§ 27. Mr. Doddsasked the Minister of Health what decision has been reached in respect to the future of the five remaining day nurseries in Kent.
§ 32. Mr. Bottomleyasked the Minister of Health to make a statement about the future of the day nursery service in Kent.
§ 33. Sir R. Aclandasked the Minister of Health whether he is satisfied that the health services in the County of Kent will be fully efficient if the impending decision to close all the day nurseries is carried out; and whether, in particular, he will consider using his powers to disallow the county's decision to close the day nursery in Gravesend.
§ Miss Hornsby-SmithMy right hon. Friend has provisionally decided, subject to comments by the various bodies who are notified of the council's intentions, to approve a proposal by the county council to replace their five remaining day nurseries by a county scheme of registered daily minders. The new arrangements should meet the needs of any mothers who cannot care for their children at home and cannot make suitable private arrangements.
§ Mr. DoddsHow can the Parliamentary Secretary justify the closing of every day nursery in Kent and approve a means scheme in which the Kent County Council will pay ls. per day per child and 6d. for a Saturday morning? Is this not a complete change of policy on the part of the Government in regard to the National Health Service Act? Further, is the Parliamentary Secretary not aware that if the Crayford day nursery is closed down, the mothers who put their children in there—separated, divorced, or deserted or those whose husbands are chronic sick—will have to give up their jobs and go on National Assistance? Surely this is a mean and despicable policy?
§ Miss Hornsby-SmithI think that the House will agree that the best place for a child under school age is, if possible, at home with its mother.
§ Mr. ManuelHow can the hon. Lady say that—[Interruption.]
§ Miss Hornsby-SmithIf hon. Members will permit me to finish my reply—so far as concerns mothers who for social needs require means by which their children can be looked after, there is no reason why a properly registered minder scheme, similar to the scheme already satisfactorily in operation in the London County Council area, should not be equally satisfactory in Kent.
§ Mr. ManuelRubbish.
§ Sir R. AclandWill the hon. Lady agree that this is a deterioration in the situation compared with what was originally intended? If we are unable to afford the service originally intended under the Act, can the Minister of Health consult the Minister of Food about why we can easily afford a lot of extra bacon for people who can pay for it?
§ Mr. BurdenMay I ask my hon. Friend how many children in Kent have been using these day nurseries in the past year; what is the cost per child to the ratepayers; and will the proposed scheme adequately take the place of this one and ease the situation for the mothers at less cost to the rates?
§ Miss Hornsby-SmithThe scheme of day nurseries covers only a limited area of North-West Kent and not the main part of the county. The cost per child per week in April, 1952, was £3 14s. In view of the fact that the council will register the minders, and will inspect and impose conditions, there is no reason why the scheme should not work satisfactorily.
§ Mr. D. BrookIf the statement by the hon. Lady that the best place for a child under school age is at home, will she consult her right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to ascertain why he made provision for nursery schools under the 1944 Education Act.
§ Mr. SpeakerQuestion No. 28.
§ Mr. SpeakerIs the hon. Member rising to a point of order?
§ Mr. DoddsI thought you were passing direct to another Question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature——
§ Mr. SpeakerQuestion No. 28.