A letter sent to local authority chief executives last week from DfES official Grahame Archer 'was only reinforcing what was said by Beverley Hughes a month or so ago', according to a DfES spokeswoman.
Initially the DfES denied to Nursery World that a letter had been sent, only acknowledging it after councils confirmed that they had received it.
In a statement last month, children's minister Beverley Hughes said that she would 'not entertain the idea' of top-up payments and that 'it is for local authorities to ensure that provision is available for 38 weeks for those parents who want it'.
Darrell King, secretary of the recently-formed Association of PVI providers in Kent, said she believed 'all hell will break loose' once local authorities realise that following this letter they cannot continue to 'turn a blind eye' to providers subsidising inadequate nursery education grant allocations for three- and four-year olds with top-up payments from parents. Kent PVI providers have led the opposition to the Government's new code of practice, warning that it threatens their livelihoods.
But while the Government remained unmoved on the issue, a spokesman for Kent County Council signalled a more conciliatory approach, suggesting that it would be contacting providers this week with fresh proposals. He added, 'I am confident that we can be more flexible than we have been.'
Caroline Parker, head of early years and childcare in Brighton, said that her authority was planning a complete review of all its nursery funding.
She added, 'We have the same issues that Kent has, but not in the same numbers. Private providers are very concerned about the code of practice.'
The lack of consistency in the way NEG is administered is underlined by the experience of Tricia Wellings, who runs five Bright Kids nurseries in four counties across the Midlands. She is paid 7.71 per session in Birmingham, 7.92 in Worcestershire, between 7.14 and 7.50 in Shropshire, depending on the type of provision, and 7.86 in Warwickshire.
Ms Wellings said, 'The differing grant amounts between the counties and even within the same county do not make life easy on administration. I find it totally unfair that a child can get one amount in one county and another in a different county. I work on the principle of paying staff the same salaries and this is encouraging me to discriminate depending on which county they work in.'
In Warwickshire, she said, she was told by county council officials that effectively she could charge a top-up by increasing her fees for any period of care over and above the two-and-a-half- hour 'free' sessions. In Birmingham she can obtain free training for staff, while she has to pay for it in Shropshire.
Gaye Whitwam, principal of the Jackanory nursery in Wallington, Surrey, said the Government's position left her with a stark choice. 'Do I follow the code of practice to the letter and face financial ruin, do I turn a blind eye and see what happens or is it just time to call it a day?'
She added, 'Some people may believe there are ways to manipulate fees to get around the spirit of the code, but I personally believe this is a dangerous path to follow. The Government has a hidden agenda here and will tighten the squeeze on us bit by bit.
'Providers and local authorities must unite and make it clear to the Government that this latest inequitable commercial interference is wholly unacceptable.'
