Advanced search

Childcare bill could contain threat of jail term for parents critics warn.

(31 Posts)
HelenaDove Tue 23-Jun-15 00:10:15

Reading this article there just seems to be layer upon layer of bureaucracy.
It just sounds ludicrous.

Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost Tue 23-Jun-15 00:22:05

angryangryangry X1,000,000.
2 fucking years for virtually nothing,
Same length of time disgusting rapist Ched Evans served wasn't it. How can they justify that.
And who the fuck is going to care for these innocent children whilst their parents languish in jail.
God I'm fuckin fuming. Not that you can tell like!!!

HelenaDove Tue 23-Jun-15 00:24:56

I couldnt believe it when i saw it I dont have DC but i thought WTF. Still trying to get my head around it.

And notice the veiled threat to single parents. NO ONE can deny the misogyny now!!

HelenaDove Tue 23-Jun-15 00:25:33

Thats patriarchy folks!

prorsum Tue 23-Jun-15 00:31:11

Where to even begin? They don't even know how it would work themselves.

I fail to see why sahm or sahd should not be given the option of childcare; a lot of these women/men would have had careers before and paid their taxes. Why are they exempt.

Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost Tue 23-Jun-15 00:34:00

Oh well that's men or so called for you, Helena . They can only stand up to women esp single parents.
I never hear any critique of the men who shirk their responsibilities.
Why are there not laws against their discriminatory mygostic attitudes and contempt against lone parents, because that's what it is,
Who voted these cretins back in. What the fuck where they thinking.
Sorry for the bad language. I'm juSt so angry,

WorraLiberty Tue 23-Jun-15 00:39:20

It's late and I'm tired so please excuse me if this sounds like a stupid question.

But isn't the threat of jail just there to put people off of committing fraud, and claiming free childcare that they're not entitled to?

In the same way that benefit fraud always has the threat of jail, although it seems to be rarely carried out?

I'm also not getting the misogyny/patriarchy angle, but like I said, it's late and I'm tired.

mynewpassion Tue 23-Jun-15 02:17:17

I agree with worra. I don't see a problem either.

Why should sahp need child care when they don't have any child care costs because they are already doing child care? I'm assuming that it's to help working parents with defraying child care costs and encourage people to work.

HelenF350 Tue 23-Jun-15 02:40:31

I agree with worra also. How is this any different to benefit fraud penalties? Seems a bit of a non story to me.

Mistigri Tue 23-Jun-15 06:07:06

It's very different from benefit fraud penalities.

Firstly it doesn't seem to take into account the realities of work for people on low or zero hours contracts, who may not always work over 8 hours a week and who may have little choice over their hours.

Secondly it criminalizes not just parents but nursery workers too.

It's a bit like threatening to jail job centre advisers if their clients are defrauding the DWP or tax credits people if they accidentally authorize overpayments (on second thought maybe that ain't such a bad idea grin)

sebsmummy1 Tue 23-Jun-15 06:27:59

It sounds to me that they are so used to people playing the system now, they are trying to prevent it from the offset by making it a crime to try and get the extra childcare fraudulently.

God knows how they are going to police it as with zero hour contracts people's weekly working hours can change at whim. Also no mention of the self employed. I am a curtain maker and plan on restarting my business from home in the future. The 30 hours would definitely benefit me but I have no idea if I would qualify a my own employer. Who would police my hours?

contractor6 Tue 23-Jun-15 06:37:11

Policing it will at least open up more job opportunities.....

OddBoots Tue 23-Jun-15 06:45:10

I can't see any nursery using the scheme with those rules.

Why not do it how the EYPP works where the parent/s fill in a short form including their NI number and the local authority can use that with the tax office and/or DWP to determine eligibility.

If the rules are too tricky for DWP to do a check of to determine then they are far too difficult for nurseries to take the risk about deciding.

BrilliantDayForTheRace Tue 23-Jun-15 06:52:08

Some of you are massively overreacting.

Every child is entitled to 15 free hours. Children of working parents will be entitled to 30 hours a week.

