National Seminar on Investing in Latvian children with support from the EU Riga, 17 October 2014

1. National Seminar onInvesting in Latvian children with support from the EURiga, 17 October 2014 Julius op de Beke DG EMPL, Unit D2

2. The Objectives of this seminar To discuss the latest trends in child poverty in LV To discuss the Investing in Children Recommendation To see where Latvia should focus its policy efforts to get maximum results To discuss how the EU funds can be best used to implement the Recommendation To have a look at some best practice examples from other EU countries

3. Evolution of share of children at risk of poverty or social exclusion (0-17) between 2008 and 2012 (AROPE means below 60% of median income + severe material deprivation)

4. The situation in Latvia • Increase in AROPE between 2008-11 but decrease 2011-12 • AROP above EU average, rate of children in severely materially deprived households beyond EU average • High in-work risk of poverty • Low impact of family benefits in reducing child poverty, low impact of social transfers in reducing child poverty • Childcare availability, cost, access (distance/opening hours) and quality are an issue • Distribution of family benefits is unfavourable to the poor

5. Poverty reduction effect of family and child benefits in 2009, children aged 0-17, is low in Latvia, just 20% compared to an EU average of 30%

6. Child care bottle-necks in Latvia • Latvia does not fulfil the Barcelona targets for childcare capacity, both for the 0-3 (just 19% instead of 33%) and 70% for the above 3 group • There is problem of access, and due to high cost many parents cannot afford childcare • There is a problem of quality • 75% of mothers between 25-49 say they are forced to work part-time, but only 12.5% do so for family reasons, the rest is due to a lack of jobs

7. Formal child care by age category (2011) Children cared for as a percentage of all children in the same age category Barcelona targets to support gender equality Education and Training Notes: ‘Close to an objective’ refers to countries that had around 25 % of coverage for children under 3 (Finland) or around 80 % coverage of children aged 3 to the mandatory school age (Austria, Ireland). Sources: Eurostat — EU-SILC 2010

8. Public spending on early childhood education and care as a % of GDP 2009 Education Source: OECD Family database, Indicator PF3.1 2009).

9. Social Investment Package • 1/ guides EU countries in using their social budgets more efficiently and effectively to ensure adequate and sustainable social protection • 2/ seeks to strengthen people’s current and future capacities, and improve their opportunities to participate in society and the labour market; • 3/ focuses on integrated packages of benefits and services that help people throughout their lives and achieve lasting positive social outcomes; • 4/ stresses prevention rather than cure, by reducing the need for benefits. That way, when people do need support, society can afford to help; • 5/ calls for investing in children and young people to increase their opportunities in life.

10. Recommendation: investing in children breaking the cycle of disadvantage Pleads for a rights based, comprehensive approach REC has three main pillars • Access to Resources (i.e. paid work and income support for families) • Access to quality services (ECEC,health,housing) • Social and legal child participation Backed by a battery of indicators

11. The earlier you start the better

12. ECEC for under 3 year olds has the highest rate of return

13. The multiple benefits of quality ECEC(to break the cycle of disadvantage you must intervene during the early years) • An essential factor behind parents' labour market participation • Strong correlation between ECEC use and women's employment rate Strong negative correlation between ECEC and ESL • Fundamental role to address child poverty and break cycle of disadvantage because of beneficial long term social mobility effects • Lack of access to affordable childcare creates disincentives to work for families on low income (can reduce net income by up to 50% in OECD countries) • Strong benefits of quality ECEC for disadvantaged children (e.g. low SES, lone parent, Roma, migrant background etc.)

14. It is not just childcare but also access to other quality services • Integrated activating approach: support is best given through collaborative multi-agency working of education, health and social services professionals. • Health: focus on early intervention and preventive measures (pre-natal care, breastfeeding , vaccinations, child nutrition programmes etc.) • Housing: growing number of families is becoming homeless or living in temporary accommodation (housing deprivation is a health risk, many single parents are overburdened by housing cost)

15. Europe 2020 strategy for a smart, just and green future • European Semester, annual occasion for monitoring and discussing with Member States progress in the required economic and social reforms. • As the recovery is taking hold we see more and more emphasis on social issues. • The dialogue with the MSs culminates in so called Country Specific Recommendation (CSRs) • The EC proposes the CSRs but it is the Council who adopts them in June.

