I welcome the Minister of State and his officials. A proposed timetable has been circulated that will allow for opening statements by the Minister of State and the Opposition spokespersons, followed by an open discussion by way of a question and answer session. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I apologise to the Minister of State for having kept him waiting 25 minutes.
Is there a time limit on my contribution?
We have allowed ten minutes for the opening statement.
I will try to meet that requirement.
I am very pleased to have this opportunity to address the Select Committee on Health and Children and present a broad outline of the proposed allocation for the new Office of the Minister for Children. I take this opportunity to give a more general overview of the objectives of the office. Members will be aware that following the Government decision of 7 December 2005, I announced that staff working on the issue of child care from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, on the issues of child welfare and child protection from the Department of Health and Children, and from the National Children's Office would be amalgamating to form the Office of the Minister for Children. The Government decision also provided that staff working in the youth justice service at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the early years education unit at the Department of Education and Science would be co-located in the Office of the Minister for Children but continue to work for their parent Departments. I have devolved responsibilities for these particular areas of policy within the respective Departments.
In practical terms, the establishment of the Office of the Minister for Children has meant establishing a separate Vote for the office, the matter we are discussing, as well as moving the child care programme and the relevant funding and staff from the former Department to the Minister of State with responsibility for health and children, carrying ultimate responsibility for it with a separate Vote, bringing together policy work in respect of child welfare and protection and the implementation of the national children's strategy and co-locating the youth justice service of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the early years education unit of the Department of Education and Science.
The transfer of the child care programme and the location of key personnel and expertise from three Departments in one office are major steps forward in facilitating the strategic linkage of services for children. It will ensure all policies and services for children can be developed in a new strategic framework of joined up government. It is worth mentioning that following the establishment of the Office of the Minister for Children, children will have a voice at Government meetings through my regular attendance at Cabinet meetings. The Government is committed to improving the lives of all children by bringing greater coherence to policy making, building on the strategy unveiled in the millennium year in the national children's strategy and now the establishment of the Office of the Minister for Children.
The total estimate of funding required under Vote 41 in the year ending 31 December 2006 is €352.24 million. It is proposed to provide in the Vote for the necessary financial allocations in respect of programmes and other specific spending requirements which the office will incur in 2006. I will address each of these in some detail by reference to the various subheads of the Vote. Provision is not made in the Vote for the administrative budget requirements of the office which instead are provided for within the overall administrative budget allocation of the Department of Health and Children under Vote 39. In effect, the office will benefit from the administrative assistance of that Department in personnel, finance and information technology. I did not see a need to duplicate these services in the establishment of a new office. That approach is both simple and cost efficient. It is also considered appropriate having regard to the fact that the Secretary General of the Department is the Accounting Officer for the office which has a director general, Ms Sylda Langford, who is accompanying me this morning.
Subhead A of Vote 41 provides for the 2006 allocation in respect of the early child care supplement. The supplement will be introduced with effect from 1 April as a new payment to give additional financial assistance to parents of children aged less than six years. The payment will amount to €1,000 per annum and be a direct non-taxable payment of €250 per quarter year in respect of each eligible child. The 2006 requirement in respect of the supplement has been estimated at €265 million based on the payment for each of the three quarterly periods this year. A full year allocation for 2007 will rise to more than €350 million. The exact number of families who will receive the payment is 130,000 in respect of 350,000 children.
The Office of the Minister for Children is responsible for the early child care supplement but its administration is being carried out by the Department of Social and Family Affairs on an agency basis. This is to assist in administrative efficiency as the supplement will operate on a similar basis to child benefit. In effect, where a parent is in receipt of child benefit for a child aged under six years, he or she will also be entitled to receive the supplement for the child. The first payment will be made by the end of August and payments will be made quarterly thereafter. The proposed payment dates for a full year are early April, early July, early October and late December.
Subhead B.1 of Vote 41 provides for the continued operation of the equal opportunities child care programme during this year. The programme is co-funded by the European Union and the Exchequer and will conclude at the end of 2007. I am sure Deputies are aware of its objectives. It operated under the remit of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and an allocation for the programme in respect of the first quarter of 2006 was made in Vote 19 for that Department. The allocation for the remainder of this year is reflected in the provision shown for Vote 41 under this subhead. The total allocation for the nine months is €81.888 million, of which more than €42.6 million is in respect of current expenditure and €39.2 million in respect of capital expenditure. During 2006 and 2007 the programme will run in parallel with the National Childcare Investment Programme 2006 — 2010 which is provided for under subhead B.2. Essentially, the Government, through the budget announcement, decided there should be a seamless transition from the equal opportunities child care programme to the national childcare investment programme.
The equal opportunities childcare programme operates through three programme spending streams which provide capital grant assistance for child care services for both community and not for profit and private sector child care providers, staffing grant assistance for community and not for profit groups catering for disadvantage, and a range of quality improvement and support measures for the sector. The programme is expected to result in the creation of almost 41,000 new child care places, of which 26,000 have already been provided. It is well ahead of the original target of 28,000 new places. As we approach its termination, I would like to pay tribute to the officers who worked on the programme and did a very good job in achieving value for money within the total allocation made by the European Union and the Exchequer.
