Free school breakfast for every child

My children’s school have been in partnership with a charity called “magic breakfast” for some years now.

The school get free bagels and have a rota of two staff to have them out on the playground on a hot tray at morning drop off for everyone to have.

They don’t do a breakfast drop off club though as they has never had much interest from parents when they floated the idea in the past. It’s a very deprived area (57 % of school on FSM), and to be honest, not enough families work to make before or after school care viable. It’s also quite a cheap place to live, so many people who work just have one parent working and one at home, like we do.

I think people have massively missed the point. The free breakfast clubs aren’t to feed the kids of feckless parents who otherwise wouldn’t, they’re to provide free wraparound care for working parents who currently pay for it. At least that is my interpretation. I’m grateful for it as a full time worker who isn’t eligible for any benefits. It’s literally the only labour policy we benefit directly from.

Anyone who thinks school isn’t a form of childcare is frankly delusional, of course it is. That’s why “keyworker” children still went in during lockdown.

Children do not need (cows) milk. I am not saying (before I get jumped on) that feeding a child who's otherwise starving a bottle of milk isn't better than nothing, but let's not perpetuate a dairy-industry funded myth.

I hope this is satire.

That is true, but neglectful/incapable parents unfortunately DO have children. The government can't stop them doing that. If we removed every child whose parents were incapable (or couldn't be bothered!) taking care of them properly, where would we put all these children? Who'd have them? Bring back orphanages/workhouses? Educating someone whose drug habit or criminal activity or relationship is more important than their children (to them) does nothing. Educating someone with the IQ of an amoeba also does nothing.

Sigh! 🙄

@rathersleepy

Agreed because we enable it.

Can't be arsed to work? Here have a house and truckloads of cash. In fact, have some more kids and we'll give you even more!

Not feeding your child? It's ok, we'll do it. You concentrate on other stuff.

The incentives are the total opposite of what they need to be for things to change.

What do you expect parents to do if they have to work full time to make sure they can feed and clothe their kids and keep a roof over their heads?

Not everyone can have a job that’s 9-3 Monday to Friday and wraparound care is absolutely essential. Also, they don’t sit and learn during that time, they often play outside or do crafts or whatever so it’s only the sorts of things they’d be doing at home.

Makes me so angry that some people think working full time and using childcare options is somehow abusive. You should see the state my kids would be in if I (single mother) could only work part time or not at all.

Dumbing*

Oh the irony 😂

The point is that everyone who sends their kids to school for their breakfast is being lumped together in this thread as lazy and refusing to prioritise the needs of their children.

There are plenty of kids (like mine) who get “free” breakfast because they are entitled to it but during breakfast club which is an activity costing me £100s per month.

So I disagree that all children who eat breakfast at school come from households with lazy parents who can’t afford a loaf of bread and, actually, it’s likely because of those paying parents that a lot of other kids are fed for free.

Of course parents who just don’t bother to feed their kids are abhorrent but this thread is suggesting it’s negligent parenting not to have given some home cooked and well balanced dieticians’ dream breakfast every morning for any reason at all and there are plenty of good reasons why that’s not practical for families that certainly don’t require social services intervention!

I understand why people don't want school to be childcare, but we have a system where it absolutely functions as that. To that end, I agree this is as much about that childcare aspect of schooling as anything else. Trying to reduce one of the barriers to parental employment.

Worth pointing out that this is happening in the context of childminder numbers contracting, meaning parents may not have access to other options. Also the numbers wanting other forms of wraparound are going to be dropping just because of birth cohort numbers, so other provision may get less viable.

Some people have to get up early and race to work.

Im sorry but wtf is up with these comments? Parents waking up at the crack of dawn to take their children to breakfast club are doing so out of need. They’re the last people to be lazy.

I WFH 4 days a week and I can see this, why is this so hard for some of you to understand??

It's absolutely this. If breakfast club is free for all primary school age pupils you completely get around the "I can't start until 9" issue that is a barrier to mum's going back into the workforce. Instead UC argue, they can go to breakfast club. Hence you can now start at 8/ 8.30.

I'll be honest, I would like to see the removal of some of the cliff edge benefits like FSM and 30 hours funding for WORKING parents. I know so many families (especially women) who are not going for promotions/ not going back full time/ shoving money into salary sacrifice ect in order to keep under that 100k for the 30hours. If 30 free hours was universal there would be more tax money as people with nursery age children would not be turning down promotions. Universal FSM would remove school meals stigma. It would also relieve pressure of household budgets who are packing children up for school. Just because parents earn well, does not mean they are fed well.

Absolutely agree. My children go to a childminder in the morning for 45minutes before school so I can get to work on time. A school breakfast club would really help me. I'm a single parent too.

This is actually a really good point. Some mid morning carbs (none of this fruit bullshit, and apple won't fill a kid up) is a great compromise. But as previous posters have noted, I think part of this is about freeing up parents to get to work.

Ha this is such a Mumsnet trope and it’s just bullshit. Of course it’s childcare.

School isn't childcare

I think you’re missing the point. It isn’t to provide their kids with food, it’s the childcare element.

And @Gooseinthewoodits not a social care issue, it’s a finance issue. Local housing allowance is divorced from the cost of housing. Lots and lots of parents are choosing to pay rent over providing breakfast as they know that school at least provides lunch.

I appreciate the breakfast as am also shepherding kids out the house at the crack of dawn but it is literally cereeal and toast

Nice idea, but it will be crap though won't it?
Sugary commercial cereal, margarine and jam on sliced white bread and porridge which apparently everyone thinks is healthy.
Their blood sugar will be up and down like a yo-yo and they will be hungry again by half past nine.
But there will be companies queuing up to make a fortune shoveling shit at our kids

we have piloted the new breakfast clubs at my kids primary. I still have to pay for wraparound as it's only funded from 8.20 which for a lot of people deosn't give time to get to work. Generally what has happened is those who need the breakfast club to get to work are still paying for the earlier start and those who can use the free half hour tend me those who wouldn't use wraparound (either SAHM or those with more flexibility with work/part time/ WFH). So in some ways it seems a bit pointless. I'm sure there are a few winners. I think it is supposed to be with enabling people to get to work but it needs to be earlier!

Thank you for this. I am getting fed up of the posts that seem to imply that children not receiving breakfast is down to parents who simply can't be bothered, without even trying to understand what could be going on in some people's homes. I am glad that this is happening. I only hope that the food is of a decent quality, and will help those children who will really benefit.

This is much less important a social consideration for state spending than the needs of the child who arrives at school with nothing to eat at all.

There are already families going to food banks. Cutting children benefit would make that worse. Alot of these parents probably didn't go to food banks before the cost of living.

Also as some people have already mentioned vulnerable children likely won't go to breakfast club because the parent won't get there on time. So the child's still missing breakfast on top of that the child benefit is cut.