Free school meals

[mutznutz]

I was just thinking. With so many Government and Council cutbacks, isn't it about time they stopped providing free school meals that cost untold millions of pounds to provide?

I mean we're already given child benefit to help with the cost of our children. Also, as long as you're feeding your child properly at home, what's wrong with providing a fairly inexpensive packed lunch if you can't afford to buy them a hot one? (not that they are particularly 'hot' nowdays)

Plus, if parents cant afford to feed their children when they go to school...how do they manage at weekends and during the 13wks holidays they get per year?

Then there are the parents who earn just above the threshold and cannot afford school meals...their kids would have a packed lunch so why not everyone?

can't grudge FSM for kids who qualify, especially those who might not get anything at home and this makes all the difference for them. I do simpathise with those who are just above the qualifying line though and struggle while working - working poor deserve more help. Maybe I'm naive but anyone working full time should be able to have relatively comfortable standard of living - not struggling to make ends meet and feed their families.

" It looks like any extra benefits and help for the term of this government will only be available to unemployed families."

And that I think is TOTALLY and utterly wring (and I'm on benefits right now). No it's not a lot, but we do get help on benefits. Most of us can live a modest life and get by ok. It's not a life of luxury but those that don't have extra expenses such a debts from when they were working or a child with special needs (because the extra benefits they get to help support the child rarely cover the real cost) can live what I would describe as a comfortable life (and the I may be a crucial point as I have low expectations about what a comfortable life is - our holiday last year included a 2 week stay in a cramped, and cluttered (and dirty - wouldn't have looked out of place on "how clean is your house ) 14th floor council flat in a grotty suburb of Edinburgh )

WTF are they going to do for the working poor??? IMO the those with living with disabilities and the working poor should be their priority right now. Not only to help those that are in that group now, but also to encourage those on benefits that are reluctant to go out to work get off teir arses and find a job - it needs to pay for them to work - right now it doesn't. Right now only those who WANT to work (usually for self esteem/pride reasons) are going to make that leap from life on benefits to working - and even then it fills us with dread.

"utterly WRONG" not wring. And apologies for the incredibly long sentence in the 2nd paragraph

Riven - I think it's completely astonishing that people think that other people should pay for their children.

Having children is a personal lifestyle choice.

If you can afford to raise them yourself, crack on. If not, put it off until you can.

Simples.

Baroque... Apologies if I'm referring to the wrong poster but aren't you one of the ladies that 'skips meals' but smokes? You think your children don't notice it but they do - your post about the porridge not eaten and your DS upset about it made me sad.

The point I'm making is that you're posting about your holiday being in a crappy place yet you still make the money available for smoking (however light a smoker you are - it's expensive).

I also had a Mum who smoked when I was a kid (she gave up five years ago now) and I was constantly aware of the tightness of money, despite her trying to hide it as you are and others who've posted do.

Nobody is perfect

Lying yes I do skip meals - and smoke - however I've NEVER Eaten breakfast (it was a long running battle with my mother long before I smoked - and even when I stopped smoking for a while I still didn't eat breakfast). HE does it on purpose he's a little sod at times.

I know that not cooking for myself costs less than my smoking I cannot feed myself 14 meals a week (lunch and dinner - I don't include breakfast as I've never eaten it unless it's a full on cooked breakfast lol) costs more than £12 a week.

My holiday was in a FABULOUS place it was just the accommodation was a bit grim (because my brother is a lazy slob) - but my god the views from the window, oh just breath taking - right acrosss the entire city and the Forth - we had an absolutely bloody fantastic time - and we wouldn't have gone away at all if I'd had to pay out for accommodation in Edinburgh during the festival/August. Even a week in Edinburgh at that time of the year, self catering would cost more than I spent on the entire holidays/travel in total.

My point in that was - that for us was a bloody brilliant holiday - we waited patiently while my brother cleared the room out the DS's would sleep in and to me despite the grim flat (he has now apparently redecorated and cleared it all out - - why he couldn't do that before when he knew months in advance we were coming to stay i have NO idea......well actually I do but its irrelevant to thread)

For some people that would have been hell on earth staying where we did - but it didn't bother us at all. For us it was a great holiday - as I have very low expectations/ideals on that type of thing.

