Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 29 Jun 2022

Vol. 1024 No. 4

Saincheisteanna Tráthúla - Topical Issue Debate

Domestic, Sexual and Gender-based Violence

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

Yesterday was a very significant and important day with the publication of the third national strategy on domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. I thank the Minister and congratulate her on her work in steering the Department towards the strategy's publication yesterday. It is an extremely far-reaching strategy but its real strength is that it has been built on exceptional collaboration between the Government and the sector, including the service providers in the area of domestic violence and NGOs representing women and men who have experienced such difficulties in their homes and workplaces and on our streets for many years. This strategy and the implementation plan that goes with it are a real step forward by the State. What will be important now is how we measure its implementation by the various Departments, including the Departments of Education, Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, and Justice, because the implementation plan is very detailed. I congratulate the Minister on that.

The reason we need this strategy is well known and that has been especially the case over the Covid-19 period. This year, facilitated by the Ceann Comhairle, I have been reading into the Dáil record the names of the far too many women who have died at the extreme end of gender violence, that is, femicide. The 244 women who have died in violent circumstances over the last 25 years have been identified by Women's Aid. If the Leas-Cheann Comhairle does not mind, I will read out the names of those who died in the months of July and August in each of past 25 years.

Those who died in July were Jamie Maughan Farrelly, Xiang Yi Wang, Eileen Coyne, Bridget McFadden, Margaret Concannon, Carmel Marrinan, Elizabeth Troy, Paiche Onyemaechi, Sheola Keaney, Mary Sleator, Linda Evans Christian, Catherine McEnery, Nicola Vonkova, Nora Kiely, Marie Quigley, Deirdre Jacob and Debbie Fox.

Those who died in August were Margaret O’Sullivan, Maura McKinney, Fiona Pender, Catherine Doyle, Margaret Murphy, Chantal Bergeron, Carmel Coyne, Mook Ah Mooi, Lynette McKeown, Frances Ralph, Ann Walsh, Breda Ryan, Jean Gilbert, Eugenia Bratis, Elizabeth Duff, Jacqueline McDonagh, Elaine O'Hara, Aleksandra Sarzynska, Carol McAuley, Clodagh Hawe, Antoinette Corbally and Neasa Murray.

Sometimes, when names are read out like that it can seem like a list. It can seem a little prosaic but every single one of those names is a woman who died in violent circumstances. Every single one is a woman who is missed by her family and friends. Friends and families of those women have contacted me since, not to thank me but to acknowledge their remembrance in the Dáil. It is the reason this Government and the Minister have been working so hard towards this strategy and towards developing a culture of zero tolerance.

Of course, the issue is not just femicide but everything before that point. It is every measure of harassment and every entry-level aggression. It is all the things that contribute to making women feel unsafe and make all the women inside and outside the Oireachtas act differently from their male counterparts, whether it is in the workplace or when going home at night on public transport. It is all the things women have had to put up with and which, at the very extreme end, can result in what I have described. This strategy paves the way towards helping to reach the serious cultural change that I hope will underpin a different experience for the next generation over the coming 25 years from the experience of the generation that has gone before.

Minister for Justice (Deputy Helen McEntee)

I thank Deputy Carroll MacNeill for raising this issue. In particular, I thank her for the way in which she has remembered and acknowledged each and every one of those women who, as she rightly said, died in such violent ways in the past number of years. The memories of those women and their families and friends, and the memories of the many other women who have been victims of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence, were at the forefront of all our minds yesterday and over the last 18 months or two years as this strategy was developed and launched.

What is different about this strategy is that we worked in a real spirit of collaboration. My Department worked very closely with Safe Ireland, the National Women's Council of Ireland and every Department across government to make sure we produced a whole-of-government strategy that works very closely with those who are working on the front line with women, men and children day in, day out. Above all, it is to make sure that we as a Government come together to make sure this is a priority for us.

This €363 million strategy is built on the four pillars of the Istanbul Convention, namely, prevention, protection, prosecution and policy co-ordination. Above all, it has set a very ambitious target of zero tolerance for any kind of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence and, indeed, the attitudes that underpin it. I have been asked many times what we mean when we say zero tolerance. It is about changing attitudes and perceptions and how we deal with domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. For all of us, it is about changing hearts and minds. To paint a picture, it is about not accepting violence, abuse, sexual abuse or any type of abuse, financial or otherwise, simply because it happens in a family unit behind closed doors.

