AnonyMouse_3139 Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Parliamentary debate, Liz Truss http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/commons/todays-commons-debates/read/unknown/108/ Mr Gove speaking in Brighton https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/what-does-it-mean-to-be-an-educated-person Letter from Michael Rosen to Mr Gove http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2013/may/06/michael-rosen-letter-to-michael-gove Mr Clegg in Nursery World http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/news/1181711/Plans-ratio-reform-hit-opposition-Clegg/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_19762 Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Thanks Rea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_3139 Posted May 9, 2013 Author Share Posted May 9, 2013 Others have contributed sunnyday, I took these from facebook 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_3139 Posted May 9, 2013 Author Share Posted May 9, 2013 From the Pre-school Learning Alliance https://www.pre-school.org.uk/media/press-releases/370/pre-school-learning-alliance-accuses-minister-of-misleading-mps-over-childcare-ratios 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_12960 Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Thanks for the links Rea...the parliamentary debate was particularly interesting, yet I feel so disheartened that it is now so clear thst Ms Truss has not listened and will not listen to our views. Looks like this one is going to get steamrollered through!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_3139 Posted May 9, 2013 Author Share Posted May 9, 2013 I'm waitng for a reply from my MP. I asked, if Ms Truss is saying its not compulsory to lower the ratios, why she said in another article she hoped Ofsted would mark down any providers who didnt employ a graduate. You cant have the lower ratios without the graduate, so its hardly voluntary is it if we have ofsted marking us down. Ridiculous woman has bitten off more than she can chew 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I can't find where to post this comment i am going to make except here... and its just my idea which will be of no use in reality but it shows i am thinking of solutions to this huge problem we are having: What if instead of the goverment giving parents of children a childcare element towards nursery fee's ie the 70% standard amount to for each child ie maybe for example 50 children in a setting average cost to goverment 50x120 = £6000 per week they instead pay the STAFF a much more deserved wage.. ie 8 staff @ £400 per week £3200 which is much less than the £6000 thus reducing child care fee's to parents by 70% possibly! Afterall the wages bill of a nursery is usually the major costs.. This will allow nurseries to employ the Teacher status staff, or dare i say it, better staff needed to control the children at the ratios we have now if not better ratios.. it will bring down the cost of childcare to ALL parents and encourage more to go back to work... Anyway let me know where i have gone wrong with this! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_3139 Posted May 10, 2013 Author Share Posted May 10, 2013 Its the same with housing benefit Pay it direct to the landlord and everyones happy, pay it direct to the tennat and arrears arise. I do understand that people should be given control of their money, but not everyone can cope. Money direct to the people you are buying a service from would make the whole thing so much easier with probably less waste 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Well in this instance it wouldn't be a matter of parents not having control of money, bacause they wouldn't need the child element support if the child care costs where much lower in the 1st place. For example: Fees at the moment £170 per week full time place for 0-3 year olds, staff only being paid minimum wage for a qualified position which in some even most cases does not bring out the best work, or ambition from the workers. With the new idea in place, child care costs £80 for full time place, staff on a much higher wage as deserved for a demanding job, with wage structures for more qualified positions, encourages self development and motivation etc Based on 50 children paying £80 per week = £4000 per week to cover other expenses should be enough right? This lower child care rate would encourage many more parents to happily pay for childcare and be able to go out to work to more than cover these costs, and be happy in the knowledge their child is getting the best childcare and all thanks to the goverment paying the staffs wages. At the sme time though this would save the goverment a lot of money in the process! WIN WIN? Even though you would think this should all be possible the way things are now, we are finding many parents don't see any benefit in working just to cover childcare costs... so that is the difference with this idea and why it would work much better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sn0wdr0p Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I am sure the government must be losing money through tax credits as I am constanty amazed by the amount of parents who claim for more than they actually pay. I have been asked by two parents so far this year to lie for them because they have been caught claiming for more than they pay me - and yes I did refuse. We get quite a few calls from tax credits this time of year. It would also stop arrears building up and parents disappearing owing money. In the five years my nursery has been open over £6000 in outstanding fees has built up despite all kinds of strategies to prevent it. it would certainly clear my overdraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 SnowDrop you have hit the nail on head, and im sure this happens to many many nurseries too, including ours! It is a joke to be honest. It makes me wonder why the goverment allows it to happen this way? What do THEY have to gain from it, that's my thinking! Afterall it is our tax payers money and not theirs afterall :rolleyes: ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Yes i wanted to use "afterall" twice in that sentence! :rolleyes: wooops Hope people could continue this debate and maybe let me know why it wouldn't work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts