MINISTERIAL plans to give funding for 15 hours of free nursery education for two-to-three-year-olds directly to parents in arrears would leave some families unable to access the provision due to the upfront cost.
As part of the government’s 2026 Budget plans, an additional £3m would be set aside to extend free nursery hours to 15 hours for those aged between two and three.
But, the government failed to reach an agreement with early-years providers to offer the additional hours, prompting Education Minister Rob Ward to confirm his department is working on a scheme whereby the money – worth around £6,100 per child each year – would be paid directly to families.
Now, a number of parents have warned that this risks excluding some families who cannot afford the initial cost.
And, in an amendment to the Budget from Deputy Inna Gardiner, Deputy Ward has been criticised for dismissing the concerns of providers and failing to reach an agreement with the Jersey Early Years Association, whose members represent around 75% of the Island’s nursery provision.
The collapse in negotiations between the government and JEYA centres on a proposed hourly rate of £11, which a number of nursery providers deemed as being not enough. Concerns have also been raised about the sector’s ability to cope with increased demand.
During a recent Children, Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel hearing, the minister said £11 per hour was a “fair rate” but admitted that he had not received the “wider buy-in” from nurseries that he had expected.
Parents told the JEP that the Education Minister’s plans to pay parents for nursery hours would leave many families unable to access places due to unaffordable upfront payments
Franky Vautier said: “That would make it impossible for us, and I’m sure many others. This is really neglecting the families that need it most, neglecting a child’s right to education, and neglecting to protect their wellbeing through interaction with other children. The government claims to put children first, whereas this is an outright example of how they don’t in some areas.”
Clodagh O’Brien said she would also have to keep her child in home as it “just doesn’t seem feasible” to pay upfront, while Sam Goguelin added: “I would have to keep my child at home and would have to give up the chance of a placement as [I] wouldn’t be able to come up with the funds to support this.”
Another parent Petra Leggett said: “If parents are still expected to pay upfront, they will have to find money they may not have or use credit cards and potentially put themselves into a debt trap. Once again, a system not well thought through.”
Meanwhile, in her Budget amendment, former Education Minister Deputy Gardiner said the minister’s proposed approach raised “significant concerns”.
She also accused the current Education Minister of failing to properly address the JEYA’s fears.
“Despite the fact that the Jersey Early Years Association represents more than 75% of all early years provision for this age group, the minister has not met with them directly to understand why the proposed partnership agreement has not been signed, nor has he sought to resolve the concerns raised repeatedly over the viability of the £11.00 hourly rate,” said Deputy Gardiner.
“Rather than addressing the core issue – the fact that the proposed hourly rate of £11.00 is not financially viable – the Minister’s proposal would divert public funds into building a new administrative structure.
“This would create additional bureaucracy and cost, place financial strain on families who cannot afford to pay fees upfront, increase uncertainty for providers, raise questions how it will work with personal tax and income support arrangements.
“It is difficult to justify creating a new administrative layer when a modest, evidence-based uplift in the hourly rate would make the scheme deliverable, sustainable, and far less costly.”
Deputy Gardiner is requesting that an additional £137,000 be set aside to increase the proposed £11 per hour rate to £11.50.
She added that JEYA had “unanimously stated” that the minister’s proposed rate is “not viable” and its members had been involved in “detailed cost-modelling” with government officials.
Deputy Gardiner said: “If parents struggle to pay upfront, nurseries face delayed or unpaid fees, creating financial instability, increased administrative burden, and a reluctance to participate in the scheme.”
The Budget is due to be debated next month.