It is about all of us. We have all been guilty of laughing off comments or saying it is only a joke, of just walking away from someone when they are pestering us and saying we will leave them to it. It is also about getting back to the basics. At this stage, I think we all agree that we cannot simply say we should not talk to young children about these issues because they would not understand. Younger children are coming into contact with these issues more and more. It is important that we talk to young people from primary school age right up to secondary school and beyond about relationships and the difference between a healthy relationship and an unhealthy one, and as they get older what a healthy sexual relationship should be like.

What we have tried to do in this strategy, under all of the 144 actions, was focus on education and raising awareness of all of these issues and how we can better protect survivors. There is a very clear commitment to double the number of refuge spaces and accommodation that we currently have, which is not enough. We have 141 spaces, which is simply not enough. We are promising in this strategy to double the number and to go beyond what is in the strategy. It is important that we get the structure right and to do that we will work very closely with the sector and ensure the resources that are put in place are specific to the needs of women and children. We must also make sure there are spaces available for men because while this issue predominantly impacts women, it also impacts men.

From a justice point of view, this is about being tough on perpetrators and making sure that if a person commits a crime, there is a penalty and a sentence at the end of process. We must also try to ensure we reform and rehabilitate and also have perpetrator programmes.

The final piece of the puzzle relates to policy co-ordination. The new strategy has a very clear implementation plan, dates, timelines and actions. It allows us to make sure we are doing the work we have said we will do. For the first time, we will put on a statutory footing a single agency that will have sole responsibility for domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. Under its auspices, we will deliver the services, improve standards and bring everyone together to ensure we implement this plan and it ultimately changes the behaviours we are trying to change.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

The implementation plan is crucial. Members of Government parties, the Opposition and the sector will rightly hold the Department and the agency to account on that. The plan shows a clear commitment to set out quarter by quarter exactly what is intended to be delivered by each Department. That is the only way to ensure implementation on a cross-government basis.

What the Minister said about education and the relationships and sexuality education programme is very important. It is core to this. Family law reform is also central to the issue. I have spoken to many different people who are experiencing ongoing controlling behaviours through the court processes. One of the ultimate abuses is to use one of the processes of the State against a partner or former partner to continue to exert control. It is one of the first issues I spoke about in the Dáil, and it goes on and on. It is a core part of this strategy. We have much improved the victim experience in court, but we have more to do. The crucial issue occurs before we get to court.

As the Minister indicated, it is about being believed. That is one side of the coin. All of us, including me, have laughed off comments and experiences. The only reason we did so was that the alternative was that we would not get a hearing, would not be believed or would not be taken seriously. It is simply easier to laugh off these things. That is why the zero tolerance approach is so important.

The video that was shown at the launch was exceptional. I hope it is pushed out more broadly because it really speaks to the experience of having a hand placed inappropriately on the shoulder or lower back and how that makes a person feel smaller. We know how difficult it is for a woman in that context to turn away or say something and to try not to disrupt the dynamic that is going on around her, despite it not being in any way her fault. It is about all of those small things. I hope everybody learned a great deal about that over the past two years. We have much more to do. I hope the video can get a much broader hearing. I know there is funding in the package to try to do exactly that public awareness piece.

Deputy Helen McEntee

On the Deputy's final point, there is funding available, and it will be part of the strategy to make sure we get that message across. It is important that we communicate what we are doing. Part of the role of the agency will be to work very closely with the sector in the way we have been doing. There is a campaign to raise awareness of the supports that are available and make it part of people's day-to-day thinking that this is an issue on which we need to respond and that we should not tolerate any longer.

As regards education, while the focus on children is important, so too is the education of front-line professionals. As the Deputy said, when a person takes the step to come forward and even before he or she thinks about court, we must ensure the first person to whom he or she speaks, be it a healthcare professional, a member of An Garda Síochána or a counsellor, is trained and there is an understanding of the trauma the person may have gone through. There is significant focus in the Supporting a Victim's Journey plan, which has been translated and expanded in this strategy, to make sure this is not just about members of An Garda Síochána and the legal profession but that it goes even further and we have a very clear understanding of what a child, a person from a Roma or Traveller background, someone who has been sexually exploited or somebody from the LGBTQI+ community goes through and that we can respond to his or her needs.

