know which, because the sequence of events is so worrying. These parents dealt with the child care people for 18 months. They then went on radio to publicise their plight, as was their right. Within a matter of days their children had been taken from them. Within a week they had been required to undergo psychiatric assessment, despite the fact this had been done within the previous year and they had received a report saying they were perfectly all right. This is terribly worrying and we would be negligent if we did not draw it to the attention of the relevant Department and seek to ensure agreement, as framed in this motion by both sides of the House. Despite their spats, I believe both are interested in the welfare of the child.

I am glad to have had the opportunity to draw attention to this matter. I am not for one side or the other. I do not say these are dreadful, malign people, but suggest that the matter should be examined.

John Minihan (Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Tim O'Malley, to the House and welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion. No politician can be blind to the ever-growing demand for quality child care. If proof of the demand was needed, one need only have spent time on the doorsteps of Kildare North or Meath where this issue was raised many times in recent weeks.

The cost and availability of quality child care has become a major issue for many families. Often couples in search of affordable housing are forced to live many miles from their kith and kin and far from the traditional support structures that existed in the past. Those with large mortgages frequently delay starting a family because of the extra financial strain child care would put on them. The question for other couples is often whether one or both should change their work pattern to provide child care for the family.

By raising this issue, the Labour Party has, like any Opposition, rushed to oppose Government regardless of its achievements. The Labour Party has turned a blind eye to the achievements of the Government in the area of pre-school child care. The Government and its predecessor have made a greater commitment to the child care sector through the equal opportunities child care programme than any of their predecessors. The Government is committed to spending at least €499 million on this programme by 2007. Even then, investment in our children will not stop. The most recent budget brought a commitment from Government to a further increase in capital funding under the next phase of the equal opportunities child care programme which will start officially in 2007. The funding allocated to date has resulted in the creation of some 36,500 new child care places.

The Government's commitment does not stop there. The equal opportunities child care programme aims to create quality child care places. The issue of quality is linked to training, education and professional development. In 2002 the national coordinating child care committee, established under the auspices of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, published the document A Model Framework for Education, Training and Professional Development in the Early Childhood Care and Education Sector. That document sets out clear guidelines for professional development through child care education and training. This document now forms a keystone in the thought process of the Department as it works to ensure the well being of all children in early childhood care and education.

The Government has done, and will continue to do, more than any of its predecessors. To argue otherwise is disingenuous. However, there is one area in which it must do better, namely, the provision of child care for school-age children. While the equal opportunities child care programme has been a boon for parents seeking facilities for pre-school children, those same parents are faced with a dilemma when their children start school. Unless they already have an established child minder, the prospects of finding child care for five years or more are slim. Faced with this problem, many parents, in particular women, are forced to put their careers on hold, perhaps for a period of ten or more years.

There are approximately 800,000 women in the workforce. They should be given every opportunity to develop their careers safe in the knowledge that their children's care is provided for in an environment where stimulating leisure activities are the norm. The provision of these activities, whether before or after school or during the holidays, is vital to the success of any child care scheme for school-age children.

The Minister of State is probably familiar with an example of such a scheme, the Milford After-School Facility, Castletroy, County Limerick. This was built with the aid of a capital grant of €250,000 in 2002. It caters for 40 school-age children providing them with a range of classes and activities, including speech and drama, supervised homework, arts and crafts and French language lessons. While the facility is primarily used by the students and staff of the University of Limerick, with children attending the Milford national school, surplus places are available to parents of other children living in the area.

With over 3,000 primary and 750 secondary schools in the State, all of which are largely under utilised outside of normal school hours, we have the means to provide facilities for school-age children. All that is required is the will, which, unfortunately, is lacking in some quarters. In 2003, the national child care coordinating committee made a number of recommendations covering all aspects of school-age child care. A number of those recommendations directly addressed the issue of the use of school property. Unfortunately, the use of school premises is a matter for the patrons and the managing authorities of the schools. I understand that despite its best efforts, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has failed to engage the interests of the school management authorities. This is unfortunate as there are many benefits to be derived for local communities through the use of school premises as school-age child care facilities.

The future of child care here lies in the provision of high quality facilities that offer a development programme of activities. In addition, such facilities could help foster, for example, healthy eating habits through the provision of nutritious meals to the children in their care.

