Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald.

Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach and also thank Senators for putting this topic on the agenda.

I am delighted to be given the opportunity to address the House to discuss the importance, significance and benefits to be gained from early intervention. It is a key area of activity in my Department. The debate is an important follow-up to previous discussions here on child and family services, and most recently on youth work.

I have no doubt that all of the Senators are aware that a substantial volume of valuable research now exists on the benefit of intervention during the early years. While much of the research emanated, in the first instance, from the US and other countries in Europe, I am pleased that we have seen a number of comprehensive child-centred research projects get under way in Ireland in more recent times, not least my Department's Government funded survey entitled Growing Up in Ireland. There are now many longitudinal reports and evaluations of various pilot projects taking place. It is very good to be in a position to say that we have home-grown Irish research as opposed to relying on international research.

The international research environment involves diverse disciplines such as neuroscience, genomics, sociology and economics coming together to provide a more complete and complex picture of childhood development. Neuroscientists armed with new technologies have given us great new insights into how the brain works and what inputs are needed to optimise its development. Pioneering experts like Professor Michael Rutter, Professor Sophie Scott in the UK and Dr. Bruce Perry in the US have shown the sensitivity of the human brain in the first three years and the learning that can take place with the right stimulation. They also showed the downside. If there a lack of stable emotional attachment or chronic stress or neglect there is a great price to be paid by children, not just emotionally. We now have research that shows that there are cognitive, emotional and behavioural impacts.

A new development has taken place in the past number of years. We have begun to quantify the costs associated with early problems. For example, Professor Sophie Scott of London University has calculated that for a child with a conduct disorder the cost to the economy is ten times more than that for a child without the disorder. That is very significant so the question then relates to the interventions that we need to make.

Similarly, economists can now estimate in financial terms the short-term economic contributions of quality early years interventions and the longer-term returns on investment. Several long-term studies have documented significant savings in the areas of remedial education, school drop-out rates, welfare and crime and more international research is being carried out. Senators will be interested to hear about the international papers on this type of research and to learn that more economists speak about the long-term benefits of early intervention and the economic return. Of course I shall focus on that today.

Obviously the personal and individual return for the children and their families is a primary concern and is absolutely enormous. Economists can estimate long-term savings. In the paper that I have circulated Senators will see that reference was made to the very famous Perry Preschool Project in the United States which followed 123 children until the age of 27 years. They attended preschool for two years for 2.5 hours per day and received home visits from the teacher once a week. For every $1 invested in the Perry Preschool Project the benefit was determined as over $16. I shall also quote research by Columbia University which found that the medium-term savings to the state from investment in early care and education, over the lifetime of the child, ranged from over $2,500 to nearly $10,000 per child. There were also savings if one had the right universal programmes in place. I attended a presentation which provided very detailed economic data on savings. For example, savings were made from not having to put money into crime, addictive behaviour and detention centres. Researchers were able to track the children who had received the right interventions and estimated that very substantial savings were made. These studies were validated and evaluated.

Similar studies have been conducted in Ireland. The National Economic and Social Forum made the case for State funding for universal preschool. It stated, "It can be readily justified as the longer-term societal benefits that would accrue on the basis of the investment are at a ratio of 1:7." A very famous graph was produced by James Heckman from the University of Chicago. He won the Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences. The graph is known as the Heckman curve but I shall not go into it in too much detail. He made the convincing case for early investment. He concluded:

The returns to human capital investments are greatest for the young for two reasons:
(a) skill begets skill and
(b) younger persons have a longer horizon over which to recoup the fruits of their investments.

The return is not just economic. We also have research on the impact of educational issues. Along with the Taoiseach, I recently attended a British-Irish Council summit in Cardiff. One of the items on the agenda, and I think that it was the first time ever, focussed on the early years. Each country shared what was happening in terms of interventions and early school programmes.

Northern Ireland has benefitted from recent developments in early education. Two recent global surveys have indicated that Northern Irish primary pupils performed better in reading and numeracy tests than any other English speaking country in the world. That is the result of the radical restructuring of its foundation stage education. It was backed by an accompanying investment in training and professional development which have been identified as a key factor contributing to the success.

Research was also carried out by the Geary Institute at University College Dublin which found that, "Children who spent any amount of time in centre-based childcare prior to school entry were rated higher than children who did not experience any centre-based childcare in the domains of social competence, language and cognitive development, and communication and general knowledge. I am talking about quality child care with proper staff training and the right interventions at the right age. There are issues concerning children aged zero to three years, how best to help the age group and the kind of supports that more vulnerable children need. The latter is a topic in its own right.

Another research project has been conducted in Ireland that I shall briefly outline to Senators. I refer to the work that is being done in Tallaght, Ballymun and Darndale funded by Atlantic Philanthropies. Significant interventions in these three communities have been evaluated. There has been a whole range of interventions ranging from public health nurses working with families, parenting programmes that tackle behavioural and emotional problems, and programmes to support literacy and promote social skills and emotional understanding in children. All of these programmes impact on the child when he or she enters primary school and moves through the education system. As a result the children cope much better with various life challenges.

Increasingly we should think about putting therapeutic services into schools such as speech therapy and occupational therapy because many parents miss clinic appointments. Pilot projects in the early years sector and schools have resulted in much higher returns in terms of availing of supports. The programmes have been a real benefit. I do not need to elaborate the point much further because Senators are familiar with the benefits.

The question then is how can early intervention influence policy and the services that we deliver as a country and Government. Ireland lags behind other countries when it comes to its early years sector. That has begun to change in recent years with the introduction of the universal pre-school year but that is just one year. As many as 94% of families avail of the early school year which provides important opportunities to support children and the Aistear framework has been put in place.

We also have the community child care subvention scheme and the child care education and training support scheme. We also have a new after-school programme that provides 6,000 places. However, we have a long way to go and many challenges remain. We have major issues with the affordability and accessibility of child care here. We need to do more to support families. At this point in our development we are faced with the challenge of how best to support and regulate child minding which is an informal sector. Should it remain informal and left to parental choice? I have asked the early years group to examine whether we need to provide more support to child minders. I want to see childminders working more effectively with local child care committees to ensure that their work is supported.

We need to assess what is the best form of child care for children under one year of age. If one follows the Nordic model one will find that the extended parental and maternity leave benefits the under ones more. Parental choice is also given more support in terms of those early years. That is a vision that we ought to have.

We also need to have greater linkages between our primary education system and early years education. Norway, for example, has the same training for those working in early years education and those working in primary school. We do not have much interaction between our primary schools and our child care settings, although we are beginning to see more of that in some communities. Those challenges cannot be dismissed. We need to examine them, and that is the reason I welcome this debate.

Our preschool population has increased, according to the 2011 census, by nearly 18% since 2006. We have more children in the country, which is a massive resource. It is a national treasure offering immense potential, and it should impact on our planning in the future. Other countries are not as fortunate. Instead of seeing our child population as a cost we ought to realise its huge value, not just in terms of the children but this country's economy on which we are focusing today. We must deal with the huge economic challenges we face to ensure we can give to those children the kind of future we believe they should have.

The point I am making is that early intervention must become even more a part of our national psyche than it is at present. There is a real need for the dissemination of this kind of information to ensure we understand the difference it would make if we invest in these early years. We need to invest more. As Dr. Anne Buchanan said at the COFACE conference some weeks ago, it should be an economic imperative. We are not used to hearing such language in this country about investment in early years. We talk a lot about the economy, but we rarely link it to the kind of investment we need to make in our children. Investing in children's early years should be an economic imperative.

