Guest post: "The government's new 30-hours free childcare scheme is neither accessible nor free"

[MumsnetGuestPosts]

The stories are legion about the sexism directed at female MPs, but I struggled to believe some of them - for instance, the claim that certain Conservative MPs would shout 'melons' and make the shape of breasts as a female MP rose to speak - before my election this summer.

But then last week I was faced down in Prime Minister’s Question Time. I took the opportunity to raise the concerns of parents in my constituency around access to the government’s 30 hours free childcare offer. Before I could even complete my first sentence I was met with jeering, especially from male Conservative MPs, to such an extent I had to stop and ask if I had made some kind of mistake in protocol. As it happens, it wasn’t me, it was them.

I still don’t entirely understand why all the shouting is necessary. I’m a former teacher, and I wouldn’t tolerate this behaviour in a classroom. Why should it be acceptable in the House of Commons? My reaction was, perhaps, quite female though: 'what did I do?' And it reminds me that the House of Commons has a long way to go to in terms of equality. I am pretty sure that if we had 50% representation by women, this kind of macho grandstanding would be far less common.

But what worries me most is the substantive point about how much the Government cares about the implementation of the free childcare policy. Anyone who has tried to take up the 30 free hours of childcare for three and four-year-olds won’t need me to tell them about the problems with the Government’s scheme.

Parents have faced huge difficulties trying to register using the online system over the summer. In fact I was granted an 'Urgent Question' on this in July when I quizzed the minister. Since then, it has become clear that the Government haven’t provided enough funding for childminders and nurseries to be able to deliver the scheme.

Many parents in Oxford West and Abingdon reported to me that either they couldn’t find a provider to deliver it or that they had to pay top ups. So neither accessible, nor free.

So my question, raising these issues and asking the Prime Minister to apologise to parents across the country for 'false advertising', was an entirely reasonable one.

In her answer, the Prime Minister has tried to assure me that everything is fine. They’re so determined to show that they are a strong and stable Government that they can’t admit that there have been problems with the 30 hours free childcare, even though they must know it to be true.

I absolutely support this policy. Anything that can help parents with the cost of childcare, help people to be able to go back to work, and to provide early years education for children should be welcomed.

But there is little point in a Government scheme that doesn’t actually provide free childcare and doesn’t give childminders and nurseries enough funding to be able to deliver it.

Some providers – entirely understandably – won’t be offering this 'free' 30 hours of childcare for three and four-year-olds as they won’t get paid enough to make it worth their while.

Some childminders and nurseries are now having to increase the cost of childcare for under threes to make up the shortfall. Many more have started charging parents for extras like nappies, baby wipes, lunches and early/late pick-ups that had previously been included.

On behalf of parents everywhere I will keep speaking the truth. I am determined to be undeterred by the behavior of heckling MPs or substandard answers by the Prime Minister or her ministers. While their attitude shows how much they really care about providing quality childcare for parents, I can assure you, I and the Liberal Democrats care very much indeed.

By coincidence, I’ve come top of the ballot for questions to the Prime Minister at PMQs again this coming Wednesday: tune in to see what happens next.

Layla Moran will be responding to questions and comments on this post shortly.

shirtyqwerty layla moran voted against the eu withdrawal bill last night.

Layla, as a childminder and having spoken to several at a meet-up today, we all feel the 30 hours childcare is not fit for purpose.

Wouldn't it be better to give the money directly to parents as a nursery grant, with them having to provide proof that the child is in a childcare setting. I'd happily still do the portal stuff, logging children's attendance every so often or provide a registration number.

The main problem as I see it, is that the upper earning is way too high. A family where each parent is earning for example £99,000 does not need the government to fund 30 hours childcare a week for them.
The upper limit should be a great deal lower so only families who really need this help will benefit.

The money saved on not paying for so many children could then go to pay providers a higher hourly rate, which everyone is in agreement needs to happen to keep these businesses sustainable.

I have successfully claimed the 30 hours free childcare. My ds has been at the nursery since age 1 so luckily didnt have to look around for a provider.

Nursery costs £60 per day fullprice.

I now pay £20 per day in termtime.

No nappies/french lessons or anything like that.

So basically £20 for lunch.

Nursery say they deduct government funding from total fees (so really it's a top up fee). The system has driven both parents and nursery staff potty with the silly codes and crashing websites.

Why make it so complicated? So you access the old 15 hours via the council and the new additional 15 hours is HMRC? The system is ridiculous. I also feel age 3 is too old to start this. It would be nice to have something from age 1 even if less hours. Often you go back to work as a woman on reduced hours/pay and then it all goes on childcare.

I don't think the £100k limit is too high I think it should be universal as long as parents are in work. A lot of high earners are still crippled by childcare costs and if you are in a heavily bonuses industry like my husband you don't always know what your income is going to be and it can vary drastically from one year to the next but then as it's based on the previous tax year if your income goes down then what?!

I have a question why are full time students who household income is such that they can't get childcare tax credits or student finance childcare grant or the free 15 hours although we are full time not eligible for anything at all

In a democracy where every man and woman can vote, women only have to vote for female MPs to get a ratio closer to 50/50. It seems like we like what more men have to say than women.

