Nine in 10 early years settings oppose Government plans to change childcare ratios

Around nine in 10 of the nursery and pre-school respondents to the online survey oppose Government plans to relax childcare ratios.

If the Government does relax early years ratios, just 13 per cent of nurseries and pre-schools would regularly or permanently use the new ratios, with the same small percentage predicting moderate or significant financial benefits from ratios changes. Fewer still – just 2 per cent of all nursery and pre-school respondents – say that ratio rule changes would lead to a cut in childcare fees at their setting.

The Alliance said that the results show that if the Government does push ahead with any plans to relax ratios, most settings won’t change their ratios, even fewer would do it regularly, fewer still would save any money from it and hardly any would reduce parent fees as a result.

The survey follows news last week that the Government will consult before the summer on plans to change the current rules in the EYFS to enable early years settings to operate with one member of staff per five two-year-olds, up from the current rule of four two-year-olds to one staff member.

A snap poll from parenting group Pregnant then Screwed of 17,000 parents, carried out via Instagram has also found that 85 per cent of parents would be opposed to plans to relax ratios, even if their costs were lowered as a result.

The Alliance online survey ran between 28 April and 4 May, before the official announcement, however the survey stated, ‘it has been suggested in media reports that the maximum number of two-year-olds per adult in nurseries and pre-schools could increase from four to five.’

It received more than 9,000 respondents, around three-quarters were pre-schools and nurseries, and a quarter were childminders.

The survey found that 87 per cent of nurseries and pre-schools are opposed to the principle of relaxing ratios, with 80 per cent describing themselves as ‘strongly opposed’.

The survey also reveals that any change to ratios could lead to a mass exodus of early years practitioners from a sector already facing recruitment challenges.

Among early years staff, of those respondents working in nursery and pre-schools settings who would not be responsible for any ratio change decisions, 75 per cent said that they would be likely to leave their current setting if ratios were relaxed there.

Amanda Trafford, a former under-twos room leader in Farnborough, Hampshire, has recently decided to leave early years, even though she has just completed her degree. ‘The workload for an early years practitioner now is overwhelming and very stressful physically and mentally, and you don't get the recognition for it, both in pay and acknowledgement. 

‘Increasing ratios is going to make this 10 times worse. This will increase safety and safeguarding issues all over the country. Practitioners are already leaving for being over worked and underpaid – this will see a big increase of people leaving and nurseries closing due to not having staff.’                 

Although most childminders surveyed were opposed to the ratio changes, there was less opposition to potential changes overall – 56 per cent against, versus 31 in support.

But they were equally unlikely to expect ratio rule changes to result in lower fees for parents, with just 2 per cent of all childminder respondents expecting this to be the case.

The survey also found that:

• 87 per cent of nurseries and pre-school respondents and 54 per cent of childminder respondents think that operating to looser ratios would have a negative impact on quality at their setting.
• 89 per cent of nursery and pre-school respondents and 58 per cent of childminder respondents think that operating to looser ratios would have a negative impact on staff and/or their own mental health wellbeing.

The Alliance said Government plans to consider relaxing ratios come despite warnings from Ofsted that children in the early years need extra support to help mitigate the impact of the pandemic.

Jackie Warren, CEO of Growing Places, a charitable group of nurseries in Waterlooville, Havant and Fareham, Hampshire, said, ‘I am stunned at the short-sighted and dismissive response to the cost of childcare for parents. To suggest that we lower the ratios of adult support for young children is disgraceful and dangerous, and will only see damage to the sector that is already in crisis.

‘We should not be looking at how we make this cheaper, but how we ensure that we fund these years and service appropriately to engage the right people into the sector and develop healthy, happy, responsible, sociably articulate citizens of the future, who feel valued members of society, with a contribution to make.’

Neil Leitch, CEO of the Alliance said the plan was 'a lame duck policy' and urged the Government to abandon it.

‘All it will mean is that at the minority of settings that might relax ratios, staff will be even more overworked and overstretched than they are already and children will receive less individual care and support at a time when they need it more than ever, without any difference being made to childcare costs,' he said.

‘The Prime Minister himself has said that investment in the early years is absolutely crucial because the first few years of a child’s life are so vital – so how on earth can a policy that prioritises cost-cutting over children’s wellbeing and early development ever be justified?’

‘For years, the Government has been knowingly underfunding the early years sector, fully aware that this would result in higher costs for parents – and now it is asking those very same parents to accept childcare delivered on the cheap simply because ministers are not willing to invest in making quality care and early education affordable.'

A number of children, family and parenting organisations, as well as unions, have voiced their opposition to any ratio relaxation, including Millie’s Trust, Children England, What about the Children?, Coram Family and Childcare, Child Action Poverty Group, Family Action, Gingerbread, Women’s Budget Group, Working Families, Unison, NASUWT and NAHT.

Joeli Brearley, CEO and founder of Pregnant Then Screwed, said,‘This is a deeply unpopular proposal with both parents and providers alike and it would not achieve any of its aims. Parents want to know their children are safe and properly cared for - that is far more important to them than saving a couple of pounds. 

‘We would love to see a minister spend the day with four children under the age of two-years-old – then they would see what hard work really is.’ 

The policy has been strongly opposed by parents who have lost children in tragic incidents in early years settings.

Lewis Steeper, husband of Zoe Steeper who started the current government e-petition opposing ratios changes, and father of Oliver Steeper, who died after an incident at a nursery in September, said, ‘After losing Oliver in an early years setting, we feel it's our duty now to protect other children from people who are trying to overhaul the sector. These are members of parliament who will never put their own children into a local nursery/childminder because of their wealth and privileges; who simply don't live in the real world the rest of us do and don't bat an eyelid at the cost of childcare. 

‘There would be no guarantee if for whatever reason the changes did go ahead that by losing/sacking staff members to save money, any savings would be passed along to parents anyway. Many early years staff are underpaid, overworked and anymore cuts would simply push them beyond breaking point.’

Joanne Thompson, co-founder of Millie’s Trust and the mother of Millie Thompson, who died after a choking incident at her nursery in 2012, said,'We are deeply saddened that the government are proposing changes to ratios in childcare settings especially when we have had previous support from the government to ensure childcare settings are safer. 

'As parents who have lost a child in a choking accident in nursery when our daughter Millie was nine months old, we strongly oppose these suggestions for the safety of other children and in support of the mental health of current childcare workers who are already under immense pressure when looking after children on a daily basis.’