General News Discussion

[eFestivals]

I don't understand what they are up to here....

I think it's little more than trying to make the costs of childcare cheaper. The current costs are pretty much set by the current level of regulation, which for many people make not working a better idea than working.

But off the back of the change it becomes possible for the govt to force more people into work - just the poor people of course - and off benefits, which by itself is a very narrow vision, and when the facts of the economy is factored in becomes completely pointless, because each extra working mother equals one extra unemployed person who doesn't have child commitments.

I can see childcare getting cheaper from this, but all it will really get to mean is that the poor have worse childcare than richer types, with all the extra problems that brings. But we're all in this together, so it's a good idea.

[hot_ice]

I think it's little more than trying to make the costs of childcare cheaper. The current costs are pretty much set by the current level of regulation, which for many people make not working a better idea than working.

But off the back of the change it becomes possible for the govt to force more people into work - just the poor people of course - and off benefits, which by itself is a very narrow vision, and when the facts of the economy is factored in becomes completely pointless, because each extra working mother equals one extra unemployed person who doesn't have child commitments.

I can see childcare getting cheaper from this, but all it will really get to mean is that the poor have worse childcare than richer types, with all the extra problems that brings. But we're all in this together, so it's a good idea.

[eFestivals]

But surely nurseries are still profit making companies, so why are they going to reduce their prices whens there healthy profit to be made?

because the nurseries that are struggling to get the numbers to be profitable will drop their prices to attract more custom, and that will result in others having to react to that.

The nurseries that keep their current prices will churn their clients to those cheaper places, unless they're lucky enough to only have clients all so rich that they don't care about childcare costs.

the middle class will pay a premium for their kids to have better ratios and those nurseries in working class areas will just keep the prices the same

Nah, neither will happen.

Because, if someone says to you that you can be (say) £50 a week richer when nothing that you'll particularly notice will have changed, you'll be very likely to cash in on that £50.

While there's some who can afford to keep paying current prices, most of those will go for the cheaper options.

The change in prices perhaps won't be instant, but it'll certainly happen.

[eFestivals]

I can't see any angle on how it gets cheaper to be honest.

I refer you to Das Kapital for you to get a lesson in economics.

[eFestivals]

Its nothing to do with economic though....

really?

I don't think the amount of people either needing or not needing child care is going to swing dramatically enough to start making a serious impact on fees.

so they'll never be any new childcare service? And there won't ever be anyone looking for childcare on a tight budget?

Pleeeeaaasse!!

£100 bet that prices change?

[zero000]

It's a grim and economically stupid policy really isn't it? Investing in childcare as a government should be considered crucial, better quality childcare should have long term implications in terms of later learning and thus benefits to the economy. But of course who cares about the poor kids hey?

[eFestivals]

It's a grim and economically stupid policy really isn't it? Investing in childcare as a government should be considered crucial, better quality childcare should have long term implications in terms of later learning and thus benefits to the economy. But of course who cares about the poor kids hey?

from one angle I agree, but from another, what is the right level of staffing to ensure that kids are properly looked after?

The only real issue I have with this change is that it's going to be used as a stick to beat poorer people with, and that it's poorer people's kids that will suffer most if the staffing levels are too low.

If all kids had to go into childcare staffed at these levels then I'd have much less issue with it. But because they're not, it's going to be a further way that ensures that the kids of the poor are disadvantaged over the kids of the rich, to add to all the things which already exist in other parts of the education system - for example, most of the free schools already operating a selection system (despite it being illegal), and Oxford colleges now ask to see £27k in the bank before someone can start a post-degree course.

[zero000]

from one angle I agree, but from another, what is the right level of staffing to ensure that kids are properly looked after?

[eFestivals]

Here comes another war - this time it's non-combat. Like that'll work!

All in support of a govt that came to power in a military coup a year ago.

Only a week or two ago it was "no troops on the ground". Remember the minister of defence saying he didn't expect the army to fire a shot in Afghanistan?

Meanwhile the USA are already in on the act with their military too. The recolonisation of north Africa is full steam ahead!

And they wonder why people get attracted to Al-Qaeda.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

Oxford colleges now ask to see £27k in the bank before someone can start a post-degree course.

[5co77ie]

All in support of a govt that came to power in a military coup a year ago.

Only a week or two ago it was "no troops on the ground". Remember the minister of defence saying he didn't expect the army to fire a shot in Afghanistan?

Meanwhile the USA are already in on the act with their military too. The recolonisation of north Africa is full steam ahead!

And they wonder why people get attracted to Al-Qaeda.

[zero000]

Can someone give me a breakdown of the Mali situation? I've been completely out of the loop lately for various reasons.

[eFestivals]

There is nothing exclusive in that. Even applying for post grad at Hull over 10 years ago you had to produce bank statements and evidence of funding at interview. It has been a standard request in post grad education for self funders for decades.

You've not noticed the difference between what I said, and what you've said.

I didn't say "proof of funding", I said "ask to see £27k in the bank". Having a job to support yourself does not count, they want to see the funds in advance as proof that you can support yourself.

