Peter Moore: Playschool finance

When we first moved into our village over forty years ago the local community playgroup had a problem.

The fixed costs which included the hire of the hall and paying the playgroup leader were costing more than the fees were bringing in. The obvious solution, if we did not want to lose the playgroup, was to increase the fees but many of the parents were angry. Some parents said they could not afford the new fees although confidential help was available for anyone struggling. If the playgroup increased the number of parents who had a discount the fees for everyone else would have to increase even more. 

What was the alternative? There was a small amount of capital in the bank which had been raised in various charity events but this would soon disappear if it was used for the running costs. Also, it was important to have a small amount of money available in case of a sudden unexpected crisis. 

Taking out a loan would have been a very short-term solution and lead to increased costs in the long term.

Ideally it would have been helpful to ensure that all the parents earned more money, but this was out of the playgroup’s hands and not realistic. 

I was thinking about the finances of our old playgroup when I read about the problems faced by the Government. If we want an NHS free at the point of use, a free education system, heating allowances and the triple lock for pensioners and increased defence spending it all needs funding. Currently we have a deficit. 

Increasing taxes is the equivalent of increasing the fees for the playgroup, very unpopular. Alternatively, can the government cut costs? This is never easy. Changing the rules on the Personal Independence Payments (PIPs) or cutting the pensioners’ heating allowance did not end well. Opposition parties of all colours often suggest cutting costs through increased efficiency and cutting bureaucracy but even Elon Musk in America found that his chainsaw caused more damage than it solved. 

Economic growth is the equivalent to increasing all the parents’ pay. A great idea but like searching for the holy grail. Don’t hold your breath. 

I had some sympathy with the recent backbench revolt over PIPs. No one wants to see the poor and disabled suffer.  Having worked on the front line as a GP I have seen at first-hand how difficult life can be for anyone with a long term health condition. But what is the alternative?

I can also understand the Government climbdown. There is no point in entering a battle you are bound to lose. This is always a problem in a democracy. Doubtless Putin in Russia or the mullahs in Iran could push it through but I do not want to live in a dictatorship.

I am not making a party-political point. Almost all parties whatever their colour complain about cuts but also object to tax rises. The Labour party were no different in opposition. My only plea would be to ask politicians to offer alternatives. When anyone opposes a cut or suggests extra money in a particular area it would be interesting if they could offer an alternative. “Please can we pay extra for X while raising money by cutting Y”. Or even “yes we can offer everything you have asked for but it will mean a penny on income tax”. 

Ever since I first took an interest in politics in the 1960s I remember being slightly cynical when opposition politicians argued that they could cut taxes and increase services. They are still doing it. 

This is not a uniquely British problem. In France the government has proposed increasing the retirement age from 64 to 66. The French pension system, like our playgroup, is spending more than is coming in. This will eventually lead to the whole system breaking down. However logical the proposal has caused a national crisis, an assault on working people. 

If our playgroup had not increased the fees it would have closed down. It may be difficult in a democracy when politicians are fighting for votes but I would love to see just one politician explaining how they will pay for their ideas. Sadly, however hard we try, two and two will always make four.