Ï㽶ÊÓƵapp

Commenting, Neil Leitch, CEO of the Early Years Alliance, said: 

"While the Chancellor claims to be building a 'childcare system comparable to the best', the news that early years settings will only receive an initial increase in funding of £204m for the three- and four-year-olds completely flies in the face of this rhetoric. 

"With the shortfall for current two-, three- and four-year-old offer estimated at around £1.8bn based on government's own figures, the additional funding announced today is highly unlikely to match what's needed to put providers on a steady footing, and raises serious questions about the government's entire approach to costing this policy.

"We know from bitter experience that expansions of so-called 'free childcare' without adequate investment are a recipe from utter disaster – and given that many providers rely on fees from younger children to make up for current funding shortfalls, the impact on the sector if the government gets this wrong cannot be underestimated.

"And while today's announcement will no doubt be effective at driving up the demand for early years places, it's far less clear how ministers intend to ensure adequate supply. At a time when settings are closing at record levels and early educators are leaving the sector in their droves, unless the proper infrastructure is put in place by the time the extended offers are rolled out, many parents of younger children expecting funded places to be readily available to them are likely to be left sorely disappointed – and the token offer to new childminders announced today is likely to do little to change this.

"What's more, while much has been said about the role of this policy in supporting parents back to work, we've yet to hear anything about the need to ensure any places being provided to children are of high quality. Early years settings don't just deliver 'childcare'; they provide vital early education, and yet this seems to have been completely overlooked in discussions - as demonstrated by the government's shameful decision to relax ratios despite almost universal opposition from both parents and providers.

"Ultimately what matters how what was promised to parents today is implemented in practice. From what has been announced so far, we are far from convinced."

Commenting on the decision to push ahead with relaxing ratios, Neil said:

"It is utterly appalling that the government has pushed ahead with this decision, and the fact that it has done so without even bothering to respond to the official consultation launched several months ago is an insult to the sector and an insult to families.

"Yes, parents want affordable care and education, but they also want to ensure that their children are in safe environments receiving quality care and education - something this policy completely flies in the face of.

"We have a cohort of children still recovering from the effects of the pandemic. We have an overwhelmed and overburden workforce already leaving in their droves. How can anyone in government have possibly looked at this policy and thought: 'Yes, this is the way forward'?

"In their focus on growth and boosting the economy, ministers have forgotten that we have a responsibility to our youngest children: to ensure that they all, without exception, get the best possible start in life. It is a shameful decision, and one we will continue to fight to oppose."

EDITOR NOTES

Based on the findings of the Alliance's Freedom of Information investigation on early years funding, the Women's Budget Group estimates that fully-funding the current provision for three- and four-year-olds in England would require an increase in funding of £1.53 billion for 2023/24. Under the same logic, to cover the full cost of the current provision for disadvantaged two-year-olds, the additional funding needed is £286.4 million. In total, an additional £1.82bn would need allocated to fully cover the provision of the existing 15 and 30 hour early education and childcare entitlements for 2023/24.