Free or Funded?

In September 2017 the government launched its flagship policy of free childcare for three and four year olds. Just a few months later and the minister in charge of this debacle has been sacked. Despite the rhetoric espoused in the echelons of Parliament, the scheme got off to a bad start. It's a well known fact that governments and computer schemes are not the best bedfellows, this proved to be the case with the roll out of the much heralded 30 hours scheme. HMRC were tasked with the issuing of codes to parents who were deemed eligible, multiple attempts to secure a code, long delays left hanging on the telephone, ears assaulted by piped music occasionally interrupted with a pre-recorded message giving a false hope that the call would be responded to shortly, the experience for many fell short of ideal. Would be recipients of the code were greeted with messages that the site would be closed for maintenance, the cutoff for getting the code to the local authorities was extended to facilitate the incompetent and hapless website and its inept implementation. Childcare providers had their administration doubled overnight with emails going back and forth to local authorities, most of whom were wrestling with new software and scant instructions from central government.

Providers were invited to attend meetings with their local authorities on how to deliver the new Free 30 hours, complicated scenarios were brought to the table, terms such as "grace period" and "code renewal" were bandied around. At these meetings providers were told how much they would be getting for their efforts, they were also told that they could not tell their clients the rate they would receive. Strange rules were explained, providers could charge for things like food and consumables such as nappies and "Baby Yoga", but these charges could not be passed on to parents unless they were voluntary. At the end of the meeting leaflets were handed out to the now demoralised providers, these were to promote the 30 hours free childcare.

Is it really free?

Some months passed, it became obvious that despite being advertised as being free, the fact that there is a cost became apparent. Many providers, already struggling with the 15 hours free childcare, found that their books wouldn't balance. The cost of delivery was in excess of the amount the government were prepared to pay the provider. To date more than 1,000 providers have left the sector, many of these were rated as good or outstanding by Ofsted. Suggestions from local authorities suggested that providers diversify, "take on ironing", "provide a packed lunch for parents", "put a collection bucket out for donations" were amongst the more entrepreneurial. Certainly the local authorities were willing to take on their own suggestions, levying a £10 fine for each mistake that a provider may make on their burgeoning paperwork and withholding payment until such mistakes were rectified. Clarification of charges were sought from the minister in charge, it quickly became apparent that he was unaware of his own government's policy in this regard. What is left is a mess, providers cannot ask parents to top up their payments,

but can charge for consumables, however, these must be on the basis that these are voluntary. The situation is farcical.

30 hours per week... really!

You may be sucked into thinking that you would receive 30 hours free childcare per week, after all that's how the government advertised their campaign. Certainly, this is how many parents saw the offer, imagine the disappointment when they discovered the offer was for 38 weeks per year, not the full 52 weeks in a year. This fact was missing or at best hidden when the scheme was rolled out, heralded as a scheme for working parents, the government conveniently forgot that the majority of those who would take up the offer actually work more than 38 weeks a year. The advertising standards agency were informed of this omission on the government's website and forced the government to change the wording on their website to reflect the facts rather than the fiction.