Subhead B.2 of Vote 41 provides for the new National Childcare Investment Programme 2006-2010 which was announced in the budget for 2006 as part of the new national child care strategy for the next five years. The new programme will have a total budget of €575 million, build on the experience and infrastructure developed under the existing programme and bring a proactive approach to future child care development. A key objective is to respond to local needs for quality child care support and services based on a knowledge of these needs. While €575 million has been allocated to the programme over the five year term, the allocations for 2006 are confined to a figure of €10.3 million in capital funding and €2 million in current funding. This reflects the need to allow time for capital spending plans under the programme to develop. Between 2008 and 2010, it is proposed that the annual capital allocation will average €100 million per annum. The initial level of allocation also takes account of the continued provision for capital and current funding under the existing programme in the years 2006 and 2007.
The new programme incorporates a number of specific targets and objectives which include increasing supply by 50,000 additional child care places. Of these new child care places, a target has been set to create 5,000 additional after school places and 10,000 additional pre-school education places aimed at three to four year olds. Further objectives set for the programme include improving the quality of early childhood care and education services, supporting families and breaking the cycle of disadvantage, and delivering a co-ordinated approach to child care centred on the needs of the child.
The large-scale grants available under the new programme will include capital grants for the building or expansion of child care facilities to a maximum of €1 million per facility for the community and not for profit sector and a maximum of €100,000 per facility for private sector providers, subject to a maximum of 75% of the total cost, and a maximum of €500,000 for multiple services in different catchment areas. Staffing grants will also be available under the new programme for community facilities that cannot meet their child care costs from fee income alone, or which need initial start-up assistance. This will come into operation from 2008 when the existing programme staffing funding ceases.
It is clear from what is envisaged under the subhead that there will be a seamless transition from subhead B.1 to subhead B.2. However, it is not a seamless transition for taxpayers because the EOCP benefited from substantial allocations from the European Union in the form of co-funding. As this will not be available under subhead D.1, I welcome the Government's decision to proceed on the basis that taxpayers will meet the obligations associated with the EU programme.
Subhead E.1 of Vote 41 provides for appropriations-in-aid to the Vote which are expected to amount to €10.481 million in receipts from the European Social Fund. I explained the basis of co-funding from EU Structural Funds. A rigorous process of reporting and verification of grant expenditure is required before the EU contribution can be reclaimed by the State. Based on the expenditure certified by grant beneficiaries, receipts of €10.5 million from the European Social Fund are forecast from the paying authority — the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Rebates from the European Regional Development Fund in 2006, estimated to be in the order of €16.8 million, are not reflected in the subhead as these are usually paid directly into the Exchequer.
Under subhead C of Vote 41, €3 million has been provided in the Estimates for 2006 to develop models of best practice which promote integrated, locally-led, strategic planning for children's services. The fund will be managed by the office working on behalf of a cross-departmental team which will have responsibility for establishing detailed criteria for the evaluation and assessment of specific projects in regard to any funding allocation. A corresponding appropriation-in-aid is recorded in subhead E in accordance with the provisions of the Dormant Accounts Acts 2001 to 2005.
On subhead D of Vote 41 which accounts for the work of the former National Children's Office which is leading and co-ordinating the implementation of the national children's strategy, the children's office has now been subsumed into the Office of the Minister for Children. The strategy had three crucial goals, to which I will refer when describing the significant amounts of funding available in 2006. Goal 1 of the strategy states children will have a voice in matters which affect them and that their views will be given due weight in accordance with their age and maturity.
There are many ways in which we are supporting children and young people to participate more fully in society at local and national level. Comhairle na nÓg was established in each county or city. An additional €100,000 is being made available for its development this year. Dáil na nÓg is an annual event which caters for young people aged 12 to 18 years. The first session was held last Saturday in Croke Park. A fund has been provided to host and operate it this year. Civic, social and political education, giving children and young people a voice, is a teaching and learning resource which has been funded by my office for the CSPE school curriculum. It is a two-year project being developed by a partnership between my office and the curriculum development unit at the VEC. It is important to do so from the point of view of the formation of civic consciousness.
The National Children's Office co-ordinated the completion and submission of our second report in respect of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Ireland is due before the committee in September. An allocation must be made for meeting our international obligations in that regard.
Goal 2 refers to the research objective of the children's strategy to ensure children's lives will be better understood and that their lives will benefit from evaluation, research and information on their needs, rights and the effectiveness of services. A national longitudinal study of children has been approved by the Government. The aim of the study is to examine the factors that contribute to or undermine the well-being of children in contemporary Irish families and, through this, contribute to the setting of effective and responsive policies relating to children and the design of services for children and families. The study will monitor the development of 18,000 children, including a cohort of 10,000 infants aged nine months and one of 8,000 nine year olds. The contract will run for a period of six years and nine months. During this period there will be two data collection sweeps of the birth cohort at age nine months and three years, and two data collection sweeps of the nine year old cohort at age nine and 13. The contract is about to be signed with the ESRI which is acting as the prime contractor for the study, for which some €2.37 million has been allocated in 2006. An immense amount of work has been carried out at the children's office in researching the need for this project. It is vital that the information gleaned from it will be of assistance to the public authorities. There is also a national children's strategy research scholarship scheme, a national children's strategy research programme and a national set of child well-being indicators and state of the nations children report. All these matters are outlined in the statement circulated this morning.
