Universal, free childcare - is it a solution?

[KateMumsnet]

This week, Mumsnet Blogger Mummyisagadgetgeek reports back from an event organized by the thinktank Progress on the subject of universal childcare. Should they win the next election, Labour are considering it as a possible policy - so we thought it would be good to find out what it was all about.

So: read her blog report from the event, tell us what you think here on the thread - and if you blog, let us know about it. We'll be tweeting posts next week.

[whiteandyelloworchid]

agree with bonsoir as well

[clam]

"dominating another thread?" Xenia is perfectly entitled to express her opinions, as are we all. Even if some view them as extreme, they enrich the debate.

[somewherewest]

Even if some view them as extreme, they enrich the debate.

I guess so, in much the same way that David Icke's views "enrich the debate" on...just about everything really. Did you know that SAHMs are actually lizard people? Just not very intelligent lizard people, obviously .

[scottishmummy]

may have three degrees but have no manners.how rude
I want to read all opinion, not just coo over agreeable posts
and clearly theres a range of interesting and diverse opinion,which I enjoy reading

[scottishmummy]

and the provision would be non compulsory.not enforced state creche
some of you describe it like a grimy loveless camp full of detainees.mrs hannigans daycare
if it not to your preference don't use,but for many many other families it's v useful

[mummytime]

Thank you Scottishmummy!

[scottishmummy]

a good point well made yes divergent opinions do enrich debates i completely agree
I don't have to agree with all pov,and I can engage in discussion not reflecting my views
there is enough room for all opinions,I'd hate to be on a sparkly high5 love ya Hun forum

[MainlyMaynie]

It's a really interesting idea I think. I would like to see the financial projections behind it (i.e. how many people would actually return to the work place/increase their hours/whatever) and whether it would increase costs overall. I assume they would be proposing it as an alternative to tax credits etc.? Which would force lower paid families to both work, while leaving higher paid families the option to have someone staying at home. On face value a brilliant idea, but the practical impact would take some working through.

[MainlyMaynie]

There should have been a paragraph change there, I think free childcare is a brilliant idea, not removing options for low income families and leaving them for high income.

[EdithWeston]

If the provision was non-compulsory, how on earth would an LA know how much to provide? Either some families would be left without, or you'd need continual over-supply which would be immensely expensive.

And given the ratios needed for under 3s, it would be hard to pay for it anyhow (additional £20k tax per woman over 4 years (as posted above) is rather less than the £24k it would cost to provide, assuming costs c£500pcm for one child (more in some areas less in others) and of course that would be multiplied if there were more than one qualifying child at a time.

[mummytime]

I do worry that the main result would be that instead of some people being SAHM's they could be forced/encourage to become low paid child care workers; because we would need a lot more of them.

[Italiana]

Mummytime At the moment 75% of c/ms are not able to do the free entitlement, if the barriers preventing us were removed you would get a huge expansion of places
Parents could then choose a c/m from when their child is a baby until end of primary school....that would provide continuity which many parents value

At the moment Liz Truss wants to deregulate c/ms and allow anyone to come into the profession...we must fight that as many c/ms are truly professional and very experienced...we would need to remain regulated and inspected to drive up quality...parents could have a huge influence in this

I really do not believe that Universal free childcare can happen by next general election but it would be a start if the govt funded 50% and the parents the other 50% ?

[morethanpotatoprints]

Mummytime.

Do you not think that only those people wanting to become child care workers would do so. I certainly wouldn't want to bring other peoples children up. I love my own and find my time with my kids as rewarding, challenging and very interesting, but nobody elses please.

Xenia

Just for the record I have 2 PG Qualifications and a BA Hons.
Its only boring raising children if you yourself are easily bored and not very creative.

[merrymouse]

I suspect that any economic projections showing that this could work are based on the assumption that there is a vast army of women available to do poorly paid work looking after other people's children.

[scampidoodle]

Surely this would, as Mainlymaynie said, be funded by abolishing the tax credit system? At least then it would be more straightforward for anyone to work out if they could afford to work and we wouldn't have the arguments that SAHPs aren't contributing anything to the economy, but that all working parents are contributing even if the government (taxpayers) is/are paying 70% of their childcare costs and giving them other tax credits each month on top of this. Someone earlier in the thread asked why childcare is so expensive in the UK - I'm sure that the fact that so many people receive money towards their childcare has an effect on the costs.

