Apologies have been received from Deputy Ward and Senators Bradley and Keogan. The agenda item is a discussion on State-provided childcare places and early childcare matters. We are joined by the Minister for Children, Disability and Equality, Deputy Foley, and her officials, Ms Hazel O'Byrne, principal officer, and Mr. Andrew Burrows, assistant principal. They are welcome to the meeting. I acknowledge that, at our meeting on the Revised Estimates on 12 February, a number of questions were asked of the Minister with regard to publicly funded early childcare places. While her recent announcement on this matter is welcomed by members, the purpose of this morning's meeting is to afford members the opportunity to gather detailed information as to how the scheme will operate at present and into the future. During this session members also look forward to a discussion with the Minister on any other issues affecting the early childcare sector.

Before we begin I have a few housekeeping matters. I remind members on Teams that the chat function should only be used to make the team on site aware of any technical issues or urgent matters and should not be used to make general comments or statements during the meeting. I also remind members on Teams of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present on the grounds of Leinster House to participate in public meetings. I will ask them to confirm that before their contribution.

In advance of inviting the Minister to deliver her opening statement I advise members of the following in relation to parliamentary privilege. Members are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the presentation they make to the committee. This means they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at the meeting. However, they are expected not to abuse this privilege, and it is my duty as Cathaoirleach to ensure this privilege is not abused. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

The Minister is allocated five minutes to deliver her opening statement, which will be followed by a question and answer session with members. I invite her to deliver that opening statement.

As the Minister is in a bit of a rush, can we take the statement as read?

Is it agreed that the Minister's statement be taken as read? Agreed. That is perfect. In that case I will call members.

The Minister and her officials are welcome this morning. We all acknowledge the importance of the early learning and childcare sector. It is probably one of the most important issues for families. Housing and childcare are obviously the two important things. I acknowledge the Minister's acknowledgement of how important this area is. Eight buildings will be started off with. How are the locations selected and, going forward, what criteria will be used for what area they will be in?

In the first instance, we are in considerable engagement with the city and county childcare committees. Groups, local authorities or interested parties are engaging as a first step with the city and county childcare committees. There is a preliminary application via them that comes to the Department. The preliminary applications will be analysed under a number of different criteria. We are keen that the provision will begin with the one- to three-year-olds and that it would definitely provide for additional supply in an area. In other words, for areas that are underrepresented or where there is an absence of sufficiency of supply, it would address issues like disadvantage, rurality or issues of that nature. It would be an appropriate and accessible location. We would like to see a minimum of 100 places being provided and that it would be a full service.

There are a number of criteria clearly outlined. I am not saying that every proposal has to meet every criteria. They will be evaluated on an appropriate basis. That is the procedure. We have had a significant number of engagements through the city and county childcare committees. The commitment is that we will begin this year with a purchase process, which means there are eight to be purchased in 2026. We have always given the commitment as we move forward that there will be a mixture of purchase and build.

What measures will be taken to ensure that the new not-for-profit services will keep their fees affordable while obviously maintaining a high standard?

That is the purpose. They will be not for profit similar to the excellent work already done by not for profits across the country already. The purpose is that the prices will be accessible. We see that already with the use of core funding and the supports provided through that. It will be entirely run on a not-for-profit basis. That will obviously be a consideration.

We all know about the shortage of places for one- to three-year-olds. Is there a projected timeline for when families can expect the first additional places for this age group to become available?

It is our expectation that we are talking about the end of 2026 and early 2027 to have the full number in place. We have been quite taken and uplifted by the significant engagement there has been already.

In some rural areas the numbers may fluctuate. One year there might be great demand and the following year there might not be as much. Are there plans for what will happen where patterns fluctuate?

In the first instance, like a business or enterprise of any nature, there has to be sustainability. The numbers have to be sustainable and that is a given. I am conscious that in rural areas there is an opportunity to provide for the immediate location, but there can be a wider radius as well that can be taken into consideration. Sustainability is important and we are clear on the provision of the numbers required.

They will have to prove projected numbers.

They will have to prove sustainability.

