| This is an
important issue which is frequently debated in this
House. I and other Senators from both sides have raised
the issue on more than one occasion because there is a
child care crisis, identified last year by a committee
established by the Minister's Department, which produced
a fine report, the National Childcare Strategy. In the
introduction to that report, the chairperson of the
group, Sylda Langford, said what we have all known for a
long time - that there was a virtual crisis in child care
supply. We know from our experience and the anecdotal
evidence of friends and parents that this crisis has
worsened. We
thought the child care issue had finally made it to the
top of the Government agenda in time for it to be dealt
with in the budget. There was a widespread expectation
that a major initiative would be announced in the budget
- a set of packages designed to meet the extraordinary
increase in demand for child care because of the increase
in the number of women, particularly married women, and
parents participating in the workforce. Media reports
clearly indicated the major disappointment at the lack of
provision for child care in the budget. We have tabled
this motion to bring attention to the child care crisis.
It is a time of
unprecedented growth. I am not the first to say that - it
is becoming a cliché at this stage. Someone on the other
side will ask why we did not do something when we were in
Government. I am sick and tired of listening to that
argument which the following statistics will dispel. In
1996, the budget surplus was £15 million. We considered
ourselves extremely lucky to have a budget surplus of
that size. Three years later the comparable figure which
is available to the Government to spend is £1,850
million. I do not want the Government telling me this
issue cannot be tackled.
The Childcare
2000 group, a broad umbrella group representing those in
the child care industry and those requiring child care,
asked the Government to spend £500 million on child care
- this is now overdue and badly needed. We got £46
million - an £8 increase in child benefit for the first
two children, £10 for the third and capital allowances
for those providing child care places, a system which
only benefits large employers capable of generating large
child care provision rather than small child care
providers. In the past few months, I have heard of
community crèches, especially on housing estates,
closing down or doubling their fees, creating an even
greater problem for parents as the crisis grows.
Against this
background, the Government has failed to deliver. It has
produced a budget which has benefited employers instead
of what we need, which is a massive increase in places
where children can be cared for, which parents can afford
and which are staffed by trained, well-paid staff,
located in the community and the workplace, along with a
flexible approach to working time for both parents and
adequate child benefit to help the lower paid, large
families and single parents. I will not be entirely
negative. I acknowledge that a provision of £46 million
was announced in the budget, with an expectation of more.
I am also aware that a considerable of money is being
targeted at the provision of child care in the community,
through the health boards and the partnerships. There
appears to be a vague sense of what can, should and will
be done. A lack of clear vision and policy is evident.
This Government
defined itself very well in this budget, particularly as
regards child care. It defined itself as a Government
which has effectively abandoned the needs of the children
of working parents by forcing their mothers into the
workforce with a tax system which rewards those who go to
work, not those who choose to stay at home. This
Government will be known as one which has put the demands
of employers and the labour force first and the needs of
children last. I hope this Government will not be known
as one which missed a unique opportunity to finally put
in place, at a time when we can afford it, a system of
child care based in the community and built around the
needs of parents and the community in which they live,
rather than the labour force where they are seen as unit.
The National
Childcare Strategy recognises that the past two decades
have seen a preponderance of reports on this issue, of
which I think the strategy is probably one of the best.
Enough recommendations have been made - this document is
full of them. Considering the size of the working group,
one must congratulate them for reaching agreement in a
diverse range of sensible provisions, some with which I
would not entirely agree. There have been enough task
forces, subcommittees and working groups, particularly
expert working groups. Action now needs to be taken and
money spent. We are calling for the issue to be dealt
with in the context of the social partnership model and
hope that the partnership will not break down as a result
of the pay issue. Considering the range of
recommendations and issues that need to be addressed, it
is our belief that it is within the social partnership
model that one can get agreement on the wide range of
actions necessary. I appeal to the Minister to ensure
when putting in place a child care strategy that we use
it, particularly at this point in our history, to
generate very high quality child care in the community,
particularly for those who cannot afford to invest in
child care by virtue of being low paid or parents who are
not in the workplace, but whose children would derive
such enormous benefit from a good quality child care
system based on their needs and the needs of the
community. We know from research carried out elsewhere
that investment in good quality and accessible child care
in the community, particularly in disadvantaged areas,
yields huge gains down the road. Studies carried out in
poorer communities in America have shown that investment
in early education and good quality child care has paid
off, particularly in reduced crime rates. I am sure the
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has taken
this evidence on board and I hope he will implement it.
I would like to
say something about how child care has become centred
around the needs of the labour force. For the last two
decades many groups have attempted to put child care on
top of the political agenda and, in general, have failed
to do so. It is only now that the demands of employers
and the needs of the labour force are paramount that we
are looking for ways of getting women into the workforce.
Employers are on their knees, begging the Government to
do something to get women into the workforce rather than
looking at the needs of children and parents. Side by
side with any child care strategy must be the
introduction of a system of flexible working. We are just
now discovering that the other side of the Celtic tiger
is a reduced quality of life for families in particular.
The high level of stress involved in travelling to work,
competing in the workforce, returning home, barely seeing
the children, leaving the children possibly in child care
facilities with which parents are not entirely happy, has
raised for many parents the question of whether they
should continue to work.
Now is the time
to take a leadership role on flexible working and
introduce it on a statutory basis outside of the public
service. I am aware it is available in the public
service. It is extremely popular and is used, as was
expected and is the experience in other countries, by
over 90% of women who have children of schoolgoing age. I
appeal to the Minister to look at flexible working for
parents, together with a series of initiatives on child
care.
I thank the
Cathaoirleach for his latitude and look forward with
great expectation to a proper initiative on the needs of
children, their parents and the community.
Mr. Ryan:
I second the motion. As I look around at the Members of
the Seanad I realise that this is not predominantly a
women's issue, it is a family issue. The fact that the
issue is articulated by women is perhaps a commentary on
role models and the way in which people have fulfilled
their role. However limited my fulfilment of that
obligation has been, I have been married for over 20
years, both of us have been out working since then and,
to my great delight, my wife is better paid than I am. I
have never had this problem that men are supposed to
have; in fact, I wish she earned twice as much because
then I could give up work altogether. I will come back to
the issue of income later.
This is an
issue about family and the way in which we organise
ourselves, and there are two routes to go. As the Leader
of the Labour Party has said on many occasions, we are at
a point of making a choice - do we follow the civilised
route or do we follow the ruthless route of the United
States? We either use the power and resources available
to the State to facilitate civilised living by families,
parents and children or we go the other route and assume
that the acquisition of more and more material goods,
centred around eternally reducing tax rates, is an
alternative to which we aspire. The evidence of most
countries is that that route has brought women in
particular, because of the unequal roles, very little
satisfaction. The evidence is that women in particular in
successful careers are stressed out and exhausted as a
result of the burden of carrying two responsibilities.
This is a reproach to men but it is also a reproach to
society. We may not be able to reform men as easily as we
can reform society, nevertheless, we can address the
issue. We all have rights but some of them, in the case
of women in particular, were suppressed for many
thousands of years and we have only in the last 30 or 40
years begun to address them. Among our rights is the
right to marry and have children. We also have a right to
a chosen career and to work inside or outside the home.
This right applies to both partners in a relationship. It
should not be perceived as one against the other.
