Fancy telling MNHQ what you think about the parties' childcare proposals?

It just looks like a clumsy, ill thought out attempt to buy the 'women's vote'.

From people who have no understanding if how the current system works or how (if) their proposals could be implemented.

If they want to help with childcare (as opposed to early years education) then making the entire amount payable before tax would be my preference.

I would strongly object to transferring tax allowance between couples. As I object to a married couples allowance.

An hour for hour voucher scheme would be fair. On the current proposals I would actually consider voting Tory

FT WOHM with registered nanny.

Childcare provision, free or otherwise, has absolutely no bearing on my decision about who to vote for in May, and I have two young children. I'm a lot more interested in the NHS, protection of the environment, social spending generally and I would be prepared to pay more tax, even on my well below average earnings, to help secure these.

However to answer your question, I live in Scotland. The 15 hours per week free provision has made at best a marginal impact on my finances. I need full time childcare and do not yet claim tax credits.

As others have said, these hours are not free-these figures are misleading for parents to be. Near here, the small print reads 15 free hours if you live right next to a childrens centre. Or right next to a primary school, but only from the september after they're 3, and don't expect you'll actually get in for reception. Otherwise you're left with the meagre reduction on fees a private nursery might give you- and for a worse quality provision than the state ones.

Agree that the 'free hours' are hard to get in a good quality setting with any flexibility.
It is not really helpful to have 'free' childcare when your local authority has run out of budget for that and is not accepting any more applications, and even if they were, it would be certain hours a day, when you need something more flexible.
And when you use a private nursery, where the council is then supposed to refund the money off the fees, you can't get that money because you moved into the area after the one week a year you have to apply for the funding the following August...

The whole 'free' childcare pledge thing sets my teeth on edge - I have been a working, mostly single, mother for over a decade and the most useful thing was childcare tax credits when I used to qualify - this is what you pay therefore we will give you X amount back.

But the really most useful thing is flexible working hours; sick leave days for ill children would be also useful; and a working culture which saw that people contribute in different ways and that long hours does not equal best.

'free' childcare is just going to mean more parents are expected to work because there is free childcare available isn't there???

I'm in two minds.

On the one hand childcare is important for women to be able to be economically active, if they want to.

On the other hand I wish politicians would actually work on more radical change, that sees a valuing of mothering and a change of attitudes that results in more genuinely flexible working so rather than just sticking plastering the problem with childcare.

And I'm very fucked off with the Tories, after all the things they've cut, the dire situations they've left people in, for ideological reasons, they're now throwing out candy like this just to try and cynically win votes. They should take the money they've somehow found for this, and use it to stop cutting bloody public services.

But you can pay it Diane.

I don't have a problem with helping out the lowest paid who simply can't afford childcare but really don't think we should be funding childcare for those that simply need to tighten their belts for a few years.Not really happy with seeing the NHS go down the Swanee and the poor hammered just so those that can afford their childcare have to tighten their belts less.

Due to my cynical nature re governments, I think they plan to scrap the current 15 free hours early years funding and lump it in with this 30 hours free child care. They have already said it will only be available where both parents are working, so SAHP's will not qualify and will therefore lose their current early years funding. My youngest starts school in September, so it won't affect me, but I'm sure it's their plan. For the record, I agree SAHPs don't need free childcare, but the current 16 hours is specifically for early years. This will go from next year I think for any family with a SAHP.

Glad the main parties are all at least acknowledging that childcare is a problem and trying to make improvements but it's discouraging to hear so many MNers saying the "free" hours don't actually come free or provide much help due to how they work.

I don't have dc yet but am intending in the near future and when I heard the Conservative 30 hours proposal I thought great, as I've calculated childcare for one child would cost me about a grand a month which will be very tough to cover even though I have a good salary. So 30 hours free would reduce it by a big chunk. However I think it needs to be all year round not just term time and have more flexibility re the times of day if the aim is to help people who are working. I would prefer to get the value in tax free childcare vouchers which could be used on any childcare of choice, whether it's a nursery, childminder or nanny but I do still think it's a good thing to increase the hours though.

Labour, as above re extra hours, and the wrap around care sounds quite handy as obviously the school drop offs and pick ups don't fit in with a working day. This would probably be a big practical help.