I will go back a step. It is proposed to publish the opening statement to the Oireachtas website. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I thank the Minister for being here to discuss this. I have said before and will say again, to the Minister and her officials, that this is a momentous step. It is something the Social Democrats fully support. I take the opportunity to congratulate the Minister for the announcement. To be able to announce this in the first year is a positive first step in her tenure as Minister for children. My concern remains that we are as yet congratulating the Minister and her officials on the announcement as opposed to the details. That is the bit I have question marks over. I will build on questions already asked about the transparent process in which any of these eight sites will be chosen. How will that happen?

To reiterate and not repeat what I have said, there is a clear application process through the city and county childcare committees. We have had over 68 engagements already through that process.

That is 68 that have applied.

Yes. That is just in these early months.

I have no doubt that will continue. The criteria are laid out and are very clear. In the first instance, one- to three-year-olds should specifically be provided for and additional supply should be provided for. People can also show that there will be additional supply into their areas. I am not saying that every box has to be ticked, but the majority of boxes do have to be ticked. The application should show that issues of disadvantage are being met and information on the appropriate location, the cost impact, the number of places and the approximate cost should be provided.

We are also looking at things like public management. In other words, that there is a diversity of supply in an area. For example, I would be very conscious that many are providing an excellent service but might, for example, be doing it circumstances where they have use of a room or two in a school. This is my experience from a special education point of view. Often those rooms are required for the additional needs of a school, whether it is a special education class or whatever, and that is part of the understanding when they move into the space in the first instance. We want to be sure that it is sustainable.

If what is being provided in an area is being done on a short-term basis in line with an understanding with a school, that is another consideration. The criteria are clear from that point of view. We have the initial expression of interest or preliminary application that comes through the city and county childcare committee. If the proposal that comes through the city and county childcare committee meets the overall, broad objectives, a preliminary business case will be made. In other words, further work will be done. That will include things like the estimated total cost, estimated time of delivery, etc. That will go to the steering group for adjudication, and there may well be a need at that point for further information. After that, decisions will be made.

If I can, I will ask three little follow-up questions in the time available. Does the Minister expect a date by which she will be making an announcement in respect of all eight sites?

No.

It will be coming in stages over the year.

Exactly.

Who are the members of the steering group and have its terms of reference been published? Third, notwithstanding the positives - I really emphasise the positives and think there is widespread support for this - ultimately, this will further fragment what is an already fragmented sector. With that in mind, could the Minister provide an update on the progress, if any, regarding a single agency that would, in theory, take responsibility for and have oversight of the sector more generally in the context of the amount of public expenditure involved?

On the steering group, we looked to where there was expertise in this area, particularly in building, the management of public buildings or whatever. Represented on the steering group are the Department of Education and Youth, because of its planning and building unit and because it has extensive experience in this area, and the OPW, which will be lending experience to the Department. They are there because of their track record of delivery and experience.

The Deputy is absolutely right; it is the overall aim that there will be an overarching body. Preliminary work has been done in relation to that. Work on it will continue. It is important that we move ahead where we can. Given that State-led provision is an objective over the Government's term of office, the earlier we start, the better. As a result, we are beginning with this.

On the six to eight we are seeking to provide this year, I want to be honest and say that there will be a great deal of learning out of that as well. There is a variety of different options being provided for. For example, the Department will buy a building or a State agency such as an ETB will have a building. Whatever happens, the Department will fit out the building. We are prepared to look at different models. In terms of who would run it, if it is not an ETB or the Department, there will obviously be public advertisement for a not-for-profit entity to take it over. We will see which model works best and will be prepared to tweak it as we move forward.

I welcome the Minister and her officials. We send our sympathies to the family of the late Brian Sugrue in Kerry.

This is a first step of five on the national develop plan. I welcome the €135 million that will, as stated, deliver in respect of the shortfall of nearly 14,000 early childcare places. The Minister has already answered some of my questions, so I will not ask them. What everyone wants is a regionally balanced output when it comes to spending the €135 million across the country. One thing that sticks out is that we are, thankfully, in a bit of a building bubble at the moment. Is it true to say that if there are more than 75 houses in a newbuild area, there has to be a childcare facility?

Yes, there have to be 20 places, but the Deputy is correct.

I am just going on the figures relating to Kerry. We have a figure of 8,000. Would that be a lot of childcare facilities provided and will they be public? I do not know where that is going to go or whether we will have enough childcare facilities under the planning regulations to support all these new houses in Kerry.

