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.

100% with you on this. Mine was potty trained fully by 14 months and able to dress herself. I also put her in nursery from 9mo part time for 15 hrs, while this gave me 2 days of work a week. It was great! she socialised with other children so well, but also had no problem of attachment with all our family.

Research shows that early infant socialisation is absolutely crucial to adaptation to later life and these kids achieve significantly better life-work balance and happiness levels than those who have been patrolled by their prison guard parents.

No they don't. Even I didn't always know, and I was the teacher- let alone the children. I don't think even the children that got FSM knew for that matter, it was never discussed. In the morning, children either ordered their lunch from me or told me they had a packed lunch. The office dealt with chasing parents for payments if necessary and the only difference for FSM was that no parent was going online at home to pay.

Where are all these kids going to be?

But then the teachers would have to start earlier (rather than the support staff running the breakfast club) and the school day would have to end earlier (which would not help working parents).

It's not (necessarily) about the food, it's about the school being open to accept children early so parents can go to work. I couldn't care less if my son got fed at "breakfast club" but being able to drop him off at 8 is the only way I can be at my office on time. But not having to pay for it would save us £120 a month in fees per child (£6 a day). That’s a significant amount for many working families, especially with 2 or 3 kids.

But also, universal free anything means the people who to need it are more likely to take it up. No having to use special tokens or other potentially embarrassing ways to say “I need the free one please” and identify yourself as in need.

I think this has two benefits.

1. It makes sure all children can eat breakfast. That's a good thing.
2. It makes it a lot easier for parents to work. That's also potentially a good thing and might possibly inject more into the economy than it costs.

I'd rather money was spent on initiatives like this than non-existent PPE from companies the cabinet had financial interests in.

Except that Scandi countries have significantly higher taxation (twice as I've calculated recently my salary back home vs my salary taxation in the UK, and I am a higher rate payer). I'm not prepared to pay twice more taxes than I already do - that's why I move to the UK. I would rather get my baby to nursery at 9mo and work part time - better for the child's socialisation, better for me too.

The use of the term absolute poverty is very misleading - globally it means those without the necessities of life.

Given the safety net of benefits - I cannot believe a third of the children in the UK are in absolute poverty.

Relative poverty - yes - and the help to alleviate that needs to be targetted to those in that category of need - not handed out to the likes of the MN demographic who can well-afford to care/nurture for their own children.

It is always the same arguement - the government (i.e. the taxpayer) must intervene to help all families (with free childcare etc) when that help comes at a cost to other targetted initiatives.

@ruby1957 absolute poverty means you do not have an income that means you can provide healthy food and a safe home. Lots of people in Britain are in absolute poverty. Lots of children live in damp and mouldy housing, live in vastly overcrowded housing, and their parents can not provide a healthy diet.
Single unemployed people living only on JSA are also judged to be in absolute poverty.

Haven’t RTFT so sorry if someone has said this already, but I thought the idea isn’t ’free breakfast’ but ‘free breakfast club’ ie for childcare reasons. The food isn’t charged separately at these anyway, there’s an overall fee for attendance and breakfast is included. After school club still costs money, even if there is no food included.

haha, the kids definitely do know 😆They make jokes and separate into groups based on this. What is more, is those who get FSM get noticed and it creates a 'priviledge free school club', which many other kids who have to pay for meals envy.

I remember the times we were fighting against 'men's only clubs' because of privilege, when some men had to pay to get into them, some didn't have to pay and women were excluded completely. Now it looks like in this thread we are creating exactly the same environment, but for children. This is what we've been fighting against for 100 years!

Free access of BCs for all kids eliminates bullying and privilege, creates better socialisation for young ones and supports interclass development.

I hate to disappoint you but social services base level for removing a child is shockingly low. And where would these children go? Do you think foster homes and care homes are better?

Oh, I'm not saying that I personally don't think there should be a choice.
I just don't think we can expect the government to promote a choice that isn't beneficial to them.

Working in childcare....apart from how it eases the bills for people lots of parents don't do breakfast because they don't eat it so have kids that don't eat it amazingly though they eat it happily at mine.
If this means children are starting school with food in their tummies not just sweets and crisps it's got to improve outcomes.

I can assure you, in most schools, they absolutely do. For a start, the children in receipt of FSM are regularly taken out of class for various incentives. When they go on trips and bring a packed lunch, the children on FSM are given a brown paper bag from the canteen.

@NotAlexa I do agree that in the scandi countries it is very much geared at both parents working- full time or almost full time -childcare is relatively cheap and as you say tax is high -that's just how their system works- and has far less couples on benefits too as although tax is high-wages tend to be higher too (unless you have what I call a highly paid job) I wouldn't say it's better or worse- just a different system - I can see that for parents who didn't want to work it could possibly be quite dull as I saw very few groups advertised for parents and babies/toddlers or pre school .

Also, @MrsSunshine2b if you as the teacher didn't know which children were on FSM, how did you do targeted interventions? How did you measure their attainment in comparison to the others? 🤔

My son goes to breakfast club. I have to feed him a proper breakfast before he goes because the school breakfast is just cheap white carbs, no protein. I still send him because I need childcare from 8am. Also they don’t have capacity for all of the kids in the school and I don’t see how they can magic that up.

If kids need free breakfast then by the same token they need free dinners? Currently dinners are only free for infants.

100% this

Whether the reason be breakfast, extended childcare or something else, it can only be a good thing.

Parents where I live mostly don’t work from home and have the ability to pop out to drop off their kids to school in a morning, which means they’re relient on wraparound care from as early as 7am.

The school breakfast club, run by a day nursery in the local area, charges £12.50 per child for breakfast - that’s a whopping £72.50 per week per child just for drop off - and you can see how it soon adds up if you have more than 1 and you need to pay the £17.50 after school fee too, pricing out some of the less wealthy families in the area.

This now means that the local childminders are massively oversubscribed and therefore often over their numbers ratios, which has led to some dangerous situations and some issues with some less than suitable people setting up businesses to make a penny, with little interest in the welfare of the children they care for.

It’s also well researched and understood that a suitable breakfast improves cognitive function and therefore academic performance in children and young people.

I would much rather my children be able to access affordable and properly managed breakfast clubs which are ran by schools staff whom they know and have good relationships with.

I’m sceptical that it will be provided for free but I’m certainly hopeful it will be.

@Piggiesinblankets out of interest (and not a criticism) do you work? Or maybe have a job WFH. That's pretty full on breakfast in the week day after day if parents are rushing to get kids ready and commute or be at work for 9am or earlier . My son certainly wouldn't have wanted that much at say 8am - as others have said it's a choice, as lots do actually get cereal and toast (or less) they won't notice a difference if they did go to breakfast club and it might help many working parents out- it's not compulsory . Lucky kids in your case though- sounds excellent- !!

Agreed. Not feeding your school age child will rarely be enough on its own.

When they go on trips and bring a packed lunch, the children on FSM are given a brown paper bag from the canteen.

That is anyone who has a lunch from school who gets that. Paid or not. A school lunch is also available to those who do not normally get it for trips as long as they pay.

Also FSM kids do not always have FSM. Many of ours bring their own lunches and reject the vouchers during the holidays.

None of the schools I've ever taught in have offered a paid for packed lunch on trip days. The children not on FSM bring their own.

I'm aware of that. What's your point?

Surely all teachers should be aware which children are in receipt of pupil premium (and therefore FSM) as those children should be receiving targeted intervention and tracking?