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.

I'm sure those that don't need it don't have to have it. I know my children would have hated the change in routine So I would opt out. But if parents are just above the threshold they are usually the families that need it.

It's difficult to concentrate when you have a grumbling belly. So by offering breakfast to all makes it fair.

Is this including SEND schools?

The school I work in has a free breakfast club. It's a secondary so less about childcare and more about giving children breakfast. If we were to open only to children in poverty then the stigma may mean they wouldn't attend. They also come with friends. Again, the targeted group may not come if they don't have a friend to sit with therefore it's easier to open to all. Most of our food comes from donations from local supermarkets.

Older children will be more motivated to get themselves to school, especially if there is no breakfast available at home.

This wasn't your original argument. You talked about spending so much time out of the house as eroding family values (whatever that means). Every family I know whose children started nusery young are loving, caring families where time spent together is cherished and valued.

The high school I teach at offers free school breakfast for all students (just toast and hot chocolate). Definitely not all students take it, but those that need it can take it without any anxiety of standing out or being different.
It can only be a good thing that our children aren’t starting the day hungry.

I'm not sure that's a bad thing - the benefit to the exchequer of more people who want to work being able to work/being able to take on higher-paid work/working more hours will at least offset if not negate the cost.

For London FSM, I've calculated the annual cost and donated it direct to the school as, like you, we could afford to pay for it.

I'm with you. I think it's absurd. I'm quite happy that parents with a low income receive Free school lunches but providing them for all is unnecessary. Likewise with breakfast provision.

Equally, I find it absurd that pensioners with a huge net worth receive a winter fuel payment.

I just knew that any movement to free school meals - whether breakfasts or lunches - would lead to bleating about 'parental responsibility' and 'resources going to the well-off'.

Why not go further. Why don't parents teach their own children to read, write, and do arithmetic until they're ready for secondary school. Why not send them home at lunchtime for health lunches rather than feeding them onsite. WHY should well-off children get anything at all from the public purse - it's disrupting market logic!!! Why should the food processing industry miss out on a few quid from breakfast cereals/yoghurt in squeezy tubes/cheesy snacks?

Why should children learn to eat healthy breakfasts together - as a community - and then do a bit of exercise before school, so that they're calm, well-fed and ready to learn at 8.45?

And why should there be any extension of educational and childcare infrastructure which might support women in particular staying in the labour market. When they're dropping out in droves because they can't afford an additional £60-£70 a week for breakfast clubs for their two children?

You're just not understanding anything I'm saying just to justify your point. WHO SAID IM JUDGING ANYONE.IN A BAD SITUATION.. there are.ppl who know full well what they are.doing and with all due respect we got brains where possible use them and don't bring kids into the world you can't afford..

The local secondary school starts 8:45 and secondary finishes at 15:05. I'm not sure but if they finished later perhaps could get another lesson in or maybe longer breaks/lunch hour

My secondary back in late 60's we had to be there for 8:20 and finished at 15:30. We had reasonable breaks/lunch hour

Ah yeh, but it sounds like your child has a whole box of food, provided by you, to eat as and when she pleases.

I’m a primary teacher, and when I talk about it being important to feed children before, I’m talking about the wee lad that likely hasn’t eaten since his free lunch at school the day before. If I can find him for a chat, shovel a bit of toast, an apple and a glass of milk into him (and find him a clean jumper if he needs it) before I do the register, he usually has a much better day.

Investing in childrens welfare only ever has a net benefit for individuals, families and the economy. Why would you not?

You’ve completely missed the point. It isn’t about the food, it’s about supporting parents to work.

Breakfast clubs are there to allow working parents to work. This helps the economy by enabling more parents to work or work more standard hours, and therefore puts money back into the economy through tax.
We pay for both breakfast and afterschool clubs, allowing us both to be high earners and therefore pay more tax. But it’s very expensive and we spend a fortune on childcare, but it allows us to work more and the effect of this is, we are contributing more to the economy.
This measure will help lots of people who really struggle to pay for childcare before school and thereby allow them to work and contribute more to the economy!

Even for those of us who can afford it, I have contemplated many times reducing my hours to save money. This measure will help avoid people cutting down work because childcare is so expensive.

Supporting families to work can only be a good thing. Families are very important for the economy, and they should be supported to raise children and still work, esp as we have an aging population with increasing care needs and spiralling care costs.

It is but for some this isn’t something they can do for a multitude of reasons.

If this helps what’s the big deal?

Starting times of breakfast clubs will vary from school to school - some will start at 7.30 and others at 8.00. The children aren't expected to be at the breakfast club at the very start and can drop in as they are on their way to class rooms.

There really isn’t available breakfast clubs for all children. We had to choose a school that provided wrap around care as 4/5 they could attend didn’t have breakfast club at all.

Not a free cafe, not lazy parenting.

It's a good thing. Family circumstances can change quickly. If schools are on board and it can be partly or wholly funded by not wasting money on admin staff to constantly do qualifying checks to see who's entitled to get it free, what's the issue? Better to spend it on a slice of toast and a piece of fruit for a child, any child.

As someone said, the stigma for older children living in poverty is removed, and they can go in early with their friends and all have breakfast.

This has been a thing in Wales for years and years. Apparently the cost of providing a bit of toast or some cereal to a child is less than the cost of assessing whether they would be entitled under any sort of rule so they just give it to all

This is much the same as PIP assessments cost more than actually just allowing everyone that applies with a doctors note and receive the benefit on the say so of a medical doctor.

Poor people not being allowed to have children is social engineering. A Capitalist system relies on a portion of society living in poverty so are you saying those people should never be allowed to start a family? Policies of lowering taxes and deregulating business has led to a decline in public services. The gap between rich and poor is widening significantly. So more people may find themselves in your category of 'shouldn't have children'

What an absolutely lovely person you are. Teachers like you are amazing people.

There is a lot of evidence that means-testing is actually wasting too much money on admin and much easier to have certain benefits done as universal.

not sure why this upsets you so much 🤷‍♀️

As someone who was in this situation as a child, your post made me cry. What a wonderful person you are! It’s a shame more people don’t feel the same. So many of us would have been so much better off for having a teacher like you x

If it's so impossible, how come people are quoting instances upthread where schools do this on a city-wide basis successfully?

But in general, it’s parents’ responsibility to feed their primary own kids and get them to school on time

Of course it is the parents responsibility - but that doesn't always happen. So instead of punishing the child because they were born into a chaotic or poverty riddled family, the government are suggesting levelling up at this stage with a cheap and easy solution - offer free breakfast to every primary school child.

Why would you want to punish a child for having unreliable parents?