Proposed changes to space requirements in nurseries ‘could lead to overcrowding'
The Department for Education (DfE) has launched a consultation on possible changes to the indoor floor space requirements per child in the early years foundation stage (EYFS) frameworks in England.
It comes as the expansion of funded childcare – which was introduced by the Conservative government – began being rolled out in England in April last year for working parents of two-year-olds.
Working parents of children older than nine months are also now able to access 15 hours of funded childcare a week, before the full roll-out of 30 hours a week to all eligible families in September.
The DfE consultation is seeking views on whether or not 'free-flow' outdoor areas should be able to be included in floor space measurements for two-year-olds and above.
Currently, outdoor areas cannot be included in the EYFS indoor space measurements where indoor activity in a building forms the main part of, or is integral to, the early years provision.
Neil Leitch, chief executive of the EYA, said: 'While we recognise that some settings may welcome the additional flexibility that would be created by this change, we remain concerned about the impact that such a policy could have on the quality of provision – and in particular, the risk that these reforms could result in overcrowding in some settings if the implementation, assuming these proposals go ahead, is not properly monitored.
'We're clear that ensuring the safety and well-being of young children must always be at the heart of early years education and care.
'And yet, as we get closer to the final stage of the entitlement expansion, it appears that the need to create new places is constantly being prioritised over and above the need to ensure the consistent delivery of high-quality early years provision.'
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said women would be given added 'freedom' to have more children by expanded government-funded childcare (Aaron Chown/PA)
From Monday, working parents of children who turn nine-months-old before September 1 can apply to access up to 30 hours of funded childcare per week.
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said women would be given added 'freedom' to have more children by expanded government-funded childcare.
She told the Daily Mail: 'They will be able to make choices about the career that's right for them, the hours that they want, but also (have) the freedom to think about family size and how many children they want to have, with support from the Government around childcare hours.
'That brings huge benefits to working women and this is a generational shift in terms of the new funding that's been put in place.'
Purnima Tanuku, chief executive of the National Day Nurseries Association, said: 'Consulting on the use of outdoor space is a positive step that recognises changes in research and best practice about how children can learn and develop in the outdoor environment.
'It will be important to ensure that this approach is based on best practice and what is best for children.
'There is also a need to review the indoor space requirements because no-one knows how they were defined and have not been reviewed in living memory.
'However, even if providers can increase capacity based on space, providers are still telling us that they need more staff to be able to meet local demand for places.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
2 hours ago
- Spectator
Labour's end-of-year school report is dire
As we approach the end of a long, hot summer term, it is a good time to reflect on the state of schools after one year of this Labour government. I teach in both the independent and state sectors and it is fair to say that both are feeling bruised and bewildered by the events of the last twelve months. Schools are poorer than they have been for a long time, facing huge and complex challenges. They also feel there is no leadership or vision to make the reforms necessary to bring lasting improvement. It's an F for Bridget Phillipson, the Education Secretary. The calendar year began in acrimony with the levy of 20 per cent VAT on school fees (which was brought forward from this coming September to January). It was rushed and ill-thought-through legislation which would bring little real benefit to state schools; most saw it as a deliberately spiteful act intended to hurt schools and families in the middle of the academic year. Irrespective of what you think of fee-paying schools, the decision to make them more expensive has been both disingenuous and self-defeating. Instead of the (disputed) £1.5 billion Labour claimed they would raise through VAT on fees going to state schools, Keir Starmer suggested in June that, actually, this money will go on affordable housing. It was a breathtaking admission of deception. Furthermore, teacher recruitment has fallen sharply since Labour gained power; there are record numbers of unfilled vacancies and the lowest number of newly qualified teachers are graduating since 2010. Starmer's VAT legislation was also self-defeating because it has