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)

I still remember one of the dinner ladies being told of by the teacher nasty asshole because he discovered that she was keeping any left over food to sneak to me and my brother. We were always sent to school without food and would have had nothing all day if it wasn't for her. It was a tiny school with only two dinner ladies. One left and it was the new one that reported the nice lady. She started buying biscuits on her tiny wage and giving them to us. The thought of children going all day without food has actually upset me more than I expected. Some kids will not get a bite without the support of the school.

This thread is ridiculous.

So someone says, 'you do realise that the government is going to scrap FSM for everyone' complete with a link to an article, someone else says 'er no they are not, they are scrapping universal FSM'.

And the answer to that is 'oh....well......I bet they will scrap it for everyone one day'.

Indeed.

Haven't schools just been forced to spend thousands adapting their kitchens to pay for the free school meal policy? And now the Tories want to reverse it. When is the axing of FSM for all kids supposed to start?

Depends on if you class someone earning over £16,195 as rich?

Someone earning £10,000 a year wouldn't qualify either if they claim tax credits. People do not realise just how narrow the criteria for qualifying is.

I'm glad. Universal FSM was a huge waste of money and food and there is some evidence that children who attend breakfast clubs (and eat breakfast there) progress faster.

Far too much 'nanny state' meddling in all of Labour's policies...

For Solihull it says £16190 if claiming WTC, which to me seems really low.

Yep, another one not horrified by this one too - makes perfect financial scene to remove it from parents who could have afforded it in the first place.
As long as the ones that always got them free due to being poor (I'm guessing) still get them, then I think it's a good area to cut.

What some truly horrible people on here

All it takes is a marriage breakdown, loss of a job , and some of YOU judgmental cows will be there as well . . Sneer away at this post as well, which most of you will . Somebody actually put "starving Children" WTF is wrong with you ??!

Free School Meals (FSM)
To qualify for free school meals under this scheme you must receive at least one of the following benefits:
Qualifying Benefits:
Income Support
Jobseeker’s Allowance -income-based (JSA)
Income-Related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
If you receive both income-based and contribution-based JSA/ESA you should still qualify if the amounts you receive are the same or if income-based part is higher. If however, contribution-based part is higher you will not qualify
Child Tax Credit, provided you are not entitled to Working Tax Credit and have an income that does not exceed £16,190
Guaranteed Element of State Pension Credit
Support under part six of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999
Universal Credit (Evidence of this benefit will be required)
Working Tax Credit run-on paid for 4 weeks after you stop qualifying for Working Tax Credit (Please note this is a temporary qualification and we will need to be able to verify this entitlement)

Oh yea and the one saying to another poster is she always so dramatic ? She is telling the truth but no , let's drag her down and take the piss !

Oh, I missed that if you qualify for WTC you are ineligible

I think I would be OK with this policy if it was implemented the other way round,

e.g. 'All those with a taxable household income, as evidenced by the Inland revenue, of >£45,000 [or whatever] will not be eligible for FSM'

rather than
'Those who earn less than £16,000 / £10,000 must specifically apply for FSM'

The former would rule out the truly comfortable, and would rule out the barriers that exist as soon as someone has to actively apply for something they are entitled to.

For a short time, many years ago, (about 50) we qualified for free school meals. My mother couldn't deal with the stigma related to it, so we went without. Mother was also an abusive arse so it would often be three or four days that one of the older ones would go without eating.
Free school meals are a great idea, there are people who need them but don't want folk to know they're in receipt of tax credits or other benefits. It'll help out a huge amount.

Oh yea and the one saying to another poster is she always so dramatic ? She is telling the truth but no , let's drag her down and take the piss !

I have said someone was overly dramatic. They were. The language they were using certainly was. No one was 'taking the piss'

HTH

Quite so, Edsheeran - it sometimes seems that, if the facts don't fit a certain narrative, then the facts have to be either changed or just plain ignored

I know it pisses me off so much and really dumbs down the quality of the debate.

