Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth debate -
Tuesday, 6 Jul 2021

National Action Plan for Childminding 2021-2028: Discussion (Resumed)

Senator Ruane sent her apologies and Deputy Whitmore is substituting for Deputy Cairns.

I remind members who are participating remotely to keep their devices on mute until invited to speak. When speaking, I ask members, where possible, to have their cameras switched on and to be mindful that we are in public session.

I also remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the place that Parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House or the convention centre, in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where he or she is not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be refused.

We are meeting today to consider the National Action Plan for Childminding 2021-2028. We have had one meeting already on the topic. I welcome all our witnesses. They are all joining us virtually through Microsoft Teams. The following witnesses will address the committee: Dr. Anne-Marie Brooks, assistant secretary general, and Mr. Toby Wolfe, principal officer, Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth; and Mr. Bernard Gloster, chief executive officer, Ms Caroline Cullen, interim director of quality assurance, and Ms Fiona McDonnell, national service director, children’s services regulation, Tusla.

The purpose of this meeting is to engage with all the witnesses on the national action plan for childminding. The aim of the action plan is to provide greater recognition for childminding and to support childminders in their work of providing high quality early learning and care and school-aged childcare, thus supporting child development and learning outcomes, and helping families. It is envisaged the action plan will involve change and significant benefits for childminders, children and the families using their services. Members of the committee wish to hear the opinions of stakeholders working in the industry regarding the provisions of the action plan.

Before I invite witnesses to deliver their opening statements, I must advise them about parliamentary privilege when addressing a parliamentary committee. As all the witnesses are appearing before the committee virtually, I need to point out that there is uncertainty as to whether parliamentary privilege will apply to their evidence if given from a location outside of the parliamentary precincts of Leinster House. Therefore, if witnesses are directed to cease giving evidence relating to a particular matter, it is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

I will call on the witnesses in the following order to deliver their opening statements. We will start with Dr. Anne-Marie Brooks followed by Mr. Bernard Gloster. We will then have a questions and answers session with members. The speaking rota was circulated to members in advance of the meeting. I advise witnesses that each member has an individual five-minute slot for their questions and that also includes their answers. They should bear that in mind when addressing any questions. I will hand over to Dr. Anne-Marie Brooks to deliver her opening statement.

Dr. Anne-Marie Brooks

I thank the Chairman for the invitation to attend this afternoon’s committee meeting. I am joined by my colleague, Mr. Toby Wolfe, principal officer in the quality unit within the early learning and care and school-age childcare division.

The publication of the national action plan for childminding in April this year was a key milestone in Government policy on childminding. Its publication follows a five-year process of engagement with childminders and other stakeholders, and it commits to the extension of supports to and opportunities for childminders over the years ahead. For the first time, it puts childminding at the heart of Government policy.

The national action plan sets out an incremental and supportive pathway to Government support and regulation for childminders, in line with commitments made in First 5, a whole-of-government strategy for babies, young children and their families. A phased approach will provide a significant lead-in time for new requirements that will be introduced, while access to the national childcare scheme will be opened to childminders at the earliest possible opportunity to support parental choice. Phase 1, which will last two to three years, is a preparatory phase that will include developing childminder-specific regulations and bespoke training for childminders, re-examining financial supports available for childminders, and further research and cost estimates. Phase 1 will also involve further engagement and consultation with childminders on the detailed planned reform measures, including regulations, as well as ensuring that childminders and parents are well informed about the reforms at the right time. Phase 2, which will be a transitional phase, will last between three and five years. Phase 3 will involve full implementation.

The phased approach acknowledges that the large majority of the estimated 15,000 childminders in Ireland today have had no experience of regulation or of State supports for their work. The timeframe for the national action plan of more than eight years, the preparation and transition phases within the plan, and the flexibility in the timelines for moving between the three phases of the plan all recognise the need to move incrementally and ensure childminders are prepared for any reforms and supported in going through those reforms. The phased approach is also intended to ensure there is time to develop and put in place the supports childminders will need.

Preparation of the national action plan has from the start involved childminders and the organisations that work closely with them.

We seem to be experiencing some technical difficulties with Dr. Brooks's connection. I will see if we can get the link back. Does Mr. Wolfe wish to take over? Does he have those documents in front of him?

Mr. Toby Wolfe

Yes. I can do that.

Great. I thank Mr. Wolfe.

Mr. Toby Wolfe

In 2016, the Department asked Childminding Ireland to chair and co-ordinate a working group to develop policy proposals for the reform of childminding policy. The report of that working group, which was completed in 2018, became the blueprint for the draft action plan.

There is a difficulty with Mr. Wolfe's connection. I am not sure if Dr. Brooks is back online. Mr. Wolfe's appears to be back online. Can he hear me?

Mr. Toby Wolfe

I lost the connection for a minute.

He is back online now.

Mr. Toby Wolfe

In total, 3,800 parents, 850 childminders and 290 children, in addition to stakeholder organisations, took part in the consultations that lie behind the plan.

The strong emphasis on engagement and consultation with childminders when developing the plan will continue during implementation. We recognise the importance of involving childminders if we are to ensure that measures undertaken are proportionate and appropriate for childminders, are achievable, and retain childminders’ support and participation throughout this process of reform. To this end, the national action plan includes a commitment to include childminders on the steering group and advisory groups for the plan. Furthermore, one of those advisory groups will focus specifically on consultation and communications, and consultation with childminders will continue during development of the regulations. The steering group for the national action plan is in the process of being established and will hold its first meeting next week.

The approach we are taking recognises the many benefits of quality childminding but also recognises the challenges ahead. A central challenge will be ensuring regulations for childminders are proportionate. Care will be needed in ensuring regulations are appropriate to the home and family context in which childminders work while at the same time providing safeguards to protect children and to provide assurance for parents of the quality of the care their children will receive. It will take time to get this right.

One regulatory issue that was unresolved in the 2018 working group report was the appropriate training requirement for childminders to register with Tusla, the statutory regulator.

The national action plan commits to a balanced and phased approach, with foundation-level training as a prerequirement for registration and delivery of training in formats that are suited to childminders. Once the new regulations are in place and the Child Care Act 1991 is amended to allow childminders to register with Tusla, childminders will be able to take part in the national childcare scheme and other supports.

