Free school meals

[heatseeker14]

Why do KS1 kids get free school meals? I think it is such a waste of public money. I can't understand why it is still being pushed? I understand that some parents struggle, I get that, but why open it up to everyone else?! Our school doesn't have a functioning kitchen, the best they can churn out is tinned hot dogs, so they buy in meals from a catering company. This must cost a fortune & it makes me mad. Why should tax payers fund school meals, it is up to parents to provide for their kids. Set a good example and cook decent food it is not that difficult!!

Or maybe the MPs should bring packed lunches if they can't afford to pay their way. Apples are really cheap at Aldi. Bit of value bread and cheap ham.

The breakfast idea is a terrible one btw. 7p per child. They clearly haven't factored in the cost of supervising this bargain basement breakfast. Or maybe they expect school staff to work for free. In our school we already have breakfast club and we pay £5 for the privilege. So how is the school going to raise extra money if they have to provide it for free? OK the free one may start later but they could still lose money.

Theresa May has decided to get rid anyway so why bother starting a thread?

Lets hope the OP and minions feel better after last nights goady rant.

It amazes me how some people live in their own little bubble with zero clue on how the shitty end of life works but feel fixing it is easy because apples are cheap at Aldi. Not forggetting over streached under staffed SS can just swoop in and remove thousands of children from their homes because housing those children will be cheaper than providing free school meals.......oh hang on no it won't.

Op you do realise it actually takes quite alot for social services to do something these days they are understaffed and overworked thanks to those lovely concervatives who make cuts everywhere.
I wouldn't deny a child having a warm meal at my expense, Sad facts are some people don't care enough to feed their children properly, That is indeed the adults fault but not the child, I don't begrudge a child having a free school meal.

I think FSM should either be available to all children or to only those who can't afford it. I don't understand only making it available to the very youngest. I'm not fine with 8 year olds going hungry, so from that perspective it doesn't make sense.

The op is coming off like a total arse though and if you're "passionate" about not wasting money there are far more worthy adult canidates for your ire.

Yes fab, I'm much more concerned with subsiding MPs booze and meals and second homes than children's lunch

It's a very recent policy (started Sept 13) so I'm. It sure if anyone has had a chance to see if this (coalition) policy really has had an effect.

Removing universality (returning the the system that ran for the 1940s until 3 (academic) years ago could however fund a new definition of who qualifies to include the children of the working poor in other KS.

Because not all schools were shit and stigmatised those on FSM, so of course making sure that their practices spread to weaker schools would also be needed (something that is already the case for every separate junior and every secondary school)

Two of my DGC get free school lunches. One is in a family that doesn't get Child Benefit any more because of parental earnings. Although the other isn't, her parents, who both work (pretty necessary these days) could afford to pay. They'll have to pay in KS2 anyway.

I actually like the idea of a free breakfast, it's considered to be the most important meal for children. If there is fruit and decent cereal/porridge on offer that would be good. A sensible threshold, after housing costs, should be applied for free lunches.

It is a bit calling the OP an aggressive moron when most of the responses are the far side of aggressive.
As a taxpayer I object to paying for a child of a rich family (income over 50K say) to have a free lunch when I have to pay for my own lunch out of a fairly small income.
FSM should be means tested at a reasonable level - anything else is ridiculous when there is a finite pot of money to dip into.

all services should be means tested.

gran the Coalition invested in school kitchens to bring in this policy. Now many families will return to packed lunches. My youngest starts school in September and he will be having packed lunches now. I am sure many parents will feel the same.
The 7p breakfast won't help families because lunch costs far more than breakfast. Plus schools will have to bring staff in early to supervise this breakfast. This staff cost won't have been factored into the 7p budget. Plus schools use breakfast club as a valuable income stream. They will lose this. It is a terrible idea.
So the Government has taken money away from school. Will give it back bu taking away free lunches for you DC. But the breakfast policy will take away an income stream from Schools and they will have to supervise kids longer for free or spend more on staff.

Means testing costs money.

If your child does not need or want them, surely it's a huge waste to provide them? Just thinking of my kids who always shuddered and heaved at the sight of the school meals so I would have ended up making packed lunches anyway,

Which is my duty as their mother who chose to have them.

The benefits I see from the universal aspect of these meals is that more parents will take them up. Just because parents can afford to make balanced packed lunches, it doesn't mean that they will. Also children who can be notoriously picky at this age, will see their friends eating new foods and copy them. This may generate better eating habits as they grow up. I like the policy, but I also think there should be more spending on all areas of schools.

Well Mps earn over 50k. Ollie. Do you object to subsiding their fine wines and lunches?

If your child doesn't need or want then you can put opt out surely.

I agree (in part). FSM should only be for those that really need it and yes, a simple packed lunch can be made cheaply, even by the working poor.

But anyway they are likely to go so no point discussing it really.

The universal free school meals idea was Clegg's baby. And not such a bad one either (tired small kids getting a boost of a hot dinner to keep them learning and focused for the afternoon ---> better achievement in the long run) but it is an idea for a country with more available funds. At the moment we cannot afford it and must depend on parents feeding their own children (not such a crazy idea!).

I love how you think SS would have time or even care.

Those meals are for some children the only decent warm meal they get. They are much healthier than a pack lunch. Our school has a fantastic menu. It teaches them to try new things, children copy each other. Why would I object to any of that?

Our school made the ks1 school.meals compulsory and banned lunch boxes. Our school has a fully functioning kitchen but the food was disgusting. Quite often my child's dinner each day was a scoop of mash, plain pasta and cucumber with a small bowl of pasta or chocolate cake after. He didn't like any other food which was fish pie, fish and chips, curry, fish fingers and wedges and pizza on a weekly basis. Puddings are jam sponge, chocolate sponge, treacle pudding and jam tart and fruit salad.

I pack a better, healthier lunch box than the dinner the school provides. But I also understand that some don't and some, for whatever reason, don't feed their children at home so school is the only opportunity for their child to eat.

I'd rather any child be offered a free meal than starve though, especially if circumstances are difficult at home.

Oh great. An early morning poor bashing thread by someone who has no idea what Working Poor means.

I find it amazing that you are all up in arms about 4-6 year olds getting lunch not that The House Of Commons has heavily subsidised food and drink (including alcohol) plus claims for meals expenses. We live in a warped country, we really do.

Exactly brokenme.