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!!!!

Can someone please clarify this for me:
the first 15 hrs is just for Early years learning and the remaining 15 is for 'childcare'?

Also confused as to why a SAHP would need nearly full time childcare?

Cost of childcare is a huge barriers for mothers returning to work - this can only be a good thing, surely?

Why shouldn't murseries charge the extra, the rate you are given by the borough is significantly lower than the normal rate! Staff would still like to be paid.

If the government continues to push lower rates for services many murseries will simply opt out

What about sahms who study?
I did OU courses when my eldest was at pre school for his 15 hours.
30 hours a week would have meant I could have done a full time course.
Ditto voluntary work.
But, of course, as usual, only paid work counts!

To add: I think it would be better to restore child benefit to being a universal benefit and getting rid of free childcare for non working parents. That way non working parents would have the choice about whether to use their CB ton pay for some childcare or whether to use it for other child related things.

Settings have 2 ears to work it all out but it is going to be interesting to see how it pans out.

Many settings find the current hourly funding insufficient to cover what are pretty fixed costs despite paying staff minimum wage (or something near it) so have to charge more for the unfunded hours to make up the difference. If there proportion of funded hours increases I'm not sure how they are going to resolve things without an increase in the rate.

Other than that there will be practical implications, the chances are there will be quite a few families 'only' using the hours that are funded so if a family getting 15h becomes entitled to 30h where is that extra space for that child meant to come from? Settings are only just keeping their heads above water without keeping spaces empty to allow for this. Lots of good settings have waiting lists.

2 years that should be.

You know what? I'd LOVE to be a SAHP, or have a little job doesn't quite cover the childcare.

But I can't, or we'd end up under a bridge.

I'd also LOVE to be able to be sympathetic with those that earn over £50k who don't get a few quid in child benefits as a result.

Nope, sorry, can't do that either.

30 hours free childcare is designed to help parents into work. If you are a STAY AT HOME PARENT, it's kind of obvious that you won't qualify. As it goes, 15 hours looks set to remain available.

I wish they'd help with ALL childcare, not just preschool.

The purpose of the 30 hours is to help working parents who need childcare in order to work. If you think that helping wohps is the same as discriminating sahps then that is your opinion. But then yabvu in my opinion.

....And IDS made his views on sahps very clear when he said they "contribute nothing to society"
It's a view shared by many im afraid, even on mn.
If I worked who would help care for my frail mother?
Who would take elderly and vulnerable people on hosptial visits/Dr visits etc?
Who would care for my dc when they are ill/on school hols etc?
Someone who would have to be paid, of course.
Which is all this govt care about.
And don't get me started on all those caring who do not claim dla/carers allowance!
They save this country millions of £ but they are looked down on and vilified.

Baddz, there is financial help available for studying parents.

It is not the job or the responsibility of the government - any government - to make decisions regarding who and how parents will care for their children and to pay for our children to be cared for to enable us to do what we wish.

However, given that so many families are not in a two parent unit and given that the costs of childcare are astronomical even for those on a 'good' salary, it makes sense for any government to look at how to address this.

Working people are good, for, the governments POV. Therefore, if a major barrier to people working is childcare fees, then pay the childcare fees.

It is not for the government to contemplate whether a child is best with her mum or at nursery. That's for the individual to decide.

It is not for the government to decide what SAHMs should do as well as caring for their children - again, that's for individuals.

It's not for the government to be concerned if SAHMs might be depressed or finding the children a bit much and need a break - that's for individual families to work out and decide.

Financially, there is a problem and there is a solution.

The other elements have to be considered by families based on what's best for them.

Yabvu - if you are sahm then your DC don't need childcare. If you wanted to go back to work though then obviously you'd be entitled to the free childcare.

You can't expect free childcare when your DC already have you at home to care for them? how odd!

It's there to help parents who are both working and need it. You wouldn't need it.

I don't get what your problem is. You want to take a year out to "support family while they are titchy" but you want to put them inti childcare for 30 hours a week .

