FactCheck: Is Cameron sure about that Sure Start budget?
The claim 
“On Sure Start, the budget is going from ÂŁ2,212m to ÂŁ2,297m – that budget is going UP, that is what’s happening”
David Cameron MP, Prime Minister’s Questions, February 9, 2011
Cathy Newman checks it out
To hear the prime minister talk, you’d think Sure Start was set for an era of expansion. But that doesn’t quite tally with dire warnings from charities that 250 of the children’s centres across England face closure because of spending cuts. So has the government spared Sure Start from the austerity drive or did the prime minister just mislead parliament?
The background
Labour refuses to drop the claim that the Tories are cutting the Sure Start budget, and Ed Miliband pounced on the issue in prime minister’s questions again today.
He reminded MPs that a survey from the Daycare Trust warned 250 Sure Start centres could close as a result of government budget cuts.
In the run-up to the election, Labour claimed that Sure Start faced ÂŁ200m in cuts that would lead to the closure of one in five of the 3,500 centres across England.
While our FactCheck-ometer swung to a fiction for that claim, we did warn that the Tories had not promised to protect Sure Start.
Lo and behold, in October’s Spending Review, the Chancellor announced that Sure Start services would only be protected in cash terms, rather than keeping pace with inflation, and the programme “refocused on its original purpose”.
The analysis
In the current financial year, ÂŁ1.1bn was spent on Sure Start – this is the figure Mr Osborne said would be “protected in cash terms”.
Education secretary Michael Gove then revealed that the ÂŁ1.1bn would be wrapped into a new Early Intervention Grant (EIG).
That grant, he said, would replace a slew of funding schemes for mental health, crime, pregnancy and other youth and children’s schemes – including Sure Start.
For the current financial year 2010-11, a total of ÂŁ2,482 million was allocated to all these schemes.
Mr Gove disclosed that the grant would be “…worth ÂŁ2,212 million in 2011-12 and ÂŁ2,297 million in 2012-13″.
Those were the figures quoted by the prime minister today. But they relate to the multitude of services covered by the grant, not just Sure Start (see the list here).
Worse, although there’s a tiny increase in the grant between 2011 and 2012, the total amount allocated in 2010 was ÂŁ2.5bn – so this year’s allocation is actually a cut of 11 per cent.
What’s more, the Department for Education says the early intervention grant “is not ring-fenced, nor subject to conditions, and local authorities are free to decide locally their priorities for its use”.
In other words, although the money has to be spent broadly on early intervention projects, individual schemes like Sure Start could be cut in favour of others like teen pregnancy initiatives.
FactCheck put the figures to Downing Street today and was told only that the ÂŁ1.1bn Sure Start fund was protected as part of “the new supersized Early Intervention Fund”.
Mr Cameron dug himself into a deeper hole by going on to say that Anand Shukla, the boss of the Daycare Trust, backed him on the fact that the government was “maintaining” its spending on Sure Start.
Mr Shukla responded by saying he is currently writing to Mr Cameron to “clarify our position”, adding that the Daycare Trust “is concerned that the removal of the ring-fence within the local government settlement in the Comprehensive Spending Review may mean money lost to Sure Start Children Centres.”
Cathy Newman’s verdict
David Cameron slipped up today by confusing the Sure Start budget with the broader early intervention grant. On that, FactCheck believes he misled the Commons.
But he was also less clear than he should have been by omitting to mention that this year’s early intervention grant has been cut by 11 per cent – choosing to focus instead on the very small increase in next year’s figures.
And that’s even before we get into the fact that none of the money in the early intervention grant has to be spent on Sure Start.
Councils have been given a free hand to close as many centres as they wish. The Prime Minister may find himself having to clarify all this before too long.
There are 11 comments on this post
“The Prime Minister may find himself having to clarify all this before long”
I wouldn’t be too sure about that!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You’re being very tactful in saying that Cameron was ‘confused’. He deliberately used that figure so he could pretend superiority over Miliband whilst the cameras were on him and hoped that nobody would notice his lie.
I was listening to PMQs during my lunch break at the Sure Start I work for and I told everyone about Cameron’s claim when I heard it. We’ve just been told our budget is being cut by 15% and that other partner services are been closed down wholesale. We are a Sure Start in one of the most deprived community in the whole of Britain. I can’t print the general reaction to Cameron’s claim because you’d censor it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Shameful. Mr Cameron frustrates me considerably.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think you are being over-generous in saying that Cameron “slipped up” by confusing the SureStart budget with the Early Intervention Grant. My interpretation would be that the rolling of SureStart into EIG is specifically intended to pull the wool over peoples’ eyes…rather like the rolling of various defense deals into the supposedly “ring-fenced” DFID budget. I very much doubt that Cameron will eat his words on this one. Instead he will use this sleight of hand to blame local authorities for making decisions to close SureStart Centres.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dead right, this was no slip up. He had the file ready and even went back to Sure Start, which was from a previous question, to be able to trot out the figures, accusing Miliband of being ‘wrong’.
The problem is that no matter how often Cathy exposes the government’s dodgy use of statistics, they never go back on the record to correct themselves or apologise.
The record in Hansard will be used in 100 years time by historians who may well believe that Cameron did all the amazing things he claims.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I am in favour of spending more money now on projects like sure start to save cash later on as the consequences of parental failures, dysfunctional families, unemployment etc will cost tax payers more in the future.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Cathy, I’m amazed they let you anywhere near Westminster given the number of times you expose them as either fools or charletans.
Keep up the great work
(Pity the opposition aren’t as forensic)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Cathy,
This is the second generation since 1979 the Tories have conned, or tried to con.
However, last time there were no social media, only Murdoch and co. peddling the usual lies with virtually nobody to contest them. Even now you can guarantee CamClegg’s Sure Start lie and others will receive relatively minor coverage.
It will be interesting to see how admirable work like yours and your researchers stacks up eventually. The more you do it the more the Labour opposition is shown up too.
This is one citizen who appreciates your search for fact over political fiction. It is the main reason I admire Channel 4 News. Please continue to expose these amoral scoundrels for what they are.
I hope eventually you apply the same method to transnational companies and banks. After all, they are the worst of the lot.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The tories have wanted rid of SureStart all along & they have managed to make sure it happens by stealth by making councils the ones to swing the axe.
My wife works for one in Blackpool in one of the most deprived wards in the town. Even this one isnt safe , but the council hasnt made any plans till the summer, therefore the staff & the parents are all in limbo.
Mr Cameron is just a plain liar or at best economical with the truth. Just a nother short sighted piece of tory penny pinching that will save a few quid in the short term but cost us all an awful lot more in the long term.
‘Strengthen & Improve’ Remeber it well Mr Cameron
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Which 250 Sure Start centres would be closed?
When Sure Start was set up, early birds parents were quick to fill every available place. They knew a good thing when they saw it.
It was the families who infants MOST NEED Sure Start who remain least likely to take up places.
If those are the families who get left behind once again, then all the Cameron promises in the world will still ensure ‘Tory style’ Sure Start won’t make a difference to the wide attainment gap.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m not surprised by Cameron getting it wrong – he and other members of the cabinet seem more ready to jump to get the headline before the facts are clear. Recent examples are Gove/BSF, the rush to close Quangos with no idea of the cost/need and Pickles blocking of easing the cuts on Local Authority budgets.
The arrogance is what surprises me – I expect it will come back to haunt them though.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0