Parents of university age children never got ANY free childcare

[Cliff1975]

Whilst it is great that the government has finally realised that free childcare is needed those of us with university age children did not benefit from this and we are now supporting them through uni at great expense. Maybe once these kids who are getting free childcare get to uni that will be free too? Just can't help feeling that we are missing out from all angles?

What is wrong with people being able to afford nice things? Why were things better in "the good old days" when people couldn't afford washing machines?

Not read the whole thread, so not sure if this has been said.

but..

maybe you will now get grandchildren in a few years because your children won’t be struggling to afford children as the cost of childcare, mortgages, gas and electricity and everything else has gone through the roof.

my household income is just over £90k and we saved £10k in advance of us having children to make sure we could survive. That’s absolutely ridiculous that we even had to consider saving when we earn well above average. Since giving birth 8 months ago, everything has pretty much doubled in price. The introduction of these additional hours now means we could have a second sooner than we would have had to without them.

I got some hours free for my uni age DC. I also got on the housing ladder before prices blew up, have friends of similar age who managed to get council properties, got some money for the child trust fund, had far smaller outgoings than today (I was paying £5 a week on my first gas meter!)... The list could go on.

This all this. Plus life isn’t fair. There are lots of swings and roundabouts to the debate. Especially bearing in mind how expensive fuel, food and rent / mortgages are at this time

I am still confused why university students can’t get a job. I always had a job term time and holidays, didn’t stop me achieving as l got a 1st

So you've chosen to judge an entire generation based on your experience of one entitled person who expected free childcare.

Can you not see that if the only option for childcare was the 15 hours that are just given as you describe with no choice, both parents are unable to work and therefore unable to keep a roof over their heads. Believe me, when paying childcare fees of £1500+ per month IN ADDITION to a mortgage and all other costs, this generation are also making sacrifices compared to their lifestyle before children 🙄

Why don't you engage your brain a little - take a look at average wages vs average house price/mortgage/rent and then factor in childcare costs and see if the maths actually add up. In many cases, it pays for the woman not to work and that is how this policy would benefit society as a whole (if the government actually fund it properly)

As someone who works in childcare in an affluent area I see the very real consequences of ever younger children in full time childcare. I just don’t think everyone should get it for free. I know parents who work 15 hours a week who qualify for full 30 hours entitlement so they use it!! I really hope they use the money to target those whose children will have significantly improved life chances and improved wellbeing by parents being able to enter the workplace, rather than paying for the childcare of those in work already who see it as free money.

Oh god not the "young people are poor because they expect phones, coffees and avocados" nonsense again. Give your head a wobble and talk to some actual people about their circumstances, I guarantee it is not as you assume.

Ffs. It’s all about you isn’t it. A phone is a necessity. Wouldn’t know about meals out because I can’t afford them anymore due to massive childcare bills plus cost of living. Bet you benefited from cheaper housing as well as your free uni education.

@Cliff1975 the difference in house prices (compared to wages) is the single biggest answer to your argument.

A phone is a necessity, although a cheap smartphone is all I have.

Glad you mentioned the avocados! They are at the root of all evil and prevent lots of things

When I was at uni it was in the age of mass expansion of higher education (under the Blair government), and we had no tuition fees. It was doable.

Plus: the UK has a massive skills gap in knowledge-intensive industries such as IT, biomedical and life sciences. It's incredibly well documented. If the country doesn't invest in higher education then that skills gap will increase, and the UK's overall economic performance will continue to decline. It's not something we can afford not to invest in, tbh. But - that's long-term thinking, something no government ever really seems capable of!

There's also much evidence that demonstrates that diversity within business leads to better economic performance, particularly during periods of downturn. Young people are being deterred from entering higher education due to cost (lots of evidence to back that up, too!). Thus, the workforce we are currently building is not diverse, and again that will have a negative impact on our overall economy.

Basically: we need to invest in the young. It makes sense for all of us, even the olds (like me).