The Senator is correct that for every 75 houses, 20 places have to be provided. I do want to say that is all under review. I would wonder about that allocation of 20. It is also under review because, as the Senator will know, there are many instances where the developer is obliged to make the provision and then, ultimately, no early learning or childcare facility goes in and there is an application for change of use, which is granted. There needs to be much more stringency.

Does the Minister see that as a problem down the line?

It is up to the local authorities to enforce what is a planning regulation. I have had a number of engagements with the Minister for housing on it. I think there are issues with those planning guidelines. We depend on the provisions being enforced. Notwithstanding that, they also need review. I am engaging with the Minister for housing on that.

There will be eight that will be purchased, renovated or extended under the programme this year. The Minister says there are 68 applications already from across the country.

Yes.

Again, I am putting on my parochial cap here. Is that across every county? Is this population driven so far in terms of the first eight?

To be fair, when I say 68, there are a range of applications involved. With the best of intentions, some of them are coming with an idea for an area where they believe there might be a need. Others are in the process of getting planning permission. They are all at different stages and are being filtered through but they are being adjudicated on appropriately. It is up to the different areas to step forward.

The steering group will keep an eye on the places that are unrepresented in these 68.

Yes, very much. There is a forward planning unit as well and it is very much going to be guided by where there is clear identification of lack of provision. I welcome the 68 but they are all at different stages.

I thank the Minister for coming in. A lot of the questions have already been answered. I really welcome this. The Minister really did move very quickly in her Department, which is fantastic to see. I would love to find out more detail about the management in the settings themselves. Is there going to be a board of directors? Who will support the manager of any of the settings?

It will be similar to any not-for-profit that we have currently, any of the community services or whatever.

A voluntary board.

It will be the same set-up. I want to acknowledge that many of them bring extraordinary experience already to the field. I do not want to say that if it is not an existing provider in the area, I am going to cut off the opportunity for a new person working in that area. However, it would have to be a not-for-profit set-up.

Okay, so it will be a voluntary board of management.

Yes, exactly.

Could the Minister then see extra support maybe coming from the manager of the setting? Would they have external support? Would the board be their support, like in the voluntary and community sector?

I take the Senator's point. It is envisaged that it will be run exactly as if it were set up last month or two months ago, long before this came into being, in that it is a similar set-up. I made the point earlier. I think that in this first year there will be huge learning.

Of course.

That is why we are open, as I said, to looking at different types of models. I am not going to say that one model will be the better model. As I said, as regards the Department purchasing, the better model might be somebody like an ETB purchasing or a local authority providing the building. We have that openness in order that we can refine this and define it all the more going forward. Specifically, in relation to the Senator's question about the running of it, it will be run exactly as it is being run by the not-for-profits.

Could the Minister maybe see, going further down the line, the wholesale acquisition of community settings? Could she see it going that way? The Department is so open to different ways of management. Generally, community-based settings are very supportive of this. Private providers might be a bit more concerned. These are just my thoughts from listening to people. Could the Minister see the whole moving completely over to community, taking over community settings?

To be fair, I have always been clear that the State stepping in here is to complement what is there already. Certainly, at this point, that is our vision. I acknowledge different service providers and all of them making a very worthy and important contribution. I include in that private providers, the community, childminders and everybody who is making a contribution. This is to complement what is there already and to provide for what is not there in terms of places.

There is another concern. These would be small independent providers. A couple of people have raised with me that if there is a public provision in their area, they are worried about their own staff and whether they will leave freely. Is there any way of addressing that? If there is a new provision, if there is a new State-led service, people might be more inclined to work there. They will get security. Is there any way of addressing that about staffing issues?

Even up to this point we have made huge efforts in terms of staffing. I would be the first to say we have a very ambitious programme around additional places and costs for parents, but it will all come to nothing if we do not have the staff in place. The staff are the most valuable resource we have in terms of running the service, providing the service and so on. We have worked very hard to support them, and it is my ambition to do similar going forward. Over the past two years, €90 million has been provided by the State specifically directed towards improving wages for staff retention and so on. I absolutely accept that the adjudication is by an independent body, but in the first instance, this year we have put €45 million on the table directed for the staff, and likewise last year. I am very conscious of that. We also have supports for staff who might wish to move to a graduate qualification. That is being supported as well. It is our intention to continue to grow and support the staff.

Like everybody else, I welcome this initiative and hope it will meet its objectives. On Senator Cosgrove's last point, my sense of this is that the employees will not be State employed but that the board of management of the facility will still be the employer.

