Am I the only person who thinks parents should feed their kids outside of school?

[HalloweenDoughnutAnyone]

Obviously it goes without saying I don't want any child to go hungry. But. Am I the only person who thinks parents should feed their kids outside of school?

Just that really.. it's free school dinners. Not free lunch all year round.

I don't understand why people think the tax payer should be paying even more? Maybe, if you can't afford to cover the basics (food and clothing) you should think twice before having a child?

Or should we extend free school dinners, to cover all the food a child needs inside and outside of school ?

I'm not tarring everyone with the same brush but I know people who rely on free school dinners. But have sky tv, expensive mobile contracts etc

this is for the OP, and I’m being generous

Are you talking about opening schools during holidays just for fsm children/anyone in the vulnerable category or everyone?

@CherryCocktails

Yes as a temporary measure for key workers children and children under the vulnerable and/or fsm category. It's not a permanent solution. Most of the staff in the schools I've been to are working term time around their own children and took the job on for that reason. Long term they couldn't do it unfortunately.

No-one has mentioned a pemanent solution.

This is for the holidays until the current sitution with the pandemic is over.

Then what happens to the children during the holidays when the pandemic is over?

YANBU. Completely agree with you OP

@CherryCocktails

Then what happens to the children during the holidays when the pandemic is over?

You have the most amazing level of whataboutery. You should actually be a politician.

That's where the campaigns to increase benefits, sort working conditions and the likes come in...

The problem atm is that there is an unprecedented situation that needs a quick solution for now to help these children in the current situation

@CherryCocktails

Then what happens to the children during the holidays when the pandemic is over?

Presumably far more of their parents will be working again, won’t they? So it will no longer be necessary.

Presumably far more of their parents will be working again, won’t they? So it will no longer be necessary.

Exactly. And if things are completely fucked we'll know we need to take long-term measures.

We won't know until it's over. We do know what is needed now.

@HalloweenDoughnutAnyone
You are exactly the sort of person this government loves

Keep playing into their hands with your pseudo “poor kids need food
And I’m not being a but” bullshit

They love you because you feel that your achievements on some level allow you to round on and to denigrate and dismiss people who could be like you but who are not

Stop being seduced by this rhetoric
Unless you are happy to look like a heartless individual which they of course love

It's not whataboutery, it knowing what schools went through for both children and staff during those strange days of lockdown in schools. At least with everyone back there's some form of normality, even in bubbles.

Term time staff cannot usually work in holidays due to their own families and if in receipt of any benefit, cannot do more hours or claim any overtime. Alot of companies are on a recruitment and overtime ban anyway due to the financial losses they've endured.

@CherryCocktails

It's not whataboutery, it knowing what schools went through for both children and staff during those strange days of lockdown in schools. At least with everyone back there's some form of normality, even in bubbles.

Term time staff cannot usually work in holidays due to their own families and if in receipt of any benefit, cannot do more hours or claim any overtime. Alot of companies are on a recruitment and overtime ban anyway due to the financial losses they've endured.

Firstly; you're not the only person who was involved with schools during lockdown. Your experience is not universal and doesn't make you an expert (particularly when you didn't even realise the financial implications for families of your cafes plan).

Secondly; no-one has said that schools should open every holidays forever more. This is a temporary measure for unprecedented times so schools opening absolutely should be considered as one of the options. For some term time staff whose partners have been made redundant or put on furlough or had hours cut then extra hours would be a godsend. There are ways round things.

For example in the Scottish set up that I know best there were set schools in an area open. Not every single one. So staffing was pulled together from all of the schools, which obviously gave more choice. Other council staff from places closed also worked in.

If you rule out schools then you are back to vouchers. Which so many of you were desperate to rule out...

Taken from a post by The Daily Politik on Facebook:

“If you can’t afford children, don’t have them!”

What if you can afford children... then you lose your job cause of recession brought on by your government’s poor handling of a global pandemic?

