The cost of state 'guidance' for the early years is astronomic and it is rewritten every couple of years in yet another glossy format.

The existence and expectations for providers in the early years has become a nightmare and the providers are, in effect, accountable to the guidance and paperwork more so than the children.

Bureaucracy has proliferated so much in the early years that many practitioners are driven to leave or downsize. There is a petition on the Times Educational Supplement online 'speakers' corner' blog which several education ministers have swept aside and refuse to meet with representatives of 'ordinary' early years practitioners.

People complain about the tick box culture and the automatic phrases used in reporting but this is what education has become - plot losing - to put it frankly. I am sure that this is not what parents want for their children.

You will note carers live with clipboards in hand to provide evidence for the government assessment system

Debbie Hepplewhite, Newbury, England

Alice - you're spot on. But why the middle class appropriation of State services should come as a surprise is beyond me. The middle classes have always been adept at making sure they take advantage of services be it health or education. Research has shown that they take more out than they put in, despite their bleating about tax.
The answer ? Probably more targetted services (hesitate to say means testing) and a concerted effort by all to reach the population that these services were aimed at.

Ian Cameron, Newbury, UK

Is it so difficult for politicians to see the clear divide in our society.
This well educated middle class cabinet holds a strong belief that all of our people aspire to their middle class ambitions, it could not be more clear that they don't.

David , bradford,

This is one of the most insightful articles I have ever read in your paper! I run a local charity supporting parents with under 5's, and we support all parents, including hard to reach ones, cost effectively, using trained volunteers.
The reason we are able to access parents across the board is that we are not affiliated to the government and its tin pot initiatives. We are also not led by post codes and targets, and we go into families own homes to give them the support they need. We hold Family Groups at our offices which are incredibly well attended because there is no stigma attached to coming here, and parents feel comfortable in our environment.

Unfortunately, we get no govt funding, and as the lottery pot has now been eroded by govt, we are looking at closing our scheme at the end of September after 9 years, due to lack of funding (and we are talking £60,000 a year to run, not billions!)

It is very sad that charities struggle whilst cash gets thrown at SureStart!

Sylvia Wyatt, Clitheroe,

Well written. You have touched a nerve with me. I live in a small cul-de-sac in a pleasant middle/working class area. At the top of the avenue there is a junior school surrounded by lovely landscaped grounds. The school recently entered a successful bid for a Surestart Centre. This is evidently to serve a socially disadvanted area that is up to 1 mile away from the school and will involve parents pushing a buggy up a steep 1/4 mile long steep hill on a frighteningly busy main road to reach the centre. Plus destroying the landscaped green area and dragging building wagons etc up this small narrow cul-de-sac. Our councillors were overjoyed and crowed in the local rag about it. Luckily the local residents got together and opposed the plan and it was withdrawn. The truth is Surestart have been allocated a load of government funds and need to spend it as fast as possible because of spend deadlines set by the government. Complete waste olf hard earned taxpayers money! The madness continues.

james Bolger, Bury, Lancashire

I managed a community pre-school for 7 years, then went into training in an attempt to help raise the quality of pre-school practitioners. All the adult learners I support through their NVQ 2 and 3 are really keen to improve their skills and do their best for the children in their care. It beats me why they should put themselves through this when most of them do not have this effort rewarded in their paypacket. The government plough all this money into the Early Years Foundation Stage but seem to miss the fact that most of the staff delivering this are on the minimum wage. I used to work through most weekends and holidays to ensure my pre-school was the best it could be and ticked all of Ofsted's boxes. My team was really dedicated but were always bogged down with paperwork. It's about time someone recognised their efforts and gave them an incentive to stay in the industry. Realistacally they could earn more money stacking shelves!

Gill, Southampton,

I'm sick and tired of hearing of the extravagant and useless utopian schemes that have been set up by statist governments like this one. There ought to be some way of penakising those who get us into this mess - in their pockets where it hurts; not given large amounts of severance pay, with amess left behind.

Dr J Find;later, Carnfortyh,

The problem is that, although the government can target a service at those who most ned it, they cannot (or should not) force those people to make the decision to take the service.

When you mention the reasons that the parents on the estate may not use the centres, you miss one that I have seen again and again as a (secondary school) teacher: parents who have a poor education themselves, are terrified that their children might surpass them, and so sabotage their chances. Probably hidden under the guise of "I didn't need school", or "my child just isn't academic".

So the solution must be in changing the attitude and perception of the parents. Parenting classes are patronising and unattractive. Perhaps a better provision of adult education would help: so the parents would stay a step ahead of their kids, and maybe even appreciate the value of education.

