Creche bailout

Millionaire only not

What do people think of the crèche bailout on insurance ?
I just see hotels have just jumped on the bandwagon claiming same problem !
Have they opened a can of worms for themselves they will not be able to close ?

https://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-news/fears-hospitality-sector-will-be-latest-to-hit-huge-trouble-as-leading-insurers-exit-market-38798859.html

James Brown

Creches should be subsidised and given a flat rate government bond/insurance.
Before anyone gets all 'why should I pay for someone else's kids', well pay for their children's allowance and lack of tax input so.
FYI: Mags Cash would have no excuse not to work for example.

The hotels can get f***ed. Why? They change rates based on greed. They are a business yes, but on that defense, let them ride the market so.
Working people need the service of a creche to work and pay tax. Hotels can close and get other work if it comes to that, such is business.

_Kaiser_

I think the problem is the same as always with FG.

The goal is to allow "big business" to thrive as much as possible, with as little interference as possible, and sell off as much state bodies and interests as they can to support it.

Same thing happened with property and NAMA and now here we are with a massive rental and availability crisis and talk of blanket rent freezes nationally.

People have been screwed by their health and car insurance policies for years under this government (as the recent report has shown). Now its small-medium business that's affected and because they're somewhat more vocal and organised, FG belatedly react - but rather than tackle the underlying problem (the free hand they've allowed), they try to fudge by throwing cash at it - which may play well in some sections prior to an election, but ultimately will only be absorbed and make the situation worse.

Rinse and repeat. Vote FG! :rolleyes:

shesty

Actually I think the problem is more the sector involved and the immediacy of the issue ...childcare is a huge talking point and a problem for many people, and it sounds like a number of facilities could end up closing their doors in the coming months, causing a huge problem for parents.ie, future voters.

You are right on hotels though.No way should they get a bailout.Otherwise, I struggle to see how they will solve the problem long term myself.

Fr_Dougal

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Creches should be subsidised and given a flat rate government bond/insurance.
Before anyone gets all 'why should I pay for someone else's kids', well pay for their children's allowance and lack of tax input so.
FYI: Mags Cash would have no excuse not to work for example.

The hotels can get f***ed. Why? They change rates based on greed. They are a business yes, but on that defense, let them ride the market so.
Working people need the service of a creche to work and pay tax. Hotels can close and get other work if it comes to that, such is business.

Tax credits for cre users. Very simple solution.

_Kaiser_

shesty wrote: »

Actually I think the problem is more the sector involved and the immediacy of the issue ...childcare is a huge talking point and a problem for many people, and it sounds like a number of facilities could end up closing their doors in the coming months, causing a huge problem for parents.ie, future voters.

You are right on hotels though.No way should they get a bailout.Otherwise, I struggle to see how they will solve the problem long term myself.

Long term it means tackling the compo culture and payouts, as well as the legal costs and practises that sustain and encourage it. Greater regulation and transparency in the insurance sector is a must too.

But that again means eating into the profits of the connected, so it certainly won't happen under the current administration anyway.

One eyed Jack

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Creches should be subsidised and given a flat rate government bond/insurance.
Before anyone gets all 'why should I pay for someone else's kids', well pay for their children's allowance and lack of tax input so.
FYI: Mags Cash would have no excuse not to work for example.

The hotels can get f***ed. Why? They change rates based on greed. They are a business yes, but on that defense, let them ride the market so.
Working people need the service of a creche to work and pay tax. Hotels can close and get other work if it comes to that, such is business.

On that basis Matt, both hotels and crèches can get fcuked, as both are businesses, and both are lifestyle choices for their respective markets, and both have for years offered a “race to the bottom” standard of service, while charging their customers for a premium rate service, which is why their insurance premiums are going up. Both industries also have a principle of keeping their costs as low as possible by hiring unqualified staff and offering them poor working conditions, then crying foul when their efforts to maximise their profits at the expense of their employees welfare is highlighted.

The issue isn’t actually rising insurance premiums, it’s the fact that the industries aren’t as profitable as they once were and business owners aren’t able to make the profits they once did.

I don’t see any reason why crèches should be subsidised by Government either tbh, they’re a business, not a charity.

