Free breakfast clubs for ALL primary school children? Why?

[Safi7]

I’ve been overseas since the election so a bit out of the loop, but is it true that Labour are going to make it standard that all primary schools must now offer free breakfasts to all children, regardless of need?

Fair enough for children from deprived families - but all children?

Where is the money for this coming from?

Are Labour actually saying that in 2024, its now to much to expect parents to actually bother to feed their own children breakfast? This responsibility can just be pushed onto schools instead - as if they haven’t got enough on? Teachers are leaving in droves as it is. Du much is out in them - the jobs is becoming more like social work in too many cases. Who will staff these breakfast clubs and make sure kids are actually eating?

Surely this is just encouraging lazy parenting - ie parents who can well afford cereal / toast / eggs etc it but just won’t bother if their kids can eat at school instead. Plus children will be dumped at school earlier than necessary, just because parents can now get away with it?

Surely it’s better to direct resources where they are actually needed, rather than turn schools into free cafes? Makes no sense.

Yes. They want everyone to be able to work.

I can’t work out if you are being ironic or wilfully ignorant.

In the schools I taught in, some of the children literally had a school uniform. Proper poverty, not just not having a PlayStation. Their parents never bought avocados because they were well out of their budget. Some were refugees, some fleeing domestic violence. Bit hard to put the kids back up there once they are here and something happens to throw a bomb under your life.

Hopefully little Tarquin and Effie never have to experience that.

(My kids get white toast. I’m obviously a shit parent 😂)

I agree. It's not always a question of parents being unable to afford breakfast, most people can manage toast and cereal, but the time factor when parents are going to work. There are also children (& adults), who cannot face anything to eat when they first get up but feel hungry when they are up and out. That is not at all unusual. I couldn't eat anything first thing, neither could my son, I starved :-), and son took a snack to school.

Children come first and it doesn't hurt us for a tiny bit of our tax to go towards making sure they start their school day without being hungry. I doubt we would even notice it and a lot of our taxes are wasted or stockpiled. I'm happy to contribute to this and glad it isn't means tested so no child is stigmatised.

For goodness sakes, it's hard enough getting up as it is, never mind earlier. The longer we all stay in bed in the morning, the better. Young children starting school earlier would mean a very long school day, too tiring.

No. I suggest the parents do whatever they need to do to afford to feed their children, or don't have children. It's not a given right.
Case in point.... walking past the Jobcentre yesterday and a whole slew of adults in designer gear, puffing away on a fag, their heads in a phone that I can only dream of owning. How can you possibly put smoking ahead of your childs health and wellbeing???

There are studies supporting this. An academic friend of mine conducted an extensive research study into the positive affects on punctuality. academic performance and mental health when universal free breakfast clubs are offered. Her study is one of many worldwide. Go and read up on the topic to see why it's a good thing.

This seemed wrong,so looked it up: it's RELATIVE poverty.

https://www.actionforchildren.org.uk/blog/where-is-child-poverty-increasing-in-the-uk/#:~:text=In%202022%2F23%2C%20the%20number,of%20children%20in%20the%20UK.

Maybe this poster would like to foster children whose families can't afford avocado on rye toast and feed them properly?
I'm sure their loving parents on NMW would be very grateful for them to be taken away.
Maybe she can give them some tips on budgeting too. Which politician was it who tried a week on benefits and couldn't last?

You can feed your child whatever you want at home. The breakfast club isn’t going to be compulsory.

of course families should be supported but all of that takes time and even with the best support going there will still be children for who breakfast club is the best option and it being free removes a barrier.

Breakfast clubs aren’t going to solve all the problems of course not but it will help.

Well it might be a good idea if the food was decent. Unfortunately the ones I have seen seem to consist of cheap sugary cereal with white bread toast and jam.
So never any eggs, porridge, fruit, plain yoghurt etc.
I wouldn’t want my children to be eating that five days a week.

This has to be satire!

There are not enough foster carers in the country for all the children who do not get a proper breakfast to be put in care. Some children, who have a less than optimal childhood, are still a lot better off with their parents than ending up in the care system (look up outcomes of children in care).

The idea that people can afford eggs, avocado and rye bread everyday is laughable.

I personally think eating might be more important than an extra hour in bed. Plus I was a proper teacher for many years and I bet you were not. Breakfast makes a huge difference.

You win a 🏅 for stuffing such a high number of well worn tropes into one post.

Eta: Jobcentres aren't open on Sundays.

I think it’s about forcing mothers to go to work. I was a SAHM until my youngest went to secondary school. I never claimed a penny in benefits to support this decision but I was constantly made to feel that I was supposed to be passing my children off to others and get some paid work.
The thing is, you drop your children at school at 8am (or earlier) for breakfast club so you can get to work, what about the children of the people manning breakfast club? Do they have to find an even earlier club?

The culture these days is NOT for children to be cared for by their parents.
We have 21 children starting in our reception class in September. Our application forms ask for certain developmental info …. more than half of the children are NOT toilet trained. Many of the forms state the child is unable to dress themselves - from previous experience many of those who say they can actually can’t. Our early years teachers spend too much time teaching these children things that I, my friends and my children were all taught by parents. If the government want to improve things for children then they should be encouraging FAMILY not institutions.

I had this in the early nineties! I didn't get a ticket though, I got cash - £1.20 per day. It was an independent grammar and I was there on a scholarship - there were about 7 or 8 of us in the whole school. I wonder now if there were more children eligible, who didn't turn up.

I must admit, I never found it stigmatising because I never thought being poor was anything to be ashamed of, but I know that embarrassment about poverty is a massive thing. Anything that increases uptake, and means disadvantaged children don't go hungry is surely a good thing.

Yes, partly. My DS goes to breakfast club twice a week so I can get to my school to teach. We have to leave at 7.45 but don’t worry I still feed him breakfast because the school doesn’t provide any food for the fee. I bet you’re a stay at home parent or work from home.

We offer free breakfast to any child who wants it. If we did it just by those on benefits the admin would be more time consuming and therefore expensive, it would spotlight those on benefits to everyone else.

I suggest the parents do whatever they need to do to afford to feed their children Steal? Sell their bodies?

or don't have children. It's not a given right and how do you propose putting this into action. Sterilisation? Forced abortions?

What do you propose doing when people living in poverty DO have children that they are NOT able to feed?

I really don’t understand this thinking. The birthrate in this country is declining and predictions are that the economy will decline as there won’t be enough working age people to support it. We actually need people to have more children and support parents financially to do so.

I think some of the motivation is not simply about providing meals, but about opening schools earlier so that working parents - or now, those parents who would like to get back to work more than part-time - are able to do so.

Lots of posts on here and other SM platforms about the fact that if children are in school from 9-3, and maybe have access to after school clubs until 5, that still does not support working parents as many need to be at work by 830 and can’t leave until 5pm, so they still need reduced hours. Many children arrive at school having been in FT nursery, and find it a struggle to adjust hours or keep jobs once their LOs start reception. This means some, seeing that this will be the case, don’t return to work even part time after children. After all, what’s the point?

I think this policy would bridge that gap and make it easier for working women, in particular, to maintain careers/employment - which can only be a good thing for the economy and help to reduct the UC bill. Am not a labour supporter, but I do support this policy.

I don't think offering a free one hour breakfast club will get thousands more women back to work.

Or men

@mrsnjw Having run a childcare business focused on before and after school care, I will have to disagree with you.

Really? It surprises me. I guess if the scho has an after school club you would be more enticed. But that wouldn't be free?

Sounds very positive to me. And I’m just coming out for the days when I would need this (youngest going into year 6) so definitely not biased in favour.

The ability to get to work must be part of it - and really should this be a privilege- but I think it’s also a child protection and child poverty thing.

It means all children are getting a good breakfast before school, and some settled time before lessons begin. I imagine it also gives staff time to check in with the children outside of teaching time and may highlight some issues.

It costs more to means test these things than to just roll it out to everyone. Plus it means abusive parents can’t neglect their kids by siphoning money they could spend on breakfast to their own needs.