The third goal of the national children's strategy refers to the need for children to receive quality supports and services to promote all aspects of their development. One of the significant elements of the work of the former National Children's Office was the publication of Ready, Steady, Play: A National Play Policy in March 2004, which policy addresses the issue of provision of public play facilities for children up to the age of 12 years and covers a five-year period from 2004 to 2008. It provides a framework for the development of public play facilities in Ireland, with the overall aim of ensuring children have access to a range of quality play opportunities to enrich their childhood. A total of €13.9 million in Government funding and co-funding has been invested in public play provision as a direct result of publication of the policy. The full funds are not included in this Vote but are included in the expenditure of other Departments.
A provision was included in the play policy for the establishment of a resource centre to provide information on play. This is being funded through the Office of the Minister for Children for a period of two years at a cost of €50,000 a year for 2006 and 2007. Based on the success of the national play policy, it is my intention to publish a recreation policy this year. The office is developing the policy to provide positive recreational opportunities for young people aged 12 to 18 years. It will deal with publicly funded recreation and is being drawn up by a steering group consisting of representatives from the relevant Departments and agencies. The Estimate provision relates to the publication of the policy. Funds must be identified to implement such a policy and priorities set in respect of existing allocations of expenditure.
The National Children's Advisory Council was established in May 2001 as one of the structures under the national children's strategy. The council represents all of the key stakeholders, including young persons, parents, the research community and the voluntary sector. It advises me and the office on all aspects of children's lives, including the better co-ordination and delivery of services to children. Provision has been made for the council in the Estimate.
I have outlined the principle areas of the OMC's work which will be funded from Vote 41. However, I want to mention other areas of my office's work that, although significant, do not require funding from the Vote. First and foremost is the area of child welfare and protection. The OMC will incorporate the child care policy unit at the Department of Health and Children, which unit has responsibility for legislation and policy on child welfare and protection and family support, including adoption legislation, the Children Act 2001 and proposals on guardianship for long-term foster carers.
A key issue in child protection and welfare is implementation of the recommendations of the Ferns Report, about which I have previously spoken to the committee. In the health area, it includes the review of legislation governing the investigation of third party abuse under the Child Care Act 1991 and the audit of child protection procedures in each diocese by the Health Service Executive. Yesterday, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform announced the establishment of the Dublin archdiocesan commission of investigation. The terms of reference provide that the commission may examine — following a notification from the Minister for Health and Children that a Catholic diocese in the State may not have established the structures or be operating satisfactorily the procedures set out in the report of the Irish Catholic bishops' advisory committee on child sex abuse by priests or the religious or that a Catholic diocese in the State may not be implementing satisfactorily the recommendations of the Ferns Report delivered to the Minister for Health and Children on 25 October 2005 — the position in that diocese and make a report on these matters considered by the Government to be of significant public concern.
It is worth mentioning that, since 1997, an additional €200 million has been committed in ongoing funding for child welfare and protection services through the former health boards and the current HSE. While the office has responsibility for legislation and policy on this matter, operational responsibility rests with the HSE. I am pleased to tell the committee that satisfactory lines of communication have been established between my office and the HSE.
Will the Minister of State tell us how that was done?
The OMC will incorporate the new youth justice service that, for operational purposes, will be an executive office at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. For strategic purposes and to ensure the youth justice service is developed within a broad framework of policy for children, it will be co-located in the new OMC. The service has a non-pay budget of €695,000, a distinct subhead within the Vote for the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. This funding will cover all of the activities of the service, including consultancy advisory services in respect of the expert group on detention, community sanctions initiative research and publications and communications.
I mentioned that staff working in the area of early years education will be co-located at the OMC to provide a joined-up government approach to the delivery of services for children. As a consequence, the Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education will come within the remit of the new office. Early years education relates to the provision within the three to six year age band, including the primary school infant provision for four to six year olds in the country's 3,200 primary schools. Almost half of all four year olds and virtually all five year olds are enrolled in infant classes in primary schools. The establishment of the early years education policy unit and its co-location with the other components of the OMC will help in providing better policy and co-ordination of services for children.
I thank the Chairman for his indulgence. I have gone ten minutes beyond the ten minutes allocated to me. However, this is a new Vote, for which reason it was important to explain to the committee the basis of the Estimate. This level of investment will have an immediate impact on the lives of children. I am also excited by the more long-term aspect of the investment in research and participation. The changes in the administrative structures and bringing together the various policy areas under one roof are important in making these essential improvements for children.
I congratulate the Minister of State on his new role. I arrived at the meeting late and it took me time to catch up on his presentation. As this is the first time he has appeared before the committee, I thought his presentation would be more detailed. His comments appear to be an abridged version of his presentation.