Meh, I think I am just pissed off generally with people's inability to actually research anything anymore. My FB feed is stuffed with people liking and sharing absolute bollocks from the (hilariously titled these days) 'Independent' or the fucking 'Canary' or similar. Like I said I am not even entertaining voting Conservative, not now, probably not ever. But that does not render me incapable of thinking that one or two of their policies might be a good idea.

It's almost like some people think that if they think, even just to themselves, that a single Tory policy might actually be a good one, then in the middle of the night their homes will be raided by the minions of Jeremy Corbyn dressed head to toe in red, and they will be kidnapped and executed at dawn for just thinking about daring to betray the cause.

Pressed too soon.

What some truly horrible people on here

I hope you are including the poster that said 'Tory scum' then too?

My mother couldn't deal with the stigma related to it, so we went without.
Yes, when I was a child, everyone knew who had FSM, and there was a stigma to it. Thank goodness that has changed.

There wasn't a stigma where I was. Perhaps it's better to educate people that it's not a stain on your character rather than pretend it doesn't exist.

All it takes is a marriage breakdown, loss of a job , and some of YOU judgmental cows will be there as well . . Sneer away at this post as well, which most of you will . Somebody actually put "starving Children" grin WTF is wrong with you ??!

Will you actually just read it properly?? As explained already upthread, it wasn't a grin at hungry kids. As NOBODY would, or indeed is, laughing at hungry kids as that would be horrible.
It's at the over dramatising and twisting of facts as free school meals wouldn't be disappearing for those in need! Only those who can and would pay for their own and by their own admission don't need it as have plenty of food/enough money at home to send in a good packed lunch or pay for their own school dinners.
Why would I take it when I don't need it? If you're going to offer it to me, that's very lovely I'll take it then. It's bonkers to keep on giving it if spending has to be cut somewhere though!

We didn't even have it until a couple of years ago when Cameron let Clegg bring it in as some sort of "shut you up" compromise.
So we're no worse off than before.
and it was a bloody stupid idea in the first place.

I don't understand why people expects government to support themselves so much but unwilling to pay more tax? Is this an argument of where the government should be spending the tax money? But different people have different priorities, so shouldn't people fight for lower taxes and government would actually reduce the benefits that are provided to citizens?

Sorry if this sounds righteous or wrong but I meant it as a genuine question. I did not grow up in UK, and where I come from, taxes are lower but at the same time, we don't have a lot of luxuries/benefits that the government provide in UK. Benefits and luxuries such as 'free' school (we pay a small fee, free lunches, unemployment benefits, disability benefits, and the big one, NHS.

Someone made a good point upthread. How come families can suddenly stop feeding their dc when they are 4 and are at school? Does this mean these dc never got lunch when they were 3?

Universal FSM are a complete waste of money afaic.

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.

See, to me, this reads as wanting to treat all parents as babies and the state doing the parenting for them as well.
It's meddling. It's interfering. It's Nanny State. If you're well off, loving parents who care about your kids and their nutrition, and would never not send them in without a well balanced packed lunch or would happily pay for school dinners, and always have a hot meal on the table at night too (the well off and loving bit relevant due to some on this thread linking to well known abuse cases)
We all have meals provided for us even though we're perfectly grown adults and capable of providing for own children?
It's like handing over control of parenting when in some cases there's no need to.

JamieXeed "Your just on here to Tory bash, get over it."

Why is it Tory bashing to use facts?
Between 97 and 08 national debt under labour went from 342bn to 562bn.
In 09 the bailout put it up to 733bn
Between 10 and 16 Osborne got it up to 1610bn - when Austerity was theoretically getting it down

Austerity is now conveniently forgotten just like monetarism - another failed policy.

Which part of the population will be hit by the Conservative manifesto plans - certainly not the 5% earning over 80k.

I'm in the 5% and throughout 'austerity' i have not been touched so have no expectation they'll change spots.

Good - this was a ridiculous policy and should always have been means tested. I find it incredible that I can't claim child benefit as my earnings are too high but my DS gets a free school meal.