I commend the Minister and his staff on the work they have undertaken through the equal opportunities child care programme and urge them to redouble their efforts to persuade school management authorities of the benefits of participating in out of school hours child care. I support the Government amendment to this motion because it is a fairer representation of the situation and of how we should proceed.

Photo of Michael McCarthyMichael McCarthy (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This important debate has been given added impetus as a result of the forthcoming by-elections in Meath and Kildare North. Child care is one of the main issues debated on the doorsteps with politicians of all hues.

A number of comparisons have been made between the situation now and in 1997. This comparison does not compare like with like. Much has happened in the past eight years, not least that in budgetary terms we have a budgetary surplus of billions now whereas in 1997 it was just £15 million. The revenue and opportunity exist now to do something constructive and proactive in terms of child care.

In recent years we also had a largely unused resource in our economy, namely, the number of skilled and professional women not actively participating in the economy. Now these women are part of our economy and in no small way have led the drive and dynamic in this context. It is a major issue when the data available to us to make informed decisions are considered. RecruitIreland conducted a survey recently, which revealed one third of all parents expend between €600 and €900 a month on child care. That is a frightening figure, which is similar to the amount paid by young couples on mortgage repayments every month. The average price of a three bed semi-detached house is €320,000 and mortgage repayments for people who buy these houses is equal to child care payment. That demonstrates the extent of the child care problem. Irish women have more children than their European counterparts. However, child care facilities in Ireland lag well behind European countries. The Government has a poor record on the provision of child care places and the cost of available places is a significant issue.

The National and Economic Social Council's draft report asserts that the average cost of sending a child to a crèche represents 20% of earnings, which demonstrates the difficulty faced by people meeting the cost of child care. Little has been done by in recent times. While I will not pre-empt the results of the upcoming by-elections, hopefully, an extrapolation of the results will lead the Government to seriously examine the issue and do something meaningful and proactive.

My party has done a great deal of research in this area, particularly through my colleague, Senator O'Meara, who ensured the issue is debated. Improvements should be made in a number of areas. For example, parental leave should be addressed because it is currently a token gesture. It should be meaningful and realistic and a system should be developed to afford both parents a period not exceeding 12 months to spend with their child during a constructive and important phase in their lives. Many developments to support employees have emanated from directives issued by Brussels. While that is not necessarily bad, we should be proactive in pursuing a strategy to benefit working parents rather than reacting to such directives. We are well aware of what child care facilities are not provided but the State must pursue a system that can provide child care at a reasonable cost. Senator Minihan proposed the use of schools when classes have been completed. The Labour Party supports the introduction of a tax refund so that families whose incomes are low can receive direct payments in lieu of a tax credit.

A number of issues need to be examined. While I welcome the debate, I hope action will be taken because recent analysis and opinion polls highlight that child care is the main issue exercising the minds of many people. It is not fair to compare 2005 with 1997 because economic activity, budget surpluses and child care demand are completely different. I hope the Government will take a proactive and positive lead on this issue as a result of the debate.

Margaret Cox (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

While debating child care two weeks after a similar debate is welcome, and I am delighted Senator O'Meara tabled the motion, the sad aspect of Private Members' motions is the issues become political footballs. It is important for us once and for all to say our children and the future of child care will not be a political football. Perhaps I am naive, foolish and stupid but looking after our children and the future of the country is the most important element of our jobs. It does not matter which side of the divide we are on because each of us has an equal responsibility to do our best in this area.

I regret the political point scoring earlier in the debate for that reason. I was sitting in my office and I will not repeat the words I uttered when I heard a number of the comments made. I was upset and annoyed. It is not fair to measure provision now against that a few years ago. This is a different era but a great deal has been done. The Minister of State is correct that child benefit has increased fourfold and quality services have been provided, including 20,000 new places with 16,000 under construction. However, a line needs to be drawn in the sand because a sea change has taken place in recent weeks following the publication of accounts of Cabinet discussions. If the information is emerging because of the by-elections, I am delighted.

We have been talking about this issue for the past number of years and are sick of listening to ourselves. However, Ministers are beginning to listen. It was interesting that the Minister for Social and Family Affairs acknowledged yesterday that child benefit was not the solution the Government thought it would be. Child benefit and the equal opportunities child care programme are fantastic but they are not solving the problem. This has been admitted and it is like attending AA and saying, "My name is Margaret Cox. I am a Fianna Fáil politician and we still have not solved child care". That is a major relief and we can begin to do something.

