S empre more insistently Dolo, the talking, whispers, it is anticipated that a possible closure of the nursery for a cost problem.
Below we will try to explain the reason for our strong opposition to this disastrous situation.
In Italy, the public debate on the nests is usually addressed in the debate on the role of women and family, ignoring, for example, the benefits of asylum for his true you, baby. In these comparisons we discuss the utility of the little nests for the Italian company and there is little incentive to understand, for example, if the implementation of the nest is actually served to families in the flesh. In such a debate, among other things, it greatly reduces the space for the dissemination of basic information, such as nurseries that produce social benefits, the low public spending to them, and the fact that no one wants to "compel" families to use them but you only want to ensure the possibility to do so if you like.
must, instead, begin to consider the nursery "just" and worthy of the infrastructure necessary to support the whole community. It should be also considered that services for young children need to budget a marginal effort and produce positive effects on aspects crucial to the future of Italy.
"The nests are not." They say. It is popular opinion more than you think. Instead, there is scientific evidence that the presence of nests helps women's employment. It is also shown that their frequency has a positive effect on the development of learning skills and the child's relationship with greater effects for those coming from disadvantaged families and less educated.
In other European countries in strengthening them is an objective shared by different political parties, of which the central government has assumed responsibility. Today, in Italy the receptivity of the system covers about 25% of children within three years, while households that would qualify are 42 percent, and if nothing will change, the goal of coming years will avoid back than it is today.
Regarding the nursery of Dolo, the administration is demagogic saying that his administration is too expensive and is no longer tenable for the municipal budget. And, then, or privatizing the service or closes. That the nursery is not sustainable for a city administration that in 2010 produced a surplus of directors of almost one million six hundred thousand euro, is one thing a bit 'risky and difficult to explain.
analyze them along with the costs of the 'nursery of our community. The estimated costs for 2011 can be found in the resolution attached to the 2011 budget not yet approved. They are: personnel costs € 186,200, costs of maintaining food, diapers, etc. .. € 108,134 for a total expenditure of € 294,334. Revenue from fees and a minimum of € 152,000 contribution from this region. The deficit is therefore € 142,334. About 40 children attending.
In the case of closing the administration will be responsible for all personnel costs. Certainly will replace it within the commune, but in this case will be expected to cover the difference between the deficit and the cost of staff plus other costs of maintaining the structure.
In the case of privatization of asylum can be two cases: a more favorable and another that only an understatement, say less favorable.
In the best case all staff should agree to transfer to private entity, which seems rather unlikely. If this situation occurs the administration could be limited to integrate the lines to prevent them from growing too much and concentrate on supervising the management.
In the worst-case scenario, ie in the case that while wanting to privatize the administration could take on the integration of personal lines, the deficit would double the cost.
is why we consider the possibility of harmful impractical privatization and closure of the nest.
should instead concentrate on making the asylum more flexible to the needs of young couples, and particularly not to lose thirty years of professionalism that both have given prestige to our asylum.
0 comments:
Post a Comment