Fancy telling MNHQ what you think about the parties' childcare proposals?

[RowanMumsnet]

Afternoon all

You may have seen over the past couple of days that Labour and the Conservatives have made manifesto commitments on childcare in England, Wales and NI, in addition to the current 15 free hours per week for 3-4yos (and some 2yos), and the tax-free childcare scheme that will come online this autumn.

Labour has promised 25 hours per week of free childcare for working parents of 3-4yos and guaranteed wraparound childcare in primaries 8am-6pm, 'underpinned' by new National Primary Childcare Service - a not-for-profit organisation promoting the voluntary and charitable delivery of extracurricular activities.

The Conservatives have promised 30 hours per week of free childcare for working parents of 3-4yos.

The LibDem manifesto hasn't been launched yet, but it's expected to promise something along the lines of 15 hours a week for all two-year-olds (at the moment, only 40% of 2yos qualify for it) and 20 hours for all three and four-year-olds, plus 15 hours a week for all children of working parents aged between 9 months and two years. (Check against delivery, as the journos say - the LibDem manifesto will be launched tomorrow.)

The Green Party promises a 'free but voluntary universal early education and childcare service for all children from birth until compulsory education age, which we would raise to 7 years'.

UKIP don't seem to have any specific childcare proposals at the moment (but do please let us know if you know differently!)

As ever we'd welcome the input of Scottish MNers if you'd like to tell us how the Scottish government's free childcare offer is working out for you.

So what do you think of the policy offers? Are they good enough? Are the funding promises convincing? Would they make it easier for you and/or your partner to work, if that's what you'd like to do? Will they make it easier on your wallet? Do they go far enough, or too far? Are there big gaps in provision?

Would any of this sway your vote?

We're all ears.

Thanks
MNHQ

Why are they calling it free childcare? Has something significant changed?

As things stand, it is emphatically not free childcare. It is access to early years education and local authorities are not obliged to ensure that working parents are able to use these hours in a way that lets them reduce their childcare bill.

In Glasgow, for example, the council say that there are sufficient council places in 9-3 nurseries to give children access to their "free hours". Obviously this is of bugger all use to working parents, and nurseries that offer the hours and are open 8-6 are in far shorter supply. The council will not allow parents to use the funding for private settings (except for a small number of "partnership nurseries" and they are cutting the available places in these.)

The council justify this stance by saying that the funding is not for childcare it is for early years education. If parents choose not to take up the opportunity of a half day place in a council nursery because it doesn't work as childcare for them, then tough.

Parties that bandy about so-called funding for childcare should either say how their plans are different from the status quo, or stop being so dishonest.

30 hours a week "free" childcare = zero hours a week "free" childcare for me if it's in a 9-3, term time only setting.

I think guaranteed access to wrap around care is the thing that would make the most difference. Care until school age (apart from the finances obv) is reasonably straightforward - and then you are into the hell of a 9-3 day and trying to balance your child being looked after and work. And it goes on for much longer than the preschool bit.

So its labour or lib dem for me

They're all talking out of their arses and won't implement anything once elected because they are just trying to get the votes of mothers.

Have child psychologists been asked their opinion on whether a ten-hour day in a school setting is desirable for primary age children?

For me personally it's too little too late. I had to quit my full time job two years ago due to my then two year olds additional needs and the fact we couldn't afford full time childcare, even with dh working full time. This what they're are now offering would have helped us tremendously, and would of meant l could have afforded childcare and gone back to work during the week instead of doin bank/agency work like I do now at the weekends.

The mandatory provision of wrap around care in primaries is the policy which appeals most to me.

I'd be surprised if N.I. does get any of this. We don't get 15 free hours for 3 year olds yet.

@sailoratsea

I'd be surprised if N.I. does get any of this. We don't get 15 free hours for 3 year olds yet.

Very sorry sailor - our mistake. What's the situation in NI then?

boyScout

who wants to think about that? Just give us more money, and more money and somebody to look after the kids

Sorry, 10 hours? you wouldn't surely?

It hasnt been thought through. If we double (or nearly double) the amount of hours then anywhere that can currently facilitate 2 cohorts of 15hr children (I'm thinking about schools and playgroups, not PVIs) will only be able to facilitate 1 cohort of 25/30 hr children. There'll be a shortfall of places and the setting could also (possibly) lose out on 5 hrs of funding per child if Labour are elected.

The Labour policy is full of holes. Which arts and sports education professionals are going to provide free services? Utterly unworkable. Wraparound childcare would be amazing were it universally available. And the poster above saying it's ten hours in school - many children are used to long days in nursery already, and vanishingly few children would be there 8-6, 5 days. I would use something like 3 sessions of after school. Others might choose 4 of the morning session.

And yes to what everyone else said about it being not free in the slightest. My DD attends a private nursery so that I can work. None of the free preschools would work as they are 9-12, 5 mornings. Nursery take the funding happily and increase their fees for the compulsory additional hours, so 2 days a week still costs me £300 a month. Free my arse.

Don't think putting 3 year olds into childcare for 30 hours a week should be encouraged.Other measures which would help parents to have more time with their very young children would be better.

