To be quite angry about proposed changes to 3-4yo childcare- only for ALL working parents?

In answer to some of the issues raised on this thread:

1. SAHMs don't have the monopoly on voluntary work - locally to me, both Beavers/Cubs and Brownies are staffed fully by FT WOHPs. Same with Football and Rugby clubs, and I can only think of one SAHP in the PTA and none who are school Governors.
2. WOHPs often lose out on childcare 'freebies' such as community summer clubs as clubs that run 10-3 are about as much use as a chocolate teapot if you work 8-5.

I am at some of the bitchy ' if I'm not benefitting no one else should' comments.

This whole thread has pissed me off. It has turned into 'they earn too much', 'they don't earn enough', 'they are freeloaders', 'won't someone think of the children'.

FFS. This site is called mumsnet. The vast majority of people who post are women.

I would like to think the majority would like equality in life, to be equal in society with men.

To have that, we need choice about how we live. People have been campaigning for years for better, more affordable childcare. Lack of quality, affordable childcare is widely acknowledged to be a barrier to women who want to work.

We have a sniff of help for childcare and we turn it into a bunfight.

This is a step towards the goal of choice.

Whether it happens, whether there are limits, whether everyone will be able to access the help when and where needed, whether childcare providers can afford to offer it, whether it will be quality childcare remains to be seen.

I really don't care if you work or you don't. That is a private decision and none of my business. I do care that you get the choice.

True chchchanging, and one of the many reasons I wasn't keen on CB being means tested. You do have to do something to keep people onside. The threshold at which the 40% tax kicks in is really not that high, after all.

Does anyone else get sick of seeing questions around why 'higher earners' should qualify for the changes?

At what point do you think we should stop penalising people for being successful?

Why should the fact that you have more income mean that you are not entitled to a break in childcare costs?

This ridiculous attitude has to stop

No talk of it, Stichintime.

Chchchanging makes a very pertinent point.
We need people who are prepared to work their way up in the workforce, to take on those roles which carry greater responsibility, and if the incentive isn't there, people are going to be reluctant to do so.

When I was a young graduate in my profession, I looked at those further up the line and naively assumed that they must be raking it in. Of course, now that I've reached that postion, I can see that once NI and tax contributions are made, what's left in my purse is waaaaay below what my salary looks like on paper.

I wouldn't for a minute complain about my income, but I do think a valid point is made upthread. Ultimately it's a balancing act: yes, obviously those earning more should pay more tax, but push them
Too hard and they'll weigh up whether it's worth taking on a tougher role and may end up hovering just below tax rate thresholds.

Same with childcare: for every person like me, who went out to work even though for a few years chhildcare took up all of my income, there will be another person who says, no, I'm not prepared to work for nothing, and gives up.

Not incentivising people to reach their potential is really bad In the long term. The next major crisis to hit a whole generation In the UK will be pensions... There are going to be hordes of people who have only got by day to day because of top ups like tax credits, which of course help out in the short term but do nothing long term- these people are going to be stuffed in their old age.

Going slightly away from the main topic there, but it's all relevant because it comes back to widening access to work for people- and in particular women who historically are the ones who get stuffed most when it comes to things like pensions

Troll You said your childminder would be able to afford savings and a pension. As a childminder who has been offering the free 15 hours (subsidised by ME), I am asking you how we are to afford this when we are subsidising other people's free childcare so they can afford a cleaner.

Like the Government, you're not listening and you have ignored what you've been told on this thread. So I'll say it again, very clearly:

We providers cannot afford to subsidise your free childcare

Is there any talk of removing the 15 hours? I thought that was part of early years education.

I'm not sure which category of people I fit into or what type of person people see me as: I do fear that perhaps people see me as a scrounger who gets benefits and is a lazy non contributing cow for being a SAHM.
I get carers allowance of £62 per week (previosuly worked in an essential worker role but gave up work due to DC complex disability). For my £62 per week during term time I provide care (much more than for my NT child) from 5am until I drop him at school at 9am, I then collect him at 3pm and carry out relentless caring duties (as well as usual mum stuff) until DC goes to bed at 9.30pm and then I usually do two night waking stints with DC to attend to his medical needs. During school holidays I do everything from 5am until 9.30pm and the two night waking stints. I am really lucky that DH helps out at weekends when he is not working.
We have a baby due soon and I am not sure we will qualify for any free early years education because I am not employed. I know that I work a damn sight harder now than I did when I was a key service worker but my remuneration is staggeringly less.
I read these threads and it makes me very depressed that some people might think as a SAHM I have made a lifestyle choice and don't deserve any financial support. I know some of the parents at my NT child's school think I am just a lady of leisure living off my husbands earnings.
I won't be wanting 30 hours of childcare for my baby when he reaches 3. We will need some care and 15 hours would be nice but we will pay for it ourselves if we have to (like we did with DC2 because it was in the days prior to the 15 hours). I do fear that other parents in my position might not be able to pay and if the 15 hours is removed to fund the 30 hours for working parents or if the situation creates a severe shortage of early years places then some people in my position will not be able to access anything.
It does feel a bit like robbing from one group to give more to another group.

