Tax-free childcare - government consultation - have your say.

Children of 5 cannot look after themselves; working parents need childcare cover which wraps around school hours.

...And the govt wants to introduce a scheme which only applies to kids under 5 and only for working parents?

What a way to simultaneously piss off parents of kids aged 5 and over AND those who cannot work due to caring responsibilities/health issues/lack of realistic employment.

Just because I am a working parent does NOT mean that I am willing to see carers shafted yet again as part of this monumentally deluded scheme.

I think this is yet another box ticked. We said we'd cover childcare for 'real' famies- job done. What rubbish!!! Why does this cover families who both work? This alone shows how out oftouch with real families the government are! Many SAHM's do so because they simply can't afford to re-enter the work place as a result of archaic childcare systems. This measure would realistically do little or nothing to change that. I don't know many (any?) families who can afford all their childcare until age 4 or 5 when children enter school, they all struggle to go back to work leaning heavily on grandparents who have had their time being carers of kids. Why is it that the government believes 4 or 5 is the age at which mum's can afford to stay off until, at which point 'childcare' is paid for?? The current system of childcare vouchers is a major barrier, not a help, as it is per parent, NOT per child- so with several children close together there is a have an have not system from the start instead of equal opportunity for all- remembering that this is not 'free' but a small perk for a hardworking family man IF their company does it.

I think this new measure is far too little, and too discriminatory. Please take a look at the way the Scandinavian counties set up their pre-school and early years childcare and take a leaf out of their book Mr Cameron. For an apparently forwards country we are still in the dark ages, relying on an elderly generation to take up the slack that your government doesn't want to address with anything more than a token measure.

Also, as an election policy, it's no more/less than what higher earner single parents lost when CB was taken away (depending on number of children). Whoop de doo.

For instance, that policy where you were incentivised (as little as £2K in shares) for signing away your rights to working flexibly/redundancy pay was inspired.

It's nowhere near enough.

I work outside the home. I want to work, I worked hard to get where I am in my field and don't want to take a substantial career break as it would be very hard to get back in. I'm also a better person for working, staying at home is bad news for me, mental health wise. Everyone is different I know.

So, both my husband and I work full time. I work for a charity, he's an engineer. We earn the same, a reasonable income, above average I believe but not enough for luxuries, holidays etc. Children in childcare 4 days a week, 1 day with family (We are lucky). Childcare is 1300 a month. That is almost three quarters of my salary. I recently changed to full time hours and the increase in salary was wiped out by childcare. I love working and I love my job, but if I didn't, I'd need a substantial incentive to return to work - otherwise I really would be working for nothing (actually paying to work, given costs for travel, clothing etc)

It's constantly worrying and we're not on the breadline by any stretch...

Agree with general trend of this thread. It's difficult to see how this will be an improvement for some. On the other hand, plenty of people (and it's mainly women) are carers for children who aren't so easy to slot into childcare, whatever their age, e.g. those with SN, older children, and adult dependants.

I would like there to be incentives for companies who enable all carers to work more flexibly (e.g. remotely, in school hours/around the support they can receive, returning to work), rather than the current rather Gradgrind approach of "all your employees are probably trying to fleece you".

"If someone wants to work full time let them, not everyone wants to."

Childcare costs mean that not everyone who wants to can. I don't really see how this policy would force anyone to work who doesn't want to? It's not about making childcare compulsory, but helping people who need it access it. It's certainly not perfect as I said earlier, but it's not about forcing SAHPs into the workhouse.

It doesn't go far enough.

And don't get me started on SAHM whinging they're being penalised for/missing out on childcare help.

This proposal is just another sound bite to win votes from 'hard working families'. I'm a SAHM but my dh works incredibly long hours and works really hard to enable this.

David Cameron and the Tories need to be careful that their not alienating their core voters with policies like this. Traditionally one high earner in the family who have already lost their child benefit and are being excluded again from policies which 'help' families.

Perhap's introducing a system whereby the SAHP can assign their personal allowance to their partner would help ease some of the perceived infairness!

I'm a SAHM, financially we're lucky enough that I don't need to work but sometimes I think I will get a job (when ds goes to school full time) which is just below the personal allowance tax threshold (dh loses his as he earns over a certain amount) just so I can take advantage of these policies..... Where are all the jobs though? Is it fair that I take a job I don't really need just because the policies which have been implemented push me into doing so.

I don't like it at all. You are wrecking the family. If someone wants to work full time let them, not everyone wants to.

We have plenty of working years before children and once the children are at school, it is only a few precious years children are small and so important.

As for this rubbish of wrap around school age child care, fine if someone wants to work, why all this forcing children to be with exhausted parents for an hour a day.

Make more term time part time jobs available around school hours instead, invest the money that way. Children need friends back for tea, after school clubs or to just hang out as a family after school.

I would rather the money go to support SAHM's to bring their own pre school children up if that is what they want. Allow families to afford to keep Mum at home who wants to, rather than generations of children brought up by strangers. Nobody will love and care for a child like their own parent.

It's frankly bollocks and a minuscule amount of what is required.

Either nationalise preschool childcare provision or push up wages to reflect the true cost of living.