Simon, London,

I own a very popular and successful Nursery. We also have a Children’s Centre locally which is chronically underused. Some parents who live close to it bring their kids to us. What we hear is that they don't want them associating with the kids from the surrounding area.
Our staff would be very angry about the suggestion that all they do is "baby-sit". That is so far from the truth. They are all qualified, well led and highly motivated. Of course they too would pick holes in, and make improvements to, the curriculum but what group of committed professionals would not do that. They care about their job and it shows. Our parents come from a very wide range of income brackets and nationalities so the experiences the kids gain is very broad.
The issue of how to convince some more disadvantaged Mums to use Children’s Centres is a real one which needs more attention. For me the author lost credibility when offering a blanket condemnation of "E numbers".

David House, Wisbech, UK

Let us hope that this 35.000 case study will at long last convince this government that even 3 billions' worth of fine words, staff training and pay, inspections and lavishly equipped buildings remain a poor subsitute for the work that competent mothers have traditionally done for love. It's in and around the home, at the table and toddling around mum and other family members that children acquire their language and life skills, not to mention empathy with others. A good nursery school is an enrichment, but no substitute. The tragedy is that this government, in its eagerness to make an earner out of every mum, confuses the needs of babies with those of older children and conceals the drawbacks of daycare by pointing out the benefits of part time nursery education at an appropriate age. Sure-Start funds belong to all parents. You cannot blame the wise ones for picking out the services that happen to suit them, especially if they are "free"!

Anna Lines, London, United Kngdom

So, another much vaunted New Labour scheme turns out to be a hugely expensive failure. Why are people surprised any more ? This government are so institutionally inept BUT have such well developed media skills that the truth rarely sees the light of day. When it does, the wheels of spin turn furiously to obfuscate all.

Rick, London, England

Why is this wrong: it is the middle classes who pay for the facilities. It is pleasant to actually get something out of the state for a change!

JS, Cambridge,

I am disgusted at your comment "In my experience, most playgroups and nurseries generally do little of anything but babysitting" I am a qualified pre-school worker and I am required to meet very exacting standards of care and education for the children at the pre-school I work in and I do so although I only receive 20p more than the minimum wage. I agree that the government require us to spend far too much time "ticking boxes" (observations, assessments) and would much prefer that we did not have to do this so that we can spend our time more productively. What you fail to understand is that the government has turned us all into social workers. We spend a lot of our time working with agencies for child protection and social services. THAT is why many of the parents you talk about do not take their children to playgroups.

Julia, Ashford, Kent

I agree with Jim of Norwich as my daughter's end of year report was obviously a standard report and was riddled with references to "he". She is 8.

J Emerson, Alcester, Warwickshire

Invariably, if you are really daft, then you will not know it, so what are you trying to improve.?You need to know just how much knowledge is out there, still to be learned, before you try to secure some of it !

David Vinter, Louth, Lincs., UK.

A recently launched Welsh Assembly initiative aims to overcome some of the issues that you raised in this article. The scheme targets the most deprived areas in Wales and offers free chilcare for children aged 2 to 3 for 12.5 hours per week. In addition to this an intensive health visiting service togther with parenting programmes and basic skills provision will work togther to ensure that the most vulnerable families within our communities receive a service which is tailored to their needs. Although the scheme is targeted, the areas are bases on the catchment areas for specific schools and so will avoid the'labelling' of families in need. As operational manager for this programme in Carmarthenshire I would be glad to forward more information

Liz Noblett, Carmarthenshire, Wales

Jim D, Norwich writes: "They generally followed the same theme for, a. the good ones, b. the middle of the road ones, and c.the duffers - remarkably similar to the types of report written for "pre school children". I have also seen the end of year report for the 5 year old granddaughter after her first year at proper school, and sadly it seems to be following the same route."

Jim, I am shocked. IF you what you write is true, then that would mean a state employee is not fulfilling his/her duties correctly and that the reports are worthless.

Extrapolating, that would indicate that government statistics are unreliable, open to abuse and opento mis-statement. This is shocking news I am sure for everyone who relies on government indicators to be correct.

There must be an error here somewhere lest we be faced with the conclusion that government statistics are worthless and that the government has therefore wasted the cost of providing these statistics.

Edwin Thornber, Bucharest,

What you don't mention is that Sure Start is paraded across the civil service as an effective and innovative form of "delivery" that all departments should emulate - ie a scheme that does nothing is seen as a beacon to follow. There again, given the dismal state of our public services, and the abysmal performance of the civil service, a programme that spends billions on doing nothing is probably better than most government programmes which spend billions and are actively damaging.