The flat was fine - for us - I knew what it would be like before I arrived - how many people would plan a two week stay somewhere like that happily??

Although it should be said his flat was a lot less grim than the chicken bus from Vic Fall- Harare and especially the toilets in Gweru bus station en route when we went on holiday in Zimbabwe just after we got married (no children at the time and we were living in the country so that holiday wasn't as flashy as it sounds as we were simply travelling in our "home" country then).

And as for the tightest of money - my boys know money is tight - I don't see the point in pretending otherwise. They're not stupid. Even if I didn't smoke (and if - god forbid - I had to give up my organ playing then I would quit as I wouldn't take it out of the other money) I know I still can't afford to do packed lunches for DS1 and 2 plus feed myself 2 decent meals a day (though as I posted above my social fund loan repayments end soon so fingers crossed that will soon change - I thought it was longer until I'd finished but it's not - it's been a bloody noose round my neck for 2yrs now and I'll be bloody glad to see that back of it).

Haha, it appears that I had things wtong. The more money you have the harder things are. So, if you earn £44k plus it is actually pretty tough,better have that £20 p/w back. But on next to nothing? Pah, a doddle. Menu plan a little better on your reduced benefit so that those poor souls on 4 times your salary can stock up on Waitrose ready meals for when they're too busy/tired to cook after DD's ballet class...paid for by CB. (Stereotyping purely to make point.)

For what it's worth I have no axe to grind either side, our income is far too high to qualify for anything there but for the grace, but it appears that there are a few double standards around.

Baroque... I'm sorry if you thought I was judging you, I wasn't - I'm an ex-smoker myself and I know how hard it is.

The thing that struck the chord with me (although I certainly shouldn't have projected it on your situation) is that I was far too aware of the shortage of money at home and when my Mum didn't eat, she still smoked and it made made not want to eat either. I knew too much as a kid and it's an awesome responsibility, even if the parent never intends it to be so. :(

Pascoe28 ?Having children is a personal lifestyle choice.?

This is incredibly offensive to the child. Children are human beings, not accessories that are inconveniently expensive to run. As a society, we have a responsibility to them all ? children can?t support themselves. Their parents have the greater responsibility, but we all bear some, and we all bear more in cases where the parents are struggling.
If I bought a sports car and then ran out of money to tax and insure it, you would be right to leave me to face the fact that I couldn?t afford it and it would have to be sold. If I have a child whom I can?t feed then it is absolutely iniquitous that you are suggesting that everyone else should shrug and ignore the situation.
If you don?t accept responsibility for those within society who cannot support themselves and for whatever reason aren?t being supported by those nearest to them, then you are either not an adult or not human.

about eve - phew, you're right! Still - the fact that people spout this stuff is saying something about the climate we are living in.
On the other hand, the fact that the OP has disappeared maybe tells us she has realised that she has been talking rubbish. (hopeful)

I do find it hard to believe that there are families who cannot afford a hot meal for their kids - it's not a luxury.

Having said that - I see kids in school who are so poor that by having a free lunch the parents aren't able to spend that money on anything but a hot meal so the decision about their priorities are taken away. Sad that it's necessary though.

Perhaps more benefits should be clearly earmarked for essentials as a way of educating some as to what the priorities should be. I'm sure most use them wisely, so they wouldn't be affected but it would give direction to those who are completely at a loss.

Lying - that's ok

Actually if my children would eat just a little less I wouldn't complain

It's very when they go round a friends house for tea for the first time and their parents bring them back for me and say " I can't believe how much he can eat"

I'm not looking forward to their teenage years

Princessscrumpy

I think more should be done in schools (as evidently many parents don't know how to do it so there's not much point in telling them to teach the child(ren)) about budgeting/managing money and cooking.

Basic life skills that so many people are lacking as they've never been taught. My parents never taught me about budgeting and managing money (because they were crap at it - still are tbh) so when the shit first hit the fan with us when we were in dire financial straits yeas ago I was at a loss.

thankfully I had a decent education and like to think I'm reasonably smart - so was able to find help when we needed it - and MN was actually a life safer for us (we didn't cope as well during our bleak period while living in Zimbabwe just before we came to the UK).