Recently, the Minister of Justice, Equality and Law Reform mentioned payments to people looking after children in their homes and I can claim a little credit for raising this issue in the House. The payment for child care should be disregarded, as this gives recognition to the value of the work being done by the person looking after children in the home. Caring for children should be on a par with renting a room in terms of reliefs. I am delighted the ball is beginning to roll.

I am also delighted the Minister for Social and Family Affairs referred to the need for a two-tier child benefits system to address the child care needs of the disadvantaged while also recognising the universality of child benefit and the importance of not touching it. The cost of child care is a complex issue, which needs complex solutions. During the last debate on this issue, Senator Henry referred to child care provision in France while Senator Browne made a similar reference earlier. I am horrified at the prospect of putting my two year old on a bus to a large school to be looked after, no matter how nice are the carers. The French model is not the answer. A number of the issues may be addressed and an improvement would be wonderful. However, let us not reach a point where two and three year old children are put on buses to attend a nursery before taking up child care places. That is not the Ireland of 2005 and, if it is, I do not want it. I want to go home and forget about the Celtic tiger. I want to give my children the same upbringing all of us were lucky to have.

There are lessons to be learned from other countries but not every idea should be taken on board. Perhaps I might go back and put on the record of this House once again my view that parental leave is very beneficial, but it must be paid leave. We must put it on the agenda now. We can forget about it if we are not going to introduce paid leave in some form within the next two years, as it will be of no benefit to anyone.

We are also talking about solutions. People mentioned part-time work. I wish they would stop talking about "mothers" and start talking about "parents". I am sick and tired of "the mothers"; I want it to be "the parents". It is as much the father's responsibility as that of the mother. We need part-time work, job sharing and incentives directed in particular at smaller organisations to facilitate their putting such options and incentives in place. We must acknowledge the difference it makes to families — mums and dads, whichever of them chooses to stay at home.

We cannot allow for periods of parental leave for one year without an economy that sustains it. Senator McCarthy is right that we may need it for a year for everyone, but we must have an economy that matches and provides for the cost. An economy that provides for such benefits or choices must be strong. For that to happen, we must protect the small and medium-sized businesses about which we talked. In the Small Firms Association magazine, Running Your Business, there is an article by Pat Delaney reviewing the last ten years. Perhaps I might quote one paragraph. It states:

There is little point in having a world class economic model if our social model cannot keep pace. Our work life balance must not be further skewed because of an under supply of suitable, affordable childcare provision, traffic congestion, inadequate health and education systems. The availability of high quality, flexible and affordable childcare must be given equal priority as the improvements of hard infrastructure such as roads and public transport. Lack of choice in childcare provision and childcare costs remains one of the most significant barriers to female participation in the labour market.

I would also like to quote from another article from Equality News regarding a study carried out in four countries on the work-life balance of parents. It addresses the issue of creating a more favourable work environment. The article states:

Attitudes towards working parents who availed of work-family programmes were also explored. In relation to Ireland, relatively speaking, there were more negative perceptions towards people who participate in family friendly programmes. Both men and women who worked part-time or job shared were seen as less serious about their career, but this feeling was stronger vis-À-vis men. There is also a greater sense of pressure on employees in Ireland to work over and above normal hours to get ahead, adding to problems in achieving work-life balance. In this climate, it will be more difficult to promote family friendly working arrangements and a greater share of gender roles unless there is attitude change.

That is our responsibility — the soft, fluffy stuff. There must be an overall, global approach from the Departments of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Health and Children, and Education and Science.

Photo of James BannonJames Bannon (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I too welcome the Minister to the House to debate the issue of child care. Being a parent and working are as compatible in this country as mixing oil with water. I would be the first to recognise that some progress has been made in the provision of funding for essential child care services. I was also delighted at the boost for such facilities in my own county of Longford. I was involved in achieving these improvements through Adjournment motions in this House and, privately, through dealing with officials in the Department from time to time.

