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

I suggest you do some research on child poverty rates in the UK. Some families can't afford cereal, bananas, milk or basic necessities. How fortunate and naive you are to be completely unaware of the deprivation experienced by some families, this figure is constantly rising too. It's a travesty.

We are not a third world country. In reality poverty is relative and not absolute in the sense parents can afford to feed their children breakfast as has been pointed out on this thread. Although we do have a spread of income in the country I think the decision not to feed your children breakfast is simply neglect and we shouldn't be unafraid of calling it our.

There are parents who do love in an entitlement culture where there is an expectation the state will step in for all the finance revealed to a personal decision to have offspring. Free education and health care absolutely I agree with but free food? Where do you draw the line?

Unfortunately for some parents free breakfast mean just a little more to spend commodities and the removal of a daily hassle. If something is free people take it and it becomes part an expanded benefits system.

We should be looking at it the causes of lack of breakfast and ensuring people understand personal responsibility in these cases instead of adding more bureaucracy onto schools as they increasingly pick up the results of societal failure. The same would apply to fetch brushing, toilet training etc. We are simply taking a basic parental responsibility that should be acted on by the vast majority of citizens in an advanced economy and giving to schools. Is this helpful?

It's good of people with knowledge to share it on here.
All the points are good and wirthy if consideration.
The knockon effects for bus operators and childminders are particularly interesting. Also for families who would like to breakfast together.
The OP's question was not shouldn't we leave the kids to go hungry, it was, is this the best use of funds.

The school start time pressure might have some validity.

We have a primary school, secondary school and sixth college all in a row. They have staggered start and finish times to ensure traffic flow. . Adding extra 30mins at the begging of the day would mean the primary start time is directly in the secondary drop off window. So they would either have to bring the secondary start time earlier (and its breakfast club!) Or make the primary day start later and finish later (its already 3.30).

Nearly lost my tea there. Where did you hear that we have a competent government? 😂

@TY78910 I can tell you don't work with large-scale budgeting. Yes, all those things need to be taken into account, because if you don't, it will bite you back in the arse a few months down the line. The schools who currently offer breakfast club (none of the secondaries around here do despite this being a deprived, but huge town) have very limited numbers; I think my youngest child's primary allow 20 - not the 600 they might have to find room for.

And if you've ever had the pleasure of dealing with bus companies and their scheduling when they serve areas with schools, you'd know what a huge ballache it is to reschedule arrival times. And if they have to run an extra service then yes, that costs money, too.

Yet you seem unaware than some people can work hard but afford neither of those.

I don't understand your comment. I'm saying I want MORE help for the kids and families who really need it. I don't want rich parents to be given free food and childcare. I don't want tired teachers to have to work longer (unpaid) hours. How am I whipping up hatred? Or are you urging me to?

We used to have funded breakfast clubs under the last labour government. I'm my school attendance increased dramatically. A marked improvement in concentration furvkids throughout the day. . etc. I'm so onboard with this.

Honestly, as a teacher who has worked in many different schools in many different areas…just do it by the percentage of children on free school meals. I’ve worked in schools with 2% (definitely don’t need breakfast clubs) up to more than 50%. We used to buy toast and cereal for the children in these schools with our own money, and wash their clothes. These are the schools that need the money. Providing a crappy 60p breakfast is pointless in some schools - I wouldn’t want my child eating the shite 60p will buy.

Wow you have a lot of time on your hands.

You do have a point about extra costs but some of your points are so OTT.

Wear and tear of flooring? You do realise that schools already have breakfast clubs they're just not funded?

Transport companies changing their timetables costing them more money? Stop it.

Yes but Scotland have a competent government who quite like helping their people.

Because some needy kids may benefit from it

Wild idea. Much better to whip up hate a la Daily Mail

I agree entirely. My point was that some parents would take advantage even though they didn't need it. Someone on here mentioned that their school's club was staffed by volunteering teachers. Why should a teacher give up their time to enable someone else to leave their kids and go off to (maybe better paid) work? Focus the funding and resources on those children who really need it.

The scheme is so poorly thought-out it's laughable.

It's all well and good saying the 60-odd pence are more than enough to feed a child, but the Maths definitely isn't math-ing, even with the money for the start-up taken into account.

Because it's not just the cost of a piece of toast or a bowl of porridge or cereal.