Yes.

Essentially, the State role here is just the purchase of the building.

Yes, that is right, and the model of the provision of the service is similar to the model of the not-for-profits presently.

Would that extend even to maintenance of the building? Would that be the responsibility of the board of management?

Yes, absolutely.

I know we have discussed locations and where the facilities will be, but the first objective in the briefing document refers to delivering additional supply where required in areas of disadvantage and rural areas. Will the first tranche be maintained to what might be CLÁR areas or areas of urban disadvantage?

I did say, to be fair, that there are a number of criteria here. I am not saying that every single one of those boxes will be ticked. It will be in the area of greatest need. First and foremost, it is to provide for where there is no provision. For example, the different criteria will be graded like "moderately positive", "entirely positive", "slightly negative" and so on. There will be a varying degree of analysis of the provision. I am very clear, however, that issues of disadvantage are hugely important. It is about balancing the opportunity. Our overarching responsibility is to ensure that every young person has access to early learning opportunities from the earliest point. If there is no provision in the area doing that, that is where the State steps in.

One of the other things I notice in the objectives is a reference to ensuring that supply is delivered in an inclusive and high-quality way. That goes without saying, but will there be any opportunity for any of these childcare services to have the access and inclusion model?

Yes, absolutely. One hundred per cent.

Will that be an expectation of them all?

That would be an expectation of every single provider at this point, not just the State-led ones. Thousands of children are benefiting from the access and inclusion model, and we have an openness to more benefiting from it. For many young children it is a game-changer, so absolutely it will be a prerequisite.

That is a clear criterion for this project, for these new-----

It is for all providers. There should be no barrier to any child accessing early learning opportunities. It is for that reason we have the access and inclusion model.

May I ask about the funding? Is the €135 million for 2026?

No.

It is up to 2030.

Yes, it is.

Do we know how much of that budget will be extended in 2026? Have we any idea?

It is €14 million in the first year.

I thank the Minister and her officials for being here and for the documentation they provided to us ahead of the meeting. It is really good to get a little more detail as to how this will work and how areas will be selected. I very much welcome this. The biggest challenge will be that there are eight locations this year and a lot of areas will want to be one of those eight.

The Minister will not be surprised at all, because I have raised this with her many times, that I will take the opportunity to mention Boyle again. Credit to them, they came together as a number of mothers who physically could not go back to work because there is no childcare. Boyle is in north Roscommon. It is a very rural area. Not only that, they came together as a committee. They viewed over 50 buildings in the town and the area. They have identified one at this point. Some have come and gone as we have gone along, but there is one now that is on the market for sale. Not only that, they also gone ahead and completed a very detailed needs analysis. It showed, in terms of the benchmarking that has been referred to, 20 childcare places per 75 households. They have 20 childcare places in Boyle, urban and rural, per 1,043 households. In terms of disadvantage, according to the Pobal index, the centre of the urban area, in particular, is disadvantaged. Going through the criteria the Minister has outlined, I just ask again that Boyle be considered. I have submitted the needs analysis to her and her Department and I ask that it be considered. They have done a huge amount of work, and huge credit to them, but there is a need there. It is impacting people returning to work, and there is a specific need in that younger cohort that has been identified. About 69% of those who responded were looking for younger children to be looked after. I just wanted to take the opportunity to make that point.

I very much welcome this. Will the Minister give us any further detail in relation to the timeframe? We are now coming into March.

Given it will be one, two, three and not altogether, which is fine, how will the Department determine how we will go along for the rest of this year?

On the engagement with the county childcare committees, will the Minister give a little more information on how that engagement is working in rooms or out of rooms? How is that engagement happening at the moment?

I acknowledge the Deputy's good faith in relation to her own area and her consistent advocacy for it. She is 100% right. It will be the miracle of the loaves and fishes at this point, but we had to start somewhere. With the best will in the world, we are starting with these eight provisions. As I clarified, it would not be possible to have them all at the one point for the simple reason, even in terms of the initial applications that have come in, there is a wide disparity in preparedness. That is fine too. That is grand because some of them will be worked out over time. It is about the readiness of the applications as they come, how far along the system they are and how quickly we can move on it.