Rather simplistic. We had one female candidate in the GE in our seat and she was a Tory who looked about 12. I wasn't going to vote for her over one of the various left leaning candidates we had to choose from.

I'm quite surprised that CMs were including nappies in their fees, TBH, since state nurseries, IME, ask parents to provide their own.

I think increasing limits on how many childcare vouchers you can get would have been better. It would be easier to work out the actual cost without having to look at what top ups are being charged. It would not frustrate people with claims that 30 hours free was being offered when it is not. Also it would not inflate the cost in earlier years.

I am glad you are raising questions about it. It is a completely flawed policy 'invented' by David Cameron just before the election without any proper thought or research.
I totally disagree that it is a good thing to subsidise incredibly high earners - who on earth thought that it would be sensible to say anyone earning up to £100 000 could get this benefit ?? Why on earth would anyone think that is reasonable when the average wage is 1/4 of that, and so many earn far less than that ?
Then the whole thing just doesn't add up for the Nurseries. Why would anyone expect a business to undercharge potentially half their clients? How does anyone who understands a basic budget - you don't even need to know about childcare for this part of the problem - think a business that was just breaking even or making enough to turn a small profit for the owner, can still survive on less income
Then, you get into the ridiculously miniscule 'DAF' (Disability Access Fund) which means a child needing additional support would get less than 2 hours support across each week. Can you explain how that is supposed to work for a child with SEN/D , or the Nursery trying to support that family ?

Hi everyone. I just want to thank you all for your contributions so far. To those who pointed out I wasn't responding, it's been a mad day. I am very sorry about that! To address a few points:

1. My issue is not necessarily that people have to pay, it's that the product is disingenuinely called free when in many places it is not. By all means let them make the case that there isn't enough money to go around, but don't hoodwink people.

1. They will be well aware of the issues and I am worried they can't just admit them, say thanks for the heads up and tell us how they plan to fix it. I think that approach would be pragmatic and refreshing.

1. Thanks especially for your stories and examples. If you ever hear more or wish to expand I'd welcome a more detailed email to [email protected]

1. To those saying this post is partisan, I would like to point out the introduction was a Lib Dem policy that was introduced in coalition. Therefore, actually, my party has in much stake as making this a success and the current Government. And I take an interest because fundamentally I believe it will help families. You'll notice every single time I've spoken about I've welcomed it and used as concilliary language as possible. But my job is to scrutinise the government and stand up for my constituents which is what I'm doing.

Good night all and thanks for commenting!

Well, it's anecdotal but colleague last week was telling me, she is now being charged £12.50 a week more than last term, since the "£30 hours free" has kicked in this month.

What we receive may be above minimum wage but once expenses have been paid for it brings it below. Even at full capacity. Can you understand that?

Mine is being paid just by me approx £200 per day and £400 per night (I am the only one who uses her over night) she also has other families kids who pay the same fees/retainers/holiday pay as me and it's two minders (a couple) work together both have waiting lists and are full weirdly she's more expensive during the termtime than she is during the holidays.

Not knocking that at all she's worth it. But even allowing for expenses and admin it would be ridiculous to suggest she was under minimum wage, she would laugh at me if I said that and if she was she wouldn't have her own kids in private school.

It's a shame really because despite me using her for years (I was happy to take the minor hike with costs when the 15h came in) I'm not prepared to do so again and it's going to work out much much cheaper for me to employ 2 full time nannies instead of using the combo of her and one nanny so that's what I shall do.

Do you think we're lying, then?

The evidence of countless nurseries and childminders going out of business over this is just a pack of lies because you have a childminder who apparently charges you around £20-25 per hour (how many children; how many hours?) and sends her kids to private school (does she pay? Or are they in receipt of a bursary or legacy or grandparents paying?).

Providers are simply saying to the Government "Either fund this properly or be honest and admit it's a subsidy and not free at all."
It's being forced to subsidise parents on far higher incomes than ourselves that is causing the problem. Parents like you, who can evidently afford 2 nannies yet who publicly resents a mere childminder whose child is at a private school.

'So basically £20 for lunch.'

And someone taking care of your kid for hours! Do you seriously believe you're being shortchanged paying 20 quid a day for childcare just because you're not getting free nappies and extras?!

No Tanith I don't think your lying. I just think it's nonsense that all childminders are poverty stricken and on below minimum wage. Some may very well be but others are not.

Mine happens to be very comfortable.
She works hard she's a very sound and astute business woman and she's fully entitled to charge the fees she does.

She also funds her kids school herself. She minds 4 of mine 3 for full days but 1 is an over 8 so not subject to the same ratios as the smaller ones some are normal hours and some are anti social, she charges a lot more per hour for the under 3's I'm guessing to account for the loss from the free hours.

I should stress I am not in favour of the free hours mainly because I think they are not free they are not reflective of most real fees and in my experance it means well off parents get a gain but less well off ones don't and I do think a child care provider who normally charges say 5.75 per hour for a child is being expected to take a loss

Some banks have now stopped giving loans to nurseries. This is how unstable the industry is at the moment, and many nurseries and childminders are closing down. That is a fact.