The issue is
not just about services for child care; it is also about
those who make demands for more and more in the labour
force, particularly the employer organisations who keep
saying that the State should provide tax breaks for them
and for parents. Has it not dawned on them that perhaps
they should provide family friendly work? In desperation,
many of them are now offering part-time hours and so on
but that will only last as long as there is a labour
shortage. Employers do not accept that they have an
obligation in society to facilitate their workforce to
have decent careers and a family life as well; family
needs are not their concern. Every minuscule progress
made by people at work in terms of their right to time
off with their family, whether it be unpaid paternal
leave for fathers and so on, produces a whinge from IBEC
about the undermining of our half-mythological
competitiveness. Competitiveness as defined by them is a
myth because it has as much to do with quality as with
price. The civilised countries of Europe, mainly the
Nordic countries, have a seamless relationship between
work and family. This facilitates parents to take long
periods off work as they need it, with generous support
from the State. It facilitates fathers to take time off
work to support mothers during the difficult period
immediately before and after childbirth. This facilitates
families in dealing with the most difficult issue of all,
which is that children, God bless them, are entirely
unpredictable. What is one to do the morning one wants to
go to work if one's children are all sick? What does one
do? A flexible, intelligent employer will recognise that
their employees have family responsibilities, but there
are many employers who would not accept it is their
problem if children suddenly get sick. There is nothing
more distressing for a parent than the enormous pressure
that arises at 8.30 a.m. when both parents are going to
work and there are sick children at home.
Unless this is
built into the structure of child care in the State,
simple gestures like better child care and tax allowances
will not get to the nub of the issue, which is, as
Senator O'Meara said, the flexibility of employers in
recognising that their employees have lives separate from
their jobs. The real issue is family friendly work and
that is a matter of definition of our values. Of course
it involves proper provision of child care, but we will
not do that with £46 million. A proper system of
State-funded child care of the kind that civilised
European countries operate will cost us about £0.5
billion and having such a system is a correct and
admirable aspiration. However, that in itself will not
solve the problem, nor will it eliminate the stress and
hassle for parents. There will have to be a succession of
back-up facilities together with flexibility in work
written into workers' protection legislation so that they
cannot be penalised for looking after their children. It
is not just about money. There must be a clear
recognition of people's conflicting loyalties between
family and work. If we do not do that, we can have the
most elaborate system of child care but we will not
eliminate the stress factor.
There is a
subsidiary issue which relates to the present system of
child care. To the extent to which it exists it seems to
be based on the de facto impoverishment of a
section of women in Irish society. Even if they are on
social welfare, most of us would regard the combination
of social welfare payments and payments for child care
they receive as profoundly inadequate and that is not the
solution either. The solution is a deliberate decision to
have work and family responsibilities recognised as two
sides of civilised living. Most men and women today have
no desire to stay full-time in the home. Most of them
have an equal desire to have a decent and satisfying
family life. That requires money to provide child care
resources. It also requires laws and a statement of
values that recognise that people's humanity is as
important in the economy as gross domestic product. That
is one of the issues that arises in child care. We have
moved from being a country that was obsessed with growth
to a country which must now become obsessed with the use
of growth to give our people a worthwhile quality of
life. The way the children of those at work are looked
after is central to that.
Ms Cox:
I move amendment No. 1:
To delete
all words after "Seanad Éireann" and
substitute the following:
"commends
the priority given to child care in the National
Development Plan, the substantially increased funding
provided in the budget for child care and the
measures being taken to co-ordinate the delivery of
child care services.
I reserve my
right to speak.
Minister for
Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): I
am acutely aware of the need for quality child care
provision in Ireland today and the Government has
demonstrated its commitment to developing quality child
care services nationally through a range of measures,
including substantially increased funding supports,
facilitating consultation with representatives of all of
the stakeholders involved to inform policy development
and facilitating co-ordination of child care service
delivery.
A particular
feature of Ireland's booming economy has been the
increasing participation of women in the labour force and
this has led to increased demand for child care services.
The historical system of child care provision in Ireland,
in which the mother or close family relative was the
principal child care provider, no longer applies to the
same extent as previously. As more women take up
employment, training and educational opportunities, the
pool of people willing to mind children shrinks, leading
to difficulties for parents in marrying their working
lives with their family responsibilities. It is with this
in mind that the Government has been working towards
developing child care which will meet diverse child care
needs.
I acknowledge
that in many ways Ireland is less advanced than some of
our European neighbours in this area but would point out
that the developments undertaken in those countries also
occurred during their periods of economic growth. The
Government recognises that child care is a complex issue
and has responded by facilitating consultation with all
of the relevant stakeholders in order to develop a
national child care strategy. My Department chaired the
Partnership 2000 expert working group on child care which
comprised over 70 members representing relevant
Departments, statutory bodies, social partners,
non-governmental organisations, providers, parents and
individuals with expertise and interest in the area of
child care. They met over 18 months and commissioned
research to assist them with their deliberations. On 3
February 1999 I launched the group's report, which set
out 27 recommendations covering financial supports for
providers and parents, regulations, planning, training,
qualifications, employment and co-ordination.
The group's
recommendations have since been evaluated, costed and
prioritised by the interdepartmental committee on child
care which was also chaired by my Department. The
committee also considered the child care proposals in the
Government's Action Programme for the Millennium and the
reports of the Commission on the Family and the National
Forum for Early Childhood Education. The committee has
reported back to Government and its recommendations are
currently under consideration.
My Department
has had a role in funding the development of child care
facilities since 1994 within its remit for equality.
Funding supports were initially provided through a pilot
child care initiative targeted at services in
disadvantaged areas which could provide low cost child
care to parents, particularly women, facilitating them to
access employment, training and education opportunities.
The initiative was evaluated in 1997, leading to the
development of the equal opportunities programme in 1998
which has supported a large number of services
nationally. In July 1998 I announced funding of over £6
million, combining EU and Exchequer moneys, for the
operation of the programme for the two year period 1998
and 1999. The programme provided funds from an equal
opportunities and social inclusion perspective under a
broader range of initiatives than its predecessor,
including capital grants for the establishment, upgrading
and enhancement of facilities which I approved for 106
community based child care projects, grants towards the
cost of two senior child care personnel in each of 25
flagship community based projects, funding for an
employer demonstration initiative which was developed in
conjunction with IBEC to stimulate employer involvement
and interest in developing child care services for their
employees - to date funding has been approved for eight
consortia involving 21 employers - and the development of
a national child care census and database providing
information in relation to child population and the level
of supply of child care in group based facilities on a
county by county basis. The database will inform future
policy development.
In June 1999,
my Department succeeded in obtaining additional funding
from the European Social Fund under the Human Resources
Development Operational Programme which, including
Exchequer funding, increased the programme's budget by a
further £5 million. This funding was secured to enhance
the equal opportunities child care programme by assisting
training and development for community support and
capital projects already receiving funding under the
programme, partnerships and community groups supported by
the Local Urban and Rural Development Operational
Programme, supporting the development of national
voluntary child care organisations, such as Barnardos, An
Comhchoiste Reamhscolaíochta Teoranta, St. Nicholas
Montessori Society, The Irish Pre-School Playgroups
Association, the National Childminding Association of
Ireland and the National Children's Nursery Association,
research into the development of family friendly policies
for small and medium enterprises, the enhancement of the
national child care database and child care training for
staff in crèche facilities in drug treatment centres.
The Government
believes that investment in the development of child care
services must be addressed as a priority. This is
particularly true in disadvantaged areas if parents in
those areas wish to avail of opportunities to access
employment, training and education to break the cycle of
disadvantage. Child care was identified as a priority
area for investment under the national development plan
resulting in an allocation of £250 million to my
Department over the course of the plan, 2000 to 2006.
Never before has there been such a significant investment
in child care service provision which acknowledges the
need to create more child care places and improve the
quality of services.
The substantial
funding planned for the next seven years will pave the
way to building up child care service provision which
will benefit children, parents, communities and society
in general. Last December I announced the framework for
implementing supports over the period the national
development plan, which includes expansion of the equal
opportunities child care programme including funding for
capital grants for community based child care facilities,
grants towards staffing costs for community based child
care services, training supports, supports to enhance the
national voluntary child care organisations, building on
previous initiatives, for example, further development of
the national child care census and database; innovative
flexible initiatives, which promote the development of
child care facilities for children with special needs and
services in areas of particular disadvantage, grants
towards the development of local child care network
initiatives, which will provide training, support and
advice to providers who would otherwise operate in
isolation and a new capital grant scheme for child care
providers caring for up to 30 child care places.