I acknowledge we owe the city and county childcare committees a huge debt of gratitude. There have been a number of engagements and meetings with them. The officials may give the Deputy a bit more detail on that at the technical briefing. They have very much engaged in the process. The Department has facilitated a number of meetings. Quite a lot of the preliminary application process is coming through them. All of that is shared with them. They all have it and are funnelling that through. I acknowledge our debt of gratitude to them. I will say we had around five meetings or more, but I do not know where that came into my brain, to be honest. Ms O'Byrne, at the technical briefing, will be able to give more detail on the specific engagement there.

We are going to go on until 9.30 a.m. I will ask my questions and we will then go into a very brief second round. If more members come in, we will skip back to them.

I thank the Minister very much for everything so far. There have been very informative replies to questions. In relation to the €135 million between now and 2030, where did the €14 million figure get chosen for this year?

To be fair, it was about what could be delivered in the first year insofar as what preparedness there was. Even the volume of applications speaks to preparedness to be able to move immediately. It is our purpose this year to be in that position. That is why we went for the purchase, including how many facilities would be available for immediate purchase and how many facilities would have the capacity to make places available by the end of the year or by early 2027. It was about the element of preparedness or capacity that was in the system to meet the need for 2026 and early 2027.

Is the breakdown going to be for purchase of the building or purchase of materials? How does the Department envisage that €14 million?

It depends. That is why I said we have a flexibility in the model. For example, in some instances, the Department will purchase and fit-out. In other instances, the local authority may have the building. I said "the local authority" but it could be an ETB or anybody at all that has the building. The Department then steps in merely for the fit-out of the building. There are different opportunities here. We are prepared to work with anybody who is stepping forward with a variety of opportunities on the ground.

This is not for profit. We know there is already a huge shortage of childcare workers. In areas where there is no provision, as the Minister said, where we will be targeting these eight buildings, will we be asking people who are already working in another setting to come out or encouraging people to come forward? Is some of that €14 million going to be provided for training in setting up a not-for-profit? How do we envisage getting people, if they have not come forward already, to engage in a process? How are we encouraging people to come forward in areas where there currently is not provision?

There has been an increase of somewhere between 20% and 24% in the number of people working in the sector. I also accept that people can move around the sector or choose to move out of the sector. It is for that reason significant supports are being provided by the Department. I mentioned the €45 million available this year for staff wages but, more than that, significant supports around qualifications are being provided by the Department. We continue to work to see where there are opportunities for people to be trained up more and more. It is so people will be aware. The more the sector expands, the more people become aware that this type of work is an opportunity. We are very fortunate that we have excellent people already working in the system.

I am sorry to cut across the Minister. Of the 68 applications that are already in, are they coming forward with a potential team that will step in to take the not-for-profit or is that-----

It depends. Some of them are coming forward as existing set-ups that have experience in the sector as not-for-profits. Others are coming that do not have similar experience, but I do not want that to rule them out either. We should be open to looking at all types of experiences. The most important thing is to meet the need in the area. Obviously, we need the provider in place. It then becomes an issue for the provider to work with staff.

How do we envisage the rest of the €135 million up to 2030 looking? Are we going to be flexible in how we balance it across the number of years? If we gather momentum, are we looking at whether we need to spend more or are we going to spend it all in a couple of years? Will it be €14 million per year? What is the long-term plan with the €135 million?

It will be a different sum next year because, all things going well, it will include the opportunity to build, but we are specifically focusing on purchase in year one. There will be varying amounts, depending on how we are ramping up and how it is embraced.

If there is money left over from the eight buildings, we might be able to expand and do more. Could we dip out of the €135 million? Is there flexibility there?

This is the first year and I hope we see a lot out of it. We will see what opportunities are there and do all that we can to meet those opportunities. That is the most important thing. If we cannot meet them in 2026, we will seek to meet them in 2027. Again, I will be clear that not all the applicants are presenting themselves with a finished opportunity. That is the most important thing. It is rare enough that any one of them would be entirely completed, as they present themselves.

Tá fáilte romhaibh. Fair play to the Minister for facilitating this and condolences. At this point, an awful lot of the questions have been asked. As regards the 68 applications that are in, the Minister spoke about them being in a very different place. That obviously relates to timelines. I imagine if we are talking about an organisation that is presently operating as a not-for-profit, and with a history as such, its capacity will obviously be wildly different. What can be done to facilitate someone who does not have that sort of track history? Does the Minister have any breakdown of how many or what type of application?