The OECD agrees. The 2011 economic survey of Ireland recognised the importance of investing in early years, emphasising that in order for Ireland to preserve its strengths in human capital, we should recognise the importance of preschool education having both a positive impact on later educational performance and an equity enhancing effect. The direct benefits for young children themselves are well known to the Senators.

It is a direct activation measure as well, and the potential for job creation in this area should not be overlooked. The free preschool year currently supports approximately 7,000 jobs, and every ten or 11 additional child care places we provide will create one new job. A second free preschool year could generate a significant number of jobs.

Is it realistic to be talking about more investment in this area as people who have been discussing this recently have asked in articles in our newspapers? Is it realistic to talk about universal services? We have to examine the way we spend our money in this country. Compared with Ireland, Nordic countries spend significantly more on child services, supports for families with young children, well-paid parental leave and a high proportion of child care, but they have lower poverty rates. It is interesting to see that the choices they make in terms of investment work well in terms of support to families. It also deals with the child poverty rates as well as other factors.

We have a strong history of direct cash payments as opposed to services. Clearly, families need child benefit and direct payments but there is a stark contrast in terms of what we spend on services compared with direct cash payments. That is a feature of the policies we have undertaken in this country. Given the information that is coming out about early years interventions and supports to families, it is an area worthy of discussion. There is a growing acceptance that the spend on direct services is too small a proportion of the State's overall spend, and I believe that proportion needs be increased.

The publication last month of the report of the tax and welfare advisory group raises the question of how we should reassess our overall levels of spending on service provision, in particular on early intervention and child care services, which improve children's outcomes while also supporting parents.

I have spoken here previously about the early years strategy group under Dr. Eilis Hennessy who will be reporting to the Department in the next few months. A wide group of professionals who are interested in this area will be coming forward with recommendations, which will help us to consider the kind of investment we need to make in the early years.

There are also a number of initiatives in the budget regarding the area-based poverty initiative. I have given Senators the details of those. We need to ensure that the learning from the projects I spoke about earlier is mainstreamed throughout the country because we have made the investment of ¤30 million. We now know what works and what we must ensure is that services to children throughout the country, whether they are being given by public health nurses or social workers, take the lessons from the research about the kind of initiatives that work with the families I have mentioned in terms of the parenting, the health visitors going into the family, the detailed work on literacy and the one to one work, all of which is being done in different projects throughout the country. The big task now is how we mainstream that and make sure that more children benefit from it rather than simply the pilot projects.

In the next few weeks I will be moving to establish the child and family support agency, which has a dedicated focus on child and family services. There is a significant body of work under way in the Department. We are focusing on early intervention. There is much more we can do. Further investment is justified by the figures we have and the research that is emerging. As we say, tús maith leath na hoibre. There is no question that a good beginning is a big part of the work. There are many lessons for us in the economic analysis of early intervention, and there are lessons for both our budgetary strategy and our policy development in the next few years.

Terry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, to the House. She is always welcome, and she had a successful time here as a Senator. I again congratulate her on getting the referendum through last year, the benefits of which will come to fruition in time. Every decision taken now can show the benefit of that referendum, particularly the right to adopt children from a so-called married family situation, which was an anomaly that deprived many children of a second chance. That was one of the most significant points in that referendum, which was unanimously passed.

We in Fianna Fáil welcome the Minister's commitment to develop a national early years strategy and the setting up of the expert advisory group to advise the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs on its preparation. We believe the Minister must make a commitment in the early years strategy to put in place the supports that will be required to deliver high quality staff and positive outcomes. I compliment the Minister on her detailed contribution which provided comprehensive information.

The OECD 2011 economic survey of Ireland emphasised that for Ireland to preserve its strength in human capital, we should recognise the importance of preschool education in having both a positive impact on later educational performance and an equity enhanced effect. In that regard, one of the major successes of the previous Government was the establishment of the preschool year. Fianna Fáil is proud of its prioritised investment in the early education and child care sector during its time in government and is committed to ensuring that early education for children continues to be a policy priority under this Government.

Fianna Fáil welcomes the setting up of the new expert advisory group.

The free preschool year is vital, and I compliment the Minister on maintaining that. It was an area on which she would have come under a certain amount of pressure, but it was important that she held the line on that because a possible option at the time would have been to remove it. The preschool year in early childhood care and education was introduced by the former Minister of State, Barry Andrews, in January 2010.

Children are eligible to participate in the scheme if they are between three years and three months and four years and six months in September of the relevant year. The scheme has been an outstanding success. In September 2010, approximately 4,300 preschool services - 95% of all such services - were participating in the scheme and 63,000 children - 94% of all eligible children - were availing of the preschool year.

I have seen at first hand the benefit of the preschool year for children. I benefitted myself from a wonderful preschool life as the youngest of eight children who was at home with my beloved mother who was born in Glasgow. Every family cannot have that one-to-one preschool education with a very intelligent woman. We listened to Scottish music and chat on the radio and I was very reluctant then to go to school as life was so wonderful and pleasant on The Walk in Roscommon town. While the surroundings were humble, the most important thing, namely, love, was present. The knowledge that he or she is wanted and loved is the most important thing for a child. Eventually, I went to school in Roscommon and decided that having a schoolbag was not a very good idea. I hid mine for a month or so and it meant a much nicer time. I was blessed to meet Sr. Anthony, my first teacher, at the Convent of Mercy in Roscommon town. She was a wonderful, beautiful person who died recently, God be good to her. The classes were large with up to 50 children in the room. She provided us in the first years with love and individual respect as if every one of us was that important. Her ability to do that for every boy and girl was key. The classes were mixed which was lovely. Teaching and teachers are vital to the confidence one builds up. I look back on those years which had a very simple but sound quality. The Sisters of Mercy and other orders have come in for severe criticism in relation to the Magdalen laundries which is tragic, but the teaching provided at primary school level was second to none. The nuns were well-qualified as teachers and had a nice, humane approach. That is my personal experience.

The work the Minister is doing is vital to allow children to have the confidence to learn. Learning is a continuing experience, as the Minister knows. I was in a different Government Department. One is given so many briefs and discussion documents and learns all the time. Not every family can have one parent at home - both may have to work - but I have witnessed through my granddaughter the excellent work that is being done in preschools. There is a lovely, confidence-building approach. Whatever else the Minister does, she should maintain the service. It would be wonderful to expand it. It is not free, it is paid for by the State but it gives families a great start. The interactions between children at that age are wonderful. They learn continuously and the earlier they are exposed to education, the better it is. Early language learning is very important also. It is not the Minister's responsibility, however, but that of the Minister of Education and Skills.

Appointees with responsibility in this area previously included Brian Lenihan, Brendan Smith and Barry Andrews, but Deputy Frances FItzgerald is the first at Cabinet level. Her predecessors were in the Cabinet room which was a step in the right direction. She has taken over and built on their work. I wish the Minister well in her work. She is doing an extremely good job and I wish her success in setting up the agency. She has a great deal of work to do and has my full support.

Imelda Henry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is always lovely to have the Minister in the House and reminds us how lucky we are to have a Department solely for children and youth affairs. Since the Minister was in the House last, we have had the children's referendum in respect of which I congratulate her on her hard work and success. When she replies, she might update the House on what has happened since the referendum was passed.

