MNHQ here: anything you'd like to tell your MP about your experiences with using childcare?

[RowanMumsnet]

Hello

There's going to be a debate on 'early years provision and nursery settings' in Westminster Hall this coming Thursday at 3pm - and we thought some of you might like to encourage your MPs to take part.

(There's not much online about the debate yet but you can see the listing on the Parliament website here.)

It's a good opportunity to flag to your MP any particular issues you've had (COVID-related or otherwise) with paid childcare.

Perhaps you find childcare extremely expensive - maybe the cost made you think twice about going back to work after taking maternity or other parental leave. Lots of discussion on Mumsnet suggests parents find the government's free childcare hours difficult to fit into a broader childcare schedule. And we've also seen quite a lot of posts about the gap between the point where mothers (or dads, if they take a longer paternity leave) usually go back to work, and the point when the 'free' childcare hours kick in.

And of course, you may have been very much affected by the unavailability of childcare during lockdown earlier this year.

You may also have positive experiences you want to share, of course And nursery owners/workers may well want to contact their MPs too (we're not completely sure whether childminders fall under 'early years settings' - let us know if you know the answer.)

If you'd like to contact your MP to share your thoughts with them and ask if they can represent you in the debate, that would be great - and as ever please post here to let us know what you think, too.

Thanks
MNHQ

Yes childminders are early years settings. They follow the same curriculum as nurseries and are inspected by Ofsted in the same way nurseries are.

Agree. Not sure why it isn’t clear if childminders count as an early years setting, there is no difference to them and a nursery.

Also a very loaded OP from you there @RowanMumsnet, maybe a more neutral approach would be fairer?

@GeorgieTheGorgeousGoat

Agree. Not sure why it isn’t clear if childminders count as an early years setting, there is no difference to them and a nursery.

Also a very loaded OP from you there @RowanMumsnet, maybe a more neutral approach would be fairer?

Please do contribute your thoughts Georgie - we take your point about the one-sidedness but it's based on the data we've seen about MN users' experiences over the years (cost and availability are the two things that tend to come through really strongly whenever we ask MNers about this).

Well that makes sense being that people don’t generally come forward and contribute their opinion if it’s that something is cheap and they’d like to pay more or that there is so much choice/availability that it’s causing an issue.

A discussion about "The future of nurseries and early years settings" should surely include a discussion of other provider types that parents use, as it may be having an impact on the use of early years settings.
Other types of provider: Nannies - registered and non-registered. Informal care - care provided by relatives and friends.
Au-pairs - how will changes to immigration rules affect that?

From just a title on a meeting list we don't know what they will cover but are they likely to cover all forms of childcare?

I think my MP may be fed up of me contacting him about childcare things.

Of course I don't love spending a huge chunk of my income on nursery fees but I'm really wary of any discussion about affordability that doesn't start from the premise that genuine, full government payment for the actual costs is the only 'funding extension' that is a viable option. It actually makes me really uncomfortable that the - wonderful, dedicated - woman who cares for DS gets paid so little, and I read recently that one in six childcare providers think they could go bust this year. The sector is chronically underfunded and I really don't want to see any more government initiatives where they generously give parents 'free' hours that they either have to actually pay for (which causes a lot of resentment) or the childcare setting ends up losing money for each funded hour. Because I'd like to pay less for DS's nursery, of course, but I want it to stay viable and open more.

I’m a nursery owner and a parent. I find quite odd that there’s a huge jump to 30 hours funding at age 3. There should be help for parents of younger children who are working too. I would prefer to see 15/20 hours funding from age 1 for working parents. This would help people remain in work after having a baby.

There needs to be much more subsidy of early years education, women should never be put in a situation where it is more expensive to work than to stay at home. And that should apply to grandparents as well, especially with the rising age of retirement. At the very least there should not be a limit on the tax relief you can get on childcare.

Agree with the PP that the women doing the caring should be paid more, our nursery had several graduates (including qualified teachers). They were extremely experienced and knowledgeable educators and I'm not quite sure why they are paid less than primary teachers except for the fact that early years is predominantly paid for by parents rather than the government.

The 30 hours kicking in at 3 years is odd, I mean by then many women (let's be honest, it's usually women) have been forced out of the workplace for a few years if cost is a barrier; an additional year before they start school doesn't make a huge difference to that. Personally I think childcare settings should be better subsidised by the government, so that funding it effectively 'spread out' and it's consistently more affordable. Here the cheapest nursery is £1250 full time, and they struggle to break even, it's ridiculous. Yes it is a choice to have children, but a lot of wages don't keep up with the cost of childcare, and it is either a barrier to being a parent, or a barrier to working- neither of which are great.

And yes, agree that staff should receive a higher wage. It is a challenging job with a high level of responsibility, yet it relies on the fact that some people enjoy working with children.