The applications are still coming in. There are 68, as I mentioned. I welcome the broadest spectrum of them, but some of them are coming with just an idea that they believe it would be very positive in their area to have a facility like this, and that is as far as it has gone. Others are coming that have a proposal that is subject to planning. Others are coming with something much more refined or are coming with a specific building in place. It is a rich and varied offering.

In terms of staffing, and I hear what the Deputy is saying, there will be some who will come with experience, but all of those coming with experience started somewhere. Do you know what I mean?

That is the absolute right way to deal with it. There will be people who will come with a skill set to deliver projects who might not have history in relation to this, but if you do not get anything in the door, then you do not have an application.

The Deputy is right.

At some point, the Department will have that sort of information. If that can be provided to us, that would be worthwhile. There will be learnings. It is about what sort of framework the Department will be able to put around those who need a greater level of a framework than others.

On the wider idea, we all know we need eight of these almost everywhere.

Agreed.

Like the guy asking for directions in Kerry, I would not start from here, as the Minister has heard many times before. There is the entire needs analysis in relation to the numbers that are required, how this fits into a plan and then, beyond 2030, how we put a plan in place to deliver a sufficient number of childcare places, with the promises that have been made around cost.

Will the Minister tell us, in two and a half minutes, how she intends to deliver it?

The first step there for us was the forward planning unit. We never had a unit like it. It is similar to what we had in education, I suppose, but we never had that in disability.

The information was there, but no one was taking stock of it.

Yes. The Deputy could say where there was an absence of provision in his area, I would make a good effort on my area and everybody here would be experts on their own areas. We did not have that information entirely collated, though, and neither did we have it in a single repository. The forward planning unit is vital in this respect. It will also this year be part of being able to quantify what the need is in an area. There is no point going into an area where there is a sufficiency of provision. We are specifically targeting areas where there is that absence, for whatever reason, and we build from there. I know there are plenty to choose from there.

That is it. The Minister was talking about taking socio-economic circumstances into account. How will that work? The Minister referred to equalising, but she is not talking specifically about just going into those areas of deprivation.

No. I mentioned that there was a variety of criteria in respect of the absence of provision. Number one is if additionality is being provided in an area. The Deputy is quite correct in this regard. If there is an effort around disadvantage, that will obviously be linked to the deprivation index that is there already.

It will also be taken into account. It is difficult to have that information in relation to childminding, particularly regarding the needs of those with children with disabilities. I heard what was said earlier about the accession and inclusion model, AIM. All of that will be taken into account.

Yes.

That is good.

I have a question to ask that is not absolutely off topic. Deputy Claire Kerrane had a number of childminders in last week. Their particular issue was fitting into these criteria. At the moment, they said the hoops they had to jump through were too onerous and a lot of them were considering leaving the profession. We would then have a greater need. It is about how we deal with all of this now.

Childminders are a really valuable resource. We have a very ambitious target that they would all be registered and everything else. The Deputy will be aware of it. I want to work with the childminders. There will be a review of how we are doing that in early years. We cannot afford to have just one type of model here. We need the childminders and all the different types of model, including this new model we have here. There is no one silver bullet.

And reviews.

I also think it is important from the child's point of view. Parents have different needs, so they will make different choices in terms of the provision they want.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire.

Will any provision be made for school-age childcare in this model?

Yes. We would hope that what is being provided for here - the one-year-olds to three-year-olds in the first instance - would meet the needs of those children as they progress through the system.

There will be something.

Yes. There would be a full-time aspect.

It will probably not be at the start. It will probably be later.

We will see, but the important thing is that it will be a full service.

Yes. Great. I thank the Minister.

I reiterate my thanks to the Minister for being here. I think it has been a really informative discussion so far this morning. I could be wrong about this, so I am happy to stand corrected on this question, but what distinguishes this from a simple expansion of the community childcare facilities scheme that is already there? If it is simply a capital investment undertaking, whereby the staff will not be employed by the State, then we already have community childcare facilities operating very successfully. Is this an investment in that, more or less? If it is, that is to be very much welcomed. This is as opposed to what we might all have inferred to be a more hands-on involvement by the State.

