Tories going to axe free school meals

[cannotbelievethistoday]

So I have 2 children in private school.

Labour want to put VAT on private school fees, and extend free school meals to all primary children.

Tories are going to remove infant free school meals.

Bloody hell. And still people will vote Tory.

(My 2 kids are in private school - I totally agree with labour on this one)

Because it's not a question of everyone being equal, it's a question of everyone being treated with equal humanity.
But surely that's why those on FSM are treated discreetly these days? They don't have a big sign over their heads. No-one need know.

Why should the government pay for the meal? Should government be paying for my lunches?

Will they supply wrist bands or colour-coded cards to those on free meals....just for "efficient administration"?

They don't now in KS2, so why would you think that would suddenly be introduced?

Will they supply wrist bands or colour-coded cards to those on free meals....just for "efficient administration"?

What I know for sure is that anything that puts the greatest possible distance between those who "have" and those who "have not" is graetfully received by the public.

It's short sighted really because one of the greatest threats to the future prosperity of this country (IMO) is what's known as the "class divide". Mind the gap everybody!

No-one need know.

Except them (the parents).

How humiliating.

But they're poor so it probably doesn't matter, if it saves everyone a bob or two.

I think generally its not hard to guess who might qualify by how they dress (Im NOT being snobby there - my kids have been the ones with threadbare knees on their trousers and shirts too small and hair a bit wild and not cut for ages due to ££££), but having FSM for only those who cant afford it wouldnt change those signs.

Unless of course nowadays those who would qualify for FSM have to get their lunch our of a trough or something?

'Hungry children'......... grin

Who finds hungry children funny? Is that a Tory joke? Because I'm not getting it.

Nobody finds hungry children funny, you've completely misread.
It's clear to me that the grin is for the sheer over dramatics of "hungry children" as FREE SCHOOL MEALS AREN'T DISAPPEARING FOR HUNGRY CHILDREN.
Just proposing being scrapped for people who can easily buy their own.
If they're going hungry and they have wealthy parents then, surely that's a parenting neglect issue? Just a thought.

It's short sighted really because one of the greatest threats to the future prosperity of this country (IMO) is what's known as the "class divide".

Absolute agreement here. It is what is behind all of this.

Would those be the same parents humiliated by claiming JSA/CB/Tax Credits/DLA and so on?

Should government be paying for my lunches?

Are you a child who is entirely dependant on the your parents and the state environment in which you're brought up to give you the best start in life? A start which has the power to either enable you to contribute productively and happily to society in your adulthood or consign you to a perpetual cycle of poverty and "taking" from the state? No? Probably buy your own lunch then.

I wish FSM had been around when my kids were young, I always earnt just above the benefit cut off point, but every month was a struggle.
The really well off are always ok, & the poor do get help, it's the millions of families who are 'just about coping' who always suffer.

Agree there Random. We're a Just Coping family too.

Would those be the same parents humiliated by claiming JSA/CB/Tax Credits/DLA and so on?

Actually I do believe the hoops many benefits claimants have to jump through have become deliberately humiliating and designed to single out and shame those who have to use them. Not for all benefits, not for everyone, but yes, I do think the Tories use this as a form of discouragement. Think about PIP for example.

So I thought they were scrapping FSM (currently a universal benefit but now only for those who can't afford it) and replacing it with free school breakfast, which evidence has proved boosts school performance.

www.theguardian.com/education/2016/nov/04/free-school-breakfast-clubs-boost-maths-and-literacy-results-study-finds

Surely universal free meals have negatively affected those that need it the most?

People aren't equal that's a sad fact of life. Some will always have more than others.

The whole point of alot of things was trying to bridge the gap right. But it's trying to do so not by improving things for those who have less but by bringing down those who have more.

Thing is those families who have more will continue to provide it. At home. They will get books and decent food and clothes eye

But now those children who are going hungry, well now they wait longer. In longer lines. Hoping there's enough left of what they like to eat. So all those children who teachers would have previously watched a bit or sneakily got them seconds are lost in a sea of other children.

Less people are now claiming pupil premium as everyone in K1 gets the meals. That won't make much difference to richer kids. Their parents will have the money for tutors and nice new books. There's now just less money available to help those who need it. So trips are being cancelled . Books are ripped etc.

