Nursery funding

Martyn Mclaughlin urges the Scottish Government to put the expansion of free nursery care on hold in order to “put the needs of the children first” (Scotsman, 21 February).

This sounds laudable, but does not reflect the reality that many parents of three-and four-year-olds already work full time, while paying a large proportion of their income in nursery fees.

Even with 600 free hours, it is often more than a monthly mortgage payment.

The increase in provision will have no impact on these children, except for reducing the financial burden on families and making work actually pay for them.

Many working parents would love to have a parttime job that fits in with public nursery provision, but these are few and far between. The vast majority of part-time jobs still require paying for extra nursery hours, a babysitter or child minder.

After two-and-a-half years mainly staying at home with my son and doing freelance work, I could afford the ‘luxury’ of returning to a career, while he is thriving in nursery. We are fortunate that our jobs allow us the flexibility to pick up our son early most days and take time off if he is sick.

For many lower-income-families, especially single parents, the “choice” to work part-time or stay at home does not exist.

I agree with Mr Mclaughlin that the wellbeing and education of children must come first. We need to see more research on the impact of nursery care, as well as improvements in quality and provision.

But what is the alternative to this expansion? Continuing the status quo or returning to a 1950s idyll where mothers put their careers on hold until their youngest child starts school?

HAZEL CLOSE Lady Menzies Place, Edinburgh