[BoffinMum]

Merrymouse, it is not just women that look after children, you know.

[time4anewname]

ugh
According to gadgetgeek's summary the main benefit of putting 73% of 12 month old babies into childcare (how many hours a week?) is to generate tax receipts.

Right tots: you may want to spend your formative years pottering around with mum or dad and siblings, but this the age of austerity and we've all got to do our bit, including you. Chin up little ones, don't cry: there's gravy trains to be funded and bus passes for Granny.

[dreamingofsun]

time4an - if you read the article it will be granny who is funding the 'free' childcare potentially. Granny may have worked hard, saved all her life, paid childcare for her own kids and then had to work a bit longer as gov says she can't retire till she's 67 when maybe she was looking forward to a rest and spending some of her hard earned savings or maybe looking after her grandkids for a few days a week whilst their parents worked. No longer, her savings must go to pay for tots to be looked after by strangers.... and presumably ones that the parents can't even choose.

[Astr0naut]

I'm for it - or at least some kind of subsidy.

I work, for a few reasons:

1. I spent years studying and training, so don't want o watse it.
   
2. I grew up poor and have a pathological fear of being there again.
   
3. I have a terror of giving up work, then not being able to find a job in a few years time.
   
4. I love my children, but days on end of me, them and a park/toddler group was almost the end of me on mat leave.
   
5. I like working even if I'm working until past 10 most nights
   
6. I've gone .8 and given up on furthering my career, as a compromise
   

However, financially, it'd make more sense for either myself of dh to give up work at the moment, which is ridiculous - epecially as my mum does two days a week. If we had to put them in full time, we'd be pretty much paying to go to work each month.

[notenoughsocks]

My first thought is 'Yes Please!!"

I do have some concerns though. Mainly about this effectively 'forcing' some women into low-paid, dead-end jobs (and much as I have grown to respect Xenia somebody has to do the more lowly jobs - like childcare, for example). Inspired by the following comment upthread - Why not just PAY ME TO LOOK AFTER MY OWN KIDS - if you are going to pay anyone to.... why not me.... - I am inclined to ask what is wrong with the idea of paying an additional universal benefit for children under fives. It might give their carers - women specifically - a bit of bartering power and choice to be able to chose whether to pay for childcare, or 'pay' themselves.

Also, I think it is so so so important to recognise that this is NOT SIMPLY A WOMEN'S ISSUE. For me, for example, I feel the ideal solution that would be for both my DP and me to work part -time (2/3 timeish) each - without having to lose any status, pretige, chances of progression or relative pay, and for DS to be in part-time care.

Something needs to be done. But the more I think about it, the more complicated it seems.

[dreamingofsun]

notenough - i'd have loved £40k a year to look after my own kids, but i'm not convinced the country's finances would allow for this without massive tax hikes.

[notenoughsocks]

Dreamingofsun (me too, by the way) ....Out of interest, where did the 40k come from? Also, are you in favour of the universal childcare idea?

[notenoughsocks]

oooops - sorry dreamingofsun, just saw upthread that you don't like the idea at all.

[dreamingofsun]

not in favour because i think parents should be responsible for their own kids, and having paid my own childcare for many years and now thankfully past that i don't want to pay loads of extra tax for other people's, or have to shell out loads of money for it when i'm retired - as initial post suggested. As I understand it tax credits cover some of the money, but not all - and this seems better.

I assume if parents would be paid to look after their own kids the salary they would be giving up would be taken into account - that's where the 40k comes from. There would have been no point paying me (or others in my position) the minimum wage as it wouldn't have enabled us to give up work.

as others have mentioned on here i would also have concerns over state provision's suitability - how would it allow me to cover the 4am starts and 10pm finishes which my job sometimes entails? What if I have to stay away overnight? Would I be able to vet the people concerned? what if i wanted my children to stay in our own home (which i would)?

[notenoughsocks]

No, even at my most fanciful, I don't think that salaries would be taken into account on a case by case basis. If you were earning that much, good on you, and as a tax payer, I would have been happy to subsidise any free childcare provision that you chose to make use of happy in the knowledge that when and if my time came, the same options would be availble to me.

I think my concern lies around people who earn no where near that amount, have little realistic chance of doing so unless the structure of the labour market changes radically, and who might feel that the provision of free childcare is being used as a way to push them into low quality work.