to think a £7500 income cap on free school meals is a deathwish?

[thirdhill]

I'm so shocked to see the Children's Society analysis reported in most papers today about proposals to introduce a £7500 income cap on free school meals.

My initial reaction is this is sheer vindictiveness, taking away a meal from kids in dire need. Will the money spent on a daily lunch for a few children save our economy? Or perhaps we can be relied on to not care anymore? Or is there a wider picture nobody is reporting? My understanding is that the present income cap is £16k, which already seems a challenge for a family of say four.

Sarah Teather, the Minister, is a lib dem MP but this must tar both parties for many and seems an absolute deal breaker for mobile voters. Straw that broke the camel's back, death wish, etc.

Curious if anyone knows any more to this.

TIA

topmumma Off course you are on a low income dear, you do not punctuate, use capital letters, and far too many exclamation marks.

In the meantime, those of us that had bloody good jobs before our dh became disabled are just about keeping our heads above water.

Leaving DC to go hungry is surely unpleasant for the child and morally questionable.

If they are distressed, irritable, distracted, disruptive through hunger or hyped up on poor food full of additives so their behavior is difficult to mange - it impact on the teaching staff and the rest of the DC in the class.

So while it great topmumma takes pride in being able to provide for her children - it is an issue that could affect schools more wildly than it first appears.

Not that anything has apparently been decided on yet.

This is the most ridiculous idea yet from our Government although I cannot see where this has been officially quoted.

I believe that FSM should be given to all children with the long term view being a country full of healthier children resulting in lower healthcare costs.

FSM is probably the one benefit that we know will 100% benefit the CHILD and should NEVER be taken away. The parents who for whatever reason are not capable of providing meals for their children and choose to spend their CB and other benefits on booze/fags cannot get their hands on this benefit and so I will protest loudly and sign any petition going to highlight the value of this benefit.

Does anyone remember the 'Thatcher the Milk Snatcher'. What can we come up with for Cameron and Clegg??

i agree gloria i think all school meals should be free.

AFAIK if you work you don't get FSM anyway . (yes, I need to read the thread).

I earn just over £8k a year and get working tax credit so I'm not able to claim free school meals.

Currently paying £40 a month for DS's dinners, will be £80 a month when DD starts next year. I've really noticed the money going out every week.

Sorry if this has already been asked, meant to be working and haven't time to read all the thread.
By quick calculation, if DH and I were to lose our jobs and start claiming benefits, in our area we would get £500 a month for a 3 bed house so 6k a year and then as we have 3 children we get over £2000 a year in child benefit. So by the theory of this report just by getting housing benefit and child benefit (irrespective of any tax credits/JSA/council tax benefit etc) we would not be able to claim free school meals just because we have 3 kids.
Doesn't sound quite right to me, or are they looking at income after house etc paid for?? (Seeing that this is a report not by the government about something that is thought might happen).

i think it must be excluding HB or no one in london would be entitled to it afaics.

I also think all school meals should be free.
Having them as an 'add on' is giving the message that a hot, decent meal in the middle of the day is some sort of luxury.

Education is paid for from our taxes, sports, some music, art etc so why have they singled out food as an extra ?

It doesnt make sense. You can have as many health drives, Jamie Olivers, educational food programes as you like but as long as we keep sending the message that feeding our nation's children is optional, they all seem a bit pointless.

Right, what would it actually cost to give every child in the UK a free hot dinner and half a pint of milk every schoolday?

Well said mrsdevere

That was a little bit unclear - I meant sports, art & music at school.

I've often found that odd MrsDV. I suppose you could also argue you need clothes for school therefore they should be free. But "lunch" is an integral part of the school day, so it seems odd that it should have to be paid for.

school dinners here are 2.20 a day and half a pint of milk is between £3 and £5 a term depending on which term it is. i have no idea how many schoolchildren there are in teh UK though.

We dont have to pay for keeping the children warm or for their drinking water or toilet facilities seperately do we?

I think it harks back to when most children went home for their dinners. I remember having home dinners and I am a shimz off 45.

Perhaps they should bring back that option? The resulting chaos should shake things up a bit

If children are going hungry and not being fed, then social services should step in.

We have a very generous welfare state already and charities "poverty" ink the UK is not poverty at all.

i think the way they (whoever they are) see it is that sports, music, art etc all form part of the educatoon of the child, whereas eating doesn't (at it's most basic level anyway) so it isn't funded as standard out of taxes. however, i do think schools could use the school dinners as a starting point for educating children about healthy eating. i know lunch boxes are heavily policed but school dinners aren't discussed with the children, they are just dished out. i think it would be a great way of making sure the schools were providing healthy dinners if part of their curriculum involved the children learning about what they are actually eating and it forming part of the syllabus. and yes i know it is up to parent's to educate their dcs on healthy eating, but we could say that about all the other things school teach them aswell really so i dont see why it couldn't become part of normal school life to have even one session a week looking at the food tehy are being served and what the nurtitional value of everything is.

yes yes HMOO, that's nice , meanwhile in reality.

Has the Children's Society charity not realised up until now that families earning very little money DO NOT get free schools meals ??

Why the sudden outrage of it being taken away - it was never given in the first place as one of the posters above who earns £8K a year will confirm.

Our family income is around £10k - never had free school meals for the children and now lost the EMA for a 6th former Why has the Children's Society suddenly issued this statement or report. it's not a new thing. Poor children have lost out for a long time and no one has cared less.

If you can't afford to feed them then WTF are you doing having children. I refuse to believe that every child on FSM is the child of a person who has suddenly fallen on hard times. The fact is millions of people who can't afford to look after themselves without benefits go on and have children they can in no real way support.

Yes happy that would be so very much cheaper than providing one hot meal a day

Why wait until a child is hungry before reacting in a draconian way? A way that entails many working hours at great cost.

There is this need to punish the poor isnt there? To somehow prove that it is 'their' fault and thus not our problem.

Actually I can see that if one hot meal a day is keeping a neglected child from being picked up by SS then that is a bad thing. But that would be a failing of the system, not an argument against feeding children. And there will be plenty of children whose parents love them and do not neglect them, but are fed sub-standard diets.

"There is this need to punish the poor isnt there? To somehow prove that it is 'their' fault and thus not our problem."

yes there is. it's disgusting.

happy I suppose because they are now going for the very poorest.
I have long thought it a bit that the rules on FSM exclude the working poor.

There is no doubt that if this new policy is introduced the most vulnerable children will suffer.

I would imagine that those working in the sector have been watching with growing alarm the way the Tories are dismantling the welfare system. This is an opportunity for them to make a point.

it certainly seems as though the people bearing the brunt of the cost savings are the people who have little, and already struggle.

londonone your name is very apt