I genuiney don't understand why the taxpayer should pay childcare costs

[Chertsey]

I know, believe me I know, that it's very expensive, but it's a cost of having children, like food, clothes, somewhere suitable to live and any activities you might want them to do. It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.

I worked for "nothing" for years but considered it an investment in all our futures - we're much better off now for having done that then, than we would have been if I'd given up work was now trying to find work after years out of the workforce.

So, apart from it being a vote winner, why should the tax payer fund it when it was all for my and my family's benefit?

We should be championing our ratios not criticising them.

Oh and apologies it was Elizabeth Truss not Lyn( she is the grammar lady I think).

I think you should be able to have some flexibility on ratios without them going out of the window altogether (but obviously not getting into the situation of the chain nursery I posted about).

I think a factor in ratios can be how well trained nursery staff are, too. We tend to employ many people who study childcare from 16-18 and leave it at that. In a lot of Western Europe people will study for an Early Childhood degree and go into the field when they are a fair bit older, with broader experience and training. That is bound to have some sort of impact.

BTW I am using cheap childcare at the moment and it's the best I have ever had, bar none. One after school club run on a shoestring and a person I found via Gumtree. Kids have never been happier.

After school is different to babies/toddlers.

I am well trained and a mum of multiples too, I still would prefer the ratios we've got if I was paying for childcare.At the end of the day babies/toddlers away from their parents need a lot of attention- emotionally and educationally.

You can champion the lower ratios but then you need to acknowledge that someone has to pay for those ratios and the burden shouldn't be placed on parents who would be perfectly happy with a higher ratio for each age group.

If you champion these lower ratios you should, as a taxpayer, put your money where your mouth is.

I'd prefer to see a system similar to the Danish one where the state provides free/ subsidised childcare directly rather than a system where payments are made directly to parents.

Er no Want from previous threads it was clear lower ratios were far more popular.Your kids,your responsibility.You can't just hand responsibility for their care over to the state.We can't afford it.

le petit surely the point is that parents should have the choice

It's not just about ratios, mums are banned by OFSTED regs from paying a trusted friend to look after dc, eveb though it would benefit both parties.

You can't have heavy state regulation on one hand then a free market on the other. It's totally distorted.