The plan will
enable my Department to provide for the further
development and expansion of child care facilitates,
which addresses the needs of men and women in reconciling
their child care needs with their participation in
employment, training and education. It will support
objectives such as the provision of diverse child care
which meets the needs of the child, increase the number
of trained personnel working in child care and improve
co-ordination and deliver of child care.
Other
Departments are also involved in funding the development
of child care. As announced by my colleague the Minister
for Finance in budget 2000, funding of more than £11
million has been allocated to the Department of Social,
Community and Family Affairs for the development of
community based out of school hours services, the
Department of Education and Science for grants to school
managements to develop after school care and the
Department of Health and Children for advisory services
for child care service providers.
It should also
be noted that the Department of Education and Science
also has a budget of more than £2 million comprising ESF
and Exchequer funding for a scheme which supports the
child care costs of participants in VTOS, Youthreach and
senior traveller programmes. FÁS is also involved in the
provision of child care training at community level for
people working in a voluntary or paid capacity and it
works closely with my Department on the provision of
training to personnel in child care projects funded by
the Department. In addition, my Department is represented
on the FÁS-Social Partners Steering Group which is
developing a traineeship for child care workers.
Changes
announced in the budget mean that the child care sector
can also benefit from tax relief on capital expenditure
by availing of 100% accelerated capital allowances in the
first year as opposed to spreading the allowance over
seven years as was previously the case. The relief
applies to all child care facilities whether provided by
employers or commercial child care operators. They can
also be availed of by investors who wish to invest by way
of leasing arrangements.
The Government
is conscious that child care has developed on an ad
hoc basis to date and that changing circumstances
require a more co-ordinated approach that will benefit
from the wealth of information gained from recent
research and reports in the area. Last December,
therefore, the Government assigned responsibility for
co-ordinating child care services delivery to my
Department. The structures that have been established or
are in the process of being established to meet these
needs include an interdepartmental committee at assistant
secretary level to focus on child care policy which will
be chaired by my Department and a national co-ordinating
child care committee to oversee the development of a
child care infrastructure in an integrated manner
throughout the country. The committee has been
established with effect from 17 December 1999 and has had
two meetings to date. It is chaired by my Department and
members comprise representatives of the statutory and
non-statutory sectors, including the social partners.
Another structure is the county child care committees,
which will advance the provision of child care facilities
within the local areas. The committees will be led by the
relevant health boards and membership will comprise local
representatives of the statutory and non-statutory
sectors.
The roles and
responsibilities of each element of the structure will
evolve over time and local needs should dictate what
structures are most appropriate at local level. The
structures will provide a means for effective planning
and targeting of resources where they are most needed. In
addition to the co-ordinating child care service
delivery, we are working with other Departments on
specific issues that are relevant to the development of
services.
Planning
permission for child care service provision has been
identified as an area of concern for child care service
development in some cases. The Department of the
Environment and Local Government has established a
committee to produce planning guidelines which will
assist developers, builders, child care service providers
and the planning authorities in their efforts to make
suitable provision for child care in their development
plans. My Department is represented on the committee
which also includes representation from the planning
authorities, health boards and the Department of Health
and Children.
The future
development of our child care services will benefit from
this co-ordinated approach and these structures will be
instrumental in facilitating child care provision in
Ireland for the life of the national development plan. It
should also enable Ireland to meet its commitments to
child care in the context of the national employment
action plan and the national development plan.
The overriding
objectives of the initiatives I outlined are to increase
the number of child care places in private and community
sectors and to improve the quality of child care
available across the country over the term of the
national development plan. I am confident initiatives
being put into place will achieve these objectives and
that the next seven years will see the development of a
diverse child care system within Ireland that will meet
the needs and expectations of parents.
It is important
to underline that quality child care provision plays a
major part in the development of our children. The
changes in child care provision required in the new
economic reality of our country must protect and enhance
our children's future. The Government is committed to
ensuring all the developments in child care over the
course of the national development plan will have, at
their heart, the interests of our children.
Mrs. Ridge: While
I appreciate the Minister has been in the House for a
long time, I hope he will listen to what I have to say. I
speak on child care from the perspective of my experience
as a teacher of early childhood education and a former
chairperson of the National Playgroups Association.
An article in The
Irish Times the other day states that the fledgling
administration in the North has provided £38 million for
preschools in Northern Ireland. The heading of the
article reads "£38 million for preschools in
Northern Ireland". The article states that the £38
million sterling cash grant will secure 9,000 free new
preschool education places in the North. It states the
allocation will bring the number of free nursery places
to almost 19,000 in the statutory, voluntary and private
school sectors. It also states that this means that by
next year 85% of preschool children will be able to take
up a free place. This is a fledgling administration.
While I appreciate there will be many cross-Border
initiatives and we will exchange views and learn from
each other, I hope a rapid learning process will take
place on the provision of child care.
I also refer
the Minister to the latest National Economic and Social
Council publication in December 1999, entitled
Opportunities, Challenges and Capacities for Choice. It
states on page 288 that the council is placing emphasis
on the provision of child care as a means of increasing
labour market adaptability and employability. I
acknowledge that was one of the Minister for Finance,
Deputy McCreevy's hopes, but I do not know if he listened
to the people because he did not go about it the right
way.
All Members are
aware - I am sure the Minister is tired hearing about it
- of problems in relation to the supply of child care.
Members are lobbied constantly because of the shortages.
The 1996 Act decreased the number of places, although
that was in the main for the best possible reason of the
provision of better physical facilities. I am sure the
Minister is aware of another problem with regard to the
provision of child care facilities. It does not appear
that a definitive guideline has been issued to local
authorities regarding smaller facilities, some of which
are attached to houses - some people are getting
permission for them while others are not . There does not
appear to be any particular rule on why some are getting
it. I am not referring to the need for a fire officer's
report, etc., but it involves a loss in terms of the
number of places for the people using such facilities. In
some cases, the facilities could continue in operation.
On the cost of
child care, the NESC report states that costs in Ireland
are the fifth highest in Europe. If one was a mother in
France or Belgium, one would not pay anything. One will
not have to pay anything in Northern Ireland but I
checked this morning and some crèches in Blackrock
charge £120 a week for full day, comprehensive care for
each child. Some people charge £50 a week but it is
obvious that it would not be worthwhile for some women to
re-enter the workforce. Their family income would fall if
they returned to work because of these costs.
I have a
certain sympathy with the cost factor inasmuch as it is
becoming increasingly difficult to recruit trained,
thoughtful and responsible child care workers. Many of
those who are trained are married women, but they are
encountering the same cul-de-sac in that they cannot put
their children into child care facilities because they do
not exist.
The position is
similar to the annual school report which states that one
is good but must do better. Nobody is criticising anybody
personally but Ireland has a burgeoning economy and many
extra jobs, but a decreasing number of child care places.
The equation will not balance. With regard to young,
single mothers, the Minister emphasised FÁS programmes.
There is always provision for children on such courses
which is great because it means people can participate in
them. However, once the course is finished, the women
find themselves back in the same position.
It would be
desirable for many young mothers with one child to
re-enter the workforce. However, they cannot do so
because the lists for free nursery facilities are miles
long in areas of urban deprivation. There is no way one
will access it under any circumstances. A barrier is
being created by not having the facilities to ensure
re-entry to the workforce at several different levels.
This barrier affects mothers who want to re-enter the
workforce, single people and others who cannot afford
child care under any circumstances because it is too
expensive.