When she was first appointed and given responsibility for a full Department, the Minister said she would do her best to create a seamless new approach to policy development and integrated services for children with the ultimate objective of ensuring that children are cared for and protected and have the best possible start in life. She is almost two years in the position and has done a great deal of work on those matters. We must focus on what is best for children. All studies point to the importance of the best possible start and early intervention. Early intervention in children's lives and high-quality early childhood experiences are crucial to a child's emotional, cognitive and social development. It is regrettable that Ireland has been behind many countries in its early years sector. For too long, we have placed the emphasis solely on supporting parents rather than on providing supports for the development of the child. That era is at an end. We know now that children must come first. The Minister is observing that.

The Department has provided targeted support to parents to assist them with the cost of child care. This support has provided for three child-care support programmes: the early childhood care and education scheme, which is the free school year; the child-care community subvention scheme, which supports nearly 24,000 children in community creches; and the community employment and training scheme, which provides approximately 2,500 full-time equivalent child-care places. In 2012, total expenditure on these programmes was approximately ¤240 million. I am pleased that the Minister has committed to maintaining the universality of the preschool year, despite increased demand.

The Minister and her Department have done a great deal of work during the preparation of Ireland's first ever early years strategy which is expected to be completed this summer. We must always strive to provide a range of services which are affordable and accessible so that parents can better balance work and parental responsibilities. Child-care provision supports not only the participation of parents in the labour market but, as the Minister said, represents a direct job activation measure. It creates jobs. The preschool year currently supports approximately 7,000 child-care jobs. For every ten or 11 additional child-care places provided, a new job is created. It is all progress. We are moving in the right direction with speed and commitment. We have a committed and dedicated Minister who is determined to see change occur.

Recent years have seen welcome changes. The universal free preschool year scheme has a very high take-up rate. Some 95% of three to four year olds are participating to avail of a high quality service. It means children with special educational needs or who have suffered from neglect come into contact at an earlier age with child-care professionals. They are assessed earlier because their problems are noticed earlier and they get a better start. Simple matters such as a child getting spectacles when he or she is two or three years old rather than when he or she is five or six years old can make an enormous difference for the better. Early intervention will play a significant role in Ireland's future economic planning. It is increasingly accepted internationally that there are economic benefits accruing from investment in children's early years. Long-term studies from the USA, UK and France show returns to the economy of between three and ten times the original investment. In the studies, children who experience high-quality preschool provision have been shown to be higher achievers in education and employment. The benefits also transfer to the next generation. I am pleased we are carrying out our own research domestically. We are obtaining significant information which allows us to cost the services we need.

The Minister attended with the Taoiseach, the last British-Irish Council summit in Cardiff at which the success of Ireland's preschool year was discussed. Scottish Government representatives spoke about the innovative national parenting strategy which seeks to support parents to secure the best outcomes in respect of their children's development, health and well-being. In Northern Ireland, a study on the effective provision of preschool education demonstrated that irrespective of the level of disadvantage, children with little or no preschool experience show poorer cognitive and social behavioural outcomes at entry to school.

Children who had little or no preschool experience show poorer cognitive and social behaviour outcomes on entry to school at the end of year one than those who attended preschool. I wish the Minister luck and congratulate her on the wonderful work she has done.

Jillian van Turnhout (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As always the Minister is more than welcome to the House and we are delighted that she is here. Her statement and speech to us today are seminal. It should be circulated generally. She was very fair in trying to give us a summary of what she has said to us today and it lays a strong foundation for a new home for children. I cannot commend enough what the Minister has said. More people should read her statement. We often focus on only one part of a child's life but it is important to consider the child's journey. I thank the Minister for providing that vision and starting this discussion with a very strong foundation. Everybody supports prevention and early intervention but it is music to our ears to hear a Minister promoting these strategies and putting them first and foremost. All too often people only talk about these theories in seminars and symposia while in the House we talk about firefighting and dealing with crises and do not give prevention and early intervention the thought and deliberation that they need.

I welcome the area-based approach to the child poverty initiative but have a difficulty with the selection criteria for the three new sites and the additional four that will come on stream. How do we ensure that the selection process is transparent, that the programmes are rooted in evidence and best practice? Programmes may look good but how do we ensure that they provide the outcomes for children and the delivery that we all want ? I want to see more details.

Often when we talk about early intervention we refer only to early years. That is why I welcome the Minister's speech because she has looked at the child's journey, the key transition points, the flash points in a child's life that are all too often missed. This is true of disability services, where life chances are affected at an early age if we do not intervene when the child is very young. Mental health problems tend to become more apparent in early adolescence. The Minister mentioned the Heckmann curve. In 2010 Cunha and Heckmann wrote a working paper on investment in our young people. Their research showed that the effect of early intervention in the lives of disadvantaged children is reduced if it is not followed up by investment at later stages. We all talk about the importance of investment and what we reap from investing in early years but if we do not provide that continuum of support the investment is lost.

I welcome the Minister's focus on how to provide services and the suggestion that we might take a step back and ask what is the purpose of child benefit and how do we ensure that it delivers the outcomes it should and that people want. The Minister mentioned the advisory report on which we had a good brief debate in the House with the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, which we will continue. We were glad that she came in so soon after the report was published. There are different ways in which we can provide services and support to children. Should we consider the affordable, accessible and quality child care, or extending the scheme to a second year, or after-school care which is ad hoc and does not have a defined structure. Should we consider universal primary health care for all children or school book schemes?

The Minister mentioned the development in data which is very welcome. I welcome her approach to ensuring that we have an evidence base for moving forward and that we understand why we are doing something. Very often when I hear economists talk about demographics I shout at the radio "That is birth rate". We have an increasing birth rate but economists do not want to talk about that. Too often children are forgotten in these issues.

The Minister mentioned Eurofound, the foundation based in Loughlinstown for the improvement of living and working conditions. I recently visited the foundation. It is doing some really interesting research on how parenting supports can best be delivered to children. Ireland has the fourth highest rate in the EU of young people who are not in education, employment or training, the NEET category. We do not want to be so high up on that list. Schoolteachers and youth workers can point to those young people much earlier in the cycle. That is where we should intervene. Eurofound did research on the loss to the economy that jobseekers represent. It calculated that they cost Ireland in the region of 2% of GDP which indicates that the cost of youth unemployment is ¤3.16 billion. Those are the figures but it has been proved that if a young person lives in poverty he or she is likely to continue to be unemployed. The pathway is laid. It is important to intervene early and help to change those young people's lives. I welcome the fact that the Minister has asked the youth work sector to investigate how we could intervene and best ensure that we do so. We need to find the tipping point at which the young person ends up unemployed rather than going into education, training or employment and see how we can support those young people.

I know that next week the Minister is hosting the EU Youth Conference on social inclusion. It is significant that Ireland has chosen to host that conference under its Presidency and I was delighted to see that the Minister is doing so in co-operation with the European Commission, the European Youth Forum and the National Youth Council of Ireland. The European Youth Forum was born during the fifth Irish Presidency. It held its inaugural meeting in Cork on 6 July 1996. I was there. I am a co-founder of the forum. I was a secretary general of one the three youth platforms. We came together to merge into one. Two of the three secretaries general were Irish. That is why I am so delighted to see them coming back to Dublin.

