Valerie O’Reilly, head of Rainbow Daycare in Sandyford, receives several calls each week from parents urgently searching for childcare. Her position, having run Rainbow for over two decades and owning the premises, alleviates much of the financial stress that is usually associated.
O’Reilly affirms her support for various recent government programs that were introduced to help parents and providers. She, like more than 90% of childcare operators, is also a participant in Core Funding, a state payment scheme for providers. However, she expresses concern about the ongoing discussions concerning a proposed “nationalised system of childcare”.
According to O’Reilly, whilst costs such as staffing and other expenses can greatly differ from one provider to the next, government support is calculated based on the number of children in care. The recently imposed fee freeze prevents services like hers from compensating for any financial gaps by charging extra fees. She questions the feasibility of universal fee structures, and shows scepticism towards political promises of capping parents’ daily costs at €10, asking where the remaining funding will come from.
Parties such as Sinn Féin, Labour and the Social Democrats have proposed further substantial increases in public funding to meet the costs of capping parents’ monthly payments for full-time early learning and childcare at €200-€250.
Despite childcare being a significant issue, Minister for Children Roderic O’Gorman and his party advocate for further fee reductions and increased state provision in under-serviced areas ahead of the predictable election.
However, surprise was stirred by Simon Harris’ suggestion of transitioning into an affordable, quality, state-run early learning and childcare model, rejecting the idea of solely relying on market forces. Tánaiste Micheál Martin too, voiced his support for increased state intervention, yet appeared doubtful about its execution, suggesting that ideas need concrete plans behind them to prevent operators from withdrawing their services.
A more heavily government-controlled model of childcare seems to be on the cards according to recent actions of the department. The department, channelling a proposal made by a group of experts four years prior, has now created a specialist team focused on understanding what a “nationalised” childcare system may entail. The team’s investigations encompass staff wages and working conditions; ownership and control of facilities; operational frameworks; governance systems; services offered, pricing for parents, and the overall financial model.
Data collected through core funding returns reveals that the current sector’s wage bill stands at a little over €1 billion, while total operational expenses reach €1.53 billion. This leaves no room for profit. Furthermore, 69% of providers’ funding, according to the department’s data, is covered by the government and just 30% is contributed through parenting fees. These fees used to be around €450 million.
However, according to Early Childhood Ireland, an organisation which represents almost 4,500 providers serving 330,000 children, Ireland is nowhere near where it needs to be in terms of spending to deliver adequate service. They argue the annual expenditure needs to reach €4 billion.
The department has in the past proposed that matching Iceland’s expenditure on the sector in terms of GDP, would involve a spending increase of almost 50%.
Grainne McKenna, an assistant professor at Dublin City University’s Institute of Education, argues that these proposals demonstrate the failings of the current system. Even though Ireland records high spending on early childhood education and care compared to other European countries, it is constantly under scrutiny for underinvestment internationally. According to multiple studies over the past 40 years, including those conducted by economists, investment in early childhood is pivotal for national development.
Presently, the investment does not align with the need for a working model that promotes female participation in the workforce, while delivering high-quality early childhood education. Therefore, it is irrelevant whether €5 billion is invested unless it guarantees high quality.
She highlights how the over-dependence on private providers, especially large chains, in countries such as Canada and the UK, and notably Australia, has led to the system’s commercialisation, resulting in poor value returned from government investment and subpar quality for parents and children.
Karen Clince, the founder of Tigers Childcare, a prominent force in the industry with 21 years of experience, 22 services, 380 employees, and roughly 2,000 children under care, opposes the notion that large chains can’t have a significant role in the panorama.
She discusses the so-called “unit cost” tied to delivering top-level care and education. Despite that an surge in government funding has been beneficial, the related restrictions on operators have hampered their execution capacity, particularly due to issues that arise with staffing.
She emphasises that “The problem is money,” and by allocating one per cent of GDP [which aligns with the Early Childhood Ireland’s proposal of €4 billion] would immensely benefit the sector. She suggests funding for wages should be reserved as staffing concerns cause most other issues.
Siptu, representing workers in the sector, concurs. However, they believe that operators, in general, earn enough to pay significantly above the minimum wage, which starts just over the minimum for many, with graduate room leaders earning only €15.50.
Funding providers adequately is critical to achieving this, says Clince of Tigers Childcare. She’s sceptical of any talk about the government trying to outmanoeuvre, take charge, or replace those already working in the sector.
Following a meeting with Fine Gael representatives last week, she felt reassured that they acknowledged the significance of current operators in the system.
A parent, Jennifer (who chose to withhold her real identity for fear of impacting her childcare arrangements), expresses her frustration with the ongoing inadequacies of the system despite the hype around government expenditure.
In her words, both her spouse and she are full-time employed and their engagement with the system is not longstanding. Yet, to her understanding, everyone inevitably endures the chaotic process of securing a place, which, for them specifically, led to an unexpected hike in fees when their provider deserted Core Funding, leaving them with no alternatives.
While the department may argue for most parents experiencing a decrease in fees, from her perspective, neither employees, parents, nor providers appear satisfied. Even though she’s open to paying a reasonable sum, it seems impossible in the absence of more options. Meanwhile, she has the impression that numerous parents might be falling prey to scams.