To think that funding free breakfast clubs is wrong-headed?

Genuine question: what stigma? Breakfast club at our local primary is widely used by working parents and takes 90 children a day. There is no stigma, more of a waiting list for places.

I'd love to know how this would work in my dd's primary if it was implemented there. We currently pay for wraparound care there at £6.50 per session for breakfast club from 07:30 till 08:45. Places are limited due to space and staffing ratios. The school hall is used for this but it is ran and staffed by an external provider who rent the space from the school. Would they be expected to close to allow the school to use the hall for a free club, leaving the working parents who need the childcare with nothing? Or would they be expected to add the free sessions onto theirs, not only meaning fees would increase for paid attendees to cover costs, but that spaces available to them would reduce to allow room for the free breakfast club?

Question for the government I would suggest. It by no means alleviates child food insecurity but it will reduce the stigma of using breakfast clubs in primary schools. My hope is that families that need it will access it. For me it's a start but by no means a fix all.

For the reasons I've given. If it's designed to prevent child hunger then it's expensive way of reaching a small proportion of children who need it whilst feeding a lot of others who don't. Are those families who can't afford to give their primary aged child breakfast suddenly going to be able to manage it in secondary school? What happens to the younger children? Or during school holidays? Why not target low income families through the benefit system?

The idea of free breakfast for all children is obviously a good thing but for me, it just doesn't seem as if it's been thought through logistically wise.
I've worked at a breakfast club and the space we had was only large enough for about 20 children (paying).
If the government are expecting schools to feed every child then where do they propose this happens and who's going to pay for the extra staff that will be needed?
Of course every school is different but at my school we don't have a separate canteen or food hall. We wouldn't be able to use the classrooms as they are being set up for the first session. We couldn't use the school hall because that is being set up for interventions/PE.
It's a good 'idea' but I just can't see that it's going to be practical or workable.

A lot of working parents will drive their kids to school on their long commute so giving them breakfast at school will be helpful. Also frees up money for all parents to spend on other stuff which can help the economy

Well to be fair some prioritise their vape products!

Why not?

But why this scheme? Why a scheme that misses out lots of children (pre primary, secondary school age) and feeds lots who dot need it? Wouldn't a better solution ve upping UC for families ?

If you've got a local library that you can easily get to without spending more on travel than the cost of broadband, that's open every weekday and will provide you with sufficient guaranteed internet access to manage your daily life then yes, others are going to be in a different position.

People don't always realise that having a library and the attendant resources nearby is no longer a given.

Most schools set homework that requires internet and computer access, benefits require internet access as do GP surgeries. In this day and age the internet is a necessity.

Free breakfast for all children seems like a great way to get all kids off to a good start and it should be inclusive of all children so that everyone gets to share a common experience. Even better if kids get involved in prepping and serving.

I’d do free lunches for all as well.

I have no stats on this but I’d imagine communally cooked and eaten food such as veg curry and rice or baked potato with salad is less wasteful, better for the environment and better for child health than packed lunches and highly processed foods.

This. It's 2025. Being able to manage normal life for oneself and a dependent without either a phone or broadband would actually be a niche and luxury situation in itself. You'd need a lot of things in place to be able to pull it off, that most of us don't have.

You need to check UC fairly frequently. What happens if you have no computer to use? People aren't in poverty due to mobile phones. I would be getting rid of the two child cap immediately.

You forgot the avocados on toast.

Forgoing phones and broadband is likely to lead to poverty nowadays . Need internet for benefits and cheap deals

With modern life, a phone with some data is pretty essential. Probably cheaper than the bus fare to the library ad well

(I'm meaning something like a monthly data package from GiffGaff, not the latest Iphone. A tenner a month).

Mums being able to work is a good thing so before school club is essential. Although always have breakfast at home as school run is walking and I need breakfast before work. If children have a second breakfast it's probably healthier than biscuits and cakes after school

I would go to a local library to use the internet of it meant feeding my children. That is my position others may differ ?

The national minimum wage continues to increase at a rate greater than many skilled graduate jobs with some graduates now bemoaning the fact they do not earn a great deal above the minimum wage. I can research the cost of bread and milk. It might sound brutal but parents can afford these essential item of necessary if their children's health depended on them.

I just think charities seem to be glossing over the deputy a lot of the hungry children are suffering from neglect possibly being brought in by parental choice. If this were such a problem maybe having food vouchers as part of the benefits system would ensure parents spent money on bread,cereal and milk? Not all parents are making the right choices.

@mids2019 I bet you think internet is a luxury too.

Some people are poorer than others granted but I would make the point that unless in the most dire of circumstances parents should make the decision to feed their children. If parents can't afford toast or basic cereal for their children then then we would have to have a completely inhumane benefits system and we dont.

How many households forgo mobile phones, broadband etc. to make sure their children get basic nutrition? For every child coming into school how many parents are there with mobile phones etc. If my children were in danger of not having breakfast I personally would forgo a while range of luxury...I would also do my utmost to get paid employment to feed my child. Maybe I am old fashioned holding such views but I really do think neglect is at the core of this despite worthy documents from charities who exist to promote an agenda.

Do some research. I honestly can't get over the uneducated posts on MN and utter lack of awareness of the child poverty rates in our country. The impact of benefit cuts coupled with the cost of living crisis has had a huge impact on families already living in poverty. Some families are in work poverty, their wages haven't gone up in line with inflation, and the increase in bills and food costs have pushed these families into absolute poverty. https://www.jrf.org.uk/child-poverty posting again. There are numerous studies and articles on the subject.

https://www.jrf.org.uk/child-poverty Thought I'd help save you some time. It's a dire situation for a lot of families and I am pro any scheme that will alleviate food insecurity for these families. Honestly, who cares if there are other benefits.

I'm not the PP but yes I think there is too much teaching time. Very long days, the kids are exhausted, and none of it is backed up by actual proven results. Look at Finland. They focus on quality over quantity and they consistently score near the top of educational studies.