Rethinking the Government’s Approach to Early Years Provision

Across the country, government strategies are shifting, encouraging schools to expand into early years provision, even for children under three.

The ambition sounds positive: improve access, support families, strengthen communities. But as with many well-intentioned policies, the question we should all be asking is: at what cost, and to whom? 

Because when it comes to the earliest years, intentions aren’t enough. What matters is whether our systems truly meet the needs of babies and families and enable the people who care for them to do so effectively.

The Bigger Picture: Families Left Out of the Fix

Much of the current conversation about early years focuses on places, how many, where, and how fast we can create them. But this focus misses the real issue.

If our national strategy for education begins by pushing babies into institutional environments too soon, it risks overlooking the fundamental foundation of all child development: family. 

Over the past decade, many of the services that help children thrive have been stripped back to their bare minimum. Health visiting appointments are often reduced or missed entirely, midwifery services are stretched beyond capacity, and early intervention and SEN support are frequently delayed or inaccessible. Schools, meanwhile, are struggling to meet the growing social and emotional needs of children without sufficient funding.

At the same time, many professionals working with families are now expected to deliver support virtually or rely on parent-completed questionnaires, often without the personal, relational contact that allows for meaningful conversation about parenting struggles. The loss of these human interactions, the small but vital moments of reassurance, empathy, and guidance, means families are increasingly left to navigate their children’s development and challenges alone.

We already know the first five years of life are critical for brain development, including emotional regulation and mental wellbeing. Secure attachments formed in these early years, both at home and, where appropriate, in nurturing early education settings, lay the blueprint for all future relationships. When this foundation is weak or inconsistent, it can have lifelong consequences.

If we get this stage wrong, the strain will be felt far beyond early years. We risk increasing demand on already overstretched services such as CAMHS, as children who missed out on early relational support present later with complex emotional and behavioural needs. That pressure then ripples outward, impacting schools, families, and wider society.

Against this backdrop, the government’s “fix”, expanding school-based early years places, feels worryingly one-dimensional. It doesn’t tackle the roots of the problem: underfunded services, overstretched families, and a system that’s forgotten the importance of relationships, connection, and the early foundations of mental health.

It’s not a fix.

It’s another symptom of a broken system.

When Education Starts to Mean Everything 

For babies and toddlers, the foundations of learning are not academic, they are relational. Security, trust, curiosity, and communication grow from consistent relationships and the freedom to explore the world at their own pace.

If we redefine “education” too narrowly, as something that happens in formal settings, we risk losing sight of what truly matters in the earliest years: relationships, play, and family life.

Countries like Denmark, Finland, and Italy remind us that great education systems begin with great childhoods. In these countries, children start school at six or seven, allowing play-based early education to take priority in the earliest years. Exploration, curiosity, and social-emotional development come before formal teaching, giving children the time to grow confidence, resilience, and connection. These systems also invest in strong family support: health visitors, local community hubs, and generous parental leave policies ensure that parents have the time, resources, and guidance to raise children in nurturing, secure environments long before they enter a classroom. Denmark, in particular, consistently ranks among the happiest countries in the world. That’s not by chance, it’s because they invest in families, not fixes.

So why are we ignoring what the world’s best systems have already shown us?
If we push children into institutional environments too soon, we risk creating exactly the opposite of what we intend, a generation less resilient, more anxious, and less ready for life.

School Readiness and the Real Issue 

The Department for Education reports that a growing number of children are entering Reception behind expected levels in communication, language, and social skills, challenges that can have long-term impacts on education and wellbeing. But this isn’t because nurseries are failing. Many early years settings are doing exceptional work preparing children for school and for life.

The real issue is systemic: not all families, particularly in deprived areas, are able to access early years provision, often due to gaps in health visiting, reduced local family support, and limited signposting to services. In the absence of these supports, schools are being asked to fill roles they were never designed for, turning them into catch-all institutions for social needs rather than focusing on education.

By the time a child reaches school, much of the foundational development that shapes their wellbeing and learning capacity has already taken place. The right support needs to start far earlier, not necessarily through formal nursery attendance, but through accessible community networks, parenting groups, and consistent contact with professionals who can guide and reassure families in those vital first years. When parents are supported, children thrive, and the pressure on schools, nurseries, and wider services is reduced.

Some forward-thinking trusts, such as those linked to the Cradle to Career programme, are attempting to address these gaps holistically, supporting both families and children, but not every trust has the resources or vision to do the same. While the government’s current approach presents itself as a “solution,” it overlooks the fact that many of these challenges could have been mitigated by adequately funding PVIs and existing school nurseries. Even then, this approach fails to address the deeper, systemic issues that prevent families from receiving the guidance and resources they need in the first place.

