A meeting has been set between early education providers and Government Ministers to discuss concerns about a recent policy. Photo / Pexels Pavel Danilyuk
A meeting has been set between early education providers and Government Ministers to discuss concerns about a recent policy. Photo / Pexels Pavel Danilyuk
It’s not often a $1.2 billion investment in early childcare causes sector leaders to request an urgent meeting with Government ministers to avoid what some consider to be a lethal blow to their sustainability.
But that’s where the sector finds itself following the Government announcing 20-hours-free of early childcare education(ECE) per week for kids 3 years old and above would be extended to 2-year-olds - Prime Minister Chris Hipkins’ flagship policy in Budget 2023.
On the surface, it’s difficult to see the issue. Early education would become more accessible for more children and it eases the financial pressure on parents already dealing with persistent inflation driving up the cost of living. ECE providers were jumping for joy when it was first revealed.
But as the policy’s detail has become apparent, providers and advocates are rushing to highlight how conditions attached to the extension of 20-hours-free could lead to the quality of childcare becoming compromised and increasing the number of centres closing.
The expansion to make 2-year-olds eligible for 20-hours-free is largely similar to when it was introduced by Helen Clark’s Government in 2007 for children aged 3 and older.
However, early education providers say the chief sticking point now is that under this new policy, parents would be allowed to enrol children only for the free 20 hours per week, providing it was no more than six of those hours per day.
According to New Shoots Children’s Centre director Kelly Seaburg, the funding the Government provides for 20-hours-free is calculated by using a ratio of one teacher to 10 children, which is the minimum accepted ratio of teachers to children in New Zealand.
Most centres, Seaburg says, do not settle with 1:10 and attempt to provide one teacher to every eight children for older children, while the younger ones - like 2-year-olds - ideally have a ratio of 1:6 because they have greater needs.
This view has been reinforced by the Education Ministry through its Early Learning Action Plan 2019-2029. It says ratios of 1:4 for under 2-year-olds and 1:5 for 2-year-olds would become “requirements for teacher-led centre-based services”.
New Shoots Children’s Centre director Kelly Seaburg.
But because centres are only funded to provide ratios of 1:10, the remaining cost to pay staff has to come from somewhere else.
“We have to have a co-payment from parents to make it workable, particularly for 2-year-olds who have higher needs,” Seaburg says.
It’s a cost that parents are happy to pay as long as it increases the quality of childcare, Seaburg claims.
Twenty-hours-free is not compulsory, centres can opt out if they choose. But Seaburg says fees for parents would likely double in order to continue providing a range of services including food, nappies and excursions.
Another option available to centres is to reduce their operating hours. However, that could become a headache for parents trying to balance work and childcare.
Cathy Wilson, head of Montessori Aotearoa New Zealand, which manages about 200 centres across the country, describes the policy as the “second major threat” ECEs are facing from the Government, adding to a problematic pay parity review currently out for consultation.
She echoes Seaburg in her concerns that the quality of childcare will decrease if centres no longer received income through additional fees as parents chose to stick to the 20 hours on offer.
She gave an example of a Wellington centre which operated for 30 hours per week, with an arrangement that meant parents were still able to access 20-hours-free but paid fees on top to cover the difference between what was provided by the Government and the cost of a quality service.
Wilson, like Seaburg, is quick to clarify that increasing access to education is something no one opposes, but there are fears the way in which it’s rolled out could spell the end for some centres, particularly smaller outfits in low socioeconomic areas.
“We’re barely making ends meet, this is going to tip us over the edge.”
Associate Minister of Education Jo Luxton is responsible for early education. Photo / Mark Mitchell
According to figures provided by Seaburg, there has been a reduction of 719 ECE services between June last year and May this year.
Jill Bond, chief executive of the New Zealand Kindergartens Network, which represents 15 local kindergarten associations, shares Wilson’s concerns about centre closures, especially in rural areas where it’s difficult to attract staff.
“We would move heaven and earth before we closed a centre, however, we do have a couple of centres in our network at the moment that are in remote locations where we are struggling to get teachers to live in those locations and work there.”
Bond explained that because the providers within the network received greater funding than others, they had been able to offer 20-hours-free for children 3 years old and above and cover extra costs by deferring less essential work like maintenance or advancing staff professional development.
While she is adamant the primary focus is high-quality teaching and learning, Bond accepts that centres are not reaching their full potential with respect to the service they could provide because of cost pressures and admits the situation is critical.
“We are getting to a tipping point for some of our services where the deferred maintenance, the increased costs are getting to a critical place and you can only defer things for so long.”
Urgent meeting set, minister responds
Late yesterday, invitations were circulated among ECE sector leaders for a meeting with Education Minister Jan Tinetti and Associate Education Minister Jo Luxton for Thursday next week, following the urgent request from said leaders this week.
Luxton, speaking to the Herald, says the majority of feedback she’d received from parents had been positive given the estimated $133 savings it would provide, but she acknowledges the sector’s concerns.
“The sector has raised the issues ... and as I’ve indicated, I’m more than happy to sit and meet with them and work through their concerns.”
Luxton formerly ran an ECE centre and did so with ratios of one teacher to four children for those under 2 years old and for those above 2, the ratios were about 1:7 or 1:8.
She accepts that smaller ratios provided “better quality in early childhood” and was committed to the targets in the Early Learning Action Plan.
Luxton claims that when 20-hours-free was brought in, there was an expectation no fees would be passed on to parents but that centres had since “worked around that”.
Given the 20-hours-free expansion isn’t coming into force until March next year, Luxton was confident a solution could be reached.
“There’s plenty of time to have these conversations and work through this.”
