Sue Robb of 4Children talks to Julie Laughton and Alison Britton from the Department for Education about the role of childminders in delivering the 30 hours free entitlement.
A £72,500 cap on social care costs due to come into effect in England are to be scrapped, a health minister has said.
The proposed cap was developed following the recommendations of the Dilnot commission in 2011.
But Jackie Doyle-Price told MPs the government would not be ‘taking forward the previous government’s plans to implement a cap on care costs in 2020’.
Labour’s Barbara Keeley accused the government of wasting time and money.
The cap, recommended by the Dilnot commission, was put into an Act of Parliament but the government unveiled a different proposal during the election campaign, which was widely blamed for Theresa May failing to win a majority in the snap election.
They have since announced a fresh consultation on the future system of social care for older people.
Jackie Doyle-Price, in a statement to the Commons, said: “The prime minister has been clear that the consultation will include proposals to place a limit on the care costs individuals face.
"To allow for fuller engagement and development of the approach with reforms to the care system and the way it is paid for considered in the round, we will not be taking forward the previous government's plans to implement a cap on care costs in 2020.”
But shadow health minister Keeley argued: “The minister has today finally confirmed what many of us on these benches suspected - that they will not be proceeding with their plans to cap care costs by 2020 as legislated by this House.
"This is a shameful waste of taxpayers' money. Over £1 million in today's money was spent in commissioning the Dilnot review and it is a waste of Parliamentary time enacting that cap.
"And it's no good for the minister to say that the government are consulting on this cap: they consulted on this during the general election and their proposals were rejected by the electorate.”
Desmond Swayne, former Conservative minister, said :”In the absence of provision that I might make, and indeed Dilnot might have encouraged me to make, is it reasonable for me to expect for my social care costs to be paid for by the state, and yet my heirs to inherit my substantial housing assets?”
In reply Doyle-Price said: “I think he, in a nutshell, actually summarises neatly one of the debates that we have to have in this space, which is about how we ensure that people can achieve care when they need it and that it will be paid for, whilst at the same time achieving inter-generational fairness.”