You just sound bitter! Cost continue to rise and this could really support struggling families to work. I would never begrudge people support because I had struggled. If this is announced this could really support your children if they later choose to have a family.

Bet your house has doubled in value since you bought it. You had no uni fees. Swings and roundabouts

On MN poverty is a virtue. Except not actual poverty, that’s neglect, you should be rich but chose to act poor.

So when you had your children, you benefited from 15 hours to yourself each week (which were just given to you without any choice as you pointed out in your PP) but you are begrudging women who work 15 hours per week and are eligible to claim 30 from claiming the additional 15...

Hypocrisy at its finest

I'm not sure that's true, although the idea is not obviously unreasonable. There are some (hard to analyze) stats on this at www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/performance-indicators/widening-participation/chart-4 . The broad picture from the 6 or 7 leading institutions I looked at is that more young people from disadvantaged areas are going to University, not fewer, and make up a higher percentage of the student population.

It's all annoying. All these free childcare hours, universal credit etc is jus to prop up crap wages.
Pay people a decent salary (or sort out cost of housing) so they don't have to feel like they're struggling when both partners are working full time.

Yeah, you've shown your arse there Clifford.

I've been pondering: back in the day when I was at uni (with a grant and no tuition fees), my parents were able to 'covenant' their top-up, so it was tax-free. I'm not sure how this actually worked, but it would make a massive difference if parental contributions could be made from pre-tax income.

There are lots of ‘benefits’ I’ve missed out in my lifetime because I’ve been too old or too young, or my timing of needing that service has been out of sync with policy changes. But I don’t begrudge others from receiving them, I wish some had happened sooner - but it’s only a good thing that someone is benefitting from those changes even if I didn’t.

I do think that a lot of these issues would be solved if wages were higher and people had more income to help them (or as Betsy says, housing was more affordable) but I appreciate it’s not straight forward.

Absolutely.
Your views are very selfish OP.

We'd never improve if we just did what we always did! Yes, some people "suffered" from lack of free childcare in the past, but that's exactly what it is - the past. Just because the OP didn't benefit doesn't mean that no one should.

After all, there was a time we all had outside loos, but that doesn't mean it was wrong to make indoor loos "the norm" does it?

It is always a bit of a choker if you miss out, I have a friend who is 51 weeks older than me and she got her state pension over 3 years earlier than I did, she got hers at 60 I got mine at 62 years 6 months. The most annoying part was if I'd been born 8 hrs earlier so a day earlier on paper I'd have got it 3 months earlier. Those 3 months were annoying but there has to be a cut off for things. My friend tried to be positive telling me I was lucky as I'd be getting a higher pension but because of my S2P contributions my SRP was already higher than the new pension. I think she felt a bit miffed then as her pension was lower than mine but she was a career civil servant and I'm pretty sure her CS pension far outweighed me S2P. It's swings and roundabouts isn't it.

I think we just have to be happy if something is getting better as it can be quite depressing listening to the news.

One positive ways to look at it is your 20 year old might need childcare in the not too distant future and you could be happy for them although I suppose it might all change again before they get to that stage.

Last time I checked the 15 free hours was in place to help the child's development (because it's cheaper and better to sort them out at this age than when they start school). The 30 free hours is for working parents and it's long overdue. The break between maternity leave and school starting is massive and it's one of the key factors in the sex pay gap. The average age of a UK first-time mother is 29 years old, when career progression is usually taking off.

So, from a purely selfish viewpoint, I'm glad of this. More women keeping their careers on track means more taxpayers, more wealth across the country and a better pension ratio for everyone down the line.

Even if I didn't want this, it makes sense to sort out the childcare issue now. We've got an aging population and a declining fertility rate. We've plastered over the issue with immigration, but you've only got to look at East Asia to see how bad it can get. The Japanese, Chinese and South Korean Governments are all frantically trying to boost the birth rate. One of the few places in Japan that has bucked the trend is a place called Nagi where they doubled the number of babies through support, such as free medical care, children's centres/creches and targeted assistance on housing.

Sound familiar?