Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Childcare costs- someone talk me through the outrage

446 replies

Suzietwo · 31/03/2013 15:00

Is it just me or does it seem a bit grabby of mothers to be getting cross about the change to child care rules?

I thought the rules were being changed to try and encourage people to work. Ie to give them more choice and be option generating aka A. Good. Thing.

But the stay at home mums voice in the media just sounds a bit self important.

Don't misunderstand me, I am entirely on favour of people and families making decisions which suit them. This isn't about that. It's about people being a bit....indulged? Make a choice, stick with it. The more choices which are available the better so if the gvnt can help (a different argument about whether they should) by offering money to assist people go to work, then fab. But don't demand it for making the choice to stay at home.

OP posts:
lljkk · 01/04/2013 14:53

Real costs of employing someone 25-35% more than their gross salary.
Nursery Staff on 15-17k real cost = 20k.

12k for a baby's place at nursery, 2 babies per staff member max = 4k "profit" for the nursery to pay rent, insurance, admin staff, cleaners, outings, redecorating, professional development (heavily expected by Ofsted), bank staff, food, cook, lekki, heating, supplies.

rustybusty · 01/04/2013 14:56

Exactly lljkk here nursery nurses are on £6.19, and thats why are childcare is so cheap. If you pay the staff a high wage like 15-18k of course childcare will be expensive.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 01/04/2013 14:57

Lijkk, the ratio is 1:3 for babies but some days there might be only four babies.

ReallyTired · 01/04/2013 15:01

lljkk its 12K for a toddler place which is 1 to 4, infact many day nurseries do not give much of a discount when children get to 3 year olds (1 to 8) and they are entitled to their 15 hours a week. I realise there are overheads like National insurance, managing staff, rent etc.

12K for 4 children is still a lot. Assuming it costs 20K to pay your nursery nurse then there is 28K profit. (Prehaps more like 20K as you have feed, house and entertain the children) Many nursery employ apprentices at £95 a week so the profit margin is huge.

Dd's private nursery had one experienced nursery nurse and an apprentice looking after 16 three and four year olds year olds.

lljkk · 01/04/2013 15:12

ok, i got ratio wrong.

If they were raking it someone would undercut them sharply, I just can't believe many are raking it in.

rustybusty · 01/04/2013 15:14

Under 2s is 1:3

LittleChickpea · 01/04/2013 15:30

General business expenditure. Let's not forget that of every pound a business make they have the following costs for each and every pound:

  • 20% to 25% corporation tax
  • 13.5% business NI
  • staff wages
  • bank charges
  • professional advisors (accounts / auditorsetc)
  • marketing
  • the list goes on

Then they shareholders also have to pay:

  • personal NI
  • income tax
sweetkitty · 01/04/2013 19:21

Janey68 - yes in an ideal works the father should be providing sadly its not always the case. What about widowed single parents then?

I suppose you could always say that those families with 2 parents working can also increase their income if they really wanted to, take another job at night, do a degree course etc.

It's not always that black and white, at the end of the day the CB cuts are very unfair and should have been based on household income.

Personally I disagree with subsidised childcare and even the tax credits system, pay people a decent living, every family gets a flat rate of CB and can then use it to spend of childcare if they choose. Families with one child get the same as families with four for example and of course very low earners and those on benefits get more but there should be less needing it as people should be able to live on their wage.

ReallyTired · 01/04/2013 19:27

People are always going to disagree with cuts that affect them. People tend to favour cuts which don't affect them.

Other countries keep their childcare costs law by having councils providing high quality nursery care. There is no need for nurseries (and indirectly parents) to pay for marketing or corporation tax with a state run nursery.

janey68 · 01/04/2013 19:42

Sweetkitty- a widowed parent with young children still needing childcare is a Completely different situation of course, and one where support should be provided. I'm not sure what is available in that situation wrt to benefits, and of course it highlights the importance of life insurance too

I was referring to situations where a couple separate and there are childcare fees to be paid- of course they should remain the responsibility of the parents. Although of course the resident parent doesn't need to actively seek work until the child is school age, so there isn't the necessity to work which many couples who remain together have.

