No free school meals during Feb half term

[noblegiraffe]

The new guidance on free school meals says that schools should not provide food or vouchers during Feb half term.

This won’t be needed as some general funding is going to LAs and they will be expected to provide food/support for the week schools are off.

This is bonkers, right? They’ve only just sorted it so that kids get more than a manky banana, cheese and dry bread for lunch and they’re going to switch to a different system for a week?

Does this government just really hate feeding hungry kids?

YANBU: sticking with one system for feeding disadvantaged kids would be best

YABU: it’ll be fine, no one will fall through the cracks and the transition will be seamless.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

The problem with vouchers is the kids who MOST need the help isnt the ones with poor but hard working parents. Those parents tend to run a thrifty budget and manage to feed their kids well.

It's the kids in chaotic homes, where (eg) maybe dad has mental health issues or drinks or theres domestic violence, single parent households where a parent might be juggling 3 kids and two insecure poorly paid jobs alongside having had a challenging upbringing with no education on how to manage money, families where mums maybe severely depressed or has struggled with learning difficulties her whole life and can't read well so tends to struggle paying bills, understanding recipes etc, living in communities frought with issues etc.

Its the minority but its the most vulnerable kids and unfortunately cash given tends not to reach them because actually money isnt the biggest issue. A low resale value cheese sandwich provided ready to eat however might actually get given to the child to eat.

It's a bit like the constant dispute of how to help the poorest in the developing world. Cash grants get embezzled by despots, but providing constant food supplies directly etc doesn't fix the systemic problems.

I think you are right

I think schools should be open all year around to provide schooling/care for vulnerable kids where they can get at least one hot, filling meal a day. Even during school holidays many of these kids don't eat anything and their may not be able to look after them properly. There should be some sort of all year, all day provision for these children.

@Chel098

Yes it does include the amount of children and other things. Why have you responded but yet continued to reply to something your not sure on.

You are the one who doesn't understand the system. The benefit cap and the 2 child limit are different things. You can hit the benefit cap with one or no children if you live in a high rent area.

@mylittletree yes I agree with there should be some sort of provision. I don’t think schools should be expected to do it though teachers are not social workers.

@PodgeBod I understand that I never mentioned anybody’s rent costs I mentioned the having more than 2 kids. I’m aware of that there is a rent cap and it was changed some time ago. I hear what you are saying and this affected people who live in expensive cities.

I was pointing out the the benefit cap covers a range of things not just the rent element.

Thanks @PodgeBod I was starting to think I was going mad, glad someone else understands the system the same way as me.
I love how on threads like this people always want to hear from "actual poor people" about how life on benefits really is. Then when "actual poor people" respond we get told we are wrong

@mylittletree

I think schools should be open all year around to provide schooling/care for vulnerable kids where they can get at least one hot, filling meal a day. Even during school holidays many of these kids don't eat anything and their may not be able to look after them properly. There should be some sort of all year, all day provision for these children.

I believe the government has been expanding holiday clubs for this purpose via local councils. Which will be a big help for this very vulnerable group. But it isn't such a help for those who are looking after their kids properly but are really struggling for money, its the benefit system that needs looking at in my opinion.

@WhatWouldPhyllisCraneDo I'm in the same position as you, having to claim benefits right now and its all getting swallowed up in rent. I am trying to find somewhere else to live but I can't even get saved up for a deposit/month in advance let alone find someone willing to rent to me. Its incredibly depressing.

perhaps they should chip in with some of their own millions of £s

They pay about half of that in tax. I bet Rashford pays more tax in a year than.lots of people pay in a lifetime.

[quote Chel098]@PodgeBod I understand that I never mentioned anybody’s rent costs I mentioned the having more than 2 kids. I’m aware of that there is a rent cap and it was changed some time ago. I hear what you are saying and this affected people who live in expensive cities.

I was pointing out the the benefit cap covers a range of things not just the rent element.[/quote]
I mentioned the benefit cap and you responded about number of children. I then told you they aren't the same thing, and explained my situation. You then continued to talk about number of children and told me I was wrong
I never said rent was the only thing affected by the benefit cap.

@PodgeBod. It's a nightmare isn't it! Other than moving away (and id have to go a long way) to find cheaper rent i won't be able to lower my housing costs. However because of my MH issues this isn't possible as I need to be near family for my support. Plus the DCs Dad is here. Not that he sees them very often, but I still wouldn't move them away without serious thought.
Good luck finding somewhere!

