Confused about 30 hours for 9mth - 2yo

[Mumoftwosweetboys]

I'm a bit confused about some of the details of the new budget announcement and 30 hours free childcare.

I have a 3 year old who benefits from 15 hours free a week. We're not eligible for 30 hours free because one of us earns over £100k.

It's not clear to me whether we will benefit from 15 hours, 30 hours or no hours for our younger child when he starts childcare. The budget document talks about eligibility being the same criteria which makes me think we would not be eligible for 30 hours (due to salary) but it doesn't mention anything about all parents being eligible for the 15 hours. Seems like an oversight! Or maybe more details to follow. Has anyone seen the answer to this.

Also how annoying that it's only being phased in from April next year. What about parents who need that NOW!

My baby is going to be starting nursery in May when he's 11 months old so it's annoying we can't benefit from the new rules from then (if we're even eligible), especially as we'll have two in nursery at the same time!!! Seems like only 2 year olds will benefit from next April.

@GCWorkNightmare that's how the world should work, it's not how the world does work though. Women look at those prices and say well It will save us more money if i don't work or I cut down my hours significantly therefore being detrimental to my career.

Futhermore, women are made to feel guilty for putting their kids into care - you just have to look at this board to know that and how they should stay at home with their babies.

I even saw on the message board of one of the newspapers under the story about these hours with someone saying "well if your partner earns over 100k then there's an arguement for the woman to stay at home". I was like wtf? why should i stay home? I am just as well educated as my husband, i've spent a decade building my career, why should i sacrifice that cos my husband has a better paid one?

I don't understand this argument though. If the lower earner (usually the mother but not always) earns less than the cost of nursery + travel and work related expenses, the household will be worse off regardless of whose wages you take the nursery costs from?

Thanks for this thread. I was wondering the same. My dh earn £110k extremely annoying as we need his salary and I feel like we have nothing all the time. After bills/mortgage+ extortionate childcare it really doesn't go far the closer to London you are!

It’s the mindset. Accepting lower pay for women, using language that suggests that if the woman’s salary doesn’t cover childcare she should stay at home (suffering the career, development, income and pension impact) and therefore becoming the default parent. It has lasting impact not just individually but for society.

If the government really wanted to get women back to work they would do what they do in other countries and make sure good quality childcare is seen as a means to an end and subsidise it heavily.

They need to think ahead and be proactive - spend now and save a fortune later.

children who have had exposure to good quality childcare will have :

problems with health and or development picked up earlier,

children from deprived backgrounds will be given the best chance possible to catch up with more fortunate peers ( comparisons of vocabulary/ exposure to books/ ability to speak in complex sentences etc all favour children who have been exposed to these from an early age)

all of which will save huge amounts of money in catch up attempts later on, money spent on early years care and education is an investment not a liability.

plus women in employment are both building up their pensions, and contributing via tax and NI, which is building a wealthier country.