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)

Herse, actually, that's a really good idea for a cut-off point.

Children whose parents are eligible for child benefit should get free school meals.

Those whose parents are above that cut-off point, don't. Inland revenue can manage the lot, using their existing databases, and send lists to schools.

Children whose parents are eligible for child benefit should get free school meals.

That is still quite high though.

Piglit, that's my point.

Yes, it is genuinely absurd that the children of millionaires get FSM in infant school.

However, it is also perfectly possible for a child of parents earning over £16,000 per annum not to be well fed, or for children whose parents earn less than that to have barriers (languiage, literacy, embarressment, chaotic lifestlyes) that make applying for FSM beyond them.

I believe that it is reasonable to remove FSM from the children of the highest earners, but not to reduce it to such a low minimum, with the additional hrudle of having to make an application.

In other words, means tested (or rather using existing proof that the state holds of eligibility, rather than people having to apply) but with a much higher threshold.

Yes, when I was a child, everyone knew who had FSM, and there was a stigma to it. Thank goodness that has changed

There absolutely should not be any stigma attached to anything.its no ones business.

But does anyone actually think that it's helpful to try and make things so unapparent.

Im.not talking about bells round necks but spending millions on trying to hide the problems and huge numbers of people who don't even need it seems so pointless. I mean no way on earth should people be employed and on such shit pay they can't afford a.loadlf of bread and some cheap ham.

No way should some parent who's been beaten up by their spouse he stuck virtually penniless in a refuge just to be safe and unavailable to provide a home and food for their family. It just shouldn't happen.

Is some policy that hides these issues away whilst simultaneously screwing the very people who have the problems over really the answer.

So we have uniform so no one can tell who has money or not. Well if you have no money how do you afford it in top of food.

We feed rich kids who don't need it just so no one knows who needs it.

It's ok.if a trip is cancelled cos no ones going...

It would just he nice of those who needed feeding could he fed. Those who need help could he helped and all the money wasted on people who dont need it could he spent on those who do. Rather than trying to hide all the problems away by making every one appear the same.

Children whose parents are eligible for child benefit should get free school meals.
I see your point. But parents could be getting £45k each = family total £90k, and still get FSM.

I grew up in a household that could easily afford to of sent me in with a gourmet meal everyday.

I lived with alcoholics who couldn't give a shit what I had for lunch everyday.

A lot of children only eat at school some days.

This is a lot more common than people think.

Research has shown that free school meals has a bigger impact on students who do not qualify for free school meals - i.e. most of your children.

They think this is because non-hungry children behave better and so everyone learns more.

www.ifs.org.uk/publications/6278

The research actually comments that universal free school meals "may disproportionately benefit children from middle and higher income families, as children from the poorest families are already entitled to receive free school meals."

I grew up in a household that could easily afford to of sent me in with a gourmet meal everyday. lived with alcoholics who couldn't give a shit what I had for lunch everyday. A lot of children only eat at school some days. This is a lot more common than people think.

That brings me to my lack of parenting point again. There are just as many (if not more) lovely, caring, and knowledgable about nutrition parents out there.
Are we just all supposed to hand over parenting to the state and let them do it for us as the default setting is that we must all be crap and hopeless?
Where does personal responsibility fit in? The Government aren't our parents, or our childrens. WE are.

It doesn't matter anyway, I'm sure that even tory voters don't believe the money will go towards helping the squeezed middle.
Conservative governments don't work like that.
Rob the poor to pay the rich, and still people vote for them.

But take isn't that where perhaps people should be less hung up on not saying anything rather than introducing blanket policies that screw the people in most need over?

How many things need to be banned or funded or serious time spent implemented rather than saying to someone "look stop feeding your kid this crap , buy a jumper that fits and de louse their hair"

Edsheeran I've responded to the "do you think we shouldn't give everyone ALL the benefits then?" question in two separate previous posts.

Bluntness yes, interest costs money. But look at it this way; you own a factory that isn't making enough money to buy the materials it needs to fulfil its orders. You borrow to buy the materials to fulfil the orders to hire more staff to grow the business to make more money - to pay off the loan you had - and voila, thriving business where many are employed and you're all making money.