The approach proposed in the national action plan will bring Ireland in line with approaches to childminding across Europe. Childminding is already successfully regulated in three quarters of European countries. In many, childminders have to undertake specific training, though at a foundation level. In some countries, such as France, Denmark and the Netherlands, childminding makes up a large proportion of regulated provision of early learning and care, especially for children under three years of age. Our steering group will include representation from other jurisdictions that have successfully achieved what we want to achieve. Drawing on international experience, research evidence on outcomes for children and extensive consultation, the national action plan aims to improve quality, affordability and access to early learning and care, and school-age childcare, through childminding. More detailed information on the national action plan is contained in the Department’s written briefing to the committee.

Mr. Bernard Gloster

I thank the committee for the invitation to appear before it today. I am pleased to join other stakeholders in this session from the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. I note that Seas Suas was originally on the schedule but its representatives are not able to be here today. I am joined by my colleagues, Dr. Caroline Cullen, director of quality assurance at Tusla, and Ms Fiona McDonnell, service director for our national children’s services regulation. I welcome the debate and opportunity to discuss aspects of this plan. Tusla welcomes the plan primarily from the perspectives relative to our functions in two areas. We are a statutory provider of child and family support services and we are also the regulator of early years' services and an increasing number of discrete specialist services that come within the remit of our children’s services regulation. From both the perspective of a provider and a regulator, we welcome the opportunity to discuss this policy.

There is little doubt that an increasing body of research demonstrates the value to children and families of the provision of quality, accessible, flexible and supported childcare options. This has been matched over the past decade with an enormous change in the landscape of provision for early years' care. Some 4,184 providers were registered with Tusla at the end of April this year. The majority of these are now operating within, and inspected under, the regulatory provisions established in 2016. There is little doubt that this is a sector that has transformed in a decade and our evidence, supported by research, continues to demonstrate an increasingly compliant sector working to very high standards.

There is also no doubt that with regulation comes challenges. When I last addressed this subject matter at this committee's predecessor in late 2019, shortly after taking up the post of Tusla chief executive officer, CEO, the sector had again come through a period of intense commentary and focus. This centred on what regulation could and could not achieve with the resulting challenges for all of society but, most notably, parents, for whom choice of day care for their children can feature among the most significant decisions they make. It is important to recognise from that period that regulation, while driving improvement, can never guarantee absolute compliance or fail-safe services. We have, and are likely to see in future, failings, poor standards and shortcomings in a small number of situations.

At that time, I committed to undertaking changes to improve our engagement and support for parents. Since that time, we have introduced a parental feedback process to enable parents to provide us with information related to the service their children attend. They can now give us this information at inspection time or at any time. We now also publish the date inspection was undertaken, even before the reports are published, so parents are aware that an inspection of their child's service has taken place. We also committed to undertake research to learn more about how we are doing and have published and shared across differing forums the following three reports in February of this year: Tusla Early Years Inspections-Parents Consultation; Report of Early Years Inspection Reports 2018-2019: Analysis and Trends; and Report of the Early Years Regulatory Enforcement Process-Outcomes.

At the end of 2019, most providers were coming to the end of their first three-year registration cycle under the 2016 regulations and, in the main, were successfully re-registered as the year closed. The challenges experienced by the sector, for parents and public confidence, led to a narrative at the time of re-registration of a sector that was over-regulated, when four months earlier the suggestion was that it was under-regulated. This is an important context as we now face the next seven years of the plan for childminding.

Childminding, mainly provided by a person in his or her own home to children coming to him or her, is the last remaining modality of early years' care required to be addressed in detailed policy, not just regulation. The plan is welcome for this reason in that it brings to life an incremental approach to policy in action. With some estimating that 15,000 non-relative childminding arrangements are in place today, as referenced in the policy document, the option clearly is meeting a need. Tusla fully supports the plan, which aims to strengthen recognition of these minders, support the choice of parents who use childminding, make it affordable, increase access and enhance quality of provision. Parents, communities and society as a whole benefit from these improvements, but particularly children. Childminding and formal early years' settings, such as crèches and preschools, do not need to be a stark either-or contrast but simply more of a mix and range of options, all supported and encouraged to improve in a sensible and regulated context.

Childminding, regardless of the setting, relies on the skill and dedication of the people doing the minding. Whether trained childcare workers in formal early years' settings or childminders in the home, recognition of the importance of the work, reflected in terms, conditions, opportunities and training, must also be at the fore of any policy approach to this sector. While not the primary concern of Tusla as a regulator, it is of concern to all that the importance of this work is not underestimated.

We are very conscious that childminding environments have several important elements that set them apart from other types of early years' provision. Childminders usually operate from family homes and cater for much smaller numbers of children compared with other settings. It is important that a homely environment is maintained and that the fabric of the home is not fundamentally altered. We welcome the development and implementation of regulations, which will acknowledge the unique circumstances in which childminding services operate and at the same time ensure that those services provide consistently high-quality and safe environments for the children who attend them.

There are currently 84 registered childminders and we look forward to building this number through engagement over the coming years as we prepare for the future regulation of the service. We believe this will be of benefit to parents and children and that there are many benefits that registration can provide. The reality is that with 84 registered out of a much larger number, there is clear need for this overall plan not only to recognise this sector but to ensure the greatest possible benefit to children.

Prior to the publication of our quality regulatory framework for childminders in 2018, we engaged with Childminding Ireland, childminders and parents in its development. This resource clearly sets out how Tusla assesses childminders for compliance with current regulation. Our annual and inspection analysis reports published on our website show that childminders are found compliant with most regulations. This, we hope, is an encouragement to the many childminders who will come within the scope of regulation over the life of this plan. In 2020 we introduced an e-learning programme on the quality regulatory framework for providers, stakeholders and students. To date, out of 8,674 who have undertaken the online training, 8,000 are staff working in services of whom 74 are childminders.

This approach is one that Tusla is committed to pursuing where we are a regulator clearly focused on enabling continuous improvement.

