An article published in The Times today (7 October) suggests rather than ‘tweak’ ratios, Truss is looking at getting rid of the regulatory requirement leaving it up to childcare settings to decide how many staff they need to children.
This is despite overwhelming opposition within the early years sector and among parents to relax the staff: child ratios from 1:4 to 1:5 for two-year-olds.
Early years organisations have warned the move could have ‘dire circumstances’ and have urged the Government to further consult with the sector.
The Times article states, ‘Ministers are understood to believe that the present ratio has become a burden on nurseries, who hire surplus staff because they fear sudden inspections when one of the staff is ill or even on an extended break.’
It goes on to include a comment from a Government source, which says, 'We are exploring a wide range of options to make childcare more accessible and affordable for parents, but no decisions have yet been made.'
The idea has been backed by the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), a rightwing think tank
Separately, The Guardian is also reporting today that a document from the Free Market Forum (FMF), an offshoot of the IEA, suggests scrapping free childcare hours, releasing green belt land for housing, abolishing corporation tax and dropping teacher training qualifications for graduates.
In one chapter, the IEA’s Annabel Denham proposes scrapping free childcare provision, arguing that the 15 hours a week provided costs the state around £6bn a year 'but there isn’t much to show for it'.
She suggests that adult-to-child ratios are 'unnecessary and damaging' and early years assessments should be dropped.
Other ideas are reported to include remote learning so parents can pick the best teachers, amending the Equalities Act so white working-class boys are better protected, and restoring the link between tax and household income so a married woman’s income could be seen as part of her husband’s.
The news comes a week after a petition against the relaxation of childcare ratios topped 100,000 signatures, meaning it must be considered for debate in Parliament.
It follows a Government consultation over the summer on proposals to reduce staff to child ratios from 1:4 to 1:5 for two-year-olds, which closed last month.
'We hope against hope that this is just a rumour'
Responding to the news reports, Neil Leitch, chief executive of the Early Years Alliance, said, ‘We hope against hope that reports that the Prime Minister is considering abolishing ratios rules is just a rumour as the impact it could have on the early years sector and families, would be devastating.
‘Let’s be clear, this would be an unacceptable solution to rising costs. Most importantly, it will greatly increase safeguarding concerns and sacrifice safety in settings, that in and of itself, cannot justify any benefits the Government may be imagining.
‘We know that it is extremely unlikely that ratio changes will lead to any cost savings for parents as settings will be forced to use any savings to plug the significant shortfall between sector funding and the cost of delivering early education. Clearly, it will pile even more unnecessary pressure on a sector that is already doing its best in unimaginably challenging circumstances.
‘If these plans are more than a rumour, the Government must consult on these changes, and if they do, we know there will be an overwhelming opposition from providers and parents alike.
‘Once again, we urge the Government to listen and rethink any current or future deregulation plans rather than charge ahead with ridiculous, far-fetched and extremely dangerous policy ideas that will have dire consequences.’
Purnima Tanuku, chief executive of the National Day Nurseries (NDNA), expressed similar concerns.
She said, ‘If the report is correct, the Prime Minister is planning on not only bulldozing the proposals through without looking closely and carefully at the valid concerns of the sector and the serious impacts on children and their families – but scrapping ratios altogether.
‘We said when the proposal was first mooted that if its primary aim was to reduce the cost of childcare to parents, it would fail. Many nurseries have told us they would not increase the number of children they care for anyway because they don’t consider it to be practical, safe or effective. The numbers just don’t stack up.
‘With early years workforce already stretched and stressed, this could tip them over the edge. Most nurseries just would not do it as it could lead to higher numbers of qualified staff leaving and the quality of early education reduced.
‘With two-year-olds now coming into nursery impacted by Covid restrictions, they are needing more support with language acquisition and social skills than ever before. This is not the time to reduce the numbers of qualified practitioners who are working really hard to help them.
‘Instead of forging ahead with these doomed plans in an effort to save money, the Government must have the foresight to invest more in our youngest children to save further investment in their later education.’
A Department for Education spokesperson said, 'As the Chancellor has confirmed, we will be taking forward reforms to make childcare easier to access and more affordable which will help boost economic growth through getting people back to work. We are exploring a wide range of options, but no decisions have been made.'