The Disparity No One Talks About

Here’s what many parents don’t realise.
Private and voluntary nurseries (known as PVIs) operate under entirely different conditions than schools, and the playing field is far from level.

They pay full business rates, while schools don’t.
They face higher National Insurance contributions, without the protection of government grants.
They receive no capital funding to expand or adapt their spaces, while schools are being offered grants of up to £150,000 to do just that.
Although some larger nursery groups can share certain back-office functions, most independent PVIs operate without the shared administrative, catering, or facilities support that schools benefit from. And while schools can pay support staff on nationally agreed scales with pensions attached, PVIs must meet all staffing costs from low hourly funding rates that still fall far short of the true cost of provision.

The result?

The government says it wants to increase “availability”, but instead of creating more places, it risks replacing one type of provision with another. When PVIs are forced to close, families lose choice.

Parents deserve more than a space in a system. They deserve the right to choose how and where their children are cared for whether that’s a community-led preschool, a home-from-home nursery, or a school-based setting.

This choice matters. It allows parents to align their childcare with their family’s values, routines, and beliefs about childhood.

PVIs bring something unique that cannot be easily replicated in a school structure: autonomy.
They are standalone environments built entirely around the needs of babies and young children, not adapted from classrooms or governed by wider school policies. This independence allows for truly responsive, play-based, and relationship-led care, the kind that helps children feel secure, confident, and ready for life. 

If government policy continues to strip away this diversity, it risks creating a system of uniformity, efficient on paper, but disconnected from what children and families actually need.

And so, we must ask:

• Why would a government not support an entire industry that feeds money back into the economy?
• Why invest millions to get babies into schools, while refusing to raise the funding rate that would allow existing nurseries to stay open?
• Why cut off a source of employment, innovation, and community investment that has proven its worth?

It’s hard not to question whether this is really about helping children, or about control.
Because when parents lose choice, children lose too.

A Fair and Smarter Way Forward

This debate should never pit schools against nurseries, or PVIs against trusts. We all share the same goal: children who thrive. Fairness matters. Funding matters. And so does recognising the expertise that already exists within the early years sector.

In the short term, there are measures that can help ensure children have access to care where it’s most needed, particularly in areas of high deprivation. But these should not replace the broader, systemic support that families require to truly flourish.

A genuine short-term fix isn’t complicated:
• Increase early years funding rates to a sustainable level.
• Reinstate meaningful SEN, health, and family support.
• Support PVIs alongside schools, ensuring choice, quality, and local provision for all families.

Families need both immediate access where necessary and a robust, sustainable system for the future, and children deserve the choice and support that allows them to thrive.

The Real Opportunity: Rebuilding the Foundations

If we want better outcomes for children, we must look beyond “more places” and invest instead in what truly matters, the systems that strengthen families and communities.

That means: restoring health visiting, midwifery, and early intervention services; funding early years properly so settings can meet children’s developmental needs; strengthening paternity and parental leave to give families time to bond; creating local family hubs that connect parents with support, advice, and play opportunities; embedding flexible work policies so parents can be present in their children’s early years; and investing in high-quality, play-based provision that prioritizes exploration, creativity, and social-emotional growth. Because it isn’t the absence of education that leaves children less ready for school, it’s the absence of holistic support.

Putting the Child Back at the Centre

Every policy, every funding model, every reform should be measured against a single question:

Where is the child in this decision?

Babies don’t need classrooms; they need connection.
They don’t need targets; they need time.

Children deserve more than a space in a system, they deserve relationships, play, and people who know them.

Families deserve the support, time, and options that make that possible, including the ability to choose the early years setting that best fits their values, needs and circumstances.

If we truly want to improve outcomes for children, we must first rebuild the system that supports their families.

That starts not with classrooms, but with compassion and the courage to put people before policy.

Learning from the World: Evidence That Works

Evidence underscores the effectiveness of strong early childhood systems. According to UNICEF’s 2023 report, nearly 25% of UK children live in relative poverty, compared with under 5% in Finland. Mental health challenges among children are rising, with 1 in 6 children aged 5–16 experiencing a probable mental health disorder (NHS Digital, 2022).

Early years funding has not kept pace with inflation, leading to nursery closures and reduced provision, particularly for families in low-income areas.

By prioritizing early childhood education and comprehensive family support, as seen in leading international systems, we can create environments where children thrive, leading to healthier, more resilient, and prosperous societies.