Another problem
is highlighted in the Family Observer, which is a
European publication. It is a matter for some thought
because it states that fertility rates are likely to
drop. The thesis is that Europe will be short of children
in the next century. Our child care crisis could be
solved by not having children at all. The mean age of
Europe is currently 39.3 years and it is likely to reach
a mean of 45 years by 2030. One of the main reasons for
this is the drop in the fertility rate and the
publication states that influencing fertility rates is a
possible way for Governments to curb ageing populations.
We have all
thought about how our older citizens - hopefully we will
all be one at some stage - will be supported when there
is a greatly reduced workforce. One example is not to
support families or provide the necessary facilities for
people to have and rear children properly. In Austria the
Government abolished a payment for families and there was
a subsequent 10% decrease in the fertility rate. It is
obvious that public policy can affect fertility levels.
One might think it is odd of me to raise this aspect when
there are obvious signs of fertility in Ireland, and
even, happily, in this Chamber, but it would be bad for
the country. We read about comely or handsome maidens
dancing at the crossroads.
Mr.
O'Donoghue: Comely maidens.
Mrs. Ridge:
We will all be too old to dance, although we may be
shuffling around nursing homes, and there may be a small
young population. Such a development would be
undesirable. It is another possible off-shoot of not
putting money into supporting child care facilities which
are necessary given the enormous distances people must
travel to work. It is an unreal existence to take a child
out at 6.30 a.m. and return home at 8 p.m. It is bad for
families and couples. It is also extremely bad for
children and we should be able to do better locally.
Perhaps the answer lies with local authorities and the
provision in any major building development of a child
care facility on site when houses are built.
Ireland is
great at commissioning reports but it is also great at
ignoring the advice given in them. The Commission on the
Family, which was established initially by the former
Minister, Proinsias De Rossa, and continued by the
Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, Deputy
Dermot Ahern, was greatly welcomed. I attended the launch
and everything was to be done for families. It was
stated:
Principal
to the unique and essential family function is that
of caring and nurturing for all its members. It is in
the family context that a person's basic needs for
security, belonging, support and intimacy are
satisfied. These are especially important for
children.
The Minister
and I know that many children are not having that
experience. Good child care would assist them greatly in
their development as adults.
Ms Cox:
I thank the Labour Party for giving us this opportunity
to discuss once again the issue of child care. I agree
with Senator Ryan that it is not only a women's issue,
although that is occasionally the perception. It is a
family issue and also an issue for business and society.
The attendance of the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, who
has overall responsibility in his Department for this
matter, is indicative of the Government's commitment to
addressing the issue of child care.
I do not
suggest that we have done it all, got it right and
everything is perfect. As Members of the Opposition are
aware, that is not my opinion. However, I am honest
enough to say that we are making moves in a direction
that will lead us on the path we all want to follow.
These moves will ensure family friendly work practices
and that child centred child care facilities are
available to all those, whether they are mothers or
fathers, who choose to use them. It will also ensure that
proper facilities, stimulation and encouragement are
provided to future generations to enable them to continue
to move forward and maintain our economic growth. Without
continued economic growth and performance we will not be
in a position to pay for the care and supports needed for
the less well off in society.
What annoys me
about the Labour Party is its pretence that its cares
about child care. Its members condemn the Government for
its failure to address the crisis of supply and access to
child care services. They sniffle at the £250 million in
the national development plan and say it does not show
commitment. They laugh at the £46 million provided in
the budget for a number of initiatives which I will
address later. They laugh at the idea that an increase in
child benefit, which is not means tested or taxed, is
paid directly to the person looking after the child, be
it the mother or the father but generally the mother.
Irrespective of their status it is increased by £8 per
month for the first and second child and by £10 per
month for the third and subsequent children. For a family
of four children the increase amounts to £197 per
month or £2,364 per annum paid, tax free. I am not
suggesting that is enough but it is an indication of the
Government's commitment.
We speak about
access to crèche facilities. Everybody here knows you
can flood a problem with money and still not solve it.
The Government takes the view that if the number of child
care places can be increased through the involvement of
the private sector, employers and the Government, that is
the way to address the issue. We must address not only
the physical space, the room and facilities which the
children will use but provide adequately trained
personnel to work in this area. We are taking the issue
seriously and working down that particular route.
Training is vitally important. Continued development of
facilities is vitally important. A grant scheme of £10
million for capital upgrading of facilities is a
commitment in that area and it is not only for the big
rich employers or the big child care facilities but for
child care facilities for up to 20 children. There is a
belief that, if there are more than 20 children in a
child care facility, out of the profit one may make in
running it one should be able to provide the capital
expenditure. A sum of £46 million has been allocated to
increase supply, £23 million to expand the equal
opportunities child care programme, the £10 million
grant scheme already mentioned, £2 million for local
child care network initiatives - focusing on the
community and the value it has to offer in the
development of society, our children and future
generations - £5 million to schools to run and provide
afterschool child care services, £5 million to community
groups to provide the same type of services and £1.4
million to health boards which play a role in advising
and co-ordinating services within their areas.
We recognise
this problem will not be solved by the Government alone.
No problem can be solved in that way. The Minister has
provided for 100% capital allowances in year one expended
on construction or refurbishment of premises. Some people
may say that is not enough. I have experience of putting
together a cashflow plan and a building plan for
developing a child care facility as an employer. When I
looked at the seven year pay back on capital allowances
it did not make sense. Irrespective of how one might
condemn businesses, because they are not interested in
being family run and family friendly, if they do not make
money to pay their employees there is not much point in
having a business because they have no jobs to go to. A
100% capital allowance on the first year of capital
allowances makes is feasible for small and medium sized
organisations to think about providing child care
facilities for their employees near the place of work.
That type of initiative should be applauded. We need more
of it and we need encouragement from employers. That is
the way forward.
When I speak of
the hypocrisy of the Labour Party, I refer to Deputy
Michael D. Higgins who had the audacity on a national
programme to speak about and compare child care
facilities to carparks and carpark allowances.
An
Cathaoirleach: It is not appropriate to refer to
Members of the other House here.
Ms Cox:
If he was careful about what he says, I would have not
have to do that.
An
Cathaoirleach: He cannot defend himself in this
House, no more than I would like him to listen to the
Senator.
Ms Cox:
Perhaps I could ask Senator O'Meara to explain if it
Labour Party policy -----
Ms O'Meara:
It is Government policy.
An
Cathaoirleach: Senator Cox without interruption,
please.
Ms Cox:
-----and if it is acceptable to say you park your
children at 7 a.m. and pick them up at 7 p.m? Is it
acceptable for someone to cast such a slur on working
parents who, as Senator O'Meara rightly said, have the
stress of taking their children to work and collecting
them and wondering if one is doing the right thing? It is
hypocritical to use children as pawns in this political
game. I regret that that happens time and again. I do not
say Fianna Fáil has not been similarly guilty in the
past. We have been, and I accept it.
One good thing
about this debate is that it makes us think about
proactive things we can do and proactive suggestions we
can make to the Department. The issue is the
reconciliation of work and family life and an acceptance
that family life is one of the most important aspects of
the community and without it we are going nowhere. Child
friendly work hours are vital. We must seek statutory
requirements, as stated by Senator O'Meara, to ensure
job-sharing, flexible work hours, mother friendly or
parent friendly work. Perhaps we should look towards
payment for parental leave. When the parental leave
legislation was being debated there were calls for paid
parental leave. I defended the fact that it was not paid
on the basis that it should be introduced and found to
work and that employers would have an opportunity to see
how it works in practice. We can then move slowly towards
ensuring that down the road people will not lose
financially by taking time off.
There should be
more expenditure on infrastructure. I refer to the £250
million available under the national development plan. It
would be marvellous if in the next budget the Minister
for Finance could provide computers for women at home,
whose children are at school, and ISDN lines to every
house in country. This would enable people to work from
home while the children are at school, contribute to the
economy and be at home for their children when they
return from school. A little imagination would go a long
way. If the key focus is not child centred and family
based it does not matter how much money is put into it. I
agree with the Opposition that this is not just an issue
for women, the Government or employers but for all of us.
