Childcare should be at the heart of our future offer to the British people, argues Stephen Twigg
On taking office in 1997, Labour entered unchartered territory in early years policy. By the end of our time in government, it had gone from being a policy-free zone to being one of the most radical and transformative areas of public policy. Our emphasis on making work pay, on raising the educational outcomes – particularly in our most deprived communities – for children starting primary school and on advancing gender equality has transformed the lives of so many people across Britain today.
We should be proud that we doubled the number of childcare places available and improved the life chances of the sure start generation. We should be proud too that we increased the participation of women in the labour market through the introduction of progressive policies like the childcare element of working tax credits and the universal nursery entitlement.
I have now been appointed by Ed Miliband to chair the Labour party’s commission on childcare. Working with Liam Byrne, Yvette Cooper, Tessa Jowell, Rachel Reeves and colleagues across the parliamentary Labour party, I am responsible for formulating proposals to put forward to the party’s policy review process on childcare as we progress towards the next manifesto.
There are three tests by which our childcare proposals will be judged and that we must consider as we move forward. Equally, we will apply these criteria to the government’s plans, following the recent intervention by No 10 establishing the coalition’s own commission.
First, on raising standards and quality in childcare. Progress was made on this front with the creation and expansion of sure start and other Labour initiatives. As minister of state, Margaret Hodge was a strong advocate of the central importance of educational development in childcare, pioneering the early excellence centres in some of Britain’s most deprived communities. Significant investment was made to build the capacity and raise the status of the early years workforce. The evidence shows that investment has positive outcomes on the cognitive and social development of children. Raising the quality and status of the workforce will be crucial to driving forward this agenda.
A similar outlook on the importance of a high-quality workforce was evident in the pre-school I visited in the Botkyrka municipality, just outside Stockholm. I was in Sweden during the May parliamentary recess to see what lessons Labour can learn from the highly esteemed ‘Scandinavian model’. A national curriculum was recently introduced for early years, setting clear goals but providing scope for professional autonomy for the early years workforce. The model encourages learning through problem-solving and heightens the interaction of children with each other and with their carers. Research from Birkbeck college at the University of London has shown that where children are exposed to this kind of learning during this stage their cognitive development progresses at a faster rate. The commission will be exploring options for improving the early years curriculum to see what works from elsewhere and in particular the balance between prescription and autonomy as a means for raising the educational outcomes at this critical stage in child development.
Second, on the economic case for childcare. We know that investing in a child’s life during the early years stage pays dividends in the long run. As well as improving educational outcomes by five and ensuring that children are ready for school when they start, the short-term benefits are felt by hard-working families struggling with the costs of childcare. Families are currently being hit by a triple whammy in childcare: costs are going up, availability is going down, and the support from government is being reduced. Despite David Cameron saying that his would be the most family-friendly government in Europe we have seen a huge cut in financial support, meaning that families will lose on average £580 per year towards their childcare costs with some families now paying 50 per cent more.
The long- and short-term benefits are clear and Labour has a crucial challenge on winning those arguments. IPPR has made a strong case for the economic benefits of universal childcare (see box), and any policy offer must of course be firmly rooted on sound economic foundations.
Third, on advancing the equalities agenda. It is a damning indictment of this government’s record on childcare that Aviva has reported that over 30,000 women have cited the cost of childcare as the reason for leaving employment. Labour believes that work must pay. That women will be forced to vote with their feet if it costs them to work is regressive and wrong.
In the Queen’s speech in May, the government set out its intention to bring forward a children and families bill that will include proposals on parental leave. We look to our Scandinavian friends with envy when it comes to parental leave: in Sweden, it is far more extensive and offers much greater flexibility between parents. Labour dramatically expanded parental leave, some of which was opposed by the Tories. As the bill progresses through parliament, Labour will be examining in detail the provisions for flexibility and choice in the government’s proposals.
The prime minister signalled his intent on childcare when he established the government’s commission, many months after Labour identified childcare as a key priority. His language is of deregulation and doing childcare on the cheap. If this is the case, we will expose this regressive direction of travel.
Ed Miliband has told British families that Labour is with you. We have some big tests ahead in making sure that our policies are up to this challenge, not least in making tough choices about our offer on childcare to make sure it is both radical and affordable at a time when there is less money around. We believe that work should pay, as part of a ‘something-for-something’ culture. Childcare will be a pivotal electoral issue come the next general election, as Progress identified in The Purple Book. It is not only right on the social and economic arguments, but getting the policy right is critical for winning the political argument too.
—————————————————————————————
Stephen Twigg MP is shadow secretary of state for education
I agree that this is a crucial issue. I’ve been an education policy researcher for most of my career and my view is that high quality early years care and education is the cornerstone of a happy and secure childhood and of opportunities for social mobility. Sure Start was a great innovation and needs to be rescued and revived. We need to go further and make early years education on the Scandinavian model available for all children and families in all areas of the country. I would advocate that all those working in the field as educators should have degree level qualifications. In Sweden early years education is an esteemed profession and attracts bright people. The same should be the case in the UK. There was a very good interview on Womens Hour with the Danish Minister for education braodcast last Saturday. She makes some very good and valid points about the value of nursery education.
Also critical is need to maintain high quality childcare delivered by trained and qualified staff in all areas of Early Years.