In 2020 we undertook a review of the registration, regulation, inspection and enforcement of the childminding sector in six international jurisdictions. The findings from the review identified that there is a range of approaches to the regulation of childminding and differing requirements, for example, in qualifications and training. These findings, combined with our understanding of the Irish childminding context, will support us to ensure that the registration and inspection of childminders in Ireland is proportionate, effective and consistent in assessing the care and safety of children in a childminder's home. Home-based care, as distinct from centre-based care, will be possible to regulate and inspect. However, we need to have a conversation about what we expect from regulation. If it is based on an absolute guarantee with no faults - a complete risk averse approach - then it will likely fail and remove the very aspiration of the policy, which is care in a relationship-based home-from-home family life environment. If, however, it is based on reasonable measurable standards, recognising the home environment and focused on the care and well-being of the child, it is likely to lead to a high quality, strong and sustainable option for parents and children into the future. Tusla, as an agency with a direct interest in child welfare and family support and as an early years regulator, welcomes the action plan being advanced by the Minister and we will play an active part in its development and implementation.

I thank Mr. Gloster. We are moving into our questions session and I remind members that they need to confirm their location. I call Senator Keogan and ask her to confirm her location.

Thank you, Chair. I am in Leinster House.

I thank Mr. Gloster and Dr. Brooks. The plan is primarily concerned with childminders who mind children in their own home and not those who mind children in the child's own home. The plan includes the action to develop information and training resources in relation to those who mind children in the child's home, but what will these actions be and how will this category of childminding be supported? What are the main challenges that will be faced in implementing this plan and what insights have been gained from consulting childminders and organisations working closely with them when devising this plan? Will the plan make the provision of childminding inaccessible to knowledgeable and experienced childminders who have no formal training or qualifications? What impact will the plan have on them? There are three or four questions to start off with.

They are for the Department, I assume. Are they?

They are for the Department.

I call Dr. Brooks or Mr. Wolfe, if one of them wants to come in on those questions. Mr. Wolfe is on mute. We do not seem to have Dr. Brooks. If Mr. Wolfe can come in, that would be great.

Mr. Toby Wolfe

Of course. I will start with the first question around resources for childminders working in the parent's home. The Senator is correct that the main focus of the national action plan is on self-employed childminders working in the childminder's home but it commits to develop information and training resources for those who are working in the parent's home.

The Senator asked for the details. I suppose the details of this and of many aspects of the plan are still to be worked out during phase 1 and there will be consultation during phase 1.

The focus is primarily on childminders working in the childminder's home. I suppose we are cautious about placing too many restrictions on parents' freedom to make private arrangements and, in particular, there would be significant challenges in regulating childminding in the child's home. If the childminder is working from the childminder's home, the childminder is typically self-employed and offers a service, and it is accessed effectively on a public basis. Someone caring for a child in the child's home is an employee of the child's parents and may carry out a range of duties, not only childminding but cleaning or other domestic duties, and, because the childminder works in the parents' home rather than the childminder's home, the childminder cannot be held responsible for the safety or suitability of that home for the purpose of early learning or childcare. It is an area where we have to move cautiously. We have not ruled out the possibility of further future supports in that area but the next step is the regulation and support of self-employed childminders. We acknowledge there is a big challenge ahead in doing what we are setting out to do in the national action plan and I suppose that is the next few years of activity.

We await the regulations on that and what supports, if any, will be outlined. What insights has Tusla gained from consulting with the childminders or did the agency reach out to those who are minding children in the child's home to get feedback on that?

Dr. Anne-Marie Brooks

I might come in on that, if I can be heard.

Dr. Anne-Marie Brooks

The opening statement outlined the considerable consultation that has taken place in developing the national action plan since the establishment of the working group in 2016 chaired by Childminding Ireland. In the course of that working group and the report that it developed, there was quite significant engagement in surveys with parents and with Childminding Ireland members, discussion days with childminders and consultation with children themselves.

In the process of developing the draft national action plan, there was also a considerable range of public consultation activities, including an open call for submissions, online surveys with childminders and surveys with parents. There were focus groups undertaken in every city and county childcare committee, CCC, area throughout the country. There were 32 focus groups in total in which 205 childminders attended and there was an open policy debate. All of that culminated in the finalisation of the national action plan for childminding. There is a commitment in the action plan to continue that level of engagement and consultation with childminders and we have already commenced that process of continued engagement and consultation.

What the consultation findings told us in preparing the plan is that there was broad strong support for the direction of travel. There was broad support for the introduction of regulations to childminders. There was broad support for the extension of State-funded supports to childminders. There was support for the commitments to develop staff local networks for childminders and very strong support in opening up the national childcare scheme to all childminders who meet requirements making childcare more affordable to parents who use this form of childcare.

Clearly, with the scale of reform that is planned over the duration of this plan, there are concerns among childminders. There is an anxiety, I suppose, around the reform and what the change may mean for them. That is why we have taken an incremental approach to bringing this reform about. A phased and supported incremental approach is what is intended, reflecting the views and the issues raised through the process of consultation.

To come back on that, what happens to those who might have years of experience but may not necessarily have the qualifications? What is the impact of the plan for these particular individuals?

Mr. Toby Wolfe

The plan proposes the preregistration training requirement will be a very limited foundation training, and after that foundation training, childminders will be able to register to Tusla, There will then be a post-registration quality development programme they will be able to complete over a number of years. That approach is specifically designed to support childminders who may have had no engagement whatsoever and no experience of training. The first hurdle they have to jump is a very low one and they will be supported in doing that. The detail of the foundation training is still to be developed in consultation with childminders and childminding organisations.

It will be delivered in formats that suit childminders and they will be supported to achieve it. The aim is to bring those childminders who have no previous experience of engagement with the State along with us on the journey.

I am glad to hear that. We do not want to hear that these experienced childminders are falling through the cracks because they have not been engaged in any educational supports or training over the last number of years. I am glad to hear that. I thank the witnesses for answering my questions.

I ask Deputy Cathal Crowe to confirm his location.

I confirm that I am in the convention centre.