As regards family law reform, the strategy works with a number of different strands in place in my Department and across many other Departments. I mentioned Supporting a Victim's Journey. There is also the issue of family law reform. The family court Bill will be brought to Cabinet before the summer recess and the family justice strategy that will accompany the Bill indicates the very clear need to ensure intersectionality between a civil case and a criminal case. As Deputy Carroll MacNeill stated, so often the abuse continues into the civil courts. There must be a way that we can prevent such abuse from continuing. In addition, we must ensure that legal professionals and others, in particular judges, are trained to understand such abuse. That is why it is so important that we have family courts that are specific to family cases and that judges are trained to deal with these types of issues. We are going even beyond that in this strategy to look at whether we will have judges trained specifically for domestic, sexual and gender-based violence.

I again thank the Deputy for raising this issue, on which I look forward to working with her and other Members.

School Meals Programme

Deputy Steven Matthews

I am delighted to have the opportunity to discuss this issue. The school meals programme is of vital importance to the students that benefit from it. The Minister of State, Deputy Fleming, will be aware that the Minister for Education, Deputy Foley, announced a €32 million investment and expansion of DEIS schools this year, which brings another 60,000 students into that support and benefits 310 schools. I welcome that. It is good that the Government recognises that there are students, schools, teachers and parents that need extra support. My concern is that it does not appear that the supply of school meals has been included in the budget for this year to support the 310 extra schools. It may well be the case that when the budget is passed in October those measures will be introduced, but it means that there will be a gap for the new DEIS schools from September up to that point. That is my understanding of the position. I hope measures will be put in place to increase the budget to allow for that.

School meals are provided under the Department of Social Protection's budget, whereas DEIS schools are funded under the Department of Education's budget. I wonder about the wisdom of that. It would probably make more sense to bring those together and have the entire DEIS programme, including school meals, supported by the Department of Education.

The school meals programme is of vital importance to children. Visiting schools over the past two years or so to discuss the environment, climate issues and projects and work the schools are doing, I have met students of all ages. On some of my visits, hot meals have arrived. Apart from the nutritional benefit and the benefit to students in their studies of getting a hot meal during the day, it is also a social occasion for the children. It is great to see. We know what the benefits are when children get nutrition during the school day. It helps them with their education and improves their attention.

Many children go to school hungry and live in poverty and deprivation. The provision of school meals is a very small intervention by the Government to assist those children. I worked out that the budget for the school meals programme probably amounts to about €1 per day per student.

We also have the hot meals programme, which caters for 280 schools and approximately 54,000 students. I want to ensure we put in place a budget that enables the new DEIS schools to avail of the school meals programme from September onwards and that we finalise that in the upcoming budget.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Sean Fleming)

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. I take his point completely and will bring it back to the Minister. The school meals programme provides funding towards the provision of food to 1,506 schools and organisations, benefiting 230,000 children. The objective of the programme is to provide regular, nutritious food to children to enable them to take full advantage of the education provided to them. The programme is an important commitment of the Government and is a key component of policies to encourage school attendance and extra educational achievement.

The Government has provided €68.1 million for the school meals programme this year. In recent years, entry to the programme has been confined to DEIS schools, in addition to schools identified as having levels of concentrated disadvantage that would benefit from the school meals programme. Prior to the introduction of DEIS in 2005, all schools and organisations that were part of one of a number of the Department of Education and Skills' initiatives for disadvantaged schools, including Breaking the Cycle, Giving Children an Even Break, the disadvantaged area scheme, home school community liaison and the school completion programme, were eligible to participate in the programme.

Budget 2022 provided funding for all DEIS schools currently in the programme. Any provision to extend the programme to schools newly added to the DEIS programme will need to be considered as part of the budgetary process. That is what the Deputy is asking for but I accept that there is a time issue involved. We are absolutely committed to continuing to grow the school meals programme, particularly the hot school meals element, building further on the significant extensions announced in the last few budgets.