I would ideally like CB to be universal and capped at 2 children (except for in cases of natural multiple births!) We are a massively over populated planet and having large families is a luxury tbh. It would need to be phased in but I think it's a perfectly fair solution.

Kazooblue · 01/04/2013 19:47

Pearly pmsl no Lidl,no holidays,battered old car,no going out etc,etc,etc

LittleChickpea · 01/04/2013 20:08

That's interesting... So we drive the entrepreneurs creating wealth, employment and helping pay the debt off out of business and replace them with a public sector nursery system so that we can pay for childcare for people that choose to be SAHPs? And the cycle begins. The country then has to borrow more to pay for the additional cost to the public sector costs. Increase the £120 billion borrowed on top of all tax collected last year. However RealyTired I am interested in hearing more about how the public sector alternatives work and how this is financially sustainable in other countries. Which countries have this system?

We need to all look at the wider implications of what we want. Again where does personal responsibility for financially supporting our own DC come into this?

blueberryupsidedown · 01/04/2013 20:41

OK, here's one example (it's where I'm from, Quebec, about 8m people, I know that the system has issues but generally it's a good childcare system, almost free, subsidised by the provincial government):

article by Annie Urban

Subsidized or free childcare is quickly dismissed by governments in the United States and many other countries. It?s too expensive, they say. People don?t want their taxes raised. Child-free individuals or stay-at-home parents by choice do not want their tax dollars to be spent on child care for other people?s children. That is just the beginning of the arguments that are made against finding a solution that will allow more mothers to go back to work and help families get out of poverty. However, new economic analysis coming out of Quebec shows that those are moot points ? subsidized day care pays for itself and even provides a healthy return on the investment.

Day Care Subsidy Allows More Women to Go Back to Work

The province of Quebec in Canada introduced free public all day kindergarten in 1997, then introduced a subsidized day care program for younger children in 1998. The program initially offered day care spaces for $5 per child per day and the fees were later increased to $7 (£4.50) per day. Currently, Parent Central reports that around half of Quebec children under the age of five are in the subsidized day care system. The subsidy provided by the government amounts to around $10,000 annually per day care space.

The cost for non-subsidized day care spaces runs about 5 to 10 times as much as the subsidized spaces. Essentially, before the subsidized day care program, it made financial sense for both parents to work only if they both had high salaries. For low income families or families with one high salary and one low salary, there was little benefit in both parents working. After the subsidized system was introduced, it made financial sense to have both parents working in almost all families.

In most families the mother earns less money than the father. As a result, the introduction of the subsidized day care system made it possible for a lot of women, who would otherwise have stayed home with the children, to continue their careers. This resulted in a significant increase in maternal workforce participation. According to Parent Central, by 2008 (1o years after the program was introduced), there were an additional 70,000 women with young children in the workforce, which represents an increase of 3.8 percent.

Day Care Subsidy Also Gives Quebec an Economic Boost

A new study by University of Montreal economics professor Pierre Fortin found that Quebec?s subsidized day care system more than pays for itself due to increased income and consumption tax revenue.

Parent Central reported on the study and noted that for every dollar that the government of Quebec invests in subsidized day care, it wins back $1.05; the federal government also benefits through the receipt of $0.44. Essentially, Quebec taxpayers are getting $1.49 back for every $1.00 spent on subsidized day care. I wish my investment portfolio did that well.

Beyond the tax considerations, Fortin also found that increased maternal workforce participation in Quebec gave the province?s Gross Domestic Product a 1.7 percent boost.

Read more: www.care2.com/causes/quebecs-subsidized-child-care-pays-for-itself.html#ixzz2PF64JVKP]

blueberryupsidedown · 01/04/2013 20:44

There's only 8 million people in Quebec I hope it will help make sense of the financial data in the article.

LittleChickpea · 01/04/2013 21:16

Blueberry with the greatest respect I was hoping for something more substantial Gov policy with published results etc. This is clearly an internet based article written in 2011 by a journalist based overseas whose political afflictions we know nothing about. We have no way of substantiating the stats/claims and whether the article is therefore biased.