@WhatWouldPhyllisCraneDo Same here on pretty much all counts. Good luck to you too I hope things start to look brighter for you soon

@WhatWouldPhyllisCraneDo no I mentioned the number of children and then you went to talk about your own situation.

[quote Chel098]@WhatWouldPhyllisCraneDo no I mentioned the number of children and then you went to talk about your own situation.[/quote]
Yes that's what I just said
But your comment about number of children was a direct response to me saying they need to remove the benefit cap. You even quoted me. I responded to that comment. You know, like a conversation.

It was interesting to read about the winter covid scheme council funding. However, I've just had a look on my council's website for more info and before any help is given, the applicant has to prove they've asked family and friends and also approached any relevant charities before they can apply and even then the stated council action pathway is to then refer them onto someone else, not provide money. It's another Labour council like pp's if that's relevant. So rather than designated money going where it should it's stuck in council coffers and that's quite disturbing to me.

@VinylDetective

perhaps they should chip in with some of their own millions of £s

They pay about half of that in tax. I bet Rashford pays more tax in a year than.lots of people pay in a lifetime.

Also footballers careers are short lived and can be over with injury. Please don't think I am defending the gross amounts of money generated by and involved in the sport. However the vast majority of the high paid footballers, that is Premier League/La Liga/Bundesliga etc. these days are in Academy teams from primary school age, play first team football from their late teens and aren't worth as much by 25. Very, very few are still regularly playing and making obscene amounts by 30-35. Because their childhood years have been dedicated to training it's not like they just retire at 30 and get a job with the local council. They do have to manage their money in their 20s to set themselves up for life after football, and be prepared for a career-ending injury.

Again I am certainly not defending their salaries because they are beyond any doubt grossly inflated, but a footballer earning £200k a week is not earning that for an extended period of time and is unfortunately unlikely to donate large amounts of their salary. Rashford is on about £10 million a year which is £5.4 after tax roughly (although presumably he pays a huge amount into some sort of mad pension!)

[quote Chel098]@PodgeBod I understand that I never mentioned anybody’s rent costs I mentioned the having more than 2 kids. I’m aware of that there is a rent cap and it was changed some time ago. I hear what you are saying and this affected people who live in expensive cities.

I was pointing out the the benefit cap covers a range of things not just the rent element.[/quote]
I've gone back and re read your posts. You are the person who responded to a suggestion of removing the benefit cap with a comment about encouraging people to have more children. Why don't you just admit you got the two confused and move on? Its very easy to do, especially if you aren't dealing with the system yourself

www.bexley.gov.uk/news/winter-grant-scheme-plans-bexley This is what my local conservative council did and I know that every FSM family in my school got £45 per child to cover the 3 weeks. I am normally very critical of how they/the government handle holiday hunger but this time it was spot on and I told them that.

That’s a good point @Wtfdidwedo. I’m not defending them either but they’re definitely making a significant contribution to the Exchequer. I’m really hoping that Rashford makes his second career in politics, he’s exactly the kind of person we need.

@VinylDetective

perhaps they should chip in with some of their own millions of £s

They pay about half of that in tax. I bet Rashford pays more tax in a year than.lots of people pay in a lifetime.

Footballers and celebrities don't pay half their salaries in tax. They set up companies with themselves as directors, and pay themselves a salary. This also allows them to pay things as businesses expenses pre tax such as managers, travel expenses, personal trainers, hairdressers etc. It also means that if they have a quiet year work-wise, they still get paid.

My point is that money is not the only or the biggest issue causing child hunger in chaotic homes.

and that if you cannot address the chaos or the factors causing it, throwing money at the parents will not mean the hungry child gets fed.

I’m really hoping that Rashford makes his second career in politics, he’s exactly the kind of person we need.

Are you joking? There's a big difference between campaigning about an issue and being the actual person who provides & implements actual solutions.

No I’m not joking. He’s intelligent, passionate and principled - everything a politician should be and very few are. Civil servants formulate and implement solutions, politicians provide the political will. I’d vote for him.

@undertheaurora pretty sure they didn't and don't think this is a new thing people struggling as look at the high profile footballers age and what goverments would of been in power when he was little and his mum struggled, there all as bad as one another . We just seem to be more aware , and tbf govermnet have said other money has been provided to provide then and not all people on fsm struggle to feed their kids for a week.
But longterm we need to look at bigger issues as to why some kids are not being fed

icanbreatheagain

That made me laugh out loud!