So great no one will know who these kids are. But then how can they be helped if we dont.

Part of the difficulty is that some - IME in some schools many- of those who qualify for FSM on the grounds of low incopme don't won't apply for it, yet their children are still not well fed without a school lunch.

If you

• Speak very little English
• Are functionally illiterate
• Have learning difficulties
• Are substance addicted
• lead very chaotic lives
• Are sensitive about needing help

then you may well not apply, even though you are eligible.

And there are other circumstances in which children are routinely badly fed, even when household income is over the FSM threshold:

• Parent financially abused (e.g. one parent is required to feed the children, but the other does not allow them any money)
• Child is a young carer
• Parents work at night and may not prepare lunch before going to be for the day.

If a way could be found to actively give FSM to all those who are eligible, without an application having to be made, then the 'safety net' of universality would be unnecessary. While people still have to actively apply - with all the admin costs as well - then I support to safety net of universality, because as a teacher I know that adequately fed children learn better.

origamiwarrior Thu 18-May-17 10:07:10
QueenofPentacles

Do you know what universal means? And the difference between universal free school meals and means-tested free school meals?

Clue: the Tories are scrapping the first and keeping the second.
Oh thanks

When you have finished trying to patronise me with your superior intellect, they will scrap the second too as they are gradually reducing all core policies which protect the poor and needy.

But Makepeace you can't think spending 1 billion pounds a year giving every well-fed middle-class kid a free school lunch is justified to save the 'humiliation' of parents on benefits (given what else that money could be spent on, e.g. changing the threshold so more marginal children are eligible for FSM)?

I would welcome Labour charging VAT on school fees to increase access to FSM, but I can not support this wasteful and ill-thought out policy.

I think free school meals for all was a bit daft. Free school meals for those who cannot afford it, yes of course we should keep those.

As school meals are mostly paid online now, no one will know who has the FSM anyway. I'd rather the cash was spent on equipment and supplies for all children instead of my child getting a meal we can afford to give him.

Apologies - that should read makeourfuture !

I'm not nosey enough to know which child has fsm in my child's class. He wouldn't have a clue either. Not all the children do take the provision up now.
I don't think it's about dignity - the children just say to the class teacher "I'm a packed lunch" or "I'm a dinner" when doing the registration, not "I'm free school meals miss..."

How does free school meals for all "bring down" those who have? Surely if it's good enough for those who qualify it's good enough for anyone?

I also don't think this is Oliver Twist; children in a lunch queue aren't going to suffer, this isn't Dickensian London.

Yes, well off children will always have more, but there should be a bottom line for how we start all children in this country off in life. It's in the best economic and social interests of the country.

It's no surprise Labour think all children ultimately should receive the same state education, although of course they want that education to be better and to be better funded. But whilst there they want all children to be equally well fed - notably WELL fed - not sufficiently fed, and whether or not the child's parents can or cannot provide that independently be completely irrelevant. And why shouldn't that be irrelevant?

^^That was in response to Giles

Our school nearly went bankrupt trying to get a kitchen in place in order to provide meals for every child only to find over half continued to bring sandwiches anyway.

Lots of children were picky eaters/restricted diets/parents wanted to know their child had eaten something etc Parents felt the best way to deal with this was to keep up with sandwiches.

In my case DS didn't have school dinners because I cook a meal every evening, my child doesn't need 2 hot meals a day plus pudding. I like our family time sat at the table every evening and feeding 1 person something completely different to the rest of us is just odd and impractical.

I'm looking at moving my youngest children to private school. I will just be able to afford it with around another 10% spare each year for increases. Adding VAT at 20% (or more if JC has his way) will mean I cant send my children there. They will have to go through the state system. And before anyone says anything about 'everyone elses kids going through state school' if your only high school catchment was for a school in the bottom 10% in the country I'm damn certain you would do everything possible to find a better option for your children.

Except them (the parents).

How humiliating.

But they're poor so it probably doesn't matter, if it saves everyone a bob or two

You are being absolutely ludicrous! Perhaps the answer would be to take away every single benefit; tax credits, JSA, FSM, child benefit - everything. Then everyone will be on an equal footing. We are all hunter gatherers so get on with hunting and gathering and it's sink or swim whether you survive. But hey it's all good because we have got rid of the stigma of benefits.