UK Parliament / Open data

Childcare Bill

Proceeding contribution from David Evennett (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 28 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bills on Childcare Bill.
My hon. Friend makes a sensible point, as he usually does on these matters. We should consider tax incentives, because they would encourage an increase in provision. If we are serious about increasing provision, we must consider all the available opportunities, and not just focus on a narrow few. There has been much debate today on the duties of local authorities in England and Wales. Those authorities will have to secure, as far as is practical, the provision of child care to meet the needs of parents, and that is welcome and encouraging. However, giving local authorities more powers and responsibilities raises the question of cost. The Secretary of State did not really answer our questions on that earlier, and I hope that the Minister will look a little harder at the issue. No extra money is being provided. The Government have said that they have put adequate money aside, but other duties will be required of local authorities, including advice and assessment and even the provision of child care. They do not know how much that is going to cost, having made their assessment, or how much child care they are going to have to provide, but there will be an increase in cost. Any such increase would worry my constituents. If the Government are not providing extra money to pay for the extra responsibilities, will council tax payers have to pick up the bill? My local authority, Bexley, has already had a 35 per cent. increase in its council tax over the past three years, and that has hit people hard, particularly people on low incomes with families, pensioners and people on fixed incomes. If the local authority had to increase the council tax to provide the additional services required by the Bill, it would probably hit hardest those who could least afford it, and that worries me. The Secretary of State did not give us enough reassurance that that would not happen. A further problem is bureaucracy. As a former teacher and lecturer, I have some concerns about the educational aspects of the Bill. Parents are the primary educators. Of course, we need to help them, but we should not dictate to them. They generally know better than Governments or bureaucrats—or supposed experts—what is best for their child. However, the Bill feels somewhat prescriptive. The Government like rules and regulations, and it worries me that the Bill contains new rules that dictate how infants should communicate, use language and literacy, and so forth. Childminders and nurseries will have to teach the early-years foundation stage curriculum from birth to three years old. Ofsted will come along to check that the children are developing according to Government policy, and the Department for Education and Skills will be in control. That worries me, because children in their early years should be encouraged to learn through enjoyment and to develop at their own pace. They need to zone in on their social skills by co-ordinating, talking and sharing. Every child will develop to a different level and a different ability, as my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham said earlier. It worries me that the Bill is so prescriptive about the level of educational involvement. Older children should certainly have formal education, but a more detailed curriculum is inappropriate for children in their early years. Parents, not Ministers, know best how to bring up their children. Of course we want more child care places, but we want to give parents the ability to superintend their child’s development.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
440 c83-4 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top