So why is Labour so quiet on the proposed deregulation of childminders?
While busy admiring the Swedish model please remember the population is much smaller there and they are taxed at 50% to fund these services that so impressed!
If Liz Truss MP has her way we will allow “agencies” instead of Ofsted to manage childminders.
It will be the agencies that are inspected not individual childminders, as is the current system.
Far from lowering the cost to Parents it actually introduces a middle man that will skim profit from both the parents and the childminders thus taking us down the same route as the care of the elderly in the U.K.
On the subject of 30,00 women leaving employment because of the cost of childcare, please consider the 56,000 childminder’s mostly women who are set to lose their small businesses if Liz Truss is successful……or don’t they count???
If it is true that Labour is “with Families” then how about remembering that those that deliver the childcare have families too and mortgages etc.
Experience in the role of a shadow minister and even aMinister is very important. A person who is chancellor would normally have some experience on number crunching and economics. You would be hard pressed to put Eric Pickles as Health Secretary. Ideally a Defence Minister or Shadow would arguably have some experience on the Armed Forces. A Justice Secretary would be chosen from experience in the legal system and criminal justice system.
The Chair of Labour Childcare Commission and Education Shadow would obviously be better suited to candidates who have not had an Oxford education and have some experience on pedagogy, children, families and learning.
What is going on?
Ed Miliband is doing so well at the moment and this announcement and all women shortlists is a disaster for Labour
Excellent article, Stephen. Just a couple of questions on your approach:
1) You mentioned Sweden in the article. Have you looked at Finland at all, which seems to be the most innovative country in terms of education? It would be interesting to know what lessons the Finns have for us on childcare
2) Have you looked at this from a rights-based perspective? I’m thinking of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Tamweer, Stephen is not only culturally unaware of the reality of hardworking families and their plight in ensuring they have equality of access to the Labour Market, his reliance on models from from countries with populations the size of Birmingham shows immaturity and his ignorance of ideas placed before him by party members in the policy review. This is unacceptable. He is clearly not suitable for the post of Education shadow, owing to the lack of respect he shows to hard working people and the lack of confidence shown in him by mainstrem society. He is no role model for families and for children and parents of children. Being drunk etc in a public place comes to mind.
Stephen Twigg reminds me of Pareto and his theory on the movement of elites. He may be best suited at looking at this model from the French. Progress and Blairite shadow ministers are clearly carrying on the mantle of creating conflict within the ranks of the Labour Party with the result of forming a hereditary class (New Labour Elite) from the social classes the hard working labour party members. This is similar to the elected and the electorate. Jonathan Freedland recently identifies this elitest attititude of the Left and Labour in his recent book. Twigg epitomises what is wrong with Labour…a london elite parachuted into a Northern Constituency. He lost his seat once, he will lose it again.
His reliance on the masses who he assist to formulate his own grievance to close off the social classes within society and the labour membership is clear here. Lets not pretend. He is a BLAIRITE and should have no future in a modern labour movement.
Not only does he fail to disclose any value judgments that allows a good society to function, he lacks judgments based on reality and experience.
Shocking
One more thing.
Stephen Twigg states
“I have now been appointed by Ed Miliband to chair the Labour party’s commission on childcare. Working with Liam Byrne, Yvette Cooper, Tessa Jowell, Rachel Reeves and colleagues across the parliamentary Labour party, I am responsible for formulating proposals to put forward to the party’s policy review process on childcare as we progress towards the next manifesto”
There is no “I ” in Team Labour it is We. This statement says all you need to know about Stephen Twigg.
Show some backbone, Ed, and sack Stephen Twigg.
No matter which models we look at for childcare we need to find one that suits our country. Totally agree unhelpful to look at Sweden with their small population and tax at 50%
It is also impereative that Labour makes proposals based on the experiences of those who work in childcare and deliver a service that is becoming too costly for providers and parents alike….but regulation makes us accountable and has raised standards…deregulation is not welcome and parents have said so in many reports.
The cost of childcare started to rise several years ago under Labour and, despite attempts to bring to their attention…no one listened !
In the childcare commission we have an excellent opportunity to find alternatives and workable answers…but it is ‘WE’ together, providers and politicians, that need to listen to each other!
Parents and providers must be considered equally in this…providers are parents too and need to earn a decent living to feed families and pay mortgages
I also would like to add that Labour needs to look at the Free Entitlement…for me this is the very reason childcare costs are rising.
The funding received vary from LA to LA (from £5ph to £2.50ph)..in some areas it is actually higher that the hourly fee while in others it could half the fee…result: providers have consistently raised fees outside of the FE to sustain businesses and cover costs.
LAs must be made accountable for the money received from central govt and show how they allocate it to providers, it needs to be ringfenced….unless the funding gets to be fair and equal for all, many providers will refuse to deliver the FE and universal childcare will not become reality especially for 2 year olds!
“… our future offer to the British people… ” Yuk! Who writes/concocts this garbage??
just an observation, we need to be clear when we are talking about ‘early years education’ and when we are talking about ‘childcare’ both are important, but very different things, and frequently conflated. Primarily early years education is about supporting children to get the best start in life and childcare is primarily about supporting parents to work. Two very different but related policy debates.