This ridiculous tokenism is not going to have any real impact on families struggling to pay childcare bills that often represent 50% of their income.

This seems administratively complex. How are they going to link me & dh & dd together & check we are both working. There is going to be a minimum hours for employed people 16 i think but what about self employed? Could i do a few hours consultancy & claim. Who claims the vouchers i work 18hrs but don't pay much tax. Then there's all the admin for voucher companies & childcare providers... I would just have an additional transferable tax free amount *2 for lone parents & maybe scaled higher for under 5s.

I'd like to know why the government won't allow childcare costs as an expense against tax - surely that simpler than some arbitrary figure conjoured up by some wonk. I can't work without childcare - how can it not be a legitimate expense? (I'm self-employed, so childcare vouchers don't apply)

I also second every word that Bonsoir has posted. Why can't the proposals also take into account those who care for other family members or those with health issues? How can you talk about the 'big society' if you don't value carers (who incidentally save the state a bloody fortune...)?

As Spirael has already pointed out, this new scheme is massively unfair to families with a child born before about 2011 - children aged 5-12 between 2015 and 2022 are going to need plenty of childcare after school and in school holidays and are going to get zero help with it. There aren't that many decent jobs which fit around school care hours. This aspect of the new scheme is the worst bit. It's also less money for families which currently have two parents in the old scheme but have only one child, but that bit doesn't seem quite so unfair as it does make sense to have a saving per child rather than per family.

Also I'm coming from the POV of someonewho's concerned about the massive pressure on single parents to go to work when their child is 1yo. It might not be there yet but it's coming.

Widow - sorry, didn't mean to come across like that at all. I'm not envious. Really not.

I was only saying that because I see so many people saying on here 'I would love to stay home and look after my baby but we can't afford to'.

So I suppose I feel sorry for people like that.

I am concerned about whether money placed into voucher companies will be safeguarded.

Will the money be placed on trust so that if the voucher company goes bust it cannot be touched?

Another issue is whether schools who provide before school and after school clubs will be compelled to accept payment via voucher.

DS's school has a breakfast club which does not accept vouchers....

Well. I'm staying on my current childcare provision of £243 thank you very much. My older child is in year 1 but we pay for afterschool club to the tune of £9/day. School dinners £2.25/day. Staff devt day £25/day.

Younger child costs £800/month in nursery. I use the £243 for her bills. Dh is self employed so none of this stuff.

£1200/child doesn't get me near as £243x12!! What nonsense are they talking about?

Also great that you lose all support as soon as one of you loses their job. Losing half of the childcare vouchers was bad enough when my husband was unemployed, if I had lost my entitlement too, would have made it worse - what with nursery notice periods, and actually needing childcare in place when looking for a job.

As for support for SAHPs - if you don't want to use childcare by your own choice, you surely don't need support in paying for it. This is discussing supporting those who need childcare. Really don't get this politics of envy.

Also as a single parent, I really fear the moment when the govt is going to say, either you work FT or we take away your CB etc. Here is some lovely childcare assistance so you can leave them with a stranger and go back to FT work.

It freaks me out - I didn't want to be single. If I was with someone, one of us would be here with them (given ideal circumstances). But I'm all they have got.

I'd rather they helped people who have children to afford to be able to stay at home to look after them themselves rather than pay someone else to do it.

Not sure of the politics of it but iyswim..

I'd LOVE to go back to work, but I chose to have children and I have to be here for them. If I left them in childcare I'd feel like I'd had them for no reason...work has to take a back seat for me, till they are a bit bigger. At least till they can talk to me reliably about what they did all day.

This scheme either needs to be available up to 12 year olds straight away or it needs to increase the age range faster than one per year.

DH and I both work FT and neither of us are higher rate tax payers. We have one child and another on the way, who we have deliberately waited to have because we cannot afford to have more than one child in full time childcare at any time.

Because DC1 will be 5 YO the month before this scheme comes in, and will continue to be a month too old forever by the way the age limit is currently set to increase, we will never be able to benefit from this new scheme.

With just one qualifying child then in childcare, it is better for us to stay on the old scheme than to join the new one. Problem is, this means that from 2015 neither DH or I will be able to change jobs without losing out on childcare vouchers, or we'll just lose out anyway as the schemes slowly shut down over the following 7 years.

Not much of an incentive there for us!

With the trend of women having their kids later in life, there is every chance there will the situation of young children and elderly parents to juggle for a not insignificant number. Why not give these families the same help

So what happens to the childcare costs of parents with children over 5 if this replacing the childcare voucher scheme which currently has no such restrictions? This could mean that actually a lot of families are initially worse off until it's rolled out to older children.

Am I understanding this right?

At the moment I work very part-time, not over the tax threshold. I want to do the work though, so toddler DS goes to a childminder for 6hrs /wk.

DH is getting childcare vouchers through his work, which reduces the cost for us from £30 to £18 as he's a higher rate taxpayer (just).

With the new scheme coming in, does that mean he couldn't apply for the vouchers and it would have to be from my pay, which would be pointless and save us nothing as I don't earn enough to pay tax? I'm confused