A loaf and a block of cheese is not lunch for ten days

[ZazieSheHer]

So some of the free school lunch boxes contain very little food.

Marcus Rashford condemns free school meal packages

“...a package, supposedly containing £30 worth of food to last for 10 days, comprising just a loaf of bread, some cheese, a tin of beans, two carrots, two bananas, three apples, two potatoes, a bag of pasta, three Frubes, two Soreen bars and a tomato”.

mobile.twitter.com/RoadsideMum/status/1348646428084760576

Can’t imagine what it’s like home schooling hungry kids. Would like to say I’m shocked but I’m not.

Surely the best solution is to add the school meal amount to child benefit or universal credit payments. There would no doubt be a small minority of piss takers, but those piss takers are not going to be feeding their kids properly whatever the FSM system. The society should be identifying those kids and managing that problem effectively

I agree with this in a way. Add FSM money to UC or Child Benefit and let the parents book FSM when their child is in school and budget appropriately with it when child is not in school. Although when you remove catering overheads etc it will probably work out as about £5 extra a week rather than the £15-30 some parents seem to be expecting.

If someone whose child is getting the FSM top-up yet not booking FSM or providing adequate packed lunches it will soon become obvious to teaching staff who is abusing the FSM money. And then I guess SS get involved.

We can't access vouchers yet.
Parcels are the only option for home FSMs presently.

Although when you remove catering overheads etc it will probably work out as about £5 extra a week rather than the £15-30 some parents seem to be expecting.

They don't need that much. It's all going to the catering company and they're not providing meals, just cheap ingredients. This could be done more cost effectively.

I'm now thinking child benefit top up or similar would be better as can cover some fuel costs/can purchase a baking tray one week or whatever.

Well @MrsMomoa I guess it depends on the sandwich. Two slices of thick cut seeded loaf filled with ham, cheese and salad is a lot more sustaining and nutritious than a thin slice of cheap bread with one square of processed cheese.

@Katyppp

To be honest, i look at threads like this and wonder when the Government became responsible for feeding children? And when did people become so entitled that they expected it? And complained because it wasn't enough? I have really struggled financially in the past, and i have never come anywhere near letting my children go hungry, ever. I am sorry, but no-one is so poor in the UK that they can't afford to feed their kids. There may be very specific situations when cash is tight, for example waiting for UC or fleeing domestic abuse, but widespread inability to afford food on a daily basis is a budgeting issue. It suits the left-wing narrative to promote food poverty, as seen on here, along with the usual juvenile comments about Tories helping their mates out. I agree there is not enough food to justify the £30 bill, that's obvious. But the real scandal is that the whole expectation of free food was there in the first place.

You are without a doubt one of the most ignorant posters I have ever come across. If you think it isn't a thing , be grateful that you have no idea.

Actually, reading this article I'm sad to say the food box linked to in the OP is actually one of the better ones...

metro.co.uk/2021/01/12/worst-school-meal-parcels-revealed-as-mum-says-she-wouldnt-feed-to-dog-13888249/

@MrsMomoa your competitive under-eating is a bit distasteful on this thread, to be frank.
Would you be just as ok to nibble on half a sandwich when you were given the whole loaf on a Monday to last you two weeks?

Believe it or not, not everyone is you.

For the many uneducated and ignorant on this issue.

The meal is most likely the only meal a child gets , so all of you ' I only have half a tomato and a cracker for my lunch' , I presume that's not all you have.

Whether or not the folk who live in la la land think we should feed kids is irrelevant. Nobody asked you. Same with your opinions on the vouchers.

The point is that 30 pound a time is going on these packages for food that costs what , a fiver? The government is stealing from children and starving them and people want to pedal out the same old bollocks about parents not feeding their kids.

Open your eyes.

@Londonmummy66

His is a sickening thread - partly the paucity of the parcels and the measly way they have been put together and partly the attitude of some posters who seem to think it is OK to treat children like this.

As a cuple of posters have pointed out the £30 is meant to cover kitchen staff and overheads etc and as there are quite a few children in school being catered for those costs are contiuing. However CHartwells have told the BBC that their food parcels should contain quite a lot of food, certainly plenty for 10 lunches even for a teenaged boy:-

Cheese (200g)
Six red apples
Four oranges
Four bananas
Two cucumbers
Four carrots
Eight baked potatoes
One lettuce
Two tomatoes
Four cans of baked beans
1kg of pasta
Four tins of chopped tomatoes
Two tins of tuna
Four tins of green peas
One loaf of bread
Three malt loaf snacks
Six yoghurts

So if your school is catered by Chartwells and isn't providing this I suggest you get on to the catering manager to ask why not.