Smaller settings are affected the most, in my opinion, as it's difficult to off-set the loss anywhere else in the business. Childminders who are the most sustainable are those working together in one setting, working with a number of assistants, so basically mini home-based nurseries.

Very large providers are also doing well out of this, many are actually buying out nurseries in trouble. And they are hiring 'apprentices' paid at £3.50 an hour to save money. I have seen it advertised locally.

Also, just to specify, each local area gives a specific amount of money to nurseries per child, per hour. In some local areas, the difference between what the nursery fees are and what the council would give them under the 30-hours childcare is minimal - say £0.20p an hour but in my local area (in London, quite a well off and expensive area) the difference between the allocated amount from the council and the average cost of childcare per hour is nearly £2.00, per hour, per child! So some nurseries and childminders will manage the change quite well, but it will be near impossible for others, as there is such a large gap to fill.

I think you misunderstood expat. The nursery is not allowed to charge to 'look after my child' for those 30 hours.

They are however billing me with the only possible 'extra service' they can according to the rules which is lunch.

I previously paid £60 a day for care and lunch now £20 a day for lunch

I'm just demonstrating that as the OP suggests this policy is not the free childcare it says it is.

I agree with paddle. My husband makes just under £25k a year. We live in London. I am a student midwife and am either on a uni week, which is a full week's study (in uni usually 9.30am to 4.30pm, Weds half-day and I read/write essays/partake in revision groups etc round this). Or on a placement week, which is a full week of hospital shifts, following the shifts of my mentor and could be nights, weekends etc.

Being told we are not eligible for the 30-hour childcare because I "don't work", as I head off for another 12.5-hour night shift delivering babies, supporting frightened and exhausted women, and getting covered in all kinds of bodily fluids makes me feel so valued.

This policy as it has been introduced - underfunded - is a complete mess. I heard about it a governors' meeting and a nursery governor next to me said it couldn't possibly work at those funding levels.

Now a children's centre nursery is closing its provision for under 2s completely and hiking fees outside the 30 hours.

Glad my kids are a bit older now (8 and 10) - I'm hoping to go back to work after an extended career break following redundancy when the kids were in school nursery class and year 1, and although I will still need some childcare it's more affordable. Don't know what local preschool parents will do.

CurlyBlueberry - sorry that you're not entitled to childcare help. So unfair.

I just think it's nonsense that all childminders are poverty stricken and on below minimum wage.

I think you kind of highlighted my point. I'm certainly not poverty stricken but why shouldn't I be paid a decent wage for the work I do? I earn good money at the moment while I'm charging my own rates. I'm full and always am in recent years. However the point of the OP and in which you've confused the issue by saying what you pay your cm (not what the government is paying CMs) is that we are being told what we will be paid for our service. We are being told when we will be paid, what we must and must not include in that fee and how much our service is worth. That is what we have the issue with and that is what is threatening to close thousands of providers. It's not sustainable.

I'm not going to feel ashamed by people like you of wanting to make a good profit. I run a successful business and will not be paid less money for more work. No way.

There's a common misconception that because we work with children and are kind and caring, we are mugs who work for nothing, who do it for the love of it. We need to eat too.
No one questions the profit margins of Boden!

The cost of living is too high, and parents can't afford to work, that's not the nurseries fault, they are business' can set their own fees, this is price fixing, and it will cause many nurseries to close, low earners will be forced out of work then due to supply limiting working opportunities.

I am more than happy to pay for my brilliant nursery who spend money on staff development and ensuring the best staff for the job, excellent food etc.
Like most people I would have been very happy at 'subsidised' hours. But because of the ridiculous way the scheme was announced and implemented we can't pay subsidised fees - the nursery has had to jump through hoops to try and charge us how they can to keep running to the high standard we enjoy. I am very grateful for the subsidisation but I dread to think how much money was wasted putting this nonsensical system into practice.

I do disagree with the amount snap but you have a choice to accept it or not.

You can choose to not offer the funded hours like lots and lots of providers are doing

Oh I have and currently I'm not.

Then you read lots of threads from parents complaining no providers are offering it or they are making additional charges and they wonder why...

I agree with paddle. My husband makes just under £25k a year. We live in London. I am a student midwife and am either on a uni week, which is a full week's study (in uni usually 9.30am to 4.30pm, Weds half-day and I read/write essays/partake in revision groups etc round this). Or on a placement week, which is a full week of hospital shifts, following the shifts of my mentor and could be nights, weekends etc.

Being told we are not eligible for the 30-hour childcare because I "don't work", as I head off for another 12.5-hour night shift delivering babies, supporting frightened and exhausted women, and getting covered in all kinds of bodily fluids makes me feel so valued.

Is this really how it works? At our nursery, aslong as 30 hours is done between the parents, the 30 hours is free. Doesn't have to be 30 hours by each.

We are lucky to actually get the 30 hours free too...rather than being charged extra in other ways.