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?

You are probs older than me I had free meals and just used my fingerprint like other people who's parents paid. Now my kids also get free meals and it's all ordered online same as people who pay.
Its been decades since kids got bullied for free meals there's just no way for other kids to know.

You must be a lot younger than me. We had to hand an envelope of money into the school every Monday to pay for the school lunches

I’m only in my thirties so not completely ancient, our nine year old was educated in the UK until recently, he could work out who was FSM once they hit KS2 and asked us why the school pays for some lunches. When I helped on a trip again it was obvious to everyone as the FSM kids had a school packed lunch, rather than one in lunch box.

This. I retired from teaching after 30 years. One morning on the playground I overheard an older brother tell his sibling to “drink lots of water–it’ll fill you up.”

Please let this be a joke thread...

Sorry but I had to check the children in poverty statistic. PP stated that 30% of children are living in poverty. That seems to me unlikely. I am currently doing cover work in schools in a city with traditionally endemic levels of poverty. I am in and out of lots of schools. Kids are almost always clean and well presented, usually mucking around rather than working but clearly in high spirits and with lots of energy. I checked the statistic online and it comes from the percentage of children living in household with income below 60% of the national median. I don't think this will give people a very good idea of whether children are well fed or not. Sorry, I'm just not seeing starving kids when I'm out and about. Quite the opposite. And growing up I did see malnourishment in my own school. Kids were weedy and shorter than those from other schools (a former teacher told me this when I went back to teach in the same school as an adult).

Not a joke, just an elitist arse thread.

I agree

And I'm against the mother being replaced by institution and also against children spending even longer in school. As per usual, the entirety of the childs psycho-social wellbeing is being overlooked in favour of booting women into what for many ends up being little more than wage slavery. Children having breakfast in school is grim in my opinion, it isn't the same as lunch.

I remember lots of nice morning pre-school breakfast conversations with my children. Sure sometimes we had the crazy manic rush, but they started their day with a meal at home.

You can buy a big bag of oats relatively inexpensively in most supermarkets that will provide many breakfasts. Left overs from dinner can also be utilised. It's unfortunate that eggs have become so expensive.

I think the funding could be better spent providing more quality school trips, which varies widely among schools.

Actually 30 minutes makes a lot of difference, it means you can start work at 9am (which is the standard 'office' time).

I live in Scotland so a fair few things are free because the cost of means testing would outweigh the revenue gained. Breakfast club would be one of them. My kids school has free breakfast club which we use to make me working a lot easier logistically.

Probably a good example as the catchment is small and predominantly council estate. Most people are local for several generations so there are no 'commercial' wrap around providers, just ad hoc (free) after school clubs for various sports some times. The local ASCs pick up from other primaries but not this one. Having breakfast club every day means one end of the day is covered so a parent working earlies could pick and a parent starting at 9 could drop off. Thus facilitating work for those that want it.

It's also possible that having a bigger target arrival time helps as if you're late for breakfast club you're not "late and in trouble" but being early for school means waiting in the weather/hanging around with the usual arrive between 8.45 and 8.50 window... So easier for parents to get stressier kids into school.

Im 52 this year. And dont have children so learning how much things have changed in schools

Fait enough I'm in my twenties. Its been almost a decade since I left school and the whole time I was at secondary school I used my fingerprint to get lunch same as the other children whos parents paid.
Now I order my kids lunch online there's no way any of the other kids know mine gets free school meals. Never on a school trip have my kids been given a school packed lunch though maybe only certain schools do that?

I just don't see how there can be bullying or stigma over it these past twenty years

Not everyone wants to be unemployed, and there are some who feel being unemployed sets a poor example to children.

Agreed! I don’t even have kids but I don’t mind pay higher tax to safeguard children’s well-being in this way. Not all kids have parents that even get up to get their kids up on time and out to school - never mind prepare breakfast for them! The fact the government are doing this must show a need for it. Can’t believe the suspicious mentality of some of the comments. Don’t assume just because you’re able to supply ‘cheap’ food like bananans/breakfast bars that every parent does.

The smug solipsism of this post is breathtaking

That’s in the plans from what I’ve seen

@ARingtoit have you actually read the thread? No one is saying they don’t want the money to go to help children who need it, just that the way this programme is being implemented does not seem to be the most effective use of (very limited) funding.

I would feel far worse about our reliance on late club if DC were doing homework. Homework isn't really beneficial for most primary aged children - play is. I love that they use the time drawing their own imaginary things, playing with friends etc.

I’m the safeguarding and pastoral lead in an inner city school - there is absolutely poverty, including food poverty in our cities.

You might not “see” it as a classroom cover teacher. That doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

Poverty brings with it a host of other social issues, including parental MH struggles; increased risk of trauma; increased risk of DV; increased risk of generational school avoidance; poor access to things like cheaper energy all of which can lead to more chaotic home situations. The mum who gave Coke and crisps? Perhaps some of the things I’ve listed apply.

What we really need is Surestart back, but in the meantime, free breakfast clubs provide not just food, but a daily check in with some of our most vulnerable children.

Some feel that.

Some feel differently.

Only one is being given the option. Previous benefit policies used to acknowledge the role of the already overly burdened parent and the psychosocial needs of the children. The phenomenon of 'latch key children' was seen as undesirable and unhealthy.

Current policy is predominantly capitalist and materialist derived, where the child is mostly perceived as a deterrent to work to be gotten out of the way, and the mother is seen as no more preferrable than any other carer or caring facility.

For some children this is a perhaps non-conducive cycle. They get up and eat breakfast at school, they have lunch at school, then they have after school club, or go home to an empty house where they see their parent for a tiny amount of hours in the day. Now if you're MC, you can ameliorate that to a degree by incorporating lots of quality experiences and you may have higher skills that allow for more workplace flexibility. But if you're working class, you may be already more stressed, have less workplace flexibility and cannot compensate as well. This can result in problems in children overly connected to school friends and not the home, who get into trouble, or whom are simply not receiving enough parental engagement. But really it can affect all children.

There has long been a debate and research that reducing school hours and varying start times (for teens for example) would benefit children immensely and boost their engagement with learning. All this research has been thrust aside and we're going the other way.

This thread is a proper mumsnet classic already. Surely ensuring ALL children can start the day with breakfast is not controversial....
For the posters talking about nutritious bags of cheap oats and quality time at breakfast - that is true and a nice idea on one level. The trouble is not every family home is like that. Many children live in households where myriad factors may converge to rule out porridge and a sit down with a parent who has the time and other resources to chat in the morning.

As a society we devalue both families and children as we don't prioritise the basics like good food for all children in school. They do in other European countries. Those children are better fed, can enjoy meal times with their peers and can learn better. The government rolling this out is good, constant lack of funding for all childcare and education is short sighted and shows a lack of insight into how important this area is.

@GreenApplesRedApplesYellowApples yes, exactly. Families need to be properly supported to provide for their children, especially very young children. Sitting for more hours in overcrowded, underfunded schools with limited adult attention or input is not going to solve this problem. Struggling families need to be supported to look after their children at home. Shipping children out of the homes and away from their parents for ever increasing hours because parents don’t have the resources to look after them properly is not a solution to this problem.

My partner works in a primary school and he said all the staff are panicking because they don't have the cover to do it. My personal opinion is that if u can't afford to send your kid to school having had breakfast then you shouldn't of had them!

Life can change a lot in 5 years, no one is immune from hard times.

How does your opinion help the children who are already here?

Yes, I have. Thank you for your curiousity.