The Chairman asked me to confine my statement to ten minutes but I employed 20.
We will need to examine the minutes of the meeting to acertain exactly what the Minister of State is saying. Is he responsible for the development of the new children's hospital?
No. Paediatric services are the responsibility of the Minister for Health and Children.
Is the Minister of State responsible for implementing legislation in respect of the Child Care Act 1991?
Yes.
Children have been let down in terms of legislation and its implementation in recent years. The Minister of State referred to the Ferns Report, on which the committee heard a presentation by the One in Four group, and to the Dublin archdiocese inquiry. Many of the concerns expressed in the reports should have been dealt with under the Child Care Act. We are 15 years down the road but still examining how to deal with children's issues.
The 1991 Act has been implemented.
Has it been fully implemented?
It has been for a number of years.
Sometimes I think it has not been implemented.
In fact, the previous rainbow Government implemented it.
I would not remember.
The Deputy had not signed up to his party at that stage.
I was only a child. Does the Minister of State have any role in respect of childhood obesity or the report dealing with that matter?
In terms of research, the OMC will take an interest in it but when it comes to taking decisions, it is the responsibility of the Minister for Health and Children.
Is the Minister of State's role to conduct research such as a study of a cohort of 10,000 infants and 8,000 nine year olds?
Exactly.
It is mainly policy that the Minister of State will deal with.
The child care programme, including child care facilities, is clearly substantial. I have responsibility for it but it was formerly the responsibility of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The work being done in the Department of Health and Children relates, as the Deputy said, to the Children Act 2001 and the Child Care Act 1991. In addition, co-located within the office but operating under separate Departments is the youth justice service of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the early education unit of the Department of Education of Science. That is the remit of the office.
What is the Minister of State's role in the area of child recreation? Is it based on the findings of the survey carried out?
No, we went a little further. In 2004 we drew up the policy on recreation for under 12 year olds. We also secured substantial funding at departmental level to implement the policy. The funding has been committed, primarily in the Departments of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The policy has had a real effect and is visible in new developments, as local authorities are committing a great deal more to play provision. It is not just a matter of providing playgrounds for under 12 year olds. We are engaged with the insurance industry and local authorities on design and planning issues.
That is interesting. Is the Minister of State's office dealing with the insurance companies in order to reduce the level of litigation?
Yes. We managed to initiate dialogue between the insurance companies and the local authorities, which removed the inhibitions of many local authorities in building playgrounds due to insurance difficulties. We are engaged in finalising a recreation policy for the 12 to 18 year old group, which raises different issues from those concerning the under 12 year old group. With under 12 year olds, the core issue was the significant deficit in public playground facilities. The value placed on the required investment in the 2004 report was approximately €18 million in order to get our physical playground infrastructure up to scratch. We have moved a long way in that direction. In addition, the policy needed to examine the insurance issues I mentioned and the matter of designing new spaces to make them child friendly.
The policy for the 12 to 18 year old group is focused on what was highlighted in the consultation process and it was no surprise that the issue was positive recreational opportunities for teenagers. Clearly, the types of investment required to meet their needs are very different in character. There is also the question of whether the existing allocations from Departments are benefiting teenagers.
What is the role of the Office of the Minister for Children in the early years education programme?
When the Government considered the configuration of services for children last year, it decided that, in addition to relocating the child care service from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to the Department of Health and Children, the early years service, which is closely linked to it, should be co-located in the one office. The Department of Education and Science is assembling an early education unit which will administer policy in this area. The Department of Education and Science funds an early education centre in Drumcondra which has been conducting research in this area, but the early education unit will advise me on future policy and link with the work being done through the child care programme. The Deputy will appreciate that much of the money allocated to the child care programme, both the equal opportunities childcare programme and the new national child care programme, relates to quality supports. The provision of child care is not only about providing places but also ensuring the best possible outcomes for children. A great deal of work has been done on quality supports at county and city child care service level. Bringing the insights from the educational early years programme into it will assist in that work.
I apologise for being late. It would be very helpful if the traffic problem was raised with the Minister for Transport.
This belated response to the issue of child care is welcome in so far as it goes, but there is still a long way to go. Much greater commitment is required if we are seriously concerned about dealing with the work-life balance. I have a concern about the approach adopted. Much grief was caused in areas of disadvantage where child care facilities were being provided that were a real resource to communities because they were focused on the needs of children, not on the needs of business to get more women into employment. We must bear this in mind all the time when considering child care policy. Those providing services for children felt under threat because they would not be able to meet the criteria being demanded of them because they were set up as community playgroups.
The audit of standards and protections for children in child care facilities needs to be dealt with more clearly. I welcome the improvements in policy in respect of play. Local authorities have faced difficulties in providing playgrounds and the efforts of the Department to facilitate them in some way are welcome. There are, however, great difficulties in fund-raising.