I thank the witnesses for their contributions. I wish to make a few comments. I have read the opening statement and briefing note. I have a query regarding the foundation training and the threshold at which one becomes subject to regulation. I know that there are various legislative measures dating back to 1991 and there has been an overhauling of things. At what point does one become a childminder officially subject to regulation and officially required to undertake foundation training? In every village there are people who are doing this work on an industrial scale. Some of them have gone the whole hog and have opened a full crèche. There are also other childminders who take on six or seven children. I understand what category they fall into. There is usually someone two or three doors down from your home who is excellent with children who they have minded for many years. Subjecting them to foundation training or whatever type of regulation may be coming down the line may have the unintended effect of causing some of them to exit the sector. Is there a threshold at which one is or is not a childminder in the eyes of the State? I ask Mr. Wolfe to respond.

Mr. Toby Wolfe

I am happy to answer that question. I wish to clarify, at the outset, that some childminders are already subject to regulation if they look after four or more preschool children or seven or more children of any age. As Mr. Gloster pointed out, it is on that basis that there are a number of childminders who are already registered and regulated.

What is proposed in the action plan is to extend regulation to all paid non-relative childminders who are working in the childminder's home, which will require the amendment of primary legislation, that is, the Child Care Act 1991, as well as the introduction of childminder-specific regulations. The detail of what the regulations will look like and the exact wording of any proposed amendment to the Child Care Act is still to be worked out. In terms of the threshold of who will meet the definition of childminder subject to regulation, the intention is that it will be all childminders who work in the childminder's home, are non-relatives and are paid. It is a similar basis to the threshold used in other jurisdictions that have already gone down the road of regulating childiminding.

I get that there is a need for a structure and regulation. However, the worry I have is that women in villages who have minded children all their lives very adeptly, and with love and care, may look at this and decide that it is time for them to leave the stage. That is a major concern for me.

To move things on a small bit, the discussion we are having here aligns to the home help sector. I ask the members to allow me to elaborate. There is a shortage of childminders and home helpers. I am not being sexist when I say it, but it is a fact that the vast majority of individuals providing childcare and home help services are female. I know many of who have gone into the home help profession in County Clare. Many of them, particularly in the home help sector, find the taxation regime prohibitive. The same could be the case in the childcare sector if childminders are required to be registered. It has often suited people to take on childminding work at a certain time of day to enable them to be free in the afternoon when their own children may be coming home from school or secondary school. The taxation regime, however, means that they go unregulated. They will continue to fall outside the net because the taxation regime simply offers no incentive for them to go on the books.

The other point I wish to make concerns the early childhood care and education, ECCE, scheme. The ECCE scheme is a major function in child education and for many families it is almost a kind of childminding. Currently, to qualify for the scheme, the child must be aged two years and eight months in the September of the qualifying year. That is prohibitive. I am helping a family at the moment with their case. The child is two weeks outside of that threshold. It stymies all of their plans to get that child into early childhood education and on to school.

Finally, there should be some discussion relating to morning clubs and after-school childcare. I was a primary school teacher until I was elected to the Dáil. The provision of such childcare happens in many schools on an ad hoc basis. Some have hugely embraced it and others have not. It is a major type of childcare in most villages and towns. Parents know that their children will be with their buddies before and after school, the environment is safe and controlled, homework will be done and the children will probably get a snack. The provision of these clubs is very ad hoc and hit and miss. Some parents are taking their children out of one school and moving them to another because that facility is there. I want to pick the witnesses' brains. Has there been any high-level discussion on the provision of such facilities becoming more uniform across the country?

Before the witnesses respond, I must point out that the engagement concerns childminding. I do not know if the witnesses are going to be able to answer the Deputy's question.

Mr. Toby Wolfe

I will respond to the first question on financial supports and so on and I will hand over to Dr. Brooks on the ECCE scheme.

I acknowledge the Deputy's concerns about losing some childminders from the sector. That is clearly something we want to avoid. The incremental and phased approach set out in the plan is intended to keep childminders in the sector and bring them with us on the journey. As part of that, there is a commitment in the action plan to review and reform the financial supports that are available to childminders. A range of supports is already in place. Tax relief is available in certain circumstances for some childminders. The Department has also run some grant schemes. We will be reviewing those.

What the national plan opens up as a significant change in terms of the financial supports for childminders is the possibility of accessing the national childcare scheme. Up to this point, because the scheme requires that a provider is registered with Tusla, the large majority of childminders and the parents who use those childminders have been precluded from accessing the national childcare scheme. The action plan changes that. It will mean that when childminders have done the foundation training and meet the initial requirements for registration, they can register with Tusla and will then be able to enter the national childcare scheme at the earliest opportunity. The parents will be able to avail of subsidies. We think that is a positive incentive for childminders. If we do not do it now, there is a risk that those childminders will lose out over time. Parents may vote with their feet and move away from childminding towards centre-based provision that is in the national childcare scheme. It is essential that the action plan opens up that up to ensure that there is an equal opportunity for childminders to take part in the national childcare scheme. I will hand over to my colleague.

We are coming under time pressure. I know that a question was asked about the ECCE scheme. I might ask Dr. Brooks to respond to that at the end. I will move on to Deputy Murnane O'Connor. I ask her to confirm her location.

I am in Leinster House.

I also want to thank the witnesses. During the pandemic things have been extremely hard. We have to appreciate the way our childcare providers and childminders have stepped up to the mark. They have played an essential role during the Covid-19 pandemic. We must recognise that. For young families to succeed, childcare must be affordable and accessible. I welcome how the witnesses are committed to the ongoing learning and are listening to providers, parents and guardians.

I also welcome the establishment of the steering group, although the urgency of this is really important. It has been mentioned that the steering group will include representation from other jurisdictions. Could the witnesses tell the committee which jurisdictions these will be? With that in mind, how helpfully will the national action plan draw on international experience in this field?

This is a vital sector and must be supported fully to provide high-quality childcare with proper regulations and inspections. According to the Big Start campaign, however, Ireland's early years system is not working for parents. It is failing the educators, essentially underfunding childcare, and has led to a lack of options for educators who leave the sector, providers who close their doors and parents and guardians who cannot afford childcare. This is the biggest issue we have to face. I know there has been a significant increase in funding, and I welcome the ambitious First 5, but Ireland still has one of the most underfunded childcare systems in Europe, failing to meet the EU average in respect of the United Nations Children’s Fund, UNICEF, targets for investment. We have among the highest childcare costs in the OECD, amounting to over half the average wage in Ireland. Despite qualifications, most early years professionals earn below the living wage of €12.30 per hour. Funding is a massive issue. I always welcome steering groups and reports, but we have to be practical too. We have to make sure that childcare is affordable and that the people who need to access it are able to do so.