Granard and Legan received this funding under the equal opportunities programme last week, and I acknowledge the professionalism of those dealing with the issue in the Minister's office. I have an interest in the Legan child care committee, being a member of the board. I am also conscious of the plight of communities where no such help has been forthcoming. Before last week's announcement, Longford had nine separate communities awaiting news of grant-aid for child care in their areas.

As I said, Granard and Legan received funding. However, the other seven areas are still waiting for funding to provide parents with the hope that both partners might be able to join the workforce. These areas are Edgeworthstown, Drumlish, Ballinamuck, Ballinalee, Killoe, Newtownforbes and Newtowncashel. In a cruel blow to their hopes, we now hear that there is a real threat that the Government may withdraw the staffing grant assistance which is currently provided under the equal opportunities child care programme to community-based, non-profit child care centres. That would be completely at odds with the stated objectives of the programme. I hope the Minister is here this evening to assure us that this is not the case. I ask him to imagine the consequences of such an action. Already scare facilities will be forced to close, and hard-pressed parents, struggling to manage the demands of work and home, will be faced with unrealistic choices.

The Taoiseach has been quoted as saying it is not the Government's position to reduce or close child care places but rather to create more. Does that tie in with the threat of closing facilities? I do not think so. Such a serious issue should not become a political football or another broken promise. What could be just another cost-cutting measure for the Minister and his Department would be the end of lifestyle choices for many, not all of whom choose to work but are forced to do so by financial necessity.

The Taoiseach also said that child care costs €800 to €900 per month. We in the Opposition would not dispute that figure, but we object to the Government's blatant attempt to ignore it and withdraw such necessary funding. I commend the excellent work done by so many in my area to provide low-cost child care for all. However, times are catching up with them, and costs are rising. Such changes jeopardise the continued provision of these facilities. For many people child care costs more than mortgage repayments, as pointed out by several Senators present this evening.

Providing tax credits for vouched child care is an obvious measure. It is imperative that the Government introduces tax credits for child care to go some way towards easing the burden and allow more women to enter the workforce. Such participation by women has been recommended in an OECD report on how richer countries can increase economic growth. The gap between the 30 developed economies of the OECD has widened, with output per person in the US now 30% higher than that in Germany and France. The differences will increase unless EU countries in particular improve their performance. If the image of parents chasing elusive and costly child care for their own financial ends does not persuade the Government to do everything in its power to extend child care places and facilities, the more persuasive argument of the economic growth of the country will stir it into action.

We all know that marginalised parents of school-going children would benefit greatly from the support of after-school services and that such services would allow them to avail of employment or educational opportunities that might otherwise not be available to them. Hard-working groups providing both full child care facilities and after-school care have shown unstinting care and dedication throughout the country over the years. It is now up to the Government to provide the funding. I am glad that two programmes of funding have been announced in the past three months. One hopes that more funding will be brought on board. As we know, in the BMW region, which I represent, there is a great underspend of funding in the area, something acknowledged in the BMW mid-term review. This issue must be examined by the Department to ensure that there is the necessary uptake.

On another issue, it was in the public domain for some time that the Minister would make an official announcement last Friday on successful applications but it was very disheartening to hear some Deputies make those announcements on radio one or two days before the official announcement. It happened in my county and in Wexford, Waterford and elsewhere. This showed great discourtesy to the Minister and his officials. The official announcement on funding was a non-event because those Deputies indicated what the Minister intended to announce on a particular day. That matter should be examined. We all talk about transparency, as does the Government, but I wonder if that happens all the time.

Photo of Ann OrmondeAnn Ormonde (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will not use up all the time available to me because I listened at length to the debate on the previous occasion. I welcome the Minister of State to the House and the opportunity to record my views on the motion. I thank the Senators opposite for giving Members on this side of the House——

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Senator is very welcome.

Photo of Ann OrmondeAnn Ormonde (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——and the Government the opportunity to drive home the message that we are not reactive but proactive in our approach to this issue. The proof of that was contained in the Minister's contribution. Those are facts. There are many schools of thought on this issue, even within the ranks of the Senators opposite, as to whether this should be approached by way of child benefit or tax credit. That question is asked even within our ranks. Nobody has the absolute approach, neither the Government nor the Opposition, and no one should take credit for this issue. As Senator Cox said earlier, no one should play politics with it because none of us wants that for our children.