placed more strain on the state sector: over 70 independent schools have closed since it was passed, and many of these children have enrolled at their local state schools. Expect far more private school closures next year. But if the government's policies for independent schools are characterised by vindictiveness, there is, at the very least, a clear intent. When it comes to state schools, there is nothing more than confusion and indecision. Look no further than the utterly pointless and damaging decision to scrap the Latin Excellence Programme, an act rightly described by Kristina Murkett in The Spectator as 'cultural vandalism'. It was a spiteful, unnecessary move which nobody in schools could defend or explain. Perhaps it was done because those currently in charge of school policy are fundamentally suspicious of anything that smells of elitism. This might also explain the decision to appoint Professor Becky Francis to oversee the review of the national curriculum. Francis is a well-known educationalist activist, and left-wing progressives were delighted by her appointment – only to be disappointed by her rather tepid interim report, published in March, which promised 'evolution not revolution'. Under this Labour government, it is becoming customary to hear bold statements but to see indecision and obfuscation. But it is in the botched 'reforms' to Ofsted where the lack of leadership at the Department for Education (DfE) is most evident. It takes incompetence to an astonishing level if the changes introduced to inspections are felt to be worse than those they have replaced. But when the new report cards – which replaced a 'single-word judgement' in favour of a five-point grading scale – were unveiled in February, many parents found them confusing. These have now been delayed until September for further consultation, leaving schools completely in the dark about how they will be inspected. Fundamentally, the government doesn't know what Ofsted should be or who is it for: is it for parents? For schools? For pupils? For politicians and civil servants? If you can't answer that, then you don't have a mechanism for assessing schools. The whole situation is a mess, branded by union leaders as 'reckless' and 'nonsensical'. Worse, it is potentially dangerous because without effective inspections children are at risk. Getting this wrong is a dereliction of duty by Phillipson. But the opprobrium that greeted the reforms to Ofsted are positively benign compared to the reception the current Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill has been met with. This has been described by the head teacher Katharine Birbalsingh as 'insane'. Others, such as the Children's Commissioner, Dame Rachel de Souza, have warned that ministers are 'legislating against the things we know work in schools'. It is, indeed, a sclerotic bill, which has no unifying logic, other than to take autonomy away from academies, give more power to the Secretary of State and make recruitment even more difficult for schools. Such things remain, largely, outside the daily lives of those teachers who are, this week, looking forward to their well-earned breaks. What is very real, and what they grapple with, daily in too many cases, is appalling behaviour by pupils. Here, again, the picture is gloomy. Earlier this month, the DfE published data which showed that suspensions and permanent exclusions from schools resulting from physical assaults on teachers are at an all-time high. The breakdown in authority figures, both in school and across society, no doubt contributes to these depressing statistics and makes recruiting and retaining staff even more difficult. There are many more battles ahead. Some, like the guidance on relationships, sex and health education, will generate a lot of debate around gender identity and age-appropriate teaching. It seems to be a landscape filled with attritional culture war skirmishes, which will only add to the sense that Labour, in government, are still acting like a group of activists, not ministers. But this will pale into insignificance when the government faces another struggle to reform the bloated and hugely inefficient Special Education Needs and Disabilities (SEND) provision. This currently costs the taxpayer £12 billion a year, and the bill is growing all the time. You would get very poor odds on Starmer getting any meaningful reforms through Parliament. The verdict on this government is that there is no vision and no clear sense of what they want or how they will go about getting it. This is nowhere more in evidence than in education, where personal prejudices, coupled with uncoordinated decisions, have had a hugely damaging impact on both the independent and private sectors. If you make a mistake with a piece of legislation, such as the winter fuel allowance, you can quickly reverse it. But changes made to how schools work take time and have lasting consequences. At the end of this difficult academic year, the impression is that Labour has learnt nothing, and that next year will be even more difficult for anyone who works in schools. Happy holidays, everyone.