As part of budget 2019, funding was provided for a pilot scheme from September 2019, providing hot school meals in primary schools. The pilot involved 37 schools, benefiting 6,744 children for the 2019-20 academic year, and was aimed primarily at schools with no on-site cooking facilities. In budget 2021, we announced that an additional €5.5 million would be allocated to extend the provision of hot school meals to an additional 35,000 primary school children currently receiving the cold lunch option. In budget 2022, we provided for hot school meals to be extended from January 2022 to the 81 additional DEIS schools that submitted an expression of interest but were not selected as part of the extension to 35,000 children in budget 2021. That change came in on 1 January this year. The number of children currently in receipt of hot school meals is 54,236. This represents almost 10% of the total primary school population. There are no secondary school children in receipt of hot school meals as the programme is aimed at primary schools with no on-site cooking facilities. We are actively working on this issue and I assure the Deputy that everything is being done to ensure we can support as many schools as possible. I again thank the Deputy for raising the matter.

We have heard from schools that when the hot school meals programme is available in some schools in a region, it is a disadvantage to schools that do not receive it. There are many provincial areas where there could be a few schools in a large provincial town and some have it but some do not. It is becoming an issue for enrolment.

I acknowledge the great work done by Marcus Rashford, the Manchester United and England soccer player, in this area, even though it is across the water. He went out on a limb to promote this issue last year and ensure children would get the meals at home during the Covid period. He helped raise the profile of this topic, not just in the UK but here in Ireland as well.

Deputy Steven Matthews

I thank the Minister of State. I am glad to have had the opportunity to raise this matter. I raised it yesterday with the Taoiseach during Questions on Policy and Legislation and I have submitted a number of parliamentary questions on it. While I welcome the expansion of DEIS schools, which is positive, I am concerned that we do not seem to have allocated any funding in the budget for those extra schools that are being brought into the school meals programme.

This is a targeted measure. We have recently been discussing the cost-of-living crisis. The cost of food is going to increase and mortgage interest rates will probably go up as well. It is a challenging time for people's personal finances. We have seen the benefit of the targeted measures the Government has introduced over the last 12 months, both in the previous budget and the emergency measures that were introduced. We have seen how those targeted measures have worked. This is an investment in children and their welfare to improve their education. Getting a meal during the day while at school helps children's attention and helps them concentrate so there are educational benefits as well as nutritional benefits. I am glad the Minister of State will take this back to the Minister. The Taoiseach understood clearly what I said yesterday and I think both the Minister for Social Protection and the Minister for Education have got the message from me as well. I hope we will see progress on this issue.

Deputy Sean Fleming

I appreciate the disappointment and frustration for the new DEIS schools that are keen to access the school meals programme. The level of interest in the programme is a clear sign of the need for its expansion and that is something we are committed to doing. I have had contact from schools that did not make the new DEIS allocations this year. That is the next group in line because there are quite a number of them. Some people felt the decision was arbitrary but there is an appeals system in place and maybe some more schools will be included in due course and be able to avail of the school meals programme.

The hot school meals programme has gone from a pilot with 37 schools in 2019 to 284 schools now covering 54,000 children availing of a hot meal as part of their school day. The significant extensions of the programme over a number of successive budgets outline our commitment to extending the provisions of hot school meals and building on what has been achieved to date. In this regard, the Minister for Social Protection has commissioned an evaluation of the school meals programme to be undertaken in 2022 to inform future policy direction and decisions on the scheme. What the Deputy has spoken about is a more short-term issue with regard to schools getting their meals provision as new entrants into the DEIS programme. This evaluation will assess all aspects of the provision of school meals and will engage with all stakeholders. The evaluation is due for completion in November 2022. I am conscious that will be after the budget. The Deputy is asking about budget measures in the meantime. The provision of the school meals programme will be considered as part of the budgetary process for 2023 and all options for the possible inclusion of schools will be explored. I am not making any commitment but the budget focus this year will be on cost-of-living issues and this is a cost-of-living issue. Historically, we make announcements on budget day but sometimes they do not come into effect until January or later the following year. This issue should be put on the agenda for consideration for earlier implementation.