Tonight we are discussing how best we can get quality child care at affordable cost. We may not have it yet but a welcome aspect of the Government's policy is that it wants a community-oriented child care service, not the very large crèches where the children appear to be like robots. I might not have experience of child care but I know something about child development from a child psychologist's point of view. There is nothing I dislike more than to see ten, 15 or 20 babies sitting in front of tutors who are giving them mass training in when to sit up and when to sit down instead of dealing with them one to one. I did not get that type child care when I was growing up but I think I did very well out of the care I received. We did not have this so-called marvellous tutor system to tell us what to do when we were one and two years of age.

Small is beautiful. We should have crèches with three or four properly trained adults in a house or in a community facility. I welcome the opportunity of providing training to people in the community who would love to get back into the system and take on that role.

For the past three weeks I have been out canvassing in the afternoons and I have never seen so many empty houses. I hate to think the future of Ireland will consist of factory oriented places with children in crèches and all the parents working. I realise that is the knock-on effect of the Celtic tiger but I worry about our future.

Photo of James BannonJames Bannon (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is the Senator worrying under Fianna Fáil?

Photo of Ann OrmondeAnn Ormonde (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No. It is a knock-on effect of the Celtic tiger.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Celtic tigresses.

Photo of Ann OrmondeAnn Ormonde (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It has been acknowledged that we want a community-oriented service and I welcome the fact that this was reflected in the Minister's contribution this evening.

In terms of education, the Minister has also thought about co-ordination between the Departments of Education and Science and Justice, Equality and Law Reform because many young people would like to have this training in this area. We have the Early Start and Breaking the Cycle programmes. I would like to see these policies implemented but it is the children of six months to two years about whom I worry most. I would like to see some programmes introduced, and I am aware the Minister is thinking about this area in terms of flexi-time, allowing mothers to stay at home and providing a quality child care service in a community. Such an approach, which the Minister referred to it in his contribution, would be very welcome.

This is a golden opportunity to drive home the message that we should not play politics with this issue but consider how best to provide a quality child care service to the children of the future. That is what we should be talking about and we should be all singing the same tune. There are many in the other House who have a different opinion to those of Members who spoke here tonight but at the end of the day we must introduce what we believe is the best policy, and what the Minister said here this evening reflects that.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House this evening. It is a pity the Minister, Deputy Michael McDowell, did not remain in the Chamber because as we all know the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is the main driver of child care policy. I am not casting aspersions on the Minister of State but I would have preferred if the senior Minister had remained in the House for the debate. I do not want to be personal but if we were debating a legal or justice issue he would have remained.

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Senator, the Minister, Deputy McDowell, was here earlier and made a contribution.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I know. I have been here for the full debate.

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate that.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am saying he did not remain for the full debate.

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Senator should continue.

Photo of James BannonJames Bannon (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He is not here to hear Senator White's contribution.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He did not hear what the other Members had to say.

Photo of James BannonJames Bannon (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Senator's contribution is very important and the senior Minister should be in the House to hear it.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not being personal about the Minister but I am entitled to make my comments.

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have a responsibility too.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is the main driver of child care policy for the Government and it is important that the senior Minister is here for this debate. If we were debating a criminal, justice or legal issue he would have remained in the Chamber. My experience is that he remains in the Chamber for the full debate, and I have nothing against the Minister of State.

I admire Senator Terry. She revealed another string to her bow this evening when she said she was involved in child care. That is another of her assets. I am a great admirer of Senator Terry and I do not wish to be personal in making that remark.

I have occasional contretemps with Senator O'Meara but she was right to put this issue back on the agenda because it is currently the subject of major discussion. It was even discussed on the radio today. There is a feeling of helplessness among parents about the child care issue.

I have been studying the issue of child care for the past six months. In November I had the privilege of presenting to the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party, the Government party, my view on the state of child care in the country, and I got great support at the meeting. I could not say I got an ovation — I do not want to exaggerate — but I had been engaged in a detailed project for six months with other Fianna Fáil colleagues including Councillor Julia Carmichael, Dr. Orla McCarthy, a doctor of electronic engineering, and Niamh Cooper. We compiled this document together. We also met the Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen. I am sure Senators will agree the report was a major bonus to the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party.

I hold in my hand a small sample of the studies that have been done on child care.