Harry Palmr

Creches are now vital to the economy - if they go bust mummy stays at home (the days of the extended family being drafted in to "mind the child" are over for the most part).

But this simply indicates the utter dysfunction of the public liability insurance market. Here in Waterford two bike hire companies which serve the Greenway are about to close up the last I heard as premiums shoot from affordable at a push to beyond reason in about three years.

James Brown

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Tax credits for cre users. Very simple solution.

Not if there are no creches.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

On that basis Matt, both hotels and crèches can get fcuked, as both are businesses, and both are lifestyle choices for their respective markets, and both have for years offered a “race to the bottom” standard of service, while charging their customers for a premium rate service, which is why their insurance premiums are going up. Both industries also have a principle of keeping their costs as low as possible by hiring unqualified staff and offering them poor working conditions, then crying foul when their efforts to maximise their profits at the expense of their employees welfare is highlighted.

The issue isn’t actually rising insurance premiums, it’s the fact that the industries aren’t as profitable as they once were and business owners aren’t able to make the profits they once did.

I don’t see any reason why crèches should be subsidised by Government either tbh, they’re a business, not a charity.

I addressed that. So take all the working parents out of the system and pay them children's allowance?
It's time the government queered the market for the tax payer IMO, they do it for private business.

One eyed Jack

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Creches are now vital to the economy - if they go bust mummy stays at home (the days of the extended family being drafted in to "mind the child" are over for the most part).

Eh? 445,000 women working unpaid in the home already in 2016 are what is vital to the economy, not low standard, below minimum wage, unqualified staff which are mostly women working part-time in poor conditions with no opportunities for career development or pension opportunities. The days of extended family minding children are by no means over, they’re increasing due to the high costs of childcare that puts it beyond the reach of most people who are now seeing that it just isn’t worth the risk due to the poor standards and practices in the industry.

One eyed Jack

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I addressed that. So take all the working parents out of the system and pay them children's allowance?
It's time the government queered the market for the tax payer IMO, they do it for private business.

I don’t understand what any of that means Matt tbh. Parents whether they are working or not already qualify for a generous children’s allowance from the State. I don’t agree with the State providing children’s allowance but I understand why it’s believed to be necessary as part of the State’s fulfilling it’s obligations towards children’s welfare.

Harry Palmr

What about the women who work or are they not your kind of person?

James Brown

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t understand what any of that means Matt tbh. Parents whether they are working or not already qualify for a generous children’s allowance from the State. I don’t agree with the State providing children’s allowance but I understand why it’s believed to be necessary as part of the State’s fulfilling it’s obligations towards children’s welfare.

Basically availability of creches helps the tax paying work force.

Amirani

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Tax credits for cre users. Very simple solution.

Introducing tax credits would be inflationary on prices. It's also not really going to solve many of the underlying affordability issues for many people.

A childcare tax credit for a single mother earning €12/hr is going to make very little difference, though may help those on middle incomes. It's not a "simple solution" as it's a very limited and incomplete solution.

One eyed Jack

Harry Palmr wrote: »

What about the women who work or are they not your kind of person?

What a bizarre question. What does it matter what kind of person they are to me personally? Your point was about crèches being vital to the economy and if they close down families will have to draft in extended family members to care for their children.

My point was that 445,000 women working unpaid in the home already provide a more vital service to the economy because they are providing their labour at no cost, and are therefore providing essential services and better value than subsidising sub-standard loss-making businesses which provide a poor return on investment given the lack of career development, part-time hours, poor working conditions, and risks to children’s safety and welfare.

James Brown

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What a bizarre question. What does it matter what kind of person they are to me personally? Your point was about crèches being vital to the economy and if they close down families will have to draft in extended family members to care for their children.

My point was that 445,000 women working unpaid in the home already provide a more vital service to the economy because they are providing their labour at no cost, and are therefore providing essential services and better value than subsidising sub-standard loss-making businesses which provide a poor return on investment given the lack of career development, part-time hours, poor working conditions, and risks to children’s safety and welfare.

A very good point. I would like to force chancers out to work though, of the having a kid, getting a flat, never doing a tap variety.
Also what about women who want a career and contribute?