They're just working out how to phrase the bill so that only those entitled benefit.

It's not penalising anyone. It's about only giving an extra 15 hours a week to people who qualify.

And it's going to be hard to get the wording right and it will take several drafts. Shrug.

No one is penalising anyone. Nothing currently offered has been withdrawn.

No law gets everything 100% right for 100% of the population. It's impossible.

This current generation of parents has so many more benefits and rights than we did even 10 years ago. More maternity pay. Some free childcare. Shared leave. Why don't you see what a good deal you have?

Thancred Tue 23-Jun-15 08:51:24

We were discussing this at our childminder drop in yesterday. As stated in the article, childcare providers can face a jail term for failing to check that parents are working the required hours so it'll be down to us to help police it - how the effity eff are we supposed to do that alongside everything else required of us!?

I live in a large village and of the dozen or so childminders currently working here, none of them are going to be offering the 30 hours because of the extra checks involved and because of the risk of penalties. I'm undecided until more information is published. I can see a lot of providers being reluctant to provide them.

sashh Tue 23-Jun-15 08:58:12

The link doesn't seem to be working, can someone summarise or provide a different link please?

DiseasesOfTheSheep Tue 23-Jun-15 09:03:52

Steady on brilliant or people will think you're a fully paid up, baby eat tory y'know...

Talk about a lot of knickers in twists over not very much here!

AuntieStella Tue 23-Jun-15 09:04:44

It says that there will be provision for 'any person' to check certain Govt records to ascertain working status of the applicant family, and that criminal offences may be created.

It is right that this point is thoroughly scrutinised, and that penalties for deliberately fraudulent applications are in line with other such frauds.

It's getting a bit ahead of how things are right now to assume it will be more draconian than what already applies to all fraud.

Mistigri Tue 23-Jun-15 09:08:11

Why bring party politics into it?

I imagine a lot of working parents on both sides of the political spectrum are in favour of more subsidised childcare. However, if the linked report is correct then the proposals seem to have significant issues particularly for parents whose contracts do not guarantee them the required number of hours, and for childcare providers.

WorraLiberty Tue 23-Jun-15 09:09:48

Mistigri, surely only nursery workers who are proven to be colluding in fraudulent claims?

In the same way a Landlord could go to prison for colluding in false housing benefit scams?

WorraLiberty Tue 23-Jun-15 09:10:55

Sorry, that was in answer to your post at 06:07:06

You seemed to have popped up while I was typing grin

Leafitout Tue 23-Jun-15 09:13:32

Not paying for your child as a deadbeat NRP, often committing fraud by not declaring their true earnings, committing fraud lying to the inland revenue= get away with it, have a pat on the back. Work and send your child to nursery so you can earn a shit low wage = penalise and a threat of two years jail if you dare to make a mistake in declaring working hours. Good old patriarchal Britain with fuckwit Cameron and his equally fuckwit women hating croneys dishing out more unecessary shit on those less fortunate in society. And to top it all they now want to interfere with tax credits!! Cuts to statutory maternity pay!!
That's it for us women, see you all in the workhouses that will be erected soon for us to be thrown into.

DiseasesOfTheSheep Tue 23-Jun-15 09:15:50

I dunno, Mistigri, take it up with this poster: Who voted these cretins back in. What the fuck where they thinking (charming turn of phrase, btw)

Firstly the article above isn't exactly an unbiased account of the contents of the actual bill - it's a work in progress, and secondly it's actually not a revelation to have the threat of imprisonment for fraud, amazingly enough...

formerbabe Tue 23-Jun-15 09:34:47

But isn't the threat of jail just there to put people off of committing fraud, and claiming free childcare that they're not entitled to?

Yep...nothing like threatening working parents with jail...and will it be used for those committing fraud or will it actually end up punishing those who have made a genuine admin error?

Tanith Tue 23-Jun-15 09:36:59

Since fraudulent behaviour is already illegal, I fail to see why they need to threaten providers with 2 year jail sentences.

This will seriously discourage providers from offering the free entitlement - not that they need much more persuasion to resign from the scheme.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now