We have spoken about Tusla. When do the witnesses see the issue of training requirements for childminders to register with Tusla being resolved?

Another thing I have always spoken about is State childcare. I always wonder whether we have looked at it seriously. With this plan, is there a clear pathway for educators, a clear guide to supports for providers struggling to sustain businesses under significant administration, inspections and regulation demands, increasing commercial rates and insurance costs, and a clear ambition to give families the confidence that we are aiming to get this right? I am a nanny now and I see my children working - they are front-line workers - and see how important childcare is. As a committee we now have to make sure we get right these serious concerns we all have. The witnesses might answer those questions.

I am not sure who among the witnesses wants to come in first.

The Department or whoever else.

Mr. Toby Wolfe

I will come in on the question about the steering group and international representation and then hand over to my colleague, Dr. Brooks, on some of the wider funding questions. We have not yet finalised the steering group membership. We are in discussions with a number of possible nominees and are not yet in a position to confirm the names. We have been working closely with a number of jurisdictions to ensure we learn from experiences elsewhere. There is no single model that we think is the blueprint. Different jurisdictions and different countries have different contexts, so things will be slightly different here but for sure there are lessons we can draw on from elsewhere. To support us in that, not only will we have representatives on the steering group from other jurisdictions but we are also regularly engaging more broadly in EU, OECD and British-Irish Council networks in this area, so we regularly exchange learning opportunities with other countries.

I will hand over my colleague on some of the other broader questions.

Dr. Anne-Marie Brooks

Regarding the national action plan for childminding and the wider issues raised about funding, the action plan is about raising quality and accessibility and giving parental choice. Opening access to the national childcare scheme is a measure to address affordability and to start to address childcare costs for parents who use childminding options but there is a wider piece of work under way. Deputy Murnane O'Connor recognises the First 5 strategy. In First 5 there is a pledge to double investment in early learning and care and school-age childcare by 2028, rising to just under €1 billion by 2028. A funding model is currently under development. That will become the vehicle to allocate that additional funding to support the objectives of achieving greater affordability, improving quality and addressing issues such as disadvantage and access for certain groups of children. An expert group has been in place since October 2019. That group continues to meet. It is chaired by a former Secretary General of the Department of Health and the work of the group will come to conclusion at the end of this year. There has been very significant stakeholder engagement on the new funding model, how we might achieve greater affordability and how we will support quality. Core to that are the issues the Deputy mentions - the workforce and pay and conditions - and the report of the expert group is due at the end of this year. It will examine how additional funding should be targeted to achieve those objectives of affordability, accessibility and quality.

Deputy Dillon, are you on campus, either in Leinster House or in the convention centre?

I am remotely logged in. I understand the limitations on my privilege. I have just two brief questions. One is-----

I am really sorry but I cannot allow you to ask any questions. That is the rule on privilege once a member is not in Leinster House or the convention centre so, unfortunately, I cannot bring you in. I apologise. Senator Seery Kearney, I think, will take the slot.

Yes. I have got Deputy Dillon to send me his questions and I will read them out but I am happy to take this as my slot as well if you wish, Chairman.

That is perfect. Can the Senator confirm her location?

The question from Deputy Dillon is to ask Tusla how the cyberattack has affected its system while remediation is progressing and when Mr. Gloster expects to resume normal services. There is a second question which I will read out in a moment.

My question is about the regulation and how it will be implemented. I have been an adviser in corporate governance and management to the childcare services for a number of years, and one of the repeated experiences of childcare services is that when they get repeat inspections, something that had been fine in the previous inspection is suddenly not all right in the next inspection. Even though we are operating out of the same regulations, a matter such as an arrangement of a door can come up in the second inspection as being an issue when it was bypassed in the previous one or found to be fine. There is an inconsistency in the application of inspection. Furthermore, what is recorded as a breach by the inspectorate will be a matter that was trivial and rectified or explained there and then when the inspectorate was in the childcare service. With that as the background, the bringing of an inspection regime into childminding makes me a little nervous. I take great comfort in Mr. Gloster's words that we cannot be so risk-averse and that there is a lot of engagement and thought on this. Given, however, that this is minding children in the home, I am fearful of what this will look like. If Mr. Gloster could discuss where his thinking is on that, I would really appreciate it.

I will pull out Deputy Dillon's second question in a moment.

Mr. Bernard Gloster

The majority of those questions are probably for Tusla in the first instance. As for the cyberattack, I do not have all the notes in front of me but it is very live in my head. Regarding the recovery phase for Tusla, the first thing was to recover basic connectivity for people to be able to operate email and to be able to connect with one another in and out through the system. We operate across nine HSE platforms or domains, and seven of the nine were successfully restored over two weeks ago with some intermittent challenges.

Two others, in the north west and the north east, took a little longer but are now moving closer to recovery. Moreover, our devices had to be cleaned, or greened as it is called, and a substantial programme was undertaken. In the case of Tusla, there are in excess of 5,000 devices, and we are now probably just a couple of hundred short of having certified them as not corrupted in any way.

The main concern for Tusla is one I discussed with the Senator's colleagues, Deputy Whitmore and others, during the course of the attack and when I wrote to committee members. Our main case management system, namely, the national childcare information system, is back up and running and social workers are able to use it, as of a little over a week ago. I want to be clear and to reflect the concern of members when I say that system was badly damaged, which is why it took so long to get it back. When it came back, I was concerned that week as to whether we would be able to retrieve it unsuccessfully. We rebuilt it from a back-up, and our ICT team, who are expert in it, and the HSE ICT team worked night and day to get it back from the back-up. The original database we were using was damaged by the encryption attack, the sudden and necessary shutdown of the HSE system and the decryption process, all of which combined to cause damage to the database and render it unusable. We do not have evidence of exfiltration of any information from it, thankfully, but it certainly challenged us to get it back.