Tax Reliefs

Deputy Emer Higgins

I thank the Minister of State for taking this Topical Issue debate. Despite the fact that there is no register for coeliac disease in Ireland, the condition is estimated to affect up to 75,000 people in this country. I thank the Coeliac Society of Ireland, which is based in my constituency of Dublin Mid-West, in the heart of Clondalkin. It makes a huge contribution to the data we do have on coeliac disease in Ireland. It provides information and support and even the opportunity to purchase gluten-free food locally in Clondalkin. We have made great advances in the availability of gluten-free foods in Ireland. That can be seen in cafés and restaurants, where there are so many options and choices now. However, the fact stands that some gluten-free foods can cost up to 75% more than foods containing gluten. The cost of following a gluten-free diet is €444 more expensive for adults and €903 more expensive for parents of children with coeliac disease. That is not even counting the additional costs of healthcare. Following a gluten-free diet is more expensive. That is a fact. It is particularly so for low-income families and individuals.

We currently offer one tax refund of up to 20% of the cost of gluten-free products purchased but there are some difficulties around that. One issue is that many products that are gluten-free are not specifically marketed as coeliac-friendly foods. They may not even say that on the package. This causes problems for people because the products do not fall within the scope of the tax refund. The system needs to be simplified. Another issue is that the tax refund does not benefit those outside the PAYE system.

A survey by the Spanish Federation of Coeliac Associations in March revealed that Ireland was an EU outlier in terms of providing support for coeliac patients who fell outside the PAYE system. Will the Minister of State examine this matter?

Deputy Fergus O'Dowd

Coeliac disease is a serious, lifelong illness. There is no cure for it and any person diagnosed with it must go on a gluten-free diet. The costs are clear. According to the Coeliac Society of Ireland, this food costs approximately €1,000 more per year on average. If you have a family, it affects the types of food that the whole family eats. It affects where you go for recreation and to eat.

I welcome the Revenue Commissioners' letter to me in May, in which they acknowledged that progress was being made. The Minister for Finance has stated that he wishes to make it easier for people suffering from coeliac disease to claim tax relief or, where they cannot and do not pay tax, to provide an additional benefit to them in terms of social welfare or whatever the case may be.

This is over to the Minister. The chairman of the Revenue Commissioners has stated that he is studying whether additional measures can be introduced to ease the administrative burden on the taxpayer who is asked to provide additional documentation. What progress has been made in this regard? I understand that there is a willingness on the part of Revenue and the Minister for Finance's office to deal with this issue in an appropriate and caring way.

Deputy Sean Fleming

I thank the Deputies for raising this matter. I should point out that the issue of subsiding gluten-free foods for those with coeliac disease is a matter in the first instance for the Minister for Health. However, if the Deputies are suggesting that gluten-free foods for those with coeliac disease should be subsidised via the tax system, I will point out that decisions regarding tax reliefs and incentives are normally made in the context of the annual budget and Finance Bill process. Such decisions must have regard to the sound management of the public finances and to the Department of Finance's tax expenditure guidelines. The guidelines make clear that any policy proposal that involves tax expenditures should only occur in limited circumstances where there are demonstrable market failures and where a tax-based incentive is more efficient than a direct expenditure intervention.

Regarding the issue of simplifying the process of claiming tax relief on gluten-free foods, this is an issue that the Minister for Finance has addressed previously through parliamentary questions. By way of background, section 469 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 provides for income tax relief where an individual proves that he or she has incurred costs in respect of qualifying health expenses. Furthermore, only health expenses incurred in the provision of healthcare that has been carried out or advised by a practitioner will qualify for income tax relief. To be clear, "health care" is defined as the "prevention, diagnosis, alleviation or treatment of an ailment, injury, infirmity, defect or disability". "Health expenses" are defined as "expenses in respect of the provision of health care" and may include, but are not limited to the services of a practitioner; diagnostic procedures; maintenance or treatment necessarily incurred in connection with the services or procedures carried out by or on the advice of a practitioner; and drugs or medicines supplied on the prescription of a practitioner.

