that the government is doing a u-turn on free childcare for 2 year olds?

[JustAnotherMum2b]

I'm glad to hear on the news that the Government have come come to their senses and won't be abolishing childcare vouchers for basic rate tax payers. But sounds like the upshot is that the plans to deliver free childcare places to a third of all 2year olds have been kicked into the long grass.

Such a disappointment.

I understand that there won't be as much money in the kitty now from vouchers. But if childcare is really a priority, like they keep telling us it is, they should find the cash from somewhere else so they can keep to the promise the PM made at Labour Party Conference. Or at least go some of the way and give free places to the poorest children.

Labour won't be getting my vote unless they sort this...

Oh I see, I misunderstood your post.

CU If your post was directed at me, I hope I didn't give the impression that I am not in favour of playgroups. My DS2 will go to a playgroup where I leave him there once a week at 2 years old. He will go to nursery five days a week once he is three. He also goes to other playgroups with me two other times a week. I am not against playgroups and organized social activities - they are very good for kids. I am just suggesting that using limited tax money to fund places for two year olds may not be the best use of money.

'I don't think that government supported universal childcare at two is a good thing.'

I totally agree with abdnhiker.

OK - well I agree with you about 2 yr old funding. Was likey to put me out of a job

We don't have much state nursery provision around here at all. On the private side we have nurseries which take children from when they are very small, part time or full time etc to cover when mums go back to work. Then we have "pre school" which takes children from about 2, a few hours in the morning/afternoon building up to whole days as they get older. These are also private and more likely to be used by SAHM - it's more for the benefit of the children than the parents IYSWIM. DD started preschool 2 mornings a week when she was just over 2 and she loves it. While she is there I drink coffee and play with my baby.

I'm glad it's not CU - community playgroups are wonderful and ours runs four sessions a week for the under-3s, only one of which is without parents.

I agree totally with abdnhiker. Playgroups are already a lot cheaper than private childcare (round here its £6 for a morning at playgroup; £20+ for a morning at private nursery). WOHMs are sadly often not able to benefit from local playgroups because of the number of hours they operate for (DD could only go to our local playgroup when I was off on maternity leave with DC2). I certainly don't resent SAHM's having a break (its a lifesaver especially when you have more than one DC), and I do think it is good for the children, but I don't think it needs to be subsidised.

'Working parents aren't the poorest parents because they actually get off their backside and work. (A strange concept for some on mumsnet)'
Yeah I do nowt, me

'providing you pay for it yourself,'

No the LA attends does, because of my Carer status. I don't earn, I maybe never will again sadly. I don't feel bad for it though, Dh always did until recently (and didnt choose that change, still does earn a little now or as much as he can anyway) and heck one doesn't choose autistic kids.

Millions of different situations on MN.

I wouldn't choose for ds4 to go to nursery or similar, the CM he goes to is someone I trust implicitly and have known for a few years, she took on ASD ds3. But I have worked with famillies on the assend of despeartion and I would prefer there to be options before complete collapse call in the SSD. 2.5 hours can mean some time to see a PND therapist, to attend a course (ours used to set up literacy courses around it), go to interviews.... all things that can actually be incredibly hard to factor in if you have no partner or alternative childcare.

(as for bad experiences- had one thanks, scared life out of me and haven't used a nursery since but equally know that therearegood ones out there becuase we have used those also at different times)

So basically peachy you are funded out of entirely different pot than the one being discussed here then
With respect, and I do have a massive amount of respect for what you do day in day out btw, this is about housewifes who may or may not be on a low income being handed out childcare to go and get their hair done or play with their babies, not about going for job interviews - different allocation of funds again - or about attending courses.

It's also about undermining the least confident parents that they aren't good enough for their childrens development and you should take them to an nursery where the early years curriculm will show them how to bash a toy drum properly.

Well its all tax income isn't it?

But the second part of my post was perhaps most relevant- why I think it is useful to have. I am nto sure i'd do it for all, I'd have a midway where people such as myself *(used to work for a charity) couldrefer easily when help was needed. ATM it has to be SSD which I feel lets the situation get too far IYSWIM

But again your talking about people with no partner or other childcare which way back in the first post or so that I made, I said my fear was that funds/facilities wouldn't be available to those cases because other people who openly admit they just fancy a coffee in peace have taken the allocated funds.

I assume you are having a go at me with the "playing with babies" comment?

Ah fuck it, I'm going t go and book two weeks in eygpt with my savings which will then mean i qualify for housing and council tax benefit, why should I care nobody else gives a shit.

Abdnhiker - no we don't unfortunately! That would be a senisble thing!