Dr. Henry:
I agree with Senator Cox that this is not just an issue
for women. Not for one instant do I blame the Minister
for leaving the House and leaving us in the excellent
hand of his Minister of State, Deputy Wallace. There are
three women on this side, three women on the Government
side and a woman taking the debate. I am grateful that
one of the officials is a man - I hope the ushers will
stay - but this matter is looked on as a women's issue.
No matter what one says we will have token men say things
about it. I hope Senator Ryan will forgive me for saying
that. Often I have heard that it is not just a women's
issue, yet I find that the running must be made by women.
The Minister of
State, Deputy Mary Wallace, will remember she and I spent
a great deal of time trying to do something about getting
a crèche in the House. Does she remember when we were
tramping all over the place, going from location to
location, trying to get a crèche established? I would be
interested to know if there will be a crèche in the new
block. At the time there was demand for a crèche and it
was not just women who worked within the Leinster House
complex who were looking for facilities for their
children; it was also men who worked here. Until we set
our own house in order in this regard, we should be
careful about castigating other employers on not having
done as much as we feel they should do. How careful are
we about flexi-time and being agreeable if people have
sick children, etc.? Often I do not think we are the very
best. I would like to see us putting our own house in
order before we tell people in other businesses what they
should do.
Senator Ridge
is correct that there have been incredible changes in the
demography of Europe in the past generation, but the
changes in Ireland have been nothing short of staggering.
Until 1972, married women could not work within the
public service; they had to resign. Here we are
beseeching them to come back into every form of
employment so we can run the country. A few weeks ago I
wrote on this topic in The Irish Times and I was
fascinated to get a letter from a childless constituent
asking why childless people should have to support child
care with their taxes. What on earth did he think would
happen in his old age? Who was going to drive the buses
and who would be the nurses? Who would run the services,
not to mind generate the economic growth?
This is an
issue which concerns everybody here. I feel so
sympathetic to young married women nowadays because we
used to have a situation just 20 years ago where about
25% of them worked outside the home and now 50% do so.
The percentage of young married mothers who are working
is much higher.
There has been
a huge change of course in the family size. The average
family size is about two, which is just about the
replacement rate. Indeed, the total fertility rate of
women in Ireland has fallen to just under two from about
four one generation ago. It is a staggering change. We
are having to catch up with the infrastructural needs
which these changes have brought about because unlike in
the past we do not have extended families to mind
children if women were going out to work. There are huge
changes which have taken place and we must insist on a
change within the infrastructure so that they can be
accommodated.
The last budget
made an attempt to address the issue. I applaud the
support given for training, in particular. Senator Ridge
spoke of the need for quality child care. It is no good
if it is just a child-parking service. I will not go into
the details of that but I would not be in favour of any
sort of child-parking service. It must be quality child
care and, unless there are trained personnel, it will not
be very useful.
I acknowledge
that child benefit was increased in the budget, but I
would like to have seen it greatly increased. For many
poorly paid women - many women are very poorly paid - the
only way they will be in a position to pay for quality
child care is by getting decent child benefit. Many of
them are working in the services industries, which are
not well paid but which are essential. They are also
working in some of our burgeoning industries which
require the input of a great deal of labour but which
again are not highly paid. Unless there is an adequate
amount of money to make it worth their while to go out to
work after they have paid for child care, it will not do
any good.
I am delighted
of course to see the support for training, as I said, but
I wonder if we could not go a little further in elevating
the status of those who work in the child care industry.
Unfortunately, as somebody said to me recently, people in
Ireland should go around with their salaries stencilled
on their foreheads because nowadays the main source of
kudos is what one is paid, not the social responsibility
one has in one's job or the contribution one makes to the
community. Child care workers are not well paid. It is a
labour intensive industry. I think the regulations
require one to have one worker per three children under
six months and then the ratio increases to one per six
older children and eventually to about one per ten.
The setting up
of crèches, as Senator Cox obviously discovered, is very
costly. The budget concentrated on the bricks and mortar
of setting up these crèches rather than also looking at
the personnel within the crèches and how they could be
helped. I would like to see tax relief in this area. I
could get tax relief for employing a chauffeur because he
would be my employee but if one employs somebody to mind
one's children, one cannot avail of tax relief. This
seems a little odd. If the person pays PRSI and levies
and is in the tax net, would it not raise the stature of
the job and encourage people to pay the person a little
more if they could get tax relief on it or on the fees
paid to registered crèches? I cannot see why this seems
such a hot potato for the Government because these are
people who are genuinely working within the workforce.
They deserve better recognition for the work they are
doing and those who employ them should be entitled to tax
relief.
I agree that
more flexible work practices would be a great help. Last
year we enacted useful legislation for parental leave and
force majeure leave. However, women in particular,
because it is always the woman who must take the time off
work, are very reluctant because they see their jobs in
danger. I had my children even before there was maternity
leave. Having worked until the day before one was born
and gone back eight days later, I think the improvements
which have been made have been more than worthwhile but
there would be a better workforce if one made even better
conditions of employment. I would suggest this is the
sort of area at which we must look next. We should try to
make it an acceptable feature of life that one has these
two unfortunate children, as most people only have two
nowadays. Surely if we are to bring up a generation of
Irish citizens who are worthwhile for the State, we must
concentrate on the early part of their career.
Ms Ormonde:
On a point of order, I observe that there is not a
quorum. I note that there is not one man in this Chamber.
We have spoken about the fact that this is a family and
societal issue, yet there are only female Members
contributing. We should get some of our male colleagues
in here.
An
Leas-Chathaoirleach: Apart from me.
Ms Ormonde:
I observed your presence, a Leas-Chathaoirligh.
Notice taken
that 12 Members were not present; House counted and 12
Members being present,
Miss Quill:
I welcome the gentlemen who have joined us for the
debate. It is a measure of the value we put on their
judgment and their decision-making powers that we invited
them to be here to listen to what we, as women, have been
saying on this fundamentally important issue of child
care A previous speaker mentioned the fact that the
Minister of State who is present in the House happens to
be a woman. In this instance, I am particularly pleased
that the Minister of State, Deputy Mary Wallace, is here.
Mr. Manning:
On a point of order, could I be excused to go home to
read my child's bedtime story?
An
Leas-Chathaoirleach: I do not think that is a point
of order.
Miss Quill:
I would like to respond but since I have only eight
minutes I will not do so. In the context of this debate,
I am particularly pleased the Minister of State is here.
Since her appointment she has devoted an enormous amount
of time, effort and expertise to developing her equal
opportunities brief. Child care is a key element in the
equal opportunities agenda.
It is far from
true to claim, as this motion does, that the Government
has failed to tackle the issue of child care. It is true,
however, that Ireland is regrettably far behind other
European countries in providing a proper child care
system. Until now we have had an informal system of child
care that has largely developed in an unregulated way and
which is inadequate to meet present day demands. The
executive summary of the report of the expert working
group on child care, which was published only last year,
states that "there is now a virtual crisis in child
care supply". That was the base from which the
Government had to build a system of child care. The
report of the interdepartmental committee said the most
urgent need was to increase the number of child care
places. It was not the only need but it was the most
urgent one. I wanted to make that point for Senator Henry
who said there was too much emphasis on bricks and mortar
in the budget provisions. I assume that was because this
was identified as the most urgent need.
The Minister -
no doubt with an input from the Minister of State -
responded by announcing a £46 million package to deal
with the supply of child care. The details of that
package have already been outlined by Senator Cox in what
I felt was a very thoughtful contribution and one from
which I benefited. The £46 million package lays a fairly
firm foundation for addressing the infrastructural
deficit that existed until now. I am confident that it
will be a major factor in helping us to build a
sustainable, affordable and accessible child care system.