I welcome the development of the child and family support agency and look forward to seeing the Bill. I have made public my opinion of it to ensure that we debate this. The new agency will have a budget of approximately ¤545 million for 2013 and at hearings held by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health and Children last week we heard that approximately ¤100 million will go to NGOs and services. When my opinion of the new agency was published in The Irish Times I was surprised by the number of organisations which contacted me because they are afraid to speak publicly about this fearing that their funding will be cut. There is a chilling effect. We need to create an environment in which people can make constructive proposals to ensure that the agency works. I know that the Minister does not intend this chilling effect but I was surprised by the number and types of organisations that came to me about this matter.

I thank the Minister. The statement she made to us today should be circulated to all Deputies and Senators.

Aideen Hayden (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I also welcome the Minister to the House. Today is almost the anniversary of a similar debate which we held last year on 7 March. I know it is common in business to schedule certain topics on board agendas on an annual basis for example, corporate governance or risk management.

It is common in business to schedule certain topics such as corporate governance or risk management on board agendas on an annual basis and it is a good practice to take a similar approach in the world of politics, particularly in an area such as the one we are discussing.

In the debate on this area last year it was noted that ¤1.3 billion has been spent on the area of early childhood in the previous decade. With respect to the current and previous Government, it is honest and fair to say that as the previous decade progressed our understanding improved considerably of the importance of early intervention in establishing outcomes for children, whether they be educational, health, welfare or child protection.

This Government has made a particular commitment to Irish children with the appointment of the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, with full responsibility to this position which is a full Cabinet post. Putting the children's referendum to the Irish people was also an important step in recognising the importance of Irish children and our commitment to them. Like many people, I wish the referendum had passed with a greater majority but I am conscious of the fact that the failure to overwhelmingly endorse the referendum signified a reluctance on the part of the Irish people and a concern about the failures of the State previously to protect children. Unfortunately some of those failures were more recent. I am thinking of the case of the family in Monageer who unfortunately took their own lives and it was made evident that there were many shortcomings in the social services in this country.

Like Senator Van Turnhout, I would like to congratulate the Minister on the document she circulated to us. I agree with her it is an excellent document. It should be circulated to all Members of the Oireachtas. It is comprehensive and it is almost like an academic paper. It comprehensively covers all of the bases and provides a strong justification for the importance of early intervention.

As someone who is passionately committed to equality in our society, there is no doubt in my mind that the measures that enshrine inequality in society are there at a very early stage of a child's life. Children who come from families where there is high standard of education and a commitment to learning do better at school. There is plenty of research to demonstrate that children in environments where parents read and where books are evident in the home perform better in an educational environment. I was struck by the acknowledgment in the paper on early intervention that assistance to parents is very important, particularly to parents where there was not necessarily an environment of learning in their early lives. It is also true to say that children who go to school properly nourished learn better and the evidence shows that the level of nutrition that children receive from birth, and even before birth, influences their brain growth and brain activity. The life chances of children are determined from a very early stage and those life chances are deeply connected to social and economic inequality.

I was struck by comments made by the former governor of Mountjoy Prison, John Lonergan, that the vast majority of the prison population came from a number of particularly deprived areas in Dublin which were easily identifiable. Apart from the 2011 OECD report, in 2005 the National Economic and Social Forum published a report titled Early Childhood Care and Education and it stated that ability gaps open early and they persist and that this is true for other forms of verbal and mathematical ability as well as cognitive behaviour.

In 2002, research into the courts system in Ireland found that children in front of the courts were more likely to come from single-parent families, families with low incomes, families in consistent poverty, families where parents were long-term unemployed and families that were experiencing poor housing. It is important that we do not lose sight of the fact that the outcomes that children have reflect the wider society in which they live. It is true to say that we can intervene in very positive ways in those outcomes.

I would like to pay tribute to the work of organisations such as Barnardos which intervenes in those types of communities to bring about positive outcomes and to research it has done which found that for every ¤1 spent in intervening in a child's life the State ultimately saves ¤8. I also pay tribute to the work of Professor Pat Dolan, joint founder and director of UNESCO Child and Family Research Centre in NUI Galway, who estimates that there is evidence that for every ¤1 spent there is a ¤29 return to the State.

I also pay tribute to the work of the local area partnerships in tackling the scourge of poverty, of which children are the principal victims. I highlight the work done by the Ballymun Partnership which works hand in hand with the local community not only to promote local job growth but to actively promote learning through projects such as the youngballymun initiative and so on. With that in mind, I ask the Minister to be cautious in cutting youth services budgets, particularly those that have an enormous importance in deprived areas such as Blanchardstown, Ballymun, Darndale, Tallaght and other areas where a little money goes a long way in giving many young people a leg up at a critical point in their lives.

Aside from early intervention, and there is clear evidence it is of critical importance, that intervention must be effective. I am conscious that in the four Dublin local authorities there is a spend of ¤29,000 for every homeless person in the region, and that is not including the amount that is raised in charitable donations. However, research carried out by the Children's Research Centre in Trinity College shows that many young people who were interviewed for their research were known to the various agencies of the State, including child care agencies, youth homelessness services and the criminal justice system. In spite of the engagements those young people had with the State in its various forms, we still had a situation where two out of every three children who had been in State care were homeless within two years of leaving a care setting. Therefore, we must be cognisant that outcomes are not only related to the services that are available but to the quality of those services.

To echo the sentiments expressed by Senator Van Turnhout, I hope that the new child and family support agency fulfils all the hope that the Minister has for it and I hope that we will see the relevant legislation in early course.

It is clear that early intervention is a key critical issue not only in the area of education but in the areas of health and engagement with the criminal justice system but looking at the Heckman curve in the Minister's paper I was struck by the fact that it is clear that the earlier one intervenes in somebody's life the more effective that is. I must emphasise that much of this is an outcome of poverty and social inclusion issues and we can never forget the wider picture.

Sean Barrett (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister, as always. When she comes to this House everybody is stimulated by what she has to say to us. We are looking at starting out with a new public service looking after the preschool group in a much more systematic way than we did previously. We are trying to do it from the perspective of a country that is broke. I think it was in articles in the Sunday Business Post last Sunday that some people wrote that the public servants should take the Croke Park offer because they were getting way more wages than they would get in Germany. That is part of the background to the problems we face. Through social partnership we have designed an extremely expensive public sector in terms of providing services. That makes me cautious about embarking on another round. We doubled the number of staff in the health service between 1985 and 2009 from 55,000 to 110,000 and the best efforts of the Minister, Deputy Howlin, have brought the number back to 103,000. We must ask what on earth was happening with all that extra employment. We hear dreadful numbers about the cost of children in care and so on raised at meetings of the Committee of Public Accounts.

We have an extremely large number of people extremely highly-paid by international standards, making it difficult for us to tackle urgent problems such as the one under discussion this afternoon. Being in favour of public expenditure may mean we end up with more highly-paid public servants. On page 12 of the an bord snip nua report, it says the biggest increase has been at managerial and higher management level, with higher management levels in the public service growing by 82% in the period 1997 to 2009 when Civil Service numbers as a whole increased by 27%. I get too much correspondence from deputy and area regional managers and too little from people on the ground helping in the tasks the Minister has illustrated.

Where would we get the money to pay for the proposal before us? The other volume of the report examines special needs assistants, which went from 6,000 in 2004 and 2005 to 10,500 in 2009. The budget grew from ¤130 million to ¤350 million. Has anyone evaluated what was supposed to be happening? Was it making life easier for teachers or were the results? Are there any private sector firms in Ireland that employ 10,500 people? We must ask these kinds of awkward questions and it does not mean the people asking the questions have formed a dislike of children or poor people. They are just asking when this huge expenditure will bring results.