• It's the energy cost of running the toaster, hob or the fridge to store milk. It's the energy cost of running the kettle a few hundred times.
• It's the cost of gas to heat the hall, to run the lights and the extra water for the increased loo and handwashing trips.
• It's the staffing cost for opening the place early (because you cannot just rock up with the kids - half an hour early means at least 45mins early for staff), including caretakers, cleaners and the actual staff running this
• It's the cost of replacing items once they inevitably break.
• It's the cost of staff time to either go shopping for food or to take in deliveries.
• It's the cost of PAT testing the equipment annually.
• The cost of food hygiene training if you use LSAs, teaching staff or others who do not normally handle food.
• It's the cost of staff time to clear up after the kids have finished - and there is always a mess after food times.
• It's the increased wear and tear on floors, furniture and crockery.

And the logistics of who will run this have not been discussed.

• The added time for caretakers.
• The added time for cleaners.
• The need for a fully-trained first-aider who will be legally required to be on site.
• The added time for either teachers (good luck mandating that when directed time is already pushed by so many other obligations), LSAs or midday supervisors - all of whom would have to be paid.
• The need for reception staff to allow students in early while ensuring that students are safeguarded on site from anyone else who'd enter.
• The added time for SLT, one of whom would need to be there in case of behaviour emergencies.
• The added time for staff who search certain students for prohibited items (drugs, weapons) - we have some only allowed in after all students are in lessons, but with the scheme being universal, we can hadly exclude them from it as it's those students especially who are very deprived.

All of that does not just cost 60-odd pence. And that's why schools with someone who does the costing properly have pulled out.

And if you want to go even further with unintended consequences:

• It's the loss of earnings for childminders and other childcare staff - even half an hour a day will be huge when spread over a year, so be prepared for those places to become even more scarce.
• It's the change of schedules to public transport companies, who'd be expected to either run earlier or more often to accommodate children who either go to breakfast club or don't.

Exactly this. And in a lot of schools they have a staggered lunch because not everyone can get into the hall/canteen at the same time. How are they going to provide food for each child within 30 minutes? Where are the kids going to eat it?

I’m entirely in favour of kids having a good breakfast and trying to counteract poverty. But I’m not sure that giving parents like me the last half-hour of breakfast club “free” is going to achieve that.

No objection in principle, but I don't know if the logistics will work.

My DC goes to breakfast club 3 mornings per week. It costs £5 per session. I can’t understand how it’s going to work if the school are getting 60p per child. Where will they get the staff? Is the standard going to drop? It’s a bit worrying really.

All schools should have breakfast/ afterschool club but they shouldn’t be free, at least not for everyone.

I don't think charities publishing data that supports their mission, or charities carefully selecting data that supports their mission is anything new, is it?

Scotland have been doing this for years. I'm assuming it's been evidenced to be beneficial.

That doesn’t answer my question.

What do you think their “vested interest” is?

I've worked in a free-at-the-point-of-use breakfast club for 15 years (in Wales, where it has LONG been a thing ) alongside being a TA, and I see the difference that it makes every day. YABU!

I don't know what the answer is but it is heartbreaking to hear from some of you TAs and teachers that so many children are arriving at school without anything to eat.
Perhaps those of us who are not on the breadline should consider suggesting likeminded parents from their school rota purchasing breakfast items for those children to help support school funds ? Or even voluntary donations to pay for staff to facilitate it? I agree to an extent that feeding ALL children seems expensive and impossible to find, HOWEVER I know personally children who's parents have reasonable money - due to wages and UC top up and also receive help from neighbours and extended family's to ensure food is available to children as they worry etc but the parent somehow manages to have professional highlights, nails done regularly and lashes and new clothes yet plead poverty and children are constantly hungry and unkempt- I don't think they would be necessarily get Pupil premium so do they slip the net otherwise ?but those children need support and food too - in this case not due to lack of money in the house but more the selfish way money is spent in the household. Since moving I see this more and more - often adding cigarettes or alcohol too. Thank you all of you superstars that slip a hungry child a meal/ wash their clothes etc.. we should all do more to help. This topic has given me a lot to think about how I can help locally.

How is that what you read? I’m saying it’s clearly not the governments plan to be feeding hungry children. It’s part of a much bigger agenda.