The requirement
to dramatically increase the availability of such
facilities in the community and in the workplace will
need much more money. As well as that, it will need much
more innovation in the years ahead. It requires new
thinking as well as extra resources to tackle this very
real problem on our doorsteps. The Leader of my party,
the Tánaiste, Deputy Harney, in her role as Minister for
Enterprise, Trade and Employment, has more than once set
out to encourage employers to see greater provision of
child care facilities "as a crucial investment in
their workforce". That is the beginning of right
thinking, the kind of thinking that will have to take
root. In many ways we need cultural changes as well as
economic provision if proper, accessible child care is to
become available. The Tánaiste is correct when she says
it is an important element.
Currently there
is much emphasis on human resources but the employee must
be seen as a member of a family. In making provision for
a person's well-being at a human level one must see them
as part of a family. The well-being of the total family
is important to the well-being of the individual. The
Tánaiste is correct when she says so and I hope those
listening to her will respond. Employers must see child
care facilities not as an extra cost but as a key
ingredient in the workplace of the 21st century in which
everyone's needs, no matter how diverse, will be taken
fully into account.
Tax incentives
in the last two budgets contain measures to encourage
companies to provide on-site child care facilities. That
shows that there is new thinking and a firm commitment on
the part of my party to make that contribution to the
totality of initiatives that must be taken to provide
proper child care. We should have a national strategy and
I am glad that measures are in train to put such a
strategy in place. A national strategy has to be
implemented at local level, however. I am glad that
county and, hopefully, city committees will be set up so
that the national strategy will be put in place locally.
That is the best way to look after the delivery of such
services.
From now on
crèches should be provided in housing estates as an
in-built part of such developments. We are beginning to
realise that in building estates we ought to be building
neighbourhoods and thinking in terms of putting in branch
libraries, health care centres and child care facilities.
That would avoid the ridiculous spectacle of women
driving their children miles to a crèche near their
workplace. That involves time and hardship, and it
contributes to traffic congestion. There is no
justification for it.
Training for
child care workers is as important as the provision of
places for children. Child care workers do not have a
recognised status in the community because of the
informal way in which the system has developed here. We
need to set up a national qualifications framework to
establish standards for accreditation so that child care
workers would have a recognised professional status,
education, skills and a qualification which would give
them access to proper remuneration. Such a qualification
would enable them to work in child care services here or
elsewhere. That is fundamentally important. I ask the
Minister of State to ensure, in the context of the money
available under the national plan, that proper and
systematic training is put in place.
The people with
whom young children are in contact in their early years
are shaping the next generation and our nation. We put a
great deal of resources into giving teachers skills
because we believe their contact with young people is
fundamentally important for the nation's health. We must
put equal emphasis on the proper training of child care
workers.
I have a
question for the Minister of State in regard to the £46
million. There is a number of community child care
service groups in my area, some of which were funded
under EU URBAN pilot schemes which have now ended. Those
groups are in limbo and are unclear about how to access
this new money and the channels it will come through.
Will it come through the ADMs? How will it percolate down
to groups of that nature? I ask the Minister of State to
address that in her reply.
Ms Ormonde:
I apologise for disrupting the flow -----
Ms O'Meara:
The Senator was right.
Mrs. Ridge:
The Senator was quite right.
Miss Quill:
Bhí an cheart aici.
Ms Ormonde:
-----but I felt I had to make the point about the need
for global thinking on this issue. That was my reasoning.
I took seriously the decision to call a quorum. I would
never be flippant about anything I do in the Seanad.
I welcome the
Minister of State and I commend her and the Minister for
Justice, Equality and Law Reform on their work to date.
We are talking here about a very complex issue. The child
care programme and the quality of child care services in
the future must be processed very carefully.
The motion
tabled by the Labour Party has provided us with a golden
opportunity to show in our amendment what is being done.
They can trust us to produce a quality programme for
child care services. The debate on this motion has
clarified that there has been no failure on the part of
the Government and that we are going to put forward a
plan that will work. This complex issue must be addressed
slowly. We are talking here about how to shape the future
of our society. This is the way to go forward. There is
increased funding in the national development plan for
the co-ordination of the delivery of child care services.
The expert
interdepartmental working group on child care, which was
chaired by the Department, produced 27 recommendations. I
do not have time to discuss of them but the global
feeling is that there should be financial support for
providers and parents availing of child care services,
support for those in employment, an examination of
qualifications and planning and a co-ordination of
services.
This is a huge
issue and we should not rush through it. To get it right,
there must be an integrated strategy involving several
Departments. We all know how long it takes to produce any
report on the examination of available services. I
welcome that this is being taken slowly because I would
never want a rushed system of child care services.
The system is
not right at the moment. We do not have proper planning.
There is a lack of after school child care services for
the children of working parents. There are no proper
advisory services in the health area. That must be worked
through. We will not be at the races in relation to
quality child care unless we get an integrated plan. The
national development plan has allocated over £250
million, which will expand the equal opportunities
programme and includes funding for community based child
care facilities, staffing, training and the national
voluntary organisations.
I always
understood that child care facilities were out there
somewhere and that people dropped their children to them
but I never knew what went on inside these facilities or
whether there was proper training for the staff. We need
proper training and qualifications for child care staff,
otherwise they will not stay. I hope the new courses in
the regional colleges will be endorsed as the criteria
for assessing the training of child care supervisors and
workers, otherwise the present haphazard, ad hoc arrangement
will continue. I worry about that. At the moment, there
is a huge turnover of staff in child care services. It is
very confusing for young children and babies if the staff
of a child care facility are replaced after two weeks by
other young people. I would be terrified to leave young
babies in a crèche with such a high turnover of staff.
We will only get that right if we have proper training
facilities, qualifications and structures, otherwise we
will not have a respected child care organisation and the
community will not feel happy and confident about leaving
their babies in its care. Unless we get that right, there
will always be an "iffyness" about child care
services.
The initiative
in the national development plan to co-ordinate
Departments is the way forward. Planning is very
important. The planning guidelines must involve builders,
developers and local communities. Any new scheme must
include a crèche. We need a community based
infrastructure. We do not want a society where people are
stressed out of their minds, getting up at 6.30 a.m.,
leaving their children in a child care facility,
collecting them in the evening and then going home. That
is not the quality of life we want for the future.
Employers must
be involved in this. We need flexi-time working and job
sharing. This cannot be done in isolation. There must be
a co-ordinated national plan involving voluntary groups,
employers and Departments. If we establish that
co-ordinated network we will have a first class child
care service in future.
I welcome the
process we are going through and the slow approach. I
have always believed we should work slowly in order to
get this right. We are talking here about the future of
our society. Those children will remember that we spoke
here tonight about the need for proper child care
facilities. I have great confidence in the Minister and
the Minister of State to bring forward a co-ordinated
strategy which will be implemented in the future and will
give us first-class child care services.
Ms Leonard:
This is an important debate. There was much talk about
child care problems prior to the budget and there is no
harm revisiting the issue. I listened with interest to
Senator O'Meara say she was fed up listening to the
Government side say that when the Labour Party was in
Government, it did nothing. I am fed up listening to the
Labour Party continually whingeing that no matter what we
do, it is never enough and using that as an excuse.
Ms O'Meara:
It has not been.
Ms Leonard:
We have a problem with child care, which we all
recognise. I am sure Senator O'Meara will agree it has
developed further, particularly in recent years, probably
as a result of the boom in our economy. It would be wrong
to imply that couples were deciding not to have children
possibly because of the problem of child care. It is a
fact of life not only in this country but throughout
Europe that the birth rate is dropping. Couples are
making a conscious decision to have fewer children due to
their careers or otherwise. It is a problem. I recognise
extra stress is placed on couples trying to avail of
whatever child care facilities are available.