When we say we would like to shift child benefit, as per the Mangan report, more towards services we must ask what kind of services these are and what they would do. We have a high level of cash transfers and the reasons there appear to be less results is the higher proportion of children in Ireland in jobless households. I appreciate the Minister's studies of Scandinavia. Dan O'Brien wrote an article about it and I know the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, is also concerned about it. In the boom, we moved people from being potentially workers into the disability and invalidity categories in massive numbers. Does that do children any favours? There is some of that bias in the Mangan report in the way the lobby groups and the submissions were highly critical of the family income supplement. What I like about it is that it gets resources to people who are working. Work is the eventual solution. I was concerned at the material in page 28 of the report, where they model the two-tier proposal. Two thirds of parents on family income supplement would lose between ¤1 and ¤100 and less than 20% would gain between ¤1 and ¤50. That seems an ill-advised route. If we are to discredit cash as a means of helping low-income people, let us not do it in a way that disadvantages low-income workers. Let us ensure the cash is turned into the benefits the Minister seeks and the Senators across the floor seek rather than more layers of bureaucracy.

What happened when we recruited an extra 4,500 special needs assistants in schools in a four-year period? It must be one of the biggest recruitment programmes ever and I never hear it being evaluated. There is no pot of gold and we cannot come into the House and say that, if there was a surplus in the budget, this is what we would like to spend it on. There is no surplus. We have spent a lot of money and we are bad at evaluating outcomes. I agree with what Senator Van Turnhout described as the academic parts of the paper. There seems to be conclusive evidence that early intervention is good. If one was a devil's advocate or a contrarian, does that mean we should stop spending money on postdoctoral fellowships? If people are still in university in their 30s, they might have grown up by that stage and we might like to give it to the three year olds about whom the Minister has been speaking.

Katherine Zappone (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Sean Barrett (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Have we made child care too expensive by excessive regulation? Are the requirements so high? In a society with 14.8% unemployment, it is a contradiction that a service like child care should be so expensive. What is the logjam that enters into the Minister's mind when she confronts the situation? I thank the Minister for raising all these issues and bringing them to the Seanad in a series of tutorials on how she is addressing the situation and asking us for input. We appreciate that very much.

Caít Keane (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House. I compliment the Minister on the work she has done since taking office. She has shown the way. I compliment the way she has led her Department and it behoves all of the Government to get behind her in this most important portfolio. It is the most important portfolio. Many of the contributors have spoken about what it costs but we should be talking about what it saves and what the Minister can save the country by putting in place programmes she is working on. I hope everyone is reading the reports produced by the Minister, listening and putting their backs behind the Minister to ensure it is not looked at as a cost Department but as a savings Department.

There is increasing evidence on this across the world, which has been there for many years in America and more recently in Ireland. Various reports have been mentioned, including the profile of children at school, those of the Geary Institute, Professors Rutter, Scott and Perry and the Growing Up in Ireland survey. I spent my life working with preschool, whether in lecturing or whatever. Dr. Maria Montessori started off life in the slums of Italy and recognised that by getting children early in the prenatal and perinatal mothering period and also between the years of zero and three, there is a return to the state. The children led the way and showed what they could do. They brought home to their parents what they had learned.

The Minister's speech referred to the research undertaken and the sensitive period in the process of development, laying a foundation in childhood and beyond for cognitive functioning, behavioural, social and self-regulatory capacities. Many children face various stresses during the years that can impair their healthy development. Early childhood intervention programmes are designed to mitigate the factors that place children at risk of poor outcomes. Such programmes provide support for the parents, children or family as a whole and the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, is doing that. The support may be in the form of learning activities or other structured experiences that affect the child directly or that have indirect effects such as training parents or otherwise enhancing caregiving environments.

As part of a recent study in America, 19 or 20 peer reviewed items of literature showed the effectiveness of early intervention. Investing additional resources in early childhood education and the economic gains that accrue from it can overcome threats to healthy development such as resource disparities in early childhood. It also addresses the consequences of those threats for educational outcomes and beyond. Programmes that provide child development services from the prenatal period to the early intervention in school and preschool, scientific studies and sound evaluation are important. A literature review identified 20 such programmes, and the findings about the outcome of the programmes in respect of 19 were favourable. That is American research, which is more advanced than the Irish research but the Irish are catching up thanks to the Minister's commissioning of research.

I refer to family support, home visiting and service provision. The Minister referred to bringing services into the classroom and child-centred environments. This has been proven to be beneficial. Programmes supplemented by parental education, delivered in the same settings and through home visits, have been found to be beneficial. Early intervention programmes demonstrate significant and often sizeable benefits in the progression of educational attainment, health, delinquency and crime, social welfare, programme use and labour market success. In some cases, the improved outcomes of these domains were demonstrated soon after the programme had ended. In other cases, favourable impacts were observed through adolescence and into the transition to adulthood. In the case of the Perry preschool programme, lasting benefits in a multiple domains have been measured for 35 years after the intervention ended.

The Minister and other Members referred to the report on the savings made for the State, be it in the one to 16 or one to 26 year category. The evidence indicates there can be longer lasting substantial gains. The report should be circulated widely. Parents of participating children can also gain from early intervention programmes. Senator Jillian van Turnhout referred to the ratio of gross domestic product to youth unemployment. Early intervention programmes would save more if they were introduced. This strategy is in the Minister's good hands.

Kathryn Reilly (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the Seanad to discuss this important topic, one that needs greater attention from all parties. I share the Minister's support for greater levels of investment in early intervention programmes for children and her endorsement of universal services in this area. With my Sinn Féin colleagues, I have long advocated that the State learn from the Nordic countries which have proved to be world leaders in the area.

While we have a Minister for Children and Youth Affairs who clearly understands the policy interventions needed to address issues of child poverty and a Government which proactively enshrined the rights of children into the Constitution, the Government is still implementing policies and budgets which are increasing the number of children in poverty and cutting vital funding from educational and youth services. These cuts are having a detrimental impact on the well-being of children, particularly those in disadvantaged communities. While I do not question the Minister's sincerity, I have to judge the commitment to improve the well-being of children, particularly those living in or at risk of poverty, on the Government's actions.

Figures show that 270,000 children in the State suffer some level of poverty, while the latest statistics from the Central Statistics Office show a further 35,000 children have fallen into poverty. Yesterday Barnardos, the National Women's Council of Ireland, OPEN and Start Strong called for an additional investment of ¤2 billion in child care to benefit early development. They argue this investment should target child care provision, child literacy and numeracy and increase the attendance of children from disadvantaged backgrounds in school, all of which would have benefits for the children involved, society and the economy. We continue to underspend in this area. Currently, we spend 0.25% of gross domestic product on preschool education, while in Denmark the figure is 1.3%. At the same time, our child poverty rate is 11.4%, while in Denmark it is 5.4%. Our higher level of poverty is not solely due to underinvestment in preschool education and early intervention, but there is still a relationship between the two.

The Minister asked whether it was realistic to talk about increased investment in early intervention in the current economic climate. Senator Keane Cáit has pointed to the savings such programmes can make for the State. Countries which invest more in preschool education and early intervention have stronger economies and more stable and equal societies.

