to ask about 30hrs free childcare for 3+4 yr olds that govt has promised

[CillianMurphysOtherWife]

www.gov.uk/government/news/government-brings-forward-plans-to-double-free-childcare-for-working-families

it's only for working parents, but if I work, eg, 20hrs, do I still get the other 10hrs free?

Is this what happens with the existing free childcare for 3+4 yr olds? Or maybe is free for all at the mo, regardless of whether they're working or not

hotcrossbun83 my parents wanted me to do that but my contract with the council specifically excluded that as an option

A lot of nurseries are campaigning against it including the one I use sadly. I could really do with the extra hours once DC2 comes along.
There is a YouTube vid called "champagne nurseries for lemonade funding" or something like that to explain from the setting point of view.

I helped run a preschool until recently, we are one of only 2 in the area that will accept 2 year olds. No way could we afford for the 30 hours, so as far as I know the committee voted not to offer it. We are oversubscribed as it is, so not like we need the kids through the door.

c) may not come into existence at all depending on the results of the trials

This!

Also it's means tested. I don't think the 15 hours is.

I'm not in a trial area but as a childminder my local authority asked if I would offer the 30 hours at a future date. I said no. It is not financially viable. The local authority will only pay around £3.40 per hour whereas I charge £6.
You can't walk into a shop and say I want that item but I'm only going to pay £x for it. The same goes for childcare. The Gov might want 30 hours provided but until they are going to actually pay for it, it won't happen.

If you've got maintained nursery schools or nursery classes near you, you should be able to claim the funded hours no problem. Most nursery schoolr or nursery classes will only do school hours during term time but that's better than nothing.

The additional funding is means tested but the testing basis is quite wide and I would imagine a lot of people will fall into the category.

From the GOV website:
The additional 15 hours of free childcare is available for families where both parents are working (or the sole parent is working in a lone-parent family), and each parent earns the equivalent of 16 hours a week at the national minimum or living wage, and earns less than £100,000 a year.

I fully support childcare settings saying no - and I will benefit hugely from the 30 hours as I have a 21 month old and another on the way! If they are forced to do it, they are not getting in enough to make it worth their while. Most nursery's, preschools, child minders are businesses or charities, they need to cover at the very least costs and on the whole make a bit of a profit - it is how the world works.

As always the government don't seem to get the idea that somethings do cost what people charge also don't seem to have left and right hand working together - nursery staff wages will have just gone up to the Living Wage, so that cost has increased, but they also want to then double the reduction in fees they can get by only giving less than 4 pounds an hour for funding.

It doesn't add up.

Oh and for a bit more context, my childcare bill is huge and I am at the point when I go back to work after the next mat leave I will effectively be earning nothing as my salary along will not cover the bill (not how our finances work but in context).

So 30 hours free would make a huge impact (It would cover my 3 days a week) - but I can also understand it from the childcare settings point of view and have no issues at all with paying top ups, charges for lunch, wrap around care etc.

"But don't worry, they certainly make their money back!"

Do they really, Tipboov?

Or are they simply trying to make up for the shortfall in slashed budgets, removal of Government subsidies, cuts in training bursaries and subsidies, and ever increasing costs and Government demands?

As Government and LAs cut their budgets in the name of Austerity, the costs are passed onto the parents.

Yes Tanith the cost for DD who is 4 is only slightly cheaper than DS who is 2. They both go full time to the same nursery. We save around £20 a week with the "free" hours as the hourly rate is significantly increased for the days we use the free hours.

I don't doubt you have to pay more. What I'm saying is that it's the nursery having to balance the books following all the increased expenses and cuts from Government and LAs.

This Government is all about supporting yourself instead of the Authorities subsidising services. That includes parents paying for the true cost of childcare themselves.

As a childcare professional I don't agree with it. Originally the free hours were given because some children would start school having not been in any kind of setting so it's a chance for them to be able to catch up with their peers before starting school. It's an added bonus that it helps parents save a little bit of money.

If the government won't pay nurseries and childminders enough money then why should they do it ? It's ridiculous. When you have children and need to work you've got to expect that you will need to pay for childcare. It doesn't come free because people need to be paid, resources need to be paid etc... I know it's expensive and a struggle for a lot of parents, but if the government carry on like this, there won't be any nurseries left! They are running at a loss.
I really wish they'd let nurseries do what a poster above mentioned, and let the parent pay the difference of what the government are paying them. That way parents still save money but the nurseries aren't running at a loss.

My nursery averages the saving across the year and we pay the difference between the subsidy and the normal fees. Works out about £180 a month cheaper per child. I'm in Scotland- maybe the rules about paying top ups are different here?

On the downside, we aren't getting 30 hours until 2020, because the Scottish Govt wants time to ensure they can deliver it properly. That would be fine if my children weren't 2 and 4!