That is still a very unimaginative and quite depressing list of food.

I think many of you "I could make 10 tiny lunches out of that" posters are forgetting that the purpose of FSM is to ensure every child has at least one decent meal a day.
So while you might scrape together half a tomato sandwich, a few cubes of cheese and a slice of apple, I ask would you be happy for that to be a main meal for your child? They may not have anything at all, or just toast or a snack for breakfast/dinner.

Exactly.

@wheresmykimchi how is the goverment stealing ? They are pay the £15 week ( its not £30) to the comApanies still so blame the providers
The goverment have also condemned them and its not all schools so some are managing

@DuncinToffee tbf thats to provide a lunch and it has to be so most kids will eat , contain fruit , be easy to
Store and cook

@MrsMomoa

LegoPirateMonkey

Also @MrsMomoa as you point out, you’re fully grown. Kids are still growing.

So are my kids. They're still growing too.
Even they just a sandwich and crisps.

They’re not going to grow much with a lunch like that.

Post on bbc website

@randomsabreuse

Not read full thread sorry!

Not convinced by a jacket potato either - either the oven needs to be on for ages (££££) for 1 jacket potato or you need a combi microwave for it to be edible. Also takes ages in the microwave.

Jackets are cheap cooked in bulk in an oven that is in use anyway and much less cheap if cooked on their own!

I make a jacket potato in a normal microwave. It takes 5 minutes with the power on then leave it in the microwave for another 5 minutes.

@Katyppp, you are Jacob Rees Mogg and I claim my reward - which will go straight to the local food bank.

What a vile diatribe of nasty meanness.

[quote donewithitalltodayandxmas]@wheresmykimchi how is the goverment stealing ? They are pay the £15 week ( its not £30) to the comApanies still so blame the providers
The goverment have also condemned them and its not all schools so some are managing [/quote]
If you think the government who are against FSM in the first place have paid every penny of the 30 quid to the kids you are dreaming.

@Wheresmykimchi well no they haven't paid it to the kids it has been paid to the catering companies etc ?!! Its also £15 a week not £30 and unless you have proof that these companies have not been given the money its actually a false accusation and one of the companies has stated what is paid and what they provide and its more than those being picture

[quote donewithitalltodayandxmas]@Wheresmykimchi well no they haven't paid it to the kids it has been paid to the catering companies etc ?!! Its also £15 a week not £30 and unless you have proof that these companies have not been given the money its actually a false accusation and one of the companies has stated what is paid and what they provide and its more than those being picture[/quote]
Why on earth are you defending any of this?

*Katyppp

To be honest, i look at threads like this and wonder when the Government became responsible for feeding children?
And when did people become so entitled that they expected it? And complained because it wasn't enough?
I have really struggled financially in the past, and i have never come anywhere near letting my children go hungry, ever.
I am sorry, but no-one is so poor in the UK that they can't afford to feed their kids.
There may be very specific situations when cash is tight, for example waiting for UC or fleeing domestic abuse, but widespread inability to afford food on a daily basis is a budgeting issue.
It suits the left-wing narrative to promote food poverty, as seen on here, along with the usual juvenile comments about Tories helping their mates out.
I agree there is not enough food to justify the £30 bill, that's obvious.
But the real scandal is that the whole expectation of free food was there in the first place.*

You are so so right. I agree with children getting food where there are known social care issues. Where for whatever reason the parents don't parent the child in a kind way and they are not being fed because of it. Unquestionably those children should have good parcels and good ones.

Parents who were hardworking, saved for a rainy day before having children and had a plan for if they ever list their job but then a pandemic blew it out the water should also recurve help.

However, all this nonsense of not having a single ingredient in the house to supplement the lunch with or saying it should be a hot meal. Just no. You don't sit down and plan to have kids and think well it's ok,when they are 4 the tax payers will pay for their hot food in the day so I can just shove a white bread ham sandwich in them in the evening.

Only people that are desperate should get food parcels and they should be nutritious.not crisps and biscuits and I'm sorry but they should be gratefully received. Someone else is paying to feed your child.

Some of the boxes pictured are for 10'days others for 5

Openly indicating people on FSM cannot be trusted with .......money!?!
Transparent conflict between MP and crisis profits, that's before we get to the kids.

Thatcher only took the milk, these guys are taking the piss.

@Crumbleandcake so if the parents are feckless wastrels, their kids starve?

@Wheresmykimchi I am not defending but your blaming the wrong people here , if a company is given a certain amount to provide then that is what it should do.
The company that quoted what was in its 2 week box is providing it so why are the others
Your blaming the goverment , but if they are paying and its not being supplies is it not the suppliers fault or does that not suit your narrative