I have had many cases raised with me recently concerning the diagnosis and assessment of autism spectrum disorder. The waiting list in Cavan stands at 25 months. While families are waiting for an assessment, the children concerned cannot be offered resource teaching hours or home support help. This flies in the face of the promise to provide for early intervention. More cases are arising and I have many families coming to me where the child should be in first or second class but is still in junior infants. They are not getting the supports they need because of the length of the waiting list for diagnosis. If they seek a private psychological assessment, they are told it is not sufficient and that they must wait for an assessment by the National Educational Psychological Service, NEPS, or the child and adolescent mental health services. How is the Department of Children and Youth Affairs working with the Health Service Executive in dealing with this backlog and ensuring the children in question do not miss out on their education? It will cost us more in the long run if we do not intervene now to help these children and ensure they receive these supports. It is putting strain on children, their families and schools when they cannot access these resources.

Eamonn Coghlan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister and know she has a lot of interest in the topic of early intervention.

In 1240 Henry de Bracton, the English jurist, said, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." There have been numerous outstanding studies and reports written on the subject of early intervention and related matters. The Start Strong document, The Economics of Children's Early Years, focused on the costs and benefits of early care and education in Ireland. Of the amounts of public money spent on children and families, only 20% goes towards early childhood services for those aged 0-5 years, 37% for those in the middle years, six-11 years, and 44% for in the later years, 12-17 years. Our spending on services for young children is weak by international standards, especially for the very youngest, as a large proportion of social expenditure on young children takes the form of cash benefits rather than services.

A report by Dr. Orla Doyle from University College Dublin's Geary Institute on early educational investment as an economic recovery strategy concluded there were high returns on early investment. For every ¤1 invested, the State receives ¤29 back in benefits which include lower crime rates, less social intervention, better health and employment prospects.

As a parent, grandparent and athletics coach, I believe I am fully qualified to know the benefits of early intervention in the development of physical literacy and fundamental movement skills from a very young age. These aid the development of literacy and numeracy skills, too. I am at an advanced stage with the Department of Education and Skills in developing my Points for Life initiative which I hope will be introduced as a pilot scheme into primary schools in the coming year. The aim of the programme is to develop physical literacy and fundamental movement skills in primary schoolchildren from a young age in order that they will have the competency and skills necessary to become active young people, be more likely to take part in sports activities and remain active throughout their lives.

While the Points for Life initiative is aimed at primary schools, these fundamental skills should be introduced to children from birth. Parents and caregivers should be taught the importance of developing physical literacy skills. They should also fully understand the benefits of having active young toddlers and children. Teaching the fundamentals of physical literacy should be introduced in the preschool environment. This is because the capacity for change decreases with age and it is more efficient, both biologically and economically, to get it right the first time rather than try to fix it later. Exposure to high levels of physical stress early in life can affect the architecture of the developing brain.

The Canadian model, HOP, Healthy Opportunities for Preschoolers, has introduced several initiatives, together with guidelines for parents on developing physical literacy in children aged 0-12 years. HOP is based on the belief all children benefit from daily physical activity that promotes health-related fitness and movement skills. It is important that individuals responsible for the well-being of preschool children are aware of the value of physical activity and help to facilitate each child's movement experiences.

More and more children are spending time in the care of others. A care environment in which caregivers can play an active role can positively shape children's futures and is an ideal place for most physical activity to take place.

The recent report, Growing Up in Ireland, produced some startling findings, among them that 26% of nine year olds were found to have a body mass index outside the healthy range, of whom 19% were defined as obese. The very young are remarkably eager to learn and we can start to teach fundamental movement skills from a young age, literally from birth through to six years. This could lay the foundations for future success in developing these skills.

Starting the process at young preschool ages enhances the development of brain function, co-ordination, social skills, motor skills, emotional development, leadership and imagination. It also helps children to build confidence and develop positive self-esteem. Needless to say, it also helps to build strong bones and muscles, improve flexibility, develop good posture, improve fitness, promote a healthy body weight and reduce stress. I realise I am under constraints of time, but I believe in the benefits of this approach having seen my children and grandchildren develop basic motor and movement skills at a young age and how advanced they have become as young adults and adults. It starts from the ground up and starting this work at preschool stage is an important way of advancing all of these health-related issues.

Katherine Zappone (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House and wish her a happy international women's week. There are two women at the Cabinet table and 12 men. We have the evidence. The Minister has the dynamism, vision and ambition required. Is the work of the Government not based on evidence? Is evidence not important in formulating policy? Everyone should get a copy of the Minister's speech. She has demonstrated the necessary ambition and evidence gathering skills for a long period. She is aware of new evidence and how critical it is.

In preparing my remarks I examined the Department's overall strategy and mission statement which refers to leading the effort to improve outcomes for children and young people. The Minister is well aware of the long list of things the Department must do to implement the strategy. Everything on the list has been either completed or the Minister has begun to do work on it. Her speech demonstrates her mastery of the detail, for which I commend her. However, her desire to develop, implement and, presumably, lead the national early years strategy has the potential to become her greatest legacy. Some of the strategy is built on the work of the previous Government and it is wonderful to see this seamless commitment, as Senator Terry Leyden noted. The Minister is now in place and the champion of the cultural shift in our public programmes of prevention and early intervention for children. She is aware of and referred to the bias in favour of policies that support later intervention, which is expensive and ineffective too. It is critical to address this issue and I commend and support the Minister for her efforts.

I have two questions on the early years strategy. I hope it is not too presumptuous to think the Minister might say "Yes" in response to my first question. Will the strategy contain a commitment to invest in the services which prevention and early intervention sites have demonstrated to work in Irish settings? The Minister has identified many of the evaluations and, as she has stated previously, some things did not work. However others are working and I hope to see in the strategy a commitment to begin to implement and invest, not necessarily in every site in Ireland, but in those that have been demonstrated to work. Will the strategy name the systems to be developed to enable schools, the new agency to be established by the Minister, community, voluntary and private providers of children's services, parents and children to work together in an integrated fashion? I hope to see in it a development and a naming of the systems, not only the ways of working, that need to change to develop that integration.

The Minister referred to another issue, also raised by a number of Senators, that is, the Mangan report. We are aware of budgetary decisions made prior to publication of the report. There are issues of cash versus services or perhaps cash plus services. Senator Sean D. Barrett spoke at length about this issue and I agree with much of his commentary. As the Minister is aware, the next part of the Mangan report will consider in-work benefits for lower income families. That will be important information for us to ensure the reform of child income supports is implemented but to ensure, at the same time, that there is an incentive for people to stay in employment. Will the Minister consider the possibility that we may need an examination of the idea of cash plus services? This picks up on something to which Senator Sean D. Barrett referred. We need to investigate the amounts of money available in child income support and the types of services that could be matched with it to produce the best outcomes in different environments. I have put it to the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, and now put it to the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs that they both have the moral authority to seek reform without further savings in child income supports. I support them in this regard.

My final point relates to economic issues. The Minister quoted and identified research into the benefits and costs of the early years strategy. Other Senators have referred to this aspect also. Many of the data arise from first generation research. I am not referring to research in Ireland but to the work of Mr. Jim Heckman whom I met when we were setting out to work on the prevention and early intervention sites eventually presented. Now, second generation research is coming through. Will the Minister consider the possibility of investigating new and innovative approaches to estimate the cost and benefits of interventions and services to build on the data from the earlier period? New econometric models are being developed to estimate the benefits and costs to local and central government to inform Government decisions on early interventions. An evidence base for investment holds considerable potential to assist strategic decision making on competing policies and programmes. We only have so much money available and can only fund certain things. New research is emerging based on these econometric models which can help us to carefully select investments that could make a significant difference not only to the outcomes for children but to the public purse also.