The adolescent child requires recreational opportunities. I suggest the Minister of State needs to go to Cabinet and stir up a debate on the fact that some schools still have no sports hall. The basic infrastructure is not in place and the older the school, the less chance it has decent recreational facilities. It is all very well to produce beautiful policy documents, but if there is not a serious commitment at Cabinet level, we will not see the required level of investment. This is the first generation that is likely to have a shorter life expectancy than their parents because of obesity, a lack of exercise and overeating. If we do not deal with this issue in a real way, we will store up significant problems. We have received representations from experts in diabetes who talk about obesity leading to an epidemic in diabetes. This is a very important issue and I will support the Minister of State in everything he does to deal with it. However, the Government must place much greater emphasis on it.
In respect of the study of children, I do not see a significant value in assessing the average child. Most parents take good care of their children and if they have the resources, they should be allowed to get on with the job. However, some parents do not have the necessary resources and their children live in very difficult soci-oeconomic conditions and have been affected badly by the lack of housing policy. Children may go to school without breakfast. Simple changes such as breakfast clubs being the norm and universally available in areas of disadvantage, as well as courses in parenting, would have a great impact. I am involved in advising on the running of parenting courses in my area. The professionals in the health service are committing themselves to running courses outside their remit. We need to concentrate more on assisting people to become parents and make it a priority to assist young people who become parents. We need to target the study of children at areas of real need and risks.
In regard to the Ferns Report and the issue of children at risk of abuse, we know there are deficiencies in the system. The Minister of State has made the point that €2 billion has been spent on this problem since 1997 but how much value has accrued from this investment? Can we state honestly that services are world class, effective, responsive and accountable? I do not think we can and the evidence from the Children's Ombudsman, the One in Four group and others that are trying to assess and audit the problem warns us about the service. A proper audit of services seems to be part of the remit of the Minister of State, but how he would carry it out is a matter for him to decide. There is a need for ongoing monitoring.
I am tired making the point about the response of the HSE to requests for information. We cannot get information from it. In response to parliamentary questions the Minister states she is referring them to the CEO of the HSE. I am now getting a letter from the CEO thanking me and telling me he is referring my letter to the parliamentary division of the HSE. I am still waiting for an answer to a question I tabled on 29 November 2005. In a system that is not properly accountable there are dangers and risks. One lesson we have learned from the health service is that there is a need for a system that is accountable. We should not need the example of Mr. Neary to tell us that the system must be accountable. However, we do — the system is not accountable. Professor Drumm who will appear before the committee tomorrow will probably get an earful from Deputies and Senators. I urge the Minister of State to do whatever he can do to address the issue of accountability.
I am very glad to have the opportunity to put questions to the Minister of State, on which he might report back in a similar way as he did to the Fine Gael representative. I was joking with Deputy O'Malley about declaring a vested interest. I am responsible for three of the 350,000 children who will benefit from the child care supplement, which I very much welcome.
On a point of order, I am amenable to being questioned directly, but will I respond to Deputy McManus later?
We agreed to hear from the three Opposition spokespersons first. Deputy Eamon Ryan is speaking on behalf of the Technical Group.
Does Deputy Ryan propose to speak or put questions to me?
I would like to do the same as the Fine Gael representative. I am agreeable, if that is agreeable to the Minister of State.
I am agreeable to whatever format the Deputy wishes.
There has been a dramatic improvement in the political debate on child care in the past year, in that there is a recognition across most parties that it is not for the State to decide what is the best form of child care for a particular child or family, that it is better for the parents to decide and that the State should be neutral in the provision of support for different forms of child care. If we are biased in our spending and overspend in one area versus another, it is presupposing what is the best form of child care for parents in general. That is a very important development and a principle we need to solidify. When I look at the figures, I wonder if the Government is living up to this principle. However, the direct payment of a child care supplement for children under six years lives up to it. It is very welcome that this supplement is available for children up to six years. When my party was considering such a direct payment, we sought to push the age limit to five years. I welcome the age limit of six. This is a progressive step on the part of the Government because it recognises that, in many cases, the age at which a child should enter the formal schooling system is flexible. Some children may enter school earlier than others. I, therefore, welcome the first step of recognising the age of six as a good target because it will give parents flexibility in terms of identifying when their children will be ready to enter the formal education system.
I have some questions regarding this matter. Is the position in this regard set in stone? Obviously, a general election will decide what will be possible in one, two or three years' time. Is the Government willing to consider possible alternative direct payment systems based on refundable tax credits? The Green Party sees certain benefits in moving in that direction. It would provide greater flexibility as to how we might target such payments and would move in a direction I would advocate, namely, towards integration with the social welfare and tax systems. This would be an extremely positive development. Will the Government parties consider moving the operation of direct payments in that direction, regardless of what happens in the forthcoming general election?
Will the Minister of State clarify the position regarding how this will apply to EU citizens working in Ireland. He indicated earlier that the family benefits paid in the respective member states will be taken into account and that the amount payable will be calculated according to EU rules. Will he provide a simple explanation as to how will this apply to parents of children from other EU countries? How will it apply vis-à-vis children here or elsewhere? Perhaps the Minister of State will answer those two questions before I pose others.
