In the debate over parenting and whether children need a fulltime parent in the home there is one constant: a great many parents who work outside the home do so out of necessity and not out of choice. All parents who send their children to pre school services - but especially these parents - will be concerned by the news, highlighted in this newspaper yesterday, that they may be forced to pay VAT at 21 per cent on the fees which they already meet. The threat arises from moves by the Revenue Commissioners to implement an old EU Directive subjecting some child care services to VAT.
The VAT will be payable on those parts of the pre school service which the inspectors consider not to be educational. The National Children's Nurseries Association makes the telling point that the continuing and speedy development of small children should entitle all pre school services to be regarded as educational. There is plenty of evidence to support this view. From the earliest days, a child goes through a process of acquiring knowledge and skills at a rate which will probably never be attained in the rest of his or her life. That a child learns new skills and ways of thinking in a structured setting is perfectly obvious to parents. That is why even some stay at home parents also send their children to pre school playgroups for a couple of hours a day at a very young age.
There is a strong case for defining all pre school child care facilities as educational and thus as exempt from VAT. It is hard to see what sensible argument can be advanced against this unless we wish to have VAT inspectors touring the country and decreeing what is educational and what is not.
But why are we having this argument at all? Are there no other, more pressing duties for our VAT inspectors to perform? Are there not bigger targets out there for them than commercial creches? If nothing else, the current controversy - and especially the failure to seek a derogation from the EU directive - underlines what many parents already suspect; the needs of families with children have never gained the political priority that they deserve. It is hard to believe that such a complacent approach would have been taken towards an agricultural or industrial directive.
Since we are in an election year, it may be that the current difficulty will be resolved swiftly by a Government which has a relatively good record in the area of children's concerns.
But there is also a good case for a wider examination of child care issues. First, there is the question of tax relief for child care. Many of those whose children are in child care facilities are working to pay mortgages. Yet they must also find up to £80 a week to pay child care fees. This is an extraordinary strain to place on such families. The case for some kind of tax relief appears clear cut.
Secondly, there is the matter of new regulations and standards which child care facilities are obliged to meet from this year. The National Children's Nurseries Association has sought one off grant aid to help meet the costs of adapting to these new rules. This, too, should be favourably considered by Government for the sake of the children.