Poor quality wrap around for hours a day in shoddy school buildings with little outdoor space( thanks to the selling off of school fields) would not be in the best interests of the children themselves.Also frankly I don't think tax payers should be held responsible for wrap around up until what are we talking -13. The vast maj can and do afford wrap around,they don't need the tax payer pulling resources from the needy.The care of children belongs to the parent who should plan accordingly.Full time nursery if absolutely necessary I have some sympathy with but sorry a few after school hours I don't.Cut back in other ways,it's temporary.

In N.I. children get 1 YEAR of free non compulsory education before they start school. I.E. Nursery. It's called the Pre-School Education Programme. So it's pretty much the same deal as the half days (15 hours a week) that England gets.

It's not meant to be childcare to be used however the parent wants to use it. It is education for the benefit of the child.

As a SAHM to twins who left work because the cost of having two in childcare would have made it not worth it for me to return to work i would honestly prefer the wrap around care. As i'm pretty sure I won't find someone to employ me for 2.5 hours a day. But i'll be surprised if any of it is implemented.

Like sleepyhead has said, I think all the parties need to be clearer about what they mean by "free childcare". Many people think it's great until they read the small print - i.e. it's term time only, not all childcare providers will offer the places, some parents have to pay top-ups as the government only pays the childcare provider a set amount per hour, leaving many nurseries (particularly in the South East) out of pocket. I'm lucky in that the nursery my children go to are flexible with the hours and will average out the hours over 52 weeks and then simply knock that many hours of payment off the bill (they're not eligible yet, but I know this is what they do with children 3+), but I don't think this is the norm.

I think it's a good thing, but I also think they should make sure everyone is able to access the current entitlement of 15 hours before increasing to 25 or 30. What use would 25-30 hours be if the places aren't available?

The idea of free child care from a younger age definitely appeals to me as my baby is due in September. For that reason the Green Party plan appeals, though I would want my child at school before they are seven. The expected Lib Dem plans would suit me perfectly as I plan to take 8-9 months mat leave & 15 hours free childcare would be an enormous help as my employer can't allow me to go back part time. It would cut my care bill by over a third . I'd love to be a stay at home mum but my husband is self employed so we need the security & regularity of my income. The current shared parental leave scheme frustrates me as my husband can't take advantage of it because he works for himself. Childcare from a young age works very well in Scandinavia & avoids the awful situation of women essentially working to fund childcare so that they will be better off later on & can keep their careers.

I wonder what Labour would have to offer in terms of its 8-6 childcare for children with complex special needs. My 7 year ild is severely autistic and we do not have any access to childcare for her. She needs 1:1 in any childcare setting.

How would Labour guarantee that children with disabilities have the same access to suitable childcare as typical children. I cannot see this happening as even at this point in time children with SN are unable to access most wrsp around childcare settings. Will parents like me loose out once again?

You can't compare us to Scandinavia.We're not Scandinavian and bitting and bobbing with polices doesn't work.They pay a lot more tax than us for one thing.There are also concerns re the Swedish system not being all it's cracked up to be due to immense pressure on mothers returning to work and behaviour issues now appearing in teenagers.

Lots of families use wrap around 8 - 6pm, I do on several days, it's the only way that I could work. It's not the same as a 10 hour school day, the kids get to do sports, crafts and play with their friends at afterschool club. Poor quality wrap around care may be damaging but then so is poor quality care with a child-minder or parents at home.

not

Poor quality time with a parent. So what are we unqualified to look after our kids now.

It doesn't take much.Kids chilling out,relaxing,down at the park,out on their bikes,reading or even lying on the sofa picking their nose etc is hugely preferable to hoards of kids of all ages herded into a school hall basically killing time. Older children hate it however good it is.Ours is Oustanding and my dc has begged not to go as her friends that do hate the noise,having to "do"activities and go with younger children.They just want to be with their friends or read in the peace and quiet of home.

Our childminders take their charges to the local park after school or to club pick ups,far preferable to wrap around whatever label Ofsted give it.Many school buildings are in a dire state and frankly not designed for this kind of care.

LePetit:

They pay slightly more tax in Sweden than we do here.

Also, where does the information come from regarding the misbehaving teens? I've never heard this one before.

LePetit:

And my children love going to their after school club. They both beg me to send them there more often!

Great mini not all do.Far from it.As I teacher I gave seen kids upset and crying at the thought of staying on.Some just simply need a change of scene.Would you want to stay in a crappy crumbling school building from 8am until 6 or later?

You can Google re teens in Sweden.They have no tax allowance and pay 57%.

Sorry most can afford wrap around.There are often free clubs and at 11 many don't get home from secondary until quite late.Yes it involves some outlay but do people really expect no cost to the care of their children which they chose to have?

Good to see the usual disdain for working mums on the thread
LePetitmarseillais. Your description of after school care is an ignorant caricature fed by your own smug agenda and bears no relation to what my kids' club is like. Different solutions are right for different families but yes some time with parents is poor quality, can you really not understand that or is your vision so blinkered as to view SAHP always being the right option for every family?