To think that funding free breakfast clubs is wrong-headed?

[WaahWaahWinston]

Government is to fund free breakfast clubs for all primary school children. This doesn't strike me as the best use of money for schools; I imagine there are better things to spend money on that would be of greater educational benefit to children.

It may help a tiny proportion of families but breakfast is probably the easiest and cheapest meal for families to provide to children. (I doubt breakfast clubs will be providing full English or other cooked breakfasts of the sort that one could argue families are hard-pushed to provide.)

So I don't see the compelling need. Why spend money on this of all things, when there must be other improvements that could be funded which would improve education specifically?

Children who receive FSM do get vouchers in the holidays, as well as HAF camp access, a lot of schools also provide uniform vouchers to PP pupils.

Government is to fund free breakfast clubs for all primary school children. This doesn't strike me as the best use of money for schools; I imagine there are better things to spend money on that would be of greater educational benefit to children

Our school has a breakfast club, its free depending on circumstances. Breakfast is an array of cereal and fruit. Every morning several members of staff stand at the entrances with warm bagels in a box for all the children at the school and I always see them offering them to younger siblings who don't attend school yet.

I know several children who benefit from it. Some of these kids don't get breakfast at all. Some of them get 20p noodles for their tea every night.

Depending on your area, some children really do live in poverty,it's awful. My DC are 10 and 8 and are unusual for not having fillings, not having teeth pulled ect.

Our school has a washing machine / dryer to wash some of the children's clothes and in the younger classes they get the children to brush their teeth after lunch. Every so often the whole school go home with toothbrushes/toothpaste ect.

I know so many children who would be negatively impacted if our school didn't provide breakfast ect for them ( I don't work at the school)

Wraparound care includes activities. Kids don't just eat for 1.5h.

OP, do you work within the education sector?

In today's society, often both parents need to work 9-5 to keep a roof over the children's heads. Also, there are a lot of very poor parents out there, who simply don't have the skills to parent effectively.

What needs to happen is the following:
-Fully funded before AND after school clubs so that between the hours of 8 and 5:30, the option is there for the children to be 'parented' by professionals before, during and after school.

• Surestart centres and parenting classes to return to support struggling parents.

All of this requires funding. If the government really cared about getting women working, and preparing the next generation, loads more money needs to be invested into schools, wraparound care and parenting in between.

Unfortunately what's happening is the government is yet again putting the pressure on schools to pick up the slack in societal services without sufficient funding, forcing more teachers out of the profession, and then the children end up worse off overall.

How would that work then? One with children retaining information. Two, with the fact there is a chronic teacher shortage in England. The country has already burnt through the profession and desperation is now sinking in as they aren’t training enough to plug gaps. Who and where is this extra half an hour coming from?

Why is that wrong?

Why wouldn't they ? Poor parents still care about their children.

Those who parent badly might not but even rich people can be awful parents.

1kg bag of oats is 99p.
That's 25 breakfasts.
It's what I feed my own children most days.
If benefits aren't covering this then the system needs looking at.

You feel 40g of oats is a sufficient breakfast? Are your children six months old?

Build it and they will come.

Ok, double it or triple it, are we really in a situation where people don't have that money, considering you prioritise feeding your children before everything else?

I witness primary aged kids that don’t go to school because neither parent (living separately) can be bothered to organise themselves into a routine to achieve it. No proper meals organised. Just a takeaway burger eaten whilst being ferried about in a car. Lots of kids who need this structure won’t get it anyway

If you buy a multi pack of crisps it's a few pence, same with coke. Some people haven't been brought up to understand nutrition and can't afford decent food. You'll notice that there's a lot of obesity associated with poverty.

@FrodisCapering Yes, I would second that question.

@sunflowersandtwinklylights no, I don't. But this ought not to automatically disqualify my views. We cannot all have everyone's lived experience. If only people with lived experience of something were entitled to make decisions about how other people's money is spent, I don't think we'd get very far. I have to buy food. I have to work. I have primary school aged children. I don't live on the other side of the world or on Mars. So it's not like the factors at play are completely and utterly alien to me.

If only there was somewhere that you could look up the facts of what’s being offered and to whom before you start another government bashing thread.

educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2024/11/free-school-breakfast-clubs/

@daffodilandtulip and @IDontDrinkTea are absolutely on the nose with this. It's all about getting children into school on time and mothers into work. We are a trial area for these free breakfast clubs.

One of my friends on UC who is on a job centre course has already been told by the job centre that her child needs to attend the free breakfast club at her child's school so her job search can be widened to more than school hours and failure to widen her job search will lead to sanctions. So it will be used a stick to beat people with when it's rolled out.

A loaf of bread is less.
so is a pack of porridge oats.
I’m afraid it’s nonsense to suggest that people feed their kids on crisps for breakfast because it’s saving them money.

@WaahWaahWinston
I work at a school where a sizeable group of parents would rather spend money on alcohol, drugs, nails & beauty treatments rather than their kids. Some of the teenagers hang out at the nearest exhibition centre to stay warm. Their parents would rather they did this then heat the house.

One of the teens was bought a meal by a man, nothing happened afterwards. However, the next week she was also given £20 by the same man. Can you see where this could potentially lead to? However, the girl's mum demanded that she returned regularly so she could get more money. Basically the mum was pimping her own dd out for cash.

When you're poor there are less options open to you & you make risky choices. The social services are now involved with this family as they are well known for not spending money on their children. If there was compulsory breakfast at school then these kids would be fed and be monitored more.

How miserly do you need to be to begrudge a child an extra 30 mins a day to be safe, warm, and get a piece of toast? What is wrong with some of you- why does it actually have to be about you- a covert government plan to get you off your arse and into work? Look past the end of your own damned nose.

Raw oats for breakfast, sounds lovely.

@SockFluffInTheBath If there was enough money for everything, I wouldn't have a problem with the policy. It's the choice of how to spend the available money that I objected to.

My school (secondary) provides free breakfast for all. About 40% are eligible for free school meals, but overall it's very deprived area; we also have lots of asylum seeker children with no recourse to public funds.
We see children literally running in on Monday morning, it’s their first proper meal since Friday lunchtime. It’s also a really joyful part of the school day, seeing children sitting together eating breakfast.
Hungry children aren’t able to learn. They need more support in other ways during the day. It improves attendance. It takes the pressure off other children who are less in need. Easier to teach engaged children. It’s a small part of the school budget in comparison.

What would you rather the money be spent on?

How os giving a kid a coke and pack of crisps a sign of poverty? I'd say quite a waste of money of a breakfast (apart from a very unhealthy one), a glass of milk and toast would be cheaper