I appreciate the question. I think it is incredibly hands-on involvement by the State. In many instances here, it will be the State that owns the building. I am not saying it will be the case in all instances. Where there is a dearth of provision, it will be the State that will step forward with a solution in terms of determining places and a need in an area. We have never before had the State itself take that leadership position. Obviously, there is already provision there, but it is not a sufficiency of provision. This is, therefore, very much a new model. I think it is a model that will grow, particularly acknowledging that there is provision, but provision that is insufficient in certain areas.

There is most certainly the need to tackle disadvantage. We have made all of these different points. It is the State that will be doing this, though, as opposed to anyone else taking the initiative.

If it were possible at some point to get whatever information the forward planning unit might has regarding the needs analysis and where the obstacles and problems with gaps are, that would be welcome. It is also about those pieces that the national childcare scheme, NCS, would have addressed before as regards ensuring there were childcare supports specific to those families that required them, those being, supports for the children rather than work activation measures, which had become an issue. I would like to know if we will be looking at any of that in future. There is also the idea of in-school and in-childcare therapies.

Reference was made earlier to the AIM. It is a given that it would be provided for. Inclusion has to be central to this endeavour. I would say inclusion is central not just to this, but to all provision. That has to be the mindset out there. It will drive this on. There should be no absence of acknowledgement that whatever supports a child needs will be provided in early years as much as they should be provided at primary, post-primary or whatever level.

On the bigger question around therapies, that is for another day.

I suppose a lot of that information will be forthcoming at some point in respect of the needs analysis.

I thank the Minister for her opening statement. I am sorry if I am going to go back over what other people have asked, but in relation to the buildings, how is the Department discovering them? Is it being left to be done locally and for people to contact the Department or is a proactive approach being taken to finding the buildings?

The preliminary application is all done through the city and county childcare committees. There has been extensive engagement with them. They hold the preliminary applications. That is step No. 1. Step No. 2 is for the Department.

Step No. 2 is the Department finding the buildings.

No. The preliminary application comes from the city and county childcare committee, whatever that application might be, whether there is a building available, a building and a fit-out are required or whatever the case might be. The identification, though, comes from on the ground in the area.

Okay. Some of the feedback I hear from the sector is that there are not enough adequate buildings for childcare in general. Does the Minister feel that we will be competing with providers for buildings? Do we have to think about additionality of buildings overall?

In the first instance in 2026, we are seeking to purchase buildings. In 2027 or, most likely, 2028, we will be seeking to build them.

Okay.

We are not in competition here. The purpose is to step in where no one else has stepped in. That is the key motivator. Where there is an absence of places, the State steps in. There is no competition.

I suppose I am asking the question because I want us to get to the point where the State is not just setting up provision but is actually building more provision from the ground up as well.

We have been very clear that that is the ambition. To fast-track delivery for 2026, however, the most obvious pathway was to purchase buildings in the first place.

It would allow us to deliver the places, most likely by the end of 2026 or early in 2027. This will grow and evolve over time. We will learn a great deal in this first year which will perhaps inform the second year. We are keen to build in the second year.

If we are to address the supply issues, we have to look at increasing the infrastructure overall. That is core to this.

That has never been in question. It is clearly laid out that the ambition is to both purchase and build.

That is why the guidelines are so important, in that they change the 2001 planning guidelines, in order that we can create a pipeline of facilities that are suitable for childcare. I can name on my hand the facilities in my area that are not suitable. Meanwhile, childcare providers are desperate to get their hands on appropriate infrastructure.

There has been a net increase of only one in the number of community childcare facilities in the past five years. Is the Department looking at working with that sector to assist with administration, as well as their management and structure?

I agree with the Deputy on the planning guidelines. We have had this discussion before. I have had significant discussions on this with the Minister for housing. We also need local authorities to take a much stronger role in this, but that is another day's discussion.

Regarding community childcare, the issue for many in the community is that they may not have the funding for a building. They may have a building but they do not have the fit-out or whatever. All of this is to ensure that where there is an opportunity in an area, the State will provide the funding and a not-for-profit body will then run the facility. In the context of the previous discussion I had with the Deputy, that is something the State has never done before, and it is a positive development. Financing has been a negative in many areas and we are going to tackle that. We will offer a building, we will fit out a building or we will do both. An education and training board could then take over the building or it could be owned by the local authority. There are a variety of opportunities.