In his Budget Statement, the Minister for Finance enunciated with great clarity the proposition Deputy Eamon Ryan welcomed, namely, that parents should have a choice as to the form of child care of which they wish to avail. The Minster was insistent on that being the golden thread that runs through the child care strategy he announced. The Government's position is that it is the responsibility of parents to decide what is the appropriate form of child care. I appreciate the broad welcome extended by the Deputy to the early child care supplement.
Deputy Eamon Ryan then inquired about refundable tax credits. While I am aware that the operation of the tax credits system is part of the tax philosophy advocated by the Green Party, the Minister for Finance made his dispositions in the budget. In the coming months, all parties will undoubtedly outline their plans and ambitions regarding the tax system for the next five years. The Deputy raised a fundamental question in respect of the operation of child benefit. The latter and the early child care supplement, which is now based administratively on the same system, rests on the principle that it constitutes a direct payment to the spouse. The introduction of a tax credit system of the type indicated by the Deputy would clearly and fundamentally change that system. Such a change has been advocated for many years and would undoubtedly provide considerable administrative flexibility. It would also target assistance on those in greatest need. However, it would be a fundamental change in the taxation and child benefit landscape and, as a consequence, there would no longer be a direct payment to the spouse of a person in receipt of child benefit.
Deputy Eamon Ryan sought in respect of the position regarding EU citizens. There are three circumstances with respect to EU citizens. For example, a cross-border worker or a migrant has an entitlement in two jurisdictions. The most common example is between Ireland and the United Kingdom. If a higher entitlement is paid in Ireland than in the United Kingdom in respect of child benefit, then the Department of Social and Family Affairs pays a top-up to cover the difference. I believe this was the issue raised by the Deputy.
It will take a change in Government, perhaps to an Administration that would include the Green Party, to move towards a more fundamental shift in the social welfare system. I look forward to that eventuality.
If the Deputy can form a Government on the basis of agreement with all of the Green Party's prospective partners to the effect that child benefits will no longer be payable to spouses, that is well and good.
I wish to return to the point made by the Minister of State to the effect that the Minister for Finance has emphasised this thread of equal treatment for parents, regardless of the choice they make. However, we provided significant funding to the tune of more than €500 million in the past five years and we will provide a further €500 million towards specific choices that parents might make. How can that be married to the equal treatment of all parents?
Is the Deputy referring to the child care programme expenditures on capital and staffing grants?
Yes. I have some detailed questions in that regard. I realise that the capital grants allocated for 2006 come from the equal opportunities child care programme, rather than necessarily from the new child care investment programme. However, what is the approximate breakdown between community and private facilities in terms of the support given? What proportion of the €39 million in capital grants and approximately €27 million in staffing grants goes towards private facilities and what proportion is directed towards public facilities? I ask because it seems that our policy is still based on the Lisbon Agenda target of creating 50,000 places. I do not believe the Government's thinking has changed and it appears that our early child care programme is based on the desire to get people into full-time work.
Not any longer. However, I will deal with that.
The investment policy has not changed.
It has changed.
I have some specific questions in that regard. Will the Minister of State target capital funding towards the provision of part-time facilities? In my experience, the vast majority of young parents seek flexible conditions and not necessarily the fixed regime supported by the Government, namely, capital grants for full-time care. There is a lack of availability of part-time care. To what extent will the capital funding provided by the Government cater for the part-time option? I support and understand the case for expenditure by the State on facilities for those communities that may not have sufficient resources to develop such facilities. What is the justification for not putting most, if not all, the budget for capital and staffing grants into community facilities? Why do we fund the private sector, given that we also now fund parents with a direct payment?
Direct payments are the correct option. Should we not increase direct payments and allow parents make the choice as to whether they opt for such facilities? While we should continue to pay for community facilities, I have a fundamental concern that this large capital programme signals that the State still favours a certain type of child care development.
I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for his presentation.
If possible, I would like to receive a reply to my final point.
We must move on.
I would like an answer.
Perhaps I can answer the Deputy before we move to Deputy Devins.
To be fair to Deputy Devins, he has been here since 9.30 a.m. and he has other things to do.
I am quite happy to facilitate Deputy Eamon Ryan.
First, in respect of the issue of choice, we started from a position whereby the supply of child care facilities was almost non-existent. One of the choices that many women who have children wish to exercise——
Or men.
Or men. However, there was not such a difficulty for men as a result of social practices in Ireland. While I know that the Deputy is an outstanding example to the contrary——
No, it has nothing to do with me. Some men were involved in raising children.
Yes. By and large, however, the problem affected women, who did not have the option of participating in the workforce. Hence, it was necessary to develop a child care infrastructure to facilitate their participation in the workforce. This also applied to those men in the workforce who also opted to care for their children. Consequently, in circumstances where supply was non-existent, it would be absurd to state that we should not have a child care programme or that we should not have a programme targeted at increasing our infrastructure.
To state that the Minister favours the option of compelling people to work is not a fair description or characterisation of the position. If individuals, such as spouses, opt to care for their children and participate in the workforce, the State must clearly facilitate them through the provision of a top quality child care infrastructure. That is what the equal opportunities childcare programme was intended to do.
