Review of babysitting ban ordered

England's Children's Minister wants a review of the case of two police officers told they were breaking the law, caring for each other's children.

Ofsted said the arrangement contravened the Childcare Act because it lasted for longer than two hours a day, and constituted receiving "a reward".

It said the women would have to be registered as childminders.

Minister Vernon Coaker said his department was talking to Ofsted about this particular case.

The two detective constables, Leanne Shepherd, from Milton Keynes, and Lucy Jarrett, from Buckingham, told the BBC how Ofsted insisted they end their arrangement.

'Shocked'

Ms Shepherd, who serves with Thames Valley Police, recalled: "A lady came to the front door and she identified herself as being from Ofsted. She said a complaint had been made that I was illegally childminding.

"I was just shocked - I thought they were a bit confused about the arrangement between us.

"So I invited her in and told her situation - the arrangement between Lucy and I - and I was shocked when she told me I was breaking the law."

Ms Jarrett added: "Our children were never in any harm, they were never in any danger.

"To think that they would waste their time and effort on innocent people who are trying to provide for their families by returning to the workplace... Surely their time and effort would be better placed elsewhere."

Thames Valley Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, said the pair had its "full support".

Secretary Andy Viney said: "Both of them are experienced professional officers.

"They just want to return to work after having children and have found that the system is working totally against them.

"They've been threatened with prosecution by Ofsted if they continue doing this."

An Ofsted spokesman said it applied regulations found in the Childcare Act 2006, but was currently discussing the interpretation of the word "reward" with the department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF).

"Reward is not just a case of money changing hands. The supply of services or goods and, in some circumstances, reciprocal arrangements can also constitute reward.

"Generally, mothers who look after each other's children are not providing childminding for which registration is required, as exemptions apply to them, for example because the care is for less than two hours or it takes place on less than 14 days in a year.

"Where such arrangements are regular and for longer periods, then registration is usually required."

Close relatives of children, such as grandparents, siblings, aunts or uncles, were exempt from the rules, he added.

But Michelle Elliott, director of the children's charity Kidscape, told the BBC's Breakfast programme that the decision defied common sense and would impose extra childcare costs on families.

She added: "These children were looked after in a secure environment with people that they knew.

"There must be thousands of people out there who are doing the same thing who are now going to think: 'Do I have to spend £300 a week or whatever it is?'"

Minister for Children, Schools and Families Vernon Coaker insisted the Childcare Act 2006 was in place "to ensure the safety and wellbeing of all children" but the government needed to make sure it did not "penalise hard-working families".

"My department is speaking to Ofsted about the interpretation of the word 'reward' in this particular case," he said.

A petition to scrap the rules governing reciprocal child care on the Number 10 website had gathered more than 5,300 signatures by 0530 BST on Monday. continues here

Schools face funding cuts crisis

Ministers are facing mounting questions about a financial crisis that is threatening the education of tens of thousands of teenagers.

Schools and colleges said sixth-formers could be turned away from courses in the autumn after Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary, forced a last-minute cut in funding.

The Daily Telegraph established that the funding gap was nearly £200 million, more than three times the original estimate. It came about despite rising demand for places at schools and colleges from teenagers, who found that the recession reduced the number of jobs available.

At the same time, millions of pounds was spent on Gordon Brown's flagship apprenticeship scheme.

Ministers said the funding gap arose because of a surprise jump in the number of children being allocated places in schools and colleges for the next school year. Yet the Tories said government documents showed that officials knew six months ago that applications were surging well above the expected level.

Michael Gove, the Conservative education spokesman, said Mr Balls had "some serious explaining to do" over his account of how the crisis developed. Mr Balls accused Mr Gove of talking "utter nonsense" and misleading people.

Hundreds of schools and colleges were facing financial hardship after the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) told them last week that funds allocated weeks previously were reduced, some by hundreds of thousands of pounds.

On March 2, the LSC told heads it was able to fund an extra 30,000 school and college places because it had won "nearly £200 million of new money". But after that letter was sent, the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) informed the LSC that the extra money would not be forthcoming. As a result, the quango wrote back to heads last week telling them that their allocations had been cut.

Details of the letter were released last Thursday, the day that attention was focused on the G20 summit in London.

Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, said last week that the squeeze arose because "we are now seeing an even greater surge in demand for places than we have budgeted for." But documents seen by the Tories appeared to show that senior LSC officials knew as long ago as last autumn that many more children than they had expected were choosing to attend schools and colleges.

Minutes of a meeting of its National Council on Nov 5, which was attended by a DCSF official, recorded a "strong growth in young people's participation, which stood at several percentage points above the plan".

"It was evident from the figures that young people were choosing the school and college route, which could have an impact on apprenticeships," it added.

The document also recorded that the LSC was already overspending its budget.

Mr Balls conceded that some children would be denied places in September unless ministers could find £200 million. He was under pressure to explain what role his department played in the LSC's decision to award "final" allocations on March 2 before cutting those allocations on March 31.

Government sources suggested that ministers were not aware of the LSC's first letter until the second note was sent but the LSC said Mr Balls's department was kept aware of what the quango was doing throughout. The letters sent to head teachers warning them of cuts included a note saying that the DCSF was "involved throughout and approved the changes".

A department spokesman claimed last night that the discussion in November referred to children starting courses last September. He said they were "working across government on the extra financial support we need to provide for the new learners that are coming forward".  Continues here

No British jobs British workers and no school place for British learners, over subscribed in all areas, our infrastructure shaky and still they will not relent, still the flood, so resource conflict will escalate, prices will rise, resentment will grow and you the taxpayer will pay, a sorry, sorry state of affairs.