To think the government consistently underestimates the actual cost of childcare?

[MsMittens]

Another day another report about rising childcare costs. But what strikes me is that the figures referred to in these reports are significantly lower than the amounts actually paid for childcare (particularly in London and the South East). By way of example our DD is in nursery 4 days per week at a cost of £1,023 per month so annual cost is over £12,200 per annum and that is not even a full time place. We also have an au pair (I accept that may be a bit of a luxury but we have no family nearby to help out and both work full time in demanding jobs). So if we include au pair costs you are looking at £15,000 per annum. That is for 1 child under 3! If others are paying similar amounts (which I am guessing is the case as DDs nursery is oversubscribed), then these reports are grossly inaccurate and the Gov has no idea of the scale of the problem. AIBU to wonder where on earth the Gov gets its figures from?

This just enrages me as with costs like this of course it barely pays for some families to have both parens at work when childcare costs are this high and what generally happens is women leave the workforce (great if it is out of choice to be SAHM but not great if it is due to necessity). And don't even get me started on how hard it must be for single parent families. I just feel like the Gov cannot possibly assist parents if they have no idea of the actual costs involved.

Post above to read - which DO NOT do a great deal to assist working parents.

I agree that childcare costs should be paid before tax. If this was the case this would enable more people (mostly women) to stay in employment if this is right for their families.

Outside of London £3/£3.50 an hour for childcare is pretty standard. We paid £123 for 50 hours over 5 days, after 15 hours free was removed. That price included 3 meals a day, and regular trips such as the zoo, park, woods

chocolate the figures you give show you are getting about £4 per hour for the funded places. If you say this is only a third of what you need are you charging £12 an hour?! And the parents are ( illegally) paying the £8 an hour difference?

I always wondered if anyone could just do 15 hours a week it did seem unlikely. I paid 68 per day and I think the nursery took off a small amount but not every month. The government put so much spin on it to make good. It didn't even replace losing child benefit

I have never known a nursery make you do top up hours if you don't want to. It's illegal for a start.

wantsunshine I have 2 children who come for just the 15 hours free a week as 2 full days. The parents pay £1.50 a day for lunch so a grand total of £3 for 2 days childcare

Its not illegal at all.

The government pays a set amount towards childcare (per term per child). This is about £670 a term. TOWARDS '15 hours' (which is a suggested number), not FOR 15 hours. No facilities that I know offers 15 hours free early years education a week, they just can't (unless they just happen to charge £3.30-odd per hour anyway, which is pretty unrealistic in a nursery setting).

If we had children purely doing the 5 hours a week (which the grant would cover) we would be not covering costs, and basically jigsawing children into morning and afternoon sessions to maximise the number of children using the facility. Logistically, that would be a nightmare, let alone staffing - the rations need to be maintained at a minimum level.

The wording on the council adverts even say 'FREE CHILDCARE FOR TWO YEAR OLDS...up to 15 free hours', and believe me, we are very reasonable for this area.

There are schemes for 2 year olds (so before the NEF kick in) but these are means tested and do offer 15 free hours (free to the parents/carers, as the council pays a subsidised - not all - amount). Also for folks on benefits, low incomes etc.

My friend pays her dog walker £8 per hour...

chocolate you are very wrong and operating illegally.
Whats dog walking got to do with funded places?

They mean up to 15 hours in tems of hours used, not payment towards.if a parent wants to use 15 hors you CANNOT charge extra fees other than food

Nochocolate - Our LA will not allow providers to ask for top ups such as lunch, and they have to provide 15 hours, no less

I agree, OP, I don't know where the government get their figures from. We were paying £900/month in the SE, £1000/month in London (but for longer days). So about double what the government says it costs. I didn't mind paying for it (glad the nursery days are behind us though), but they should be honest about it. Free hours & childcare vouchers barely make a dent in the cost.

www.gov.uk/free-early-education
The child is entitled to 570 hours of free early education or childcare per year. This is often taken as 15 hours a week for 38 hours a week.

(The article doesn't point out that this is basically the same as a school nursery place)

Why have a go at me? I just work in the next door office and that is the way it is.

And it's not illegal. How can the government 'make' a not-for-profit organisation basically give away free early years education at a loss? They'd go out of business.

Re dog walking - I was just pointing out that for £3-4 an hour you get very little around here.

That was aimed at chocolate who seems to think it's ok to offer far fewer hours than that- 5 hours a week equates to 260 hours a year, less than half their entitlement.

we live in London and it certainly costs more than that here.

It's hard to say if the governments figures are misleading because I don't know what their average is over. But at our local nursery, which is council supported, people with lower incomes get subsidised, so it could be reasons like this the 'average' is lower than many people experience.

Sorry, it's a net mums link, but this one explains how the provider is NOT allowed to charge you if you just wish to take the free hours.
www.netmums.com/back-to-work/choosing-childcare-free-early-years-education

I think the family being around to help is really unusual though. It certainly isn't usual

We are sending our dd for her free 15 hours. For free. As per my entitlement.

It is a standard preschool place and she is starting with 2 afternoons. I will use it for childcare so I can work.

It is harder if you need those long days of nursery placement I appreciate. But it is still an entitlement.

At our previous nursery we just got some money back credited back to us from our private nursery at the end of each term, which I guess amounted to what ever our local council was giving them per child (15 x £3-ish).

Sorry - meant to say 'at our previous private nursery we just got some money back credited back to us at the end of each term, which I guess amounted to what ever our local council was giving them per child (15 x £3-ish).'

I live in Leicestetshire and my childminder charges £3.50 an hour which is a pretty standard rate.

My friend uses a nursery (10 minutes from where my CM lives) and she pays £5.80 an hour.

I imagine that nurseries are more expensive than childminders in most areas?

This wasn't a factor when me and DH chose a CM over a nursery but it's definitely a lovely benefit.

Whilst I accept that the SE is an anomaly (I was paying £2800 PCM for 2 DC in central London nursery 4 days week, almost 10 years ago) I find it hard to believe that you can access good childcare for less than £3 per hour.

Our local pre-school charges £2.55 an hour, our local dog walkers charge £9 so that comparison isn't really relevant