Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have plans to review
the childcare system.
(Con)
My Lords, this Government are committed to ensuring that as many
families as possible can access high-quality, affordable
childcare. That is why we are investing around £3.5 billion in
our early education entitlements this year alone—more than any
previous Government. We monitor the provider market constantly
for a range of regular and one-off research projects, which are
ongoing and have already been published.
(Lab)
First, my Lords, I apologise: the Question did not appear on the
Order Paper in the manner I thought in my head I had asked it. I
am not sure what happened but I did not look at the actual
Question until last night. I actually wanted to ask about
children in care rather than just childcare, so I apologise to
the House and to the Minister.
The number of children in care is higher than ever before and
rising every year. The money going to local government to look
after them is reducing, which means that local government is now
spending a very high proportion of its money allocated to
children in the care system, and not on early prevention and so
on. This is now a crisis. We continue to see the most vulnerable
children ending up more likely to be in the criminal justice
system than in university on leaving care. The system is broken
and the state is not proving to be a good parent. Will the
Government take hold of this and make sure that they have a
proper look at the whole system, which is broken and not working?
The Government need to change the way in which they look after
the most vulnerable children.
Let me focus on the subject of social care, which the noble
Baroness raised. When children cannot live at home, it is one of
the state’s most important responsibilities to ensure that they
are kept safe and that they flourish. That is why we have set out
a far-reaching programme of reform in children’s social care,
improving practice in local authorities, strengthening the social
care workforce and supporting care leavers through staying put.
Since 2010, 44 councils have been lifted out of failure and have
not returned. So, rather than establishing a new review, our
priority is to embed these reforms as they stand.
(Con)
One of the most natural results of ordinary parenthood is a bond
between parent and child, which is of immense importance. I have
tried on a number of occasions to secure something of the kind in
the children’s care system that the noble Baroness meant to talk
about, because it is vitally important. I understand that it is
difficult for management, but the aim should still be to secure
that, because it would make a terrific difference to the outcomes
for most of those in the system.
My noble and learned friend is right; the Government believe that
good early years education is the cornerstone of social mobility
and that children should be allowed to bond with their parents.
Equally, we believe that parents should be allowed to work. That
is why we have the entitlement to 15 hours of free childcare, and
to 30 hours for those in work. But it is still the case that 28%
of children finish their reception year without the early
communication and reading skills they need to thrive, so there is
more work to do.
(Lab)
My Lords, some years ago, I was on a Select Committee for
affordable childcare. We had many excellent witnesses, including
from parents’ organisations, and we reached some interesting
conclusions. One of them was that the system was so complex that
parents found it difficult to understand their rights, and
therefore that some parents were not using the system as they
might. Could the noble Lord say what is being done to simplify
the childcare system so that everyone understands it, and
children and parents alike can benefit from it?
We do not believe that the system is too complicated. However, I
should point out that parents can find information about all the
Government’s childcare offers on the website: I can give the
noble Baroness some details on that. We also have a childcare
calculator that parents can use to check their eligibility for
support. But perhaps the proof is in the pudding, as it were,
because there is near universal take-up of the 15 hours for all
three and four year-olds—92% of three year-olds and 95% of four
year-olds—and the parents of 72% of eligible two year-olds are
taking up their entitlement. So there is something that does
work.
(Con)
Is my noble friend able to update the House on the progress of
the scheme supported by the Government through which children in
care can secure places in state and independent boarding schools,
where the child is suited to such an education?
I can, to the extent of saying that the onus of this is on local
authorities. Our position is that local authorities are best
placed to target spending and set their budgets, and also to work
out where their children in care might best be placed.
(Lab)
My Lords, let me try to blend the two questions. Nine years ago
this month, the coalition Government, in the first round of
austerity measures, dealt a mortal blow to the Sure Start
programme. Although Sure Start is more than childcare and
healthcare, the recently issued IFS report unequivocally
demonstrates its value in terms of health outcomes. Surely
reinvesting in the original local Sure Start programmes will
ensure that children are properly nurtured and parents are
engaged in parenting programmes that will stop children being
taken into care in the first place.
I know that the party opposite feels very strongly about the Sure
Start programme. I very much note the recent report that came out
from the IFS, and in particular the focus on the health effects
of Sure Start—but it also demonstrates that children in
disadvantaged areas benefit most from the services, and the
policy framework we have in place reflects this evidence. Also,
there are more children’s centres now than prior to 2008, and
during the period when was PM.