I am pleased to state that coeliac patients may claim income tax relief in respect of the cost of foods that have been specifically manufactured to be gluten free. I am advised by Revenue that, in such cases, a letter from a medical doctor stating that the taxpayer is a coeliac sufferer is generally accepted as proof of entitlement to tax relief on such costs. However, I should point out that the arrangements exclude costs incurred in respect of gluten-free alcohol, which people will appreciate. I am further advised by Revenue that, as with all claims for tax relief, a taxpayer may be asked to provide additional supporting documentation to prove his or her entitlement to the tax relief claimed. The type of information that a taxpayer will need to provide will depend on the nature of the expense involved.

It is important to point out that, if a taxpayer is requested to provide receipts to support a claim for income tax relief on the cost of gluten-free foods, the receipts and documents provided should contain sufficient information to satisfy the Revenue office dealing with the claim that the costs incurred by the taxpayer relate to foods that have been specifically manufactured to be gluten free. In verifying claims for tax relief on gluten-free food, Revenue officials may accept either a chemist or supermarket receipt or evidence from food packaging in support of a claim if the information provided clearly demonstrates that the foods purchased have been specifically manufactured to be gluten free and show details of the expenditure incurred.

It is also worth pointing out that some multiples provide a service for coeliac sufferers to receive an annual statement showing details of any expenditure that they incurred on specific gluten-free products during the year. This statement can be used to validate a claim to Revenue. Revenue officials may also accept information from the Coeliac Society of Ireland's annual food list if it is provided by a taxpayer in support of his or her claim for tax relief, together with proof of the expenditure incurred.

Revenue has engaged directly with the Coeliac Society of Ireland and, in correspondence earlier this year, invited the society to engage with it on the matter if the society had further queries.

Deputy Emer Higgins

There are six EU countries in which monthly aid, averaging €67.66, is provided to coeliacs. Following a gluten-free diet as a coeliac can be costly. In light of the rise in the cost of living and other inflation, this is an issue that we need to examine. We need to simplify and expand the current process.

I am grateful to the Coeliac Society of Ireland in Clondalkin for raising this issue with me and Deputy O'Dowd. I will remind my constituents that they can purchase gluten-free products in the society's shop in Clondalkin and use those receipts as part of their tax relief process.

I hope that we will see supports for coeliacs improving. The budget will form part of that plan in the context of non-PAYE supports and potentially expanding the tax relief.

Deputy Fergus O'Dowd

I am unhappy with the Minister of State's reply. I reject it absolutely. I know he was only reading from a script that he was given, but he said "the arrangements exclude costs incurred in respect of gluten-free alcohol." I do not know who wrote that, but if he or she believes that people who suffer from coeliac disease are guzzling alcohol and looking for a subsidy for that, then nothing could be further from the truth. People are concerned about the health impacts on them and their families for their whole lives: osteoporosis; amnesia; vitamin B deficiency; and various cancers. That script had a callous writer – the Minister of State did not write it – and what was in it was unacceptable. I reject its first paragraph, according to which this "is a matter in the first instance for the Minister for Health." As I told the Minister of State, the chairman of the Revenue Commissioners has made it clear that he accepts his responsibility. He went further, writing that the Minister for Finance had stated that he would ask his officials to discuss this matter with Revenue. He also wrote that Revenue was engaging with the Coeliac Society of Ireland.

The Minister of State has been given a bum steer. It is not good enough that someone would send him into the Dáil with that rubbish. I want to know what is happening and what progress is being made on Revenue's commitments. The script's writer would be hauled over the coals if he or she was in my office.

Deputy Sean Fleming

I thank the Deputies for their comments. I apologise for the insensitive reference in my script.

Deputy Fergus O'Dowd

It was absolutely unacceptable and offensive.

Deputy Sean Fleming

The issue mentioned is probably dealt with in legislation, but I accept that the context in which I read it out was insensitive. I hope that the Deputy will accept my bona fides in that respect.

I stated that the question of subsidising gluten-free foods for those with coeliac disease was a matter for the Minister for Health in the first instance, but let me explain. If it is not handled in that manner, Revenue and the taxation side can play a role. If it was handled by the Department of Health in the first instance, though, then people might not need to go through the tax system. Since it is not being done through the Department of Health, the tax system is coming in as a safety net for some people. As Deputy Higgins pointed out, that does not address people who are not in the tax net, who are not covered by Revenue's intervention. Perhaps it should all be dealt with more holistically through the Department of Health and not require Revenue or taxation interventions. That is a longer term policy issue, but it would be a better solution and would not need to involve the Revenue Commissioners at all. I take Deputy Higgins's point.

