To be really cross that David Cameron wants to limit useage of Sure Start Centre to families on low incomes.

[Housewife2010]

I have used them for the last 3 years & the majority of the mothers there are middle class. If they didn't go, the places I go to would be almost enmpty.
I use them a lot and my children have got a lot out of the classes/events there. We may not be poor, but our household income has dropped a lot since I gave up work to bring up our children. It is very helpful to be able to take them to some free classes and meet other local families.

Samantha Cameron grew up on an estate you know...a 300 acre estate in Lincolnshire.

'Middle class', he's such a dick.

Re SureStart, they're going to have to start limiting things, can't afford free jollies for all

Thise who can should pay to use SureStart, not be banned from it.

I took my son to SureStart activities, and yup there were plenty of real middle class folk there (ie people with degrees who lived in tiny ex-council flats in dodgy parts of SE London)but, oddly, no old Etonians with £30m in the bank. And hey, one of my kids turned out to be autistic, even though he is middle class. What a turn-up, eh? Stone the crows, my old man's a dustman etc.

I used a local Sure Start in Liverpool when I had my first child. In my experience the reason classes were mainly full of middle class mums was because these women were not from Liverpool and so had no support network of mums, aunties, sisters etc. I think that local 'disadvantaged' mums didn't have the need to make support networks in the same way as they had lots of family and friends close by. So whilst I think Sure Start centres are fab, I hate to admit
that I can kind of see David Cameron's point. I promise I did not vote for him though!

As I said earlier in the thread my friend who is SAHM with DH investment banker has her DD at the surestart nursery, fair enough, its local, and its much cheaper than the private nurseries and its bright modern etc etc.

I was in the surestart centre when waiting for midwife appointment and someone walked in and asked about the nursery, was told there was huge waiting list.

I am - why is the government subsidising childcare for the middle classes and as a result its totally full when someone asks.

There need to be cuts and I agree this is a good place to start.

It's the opening move in the battle to dismantle the welfare state. All the easier to make the really savage cuts down the line once you've taken the middle classes out of the equation.

Make government services something they don't have any stake in. Stop 'em mixing with those commoners - you don't want them finding out working class people are pretty much the same, rather than two-headed monsters who live on benefit fraud and feed their kids exclusively on fruit shoots and Greggs.

Great way to breed resentment: 'Hey, middle class people, you have to pay for everything while working class people get it for free!'

Great post, edam

There was no Surestart in my area when I had kids - things like weaning were discussed in parents group at the health clinic. I've just looked up to see if the situation has changed, and there is now something called a children's centre - the health visitors use it for things like bf support and new mums' groups, and it is also used by local community groups such volunteer run toddler groups.

So if Surestart isn't run like that, isn't that the answer? All parents of young children get to use the centre, but some groups are run by the health visitors, some are perhaps classes where you have to pay, and some are set up by groups of parents. That way the Government provides the building but the services are a mix of NHS, social services, and community run groups all under one roof.

thanks, usual.

MumNWLondon, in the area I work in, the CC nurseries are streets ahead of the private nurseries in terms of standards. There are several rated outstanding where I work (as opposed to 0 private day nurseries).

I'm not particularly sure that it is a fantastic idea to dismantle centres of excellence and/or make them inaccessible to "middle class" people. Again, I have no issue with paying more.. however, surely rather than asking why should government subsidise middle class families to have excellent preschool education, we should ask why government would want to deny excellent preschool education to middle class families because "the nation can't afford it". The CC nurseries I have worked in have been fantastic examples of good early years educational practice: I don't mind paying for this but I really don't see why it's okay to shut a whole group of people out of the only outstanding educational provision within a 20 mile radius because they can 'easily afford' the more expensive provision down the road that is, frankly, pants?

Ideally I feel this good practice should be capitalised upon: make the middle classes pay more and increase capacity for all for nursery education places. Use CC's as centres of excellence and points of contact for a range of services for the entire community by allowing community groups to hire out rooms/run their own services/utilise the skills and enthusiasm of local business people so that the centre becomes self-sustaining. Grant central funding for work with the most needy and to subsidise access to services that require payment for those who need them but cannot afford them.

I can't see how shutting up shop will really be good for anyone. So CC's have been seized upon by the middle classes? Well then, there is a demand for the services - now payment is necessary. Shouldn't impact upon what SS needs to do with its target group to bring in revenue from the middle class cohort.

It obviously can be done as this is the model in our centre: payment for classes for everyone not on benefits at standard market rates. Need should be factored in too, I feel, but there are more creative and sensible solutions vs swingeing cuts.

Milly, Childrens Centres are Surestart - there was originally 50 something Surestarts, and they have expanded into "Childrens Centres" and more Childrens Centres have been added. Same staff, same buildings mostly, new name.

MillyR, exactly.

Cuts are simply wasteful. These buildings exist: the toys have been bought and paid for, the carpets laid, the facilities designed and executed. Transform the services, yes.. but exclude the MC so that you can prove there is no demand in order to shut them down and we all lose out. We have paid a good deal for these centres already.

We ran a playgroup in a very mixed area and you had to put a pound per family in the pot on your way in, and unless one of us volunteers sat there the whole session loads of people didn't. I have no idea if it was the 'middle class' or poorer ones who didn't pay.

It did stop a bit when we said that we need to pay for stuff and if you can't afford it please just let us know and you won't have to pay. No one asked to not pay (and we wouldn't have gossiped or enquired why or anything), I think people were just tight and glad to get away with not paying. At our SS you have to pay for some things and the lady said that she has to go and ask the majority of people for payment. So asking people to contribute or declare their income band probably won't work.

can they not just pay @ the reception on their way in, one round here does that i don't see why it wouldn't work if done @ all of them?
or even like just get a subsciption for the year that you're allowed to use the services and show that card when you sign in? (eg free for benefits, and other people pay to have that card to use the stuff)
they do have people sat at reception permanantly in childrens centres so dont see that should be a problem

edam - talk about rationalising your way to some subsidised services courtesy of the Great British taxpayer!

I salute your intellectual dexterity.

Agree with edam, great post.

in my area the "middle class mummies" wouldn't be seen dead in sure start. its the other way round. people with more than a basic education feel like the odd ones out.

Bloody hell. The country can afford free baby massage but carers of elderly and disabled people fight for help. Insanity.

The welfare state is there to supply basic needs not fund a melting pot social experiment Edam.

Appletrees - quite.

Actually...the whole point of the welfare state is to encourage a melting pot. It was formed after WC and MC fought together and realised that, actually, they weren't all that different.

"Basic needs" were met by the bloody workhouse.

In my area, which is roughly an equal split between working poor and those on benefits, there are no pre school groups, hardly any mother and toddler groups (apart from those run by churches).

Surestart is the main centre of everything for the under 3's.

DH and I would lose out if this policy came to be but we are no means middle class. Last week we were able to take dd to a day out to the beach for £17 on a surestart outing. We have no car, due to lack of funds and also cannot afford the train fare.

This scheme doesn't hit the middle classes the hardest, its the working poor who suffer - those who earn just above the 'low income' level but couldn't dream of spending money on expensive toddler activites and who live in areas where there is no other provision.

I must admit I am more and more pissed off with lifelong contributers being seen a drain on society. Thrifty pensioners still paying through the nose just becsuse they were more careful than this lot.