It was the news that spread around nurseries and parents quicker than an outbreak of chicken pox. When Jeremy Hunt announced his £4 billion childcare expansion policy, it seemed like cause for celebration for campaigners and cash-strapped parents alike. But almost immediately there was anger from nurseries about what these plans will do to a system already in crisis, and frustration from some parents that the changes will take too long to benefit them. If this was Hunt’s “rabbit in a hat” moment for the Spring Budget, then by the end of last week, it looked a bit Watership Down.
Childcare looks set to be the major battleground at the next election, with Labour promising an overhaul of the system. The shadow education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, has likened the “scale and ambition” of Labour’s childcare reforms to the creation of the NHS — although details haven’t yet been forthcoming. On the surface, it looked like Hunt might have beaten Labour to the punch with the largest expansion of free childcare England has ever seen.
Yet many who work in the early-years sector say the Government’s plans could bring the whole system to collapse. Kelly Salambasis, one of the owners of More2 nurseries in Greenwich, was shocked by the announcement. “It feels like the sector just hasn’t been consulted at all,” she says. “We’ve been actively campaigning not to relax ratios [from September, childcare settings will be able to operate with one adult to five children, not four] because it compromises on safety and quality of care. I don’t want to sound like a greedy nursery worker and we have complete sympathy for parents because we know how expensive it is. But the fact is, these ‘free’ hours aren’t actually free, they’re funded and only partially so. In most boroughs there’s a shortfall of at least £2 an hour per child.”
Currently, nurseries use what they charge parents of under-threes to make up the difference, but if the free hours scheme is extended they won’t have that option. The Women’s Budget Group has estimated that fully funding current hours for three- and four-year-olds alone would cost an extra £1.82 billion — far greater than the amount promised in the Budget. Instead, the Government is planning to invest £84 million, which works out as an extra 21p an hour per three- and four-year-old.
So while it seemed like good news for parents — the UK has the third highest childcare costs in the world — it was very bad news for nurseries, 83 per cent of which already expect to make a loss or only break even this year.
“This is a shameful policy of appeasement which is going to crucify a sector already on its knees,” says Neil Leitch, chief executive of the Early Years Alliance. “It’s all very well saying you’ll extend the free hours scheme, but fund it properly or there simply won’t be enough places when nurseries keep closing at the rate they are.” Indeed, a study by the charity Coram found that only half of local authorities in England said they had sufficient childcare places to meet the needs of full-time parents and a 2021 report from the Mayor’s office found that two-thirds of London’s nurseries were facing closure.
So if Hunt’s “landmark” plan to get more women back to work is shambolic, what should be done instead? Neil Leitch would like to see a dedicated early years cabinet minister. Kelly Salambasis suggests a scheme such as TeachFirst, to encourage young people to consider a job in early years education. Maggie Bolger, owner of the b_together nursery in north London, says she would prefer it if parents received funding from the Government directly to spend as they wished, a plan floated by Liz Truss before she left office.
“Give it to the parents and then they can see how little funding we actually get for these ‘free’ places and they can deal with all the admin and bureaucracy,” she says. “We have a saying in our industry of ‘Champagne nurseries, lemonade funding’. We know how important early-years development is to a child, and yet we don’t respect the people that work in this sector and the wages are so low. Teachers have a starting salary of £28,000; in nursery settings you’re lucky to make minimum wage. No decent setting is going to relax ratios because it’s not safe.”
Helene Mark, who owns Outdoor Owls nursery in Richmond and Putney, thinks we need a total overhaul of early-years education. “It’s not about these misleading ‘free’ places or even ratios necessarily,” she says. “We need to make early-years settings part of the public sector, not charge them business rates, and then subsidise them properly so it’s affordable. We should get rid of Ofsted inspections which are needlessly stressful for providers. Nursery workers need unions like teachers do, and they should be paid to match their skills and the importance of their job.”
There were also those who felt that Hunt’s announcement had forgotten the parents who want to stay at home. “Where is the support for them or are they just ‘economically inactive’?” says Sarah Ockwell-Smith, author of the forthcoming book Because I Said So! Why society is childist and how breaking the cycle of discrimination towards children can change the world. “Yes, it’s great that the Government is finally talking about childcare, but this announcement is not a win. It is a platitude with a murky neoliberalism underbelly. And all this focus on childcare takes away from the bigger problems many families are facing right now, such as not being able to afford food or heating or ever afford their own homes.”
This announcement is not a win — is a platitude with a murky neoliberalism underbelly
Although Hunt’s extension of the free hours scheme will no doubt appeal to squeezed millennials — the Chancellor claims it will cut families’ childcare costs by 60 per cent — those who are really struggling may not even be able to take advantage of it. Kirsty Lowe, co-founder at MammaKind baby bank in south-east London, says many families aren’t able to take up existing free nursery places because they can’t afford nappies, spare clothing or outdoor gear. “These things may sound small but are a real barrier for families in poverty,” she says. “Perhaps increasing childcare hours is a huge help for many, but it won’t solve the problem for everyone.”
And what do most parents and prospective parents think? Although my WhatsApp groups were full of party blower emojis from friends who, like me, spend a small fortune on nursery fees, for most of us it’s too little, too late. It won’t be until September 2025 that all under five-year-olds are entitled to free hours, or 2026 that all schools will offer wraparound care. Both those dates are well after the next election, so it may not even be this Government which has to deliver on these promises.
Jenna*, an editor in Hackney, is the mother of three-year-old twins, and says her family has gone into debt just so she could go back to work. She’s far from alone — research released this week by the think-tank Nesta shows that some single parents spend up to 80 per cent of their post-tax income on childcare.
“We’ve probably spent around £60,000 in the last two years on childcare alone,” she says. “It’s made our outgoings more than we earn so every single month we go into debt. Now, we’re thinking of borrowing against our mortgage.
“Although I’m pleased for future families, this announcement is depressing for us. There needs to be a better system or even something like a 0 per cent interest loan for childcare costs which you could pay back gradually.”
Emily Milne, a stage manager from east London, has a six-month-old son, Sidney. “I can’t afford to go back to work as childcare would cost us £27,000 which is more than I earn and this funding won’t start in time for us,” she says. “I’m gutted as I love my job. I think there’ll be a lot of women like me, giving up their jobs while they wait for this to kick in. I feel like I’ve been forced back into the home like some Fifties housewife.”