All our smaller systems are, in the main, back up and running, although there are some issues with internal file shares and other systems. I will go not go through the entire list, but one in particular remains outstanding for us. It relates to the external portal by which members of the public make referrals to us. Coincidentally, given that we have been talking about our early years service, our early years service interacts with all the preschool providers through that external portal for registration and other purposes. Ms McDonnell, who is in attendance today, and her team have worked exceptionally hard to continue to support people manually to work through that. At the moment, the best advice I have suggests the external portal will probably not be available until the start of August. It is connected with a dependency on the Internet, which is in turn connected with a security concern for the system, which has to be slowly brought back in steps. If I can assist members with any other information on the attack, I will be happy to do so. I have provided a global picture of where we are. We are still challenged but we have got an awful lot back.

As for how regulation is to be implemented, inconsistency on repeat inspections can happen anywhere. I have for years worked in every part of the social care system in Ireland, which is regulated now, and I have seen exactly what the Senator was talking about. I have seen it from the points of view of both the regulated and the regulator. I might ask Ms McDonnell, who has an established expertise in inspection and manages the service, to address how that inconsistency can happen and why small breaches are recorded, even if they are rectified at the time. The research we have published this year shows that by the time we come to publish our inspection report, 85% of either breaches or drops below the standard of compliance detected on inspection will have been corrected. It shows a continuing improvement and that they result from the regulatory environment.

Ms McDonnell might address the issue of inconsistency. Before I pass to her, so as not to hold up the committee, I will point out that the Senator is quite right and I thank her for picking up the observation. As I stated, regulation is good and important, but if we are not sensible in how we develop it or sensible and judicious in how we apply it, it can give rise to these types of challenges and problems. That is why the Department's commitment to tailoring a specific regulatory environment for childminding is important, given that the current regulatory regime is quite difficult to apply.

Ms Fiona McDonnell

Tusla is no different from any other regulator in that the main difficulty in regulation always relates to the standardisation of practices. We have done a great deal on how we can mitigate that. We have moved to a strong national governance within the early years inspectorate and we have highly skilled and dedicated staff. With the quality regulatory framework we published in 2018 that relates specifically to childminders, we broke down the regulations and were able to state clearly what we were looking for against each regulation. That is there as a guide for us, parents and providers and it is clear what we are looking for, so it goes some way towards standardisation. Another key issue for us in the context of the early years inspectorate relates to consultation with providers and parents on what they expect of us to ensure we meet that need.

On the issue of small breaches on inspection, in the past year, particularly with Covid and Covid-related inspections, we have simplified our language. We have moved away from smaller breaches that can be rectified. If there is a significant risk to children, parents will want to know it was found but we will also state that the premises was compliant when we were leaving it, for example. A certain amount can happen at the closing meeting.

I hope that gives some assurance in regard to what we are trying to do to ensure the standardisation of practices throughout our systems.

I have a further question from Deputy Dillon, so I will come back in on the next round, if that is okay.

I confirm that I am at the convention centre. I thank our guests for their excellent contributions. Those who have engaged with Tusla will, in general, have already committed to raising professional standards in childcare and will welcome the appropriate regulation. As was noted, however, many others see childminding as a short-term, casual job and some parents can avail of this casual approach only. Given that childminding works for tens of thousands of families throughout the State, there is a fear that over-regulation could disrupt these ongoing casual arrangements. What is in the plan to prevent this from happening and to prevent people from exiting childminding services in order that families in need can be helped?

I have to speak in the Chamber in a moment, so I might ask my other question now. It relates to Tusla's responsibility to manage the register. I spoke to our guests a couple of weeks ago at a meeting of the committee on adoption rights. Tusla is expected to manage counselling for those who have experience of adoption. At that stage, there were concerns about the capacity of Tusla and the resources it would need to provide that service. What resources are in place for Tusla to manage the childminding register? Does it have enough resources or will additional resources be required?

Mr. Bernard Gloster

Part of the first question, on the policy dimension in respect of those who have and have not engaged, might be better answered by my colleagues in the Department. Nevertheless, I will note to Deputy Ward that we will implement the regulations determined by the Oireachtas, as instruments of the primary legislation of the day. We are working hard with the Department to use our knowledge and experience to ensure those regulations are sensible and applicable. When it comes to the overall mix of how a community and a family and children mix and connect with one another and are cared for, the last thing we want to do is create an environment that drives people away from that. It is much more about improving the quality. The officials from the Department might pick up that point.

On the issue of the resources currently available to children's service regulation and what that might look like in the future, were we suddenly to have an explosion in registration of thousands of people, I will ask Dr. Cullen to pick up on that.

Dr. Caroline Cullen

In response to Deputy Ward's question regarding resources, I want to reassure him by giving him an example of the resourcing we currently have in place within Tusla. With the support of our Department colleagues, and the Department more generally over a number of years, we have built up a strong children's services regulation unit that is well staffed and well resourced. That took place over the period during which Tusla was established from 2014 onwards, which is also the period in which we have seen increased regulation. I will try to ground that in some figures. In 2017, which is only four years ago, we had 37 staff in place who had responsibility for inspection and regulation of the early years sector. Staff numbers have increased by 100 up to 2021. We have worked with the Department to build up that resource and we now have a workforce with that responsibility of 107.

When it comes to this new area of regulation, we would work very closely with the early years sector in phase 1. It is called out in the paper shared earlier by Dr. Brooks that there will be in-depth costing against the numbers that will require regulation and inspection over the next seven-year plan. We will work closely with the Department to identify what level of resources we will need additionally to enable us to carry out that function.

I thank Dr. Cullen. Are there other points that Mr. Gloster would like to cover?

Mr. Bernard Gloster

To be fair to Deputy Ward, who I know is under pressure, the other part of his question was the policy platform for the Department. Those who are committed are, we know, in it for the long haul and those who are not are sometimes the people who are only available to parents. The Deputy raised concern about those becoming not available. My Department colleagues might address that in policy intention.

I thank Mr. Gloster. Would Mr. Wolfe or Dr. Brooks like to come in?

