to think the new free school meals for all KS1 children is a ridiculous idea?

[Flexibilityiskey]

I just don't see the rational behind it, when benefits are being cut to the bone, why give free school meals to people who don't need them? Yes it may benefit the odd family but there will be loads who just don't need free meals, and at what cost? My DS's school will have to build a new kitchen as they currently don't have the facility to provide hot meals. There must be loads of schools with similar issues. Add to that the cost of feeding all the children in KS1 for each school year, the cost must run into millions. Surely the money could be better spent being targeted at those who genuinely need it or am I missing something?

I would much rather they used the money to increase the cut off point for FSM so more people get the help that need it rather than providing the meals for 3 year, getting the kids used to having school meals then making parents pay.

DS starts school in September and won't be having school meals, talking to a few other parents this morning there are a lot sticking with packed lunches

I'm just glad to be well out of it. Every time they made the menu 'more healthy' - for a full grown adult. My very active, slender, fussy DD2 ate less and less of the meals offered.

YANBU. I don't understand why they didn't just raise the income threshold so that more people would be entitled to it. I think it will be like the £250/£500 they gave every child when they we're born and then again at 7, it was unsustainable and they phased it out.

I think it is a dreadful plan. There are whole areas where very few children in a class qualify for free meals; these parents do not need, or probably even want, free meals. The meals are of poor quality and in some schools will be compulsory. I do not want to see more of the school's funding diverted to providing meals to cover the shortfall. Even more ridiculous is the idea of free breakfasts; why have children if you can't afford to feed them?

Hopefully our school will still get some children applying for FSM because we use some of the pupil premium money to subsidise school trips and uniform.

Although I have seen some parents still think there's a stigma involved. There isn't, by the way. The only people who will know are the teachers and office staff. The children won't have a clue who has FSM and who doesn't (at primary level anyway).

I've never been entitled to wtc or had to apply for any sort of benefits but have paid in for many years. We struggle aswell and the £40 a month it will save us is very much welcomed so I am all for it.

My experiences of school dinners (for me and for my children) is that they were either just plain nasty (mine) or completely inadequate (my children). As the government clearly haven't allocated enough money to the scheme the outcome is either going to be poorer quality meals (so those who were previously on FSMs will be fed poorer quality or less food) or the schools will subsidise it and have less money, or both.

None of which are ideal.

Hmm we've paid in off years too but aren't getting them and we're having our CB eroded whilst others on more keep it.

It's ludicrous.

I can understand why it is being brought in, but the practicalities for school are very ill thought out and very little, if any at all infact, has been allocated to deal with this.

I'm at an infant school. We have 270 children who will be entitled to a fsm as of September. We have to plan as if all will take it up.

We have no room.

The hall is where children eat. The same hall used for pe, dance, assemblies, etc. it's already out of use for learning purposes between 11:30 and 1:30 and after 3pm (for asc to set up.)

Packed lunches have to eat in a classroom or outside if dry and warm enough.

Eyfs already start lunch slightly earlier at 11:50 to get all the children through.

The option of creating an additional eating space in our quad/courtyard has been vetoed by the lea. It wasn't ideal and meant paying for a roof, making it an internal room and loosing room from the ict suite.

Lea wasn't happy.

New option is for y2 to go to hours next door - separate school to us, though we use their kitchen for food prep for lunches as we don't have our own. But they will need to eat from about 11:40ish so that their own junior dinners can still get through, meaning out school day will need to change and I think that is too early to eat. Trials about to take place with next years y2s. It is unlikely to work.

Lea now considering longer term plans to create a new dining area at our school but won't be til next summer at earliest. Will mean major work and a lot of money (lea funding??) and we are a cramped Victorian building and already have outdoor mobiles/pods for 2 classrooms. And not that much outdoor space either!

Likely solution in meantime will be children eating hot meals In the classrooms. But we still don't know which rooms and if they will need vacating before normal lunch break, if rooms will need rearranging, what happens to tidying up after, good small and waste afterwards, etc.

And it isn't even a case that we have left it so late. We've been making recommendations and decisions since it was announced but we are in the hands of the LEA. We can't do anything without their agreement and their money!

surely the majority of these pupils would be having school meals anyway

not in our school. We have about 1/3 of kids buy a dinner.

We have these problems:

1. school hall is not big enough to serve all the kids. Packed lunches eat in the classrooms, that would be difficult to do with school dinners because of layout (hard to serve and then walk with dinner to where classes are) We are having to build an extension to accommodate this.