Lib dem, I really like that they would want to offer some free hours from 9 months rather than from 2 or 3 years. I never understand why free hours only come later as obviously childcare costs kick in as soon as you return from mat leave and are a huge burden. This will be really helpful for mothers going back to work (obviously with the proviso as above that the hours need to be properly made available by the nurseries for free and at convenient times). If implemented correctly so that you actually see the benefit of your childcare bill going down by 15 hours a week from 9 months up to school entry this would be my favourite of the proposals. Labour and conservatives versions still leave you struggling for a couple of years before you get any help.

Green, this is obviously just nonsense. How are they going to pay for it?

But many aren't paying tax. Many second working parents are only working part time or paid low wages.

Wizard Yes of course all of these are focused on childcare so people can work/pay tax, they're not coming up with these policies out of the goodness of their hearts! The only exception is probably the Green Party.

I agree with Green policy to make school age older.

Agree with PP re: it would be good to see alternatives to simply pushing really long days.

I would like to have seen businesses incentivised to offer more part-time or school hours jobs, this would certainly get more parents into work. Currently little incentive, bar the ability to recruit talented, hard working women easily...

I currently put my DS in nursery 10 hours a day (part time) as it's the only way I can keep my job. I'm very lucky to have it part time at all.

By "free" places the parties mean they will partly subsidise childcare at a level lower than most nurseries provide the care for. It will result in most nurseries lowering costs and therefore quality, or pulling out the whole system, leading to a two tier sector of cheap/poor quality childcare for lower income parents, and good quality unfunded childcare for higher income parents.

Nurseries are fucked.

Have you contacted Plaid Cymru to see what their policy is - otherwise I can't comment really.

Thanks penguin, I think it's clever wording - everyone knows the majority of working parents will see it as free childcare (whether it's meant to be or not, free or more affordable childcare is what's needed if parents are to keep working and contributing to tax). My childminder is fantastic but I don't expect her to educate my child anymore than I would and do at home. I chose her for her childcare credentials as I would a nursery for a child so young - particularly aged 2.

I haven't used my full 15 hours with my dc. Partly because we were able to arrange our work around childcare but also because I didn't want to and even if I did the local provision wasn't there for what we'd have needed.
The biggest problems with these plans seems to be term time only provision and capacity. Are there non profit organisations out there to do this? On that scale?

That is from the horse's mouth by the way, not a newspaper rehash.

Labour haven't said it would be free for parents, but they explicitly said the purpose of the new body is to recruit 'volunteers'. A massive insult to all the wonderful organisations providing sports and arts education and activities, to be expected to now do so for free. It cheeses me off immensely. All the parties have a total lack of will to put their money where their ideas are. This is Labour recycling the 'big society' thing. News flash - even people who work in such fripperies as the arts and sport, and childcare and education for that matter - have families and mortgages and bills to pay. Providing wraparound care will only work if it's actually funded properly.

When it the proposed change to 30hrs actually take place ? Is this mentioned anywhere ? What about all those nurseries who only run half days ?

Free childcare for younger children appeals the most to me, we can barely afford things at the moment with one 1yo, it'll be even harder with 2.

However isn't it most important to focus on those people for whom work doesn't pay and subsidise their childcare? As opposed to a blanket '30 hours for all'? Much as it is the more free childcare the better for me personally we don't need 30 hours to get by and make work pay.

No agenda,just disagreeing with you.

Peachy a school hall for hundreds of children does not good childcare make. It takes a lot more than that and the fact is it won't be ideal for many kids.

And yes schools should be sorted first but they're not so piling more pressure onto buildings already under immense pressure is not a particularly good thing.

I like the idea of the wrap around care but I am sceptical that there are sufficient organisations in the country waiting to provide free activities for every child of working parents.

Labour haven't promised FREE wraparound care though, have they?

57% tax in Sweden! Wow, they're going to start chasing me soon for some money as I paid nowhere near that amount during the ten years I worked there!

And no, telling someone to "google it" does not count as giving a source.

It is quite clear what your agenda is LePetit....

Where school facilities are poor that needs addressing whether or not there is after school provision on site, our after school club is in the hall no extra space needed.

Wigfield - because childminders follow the early years curriculum. Nannies don't so you can't.

If it is childcare - why term time?

Sorry but school fields are disappearing.You like yours which is great however keeping kids who have already done a long day even longer in poor facilities when many simply need a break because a few are lucky enough to enjoy it and have great facilities isn't right.

Where is the money going to come from to provide green spaces for kids to play in,decent facilities built on schools many of which could barely squeeze a kitchen in after the last mad Condem vote buying idea?