Jamie Oliver!

[paintitallover]

Well said that man!

twitter.com/bbcr4today/status/1579736618646220800?s=46&t=F6vE4kOinvkrdmLJVGHV4w

I don't even know where to begin with this post.

Life happens. Peoples circumstances change.

Punishing families and children is NOT the answer.

I can take or leave JO, and think most of what he does is purely for his own PR but he is highlighting how low the bar is for FSM.

My kids are in secondary now and they have told me there is a girl in their class who gets £2 a week on her fingerprint (which doesn't buy a meal) and often doesn't have food to take in from home. I'm sure there are many more. We live in a pretty affluent area.

The girls are all sharing their food.

@BarbaraofSeville that seriously didn't take long for the Jamie Oliver bashers and the disingenuous "just asking a question"/whataboutism types to show up and try to derail the thread. 😂

Keeping a population healthy and reducing the pressure on NHS should be a priority.

Ah it used to be up to p3 didn't know it was extended.

Er no!

Op starts a thread with just a link, like fuck am I clicking on it

They get it pro rated down until 125k is it? Anyway I’m saying remove completely.

We're a higher income family. I don't need free meals for my kids. I'd rather the threshold for free meals was changed so more kids got them.
But I don't need the support- why should all taxpayers pay more for my kids to get free meals?

That’s bloody brilliant. Well done that school.

Totally agree

I’m sure it used to be families with an income of under £16,000 a year got fsm,what on earth happened?

Well said, they should fund free school meals for all those on incomes under £30k but no free school meals for infants with more affluent parents, never agreed with that.

Sometimes flawed people (and don't we all have feet of clay?) say things that are absolutely right. I'm pleased Jamie Oliver has publicly had a pop at this dreadful government.

I suppose I 'bred' children I couldn't afford. I was on the bones of my arse for a while when my ExH fucked off out of the blue and left me with our two very young DC. Even then we didn't qualify for free school meals because of my job. ExH decided that he would give me £25 a week per child maintenance, and I would need to pay everything else plus the mortgage. *

Shit happens to people.

*I'm pleased to say that ultimately all this didn't happen quite as he planned and the DC and I ended up doing OK. But it was bloody awful for a long time and FSM would have helped so much.

Excellent posts @katmarie and @OnlyFoolsnMothers.

No to taxpayers footing the bill.

It's up to parents to fund their kids' meal costs.

People without kids shouldn't have to constantly subsidise other people's lifestyle choices.

LadyKenya · Today 09:20
As far as I am concerned, all children should get free meals at school“

why? We could easily afford our kids’ meals. What a waste, when more could be going to people who actually need it.

the household earning threshold is disgusting, ought to be at least doubled, probably tripled.

I completely agree with this proposal.

I have no issue with subsidising blameless CHILDREN getting a free meal. It could be the only decent meal they get all day.

It is well-documented the impact that being well-fed has on concentration and ability to learn.

As a society, we should be ensuring all children do well and that no-one gets left behind. We should not be pulling the ladder up behind us.

I'm certainly 100% behind extending eligibility to those whose families are in receipt of UC (and its legacy benefits).

Personally, I agree with raising the threshold, I didn’t realise it was so low.

Making all school meals free is a separate thing, not sure I agree with it, but am amenable to persuasion if their is cost/benefit evidence backing up.

You know they go on to become adults who contribute to the economy.
think of it as investing in a prosperous future for all, not feeding someone else’s kids.
a prosperous future benefits everyone, even the childless will benefit from supporting all children’s future.
it will cost the tax payer less, it will mean people paying into the economy not taking out. More people working paying into pensions. It’s very short sighted thinking it’s just about feeding other peoples kids.

People without kids shouldn't have to constantly subsidise other people's lifestyle choices

This is so shortsighted. Today's children will deliver tomorrow's essential services. We all benefit from giving children a healthy start in life.

To those questioning the cost, there are studies completed with cost benefit analyses that the benefits outweigh the costs.

An earlier interviewee on R4 this morning from Feed the Future cited their research, which states that "For every £1 invested in this scenario, £1.38 would be returned" (scenario = extending to those in receipt of UC).

Their work can be found here: www.schoolfoodmatters.org/news-views/news/news-and-views/feed-future-free-school-meals-are-worth-it

I think all schoolchildren up to school leaving age should get FSM, i wouldn't even care if the mega rich took advantage of it. I don't think it should be means tested.

Why is it children/young families that are hammered and means tested on everything? My in laws now in their early 70s benefitted from free uni education, massive rise in house prices, retired in their 50s, state pension far younger than earlier generations, they live in a large 4 bed house just the two of them that is probably worth 900k and they go on multiple holidays every year. Why should they get free bus passes and winter fuel allowance? The argument is always that it's cheaper to just give those to everyone and not means test, funny how it doesn't apply when it's children/young families that could possibly benefit from something.

Completely off topic but if you'd shown me a picture from that show, I would NEVER have guessed that was JO.

@00100001 , who is JM?