PM's Office says childsitting friends don't have to register with Ofsted

mas - 12 October 2009

I'm bemused anyone would think those that feel this situation is ridiculous are in the minority.

If a parent judges their children to be safe in the care of a friend of a friend they should have the right to make that choice, much as we should all have the right to express that thanks by way of gifting flowers, chocolates or a pint in the pub.

Regulation for professionals is fine - interfering in peoples informal arrangements is not, and this kind of interpretation of rules, regulations and laws is likely to be damaging in all sorts of ways.

Tunja Stone - 12 October 2009

When I first registered in 1992 it was illegal under the old childcare act to provide childcare for reward even if you were friends!

A change could open a whole can of worms. How do you define a friend? What about a friend of a friend? What if all your friends are pregnant at the same time? This could mean you have six babies under one to look after. No training, no first aid, no insurance.

How do you define reward? The tax office has its own definition so chocolates, money, flowers, grocery shopping all count in their eyes.

The prime minister's reply is another knee jerk reaction for a minority request.

Tony Copley - 12 October 2009

Firstly, surely Ofsted should have checked what the legislative intention was in 2006, before applying it, or perhaps like in all other aspects of Ofsted's dealings with various organisations & individuals it appears to act in a wholly rigid manner.

Secondly, save for the individuals having managed through their own sterling efforts to raise a petition of some volume to their credit, why is there no easy means by which any person cannot ask for the 'correct' meaning/intention of legislation to be reviewed/clarified. OK, the individuals themselves could have gone to court and asked for a 'Juidicial Review', but that process in itself is like using a 'sledgehammer to crack a nut' and extremely difficult for most private individuals.

Thirdly, I read elsewhere that Ofsted have sought clarification of the law. Obviously now, Brown like his predecessor feels he can act in a 'Presidential' style and issue dictats as to how the law should be applied. In a proper democracy, this is government responsibility re: the statute, or the Judiciary in some form. Without such bodies paying due & proper regard (which they more often than not do not) to the sensibility of legislation that managed to reach the statue, we are all subject to the monolith and juggernaut of the state, often politically motivated, to dictate and interfere with the rights of every child and family.

Roy Everett - 11 October 2009

Words from the Prime Minister's Office about what the legislative intention was in 2006 \(to outlaw baby-sitting circles) do not overturn the actual legislative outcome in 2009 \(to outlaw reciprocal childcare arrangements) as debated in the courts. I wouldn't like to be in court at the wrong end of an Ofsted/LA case trying to defend myself with this hasty press release from No 10, which would be of more practical value deployed in the courthouse toilet. "Your honour, please don't find me guilty yet: Mr Brown is talking to Ofsted because of a petition".