I can’t make up my mind whether I’m pleased, outraged or indifferent. The first thing that strikes me is that there’s a bias towards getting everybody out of the house. That includes children.

Yes, people need to work. Yes, childcare costs money. I know all that.

And maybe I don’t even begrudge those who earn up to £150K (£150K!) who want their children looked after by someone else. (Something tells me that one parent on that salary can afford to have the other one care for their child. Seems I’m wrong.)

So for every £8000 the parents spend on childcare, the government pays £2000. Nice.

I question the government’s values here.

It seems obsessed with making sure everybody’s doing what they want them to. It fosters a strong work ethic in children from very early on. They too – poor little darlings – have to be out of the house all day in another room full of strange people doing stuff they’re not that keen on. Isn’t that how most of us define work?

I’m just wondering whether a full time mother like me couldn’t also make use of £2000.

It could pay for a lot of violin tuition for my daughter. Time ice skating. A good number of books. Travel to see family. Her portion of a good holiday each year. Not important?

Well don’t young people need to learn how to use their free time too? Or does the government deem that superfluous?

Considering most workers only take 33 minutes for lunch now, they seem to be getting their way. Work, work, work.

When I was studying sociology, we were examining the increased amount of leisure time the UK population would have in years to come. Ha! We’re more busy, more swallowed up by work and the work culture is even more powerful today than ever I feel.

So maybe the government’s tactics are working. We are to become (and breed) work machines.

I just think the total figure for this state-led removal of children from their homes could be used more creatively. Perhaps it could be universal like child benefit.

I can’t even find a way of thinking this system is benefiting the child. What would they spend it on? Mr. Whippy and Haribo. So? OK, not good for the child either.

We could put it away in a fund and they could (aaah, here’s a thought) pay for their further education with it!

But this is a sad allocation of money. Subsidising external care for our own offspring.

I know I’m biased just like everyone. I know I’m fortunate. I’ve also made huge sacrifices, career-wise and status wise. (There’s no scorn stronger than that delivered by the ‘working mums’ set.) I’ve felt it’s worth it.

I just feel it’s creating a barren society where parents too are missing their children’s young years.

Parents have reduced influence, families make do with impoverished relationships, children miss the sense of homeliness and richness that can come with being looked after by a parent at home.

There is more than one way to raise children.