I thank the Minister for attending. I listened with interest to the earlier contributions. I hope I am asking fresh questions. Senator Kennelly spoke about wanting a geographical spread. I totally understand the need for these facilities to be in disadvantaged areas and areas of most need. Does the Minister envisage that, during the lifetime of this Government, one of these State-led facilities will be established in every county?

I would love to be able to say that I do envisage that. I hope so. It is important to note, however, that the guiding principle here is meeting an absence. If there is a sufficiency of supply in a particular area, then there is a sufficiency of supply. The first guiding principle will be to move in where there is not sufficient supply. I would like to think there will be a wide distribution of this type of State-led facility, or whichever way people wish to describe it, across the country. In the first instance, it will be led by the shortage of supply.

Earlier this week, the Minister and I met the CRANN Support Group. We met Marie Daly and Rachel Grant in Coiscéimeanna in Trim. I was surprised by the wide range of services the organisation provides, probably outside its original remit. Listening to the earlier contributions, it occurred to me that early engagement will be needed with the different stakeholders. Has there been that kind of engagement with not-for-profit organisations, such as the CRANN Support Group, to see what more supports they might need to step up and step in here?

The first line of engagement is always with the city and county childcare committees. Their purpose is to support provision in an area. I acknowledge their great work. They are a great resource. I also acknowledge the meeting the Deputy and I had with CRANN, and the great work that is done by that provider. Sterling work is being done on the ground by excellent providers, coming from different backgrounds and providing different models. There is no question about that. There are excellent staff on the ground. We spoke about the staff earlier and the need to grow and protect staff going forward.

We are keen to work those that are stepping forward. I noted earlier that we have received more than 68 applications at this point. Many of those are at different stages. We are prepared to work as hard with those that are coming with a completed application as we will work with those that are not, if there is a need in their area. We are open to working with anyone to fill or meet a need in an area. That is why we are saying that the Department may purchase a building but also that it may not need to purchase a building because another State agency has a building, which we will then fit out. There is an openness to work with any kind of model that might meet the need and then refine it as time goes on. We may decide, based on our experience of the first, second or third year, that the best model going forward is model A - whatever model A happens to be - or maybe we would decide to continue with two out of three of the models, or whatever the case might be. There is an openness to learn as we go along. The primary objective is to make provision.

That is brilliant. Returning to the topic of planning, which I know is another day's work and another Minister's responsibility, we are all aware that the 20 childcare facilities that developers are being conditioned to provide are not viable or attractive to many providers. I ask the Minister to work on that with the Minister, Deputy Browne. I have spoken to a number of developers who have said they would prefer to provide a financial contribution, so the State could provide a larger childcare facility to cover a larger area, particularly in rural communities. If the Minister could push on with that with the Minister, Deputy Browne, it would be brilliant.

That is a concern. I acknowledge that many Deputies and Senators consistently raise this issue. We see it on the ground. I am not so sure that having 20 childcare places for every 75 homes is workable. That is something that needs to be looked at. In the first instance, it would be a big help if the local authorities imposed the requirement that is in place, did not allow a change of use and recognised, when a facility is being built, that it must be built appropriately to meet the needs for an early years or childcare facility. Our discussions are ongoing with the Department of housing.

I have an email here that was sent by one of our councillors, Councillor Kieran Dennison. It is an email from Tusla to highlight the need for Fingal to be prioritised in the first phase of the Government's new State-led early years services. In Fingal, not-for-profit community childcare accounts for 5% of the total. The county as a whole is one of the fastest growing and youngest in the country. We are dealing with a lot of new development. We have a lot of waiting lists and families in need across the board. It would be remiss of me not to say that Dublin West and Dublin 15 in Fingal need to be prioritised.

I have a few quick questions. Post 2026, when we expect groups that might build to come forward, do we expect them to have advanced to a certain level, for example, to have secured planning permission, or will we be happy to help groups that are only starting out?

There is a wide variety in the application. We are happy to work with groups. Obviously, the further along a group is, the quicker the delivery will be. A level of preparedness will make it more actionable from an earlier point.

If we take the €14 million or €15 million for this year, that leaves €120 million in the pot for 2027 to 2030. Does that infer that we are expecting a significant increase after this year?

Yes. We are expecting to build year on year, by which I mean ramp it up, not literally build.

That is excellent.

I thank the Minister and her officials for joining us this morning for an informative engagement on an important subject matter. We will suspend for a couple of minutes and the meeting will then resume in private session.