Parents must not pay mandatory extra charges to access free childcare, government says

Published

5 months ago

February 21, 2025

admin

Parents who are entitled to hours of free childcare should not have to pay mandatory extra charges to secure their nursery place, the government has said.

Updated guidance from the Department for Education states that while nurseries are entitled to ask parents to pay for extras – including meals, snacks, nappies or sun cream – these charges must be voluntary rather than mandatory.

The guidance, which comes amid concerns that parents have faced high additional charges on top of the funded hours, also states that local councils should intervene if a childcare provider seeks to make additional charges a condition for parents accessing their hours.

Since September last year, parents and carers with children aged nine months and older have been entitled to 15 hours of government-funded childcare a week, rising to 30 hours for three to four year-olds.

Politics latest: Farage under fire for ‘deeply disappointing’ response to Trump’s Zelenskyy attacks

From this September, the 30 hours of care will be made available to all families – a rollout that was first introduced under the previous Conservative government.

However, there have been concerns that in order to subsidise shortfalls in funding, nurseries have charged parents extra for essentials that would normally have been included in fees.

Under the new guidance, nurseries will be now obliged to clearly set out any additional costs parents will have to pay, including on their websites.

It says invoices should be itemised so parents can see a breakdown of the free entitlement hours, additional private paid hours and all the additional charges.

‘Fundamental financial challenges facing the sector’

Representatives of childcare providers welcomed the announcement but pointed out the financial stress that many nurseries were under.

Neil Leitch, chief executive of the Early Years Alliance, said: “While we fully agree that families should be able to access early entitlement hours without incurring additional costs, in reality, years of underfunding have made it impossible for the vast majority of settings to keep their doors open without relying on some form of additional fees or charges.

“As such, while it is absolutely right that providers should be transparent with parents on any optional additional fees, today’s guidance does absolutely nothing to address – or even acknowledge – the fundamental financial challenges facing the sector.”

He added: “Given that from September, government will control the price of around 80% of early years provision, it has never been more important for that funding to genuinely reflect the true cost of delivering places.

“And yet we know in many areas, this year’s rate increases won’t come close to mitigating the impact April’s National Insurance and wage rises, meaning that costs for both providers and families are likely to spiral.”

In last year’s budget, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced that the amount businesses will pay on their employees’ national insurance contributions will increase from 13.8% to 15% from April this year.

She also lowered the current £9,100 threshold employers start paying national insurance on employees’ earnings to £5,000, in what she called a “difficult choice” to make.

Last month a survey from the National Day Nurseries Association (NDNA) found that cost increases from April will force nurseries to raise fees by an average of 10%.

Analysis by Anjum Peerbacos, education reporter

This could be welcome news for working parents as they approach the end of another half term break during which they will have incurred childcare costs.

But this money would not affect school age children.

It is dedicated to very young children, aged two or below and is targeting parents, predominantly mothers, that want to return to work.

Previously after doing the sums and factoring in childcare costs, many mums would have felt that it wasn’t worth it.

And so, if these funds are easily accessible on a local level it could make a real difference to those wanting to get back to work.

The survey, covering nurseries in England, revealed that staffing costs will increase by an average of 15%, with respondents saying that more than half of the increase was due to the national insurance decision in the budget.

Purnima Tanuku CBE, chief executive of the NDNA, said “taking away the flexibility for providers around charges could seriously threaten sustainability”.

“The funding government pays to providers has never been about paying for meals, snacks or consumables, it is to provide early education and care,” she said.

“Childcare places have historically been underfunded with the gap widening year on year.

“From April, the operating costs for the average nursery will go up by around £47,000 once statutory minimum wages and changes to national insurance contributions are implemented. NIC changes have not been factored into the latest funding rates, further widening the underfunding gap.”

The Department for Education said its offer to parents meant they could save up to £7,500 on average when using the full 30 hours a week of government-funded childcare support, compared to if they were paying for it themselves.

In December, the government also announced that a £75m expansion grant would be distributed to nurseries and childminders to help increase places ahead of the full rollout of funded childcare. 

Local authority allocations for the expansion grant will be confirmed before the end of February. Some of the largest areas could be provided with funding of up to £2.1m.

Politics

Building societies step up protest against Reeves’s cash ISA reforms

Published

3 hours ago

July 7, 2025

admin

Building societies step up protest against Reeves's cash ISA reforms

Building society chiefs will this week intensify their protests against the chancellor’s plans to cut cash ISA limits by warning that it will push up borrowing costs for homeowners and businesses.

Sky News has obtained the draft of a letter being circulated by the Building Societies Association (BSA) among its members which will demand that Rachel Reeves abandons a proposed move to slash savers’ annual cash ISA allowance from the existing £20,000 threshold.

Money blog: ‘I get paid to taste biscuits’

The draft letter, which is expected to be published this week, warns the chancellor that her decision would deter savers, disrupt Labour’s housebuilding ambitions and potentially present an obstacle to economic growth by triggering higher funding costs.