I think it's great that there is a discussion about early years provision but there is a much bigger gap - childcare for children with complex needs esp once they are older and beyond traditional childcare age (12+). There is virtually nothing forcing many parents to give up work.

That is a discussion which is just as much if not even more needed.

The 30h free is for early years education, to benefit the child and get them ready for school, not for childcare.

Rightly or wrongly, I should add..

The initial 15 hours is early years education, the additional 15 is childcare.

The rates for the funded places needs to improve. As a childminder I'm paid 45p per hour less for a funded place than my hourly rate. Also pretty rubbish not knowing childminders are early years professionals Mumsnet!

After expenses, training costs, replacing damaged resources, additional heating costs etc I average about £6 per hour. That's taking into account the preparation time for care (cleaning, set up, making resources etc), business paperwork like accounts, learning journals, dealing with enquiries and discussions with parents, training courses and so on. I do this job because it works for my family and I love working with my littles, certainly not for the money!

I feel it would be better for families to have a government 'pot' they can access for funded places which they claim and use towards their bill, like tax free childcare but with an additional grant, that way parents get a discount, more flexibility over when they can use the hours and providers get their full amount.

I would like to know how the purported importance of early years education can be squared with the idea that the responsibility for running many of the 'government-funded' settings lies with unpaid, untrained and inexperienced volunteers. Having served on a preschool committee for more than 5 years, I find the reliance on an unpaid workforce of well-meaning parents and their fundraising efforts devalues early years education and belittles the work that the practitioners do.

@RednaxelasLunch
The universal 15 hours is early years education but the extended 15 hours is for when both parents (or one when a single parent household) are working only so it’s for childcare.

I flagged that I was being charged top up fees by my son's nursery provider a few years ago (which at the time was not allowed under their funding contracts), my MP couldn't have cared less and sent me a letter filled with spelling and grammar errors and a statement about how much the government planned to invest in early years education in the next 5 years.

Thankfully I now no longer need any sort of early years childcare as my children are too old. The system is very very poor and needs significant reform, but there doesn't seem to be any interest in listening to parents or providers.

I feel it would be better for families to have a government 'pot' they can access for funded places which they claim and use towards their bill, like tax free childcare but with an additional grant, that way parents get a discount, more flexibility over when they can use the hours and providers get their full amount.

Exactly. The free hours sounds great but in practice has been a nightmare. They should have expanded the childcare vouchers scheme but I suspect employers didn't like paying for the childcare vouchers when a mother was on maternity leave (they were quite happy with their reduced NI contributions of course). But putting the choice in the hands of the parents seems like a Tory policy, whereas free hours is pulling preschool childcare into the early years education sphere. And if we think early years education is important it needs to be like schools and funded by the state.

I pay trusted people cash in hand to care for my kids
It’s cheaper , works for all
And means I can happily work and pay my 40% tax
And yes it’s not strictly legal but it works really well for us

When my DD was born I went back to work when she was around a year old. Worked brilliantly. Nursery were consistent, professional, had good communication and generally worked WITH us to ensure DD was safe and happy.
Almost as soon as she went to school, I started having problems. After school care cancelled with little notice, had to re-apply for sessions each half term, sometimes not enough places. INSET days, parents evenings and ad hoc 'essential' parent briefings with very little notice.
Within 6 months, I felt I had to give up work.
Most people only get 5-6 weeks off work per year, so covering holidays is a nightmare. If you can find holidays clubs, many don't start until 9am and finish at 3/4pm.

I appreciate school isn't child care, but we have to arrange childcare around it.

The whole system needs a re-think.

The cost is extortionate. My second child was twins. Double the cost. Well triple actually if you count the first one. Parents of multiples are not entitled to longer maternity leave, not exempt from child benefit reductions on subsequent children, and yet somehow have to pay for an extra child. It is grossly, hugely and disproportionately unfair. It nearly bankrupted me.
I had to employ a nanny as I couldn't afford nursery. It cost £2k per month. There are no tax benefits to employing someone, and you are not entitled to any of the benefits a small business would get. Yet, you cannot grow your income as a business could do, and you are stuck paying these enormous bills.
It's a disgrace specific to multiple parents.
Mine weren't ivf, and although you could argued that ivf twins are a known 'risk' in terms of these costs, you could also argue that these pot parents have paid enough and shouldn't be penalised for infertility.
I really, genuinely think that parents of multiples need some financial help. It is very rarely 'buy one get one free' with twins in my experience.

I appreciate school isn't child care, but we have to arrange childcare around it.

Think that the pandemic has put that myth to bed, of course school is (and always has been) a form of childcare.

@RowanMumsnet the team at Pregnant Then Screwed have been covering this all week due to the potential funding challenges in early years childcare. There’s a lot about the debate on their social channels at the moment.