What if you can’t afford children... but you accidentally get pregnant? Do conservatives advocate for mass abortion now, or are they still the party of purported “family values”?

What if you can afford children... then after a few years, you get an illness, or suffer a work injury that prevents you from being able to do the job you are qualified for, so you have to take a low paying job to keep the rent paid?

What if you can’t afford children... but your sister dies, and you are the only relative to take care of her children? Is it better if they stay with you and the state subsidies their meals, or go into the social care system where the state has to pay for all their meals, clothing and accommodation AND raises them?

What if you can afford children... then after a few years, your partner unexpectedly leaves you and the kids and takes their salary with them? Should you be penalized for THEIR actions and live in poverty with your children for the rest of your life?

Did you know that more than half of all children living in poverty in the UK, have parents who work? They just don’t earn enough to provide for their families. Shouldn’t the minimum full time salary cover the basic needs of a small family? If not, how else are single parents supposed to raise children?

The kind of people who say things like “If you can’t afford children, don’t have them!” Don’t have much experience of the nuances of life at all.

Why does everyone always say "they've got Sky" as if they are actually paying a contracted monthly subscription?! I don't know anyone who lives on an estate that doesn't have a Skybox that Dodgy Mike from pub chipped for £100. I'm not saying it's 'right', but i wish people would stop automatically equating a satellite dish with using 3 kids worth of child benefits to watch The Real Housewives of Atlanta. It's like saying "they all wear Rolexes"

Doesn't help single parents though.

These vouchers, I assume they'd be for supermarkets/food shops which deliver?

If things had been organised well in advance (and it could have been as it was clear before the summer this was going to be an ongoing issue) then it could have been set up so that people had a choice. That would have impacted people in the best way.

People could have had a choice of a meal in school. Not necessarily in their specific school, but a school in walking distance to their home (or given free transport to the school).

Or a choice of a voucher that was useable for them. People could have been allowed to choose between Tesco/Asda/Aldi/Paypoint voucher. The supermarkets were all desperate to be part of the voucher scheme so it could have been done

Of course with this government the system would have been extortionate and probably wouldn't have worked

@CherryCocktails

Doesn't help single parents though.

These vouchers, I assume they'd be for supermarkets/food shops which deliver?

Most of them couldn't be used online.

Plus most of the supermarkets have a £40 minimum spend for delivery

Oh the "sky tv" "mobile phone " line people spout about is so eye rolling! Along the lines of avocados are why people don't own houses nowadays!

@CherryCocktails What do you suggest then?

You've rubbished everything anyone else has said. So what is your suggestion that works between than schools opening for lunches or vouchers?

So they'd need to get a bus then to the shops to spend the vouchers?

It would be much easier to just give people the money. Just pay it into the bank and they can add it to their shopping.

They won't though because people might spend it on the "wrong" things.

Even though any of the minority of parents who'd do that will find a way to do that anyway...

@CherryCocktails

So they'd need to get a bus then to the shops to spend the vouchers?

This is like groundhog day...

Which is why they shouldn't be sending people specific vouchers for specific shops.

Like the poster earlier in the thread who sold the voucher to a relative for cash, that she could spend with her usual shopping, because the supermarket it was for was too far away.

She was accused of fraud by another poster...

So they can't use the voucher online, online delivery is £40 minimum for delivery anyway so too expensive, they can't get the bus anywhere to spend said voucher at a restaurant or cafe so presumably that means they can't get the bus to the supermarket either to spend the voucher if they don't live near enough.. so what exactly is the point of the voucher?

@CherryCocktails not sure there's much point arguing any further. There seems to be concerted bullying going on in this thread. Fwiw I thought you made a perfectly valid point and clearly since you are actually involved in fsm it's not uninformed.

They are doing that in Wales lyralala, paying direct into bank rather than issuing vouchers.

Let's face it, the government will never give plain cash because unfortunately there are parents out there who still wouldn't feed their kids with it. Maybe vouchers should be more universal then, so you don't have to spent it in a specific shop. That would make more sense.