“Cash ISAs are a cornerstone of personal savings for millions across the UK, helping people from all walks of life to build financial resilience and achieve their savings goals,” the draft letter said.

“Beyond their personal benefits, Cash ISAs play a vital role in the broader economy.

“The funds deposited in these accounts support lending, helping to keep mortgages and loans affordable and accessible.

“Cutting Cash ISA limits would make this funding more scarce which would have the knock-on effect of making loans to households and businesses more expensive and harder to come by.

“This would undermine efforts to stimulate economic growth, including the government’s commitment to delivering 1.5 million new homes.

“Cutting the Cash ISA limit would send a discouraging message to savers, who are sensibly trying to plan for the future and undermine a product that has stood the test of time.”

The chancellor is reportedly preparing to announce a review of cash ISA limits as part of her Mansion House speech next week.

While individual building society bosses have come out publicly to express their opposition to the move, the BSA letter is likely to be viewed with concern by Treasury officials.

The Nationwide is by far Britain’s biggest building society, with the likes of the Coventry, Yorkshire and Skipton also ranking among the sector’s largest players.

In the draft letter, which is likely to be signed by dozens of building society bosses, the BSA said the chancellor’s proposals “would make the whole ISA regime more complex and make it harder for people to transfer money between cash and investments”.

“Restricting Cash ISAs won’t encourage people to invest, as it won’t suddenly change their appetite to take on risk,” it said.

“We know that barriers to investing are primarily behavioural, therefore building confidence and awareness are far more important.”

The BSA called on Ms Reeves to back “a long-term consumer awareness and information campaign to educate people about the benefits of investing, alongside maintaining strong support for saving”.

“We therefore urge you to affirm your support for Cash ISAs by maintaining the current £20,000 limit.

“Preserving this threshold will enable households to continue building financial security while supporting broader economic stability and growth.”

The BSA declined to comment on Monday on the leaked letter, although one source said the final version was subject to revision.

The Treasury has so far refused to comment on its plans.

Politics

Govt declines to rule out wealth tax after ex-Labour leader Lord Kinnock calls for wealth tax

Published

5 hours ago

July 7, 2025

admin

Govt declines to rule out wealth tax after ex-Labour leader Lord Kinnock calls for wealth tax

The government has declined to rule out a “wealth tax” after former Labour leader Neil Kinnock called for one to help the UK’s dwindling finances.

Lord Kinnock, who was leader from 1983 to 1992, told Sky News’ Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips that imposing a 2% tax on assets valued above £10 million would bring in up to £11 billion a year.

Politics latest: Reeves’s tax turmoil deepens

On Monday, Sir Keir Starmer’s spokesperson would not say if the government will or will not bring in a specific tax for the wealthiest.

Asked multiple times if the government will do so, he said: “The government is committed to the wealthiest in society paying their share in tax.

“The prime minister has repeatedly said those with the broadest shoulders should carry the largest burden.”

He added the government has closed loopholes for non-doms, placed taxes on private jets and said the 1% wealthiest people in the UK pay one third of taxes.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves earlier this year insisted she would not impose a wealth tax in her autumn budget, something she also said in 2023 ahead of Labour winning the election last year.

Asked if her position has changed, Sir Keir’s spokesman referred back to her previous comments and said: “The government position is what I have said it is.”

The previous day, Lord Kinnock told Sky News: “It’s not going to pay the bills, but that kind of levy does two things.

“One is to secure resources, which is very important in revenues.

“But the second thing it does is to say to the country, ‘we are the government of equity’.

“This is a country which is very substantially fed up with the fact that whatever happens in the world, whatever happens in the UK, the same interests come out on top unscathed all the time while everybody else is paying more for getting services.

“Now, I think that a gesture or a substantial gesture in the direction of equity fairness would make a big difference.”

The son of a coal miner, who became a member of the House of Lords in 2005, the Labour peer said asset values have “gone through the roof” in the past 20 years while economies and incomes have stagnated in real terms.

In reference to Chancellor Rachel Reeves refusing to change her fiscal rules, he said the government is giving the appearance it is “bogged down by their own imposed limitations”, which he said is “not actually the accurate picture”.

A wealth tax would help the government get out of that situation and would be backed by the “great majority of the general public”, he added.

His comments came after a bruising week for Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who had to heavily water down a welfare bill meant to save £5.5bn after dozens of Labour MPs threatened to vote against it.

With those savings lost – and a previous U-turn on cutting winter fuel payments also reducing savings – the chancellor’s £9.9bn fiscal headroom has quickly dwindled.

In a hint of what could come, government minister Stephen Morgan told Wilfred Frost on Sky News Breakfast: “I hold dear the Labour values of making sure those that have the broadest shoulders pay, pay more tax.

“I think that’s absolutely right.”

He added that the government has already put a tax on private jets and on the profits of energy companies.