Mr. Toby Wolfe

I am happy to answer that question. I want to make it clear that the Department shares the Deputy's concern. The risk of driving childminders out is one of the main factors that has shaped the approach we have taken in the national action plan. The approach set out is intended to be supportive and to help to bring childminders with us on what will be a challenging and new journey for them. The approach is incremental and phased. The initial training bar is deliberately set very low. The issue of financial supports to childminders, which has been discussed briefly already, is to be reviewed. It is important to emphasise that there is a strong focus in the action plan on engagement with childminders, in particular local level engagement. The national action plan commits to developing an infrastructure of supportive local networks across the country. We know from experience here and in other jurisdictions that the most effective way of engaging and supporting childminders is to do so at that local level. In terms of the detail of what exactly the local networks will look like, there is a commitment that during phase 1, we will research, develop and pilot a new model of local support networks, which will then be rolled out. As I said, I share the Deputy's concern.

I thank the witnesses. I call Deputy Whitmore and I ask her to confirm her location.

I am in the convention centre.

Thank you Deputy. You may proceed.

My questions follow on from those raised by Deputy Ward in regard to consultation. There are 15,000 childminders in this country, which is a huge number of people involved and very disparate and working individually. I am pleased to hear that there are plans for local networks. That will be critical. Of the 15,000 childminders, to date how many have been engaged with? I know there are some representative groups, but I am interested in knowing how many of the 15,000 childminders have been engaged with. I know from my engagement with people that childminders are to become part of a very informal system and that they will be in that system for a few years while their own children and families are at a certain stage in their lives. I would imagine it will be very difficult to get them engaged in a process that they think will be six or seven years away. How many childminders have been engaged with? If the witnesses could elaborate on the plans for that engagement it would be useful.

My next question in regard to the national childcare scheme. Currently, approximately 88,000 children are being cared for by childminders. In terms of cost, has an analysis been done of the additional cost to the national childcare scheme if those children are brought into the net? On resourcing, Tusla has had difficulties with its IT system, as outlined to us during a previous meeting with it. At that time, Tusla was already in a process of redeveloping that system. Is it proposed to undertake advanced development in regard to bringing childminders into the system? We do not want to get to the end of the six or seven-year timeframe and find that the IT system needs to be further developed and thus cause further delay. If that work could be done in parallel it would cheaper and a lot more efficient.

Would Mr. Wolfe like to respond first?

Dr. Anne-Marie Brooks

I might come in on the questions around consultation and the national childcare scheme. In relation to work to develop and launch the national action plan, there was engagement with 850 childminders. Among other stakeholders and representatives, there was engagement with 850 childminders through a range of activities, including focus groups, surveys, calls for submissions and discussion days. We have engaged with a considerable number of those involved heretofore. As set out in the plan, we have a strong commitment to senior level engagement and consultation. As mentioned, a steering group is soon to be established. The first meeting of that group will take place next week. The group will include childminding representation. There will also be four advisory groups established under the steering group structure to work on a range of activities. One of the advisory groups will look specifically at communication and consultation and assist with the development of an intensive communications and consultation strategy.

In the process of us moving forward to convene the steering group and to identify childminders to contribute to that group and also to identify childminders who are in a position to contribute to the advisory groups and other consultation activities that will happen over the course of phase 1 and beyond in the course of implementing the plan we currently have an expression of interest active inviting childminders to register with us to be involved in the various structures that are being established and to signal their interest in continued engagement through focus group activities or other mechanisms that will be set up over the course of the action plan. We have already received over 50 expressions of interest from childminders nationally.

On the national childcare scheme, the national action plan sets out an initial costings for phases 1, 2 and 3 of the implementation of the plan. Clearly, these are initial costings and in phase 1 we will sit down to re-examine those costs in light of further analysis and data collection. There are initial costs of extending the national childcare scheme to childminders and an upper and lower cost based on various assumptions of the number of childminders who will be subject to regulation. The cost ranges from €14 million to €33 million, depending on the numbers of childminders who will be regulated and the number of children accessing supports. That cost is also based on there being no change in the level of uptake of the national childcare scheme and no increased demand or increased intensity of use. The current estimate is €14 million to €33 million. Again, that is very much dependent on the number of childminders who are regulated in the initial implementation.

I thank Dr. Brooks. At some stage did Childminding Ireland step away from the consultation? What is the latest situation with it?

Dr. Anne-Marie Brooks

We are very pleased to say Childminding Ireland has written to us in recent days agreeing to re-engage with the process for the national action plan for childminding. It has accepted an invitation to participate on the steering group that will oversee implementation of the plan. There were a number of meetings with Childminding Ireland in recent weeks to hear its particular concerns. These are regarding the importance of active continued engagement with childminders in the entire process and the importance of childminders having a seat at the table where decisions are made and where policy is developed in the national action plan. We gave great assurances to the members and chair of Childminding Ireland on our absolute commitment to continued engagement with childminders and a firm commitment to include them in implementation and in the decisions being taken in the course of the first phase of the implementation plan. It has confirmed it has re-engaged in the process.

Mr. Bernard Gloster

I thank the Deputy for her questions. I will ask Ms McDonnell to give a headline view of how the registration system for providers works, which is what would be expanded for childminding, and whether a specific module is needed for it. I hope the registration portal through which people interact with us at present will reopen in early August. That will continue normal business. The Deputy is quite correct that consideration will have to given to a module or capacity for potentially thousands. Ms McDonnell will speak about this. With regard to the resources to achieve it, it is predominantly more about the skill set and capacity resource we have in our ICT department. At present, our recovery plan to bring it to a level of stability after the attack and bring forward some actions from next year will take every hour of ICT capacity we have from now until the end of the year. It will be into next year before we develop any new module. Ms McDonnell will describe it. The system she has at present is quite effective, other than it would need more capacity.