The renowned Washington State Institute for Public Policy has created a model for the United States and my colleague, Professor Michael Little, from Darlington in the United Kingdom is working with the institute to create a model for Europe. They are developing a way to estimate the cost of a particular service, for example, a reading programme or a reduction in class size and the economic benefits to the child, the local agency and the state. They provide an analysis which suggests policy options for the Legislature. The institute informed the early learning strategy of the governor of the State of Washington, whom the Minister met with me some time back when that state produced the ground-breaking early years strategy. Since Ireland is setting out to publish its first national early years strategy, this could be a prime opportunity to take the lead throughout Europe to develop a model for current and future legislators in order that we can improve outcomes for children with smart, targeted and modest sums of investment.

Mary Moran (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister back to the House and commend her for her ongoing work in this area. There is a large body of international research. I do not wish to rehash what everyone has said because we are all singing from the same hymn sheet. We all recognise the importance of investing in early childhood care and education and that this makes economic sense in the long run. Child poverty is a growing concern, with the rate currently standing at 19.7%. We know that growing up in such an environment has a long-lasting effect on children and the effects often persist from one generation to the next.

Early care and education can help to reduce child poverty. It will have a beneficial effect on the child's development, allowing them to engage as fully as possible in the education system and to reach their potential so they can enter the workforce and secure a rewarding and well-paid job. Where child care is affordable and accessible, it enables parents to access employment, education and training which will improve the situation of both parents and children.

The recent publication of the Mangan report has given us reasons to focus on some relevant points regarding child poverty. Ireland is the only OECD country with an above average child-cash benefit transfer but an average child poverty rate. On the other hand, Denmark, Iceland, France and Spain spend twice as much on their services, including early care and education, as on income supports. Their child poverty rates are between one third and two thirds of the OECD average. In monetary terms, we appear to be spending much money on our children but are not getting the outcomes we should.

Child care in Ireland remains a significant cost for families. Among OECD countries, we are second only to Switzerland for child care costs. A recent survey by Barnardos, the National Women's Council of Ireland, OPEN and Start Strong showed that these costs are having a serious effect on household budgets and on the ability of parents to take up employment. The provision of the free preschool year for all children has been a great development with 60,000 children availing of the scheme. The Minister is working towards the provision of a second free preschool year for all children, which I welcome. The recently published statistics on child poverty and child care costs emphasise the need for this second year.

My first experience with early intervention was with my 15 year old son when he was three years of age. At the time we were not aware that he had an intellectual disability. We were told then we needed to attend an early intervention parenting course. I reluctantly dragged my husband with me where for eight weeks we were told about OWL, observing, watching and listening to our child. At the time I noticed that all the children on this programme had intellectual disabilities. When I asked my husband did he think our son had one, he said not at all. We thought every parent was brought along to these sessions.

Eventually, when our son was diagnosed and required early intervention for speech therapy, I believed he was going to have a great life ahead. However, when he reached four years of age, we had to take him for a private psychological assessment because the waiting lists were long. We were also told to enrol him at a different service provider for his education because of his abilities. I received a telephone call at work to tell me he did not qualify for any more early intervention because he was attending that service. The problem was the service provider did not have the therapy programmes we needed. For the next 13 years, he did not receive speech or physiotherapy services. Some are lucky that they can afford to pay for private services. I see parents spending every cent of their children's allowance and other care grants to provide private physiotherapy for their children.

On the recommendation of a psychological report last year, we changed our son's school. Once again, he was eligible for various interventions. I thought this was brilliant and that we would get the services we should have got when he was three. Within a month he was assessed for physiotherapy and occupational therapy. Unfortunately, he has spent the last several months in a wheelchair which could have been avoided if he had access to these services at three years of age. As well as this, when he was assessed, we were informed there was a year and a half long waiting list for the services. By then, he will be 17 and over age for child services so he will have to access adult services. Again, he will slip through the net. On top of all this, both therapists, who are excellent, went off on maternity leave at the same time and were not replaced for the whole year. Why is someone denied physiotherapy or speech therapy because the therapist is out on maternity leave? I understand priority cases were dealt with but to every mother her child is a priority. The services should be in place for everyone.

Early intervention sounds wonderful. Through my personal example, I hope I have shown how when it comes down to the nitty-gritty many people can fall through the net. There is much to be done in the area of disability and I would welcome the opportunity to meet with the Minister to discuss it further.

Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

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

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

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

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

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

Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Senator is actually a minute over time. She was so engrossed she ignored my little warning.

Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise; I did not hear. To sum up, the evidence supports the Minister and she is on the right track. However, throughout the country we have better provision in some areas than others, particularly with regard to developing the creativity of young people. For example, in Dublin we have the Ark, the creative writing centre Fighting Words, and Imaginosity, and in Limerick we have the Learning Hub. These provide a parallel creative system for children that the education system does not always develop. I ask the Minister to be open to proposals in this area. I am developing a proposal currently for a young creator centre that will help children develop their creativity, particularly at second level, in an exam-based system that often beats the creativity out of them. I am knocking our second level system, but suggesting we need more, because our young people are our future and the more we invest in them, the stronger the nation we will have.

Marie Moloney (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

At this stage of the debate, everybody has said everything one would wish to say. We are all singing from the same hymn sheet and there is no need to repeat what has been said. I welcome the Minister to the House. She always has a smile on her face, has been a fantastic Minister and has worked very hard on behalf of our children. I thank her for that.

Nobody can overestimate the importance of early intervention, which is vital for our children. I have come across a number of adults who cannot read or write, which is very sad in this day and age. The reason is that when they were young and in school, there was no help for them. Unfortunately, because they were that bit slower or could not keep up with the rest, they were put to the back of the class and left there. As a result, they did not learn to read or write. This situation shows the importance of early intervention; their situation could have been avoided had the services been available.

I particularly wanted to speak in this debate about the HSE services plan. We got a briefing on our HSE services plan in Kerry last Monday. In discussing that plan we spoke about the reconfiguration of children's disability therapy services. I am not speaking against the plan, but it proposes to amalgamate the Brothers of Charity and Enable Ireland and other services and to have them all working from the one centre. However, no extra resources are to be provided. It is proposed to bring into the net all those children who are left out and not getting the services currently and to expand and grow on that. This is great news and hopefully it will happen. However, I am concerned that the services for existing children will be diminished due to the fact that no extra resources are to be provided.

The Brothers of Charity in Killarney also run a fantastic preschool for children with all sorts of disabilities. The benefits to the children who go through that preschool are untold, as is the work put in by those working there. However, the facility is not set up to take any older children with wheelchairs. I believe this will be a problem in the long run. I would welcome the Minister's opinion on this and on whether we will be able to put more resources into this campaign. Otherwise, what is there for the children currently will be reduced. The staff will remain at the same level, but if more children come into the system, the staff will have to spread themselves more thinly on the ground.