I am sure you are aware that Quebec has a very precarious debt hanging over their heads. Their net debt is 51% of GDP and add that to the federal net debt f 37% of GDP and they face an extraordinary net debt to GDP of nearly 90%. Not sure that's a country we need to be looking at as a example of good policy.

LittleChickpea · 01/04/2013 21:26

Forgot to mention. From my limited understanding those numbers don't include some costs associated to their pension plan and health care system which will grow. Their tax payers will have to pay for this via increased personal tax.

How many of us are will to pay more tax I wonder?

blueberryupsidedown · 01/04/2013 21:32

It's not a country, it's a province. You asked for an example, I gave you one. If you want an example from a country that has no debt, well that will take some time. I mean, to actually find a country that has no debt, or no financial issues in today's economic climate.

With the greatest respect, I think you are not as stupid as you sound. Really, are you asking to find a country that has no economic problems? Really? funny that, I don't think it exists, even in this internet age...

ReallyTired · 01/04/2013 21:35

How about Demark.

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/feb/18/britain-learn-denmark-childcare-model

Or Sweden

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/mar/11/children

keeping women in the work place has long term benefits for the country. It means that women's careers don't get trashed and if a family breaks up the single mum does not end up on benefits. Working women pay more tax over a life time.

Elizabeth Truss advocates having more qualified professionals, but I have never come across a private day nursery which has a teacher working directly with three year olds with a ratio of 1 to 13. most pre schools and day nurseries tend to employ people on little more than the minimum wage. Having the private sector run day care has resulted in the cheapest people (with minimal qualifications) looking after our children rather than the best.

LittleChickpea · 01/04/2013 21:39

I understand is a Candian province with some of th highest taxes over there.

No need to be like that. I just don't think taking on policies from countries or provinces with more problems than we have is very clever. A quick Internet search also seems to indicate that Qubec is cutting spending to subsidised childcare. I don't tend to copy pasteinternet articles to support my point but following suit I have not done much (30 seconds) but the article was written in 2013. I am sure you are already aware of this though..

www.cbc.ca/quebecam/2013/03/27/subsidized-daycare-providers-unhappy-with-budget-cuts/

LittleChickpea · 01/04/2013 21:42

Not done much reaserch that is Grin

LittleChickpea · 01/04/2013 21:47

And another Qubec article. Didn't actually bother reading it all as off to bed but thought I would share....

www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/straighttalk/archives/2013/03/20130325-085016.html

blueberryupsidedown · 01/04/2013 21:48

Please tell me I'm not reading this. You asked! YOU asked! Read your own post.

Yes, there are problems with all systems, subsidised or not. I wrote that in my initial message. No system is perfect, and I am sure that if you search the internet you will find thousands of complaints about the NHS, schools, etc. But you asked for examples....

Wallison · 01/04/2013 21:51

^ Having the private sector run day care has resulted in the cheapest people (with minimal qualifications) looking after our children rather than the best.

I would agree that this is a problem. When you have people chasing profit, you get a lower standard of service. It is frightening how little employers demand in the way of qualifications or even aptitude when recruiting for nursery posts. Because they don't care about that. What they care about is profit. And parents are spending ££££s, limiting their families, making cuts to their budgets elsewhere ... ffs, they are even in a lot of cases paying more out in childcare than they make off the second wage - and for what? For someone on minimum wage with minimal qualifications to look after their children at a high monetary cost.

LittleChickpea · 01/04/2013 21:54

I asked for examples of a system that is financially sustainable. The one you provide seems to be getting bad press in Qubec and is costing the tax payer an additional $1.5 billion price tag.

amothersplaceisinthewrong · 01/04/2013 21:55

I think it would be good if the govt allowed SAH mums to transfer their tax free allowance to their partners. But of course that would lead to bleating from the single Mums with no partner to transfer this to. THe system will never please everyone.

If all families have all adults working in them, who pray tell will be the volunteers in schools, running scout groups, etc......

Swipe left for the next trending thread