Photo of James BannonJames Bannon (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has the Senator passed details of them on to the Minister?

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The studies to which I refer are the national child care strategy, the national children's strategy entitled Our Children — Their Lives, the national action plan against poverty and social exclusion implementation plan, the White Paper on Early Childhood Education — Ready to Learn — and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform's strategic statement. These are technical documents written by professionals involved in the area of child care. Last week, the OECD produced a report, Economic Policy Reforms: Going for Growth, in which the issue of child care in Ireland is examined. The Government has, therefore, been provided with a massive amount of documents and advice in respect of child care.

As part of my research, I visited crèches early in the morning when they were in the process of opening. Contrary to what Senator Ormonde stated, I was amazed by what I discovered. Perhaps I only visited the crème de la crème of these crèches but the children there receive wonderful intellectual stimulation and learn great social skills. I was an extremely shy person for many years.

Photo of James BannonJames Bannon (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Senator is still shy.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Social skills are different to those one uses to support one's opinion. Senator Terry — I hope she will support me on this — knows what I am talking about.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Senator is doing fine on her own.

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Senator White, without interruption.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The children learn great social skills by mixing with other children and receive intellectual stimulation. I saw children aged 18 months who are learning to paint.

I have first-hand experience of this matter from visiting crèches and meeting parents and those who own these crèches. I held a public meeting on 27 February in Baggot Street which was packed out. As this poster shows, I intend to hold a further meeting on Tuesday, 5 April in the Ringsend and Irishtown community centre.

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not permitted to display advertisements, promotions or posters in the House.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I apologise. I did not realise that was the case.

The meeting to which I refer is designed to help evolve my proposals on child care. Those proposals are not carved in stone because it is dangerous, in political terms, to carve anything in stone. I met people who informed me about the draconian regulations which have been set down and to which Senator Terry referred. These regulations are preventing people from entering the child care area. It is extremely expensive to run a crèche.

Myriad documents have been presented to Government in respect of this issue. In that context, there are 11 Departments which deal with child care and family issues. These include the Departments of Finance, the Taoiseach, Education and Science, Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I wish to call for a co-ordinated Government approach on child care——

Photo of Brian HayesBrian Hayes (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hear, hear.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——and the establishment of a Department of children and the family. The approach suggest would remove responsibility for child care and family issues from the 11 Departments to which I refer. The bottom line is that every child, rich or poor, born in this country should have an equal chance. During my research I discovered that the parents of economically disadvantaged children cannot afford to send them to the crèches I visited.

There has been only one successful co-ordinated approach taken by Government in recent years. I refer here to that initiated by Mr. Haughey in respect of the Irish Financial Services Centre. The Secretaries General of the various Departments were brought together in respect of that matter and made to co-operate with each other. We must establish should an approach under a Department of Children and the family and ensure that child care policy is child oriented.

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am obliged at this stage to call on Senator O'Meara to reply to the debate.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will conclude. Increasing child benefit is not the way to provide for people's child care needs. One of the main points raised in the documents I listed earlier is that tax relief is one of the key instruments that should be used. The proposals I put forward do not exclude——

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a pity the Minister is not present to hear the Senator say that.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, I am disappointed that he is not here. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform drives policy in this area and the Minister should be present.

Paying people €35.40 per week in the form of child benefit when a crèche place costs approximately €1,000 per month is not the way to proceed. Being obliged to pay €1,200 per month to place two children in child care is the equivalent of paying a mortgage of €240,000. In effect, people are paying second mortgages in respect of which they do not receive tax relief.

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Senator White for her contribution. By an order of the House, I am obliged to call Senator O'Meara.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thought the debate was to conclude at 7.15 p.m.

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is due to conclude at 7 p.m. In any event, the Senator's time was exhausted. I call Senator O'Meara.

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank all Senators who contributed to the debate. I make no apologies for bringing forward this motion only two weeks after our debate on the equal opportunities child care programme to which the Leader was good enough to concede at my request.

