Osborne to announce free childcare for 2 year olds(337 Posts)
In the Autumn Statement the Chancellor will outline a £650 million scheme to provide free early education for about 40 per cent of two year-olds.
Just wondering what MNers think about this....
If it's just 2 or 3 hours at a time then it's of very little practical benefit. And what about the other 60%? It will take more than this to win back the lost Women's vote.
And it's not just about work - its about the opportunity to study, or just catch your breath. The fact that it is targeted at the less well-off makes it less likely to be about the "wealthy". It is the dastardly Tories following through an excellent New Labour scheme.
If the mother went back earlier in all cases they would have kept working. Short term there may well have been a net cost for covering 3 children in childcare but costs would be repayed when children at school and mother/parent still working.
But if no jobs they don't get the benefit! It is the implementation that is key I have already questioned the 3-5 year free childcare implementation.
Went back to what, iggly ?
No jobs I know will hold a vacancy open for 2 years
One year max, and then that is when you are pretty lucky and work for someone like the NHS
I would love to have childcare so I could go back to work, unfortunately it costs more then I earn a day and this idea is balls as well, 2 or 3 hours a day, well the second shift at my work (I'm still under contract there) starts at 3pm, unfortunately DF finishes work at 5.10pm, not much room there is any for the commutes.
not that I expect I'd be eligible anyway as DF earns 25k thats probably 10k too much.
I agree with scarle banner a few hours here or there is not worthwhile. This is near full funding so you can keep a career going in the expensive childcare window before children start school.
There is no real substance to this at all. 3 hours a day and targeted to "the disadvantaged" whoever that may actually be.
It would be so much better if the Con-Dems stopped eroding employee rights and did something tangible for equal opportunities like ensuring there is decent quality childcare for all children at a reasonable price. Where I live full time childcare is £16,000 a year. I doubt anyone who is a SAHM because they can't afford to pay this and go to work is going to be entitled to any help from this scheme and even if she could where are these jobs for 3 hours a day?
But what I'd really like to see if the spreading of the burden across everyone's shoulders. Less tax avoidance, less tax breaks for the extremely wealthy and less wasting money bailing out those who've failed to manage their finances properly themselves.
I would want it for far earlier than the 2 years (but at least its a step nearer to the 3 year current situation).
Pilot scheme for this has been running in my area for a while now. Problem is it doesn't get anyone back into work.
The criteria is strict that you have to be a teenage mum, have drug issues, risks of abuse, be on certain benifits, be a child with SN or English as second langue, and loads of other stuff.
In all the families I have help get the funding and a place NONE have return or started work.
It's a huge amount of paper work and weirdly enough we have spent the budget for this year and so some that applied in sept didn't get a place.
It's a load of twaddle and just providing childcare for needy family does not equal people going back to work.
They would be better to offer cheaper childcare for all, because even families who are working aren't always better off if paying childcare.
For the benefits (not just economic) of the scheme: https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/DCSF-RR021.pdf
lisa you've just confirmed my fears.
It's just more Tory
bollocks rhetoric. Well you can fuck the fuck off Osborne you twat
Well which is it, then?
Or early years education?
It's 3 hours a day, is it, allowing a mother to work, what - 13 hours a week when you factor in work-to-pick-up time? And paid for probably by creaming off the child tax credit of low earners.
Who the fuck can get a job in those 13 hours, Osborne?
Actually anyfucker not everyone working for the NHS can do that I got TTFO when I had my child as did two of my colleagues short term contract are becoming a lot more common I think as are the wonderfully named non career posts!
It's early years intervention for those most in need (never thought I'd be in a position defending a Tory initiative, but in this case the extension of the pilot is long overdue).
Sorry Kate it's very hard to know families get free childcare because their life is pretty pants (wouldn't wish it on anyone) but families that life on paper looks ok get nothing and sometimes they are struggling more. It doesn't take into account if your paying a mortgage, student loans on anything else.
You have to earn under a certain amount, and be in a pretty hard place to get funding.
I think the point of 3 hours care is that most nurseries now do a wrap around service and therefore you can pay a top up if you need little one there longer.
And don't get me started on how they capped the amount they will pay per hour. I had to pay for dd2 to go to a specialist nursery at £42 a session but because it "was my choice" to send her there rather than a mainstream nursery they wouldn't pay it. did they seriously think I wanted her there, would have loved to send her to mainstream!! Idiots IMO
But those most at need won't put their dc on the wating list for a pre-school or Nursery - so how would they USE the funding available? In my area there is such a shortage of pre-school places, even in private nurseries, that a lot of dc only get 1 half-day a week until they are one year before school age - which for some dc means they may be 4yo when they get more than one day a week, and that is when you have put their name down on the waiting list when they are UNDER 1 MONTH old.
What, may I ask, is the fucking point? Surely a BETTER way to get people back into work would be to pay 80% of the childcare costs, through the Tax Credit System, as was being done until it was dropped back down to 70%? And making sure that EVERY town has ENOUGH childcare for the people that want it? And maybe, just maybe, providing more SN childcare for dc with sn that are OVER 11yo??
AnyFucker and those mentioning no-one keeping jobs open for two years, in some Scandinavian countries there is two years of parental leave for two parent families after the birth of a child. They also have much better subsidised childcare, employment rights for parents and pay after the birth of a child. Consequently they have much lower rates of unemployment for parents and more women in work as a whole.
This document is very good at explaining the differences. http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/parental_2008_09.pdf They also point out ^France and Spain allow both parents to stay at home and return to their prior job or a comparable one until their
child's third birthday.^
Or, as LisaD points out - not putting a limit on the amount the voucher is worth, so that it can be 'cashed' at SN nurseries too?
"The criteria is strict that you have to be a teenage mum, have drug issues, risks of abuse, be on certain benifits, be a child with SN or English as second langue, and loads of other stuff. "
I actually think its an excellent idea to give free pre school education (education NOT childcare) to socially deprived families. It will help improve language skills of these toddlers. Hopefully these tots will learn some social skills and be less distruptive in the classroom. I believe it will be an ecomony in the long run as there will hopefully these kids will not have major special needs at school age. I think will help to close the gap between the rich and poor as many high income families send their children to nursery from two and half whether the mother is working or not.
I willl be contraversal, I see no reason why the tax payer should foot the bill for childcare for working parents unless there are special circumstances. Education is a different matter.
Also live how it says that because of the summer riots government need to help earlier!! I'm sorry but schools have little to do with providing social boundaries and thoughts. Its the parents job to enstill these things, not teachers and nursery nurses.
They would be better to pour the money into building better communities to help raise children in safer and surcure places, NOT shove them into nursery at 2 so that mummy and daddy have more time to watch jeremy kyle!
Huntycat funded places jump straight to the top of the list, so don't need to have bothered to put name down, sorry
15 free hours a week for some two year olds targeted at the poorest families? So basically targeting exactly the same group that Sure Start was aimed at. You know Sure Start? The centres that have been squeezed out of existence by funding cuts in many areas. Funding cuts by ... oh yes, the Chancellor.
Reallytired I agree that those most in need, could do with this BUT this was what childrens centres were made for. To teach families in need how to play, how to develop language in children and how to raise confident children by building parents confidence in their abilities to parent. Guess what our new government did to those centres!?
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.