Examples of doublespeak

According to an analysis of Eurostat figures on the provision of childcare services in EU member states, in 2006 only eight per cent of children under three years of age were provided with public or private childcare facilities in Malta. The EU average stood at 26 per cent, showing Malta as one of the worst performers.

However, our Prime Minister is of the opinion that had Malta decided to call its kindergartens childcare centres, the statistics on such places would instantly shoot up because here kindergartens cater for three-year-olds whereas in other European states the service is provided for five-year-olds. The Prime Minister made this statement while addressing a conference organised by the UĦM and the Office of the Prime Minister with the theme, Family-Friendly Measures - A Balance Between Interests, Rhetoric And Reality.

Our Prime Minister is, again, playing with words. So, what's new? We have become accustomed to this kind of intentional ambiguity (for instance using "downsizing" instead of "ayoffs" in the shipyards case). While Lawrence Gonzi was speaking on services for three-year olds, there is a clear reference in the report he is quoting from to childcare facilities for children under three years of age. In this case, children do not attend kindergarten. So no matter how much the Prime Minister tries to obfuscate the issue by his doublespeak and by insisting that Malta has adequate childcare facilities, an analysis of Eurostat figures shows that Malta is failing miserably in reaching the Lisbon target of 33 per cent provision of childcare services when "only eight per cent of children under three were provided with public or private childcare facilities in 2006 in Malta".

As Vladimir Spidla the EU Employment Commissioner, contends, "adequate and accessible childcare is crucial to allow parents to work, to strengthen gender equality and to reinforce social inclusion" and that "Malta has to pull its socks up and start taking seriously the targets set in 2002, which include the provision of child-minding facilities for at least 33 per cent of children up to three years old".

We have been saying these words and, since we've become EU members, we have been hearing these statements made to us ad nauseam.

Malta has moved at a snail's pace when it comes to women in the labour market. Every study conducted on this issue concludes that a very important factor contributing to this deficit is the lack of proper childcare services.

According to the executive director of the National Commission for the Promotion of Equality, Sina Bugeja, "If a system (for childcares services) was introduced, where parents could pay according to their income, it would be more manageable and possibly fairer". Ms Bugeja is, inadvertently it seems, advocating the government to take up the Labour government's policy when, in 1998, the Kalkara childcare centre project was launched with such a system and providing also for a subsidy according to a means test. And I say "inadvertently" because Ms Bugeja goes on to say that "We started working on this issue at a very late date compared to other European countries", so she must have been unaware of the Labour initiatives of over 10 years ago, which were shelved by the following Nationalist government.

Had the project not been abandoned and childcare centres were introduced in various localities as planned, perhaps by today some progress would have been registered in this area of policy and we would not be, as the Prime Minister put it, "receiving stick on childcare centres". Moreover, and more importantly, Maltese families would have been benefiting from a much-needed service.

Over 10 years ago, when Labour was in government, the childcare plan of action included various initiatives undertaken to address this issue. It was evident that much of the investment in women's education and training was being lost because of inadequate childcare services for parents with young children. Incentives were introduced through the Business Promotion Act to encourage employers to offer childcare services to their staff. These incentives were removed by the ensuing Nationalist government.

A pilot project with a local council, referred to in the foregoing, was launched, only to be left to die a natural death after there was a change of government, much to the chagrin of the local council involved that wanted to carry on with the project but found no support from the central government.

More childcare centres were earmarked for other locations. Child-minding regulations, governing childcare centre licences, drafted in this period, were shelved for many years. A plan to have childcare facilities in government departments, where premises were available, was also discarded. I recall the parliamentary secretariat having started talks with various departments where a high percentage of the personnel consisted of women of child-bearing age. Had these initiatives been continued we wouldn't be in such a tight spot today.

We are all the time hearing women being encouraged to remain in or re-enter the labour market. There have also been incentives for women to remain at or return to work through the reduction of national insurance contributions and crediting of national insurance during parental leave. However, on further scrutiny, not only do these two measures result in anomalies on comparison but the overall effect on the participation of women in the labour market is minimal, the reason being that the childcare services being offered are not meeting requirements.

According to a government spokesman, "the majority of parents of children below the age of three still prefer not to make use of childcare facilities due to strong family bonding". Has the government asked why? Is this lack of trust in the facilities on offer on the part of the parents so strange when the government itself has not been enforcing standards and no register of licensed childcare centres exists to date?

Contradictory statements abound in this matter and all emanating from government officials. While, on the one hand, justification for lack of childcare facilities is being placed on parents of "children below the age of three (who) still prefer not to make use of childcare facilities" at the same time the "government was committed to continue building more childcare centres..."

Another pertinent question, within the context of the preference to the "traditional family model" still prevailing in Malta, as declared by the government, would be: How is it that the government has only legislated for 14 weeks of maternity leave and a paltry three months of unpaid parental leave for each parent only to be taken in agreement with the employer and until the child is eight years of age for workers in the private sector?

Let's hope there will be no doublespeak in "answering" these questions.

The author is a sociologist and a Labour member of Parliament