The debate
which took place following the budget was probably one of
the most divisive which could have taken place. It pitted
families against families, double income families against
single income ones. It was unhelpful and hurtful to
parents in families where go out to work. They were made
to feel they were almost neglecting their children in
that they were parking them in the morning and collecting
them in the evening. I respect those who go out to work
and the mother or father who stays at home. The problem
is we do not have enough choices.
I listened with
interest to Senator Ridge who said that when we grow old,
we will be shuffling around nursing homes with nobody to
look after us. It is a very sombre thought. I wonder
whether it would be worse to be a lone parent trying to
manage child care on my own or to be an elderly person
with nobody to look after me. I have not decided which
would be worse but perhaps I will decide before the end
of the debate.
We all
acknowledge there has been a problem with child care but
we must also acknowledge what the Minister has done to
date. It is a complex issue and we only have to listen to
parents who go out to work, those who choose to stay at
home and the employers. It was a difficult issue for the
Minister to try to grasp. He has tried on all counts to
take the first steps to deal with the problem. I welcome
the £46 million announced in the budget and the £250
million set aside in the National Development Plan.
There is no
point talking about what was done in the past. We
acknowledge there have been problems. The Minister in his
efforts to date has tried to deal with them. I welcome
the suggestion of a forum to discuss the issue. The
Labour Party motion referred to the social partnership
talks. We should create a partnership among employers,
the voluntary sector and Departments to try to come up
with strategies to deal with this £250 million.
The crux of the
problem is that we must recognise that society demands
greater appreciation or recognition of couples who chose
to go out to work, greater co-operation between employers
and employees and a recognition that people have a family
life as well as work.
I come from a
nursing background and ten years ago a number of my
colleagues sought job sharing or part-time work because
they had small families at home. They were unable to
avail of that facility at the time, because it was a no
go area as far as employers in nursing were concerned,
and many of them left the profession. Unfortunately, we
are seeing the other side of the coin now with the
problems there are recruiting nurses. If employers had
been a little more farsighted, they would have seen that
one benefits most from workers if they under less stress
in their home life because they are probably able to
contribute more to their work life.
We had problems
in the past which we acknowledge. The Minister has done
his bit in the budget to start to get the ball rolling in
terms of where we go from here on the child care problem.
I hope there will be greater co-operation between the
employers, Government strategists and the voluntary
sector when deciding the direction we take in the years
to come.
Mr.
Cosgrave: I would like to contribute briefly to what
is a useful debate on the question of child care, lack of
same or a full recognition the issue. The problem has
increased substantially in recent times due to various
factors, including the increasing number of women working
outside the home, some by choice, others of necessity,
and it is a point which should not be lost. In my
practice I see people taking out substantial mortgages
which would take two salaries to fund, and they will not
have much surplus income.
The Commission
on the Family reported in 1998. It undertook a national
survey of child care arrangements. The main findings of
the survey were as follows. About one in three children
not yet attending primary school experienced periods of
care outside their own home and away from parents for
some part of the week. This can arise in various ways and
does not necessarily mean the child is away from home all
day. Some people have temporary or part-time jobs or work
for a couple of hours each day. The care can take various
forms. There are some very qualified people looking after
children. There are arrangements where a granny or an
aunt looks after the child for a couple of hours and
there are full time crèches. There must be a debate on
the quality of care available, although much of it is of
a high standard. I know some of the people in my area
running child care facilities who are very dedicated and
thorough, but there are areas in which improvements can
be made.
Speaking as a
local authority member, the question of child care
facilities in certain residential areas has come up
recently in the Dún Laoghaire. There is much to be said
in this regard. As Senator Ridge said, if the travel
arrangements could be kept to a minimum or if the child
could be looked after a couple of hundred yards from
their home, it would cut down on traffic problems and the
child would not have to get up at 6 a.m. and be driven a
number of miles causing further problems. Local
authorities look at this issue and take a sympathetic and
realistic approach. If there is a certain increase in
need in an area and if the traffic problem is not too
bad, these facilities should be allowed. A common sense
approach should be taken in addressing this problem.
Our party held
a forum on this issue some time ago. The variety of
speakers who attended show that it is a crucial issue. I
support the comments made by Senators O'Meara, Ridge and
others, including the Members opposite. We must accept
that there is a need for further cross-party action on
this issue, particularly when one considers the
horrendous amounts of money people must spend from their
household budgets in respect of child care. I support the
motion and I welcome this debate.
Mr.
O'Donovan: With the Chair's permission, I propose to
share time with Senator Chambers.
An
Cathaoirleach: Is that agreed? Agreed.
Mr.
O'Donovan: I will be brief. I wish to correct
people's perception that we men were not interested in
this debate. As my party's spokesperson on Justice,
Equality and Law Reform, at out group meeting earlier
today I decided to bow to the greater knowledge of
Senators Cox and Ormonde who have expressed a keen
personal interest in this issue for a long period. I
stated that I would give way to them instead of assuming
my usual position as front bench spokesperson. I must
point out, however, that as a married man with a family I
have a keen interest in this issue.
The Joint
Committee on Justice, Equality and Women's Rights
discussed child care and related matters at some length
on at least two occasions with various groups. The issue
of child care has been in the public domain for upwards
of 20 years; it is not a new phenomenon. What came across
during the Joint Committee's meetings was that successive
Governments, including those in which my party has been
involved, have neglected the debate on this issue.
The current
Administration and the Minister for Justice, Equality and
Law Reform must be congratulated for taking the
initiative and providing funds. I accept that £46
million does not sound like much but it is a start. The
Government has acknowledged that this issue must be dealt
with and a great deal of funding will have to be invested
in providing crèches and child care facilities,
educating personnel, setting up databases, etc.
I welcome the
fact that £250 million is being provided in the national
development plan in respect of this area. It is important
to record that fact because people who are in now
Opposition tend to criticise the Government and forget
that when they were in power they did little more than
talk about this matter. The Government has grasped the
nettle. It is providing a substantial amount of money to
kick-start developments in this area. For the first time
in the history of the State, child care is being funded
by Government. That is an important development. It may
be a small step but it is certainly a step in the right
direction. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law
Reform must be congratulated on his efforts in this
regard.
I have no doubt
that a great deal more must be done. As already stated,
this area has been neglected for many years. My youngest
child is nearly 11 years old and access to child care is
of particular benefit to me. In recent years, many women
have re-entered the workforce because of our booming
economy and there is a great demand for them to return to
work immediately after maternity leave. The Government
recognises the problems people face. There has been a
great deal of discussion and action has finally been
taken.
During the next
four to five years, under the national development plan,
child care services will improve dramatically. For the
first time in the history of the State, the Fianna
Fáil/Progressive Democrat coalition Government has put
in place a financial framework in respect of child care.
I welcome this and I expect to see greater financial
support and increased capital grants to aid the
development of crèches and other such facilities. The
general position in relation to child care will improve
year by year but at least we have made a start. That is
very significant.
Mr.
Chambers: I welcome the opportunity to speak on the
amendment to this motion. As a parent, I realise the
great importance of child care in the future development
of children. I support the Government's consideration of
child care, its planning in respect of it and the
investment it has made in it. We face a major challenge
in this area because our method of managing it will have
a tremendous bearing on the society in which our children
will live, on their quality of life and on their personal
development.
In the past,
because of the type of society in which we lived, there
were many family support structures in place which
greatly aided the upbringing of children. However, we
must take into consideration the fact that our society is
changing. We each have new roles to play because the
structures which obtain in the workplace are constantly
changing. That is the reality with which we must deal.
In the
negotiations for a new national agreement taking place
between the social partners, child care will assume a
place of priority and importance. In my opinion a great
deal of emphasis will be placed on how the £250 million
for child care provided under the national development
plan will be spent. Perhaps it should be given to the
health boards to distribute in co-operation with the
local authorities.
