To think there should be more funding for under 3yo childcare?

[Rainbowhairdontcare]

I know things are better nowadays, but still find it disheartening that two parents in FT work will only get the "tax-free" childcare help (around 20%). Our take-home pay is around £2k after commuting costs, £1k go to housing and utility bills (CT, energy, and broadband) and then 800 go to childcare even after that 20% off. Leaving us with £200 to feed ourselves, unexpected bills, road tax, insurance, etc..

Our basic UC is 750 +650 of childcare. Our deduction is £1350 so we're still better off with tax free childcare. As this is unsustainable, DH will have to go part time. A bit unfortunate given we don't want to rely on the system, but it's what works out best for our family. We'd both like to work FYT but because childcare is too expensive we can't afford to work as much as we'd like.

Personally I think universal childcare is the answer.

By not having any children I have a very chunky private pension and can afford private medical care.

Are you planning on emigrating? If people stop having children, it doesn't matter how good your private healthcare is if there is no-one around to provide it.

*Something has gone wrong when working families can't afford one or two children.

This.

We're the first generation where house prices are so expensive that mortgages need two (good) wages.*

Funding free hours for childcare for under 3's is not the answer. The cost of childcare is a straw man here. The cost of living must be tackled.

It has probably already been covered, but the reason that children over 3 get free hours is because research shows that childcare at this age is beneficial to children on average.

Childcare for the under 3's is not beneficial for the average child. It is beneficial for disadvantaged children.

Childcare funding is not an economic policy to help parents afford homes, it is a child-based policy to benefit children's outcomes.

Childcare for the under 3's is not beneficial for the average child

True, but it would help stop the gender pay gap, women from having to leave their jobs and go on to benefits (which will cost the government more in the long term) and allow women to actually be able to progress in a career rather than be stuck in some minimum wage dead end job.

Funding for three year old is NOT FREE, they are subsided hours. The government pay the childcare provider pittance to cover the 15hrs.

Sorry I realise that’s not the point of the thread but as a childminder it frustrates me when people talk about free childcare. That’s really not what it is.

One of the demands of 70s feminism was universal childcare.

Don’t know how this has got lost along the way.

No one should be prevented from working by the cost of childcare.

Op...my dd just turned three so got my first three year funding. Its been a shock. Its not free. You have to pAy for wrap around care. I had told my boss i was going to do extra hours but sadly with the funding i cant afford it. However dd is dh and my responsibility so happy to pay for childcare.

I work part time and dh full time. We have 2 kids, one now gets the 30 hours other will next year. Prior to that both were in private nursery two mornings a week and the cost was around £450 a month. We were lucky that grandparents were willing to help two afternoons a week otherwise our costs would have been double that and I would have had to be a sahm. I do not begrudge hours for deprived two year olds as a lot of research shows it benefits the actual children but there is something wrong with a system that gives subsidised nursery hours to parents that don't work over ones that do. Yes, ee should all consider the costs of paying for childcare, associated costs with having kids before we have them.

I pay national insurance contributions have done since I was 16. I am in my 30s and am unlike to benefit from a state pension, free bus pass like pensioners of today. I did not receive a free universty education like people in their 50s or 60s either. It is all swings and round abouts I pay towards services I will never get the benefit of as do others, I do not begrudge it as we live in a society.

I agree with some pp that people do have to take some responsibility for their own choices. There is uc for childcare and for your life generally. I am a high earner and work extremely long hours so had to pay a nanny when my dds were very young. I had to pay her tax and NI out of my after tax income but I kept with it as i needed it for families long term welfare.

How many hours were you working? Surely even on minimum wage you should get more than 2k a month for two people working full time.

Completely agree, I warn £800 per month working three days a week. After nursery costs I have absolutely nothing left. However, if I didn't work you'd be jumping on me saying I was lazy and get a job. I can't up my hours because it's just not worth me doing so financially. What's the answer?

In the early 80s we both worked full time and spent 50% of our net pay each on full time childcare for the baby. It never seems to get any better. The simplest solution for full time workers where both in the cuople work full time would be to allow the childcare cost to be set against their tax bill but never seems to happen.