It did not allow for part-time workers.
I will deal with that issue. That is also what the new national child care programme is intended to do.
The Deputy may be surprised to learn that I agree with him regarding part-time facilities. I am having the law reviewed to ensure the Child Care Act applies to part-time child care. Moreover, because the State received co-funding from the European Union, the philosophy of the original equal opportunities childcare programme was somehow seen to be encouraging participation in the workforce. However, now that we are no longer dependent on European Union co-funding, we are free to tailor and devise our own child care programme to take into account the considerations advanced by the Deputy. I am extremely conscious of such considerations and agree with the Deputy that the development of part-time facilities is important, as is the development of flexible working arrangements.
Will this year's capital funding allocation for such facilities be predicated on the provision of part-time options?
As I outlined in my presentation to the select committee, my office is engaged in a seamless transition from the old to the new programme. Hence, some funding will be allocated, of necessity, under the old programme. However, in the context of the new programme, options which will provide financial assistance in the context referred to by the Deputy are under examination.
I believe the Minister of State has answered "No".
No, that was not a "No".
The answer for this year is "No".
Programmes must be devised to ensure the taxpayer will receive value for money in respect of any allocations made. One of the remarkable features of the programme to date has been the adoption of a value for money approach. Such an approach will continue and new programmes will be designed to address precisely those needs identified by the Deputy. Hence, it is not a question of "No". The Deputy is pushing an open door. However, I will insist that the taxpayer receive value for money for any programme I draw up.
My final question pertained to the breakdown in the Vote between private and community facilities.
It is approximately 50:50. The generally low supply in this jurisdiction justifies the subsidising of private facilities. Our rate of provision is extremely low when compared to our partner states in the western part of the European Union. We must deal with this issue by every means possible.
While I also agree with the Deputy that in an ideal world we would have a far greater number of community facilities, our experience in the implementation of the programme to date has been that it is far easier to increase supply dramatically through private provision than through community provision. I am sure the Deputy is aware, from his experience at local government level, that voluntary and community initiatives, even when supported by the Government, often have a longer lead-in time to implement and complete. We have also experienced this problem in implementation of the child care programme. However, my office is supportive of community initiatives.
I welcome the Minister of State. I have a few brief comments, as well as two questions. First, I welcome the early child care supplement. To clarify, will the first payment be made in August?
The first payment will be made in August and the second in September. The third payment for this year will be made in December.
Will there be three payments this year?
Yes. Under the relevant legislation, there is an entitlement to a payment for three of the four quarters this year. However, the actual payments will be made on the dates mentioned. I appreciate that the entitlement will have accrued somewhat earlier in the year. However, from my office's perspective, the difficulty is that it depends on the payment machinery at the Department of Social and Family Affairs to pay this money. It is our distribution agent. Consequently, the various computerised adaptations which must take place will result in the payments being made on those dates.
Hence, parents will receive payments in August, a month later in September, followed by the final payment in December. Is that correct?
Yes, that is the position.
Is the equal opportunities childcare programme now coming to an end?
That is correct.
Essentially, will the new national child care investment programme pick up its work?
Yes.
The Minister of State has estimated that approximately €100 million per annum will be made available for the programme. Is that correct?
That sum refers to capital funding. There will also be substantial current funding in terms of staffing grants and funding for quality support measures.
As the equal opportunities childcare programme begins to wind down, is it solely targeting the community and not for profit sector? Will the national child care investment programme target the private sector?
Yes, that is correct.
I was unable to understand the Minister of State's briefing note with regard to the large-scale grants available under the new programme. The maximum grant available to the sector is "€100,000 per facility subject to a maximum of 75% of the total cost and a maximum of €500,000 for multiple services in different catchments areas". What exactly does that mean?
This refers to a private chain of child care facilities. Some providers now operate a chain under a logo or brand name and the figure mentioned constitutes the ceiling for such cases.
Such providers will only receive €100,000 per facility, up to a maximum of75%——
Moreover, there will be a maximum of five facilities in the case of a chain. Hence, if the chain contains ten facilities, only five will benefit.
In respect of the community and not for profit sector, the maximum grant will be up to €1 million. Is that correct?
Yes.
That is excellent.
There is now a lot of emphasis on pre-school facilities. I have been approached by some national school principals who wish to include a pre-school year within the school structure, before children begin their formal schooling. They argue that as they have the building, albeit not the staff, the cost would be minimal. I am confused regarding the respective responsibilities of the Minister of State's office, the Department of Education and Science and, in some cases, the Department of Health and Children. Now that matters have been rationalised, to an increased extent, in the Minister of State's office, is it feasible that all responsibilities will fall under his aegis? How does he envisage matters developing?
Yes, that is the intention. As it is taking time to put together the necessary administrative arrangements, the appropriate verbal formula is, "now that matters are being rationalised within my office". However, the intention underlying the Government's decision to co-locate the early education units of the Department of Education and Science in my office was to facilitate joined-up thinking on the subject to which the Deputy referred.