People need to keep receipts and so on, but it can be done in a simplistic way. Most people's income tax returns are on a self-assessment basis. They just put down the figure for their medical expenses on a form each year. Only if they are subject to an audit must they produce receipts.

It is not normal to have to send in all those receipts or go through all that paperwork. I take on board the importance of the issue from a health perspective. Where the Revenue Commissioners or the Department of Finance can help those income tax payers, we are happy to do so as best we can.

Childcare Services

Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan

I thank the Minister for taking this Topical Issue matter. He will remember that I intended to submit this matter a number of weeks ago and the Minister was not available to take it at the time, so I said I would come back to raise this important issue, which I am doing now. I know the Government is motivated to reduce childcare costs and that the Minister is motivated to do so as well. Since the Minister has taken office, a key goal of his has been to make childcare more affordable and accessible. In doing that, we have to ensure there is a childcare and early education service in place that can provide the service we are looking to provide to parents and guardians, which is very important.

I know the Minister says that, under the core funding model, an overwhelming majority of service providers will see an increase in funding and that only 1% will not see an increase. However, the bottom line is that if the new core funding model was fit for purpose, we would not have had a situation where hundreds of early childcare providers, early education providers, crèche operators and Montessori school operators descended on the gates of Leinster House like they did last week. I know the Minister went out to meet, address and listen to them, but the message I was getting is that the core funding model is not fit for purpose. It will be suitable and it will increase funding for a number of operators, which is right and merited, but we have to make sure nobody is left behind in this. That is incredibly important.

It is also important the smaller early childhood care and education, ECCE, operators are not left behind and I consider that they are. They are the people who were outside the gates of Leinster House last week. They were joined by many of the bigger chain operators in solidarity but it was mainly those smaller operators. My fear is that if we lose the smaller ECCE operators, we will leave gaps in services, especially in rural parts of Ireland. I am not being parochial and I know the favourite hobby of some Members is to list the towns and villages in their constituencies, but last week we had people from Skibbereen, Clonakilty, Aghyohil and Aghadown at the protest. The reason I mention those areas is not just to list off names but because if these ECCE operators find it hard to maintain and sustain their businesses under the new model, which they say they will, there will be gaps in services and parents and guardians will have to drive 7 km or 8 km to avail of childcare, Montessori and early education services. It seems to be affecting those smaller operators in rural areas more than in the bigger urban areas.

It is also not right that we have situations where many members of staff are signing on during the summer months simply because their work is not sustainable. That is something they do not want to do because many of the staff, and I am not trying to call anyone out with this, are having to say they are available for work when they essentially are not because they will join the service again in September when it reopens. It is also not fair that there are situations where the early education operators may have received €80 per child under ECCE because they had graduates and they are now dropping down to €69 per child. They are essentially being penalised for having graduates on their books. It is not fit for purpose and I am asking for an amending of the core funding model and some bit of movement. All the providers are asking for is to bring that payment per child from €69 up to €100. It is a big ask but surely we can meet them somewhere in between so that we can keep that service available.

Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth (Deputy Roderic O'Gorman)

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue, which he has done one on one with me on a number of occasions, and he has been a strong advocate for the sector. The Deputy is right that one of my goals as Minister is to reduce costs for parents, but I have always set out two other goals. My second goal is to ensure childcare professionals get properly paid, and we are about to achieve that through an employment regulation order, ERO. My third goal is to protect the sustainability of services. I want to reduce costs for parents, get better pay for staff and protect sustainability. Those are the three goals.

Core funding is the new funding stream to support the delivery of early learning and care, ELC, and school age childcare, SAC, for the public good, quality and affordability for children and families, sustainability and stability for providers and staff, and, importantly, accountability, transparency and value for money for the State, considering it is an investment of €221 million in the first year. Services that sign up for core funding will become partner services, working with the State to deliver SAC and ELC. Core funding is designed to improve quality for children, including through support for better terms and conditions for staff, underpinned by that ERO, improved affordability for parents by ensuring fees do not increase and the full benefits of the national childcare scheme, NCS, are felt, and offering stability to providers with an income that contributes to the cost of delivery and does not fluctuate with child attendance.