There was a piece about it in The Guardian or Observer, within the last week.

[eFestivals]

Can someone give me a breakdown of the Mali situation? I've been completely out of the loop lately for various reasons.

Oil and power.

Same old same old.

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

Nicolas Sarkozy, started all this - inflaming North African youth in suburban Paris riots - it's their mess let them sort it aht.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

You've not noticed the difference between what I said, and what you've said.

I didn't say "proof of funding", I said "ask to see £27k in the bank". Having a job to support yourself does not count, they want to see the funds in advance as proof that you can support yourself.

There was a piece about it in The Guardian or Observer, within the last week.

[pink_triangle]

Fantastic news to see the tory boundary reforms beaten, anything that makes a conservative majority less likely can only be seen as positive in my opinion.

Its funny during the AV campaign they complained voters werent interested in constitutional reform but it became a priority when it suited them. They moan about how the current system could mean they get more votes than labour but less seats, yet at the same time are anti PR

The reduction of 50 seats was completely arbitary with no evidence to support it and I am personally glad the lib dems have stopped it happening.

[eFestivals]

No that is not what I was saying. In proof of funding I mean just that.

I know you do.

What I'm saying is that what you are saying is not what I'm talking about. The Oxford colleges want to see money in the bank, not proof of funding.

They want to see cash already in your bank account, not something which suggests that money will appear in your bank account over the course (such as a job).

I know for a fact Oxford operate that same system.

then your facts are out of date and need revising.

They are now operating as I've said they're operating. The want to see cash in the bank, not 'proof of funding'.

Edited January 30, 2013 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

What I am saying is the picture this time next year won't be dramatically different...

I'm not sure when these changes will take effect, but if it were tomorrow then I wouldn't argue too much against what you say here. I'm not thinking that price changes will be instant everywhere - those places that can maintain their fees after their costs have reduced will do so; few will be able to sustain their current charges over time tho.

Its currently £160 for five full days. I either of us can remember in 6 months lets see which way the fees have gone, factoring in inflation.

6 months is probably too soon, because few people currently using childcare are going to start shopping around looking for a cheaper option.

The change in prices will take a while to work thru, as nurseries shut down and new ones open, and as new parents start looking for childcare places.

I'm saying they'll change for just about everyone over time, but not that they'll change immediately.

[Guest]

i was listening to the radio this morning, while i do not really have a full understanding of the nursery system as a whole, couple things arose when the tory (i believer councillor) was defending it, He said "look at our other European countries", however my understanding is their systems are different (funding wise) so that doesnt really stand up (and just because the germans/french do it one way doesnt mean we should follow!).

the other issue is these nursery workers are suppose to be better qualified, now while i dont have an issue with that. its the type of qualifications they going to get, i find it amusing that just a little while ago Btech's were courses the tories said were a waste of space but apparently now they are worthwhile?

also if these nursery nurses are all better qualified? surely this will cost more money in the long term?

[Guest]

We are hardly a low tax country.... It's more what we choose to spend on....

[eFestivals]

So your point is the price will change at some point in the future.... Ok....

You're saying it won't change prices, I'm saying it will. Only one of us will be right.

Price changes downwards always take a while to work themselves thru, because existing businesses will try to hang onto the extra profits, while new businesses will see that gap as their opportunity into the market - and ultimately those new businesses will effect the prices charged by existing businesses.

I'm not thinking that every childcare business will hang up a sign saying "new lower prices" from the first day the change comes into effect, only that the prices will come down over time as an average across all of the childcare sector as a result of the change (they'll be some places that will manage to maintain their current charges).

[eFestivals]

We are hardly a low tax country.... It's more what we choose to spend on....

the problem is that, as a country, we look at the costs but never at the value we get from those costs.

As I keep pointing out, the NHS gets constantly slagged off for haemorrhaging money, but the value we get from what it costs is never considered. A quick look across the Atlantic gets to show that they spend twice as much but have a lower average health outcome from spending twice as much.

The considerations that we make are totally wrong. It was (surprise surprise) Thatcher who made everything about costs and nothing about value, and this country has been ripped apart because of it.

[5co77ie]

Hmm, I think this would have happened whether there was tension in France or not.

If you want to look at the cause, I'd argue you need to look at China's position in Africa in recent years. This is the kickstart of the response....

[eFestivals]

Ok but whats that got to do with anything I just said...

because the choice of what it gets spent on doesn't nowadays have any relationship to the value that is got from that spend.

For example, the tories love to bang on about how we spend too much on welfare, while nothing of that is related to how many people that welfare money is supporting or how it's supporting them.

Similarly, they go on about how the NHS spend isn't sustainable, while pushing us towards a system where the amount spent on healthcare will double - which is even less sustainable than the situation now (which also gets to prove the lie that the NHS spend isn't sustainable).

Etc, etc, etc.

Low tax or high tax, the spending decisions should be made on the value got from those decisions, and not merely on the basis that something is 'too much' but without any consideration of what happens if that spend isn't made.