I was pleased to hear the Deputy's remarks regarding school principals who have taken an interest in this area, in the context of school accommodation. One of my office's difficulties in this respect has been engagement with boards of management of schools on the provision of space outside of school hours for school-age child care. While that is a different issue from early age education, the Deputy is aware that under our education system, the vast majority of facilities are owned by the patrons and managed on their behalf by boards of management. From the State's perspective, school space is not used to maximum effect in this regard. Hence, I was delighted to hear school principals had taken an interest in the matter.
Should I badger the Minister of State for funding or continue to talk to the Minister with responsibility?
If the Deputy wishes to make representations to me in that regard, he should do so.
I welcome the fact that certain departmental units are coming together within the Minister of State's office. However, I note that staff working in the youth justice service in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the education for early years unit in the Department of Education and Science will continue to work for their parent Departments while located in the Minister of State's office. Is that correct?
That is correct, but it is important to realise that I will have full devolved responsibility for these matters within the respective Departments and that the officers in those Departments will work to my direction in the co-located office. In that sense, they will remain in their Departments. For example, in respect of the early education unit, the Minister for Education and Science will ultimately be responsible for its Vote and for its administrative provision. In the context of early education, it would be undesirable to relocate the unit, in its entirety, to the office of the Minister for Children because it requires linkages, through the Department of Education and Science, with the other educational sectors, with the unions that represent primary school teachers and with the Department's research base in the entire educational sphere.
On the justice side, there will be a youth justice unit and a service established within the Department in respect of youth justice. On the policy side, the officers involved will be collocated in my office. I will have devolved responsibility within the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform for youth justice. Those officers require the necessary linkages with the Garda Síochána, the probation and welfare service, the Courts Service and the new detention service, which they will manage. It is important to emphasise — I will revisit this matter when I come before the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights — that the area of detention on the justice side will be removed entirely from the remit of the Prison Service. The intention is that all detention facilities will be provided by the youth justice service and the model will be the child detention school. That is quite a fundamental shift in approach, even on the position as it exists under Children Act 2001, and it will require legislative change, which is being put forward in the form of amendments to the Criminal Justice Bill.
We would all welcome that. I wish the Minister well in his enhanced post.
I thank the Deputy. Does the Chairman wish me to reply to Deputy McManus. She raised a number of points and I wonder whether, in justice, I should reply to them.
It is quite difficult to answer when the Deputy is not present.
For the sake of the record, I will make a few points. Deputy McManus referred to the work-life balance. I agree with what she said. Like Deputy Eamon Ryan, I believe that it is important to note that the change in the programme means that its basis is no long simply a market-driven requirement to ensure the maximum number of child care places. We are conscious of the fact that community provision can be brought into the philosophy of child care provision under the new national child care investment programme because we are no longer dependent on European Union funding. The budget also provided statutory increases in paid and unpaid maternity leave and in child benefit, which reflects that philosophy.
Deputy McManus also referred to the absence of sports halls in schools. The Minister makes capital provision in that area from time to time. Quite a number of sports halls in schools are not available to the public in the evening. That issue is being examined in the context of our recreation policy.
In light of the detailed analysis we carried out in respect of the longitudinal study, we are satisfied that we will obtain information which will identify the key factors that, independently of others, most help or hinder children's development. That will be a worthwhile exercise.
On the issue of children living in poor conditions and the need for breakfast clubs, the school completion programme introduced by the Government in 2003 provided substantial additional funding for programmes such as those involving breakfast clubs to a wide range of primary schools.
Reference was made to whether we are obtaining value for money regarding the increased funding allocated in respect of children and family services. Both we and the HSE will be considering this issue. It is worth putting on record examples of where the additional money has been invested. Some has been spent on early years intervention in the form of the springboard programme. There have been youth advocacy programmes that have resulted in many youths not being sent to lock-up facilities. There have also been teen parenting programmes that have resulted in a reduction in the number of teenagers having children. A number of initiatives have been taken. I agree with Deputy McManus that we should vet and validate them.
The question of obtaining information from the Health Service Executive arose. We must all deal with the Health Service Executive. In their routine inquiries, Ministers also work through the parliamentary affairs division. The HSE, which was established on a statutory basis on 1 January 2005, had a very difficult year because it is responsible for a large sector. A huge administrative revolution took place and all of us, in our positions as Members of the Oireachtas and as Ministers, were obliged to redefine our relationships with this new entity. I am satisfied, in regard to the areas under my responsibility, that I have managed to establish a satisfactory working relationship with the HSE.
Deputy Devins asked about the payment dates for the early childhood supplement. I should correct what I said earlier. I stated that the first payment will be made in late September but it will not actually be made until early October.
Will payments be made in August, October and December?
Yes. There will be payments in August, October and December.
That will be of great interest to many people.
Each recipient will be advised by me in a matter of weeks as to the position.
Will the notification be made by post?
Yes. I will not be taking advantage of any photographic opportunities.
On behalf of the committee, I thank the Minister of State and his officials for attending.