Senators Terry, Cox, White and I have spoken about this matter on various occasions in recent years. However, we seem to have made a breakthrough in the debate. We and those involved in the child care industry believe we are finally being heard. In that regard, I wish to refer to those who work in that industry in the context of correspondence I received today. I understand that the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, appeared on the recent "Prime Time" programme that dealt with the issue of child care. Unfortunately, he left viewers and those in the industry with the impression that he believes it is acceptable that child care employees should be on the minimum wage. That is indicative of how we regard child care. I hope the Minister of State will clarify his remarks. However, I also hope what he said will initiate a debate on how we should reward, in economic terms, those who carry out the important job of caring for our children. That is one of the myriad issues which need to be considered and tackled and brought to the forefront in terms of our policy agenda. The Labour Party is placing child care at the top of its list of priorities going forward.

As regards the comments of the Minister, Deputy Michael McDowell, I was being totally honest when I said that, in terms of Government spending on child care, it has been a case of our coming from nothing. Why is that the case? There are two main reasons. The first of these, as Senator McCarthy pointed out, is that the economic position in 1997 was very different to that which obtains now. At that time we were increasing child benefit by a substantial amount relative to the standards that then existed. We had a budget surplus of €15 million in 1996. That surplus is now counted in billions and the country is much changed.

The second reason relates to the fact that Ireland is now a different country. The latter is the case because, on foot of our economic prosperity, so many people are at work. That economic prosperity has created the demand for child care. It is not accident that every week without fail The Sunday Business Post comments on child care. It has become an economic issue and the Government must sit up and pay attention to it.

The participation of women in the workforce has been one of the drivers of our economic expansion.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hear, hear.

7:00 pm

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In the past, women were an under-used resource in our economy. I am glad that they now have the choice as to whether they wish to be at work. Most women choose to be at work. We did not strive to be educated so well and then not use that education to some end. However, there are times in our lives, as mothers and parents, when we want to spend more time at home with our children. We do not want to leave small children, in particular, in someone else's care for long hours each day or have very little time to see them. This is what generally happens to people who live in the commuter belts. That is their experience and it is no way to live in terms of quality of life, work balance and time management. Unlike Senator Ormonde, when I was canvassing in Kildare North I met many women who opted to go home to mind their children. They did this not only because of cost but because they also wanted to fulfil their desires and responsibilities as parents.

Senator Cox spoke about parental leave, paying for parental leave and how we need to be economically buoyant. Evidence shows that if paid parental leave existed, we would benefit economically as it keeps women in the workforce. If parental leave was paid for the first year of the child's life, there is a far greater likelihood that women will return to the workforce. That has been shown in different studies. The Government will also benefit as the women who returns to the work force will continue to pay tax.

I agree with the Minister when he states that we have to be very careful about what we put in place in the next few years. We want to put measures in place which support families, communities and the economy. We have to be careful when we look at tax credits, taxation measures, vouchers and so on. They have an impact on those who are receiving the benefits and on industry.

The income disregard system has been part of our policy since 2002. One of the big advantages of that system for those who are in the informal network is that it brings them into the formal economy. It is also of great benefit to those who are running those facilities as they are recognised by the social welfare system and their hard work will be rewarded with a pension later in life.

I welcome this debate. It will not stop here as I believe we have only started. I am determined to keep this issue on the agenda, as are others in the House. We should ensure that it is a priority policy for every political party and I commend Senator White in her work in that respect. The only way to be heard is to demand to be heard. On this particular issue, it is extremely important to do so.

Amendment put.

The Dail Divided:

For the motion: 24 (Michael Brennan, Margaret Cox, Brendan Daly, John Dardis, Timmy Dooley, Geraldine Feeney, Liam Fitzgerald, Camillus Glynn, John Gerard Hanafin, Brendan Kenneally, Tony Kett, Terry Leyden, Don Lydon, Marc MacSharry, Martin Mansergh, John Minihan, Paschal Mooney, Pat Moylan, Labhrás Ó Murchú, Mary O'Rourke, Ann Ormonde, Eamon Scanlon, Mary White, Diarmuid Wilson)

Against the motion: 16 (James Bannon, Paul Bradford, Fergal Browne, Noel Coonan, Maurice Cummins, Frank Feighan, Michael Finucane, Brian Hayes, Mary Henry, Michael McCarthy, Derek McDowell, Joe McHugh, David Norris, Kathleen O'Meara, Shane Ross, Sheila Terry)

Tellers: Tá, Senators Minihan and Moylan; Níl, Senators McCarthy and O'Meara.

Amendment declared carried.

Motion, as amended, put and declared carried.