To be quite angry about proposed changes to 3-4yo childcare- only for ALL working parents?

[AcademicOwl]

Ok, Queen's speech.
Proposal to increase 'free'* childcare to 30hrs for 3-4 year olds.

BUT only if all parents working.

As I understand, the current provision for 3-4 yo there are no caveats re parents working. So ok for SAHMs & SAHDs. Gives children chance to socialise pre-school, parents to find feet again and possibly find work.

I've got 2 DC under 5, and worked 3 days a week, so understand costs of childcare (I.e. Two in childcare = more than I earn by about £200pcm). Expecting DC 3 in Oct, so was considering a year out on a career break... Help make costs manageable, support family whilst they are titchy, etc. but DC 2 prob wouldn't be eligible for 'free' childcare if I do that.

Can't help but feel this is discriminating against SAHPs & again undervaluing the importance of parenting choices and the family unit...

What'd you want to bet they'll remove current 'free' provision?

*'free' because in our patch it isn't. The nursery work out how much money it contributes to your monthly bill, then you have to make up difference.and, yes, they are allowed to do that... I investigated at length a couple of years ago.

Grrrr!!!!

Littlemonsters - Morethan seems to have a particular axe to grind.

I'm not an economist either, but I do also have some background in economics.

tbh, I think it's scaremongering to speculate that the rules will shift towards free hours only for those with 2 working parents. If it were up to me then the free hours would only be from the September after they turn 3yo making equal free hours regardless of when child's birthday was. Some kind of incentive to subsidise working parents is fine by me in principal (I was a bored witless SAHM for 7 yrs, btw, before anyone presumes I'm anti-SAHP).

Little

I don't, on the contrary I am pointing out to you that unless you pay for all of these things yourself you too are receiving benefits. i find you hypocritical tbh.

Narv

Yes, the axe. A poster who believes that disabled people should lose money by way of cuts. Yet, I imagine takes just as much out of the pot herself.

*principle....

People who work so pay for themselves through the taxes they pay.

Morethan, I don't pay for childcare nor do I get it for free so it doesn't affect me either way so how am I hypocritical?

Hypocritical is not wanting workers to have subsidised childcare whilst claiming tax credits for years on end as you don't want to work. At least those workers are contributing and will continue to do so.

Morethan it's not clear who you are suggesting takes out of the 'pot' but if it was me - think again love. I'm very happy that my humungous taxes go to provide support for those who need it. I voted to increase my taxes in the last election because I think tax rises are needed. I am not at all happy to pay for benefits or tax credits or, well, anything really, for people who call themselves SAHPs when actually their kids are either grown up or at school and who don't work because they can't be arsed. Most unemployed people don't fall into that category but some do.

Why begrudge working parents help with childcare costs?

I am slightly aggrieved that I will soon have just finished 8 years of expensive childcare and this would have greatly helped but hey ho. At least others are getting help to make going back to work worthwhile financially.

I think you have nailed it tbh NARV

The whole system is biased against the sahp. In our house there is one income just over £60k, meaning we get no child benefit - while friends on £30k each get full whack. Taking into account that they are both also basic rate taxpayers their total income is way way higher than ours. I'm sure there is also some sort of tax code trade off that can be used - again this excludes the single high income family. Then here comes the childcare exclusion. Pretty poor.

You don't need childcare if you are a sham, surely?

Comparing a households like that is comparing apples with oranges.
If your friends were in the same position as you- ie: one parent working and one SAHP, then they would have £30k- half your income!
If you want to make a comparison, then why not start on a level playing field: ie your friends having one partner earning the £60k that one earner in your household earns and then the other earning on top.

Or to put it another way- why don't you (or your partner, it's not clear which of you earns) drop your earnings to £30k and then the other can top up if they want!

Just ridiculous that whenever this argument arises, people choose to compare a single earner on £60k with two earners. The right to be taxed as individuals was hard fought. And very few people are going to get the violins out for people who don't work, have a partner on £60k and are complaining that two earners along the street working a full week for half the amount each, get child benefit.

7amliein, you could always go out to work. Then you can have your own tax code just like the couple and if your children are the right ages the new childcare assistance or vouchers. Little point in moaninh about those two things when neither apply to a non worker. It's not biased anymore than not claiming a uniform tax rebate as you don't need to wear one.

Nerv No, I wasn't referring to you.

During austerity any lifestyle choice should be funded yourself, this is what is happening to everyone, tax credits, UC, bedroom tax etc. It is my belief that whilst cuts are being made to those who don't have a choice whether to work or not, such as disabled and their carers that we shouldn't fund childcare for those who choose to work when they don't have to. If you choose to do it to keep career going or just because you don't fancy being a sahp then you should fund it yourself.
So yes whilst I support childcare for those who need to work to make ends meet, I think it should be means tested and not to subsidise luxuries.
If you can manage on one wage and you both want to work well both go p/t and save other taxpayers paying your childcare.

Jesus, I've heard it all now. How someone with a household income of £60k can find anything financial to moan about is beyond me. But you look around and see someone getting something you aren't getting and suddenly you're the victim. It's disgusting. That's what it is.

If you're at home why do you need free childcare?

Biased. She's experiencing bias. Doesn't work. Husband on £60k and she's discriminated against. One of these days, I expect to hear Kate Middleton complain she's hard done by.

Applauds 32 !
I think some people are forgetting that if you earn 30 K/20k/15k a year you are probably out there doing a bloody hard job.

Absolutely what 32 said.

I am sure my FIL posts on this thread judging from the posters who seem to think a woman's job is practically a hobby funded by the tax payer

hello Snow white, fancy you popping up again.

namechange

I haven't personally been paid anything, my family have tc and it enabled me to sah. I doubt the amount we have had would buy your lifestyle, but don't let that put you off bashing. You know nothing of our income, you like to think you do. It's very small, would you like to swap?
My children are doing fine thank you. Both working several jobs, ds1 has bought a house for cash and is doing it up atm, I'm very proud of them all.

What I find interesting is come the election Tory voters were all selfish self hating bastards and seemingly 90% of MN was labour because they care about other people not themselves, yet when policies are introduced to help some people not themselves there are those that begrudge those getting help because they don't feel the full benefits of this help

littlebooktroll , it is a bit like that isn't it