Being able to look in the fridge/freezer/cupboard and throw together a meal from random odss and sods, and knowing which bills (or debts if things have gone really arse over tit) to prioritise had to be learned.

Those lessons from years gone help me now, and will help me in the future

I recently had to work bloody hard to convince a RL young single mum to NOT use her backdated child benefit to pay off a (now closed) mobile phone bill debt, but to use it for other bills.

nutsandtangerines - thinking through your analogy of the sports car...if you buy one, presumably it's your money in the first place? If so, fine...you fall on hard times, you sell up and that's that.

With children then yes, the State should provide some basic element of support to those whose circumstances have changed and are no longer able to provide for their children in the same way.

However, it should not provide money to those who are already unable to provide for children by themselves. For to do so is to discourage self-reliance and encourage the numerous problems we have in this country that can be laid at the door of the (well-meaning) welfare state (family break-down, teenage pregnancy, crime etc etc).

Paying such people to have more children is the ultimate in irresponsibility.

Pascoe28, I have doubts about all these "problems" being laid at the door of the welfare state. I have doubts - hence the inverted commas - about all of them being problems at all.

Eg - family break-down. I don't think it is a bad thing if it is not the case that women with children can only survive within possibly abusive relationships.

Crime - how does that relate to the welfare state? Surely if there is any relation, a strong welfare state might discourage crime as it disincentivises theft (just thinking off the top of my head)

Hate in when people come on spouting 'don't have kids if you cannot afford them', it's as though they have never thought about anyone but themselves. Fortunately there is something called 'society' and all government recognise this some to a lesser extent than others.

I am surprised that Cameron & co are targetting help to people on FSM's rather than the working poor as their ethos is to get people out working. I suspect it's merely so that they can proclaim that they are helping the most vulnerable, poorest in society when in actual fact that doesn't amount to many people at all and is just a smokescreen for massive spending cuts.

FSM are a good safety net for the parents who do not give their kids a reasonable lunch, due to finances, ignorance or neglect. FSMs should be available to all children, pay for it by getting rid of Child Benefit to people who dont need it.

FGS I've read posts on here from people who say they spend their cb on cleaners and piano lessons ...oh but that's ok then ,I'm sure they are essentials...would you like them to have vouchers or just the poorpeople

I think free school meals are a good thing.

It would be better if school meals were more affordable for those who don't qualify for free meals though - £2 a day works out expensive, especially when you have more than one child at school.

It's also a bit irritating to get the leaflets from school pushing the benefits of (paid for) school meals, saying that they often work out cheaper than packed lunches which is a load of old twaddle. It's easy to make a healthy packed lunch for about £1 a day - you don't HAVE to buy tons of froot shoots prepackaged stuff to go in them.

nutsandtangerines - regarding family breakdown, our current system pays people to live apart.

If both partners in a relationship are unmarried and on benefits, it is in their financial interests to live apart - hence the issue of people pretending to live apart when they actually live together (an issue oft discussed on here).

Family breaks up, parents move onto new partners, new children are born with an increased risk of abuse from any stepfather.

Teenage pregnancy - CB and HB etc encourages young men to impregnate as many willing women as they wish, with no fear of being held truly financially responsible for their offspring.

The result - increased numbers of children born to young, single women without the wherewithal and/or resources to bring up said children properly.

The result - increased crime. Do you really think the young criminals of today are all living in stable homes with 2 married parents?

interesting timing - my DS's junior school has sent letters home today about free school meals. As mentioned above it's currently poacked lunches, but apparently they're going to be providing hot food from next school year.

Anyhow at the bottom it VERY clearly states

"You may have read in the press or seen on the news articles about the proposed pupil premium. Schools will recieve additional funding at the rate of £430 per pupil based on the number of pupils entitled to free school meals. It would be helpful therefor if all our pupils eligible for free school meals take up their entitlement and secure the funding which they deserve"

(and obviously that funding is spread out among all the pupils so they all benefit). So evidently the school doesn't think free school meals should be scrapped.

Interestingly in a bit quote from the local councty council it also says

"A national survey has now highlighted that children are not accessing a free school meal as they are unaware they are eligible in the first instance"

Riven - good point. He was scum as well.