17. Average progress by policy field during 2013 and 2014 • Financial services 60 % • Fiscal policy 55 % • Incentive to work/job creation 41 % • Childcare 40 % • Health and LTC 35 % • ALMP 33 % • Poverty and Social Inclusion 32 % • Education 30 %

19. 2014 CSRs relevant for children

20. POLICY ADVICE ON INVESTING IN CHILDREN(1) LOW WORK INTENSITY • Causes • General economic condition, low wages, financial disincentives for 2nd earners/single parents ,low activity measures, obstacles to childcare • Policy Guidance • Make sure work pays (gradual withdrawal of and in work benefits, such as tax credits) • Parental leave limited to one maximum two years • Flexible working arrangements • Tailored ALMP, individual case handlers, public work programmes

21. Supporting parents' access to the labour market Target extra support especially for lone parents, second earners and after parental leave Tailored made active labour market policies through individual support: individual contracts, quality case handlers, lifelong learning Subsidised employment, social economy Flexible working arrangements (hours flexibility and part time) Eurocities example from NANTES where childcare is provided in function of working time

22. (2) High rate of AROPE* • Causes • Low amounts of benefits, not redistributive enough, low take up, not adapted to family types at risk • Policy Guidance • Child benefits, housing allowance, legal minimum income • Target disadvantaged families (lone parents, migrants, Roma) • Means tested benefits but beware of inactivity traps, stigmatisation and administrative cost • Best strategy would be selective or targeted universalism • * below 60% of median income + severe material deprivation

23. (3) Affordability and access to ECEC • Causes • High cost, insufficient capacity and opening hours, distance, short length of parental leave, lack of qualified staff • Policy guidance • Reduce cost for low income families, raise capacity • Focus efforts on under 3, raise awareness for benefits of ECEC, • Promote quality services (child-staff ratio, qualified staff, monitoring and evaluation • Develop joint integrated services (social, health, parent support)

24. Early childhood education and care: Improving both access and quality Wideningaccess • Increasesupplyespecially in remote areas • Address obstacles in access for disadvantagedchildren (targeted measures, removing financial barriers, free meals, mediators..) Improvingquality • Staff professionalisation • Development of age-appropriate curriculum or pedagogical framework • Establishment of legalframework and/or qualityassurancemechanisms • Develop joint services combining ECEC, health, social and parenting support • Supporting new approaches through social innovation

25. New opportunities structural and investmentfundsin 2014-2020 • Clearerlinkwith the Europe 2020 strategy and Country SpecificRecommendations • Minimum share of 21% for ESF in ESIF plus 20% of ESF earmarkedfor social inclusion • Ex ante conditionalities: Roma inclusion, active inclusion, earlyschoolleaving • Stronger focus on earlyschoolleaving and on preventative action in the earlyyears • Emphasis on partnershipwith NGO stakeholders (Code of Conduct, January 2014) • Thematic objectives 8,9,10

26. Employment (thematic objective 8) ESF - Access to employment for job-seekers and inactive people - Integration into the labour market of young people - Equality between men and women ERDF - Local development and neighbourhood services (ERDF) • Education objective (thematic objective 10) ESF - Preventing early school-leaving - Access to good quality early-childhood, primary and secondary education ERDF - Investing in education infrastructures such as ECEC

27. Social inclusion (thematic objective 9) ESF - Active inclusion - Socio-economic integration of marginalised communities - Access to affordable, sustainable and high quality services - Combating discrimination and promoting equal opportunities - Communityled local developmentstrategies ERDF - Health and social infrastructure - Regeneration of deprivedcommunities - Communityleddevelopmentstrategies

28. Empoweringchildrenthroughquality services Integrated intervention during the earlyyears - Services combiningchildcare, education, healthprevention and parenting support, re-integration in the labour Providing a healthy living environment - Social housing, debt management services for families - Public playgrounds, cultural and playactivities A more preventiveapproach to child protection - Prevention of abandonment - Parenting support programmes (home visits) - Quality alternative care settings for children removed from their families (small size, foster parents, staff training…)

29. Young Mumswillachieve (UK, supported by the ESF) • Support programme for pregnantteenage (14-19) mums. It offers guidance and help with essentials like childcare and transport, in order to boost self-esteem, develop Maths and English skills and ultimately encourage young mums to progress onto further education or employment.

30. FEAD: European Fund for Aid to the Most Deprived • € 3,8 billion (2014-2020) for non-financial emergency assistance through partner organisations, €41 million for Latvia • Two options • Focus on food and material assistance + accompanying social inclusion measures (OP 1) • Focus on non-material social inclusion measures • 85% co-financingfrom the EU, reimbursement via unit costs or lump sumgrants of maximum €100.000 • Partner organisations are public bodies (ESF) or NGOsselectedthrough public call for proposals

31. Finding out more • Training through national seminars in 12 Member States in 2014-2015: using EU instruments to implement the Recommendation "Investing in Children" for government officials in charge of submitting project applications for ESF funding. (So far four have taken place in IT, GR, SP, HU, we will also have one in RO, LV, IR and BU) • European Platform for Investing in Children EPIC (http://europa.eu/epic/) provides a repository of evidence based policy practices that can serve as an example for future projects • Upcoming new study on Conditional Cash Transfers (CCTs) in child policy by TARKI

32. The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago, the second best time is now!Thank you for your attention