Core funding is worth €221 million in full-year costs, and that allows for an estimated 19% increase in the total cost base for the sector in the first year. That is a significant public investment in services so that services income may now include core funding, ECCE and NCS capitation, and parental fees. Core funding will be allocated based on the capacity of services being offered. Capacity is determined by a service's opening hours, a service's opening weeks, the number of child places, and the age group of the children being cared for. These are the primary drivers of services' costs of delivery and this is, therefore, a fair, reasonable and logical method for distributing funding. Core funding is a new way of providing funding for the sector and it addresses some of the disparities in the previous system of funding. There is no solid foundation in evidence for the concerns that core funding will undermine the viability of services.

Every year a number of services close and others open. Current data show the closure trend is less than in previous years. These data also show services close for a wide range of reasons and few of those closures relate to sustainability. They are mainly to do with retirements and the like. The vast majority of services will see an increase in funding with the introduction of core funding, and less than 1% of services will see no change. No service will see a decrease in funding. For any service that experiences financial difficulties, we have put in place the safety net of the sustainability fund. This new strand of the sustainability fund is directly linked to core funding and, for the first time, it is available to private services as well as to community services.

Core funding is designed to facilitate a partnership between the State and early learning and childcare services for the public good. With 94% of services currently participating in the transition fund and associated fee management, and with 83% of services having completed the sector profile, services have already shown considerable openness and willingness to engage. I have met providers, including meeting them at the Dáil last week, and I will meet their representatives. We will continue to work, listen and engage. This is the first year of core funding and this will deliver for the entire sector.

Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan

I appreciate the Minister's response and I do not question his motivation on better pay for staff involved in the sector and in making childcare affordable and accessible for parents. We have to come back to the facts of the matter. We had hundreds of people protesting outside Leinster House last week. Many of these operators were being sustained on the employment wage subsidy scheme, EWSS, which has been removed, and they are finding it difficult to retain staff without that support. As well as that, the Minister mentioned the fact that core funding will lead to an increase in funding for the vast majority of service providers.

The Minister says many of these providers, the 1% and those outside that 1%, will not be any worse off, but these same staff, operators and business owners protested in February 2020. At that point they were already unhappy with the status quo. Why would they all now suddenly be happy with it? They still believe this core funding model is not fit for purpose and it will not lead to the increases that would be appropriate to keep their businesses open.

There is a final, incredibly important point. As part of core funding there is a sustainability fund of approximately €20 million, if I am correct. That is in place to kick in if businesses are having difficulty remaining open and viable. With all due respect, why would there be a sustainability fund if we are not concerned about the viability of operators? That is an important point. All I ask is that we look again at the figure of €69. The operators are seeking €100. Surely there is a middle ground in between in the €221 million budget whereby we can keep everybody happy and keep the smaller operators in rural areas open to ensure we do not have a gap in services.

Deputy Roderic O'Gorman

I look at the sustainability fund in another way. I do not know many other sectors where the Government provides a safety net for private providers. We are doing that because we recognise the importance of this sector. Where there is a situation where a private provider has a sustainability issue, the Government is ready to step in. There are not many other sectors of private enterprise where the Government provides that safety net. That is how I look at the importance of the sustainability net - it is a final level of protection.

I emphasise that the ECCE two years and ECCE-only services remain a fundamental part of the offering. We recognise that different parents have different needs and terms. Some want full childcare and some just want the ability to do the early learning and care, the three hours per week or the sessional element. As part of our commitment to ECCE, we are undertaking a significant evaluation of it at present. It is an evaluation I believe will result in ECCE being put on a statutory basis and enshrined in law, further copper-fastening the place of ECCE in the system. In terms of the access and inclusion model, AIM, which everybody recognises, last week I increased the capitation for AIM workers. AIM workers are only in ECCE services. I increased the capitation from €210 to €240, a 14% increase.

We are continuing to look at the system and where there are pressures. In the case of AIM workers, ECCE services were experiencing a pressure there, and we have responded to that pressure by increasing the capitation. We will continue to look at, address and refine core funding. Fundamentally, core funding is going to deliver for the sector, for services, for parents and for children.