The extra free provision is meant to help those who are struggling to continue working or find work because they can't meet astronomical childcare costs. If you're not working, why do you think you should get it?

Your children will have their free 15 hours for early years learning and socialisation, if you want more than that, why shouldn't you pay the difference?

You seem a little misguided.

I'm not sure I even agree with non working parents having 15 free hours as it isn't necessary and just removes the responsibility for socialising ones child from the parent and onto the govt at huge cost. Only children who have SN or a family member who is disabled need 15 free hours if the parents are not working.

Actually, although I sort of agree with you, I support the 15 free hours for SAHPs, as I think the evidence base suggests that many children do benefit from good pre-school provision. In an ideal world, it wouldn't be necessary, as all SAHPs would do a good job of socialising their kids and making sure they're ready for school, but the reality is that some SAHPs don't do this very well, and the children then lose out. However, I think 15 hours is enough.

I wish they'd help with ALL childcare, not just preschool

Then they would be accused of trying to force all parents into work when their babies are young. Again, they can't win.

The current 15 hours is for early years education, not free childcare. YANBU to want that to continue - it's for the child's benefit regardless of their parents working status.

Yabu to want 30 hours of free childcare as a sahp though. What on earth would you need it for?

As a working parent I support the 15 hours for everyone. I know lots of kids that it has made the transition to school much easier.

Not for me!
Dh earns too much (hahahaha)
I don't expect any help from the govt tbh.
It's my choice and there are very compelling reasons that I am a sahp.
But this policy does denigrate sahps and carers.
Not doubt about that.
I agree with the pp...if childcare was more affordable then more parents would have the choice about wether to be a sahp/pt/ft/wohp.
As it is so many are forced back into jobs that are not family friendly and mean their dc are in full time childcare from weeks old at crippling cost.
Not a great system, is it?

Badz - helping parents who do work does not vilify anyone.

Your circumstances mean that for your family it makes sense for you and allows you to be a sahm, many people have frail parents and dc but can't afford not to work.

Yes....it's not free childcare it education!

im not sure I understand it fully and probably wont affect me.

but I agree I chose to be a sahm and thats what I am doing, dd1 went to her free 15 hrs for a year before school and it was v beneficial for her and worked out well as dd2 had just been born so could take her to baby groups. dd2 was eligible for her hours at 2 and was in need of more socialisation so we put her in for 6 hours p/w then increased to 8hrs 6 months later. we are now debating whether to increase to full 15 hrs as she is 3 next month. she may benefit but as she is our last I want to make the most of time we have before school.

what im clumsily trying to say is why should someone who chooses to stay at home get free childcare? in my opinion the 15hrs is for the benefit of the child but if it increases, the additional free hours should be for working parents whose income wont cover the extra costs. not those who stay at home or those with a huge combined income.

Fiveacres has nailed it for me.

You would get your 15hours free why would you need 30 hours if you are not working childcare and preschool hours is different, and if it works out then its a blooming good idea my friend works 20 odd hours her childcare costs is ridiculous

This won't benefit me as my ds will be just turning 5 when this is supposed to be rolled out and I am not having another dc but I am actually thankful it's going ahead.

My OH and I fall into the 'forgotten' category, we both work FT and are not high earners by any means but earned just over the threshold for TC. We rely heavily on nursery as we have no other option, up until very recently our childcare bill was over £500 pm for 3 days. We couldn't afford any more so OH and I have to work opposite shifts so our dc is cared for. Even 15 free hours has made a massive difference to us and we can now afford things we haven't been able to for years.

It was soul destroying having to place dc into nursery for an extra day as my shifts were moved around, only to realise the extra day I worked was the same amount in wages as the extra day in nursery.

I have no idea why people are getting upset that this isn't extended to SAHP, surely it was a choice to stay at home looking after the children (I understand that's not the case with everyone but a majority of the time it is) so why the need for a full week of childcare? You are their childcare.