To think that what's happening to 'free' childcare hours is just another kick in the teeth?

[SerendipitySunshine]

For all of us who have been looking forward to these supposed 30 'free' hours from September (or currently with 15) it's just another kick in the teeth for working parents? I'm dreading what our nursery will do. Yes, I'm grateful to have anything (and I know others didn't) but this is not what was promised.

www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/national/uk-today/24724272.free-childcare-hours-risk-nurseries-add-top-fees/

I think whenever the government bring in a new scheme, it's worth thinking through if it's logistically possible.
They can say whatever they like after all to get votes.

Sod, and I say this as a childless person, off.

What a helpful and relevant comment

Most of the nurseries locally to me are already refusing to offer the ‘additional hours’ beyond the 15 at three because it’s not affordable to offer them.

The rate is far below the cost of actually providing a place.

It is absurd.

Humph well we paid full whack for our kids- youngest just qualified for 30h so we have had very minimal benefit from the extended subsidised hours.

In the mean time fees, including ours, have gone up to cover the cost of the subsidized hours for younger babies. So the new scheme is actually costing us even more money.

My employer has also just announced a great scheme that we won't benefit from as kids are just too old

Nonetheless I am glad things are changing for the better.

Suppose you were running a business that offered a service, hairdressing for example.
You've worked out all your costs of running the business and have come up with a price list for your services, which your customers are paying.

Then the government announces that everyone over 40 will be entitled to free haircuts from any registered hairdresser. Your rival businesses register and many of your customers defect to them in order to get their free haircuts. So, you have no option but to register as well, in order to keep your business afloat.

You then discover that you get paid a fixed amount for the free haircuts that you provide under the scheme - and the amount is much less than what's on your price list.

Your price for a haircut is, say, £45, but you only receive £30. So you have a shortfall of £15. You feel you have no option but to increase the price of haircuts to your younger customers (those under 40 who aren't eligible for the free cut) to £55. So then your younger customers and the business itself are effectively paying part of the cost of the so-called "free" haircuts.

Each year your costs increase (rent, rates, energy, staff salaries etc) and the amount you receive for the free cuts doesn't keep up. You have to start charging your customers for "extras" that used to be included in your haircut prices.

And so it goes on. Eventually, if you want to keep your business running, you have to introduce a charge for those accessing the free haircuts. Maybe they can now only have the cut if they book a blow dry or some highlights at the same time.

All this time, the government bangs on about everyone over 40 being entitled to free haircuts. Those supplying the cuts and those accessing them know that there is no such thing and what they actually have is a subsidy towards the cost of a haircut.

@AsTim3GoesBy that's a brilliant analogy.

What a disaster the whole thing is.

@Rumblytumblytea There is a slight subsidy for snacks etc. Although actually I think we pay mainly for the one later session we use a week. So you are OK if you stick between 9-3 in term time.

It's hard because it's clearly not a properly funded policy but also I think we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Most people I know do now pay quite a bit less than they used to. Obviously we need to keep applying pressure for funding and decent pay of staff.

It's a stupid way to do things, they should incentivise companies having workplace creches (or a share in a local creche if it's impractical otherwise) with a tax break for doing so and a campaign to highlight the advantages (parents can't make up a story about their kid being ill, shorter commute, job perk etc.).

I’m a childminder and the current funding is slightly more than my hourly charge so my clients are not charged a penny more than they did before funding was introduced.

This calling it free hours is misleading but politically sounds better. The government funding purely covers the childcare element so all extras have to be paid for.

We do 27 hours a week and when the 30 free hours to quick in I’ve calculated our monthly fee will halve, which makes it a lot more affordable but it obviously very different to how the “30 free hours” headline figure sounds.

This isn't a surprise at all. My eldest was was eligible for the 15 hours when he was small, and we really struggle to find providers who didn't charge top-ups or insist the free hours were taken alongside very expensive additional hours. The problem is, the government just don't pay enough to cover the cost of the 'free' hours, so nurseries have to get the money from somewhere else.

