Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

FFS, Government making loads of cuts but now they are giving extra funding to...

155 replies

CrazyPlateLady · 15/10/2010 19:57

the most deprived familes so their children can have 15 hours of free nursery from the age of 2 and extra help all the way to university.

AIBU to think that this is really unfair?

We don't earn good wages, but there is no way we will come near the poorest families. Why should my children have to wait an extra year to get nursery? If you aren't working I don't see why 2 year olds need 15 hours a week of nursery anyway. I'm happy to have DS at home with me now but I can see that next year he will need a bit more and nursery will be good for him.

There are going to be sooo many families that 'lose out' because we are in the middle somewhere (and by that I mean DH's wages of an amazing £16500.00 and my In Cap benefit).

What a waste of money when we all have to tighten our belts!

OP posts:
Theincrediblesulk1 · 15/10/2010 19:59

Here we go again!

Original poster
CrazyPlateLady · 15/10/2010 20:00

What?

OP posts:
GypsyMoth · 15/10/2010 20:00

how many threads like this are there going to be??

moaning about the cuts.....moaning when something else is put in place!!!

foxinsocks · 15/10/2010 20:01

well I think again it's a contradiction in terms

hike up the fees for university, stop schools being rebuilt (and I mean some of these schools were really on their last leg, we have one near work!) and then err subsidise education through another route

I think it's a very good idea to give children from the poorest families extra help the whole way through to university.

Think 2 is too young though. The current idea of starting at 3 seemed fine - not sure why they feel the need to start it at 2 tbh.

ApocalypseCheese · 15/10/2010 20:01

meh

Biscuit

< hands out popcorn on way out >

mamatomany · 15/10/2010 20:01

Well you know what do to either earn a lot more money and make up the difference or else don't work as hard and make sure you qualify.

Goblinchild · 15/10/2010 20:01

Think of it as enabling all children to start school with a more level playing field.
Save money on learning support in school.

MmeMorph · 15/10/2010 20:01

I think the logic of offering early nursery to "deprived" children is that they maybe do not have a suitably language-rich home life and that the early intervention helps them to catch up before they start school.

Chil1234 · 15/10/2010 20:02

It's 'unfair' to help the children of poor families have a fighting chance of escaping poverty? Age just 5, children from deprived backgrounds are already significantly behind children of the same age from households with even modest earnings. As they get older this gap widens, meaning that they are highly likely to be trapped in the circumstances to which they were born

I'd rather my tax went to helping people like that than giving Colleen Rooney £20/week to look after her baby....

NothereisnobodylurkingbehindU · 15/10/2010 20:02

I'm a bit puzzled by this as my nursery manager told me ages ago that there already is funding available for younger children to attend nursery if from 'deprived' backgrounds. Hmm Does anyone know anymore about this?

mamatomany · 15/10/2010 20:03

Yeah by educating they mean teaching the 2 year olds how to use cutlery, the parents aren't doing it so the state will have to. Since these children are here now and can't be sent back we at least have to give them a chance to turn out well and early intervention probably is the best way to do this.

Theincrediblesulk1 · 15/10/2010 20:03

There is, most of the "new" things this government are introducing are already firmly in place! its all lip service!

herbietea · 15/10/2010 20:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

GoreRenewed · 15/10/2010 20:04

"We don't earn good wages, but there is no way we will come near the poorest families"

Well aren't you lucky?

thefirstmrsDeVeerie · 15/10/2010 20:04

I find it patronising. They way they talk about the poorest children being rescued from their circumstances.

Yes we are on a low income and it will get lower and lower as OH gets sicker and sicker. But our children dont need rescuing.

We may be poor but we still read to them I take them to play groups. FFS I am sick of being spoken about as if I am a seperate species.

CatIsSleepy · 15/10/2010 20:04

tbh am pleasantly surprised that this government would do something so enlightened! are you sure about this??

GypsyMoth · 15/10/2010 20:06

how do they define 'poorest families' then??

saffy85 · 15/10/2010 20:07

Didn't Labour start with this, not the Tories? I only ask because last year I got a form from DD's nursery to fill out incase I was eligable for this.

I didn't fit the criteria despite being on part time, minimum wage and a single mum as I'm not under 16, living in a hostel, DD isn't on the at risk register, and I'm not currently seeking asylum in this god forsaken dump of a-- country. AS well as many other points.

No biggie to me. The most deprived doesn't have to mean those by 6 kids by 7 dads or whatever, sitting on their arse watching Jeremy Kyle of a morning. I figured from that list of criteria that there are alot of people worse off than me.

KERALA1 · 15/10/2010 20:08

Exactly thefirst. Why is nursery care for 2 year olds seen as a benefit anyway? My 2 year old much happier pootling around at home with me [puzzled by this "benefit]. Am sure not all "deprived" families mothers are Waynetta Slob. Parks and libraries and toddler groups pretty much free/very cheap.

NothereisnobodylurkingbehindU · 15/10/2010 20:09

Saffy - that must be what my nursery manager was talking about then. Typical tories - trying to take credit for something already in place...

Theincrediblesulk1 · 15/10/2010 20:10

I think this regards children who come from asylum seeking households, it will help them be ready for school by having a level footing regarding ability to communicate, and children of people on income support.

Original poster
CrazyPlateLady · 15/10/2010 20:11

herbietea I agree. Why can't that money just be put as extra into all schools?

It is a shame for the children whose parents don't teach them certain, basic things at home but, I don't know, it just seems like they will get extra special attention because they are deprived, whereas all children in the middle will be completely invisible.

Also, I'm not saying I want to be in the poorest bracket, just to get some extra free nursery. Children already start school so young, I would like them to be at home for a few years first without shlepping them out (this does not, in any way apply to people who go to work and their children are in nursery).

OP posts:
Chil1234 · 15/10/2010 20:12

@KERALA1 4 and 5 year-olds (not registered special needs) are turning up at reception class in some places unable to do basic things like sit still, use the lavatory or hold a crayon. Age 2 that 5 year-old wasn't "pootling around at home" with mother but probably left alone in a room, isolated and without any form of human interaction. Some children have a very nasty existence.

The solution in the past has been to give money to the family and expect it to automatically facilitate better parenting. This proposal - if I read it correctly - is to give those same children more direct intervention by giving them some nursery time with trained professionals. I support that.

GypsyMoth · 15/10/2010 20:15

just saw this on the news

Jenski · 15/10/2010 20:15

I wouldn't normally discuss politics on a Friday night, but I feel disgusted that the Tory government have implied that being poor should lead one to feel embarrassed. They are so out of touch it is unreal! As for them leading on from Labour decisions, I don't agree. At least labour was trying to improve schools and rebuild the worst buildings.

Swipe left for the next trending thread