Ms Fiona McDonnell

With regard to the registration of services, since 2016 we have registered early years provision and 4,184 providers are registered with us. Since 2018 and the implementation in 2019 of the school age registration, we have registered 1,169 of these providers. This gives us approximately 5,353 providers registered with us. The majority of these come through the portal. This requires certain policies, a certain amount of information and Garda vetting. This happens at the registration office. What happens at present is we do a fit-for-purpose inspection and register the services. They are inspected again over a three-year period once or twice depending on need. The inspections are risk based. In the plan for childminders we are speaking about three times this number, which is 15,000 providers. It will be a decision of all of the working groups the Department has spoken about this afternoon as to what will be required to register. We will advocate that it be simple and clear. We will also advocate that a certain amount of first aid training is done before childminders register with us. All of this will be decided through the working groups. When we did our piece looking at inspection internationally, we found much variety and variation in Europe and throughout the world. It could be that providers will carry out a self-audit. There are many options to make inspections more approachable for the providers so it is a home from home. We are working on all of this.

Mr. Bernard Gloster

To come back to ICT resourcing, the Deputy and I had a long conversation during the cyberattack. As I told her at the time, we are building the Tusla url domain, which will be a domain exclusive to Tusla. I have already approved significant expenditure to build server capacity on this to comprehend all of the volume we will take on in the coming six months and to have good solid capacity for future needs, such as those Ms McDonnell spoke about and which we are speaking about today. The majority of early years providers had to re-register at the same time at the end of 2019. We know exactly what it can mean regarding frustration for people and pressure on an ICT system. In the round, it worked quite well. I am very confident we have the ability, knowledge and expertise. The issue that will arise will be timing.

I believe Senator Seery Kearney has an additional question.

I have a question to ask on behalf of Deputy Dillon. I believe it has been answered but I will ask it for the sake of clarity. Deputy Dillon would like to know from the departmental officials what are the plans to increase the funding available to national organisations under the Department's remit? Have the Minister and the Department committed to additional funding pathways? The coming period will be a time of real change attempting to move tens of thousands of childminders into a regulated system. Deputy Dillon states childminders must be supported and engaged with at this time.

I have a follow-up question to my earlier contribution. I also want to say thanks for the huge amount of work that has been done. This is very clear and obvious from the answers of everybody. When the childminding representative groups came before the committee one in particular spoke about how seven years is too ambitious. I recoiled in horror because in the context of remote working and everything else, we really need a flexible childminding response. I see this as being a very clear pathway to this. What are the views of the witnesses on this? Are we being too ambitious or not ambitious enough?

Following our previous meeting, Mr. Gloster followed up with some of the St. Patrick's Guild people and I want to thank him publicly for this. It was very sensitive and very thoughtful.

Mr. Bernard Gloster

I thank the Senator. I will begin with the Senator's own questions and my colleagues in the Department will answer Deputy Dillon's questions. With regard to whether seven years is too ambitious, all of us would say seven years is a long time in the life of children. Whether with regard to a policy or regulatory framework, seven years is quite a generous time. I recognise what representatives of the sector would say about the enormous challenge depending on its scale. What is particularly positive about this policy document is that it is now an articulated action plan that has a lot of sensibility built into it. The seven years will be productive and will deliver on as many parts of the plan as possible, rather than being a scenario of all duck or no dinner. The incremental phase is important.

I thank the Senator for her comments on the St. Patrick's Guild group. I met people in a very private and sensitive context. I will meet some of them again. This has been scheduled for the coming days. I hope we can continue to build in a supportive way for them.

I thank Mr Gloster.

Dr. Anne-Marie Brooks

I will come in for the other questions. With regard to costs and funding, the national action plan sets out indicative costs and initial cost estimates for some of the infrastructural developments that need to be put in place to support the implementation of the plan. There are some initial estimates on regulation and inspection, training support, quality supports and supports to enhance research and data. Again, they are all initial estimates. We are in phase 1 of a process. We will have to revisit these estimates based on new data and emerging evidence. We are looking to update these cost estimates to assess the level and the size and scale of funding needed to enhance the infrastructure that must be put in place to support implementation of the national action plan.

Separately and in parallel, a review is under way in the Department of the operating model for the early learning care and school childcare sector. This is being overseen by an oversight group.

We have engaged independent consultants to support us in that work which involves reviewing the current operating model for early learning and care and school-age childcare, having regard to reforms and actions committed to in the First 5 strategy over the next number of years and how the operating model may need to be reformed and enhanced such that we can deliver on those actions and commitments. The oversight group and the consultants are aware of the national action plan and other reforms that are committed to in the First 5 strategy and will take account of that in the context of their recommendations around enhancements or changes to the operating system for the broader sector. That work may also identify other supports or functions needed.

On the pace of implementation and whether we are being too ambitious, a balance has been struck in that we are not moving too slowly given the importance of opening up access to the national childcare scheme for parents who choose childminding and addressing their childcare costs, but also not moving too quickly to risk driving childminders out and to give us the time necessary to develop the supports that are needed to make this plan a success. We believe we have struck a good balance in terms of the time we have set out. We have left flexibility between phases to allow us to readjust and to revisit the phases and the timing of implementation. The steering group, which will meet next week, will report progress to the Minister annually. There is a commitment to revisit the timelines in regard to implementation of the plan over the next eight years.

I thank Dr. Brooks. The plan is comprehensive and a fine piece of work.

Would any of the other witnesses like to come in at this point?

Mr. Bernard Gloster

My point is not related to today's meeting, but for the information of the committee. I am conscious the agency would normally by statute publish its annual report at the end of May, but obviously it was buried in the system that was excluded under the cyberattack. It is ready but we cannot do any type of webinar publications at the moment. It is too complex for us so we will be publishing the annual report online and in limited paper version within the next fortnight. Also, our three-year corporate plan expired at the end of 2020 and the corporate plan for 2021-2023 will be published by circulation to the media and the committee on, I think, 13 July, with wider distribution to our stakeholders the following week. We have had to move from less printing and online provision to a little more printing because we are online challenged at the moment. They are two significant documents for the agency and the members of this committee who have stewardship of that brief. I wanted to notify the committee that those events are coming up and again to apologise to everybody for the slight delay in respect of the normal timelines.

I thank Mr. Gloster for that information. It is good for the committee to have it. As nobody else is indicating, I thank the witnesses for appearing today and I apologise for the technical issues that arose throughout the meeting.

Is it agreed to publish the opening statements and supporting documentation to the Oireachtas website? Agreed.

The joint committee adjourned at 4.54 p.m. until 3.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 13 July 2021
Top
Share