1. The kitchen is too small to provide for all the meals, so we are having to extend it.

1. dinner hour will need to be extended, They are planning on a staggered dinner. this has knock on implications:

-the hall cannot be used for pe during the extended dinner time -the TAs who currently do classroom plus midday duty can no longer do midday duty as they will then not be in the classroom,so it will effect their jobs -the classes that are around the hall will be disturbed by the noise

But I seriously wonder if the dinners are any better than the decent packed lunch I send in (nothing fancy but nutritionally fine)
I think fussy eaters will just bring in packed lunch.

I think it is a great idea - encouraging all kids to eat a properly cooked meal together is good for them on so many levels. It educates the parents as to the value of the same and since take up will be 100% there are economies of scale to take into account.

I don't think we can make any judgements about the quality of the food until it's actually been served up but in a neighbouring school in a different borough they've been doing this for a while and it has made a big difference to the school as a whole. What is going to be eaten for lunch becomes a part of the teaching in the early years because all the kids are eating it.

There is a cost and the government aren't supplying enough funds to implement it properly but the theory is sound. At my DC's school they all have school meals, packed lunch is just not encouraged. I am just sad my kids are in Juniors so won't benefit.

Forgot to add that the junior schools kitchen is already having to a&e expansion building works in order to accommodate the prep of these meals.

apparently less than 3% of packed lunches meet the same nutritional requirements as school lunches which are not awfully high in the first place

The universal free school meal plan amounts to no more than a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

There is a minority of parents who don't know how/or can't feed their children in a healthy way so it's decided that the education system should address that problem.

It's a nonsense. Free school meals for children aged 4 to 7 will not address the health/obesity crisis facing our future.

The funds devoted to this scheme would be better diverted to the families' who really don't know how to feed their children. But that would involve more thought and analysis. So 'one size fits all' is the easiest solution.

Teacup drama - where is that stay from?

I'm not sure I believe it tbh, well not at my school. Sure some are bad - but many are far superior to the school hot meal. Also with a school dinner you have to take into account which bits the child takes and also which notes they actually eat.

My dd's school dinners at primary were very good. Own kitchen, cook and team cooking fresh every day, decent sizes, etc. I helped at school for a while and eat their each day and it was really good. I have eaten at my school a few times but it's not great.

In theory it's a good idea but putting it into practice will be something else. I work in a school with close to 500 pupils and the majority of them have FSM. Space is at a premium as it is and although we have a decent size kitchen we will need more utensils and staff to cope with increase in meals come September.

When we changed to using separate plates and bowls instead of the old style trays it was hell and took us months to get used too. We've only just started finishing on time but we'll be back to square one with more plates, bowls, cups anything that needs washing really. It will be bedlam and we already aren't looking forward to it.

And then there will be more food waste It's actually very good food but kids just don't eat much of it and often don't have the time to eat it. And some of them are more interested in going out to play.

Don't know if it's the same anywhere else in the country but here from September they are wanting to use fresh cuts of meat. Joints and that sort of thing.

As far as I can see it's going to make an already busy job even busier and harder.

I'm not convinced by these 'less than 3% of packed lunches meet nutritional standards of school lunches' arguments. Not all children will accept/eat all elements of the theoretical lunch; many reject the vegetables and end up with meals high in fat and calories. And don't even mention the endless cake. 'Home made' with cheap fats and smothered in icing sugar and jam. Forget it. most parents who send a packed lunch know what their child will eat and can produce a balanced offering.

Btw those worrying about sugary high fat desserts in school dinners. Little to worry about ime. I've eaten them. There is very little sugar present - they are very bland and not sweet at all!

Exactly. Plus it's just one small meal. Not one that renders them unable to eat better at tea time. Unlikethe school dinner.

97% of parents are not that crap!!

On the other hand, I am in favour of using plates and bowls rather than prison-style trays. If I had my food slopped onto a plastic tray with the baked beans next to the custard, I would heave. :(

Hula .....high FAT desserts ....says it all. Cheap trans fats. And then there's the cheese. It comes pelleted in big bags. More cheap fat and very little real 'cheese'.

Oh I'm not worried about the sugar in the cake. Just the fact that it's a large chunk of stodge and is basically cheap filler.

Have to say the plates and bowls do look better but the trays were much easier to deal with.

Instead of say, 350 trays to wash we now have 350 plates the same amount of bowls and the trays they go on plus the cups and cutlery. It was hell to start with but hey ho, we got there.

most parents who send a packed lunch know what their child will eat and can produce a balanced offering.

This is exactly it.

Erm Hula my dc have sugar sprinkled short cake,syrup sponge,fudge tart,jam lattice,sticky toffee pudding....believe me there is sugar and stodge in those there desserts and more than in the yogurt or fromage frais I send in.