Senator Zappone spoke about cashflow services schemes. Today, at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education and Social Protection, a presentation was given on poverty in Ireland and we were told of the significant number of children encountering poverty in Ireland. Yesterday, I spoke on the Order of Business about the mobility allowance, which is to be abolished in four months' time, although I understand we are considering an alternative scheme. One cannot underestimate the value of a monetary payment to these people. It allows them to provide their own transport to take their children in wheelchairs to early intervention services, to speech and language therapy and whatever other services they need. It is not always so easy to have a bus or van, such as a Vantastic van, in situ to transport children at the right time. It is all about timing. How can we tell these people they must be at a certain place at 3 p.m. or 11 a.m.? This will not work in rural Ireland. The best solution is for parents to continue doing what they are doing by providing their own transport and using the mobility allowance to maintain and buy vehicles in which they can transport their children. I understand this issue does not come within this Minister's remit but, as Senator Zappone said, one cannot beat having a woman at the Cabinet table. Perhaps it is sexist to say that. However, I know how women react to the position of children with disabilities and I hope the Minister will put a good case forward for maintaining a monetary payment for people providing transport for children, particularly those with disabilities, to enable them to continue availing of the services.

Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators for their wide range of statements on the future of early intervention. There is a widely shared view that a new emphasis on early intervention is needed as a matter of critical importance. Senator Barrett and others reminded us that this discussion is taking place in a difficult economic context. There was a shared focus on the part of a number of speakers on the importance of effective intervention. Money used to be thrown at interventions in a variety of ways without any evaluation of their effectiveness. I think the point is that we need to examine what is the most effective intervention. It is clear from studies that have been done in Dublin that some interventions do not work as well as others.

While I accept that we have to make sure we move towards a more research-based emphasis on intervention, I do not think everything can be measured. Senator Leyden spoke about the value of having a happy childhood and being loved. Clearly, the quality of love and affection given to children - these are basic things every child needs - is not something that can be subjected to a strict measurement. There is overwhelming evidence that if we do not invest more in early intervention, the cost in terms of the poor prognosis for the children who do not benefit from it will be quite high.

A number of Senators spoke about the issue of disability, for which the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, is responsible. Of course the Department of Children and Youth Affairs has a role to play in this regard. We are working closely with the Department of Health, the Health Service Executive, the Department of Education and Skills and the National Council for Special Education to improve the provision of supports throughout the continuum of a child's life. As Senator Moran pointed out, we need to ensure the transitions work better for children with disabilities. It is appalling that when some children move from one service to another, they almost have to start at the end of the queue in order to have direct supports provided to them. We need much more integration than that. It should not be happening. It is disturbing to hear the stories we have heard today about disability services in the early years. It highlights how much we need to do in this area to ensure services are provided as early as they are needed. They should not be always provided on the basis of diagnosis. We want to see services provided throughout the early years.

Senator Reilly mentioned the waiting list in Cavan. Obviously, it is totally damaging for a child who is on the autism spectrum to have to wait 25 months. If the Senator sends me details of the cases in question, I will take them up with the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch. We will examine precisely what is happening. A number of other Senators, including Senator Moloney, expressed concern about the provision of disability services. There is room for more cross-departmental work in this regard. I assure the House that these matters are being examined. Detailed interdepartmental work is being done to improve the situation. There is no question about the fact that it is very urgent.

Senator van Turnhout asked about the allocation of grants to non-governmental organisations. The reality is that the circumstances of those organisations will not change. There is approximately ¤100 million in the budget for non-governmental organisations. Following the establishment of the new child and family agency, there will be greater co-ordination between the work of the organisations being funded and the priorities of the agency and the Government. I think that is needed.

Jillian van Turnhout (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, absolutely.

Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We need more integration and more co-ordination. I am aware of a particular town where a variety of services are not in contact with each other or even aware of each other's existence. I have had several such experiences in the past two years. It was clear from the child death report, which mentioned a family that was dealt with by 14 different agencies, that there is a need for co-ordination. I do not think there is a need for any kind of "chilling effect" on these organisations. We want a good partnership between the organisations we are funding and the priorities of the new agency. That is the reality of the current situation. It is the right thing to do as well. There is no need for concern. The new reality involves more co-ordination and more engagement between statutory and voluntary bodies. The goal of the new agency is to facilitate such integration.

Senator Hayden spoke about parenting and about the past failures of the State. Her point about the need for more engagement with parents is important in the context of early intervention. It is increasingly emerging from the studies that we need to work with families and parents, rather than merely taking the children for a number of hours each day or week. There is scope for us to do more work with parents than we are doing at present. It would be good to see more parental engagement in the course of the universal preschool year. That involves the provision of resources, staff time and training. It is happening but it is not as universal as I would like it to be. Many of our centres are working very well with parents. A substantial number of parenting courses are taking place throughout the country. The Senator also mentioned the cutbacks in youth funding. I want to try to preserve front-line services. There has been some misunderstanding about the amounts that are involved. I am in discussions with the youth organisations, including the City of Dublin Youth Services Board, on the matter.

I agree with the other points that were made about trying to keep the focus on the front line. A number of Senators, including Senator Barrett, asked whether there should be a focus on direct cash payments or on early investment. Some speakers suggested we should focus on both. We need to have a discussion on this matter. Ideally, one would do both. A number of Senators mentioned the child poverty statistics in this context. The current rate of absolute poverty is approximately 9.5% and the current rate of consistent poverty is approximately 18.9%. We will publish some research on this tomorrow. As far as the Government is concerned, the best way to help these families is to create jobs. The best way out of poverty is to be able to access work and employment. That is why we have to keep a focus on job creation. International evidence suggests that the kind of investment in early childhood about which we are talking today is a great support to the families which are most at risk.

Senator Eamonn Coghlan spoke about the need to work with preschools on physical activity. It is a very good point. We need to think about the quality of the experiences of children who have been in these services for a year or two. I refer to their experiences at every level, including emotionally and physically. There is a need for us to consider the kinds of interventions we are making.

Senator Zappone asked about the increasing use of the more sophisticated evidence base that is coming from Washington, for example. I mentioned the research work that has been done there. I believe we should move in that direction. I am a big fan of that kind of research because it is the best way to convince all areas of government. It needs to be much more integrated into our budgetary strategy.

Jillian van Turnhout (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Hear, hear.

Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is why today's debate is really important. We need much greater public awareness and policy awareness about the kind of research that is emerging and can save Governments money. It is clear that if we work with young children, particularly those who are most at risk, in an effective manner, they will not go down the path of getting into trouble with addictions or dropping out of school, a problem that was mentioned by Senator Healy Eames. While this research is very convincing, it is difficult at a time of economic challenge to put in place the resources in that would make a difference to such children. If we do not provide those resources, however, the cost to the children in question will be much greater. As Senator Keane said, there are savings to be made if we approach this in the right way. I think that is the message from today.

I welcome this debate. We need to continue it, particularly in the context of the budgetary discussions later in the year. We must ascertain how we can move towards the kinds of services we need and how we can get the funding for them. Obviously, that will have to be done on an incremental basis.

It does need to be rigorously evaluated, but it is possible for us to identify immediately the quality aspects we need to improve in the provision of early years education. With a relatively little financial input, we could make quite a difference to the outcomes for vulnerable children. Equally, we have the debate about whether something should be universal or selective. I was very pleased to be able to maintain the universal aspect, as Senator Terry Leyden noted, of the preschool year. The ideal would be to have a second preschool year. There would be staff training issues connected to this, as well as quality issues which the early years strategy group is examining.

Senator Katherine Zappone asked me about whether the early years strategy would be able to suggest a model for the services integrating and working well together. The best place for that to be happen would be through the Child and Family Support Agency. The agency will be examining the linkages needed between the early years sector and services under the agency in the same way as we need to integrate youth services. We need a seamless integration of all of these services. There has been fragmentation. Parents and early years services can be helped by working with the Child and Family Support Agency which I am sure will address that issue when the report is finalised around June or July.