Daily Mail
4 hours ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Leaked Sky News plans reveal network's high hopes for young presenter - but there's one complaint we keep on hearing... INSIDE MAIL
The Liberals may be stuck in the political wilderness, but over at Sky News HQ, the conservative star factory never stops. Word from Macquarie Park is that the 24-hour news channel has found its Gen Z poster girl - and she's already being groomed for prime-time stardom.
Rhyl Journal
11 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
Water bills to see ‘small, steady' rise despite reform plans, says Reed
Steve Reed is expected to set out plans for 'root and branch reform' of the water sector on Monday, following the publication of a landmark review of the industry. Those plans are thought to include action to tackle sewage spills, invest in water infrastructure and the abolition of the industry's beleaguered regulator Ofwat as ministers seek to avoid a repeat of this year's 26% increase in bills. But while Mr Reed has promised that families will never again see 'huge shock hikes' to their bills, he was unable on Sunday to rule out further above-inflation increases. Although he told Sky News's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips that bills should be 'as low as possible', he added that there needed to be 'appropriate bill rises' to secure 'appropriate levels of investment'. He said: 'A small, steady increase in bills is what people expect.' Government sources have argued that the recent large rise in bills was necessary to pay for investment in long-neglected infrastructure, but expect Mr Reed's promised reforms to make further rises unnecessary. Asked about the possibility of expanding social tariffs to help households struggling with bills – a move that could see wealthier families pay more – Mr Reed said he had 'not been convinced yet' that this was necessary. Earlier on Sunday, Mr Reed had pledged to halve sewage pollution in England by 2030, after the Environment Agency said serious pollution incidents had risen by 60% in 2024. Mr Reed said the measures the Government was taking would enable it to significantly reduce pollution, with the aim of completely eliminating it by 2035 should it be re-elected. He also suggested to the BBC that he would resign if the 2030 target was not achieved, provided he was still in the same job by then. His comments come before a major report by former Bank of England deputy governor Sir Jon Cunliffe, which is expected to recommend sweeping reform to water regulation on Monday. Sir Jon has been widely reported to be preparing to recommend the abolition of Ofwat, which has faced criticism over its handling of sewage spills and allowing water companies to pay large dividends while taking on significant debt and missing targets for investing in infrastructure. On Sunday, Mr Reed would not say whether he would scrap Ofwat, but also declined to say he had confidence in the regulator. He told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg: 'The regulator is clearly failing.' Sir Jon's interim report criticised regulation of the water sector, which is split between economic regulator Ofwat, the Environment Agency and the Drinking Water Inspectorate. But on Sunday, Conservative shadow communities secretary Kevin Hollinrake said he would be concerned any changes 'might just be shuffling the deckchairs on the Titanic'. He told the BBC: 'It's really important the regulator's effective, and we put in a lot of measures to give Ofwat more powers to regulate the water industry and a lot of those things were very effective.' Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said he backed scrapping Ofwat, calling for a new Clean Water Authority to 'hold these water companies to account'. Sir Ed has also called for the Government to go further and aim to eliminate sewage pollution entirely by 2030, saying voters were 'fed up with empty promises from ministers while Britain's waterways continue to be ruined by sewage'. He added: 'For years water companies have paid out millions in dividends and bonuses. It would be deeply unfair if customers are now made to pick up the tab for this scandal through higher bills.' Although sweeping regulatory reform is likely to be on the table, full nationalisation of the industry will not be after the Government excluded it from Sir Jon's terms of reference. Smaller parties such as the Greens have called for nationalisation, while on Sunday Reform UK's Nigel Farage said he would look to strike a deal with the private sector to bring 50% of the water industry under public ownership. But Mr Farage was unable to say how much this would cost, leading Labour to accuse him of having 'nothing to offer apart from bluster', and shadow Treasury minister Gareth Davies to say he was 'flogging billion-pound promises with no plans to deliver them'. Mr Reed argued nationalisation would cost 'upwards of £100 billion', diverting resources from the NHS and taking years during which pollution would get worse.