If you don't borrow because you don't want the expense of interest repayments, do you think your factory will be better off financially? Will your employees? You won't be paying interest - fantastic! - but you'll only be turning over one small job at a time because that's all the materials you can afford. You'll have to lay off staff until you can afford to ramp up production. It will take a LONG TIME of hardship to get up to where you need to be, and all because you wanted to spare your business the interest repayments to a lender? That would be crazy business.

So yeah, we can save ourselves some interest repayments, but would it be at the costs of strangling economic growth the scale of which would far outstrip the costs of interest? It's not as easy as "let's have less debt and pay less interest because less going out means more in the coffers. With an economy it doesn't mean that at all.

Yes, when I was a child, everyone knew who had FSM, and there was a stigma to it. Thank goodness that has changed
Only it hasn't. It has been noted in a number of studies that those in receipt of free school meals are often the subject of prejudice in the classroom, both by teachers and pupils. Pupils for obvious reasons, teachers because they're expectations of children in receipt of benefits is lower. They are picked to answer questions less frequently than their peers, their questions are answered less frequently, more slowly and with less care than their peers, they are considered to be more troublesome than their peers whether or not that is actually factual.

takeabreakthatslife Thu 18-May-17 13:35:53

^^ Yes that very true people seem to forget that sort of thing on here sometimes. They think any money shields dc from neglect and abuse.

dawn thats rather a funny assumption to make how on earth would you know what went on in each classroom with each teacher faced with a room of dc some of whom on FSM I imagine many teachers in fact - as they are normal and human may do more for those they know are dis advantaged.

"Children whose parents are eligible for child benefit should get free school meals.
I see your point. But parents could be getting £45k each = family total £90k, and still get FSM."

It's tricky. I'm trying to think of a route, using what the state already knows about you, via which those with the highest incomes can be eliminated from FSM but all those with middling to low incomes can receive them without having to actively apply.

Collating benefit data + inland revenue tax data would be possible for many, but might not include e.g. recent refugees, those whose lifestyles don't fit the normal model [e.g. Traveller families]...

That's why i was thinking of an 'eliminate from the top rather than build up from the bottom' approach. The latter will almost always miss some who are really in need, which i think is a greater risk than accidentally letting someone very well off through the net.

It's not an assumption Rose. As I said: 'in a number of studies"

I grew up in a household that could easily afford to of sent me in with a gourmet meal everyday. lived with alcoholics who couldn't give a shit what I had for lunch everyday.
That is awful, obviously. Surely the way to pick this up is by the teachers noting that a child is sent in with an inappropriate/no lunch, not by giving everyone FSM. In fact, universal FSM might mean that no-one would realise what was going on, because it would be masked by the FSM.

I would rather pay for my own dcs school meals. Parents who needed help always had help. Never understood why they made them free for all anyway

It is surprisingly difficult, IME, to pick up what is in the lunchbox of someone who wishes to mask any issues - especially where dinner halls are (as is usually the case) supervised by lunchtime supervisors rather than teachers.

Parents who needed help always had help.

All of them? All the time?

Someone upthread has posted the eligibility criteria - do you not think that there is ANYONE above these who might need help, or that there might be any barriers put in the way through the need to actively apply?

The school meals at my DD's school are awful. It would be nice if school meals were genuinely healthy and free. But its these awful catering companies selling shite in their cafetrias, including junk pizza, horrible sandwiches, sugary drinks, chocolate bars (for puddings lazy feckers).

Can't parents just feed their own kids ffs. It's a pretty basic requirement

I would rather pay for my own dcs school meals.

Me too. Why are people are insistent on everyone having them, even when I'm saying I'm perfectly happy to pay for my own as I don't need it.
Why would anyone happily infantilise a load of people and say "no, we're paying for you?" If you're willing and able to pay for your own meals, you should be able to.

Few people seem to be picking up on the introduction of free breakfasts for all primary pupils. In our school this could be several hundred pupils. We have no breakfast club, staff are paid from 9.a.m. It will require the hiring of several additional assistants every day of the week to set up, supervise and clean, receive deliveries etc. in a way that the free lunches didn't, as everything was set up already. Our school has only just cut midday assistant hours as it's budget is so tight. This change will place an enormous new burden on many schools and probably lead to loss of more teaching staff and classroom assistants.