Peter, London,

Alice Miles is exactly right. I have observed in Hackney that, although the under five population is predominately poor and non-white, our Sure Start Centres are disproportionately used by middle class mums. And it becomes a self re-inforcing situation, as mums off the estates decide that the centres are not for the "likes of them"

Diane Abbott, London,

I recently saw a end of year report for my 3 year old grandson. It reflected much of the reported guff in this article, however, the most striking point that came across was the similarity to reports I used to read as a manager. These reports were written mainly by people who didn't want to do them, weren't capable of doing them, or didn't have the time to do them. The net result was copies from the year before with names changed around, and some of the words changed to come at the beginning, middle, or, end depending on where the current year change was. They generally followed the same theme for, a. the good ones, b. the middle of the road ones, and c.the duffers - remarkably similar to the types of report written for "pre school children". I have also seen the end of year report for the 5 year old granddaughter after her first year at proper school, and sadly it seems to be following the same route.

Jim D, Norwich, UK

Alice, I usually disagree with virtually everything you write, but this article is absolutely spot-on. My daughter goes to nursery two mornings a week (she's three and a half) and the rest of the time she's taken care of by my wife. We're lucky you see, we can get by (just) on my wage alone. In her last report card we were informed Lily (my daughter not my wife) was doing really well and that she could now count to 20 and recognise her name. Of course she can actually count to hundred and write her name (sort of). The fact that her 'teacher' is totally unaware of both proves your point.

Bill, Sheffield,

I wasn't thinking of right and wrong people to provide help to in bringing up children! Have I got the wrong mind-set?

Mike, Birmingham,

"Free nursery education for all 3 year olds" is a big con anyway. Until recently it was free from the term before their fourth birthday (now the term AFTER the thrid birthday) and for 5 2/12 sessions a week for 33 weeks a year. As most nurseries follow school terms parents then had to find the money for the remaining 5 weeks of the year - not easy for those on benefits or low incomes I would imagine at around.

A child who is 3 in the summer term will only get 3 terms of 'free' nursery before starting school. Yet more government spin without substance.

I must take issue with Alice's description of nurseries though - our local one manages to find plenty of stimulation for all the children it cares for and the staff are very well qualified (not that I believe that you need to be qualified to be - middle class mothers seem to manage to teach their children to read without a specific educational qualification!)

Caroline, Cambridge, UK

Isn't it about time that you were honest about people's ability to rear children & nurture them into honest productive citizens - assets to society. Why complain about so called middle class mums making use of a nursery ???? Just be honest and complain about the drongos breeding kids without a thought for their upbringing. We all know you have dressed up the article to gently reveal this fact......

Vince martin, Walton on Thames, surrey

I had wondered how it was that studies suggested that this program had no effect, when Head Start, the American program on which it was ostensibly based, reportedly DOES have a worthwhile effect. My understanding is that Head Start actually reaches those disadvantaged children for whom it is meant. If it is true that First Start's resources have been going largely to provide free babysitting for the middle class, then this could help to explain the difference.

Unfortunately children who benefit from Head Start often don't do well once they are actually in school. They get a better start, but still receive far too little coaching in the actual race.

D.L. Anderson, Crossett, AR/U.S.A.

What is it about politicians that ensures every government initiative, produces an outcome directly opposite of the intent?

Luck or Incompetence. You choose!

michael murphy, brightlingsea, essex

Spot on!

LYDIA BESSIRON, camberley, SURREY

The government can't force working class parents to attend nursery, it's the responsibility of these parents to use the services provided for them for the benefit of their child.

So many topical issues at the moment, e.g. knife crime /gun crime relate to poor parenting. Such parents should be forced to attend parenting classes and to sign agreements that they will meet certain targets.

James Smith, Oxfordshire, England

Regrettably, this pattern pervades life in the UK. I remember going to Local Authority evening classes where the clientele were nearly all members of the already well-educated and articulate middle class. It was notable that people from less educated backgrounds - those the provision was primarily intended for - seemed uncomfortable and almost always dropped out after 2-3 weeks. What is to be done? Is there sometimes a case for a kind of 'inverse means test'?

Andrew May, Wimbledon, UK

The question is: how do you make the right government minister read this?

LS, Oxford,

That is the inherent problem of socialism.

If the state is giving out all the goodies, then the most influential, wide-awake, and well-conected people will get the biggest share.

Jonathan, NYC, USA