Changes to free school meal eligibility…

@AlwaysCoffee25 I think it must be the opposite in DS' school, they try to get the kids having a cooked meal finished and out of the door so they can clean up and get the area ready again before the next lesson - they only have the one hall (no separate dining room) which is then in constant use. Whereas the packed lunch kids eat everything/ bin their own stuff/ take leftovers home, meaning it's not so much of an issue!

You couldn’t even pay for a 1 bed flat on this wage round these parts. And I’m in the North!

Abominable that it’s so low.

Why's it absurd? 90% of parents who were eligible when their child started reception will not go on to be much better off. Maybe they'll go from earning 6k to 10k for example.

You know the threshold used to be 16k before they reduced it to 7.4k

What is absurd is that every kid in reception to year 2 gets free meals even millionaires, what is the point in that?

And yes pupil premium funding will go right down because barely anyone earns less than 7.4k for a long time. That's less than twelve hours work a week even on minimum wage.

It's another policy that looks good in headline form, but won't make savings really (as now more staff and hours will be needed for the renewals) and the overarching impact on schools will be negative. And that negative impact will affect all pupils.

Absolutely absurd waste of funding to give it to families who were no longer eligible. The parents should have to apply annually to the local council.

I do suspect this is a sneaky way of reducing pupil premium to schools though, which is very bad news. They’re desperately underfunded.

Oh true… I guess I was thinking back to what I was reading that they are thinking if scrapping it for infant fsm.

Yes but still feels like it will be an absolute kick in the teeth that my taxes have funded every one else’s free school meals but not my child’s.

There’s no reason why the state (i.e. other taxpayers) should be funding lunches for those who can afford them.

Of course meals should be free for parents on a low income, but otherwise I would far rather the money was spent on reducing class sizes or additional learning support for those who need it.

It's £7400 per year of earned income. Not including benefits, universal credit etc.
If your household earned income is £7400 per year then this will be topped up with benefits. It won't be all you have to live on.

As a teacher, I wouldn't ever want to see a child go hungry. However, I do think the current situation of universal free school meals for all key stage 1 children (not means tested) is utterly ridiculous. I reach at a small rural primary school and we have 90 children in key stage 1, most of whom have the free school meals on offer most day. I know that approximately 5 of them are in low income families and NEED this help. It's a terrible use of public money. 85 of those parents should be paying for their children's lunches.

That sounds like Ever FSM 6. It does mean they’re entitled still to FSM but the govermemt recognises that educationally most children who have recieved school meals in the last 6 years are more likely to be at a disadvantage educationally.

So what should the wealthy families do??

i am not wealthy but by no means would I meet the means as it currently stands as it’s very low and just feels like I pay and pay and pay and pay tax and get nothing in return! Was looking forward to free school meals next year when dc starts reception. Finally feels like getting something, anything, back from all the tax I’ve paid in. Because of their age have missed out on a lot of the new funding for nursery and having to pay hugely increased fees because the funding is terrible ect ect means the funded hours have basically become meaningless!

I was thinking this too. School funding is already more stretched than ever before under this government, if it means schools lose a chunk of their pupil premium that will have a huge negative impact

Yes, this really isn't uncommon. There are a lot of very wealthy families that use state schools. It's ridiculous that they enjoy FSMs funded by the government when cuts are being made elsewhere in schools.

In my view free school meals should be means-tested for all DC.

There’s absolutely no need for the parents pulling up in Range Rovers and Jaguars at my local primary to have their DCs’ lunch funded by taxpayers. That money could and should be used elsewhere.

Exactly this.

Plus the FSM6 helped the school budget to have stability from the funding rather than fluctuating funding

Like many PP, I don't see the issue with reapplying every year for FSM eligibility - circumstances can change so much year to year.

In our area though, the cost of school meals is due to go up again to £3.50 per day and (IMO) it's just not worth it. I pay because DS enjoys the mealtime atmosphere, a lot of his friends have school dinners and if he took a packed lunch he'd have to sit separately, and he does like most of the meals - but packed lunches would be vastly cheaper and probably more nutritious. Plus the portions aren't even very big, he usually comes out of school ravenous! So I'll continue to pay but very resentfully as it makes him happy to have his school dinners, but I really fail to see how the county council (who set the prices) can justify the cost increase when the quality and/ or portion size won't increase at all.

Seen all the policies.

Ffs indeed.

I think you completely misunderstood my post.

This bit, the opening bit -

"Is it not 7400 after UC etc" meaning UC, plus 7400...

So fuck off with your ffs and your fucking whining because I've been a single parent on the edge of poverty since the last Labour government.

…would be terrible if that’s what was happening.