@zsazsajuju if you work full time on minimum wage you earn £1272 GROSS. That's if you're over 25. If you're under 25 it's even less.

To be honest (and maybe I'm being selfish as I'm past the young child age but do know / remember what a struggle that was) but if there was more money to be allocated I'd advocate it to be given to help those supporting elderly parents. I've spent the past 5 years doing this. I don't begrudge it at all. My father has now died, mum is frail but managing to live independently with a lot of help from me, which I'm happy to give. They're not entitled to any state help apart from the NHS. So for example, I take mum (and used to take dad as mum can no longer drive) to their many hospital appts. I wasn't entitled to carers leave under our work policy as apparently they weren't dependent on me, it was aimed at parents of children. So I lost a lot of annual leave. Several hospital admissions, mum couldn't manage him post discharge so again, I took time off at short notice. My boss wasn't that sympathetic and I had to take some unpaid leave which I could I'll afford. I didn't have the right to request to work part time as returning to work parents do and when I asked for compressed hours to help me support them, it was refused etc. They is no or little employment rights or financial support for those caring for the elderly. I say all this as I really think those younger than me will have it far worse than me when they are facing managing elderly parents due to the current state of the NHS & social services support so we need to try and smooth out both ends of the spectrum.

Nope.

The systems for education, the NHS and social care, to name but a few, are in crisis due to austerity -

amp.theguardian.com/society/2019/sep/29/doctors-quit-nhs-austerity-stress-staff-shortages

IMO, more funding for “free” childcare for children under three is way down in the priorities!

@zsazsajuju as I've mentioned two minimum wages are not enough to pay for childcare.

If not reducing our hours, we get no help (within the UC system) so our only option is tax free childcare.

You have to remember that there are work related costs (like commuting).

Not exactly our case but a couple/young family with two MW/ dead end jobs would never make it out of poverty because to the system they make more than enough, but salaries are too low for the cost of living.

@53MontStMichel

The NHS and social care might be in less of a recruiting crisis if potential staff with children could afford to fill the vacancies without being crippled by childcare costs and lack of any childcare if you do shift work.

If my DH didn't have a decent job, I wouldn't be able to afford to work as childcare costs are 3k + taxes per year more than I earn. I would loose double that if I worked full time.

I think that funding adequate educational provision for all school aged children has to come first.

Surely if you allow people to work and not destroy their careers, they will be able to pay more in taxes than they receive through benefits/childcare help and we will be able to pay for better educational provision. It would be a win win situation all round.

True, but it would help stop the gender pay gap, women from having to leave their jobs and go on to benefits (which will cost the government more in the long term) and allow women to actually be able to progress in a career rather than be stuck in some minimum wage dead end job.

Why is the answer to this that children should spend their time in full-time childcare? Why can't more men leave their jobs/go part-time/work flexibly?

Maybe we need to raise our expectations of fathers.

The NHS and social care might be in less of a recruiting crisis if potential staff with children could afford to fill the vacancies without being crippled by childcare costs and lack of any childcare if you do shift work.

What percentage of those people having problems with childcare, have children under three? A relatively small proportion, I would have thought?

Having experienced social care or the lack of it for 11 years, the biggest problem ime, is lack of funding to LAs and the resulting rationing to service users - not lack of childcare for under 3 year olds. I saw care workers having bigger problems when their children were in school. As far as I can see, bed blocking occurs, because so many care home providers are closing care homes or only taking self funders, as LAs just don’t pay enough in fees to cover the costs?

Likewise the NHS? Surely the major problem for the NHS is lack of adequate funding - if it received the same percentage of GDP as Germany and France, that would alleviate many of the problems of poorly maintained buildings, obsolete equipment, lack of access to the latest drugs, more beds for patients, more pay for staff.....

@Rainbowhairdontcare why are you posting this thread and leading people to believe this is your first baby?

Between you and your boyfriend, it will be the fourth.

Don't help break up a family and then have more kids together at break neck speed if you can't afford it. Pretty damn simple.