As the Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, pointed out to the politicians in the Dail chamber yesterday, there is a "great diversity of view in relation to addressing the childcare issue".
Despite his announcement of the "greatest ever package of supports for children and their parents", that diversity of view remained last night. The record increase in child benefit rates was generally welcomed but not seen as going towards solving the current childcare crisis, with a chronic lack of spaces and some parents paying up to £200 (€242) a week for childcare.
While the Government had been urged to introduce tax breaks on childcare, increased child benefit was the method it chose instead. It was clear the Minister had learned his lesson after last year's individualisation controversy, bringing in policies which, he said, supported children and parents. He made sure there was no discrimination between mothers who worked inside and outside the home.
But as far as the umbrella organisation, Childcare 2000, was concerned, these are two very separate issues. "We welcome very much an increase in child benefit but that is different and separate from childcare payments," said Ms Hilary Kelly, director of IPPA, the early childhood organisation, and a member of Childcare 2000.
"We wanted a parents' childcare payment which was taxable for all parents and that most benefit would go to the poorer parents. Child benefit is a very blunt instrument; to think that he is getting away with calling it childcare is really annoying. Overall, I suppose we are moderately satisfied." The measures which the Minister outlined to increase the supply of childcare places left Ms Kelly largely unimpressed. She said a number of them had already been announced.
Ms Mary Lee Stapleton, of the National Children's Nurseries' Association, said that under the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness, the Government was committed to significantly increasing child benefit in this Budget for the purposes of child welfare, so the percentage of this new rate which was actually for childcare was minimal.
The increases of £25 and £30 would not address both child welfare and childcare, she said. "Our campaign lobbied for the implementation of a new and separate parents' childcare payment which would have been paid to all parents. Such a payment would have been a far better way to address the childcare issue." There was "absolutely nothing" in the Budget to stimulate or support the provision of childcare places.
However, there was something in yesterday's Budget for civil servants. Mr McCreevy said he was providing for the introduction of a major civil service childcare initiative which would involve the establishment of creches for the children of those working in Government departments. He allocated £10 million for capital expenditure over the next two years for 15 civil service creches. The general response was echoed by Ms Grainne Healy, chairwoman of the National Women's Council. "We have positive and negative things to say." The council welcomed the approach of giving a universal payment to every parent, which was not divisive. However, she said, the increases did not amount to anywhere as much as they initially seemed. "So actually, it is hugely disappointing."
Barnardo's, the children's agency, said the Government's children's policy was going in the right direction but said Mr McCreevy should have given more generous increases in child benefit.