I write to you in the hope of a response that will provide up-to-date evidence to justify the Government’s childcare and early education policy.
With regard to the 30 hours scheme, the Institute of Economic Affairs argues that subsidised childcare distorts the true costs for parents and does not benefit the most disadvantaged children.
When collecting the data to identify the families who will be entitled to the funded 30 hours, the evidence shows that these will be the parents who historically have paid the additional top-up fees set at a realistic rate by the provider.
These are predominantly parents who already work in a profession that offers them the financial ability to afford to pay for quality childcare and education with the necessary wrap-around childcare not covered by the 38 weeks funding, with the addition (for some) to enjoy the luxury of family holidays abroad throughout the year. Why is the eligibility cut-off set as high as £100,000?
Although it is said that this scheme will enable parents to get back to work, there are barriers that need to be considered; for example, how will this look for the non-professional family working for the minimum wage – where are they going to find the additional (realistic) costs for childcare that the 38 weeks will not cover?
The early years and childcare sector has worked tirelessly to close the attainment gap for our disadvantaged and vulnerable children. The success of this work in part can be attributed to our children’s centres that have now all but gone due to a lack of funding, yet millions of pounds of funding has been invested in/designated to the 30 hours scheme.
It must be anticipated that the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) will show the percentage of IDACI payments made against children entitled to 30 hours will be a lot lower (if any) than those eligible for the 15 hours.
Can the Minister explain and justify how the early years sector can continue to improve the lives of our most disadvantaged and vulnerable children when it seems we are doubling the amount of free quality childcare and education to children from a more affluent background who historically are achieving and reaching their full potential (and whose families historically have been paying for this themselves).
The National Audit Office warned in March that ‘the new entitlement for three- and four-year-olds could put further implementation of the entitlement for disadvantaged two-year-olds at risk’.
Having doubled the entitlement for some of our three- and four-year-olds, how are providers going to ensure that they have the sessions available to accommodate our most vulnerable funded two-year-old children as they become eligible for the 15 hours’ EYE funding? How can the Minister reassure us that this is not going to have a negative impact on closing the gap?
Finally, to put the £4 per hour into perspective, I would like to put to the Minister that a parent pays up to three times as much to have their dog walked for an hour, compared with the rate set and controlled by Government policy to pay for quality childcare and education for their child. Where does this leave the future of quality childcare and education?
