Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister, Education; Bognor Regis & Littlehampton, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 11, in page 6, line 13, at end insert

‘, which should have regard to the demands and needs of families as set out in section 6.’.

Joe Benton (Bootle, Labour)

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments: No. 86, in page 6, line 13, at end insert—

‘(1A)An assessment under subsection (1) must include the childcare needs of children whose parents are not working.’.

No. 272, in page 6, line 13, after ‘assessments”’, insert

‘which must include an assessment of—

(a)the supply of childcare provision available locally, and

(b)the childcare requirements of parents living in the area’.

No. 271, in page 6, line 23, after ‘criteria’, insert

‘which must include an assessment of the quality of the childcare provision available locally’.

No. 304, in clause 26, page 12, line 40, at end insert—

‘(2A)Regulations made under subsection (1) shall include provision requiring a local authority to review an assessment following the provision of relevant evidence, not previously considered, by parents.’.

Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister, Education; Bognor Regis & Littlehampton, Conservative)

The amendment would define in a little more detail what is meant by the word “sufficiency” in subsection (1). It brings in the wording used in the 10-year strategy, which states:

“The new duty will require local authorities to actively monitor the demands ... and to ensure that provision is responsive to their needs.”

The amendment would guide the local authority when it is assessing the sufficiency of the provision of child care to take into account locally expressed opinion about what is needed and not simply the preconceived views of what constitutes sufficiency.

Amendment No. 86 would extend the duty on local authorities to assess the sufficiency of child care in relation to the demands and needs of working families and to extend that assessment to determining whether there are sufficient child care places to cover the needs of non-working parents, too. As the brief from the four children’s organisations 4Children, the Daycare Trust, the National Childminding Association and the Pre-School Learning Alliance said, early childhood is a time of vital importance in children’s development. Children’s experiences in the earliest years of their life are critical to their subsequent development. Quality early education is the most important factor bar none in determining a child’s life chances. They should be enjoyable, secure years, but full of fun and challenge. They are a time when children develop rapidly—physically, intellectually, emotionally and socially.

It is the children who are important, rather than the convenience of parents. That is why the 10-year strategy states:

“Evidence from the National Institute for Child Health and Development (NICHD) Early Child Care Research Network suggests that good quality care can boost cognitive skills and language. Evidence from the Effective Provision of Pre-school Education (EPPE) project shows an early start to pre-school can have significant positive effects on children’s cognitive and social development. For example, every additional month of quality pre-school from the age of two improves cognitive performance at the start of school ... Those who started in a good quality pre-school at two or younger were up to 10 months ahead of those without pre-school. The EPPE evidence also shows that an early start in pre-school improves children’s social skills at entry to school.”

It is the quality that is the issue. The 10-year strategy gives an example of evaluation from the early “Head Start” programme from the United States, which targets young disadvantaged children. It found significant positive effects of high quality child care for child development and parental well being, as is also pointed out in the child care summary document.

Amendment No. 272 is broadly similar to the aims and objectives of amendment No. 11 in that it would bring into the assessment of sufficiency not just an assessment of the supply of child care in the area but would also make that assessment in the context of the demand. The amendment has the support of 4Children, the Day Care Trust, the National Childminding Association and the Preschool Learning Alliance. Indeed, they may even have helped draft it. They want to see the amendments assessing parents’ demands for child care, as well as the supply of child care in the locality. The brief says that ensuring that local child care assessments consider both supply and demand is crucial to supporting the local authority effectively to plan and manage the local child care market and shape local provision to parents’ needs.

The organisations point to clause 12(5) under which the local authority must proactively reach out to families who do not traditionally use child care services. That is about creating demand to meet parents’ needs, as well as existing demand. They therefore say that they believe that making specific reference to both supply and demand here in clause 11 will assist local authorities in fulfilling their strategic role.

However, I shall leave the detail to the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole. I shall leave also amendment No. 271, which again is a Liberal Democrat amendment. It is also supported by those four organisations. The amendment introduces the issue of quality to the assessment of sufficiency. That makes sense. It is no good simply carrying out an assessment of the raw number of child care places without taking into account the quality of those child care places.

As the Effective Provision of Pre-School Education study found, high levels of group care of poor quality below the age of three can have a small negative effect on behaviour for some children. That is why those four organisations that I have mentioned support the amendment. They say that it is vital that in increasing capacity in the sector local authorities focus on developing high quality provision in well resourced and well led settings.

Ann Coffey (PPS (Rt Hon Alistair Darling, Secretary of State), Scotland Office; Stockport, Labour)

I wonder if the hon. Gentleman could help me to understand the definition of quality. As I understand it, in order to be registered, all provision   has to meet standards set by Ofsted, which, I imagine, sets standards of quality below which it will not register the provision. In which way does his definition of quality differ from that which would be assessed by Ofsted?

Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister, Education; Bognor Regis & Littlehampton, Conservative)

The definition that the experts in the field want is given. They want the provision to be well resourced and well led by well trained, properly supported and fairly paid staff. There are other definitions of Ofsted’s criteria, grades 1, 2, 3 or 4. Is it acceptable for the provision to be grade 4 after an Ofsted inspection?

Ann Coffey (PPS (Rt Hon Alistair Darling, Secretary of State), Scotland Office; Stockport, Labour)

Is the hon. Gentleman saying that if a private provider could reach grade 4 in an Ofsted assessment, he would be looking to the local authority to make an assessment and decide that that grade was not an acceptable quality of child care?

Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister, Education; Bognor Regis & Littlehampton, Conservative)

When we assess sufficiency, it is not enough to say, “There are 50 child care places within 100 yards of point x,” if they are of such poor quality that when Ofsted inspects, its judgment is that the provision is unsatisfactory. It should not be regarded as sufficient.

Ann Coffey (PPS (Rt Hon Alistair Darling, Secretary of State), Scotland Office; Stockport, Labour)

Ofsted is surely not defining the provision as unsatisfactory, because if Ofsted did, it would not register the provision.

Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister, Education; Bognor Regis & Littlehampton, Conservative)

The registration will, presumably, take place at the beginning, before any inspections take place. Only in the course of events and time, when Ofsted examines what is happening and the quality of the child care, will it be able to come up with a judgment.

If the local authority assesses sufficiency in an area, and it finds that a child care provider does not provide what the local authority, assisted by the judgment of Ofsted, regard to be sufficient quality, the provision should not be regarded as part of the sufficiency that the local authority has a duty to assess. It makes common sense.