This isn't a new concept so – nurseries have always added top up fee to funded hours. At least they did with our two kids, years before the new hours came into play. Our kids' nursery was £79 a day and the top up fee made it £24 a day with the funded hours. This was 7yrs ago and all the nurseries in the area did the same to varying degrees.

So mine finished nursery in August. We had 15 free hours. She went 20hrs a week all year round. We paid £432 a month for the privilege. 15hrs before funding was £420.... personally it was never going to be free- you couldn't use hours at certain times, didn't include any consumables or snacks at all.... nurseries will go out of business if they don't charge a top up- there is no money left in the budgets- period....

I would prefer parents to receive the cash for 'free' or 'subsidised' childcare rather than it be mandated to only working parents. Then, parents could choose the childcare that suits them, e.g. parent at home, grandparent care, nursery, childminder etc. all to the benefit of the child rather than the economy (which is how current arrangements are geared).

Other countries in Europe do childcare better - but they have different social systems and expectations. About time the UK had a look at those alternatives rather than forcing everyone out to work.

My sister will actually be paying more as her DC's nursery is putting up fees. She is considering moving her DC to a setting that doesn't offer "free hours" that she is essentially part-paying for for other children.

I would imagine the reluctance to do this comes from thinking that if every parent gets, say, £200 a month towards childcare fees, the fees may suddenly just be £200 a month more. In the same way that now the unfunded hours and extra fees often increase the total fees to nearly what they'd be without the funding anyway.

The cost of every service or purchase is going to rise in step with minimum wage and the employers NI.

To expect businesses to absorb the new costs is foolish. Anyone “working person” doesn’t get a raise that exceeds inflation is going to be worse off …

The news about Pizza Hut reducing staff, selling assets and increasing prices as result of minimum wage & NI hikes demonstrates that business doesn’t see the budget as a growth budget. Food & beverage, supermarkets, childcare & retail will be impacted heavily. Passing the cost on to the “working people”

The free hours roll out was fairly disastrous from the start. The current labour government put the last nail in the coffin with NI, NMW rises. Why they didn’t exempt them, GP’s and care homes I will never know.
Yes, we need affordable childcare to allow (mainly) women to return to work but the model has to be commercially viable or provisions become low quality and unsafe. The fault is that the hours have never been appropriately funded. The recent changes have made the current funding model unviable.
It’s a bloody crying shame for equality, and levelling up.

Wait, where have you been for the last 10 years?! 😂 My eldest is in secondary school and her nursery was in the very first (Tory-run) pilot scheme and there have always been top up fees and extra payments for meals and consumables.

This all happened before in the 00s.

The then government had both

• "reformed" what was then the ELG, and banned top ups. But the amount that was paid to nurseries was short of actual costs, and many either folded or became part of a chain. Top ups are still (in theory) banned, but crept back in, in the guise of ancillary charges.
• hiked NI, hitting establishments with high staff costs (like schools, nurseries etc) particularly hard and requiring a considerable increase to be passed on to parents just to keep afloat.

It was perfectly obvious from the failure to reform the scheme (either banning top ups completely and enforcing it; or accepting that a "free hours" scheme is currently unaffordable and modifying it to a voucher scheme) and the NI increases in the budget that we were going back to exactly the same squeeze. Early in the administration, in the hope that it'll all be forgotten by the time the next election comes round

It’s better than the alternative. I’d rather pay a bit extra than have my child’s nursery closed

Several nurseries in my area have closed in the last 12 months because they can no longer afford to operate.

My friend’s dc went to one of these nurseries and it is really difficult to find local nursery places now

My friend eventually managed to get a place at a nursery that she wasn’t that keen on but there was no other choice. It’s also added over an hour to her commute each morning. She knows of a couple of parents from the previous nursery that haven’t found places. It’s been a nightmare for her and all of the other parents.

Have you not been reading about the issues over the last 6 years or so?

It needs to be called 'subsidized childcare' and settings need to be able to cover their costs. They can't just keep jacking up the prices for everyone else (babies) to cover the older 'subsidized' children.

Free hours is a disaster for nurseries. Not only do they lose funding per hour from parents who would have paid the full whack they get parents coming just to have the "free" hours without contributing to the premium hours. They can't even really offer a budget version.