To date, a
number of small groups and organisations have done very
constructive work in terms of caring for children,
stimulating and educating them and encouraging their
personal development. However, we must now plan for the
care of substantial numbers of young people in a
co-ordinated way. Between 12 to 15 years ago I visited
the first crèche in Brussels while on a trip to Belgium.
I was amazed by it because we did not have those types of
facilities in Ireland at that stage. To me it provided an
indication of where Ireland stood in terms of its
economic development because in Britain and elsewhere
substantial numbers of mothers, fathers and single
parents were out at work.
The Government
is setting out a structure to deal with problems relating
to child care. It is a new initiative in which we must
all participate. The greatest challenge we face involves
the quality of child care service we put in place. If we
put in place good structures at local level, we will make
better provision for the future care of our children.
Mr.
Costello: I am surprised that this debate is being
taken by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law
Reform. I am aware that it is responsible for
co-ordinating the national child care strategy and
implementing the report of the expert group on child
care. However, even the decision to place the Department
in charge of that group is questionable because in the
normal course of events it does not have responsibility
for the delivery of child care services, other than in
extreme circumstances involving conflict with the law.
I am unhappy
with the wording of the amendment. The Government has
tabled a woolly amendment which commends the priority
given to child care in the national development plan but
it could not commend the priority it was given in the
budget. The Minister for Finance has produced three
budgets but the Government has not shown any sense of
urgency in making child care a priority. It seeks to make
it a priority in the national development plan but it
will not be in power to implement most of it. It is a
case of live horse and you will get grass. The Government
has not given a commitment to do anything in this
amendment. This must be compared with the specific
promise and commitment given in the Fianna Fáil
manifesto of 1997, with which I am sure the
Chathaoirleach is intimately acquainted, that a £2,000
tax relief for married couples would be given to allow
them to access services or to facilitate one spouse to
stay at home to engage in child care. It was estimated
that this measure would benefit 181,000 families. That
was a specific commitment but nothing has been delivered
on it in three budgets. The Minister for Finance has
taken the exact opposite position and has discriminated
against stay at home spouses in financial terms.
An increase in
child benefit of £2 per week for the first and second
child and £2.50 for the third and subsequent children
was granted in the budget. That is not a colossal amount
to assist in child care or make provision for child care
services.
The Government
has offered to assist in co-ordinating existing voluntary
organisations and community activities to deliver
services. Schools and community groups who run after
school and child care services received a budget
allocation of £5 million. How does the Government intend
to make provision for any substantial after school or
community based service? Even if it makes provision, who
will run it? Will it run on hot air? It will not. It is a
totally impracticable scheme.
The one
substantial thing the Government did was provide a 100
per cent capital allowance for investment in child care
facilities. In other words, any money given out is given
to the private sector to provide bricks and mortar to
build crèches and pre-school facilities. It is like
saying we will provide the private sector with money to
build parks, like car parks, to park children. Who will
pay for it? The parents will pay for it. There is no tax
rebate for this service. Parents will not be provided
with any help and the private sector is supposed to carry
the can for the Government.
The opposite
position has been adopted by Minister for Education in
Northern Ireland. Last week he announced that he would
provide funding for a free pre-school system of
education. This system extends only to three to four year
olds but this age group will now be brought into the
State system of education. We have not begun to consider
this approach. Why can we not have a pre-school system,
properly financed with facilities, rather than paying out
capital allowances to the private sector to provide
premises? Let us get down to the real child care services
that are required, their supply and access.
We will not be
able to provide an adequate system if we do not provide
one that is State run. The first major announcement by
the new administration in Northern Ireland has been about
support for children. If it can be done in Northern
Ireland then the least we can do with all our new found
wealth is to respond in kind to child care.
A
constitutional case would be worthwhile in relation to
the commitment to provide free primary education for our
children. That commitment has never been met. A provision
catering for children between the ages of four and 12
years is not free primary education. The first stage of
education that children benefit from should be financed
by the State.
The
Government's proposal is modest. As the budget did not
address this matter in its earliest manifestation I ask
that the new Finance Bill, with all the amendments that
we are expecting, should address it. The partnership
talks are taking place and that would be the ideal forum
for putting together suitable amendments to the Finance
Bill. This would enable us to deal with the matter
adequately now rather than at a future stage in the
national development plan.
An
Cathaoirleach: Senator Farrell has two minutes before
I call Senator O'Meara to conclude.
Mr. Farrell:
It would be impossible to say much in two minutes. Can my
time be extended?
I would like to
correct Senator Costello. He is wrong when he says the
Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has no
responsibility for child care. The Department's role in
child care has grown from a pilot funding initiative
which had an annual budget of £800,000 in its last year
of operation to a child care measure which will provide
funding of over £250 million for the development of
child care services under a broad range of initiatives
over the next seven years.
Mr.
Costello: I am referring to this budget. Many
children will have grown up in seven years.
Mr. Farrell:
I would like a system where mothers could be given the
choice to stay at home or go to work. Many mothers would
like to stay at home. No mother should have to work
because of necessity. We should set up a system where a
woman could spend a year or two with her baby-----
Mrs.
Taylor-Quinn: What about the daddy?
Mr. Farrell:
-----and receive a refresher course at the end of the
first year and another one after 18 months to prepare her
for her return to the workforce. If a mother wants to
work at home, fair enough. My proposal would be one way
to deal with this matter..
We could talk
about child care for months. However, I would like to
refer to a few newspaper articles.
An
Cathaoirleach: We have little time for reading.
Mr. Farrell:
A headline for one of the articles was "Group care
babies troublesome tots". The article continued:
Badly
behaved babies are more likely to become troublesome
tots if they attend a day centre before their first
birthday, it was claimed today. New findings showed
children who spent more than seven or eight hours a
day in group care could have more problems, up to the
age of three, co-operating with other children. And
they suggest the children were more difficult at home
until they were six years old.
The link
was disclosed in a paper given by Professor Dario
Varin of the University of Milan to the British
Psychological Society's developmental section annual
conference at Oxford University.
Mrs.
Taylor-Quinn: An Italian chauvinist.
Mr. Farrell:
The article continued:
Research
was carried out comparing children who had early
group care with those who had home care during their
first three years. Professor Varin and his colleagues
discovered young children who were given group care,
even when its quality was "good enough",
could experience problems.
Mrs.
Taylor-Quinn: Heresy.
Mr. Farrell:
Other headlines are "Working mums threatens human
race" and "Have we forgotten how to be
parents?". I am sorry I do not have time to read
these articles into the record because they are
important.
Mr.
Costello: The Senator can pass them on to the
Minister for Finance.
Mr. Farrell:
The problem is that we have so many experts telling us
about rearing children.
I compliment
the Government on the amount of money provided and the
work, particularly by the Minister of State, Deputy Mary
Wallace, on this issue. I welcome the amendment and the
work being done by the Government. If I had the time I
would have thrown a few controversial thoughts into the
arena to create a discussion. I would quote experts and
professors who spoke at conferences.
Ms O'Meara:
I thank the Minister, the Minister of State and all
Senators, male and female, who contributed to this debate
for their thought-provoking, wide ranging and worthwhile
contributions. This motion has been worthwhile and there
has been a broad measure of agreement that, not only do
we have a problem, but that we have to come up with
solutions. However, there is no agreement on the range of
solutions and the fundamental issue clearly outlined by
Senator Ryan as to where we are, the choices we have, the
manner in which we build our community and the kind of
society we create.
It is clear
from the Minister's response, the budget and comments
made by several Ministers that this Administration still
sees child care as a problem for parents. The Minister
spoke about a range of initiatives, particularly supports
for community groups and voluntary organisations. These
initiatives are very welcome, particularly in the context
of the equality agenda, but they do not deal with the
major problem - the thousands of families who face into
work every day and the issue of who is minding their
young children. It is clear the Government is not going
to deal with this issue in a comprehensive manner and
that it sees it as an issue for employers, hence the
introduction of capital allowances.
|
