North Dorset is a rural area with a number of small towns. Rather than one expensive building, children's centre funding was to be in the form of additional support for families. There is an extreme shortage of services such as speech therapy, so we supported the proposal for a 'virtual children's centre' which could develop provision for disadvantaged children.
Flying Start Nurseries is the major early years provider in the area. We provide grant-funded sessional education, wraparound care, baby places and holiday clubs. We include many children with special educational needs. We liaise with the community paediatrician, health visitors and portage. We have excellent Ofsted reports, Investors in People status and a highly qualified and experienced staff.
I discovered that the manager of North Dorset Children's Centre was holding a meeting to discuss a children's centre in Shaftesbury. As it was held without notice, I was unable to go, but telephoned the manager to express my dismay at the lack of consultation. I was informed that the proposed children's centre was to 'cater for a different market' to Flying Start Nurseries.
When I suggested that a local children's centre should build on existing good provision and not compete with it, and that we considered ourselves to be a community provision, I was told, as if the two concepts were incompatible, that I was 'a business'.
Consultation with local providers? No chance. Find out what good provision exists and support it? Not if it's 'a business'. Threaten the sustainability of other early years providers and reduce local choice? Looks like it. Prove unsustainable so when the funding fizzles out there's nothing left? I fear so.
Government strategies for children must include existing early years provision. Not to do so is short-sighted, costly and ideologically flawed and will lead to poor quality services.
* Claire Macdonald, proprietor, Flying Start Nurseries, Shaftesbury, Dorset