Financial support for childcare (which is how these 30 hours are being badged) is, in my view, about equality.

One of the biggest hurdles for women, all women regardless of income (well maybe no those with a private island) is the cost of childcare.

If this helps promote choice about whether to work, how much to work, I see it as a good thing. Without that choice, we don't have equality.

Ok this will be unpopular but to all those querying why higher tax payers benefit- because there has to be something we get support on otherwise a system where people only ever pay in makes for more people opting to not ie quit...
I'm higher rate yet post childcare my disposable is less than when I was on £20k 10 years ago
If lower income is always supported the ability to more from lower to middle to higher incomes will be totally impossible because of the 'loss'
Childcare based supprt I'd accessible to all on 15 atm and is therefore a fair system
I'm amazed it's not something taken altogether

To those posters questioning why higher earners should receive help with child care, you are assuming both parents are high earners.

Yy I get that the family has a combined income, but realistically the childcare costs are taken from my salary. When our costs were at their peak (one at school, two preschool) plus travel, I was bringing home less than 150 a month.

The 15 hours a month made a massive difference to us. Made my career financially viable. Without having to depend on a man. I contribute far more in tax now than I received via those 15 hours a week.

Duelling

There are no school attached nurseries up here
I've only ever heard of them on here tbh.
They are a bit grim in our area. Although, I know there are some brilliant nurseries out there Thank you Janey if you are still about. My eyes have been opened on here.
It doesn't have any bearing on us at all, but I hope the 15 hours isn't pushed aside for "more deserving" cases. I hate loss of opportunity for children.

Sorry, I meant any other benefits as well as DLA, I'm not that familiar with them all

fancy

That wasn't the point I was trying to make, I said those families that could survive well on one wage.
My objection is that we can't have it all ways, we can't support one lifestyle choice and not another.
Of course i think that parents, women in particular should be helped with childcare if it is needed, but when it isn't it becomes a lifestyle choice the same as other benefits excluding DLA and it will be a benefit.
Everybody is losing the money they don't need and many are losing the money they do need and subjected to poverty.
Nobody except the disabled are exempt, or so the Gov tell us.
There are arguments that tc allow a sahp, which in a few cases I think it does.
If you have outgoings and debts, like credit though, you need to work irrespective of tax credits. This has stopped or will do very soon, yes great while it lasted but has to go now, bye bye.
It is to replaced by a wohp being able to employ a cleaner for some, just the same. The gov have just robbed Peter to pay Paul.
Neither situation is more deserving but don't anybody kid themselves it will save any money.

'more than* I am a teacher that has worked part time since my DC were born. If my DH worked pt too, we would not be able to pay the bills. Teachers can work part time, but they will not have any career progression, as you have to be full time to manage a school. That leads to the same issue. Women in a female heavy profession, but with no career progression, with a male heavy management structure. What ambitious young woman would sign up for that? not many. These women are also paying NIC's for non working parents, so they get some sort of state pension. If more women were SAHP's, ironically, the less money would be available in the economy for people to be SAHP'S

'Definitely children of a sahp need and should be able to access pre school education.
All children irrespective of household income or parents employment status need education.'

Maybe I am misunderstanding but aren't ALL children able to go to a school attached nursery from around 3 anyway? Pre school education IS available for the children of SAH parents.

Only sometimes, 32?

I sometimes feel like Ive fallen into the 1950s on MN

Cotsowlds, people don't pay tax as a unit any more though do they? Separate taxation became the practice some time ago.

With 30 hours subsidised childcare though cotswold, you can go back to work :)

Oh and the husband on 60k and wife on 16k is not a model we all aspire to anymore. And I'm speaking as an old gimmer of over 50! Some of us have had a working life where we've earned equally to our husband. And I certainly haven't brought up my dd to expect to be supported by a man earning 4 x what she can, or indeed my ds to support a wife singlehandedly if he doesn't want to.

There's nothing wrong with being a SAHM with a husband on 60k if it floats both your boats, but you're not going to get the sympathy vote if you start complaining.

May have childcare costs. If they're secondary age or have relatives near by of do shift work or work part time they may well not.

Cotswold- your decision. I'd just point out though, that many people on 16k are slogging their guts out, even if you weren't.

And speaking from personal experience, I'd say my work life was a damn sight tougher in my early years after qualifying when I was on about half what I earn now.
Besides, I really hope we've moved beyond the era when a wife proudly proclaims what her husband earns, as if it's some kind of joint achievement, rather than achieving in her own right.
And yes- I quite understand about the whole teamwork and support thing- how do you think we function in families where both parents work? DH and I support eachother to the hilt, professionally and in terms of raising our family.
Please not let's hark back to some 'golden' yesteryear when wives were seen as an appendage to their husbands' achievements

fancy

just an idea, maybe not thought through properly though
Although, some of the teachers I know would love pt work so they could be less stressed and with their dc more.