Fr_Dougal

Amirani wrote: »

Introducing tax credits would be inflationary on prices. It's also not really going to solve many of the underlying affordability issues for many people.

A childcare tax credit for a single mother earning €12/hr is going to make very little difference, though may help those on middle incomes. It's not a "simple solution" as it's a very limited and incomplete solution.

Fair point, but at present non-workers can avail of free crèches.This should be removed as it’s really not necessary.

In the case of insurance, do an exercise on what part of the market is the most profitable. Then make it mandatory that insurers who want to service that market, have to offer insurance for the likes of cres.

It was only reported yesterday that insurance companies are making record profits.

jester77

I like the solution we have here. The first 20 hours per week for each child are paid by the state. If you want to stay in the creche longer you have to apply for a voucher for the remaining weekly hours and these are subsidised based on a means test. You are also not automatically entitled to get extra hours, for example if you are not working you won't get extra hours in the creche.

James Brown

jester77 wrote: »

I like the solution we have here. The first 20 hours per week for each child are paid by the state. If you want to stay in the creche longer you have to apply for a voucher for the remaining weekly hours and these are subsidised based on a means test. You are also not automatically entitled to get extra hours, for example if you are not working you won't get extra hours in the creche.

The trouble with that is the Creche can charge what it likes. We have enough tax money going to private profits.

RedXIV

My wife's cousin was over with us yesterday and she works in a school and overheard that the insurance used by the school is looking like they won't be around next year, potentially causing a delay in the school re-opening in January.

I think there things that should have flat, government managed insurance rates, such as schools and creche's but it'd be remiss to think there are companies packing up just because they aren't raking in a mountain of cash anymore. I know a local leisure play area where my parents live which is used all the time, good connections with the community but the owner has been pretty clear that if the insurance keeps jumping as it has been doing, it'll cost him money to stay open.

I wouldn’t be letting crèches have flat rate insurance until
they are charging flat rate for their services too.

shesty

Pity they wouldn't offer people the option of tax credits around childcare costs or children's allowance.That would probably be the most flexible approach.

whisky_galore

Short term fire money at it type of solution rather than tackling the root of the problem.

ChikiChiki

Ireland has turned into a wild west of cartels and businesses operating like gangsters under FG leadership. They have been asleep at the wheel for such a long time now. FG have enabled this carry on by failing to tackle it.

Bailing out creches sets a bad precedent imo! Enough is enough for the taxpayer. FG need to be booted out onto the streets quick.

Limpy

Its hard for crèches to operate these day's. Feeding kid's Raman noodle's will get you investigated and on TV.

Millionaire only not

Let the government underwrite them followed with free legal aid !
Seen as they already put there foot in it by subsiding !
I’m being sarcastic before anyone jumps on me !

salmocab

One eyed Jack wrote: »

On that basis Matt, both hotels and crèches can get fcuked, as both are businesses, and both are lifestyle choices for their respective markets, and both have for years offered a “race to the bottom” standard of service, while charging their customers for a premium rate service, which is why their insurance premiums are going up. Both industries also have a principle of keeping their costs as low as possible by hiring unqualified staff and offering them poor working conditions, then crying foul when their efforts to maximise their profits at the expense of their employees welfare is highlighted.

The issue isn’t actually rising insurance premiums, it’s the fact that the industries aren’t as profitable as they once were and business owners aren’t able to make the profits they once did.

I don’t see any reason why crèches should be subsidised by Government either tbh, they’re a business, not a charity.

Crèches can’t hire unqualified staff but your rant was fun

lawred2

salmocab wrote: »

Crèches can’t hire unqualified staff but your rant was fun

Wouldn't engage with auld Jack. He's not a fan of women in the workplace.

He's a 1950's man.

jam_mac_jam

Alice?Who dafuk is Alice? wrote: »

Maybe women here might start actually parenting their children again instead of leaving them all day to Olga and Adeola on minimum wage. Shocking idea I know .

Or men perhaps...

One eyed Jack

salmocab wrote: »

Crèches can’t hire unqualified staff but your rant was fun

They can, and they do.

salmocab

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They can, and they do.

No they can’t