To think that free breakfast at school is a bad idea due to the quality?

[Mushypeass]

Firstly, I fully agree with the principle of free breakfast for all pupils. My reservation comes from the quality of food that is often served up in UK school canteens. Obviously a poor quality breakfast is better than no breakfast at all but AIBU that it could encourage children to eat even more UPFs? For example, children who have may had a relatively healthy breakfast at home may now opt eat UPFs at school with their pals instead.

Seocondly, why is the food so poor in so many schools? How can other countries manage to provide their youth with nutritious and healthy meals but we can’t?

Learnt helplessness is what many parents have developed because society are there wiping their arseholes all the time.

Yep our school has healthy meals like this. Parents are regularly invited for tasting sessions and feedback too

For those who want to use the childcare for free but not the UPF, surely just make a packed breakfast? Suggestions to include boiled egg and baby spinach, granola, honey natural yoghurt and berries type thing. Sourdough and avocado. Go for it! If the school allow packed lunch, surely they allow packed breakfast?

Also I am in London and all kids get free school meals at present and at least 30 per cent of DCs class don’t have it, choose to have packed lunch instead.

Actually, subsidised school uniforms for the poorest seem fair enough to me, though I'm ignoring your first line as you're just being deliberately goady.

And obviously parents should be accountable, it's so blindingly obvious that that's a pretty goady statement too. But sometimes the system breaks down - sometimes parents themselves break down - and when this happens, no, a civilised society does not allow blameless children to go hungry.

You and your mate Katie have never seen real poverty, have you? I suspect if you had, you'd be a little less keen to judge those at the bottom of the pile with no real knowledge of their circumstances, and a little more angry at the governments who have allowed things to get to this state over the years.

For breakfast? What sort of foods do they have?

I know right...

Well said

Why do you agree with all children getting free breakfast - this is a parental responsibility.

I pay for my DC to go to breakfast club a few mornings a week. They provide porridge, toast, weetabix, shreddies, and shredded wheat, I don't see what's terrible about that.

Also makes sure they continue voting a certain way.

Totally agree. A huge bag of supermarket porridge oats costs around £2 and would last a while. Everybody can afford that.

The 1906 Act allowed councils to provide meals to poor children through funds raised by local taxes - not many did. The 1944 Act provided universal free school meals until 1949 when it was deemed unaffordable and only poorer children got them for free up. Of course we were still at war in 1944 so perhaps there was more feeling that the state needed to look after children whilst their fathers were away fighting.

Err Sainsbury's. Ever heard of it?

It's not necessary to buy branded things.

www.sainsburys.co.uk/gol-ui/product/sainsburys-cornflakes-500g?utm_medium=cpc&cmpid=cpc&catalogId=10241&utm_content=shopping&productId=10582&utm_campaign=11354430451&utm_custom2=759-449-0952&storeId=10151&gclid=CjwKCAjwr5_CBhBlEiwAzfwYuFa7Fm2S1WU6CNCky59SPvk-2oTtu8uXXZfAWrnFwnNwZ0_rB8rkMhoCn9AQAvD_BwE&utm_custom1=106571615210&langId=44&utm_source=Google&krypto=KWrCsbn6R%2B7%2F6lRPacPfdh30SE%2B7DQDu7znpsMF20BUyljv9gbIArENjitPHU9koij%2BUa%2FYPYjulYsFa5TLrPIyLp67IDIbu%2BWf2b8Qw0aZSEq%2BMNbklRcro6pTBDwtNjIJbLrEPoNBMiOVAiBbSbZCiMWYPUc0Am8sw%2F9iRU32YNwzct6CU36wHTB2Sp4rH3B7pzJsw%2B2geknAy2w%2Bab7oiFUgNrqXesohE%2BY224rYFMnbuJT0GEpkQF%2FZrT2wZt2jQ5KlOXFLjX5BEAJV%2FakHI2cb8v3hsIvha58RgIXgLEFLxTxdRWAHB535MmfKGj74hynSlDw9LyReY18%2FwnE1ofBeCAUqsQmiSYXv3ItMgh%2Bof49LQSsbfoo4rGA4SLDtIdEGGD%2Bs2fnPzVOHWqn3QU9VMfHJJNYCK9owtuPdgUSGzB0AvHENok1JiT0jLJABju6RL6LvEuz%2BaYfvK4j4DpYWw0pS0ncy9Xb6FdA4%3D&ddkey=https%3Agb%2Fgroceries%2Fsainsburys-cornflakes-500g

Children are in school for 190 out of 365 days of the year (and 38 of those days on average are the half day Fridays)
Lunch which is one meal in those days offered in schools is not causing the obesity problems. Perhaps educating parents on nutrition is the way forward as children are eating the majority of meals at home.

Here in Scotland yes once every 3 weeks pizza is an option one day along with an option of soup and a sandwich or a filled baked potatoe.
But Other days lunch options can include, fish fingers, mince and potatoes, chicken, stories, vegetarian bolognaise, pasta, macaroni cheese, quiche. All served with vegetables.
Along with an option to have home made soup and sandwiches. Every lunch there is a salad bar offering a variety of veg/boiled eggs/ plus fresh fruit and yogurts.

In terms of a free breakfast, it’s better than nothing as some parents are struggling financially.
The example of a breakfast offering you saw, Is it not better to have a hot drink and some bread than nothing at all ?

I never said anything about 'branded things'.

If it's a parental responsibility why are you palming it off on to breakfast club?

No lunch is three courses, so they will have say a salad or soup, some kind of meat and veg then yogurt or cheese and a piece of fruit.
We don’t do breakfast as school starts at 8:15 so not necessary for us but I doubt it’s anything fancy or incredibly nutritious to be honest but the children are getting something decent for lunch for sure.

Thee pp is taking responsibility as a parent they are PAYING for their child's breakfast.

Britain isn't a poor country, free school meals is something it can easily afford if it chose to budget differently. My country has free school meals for all, only just slightly richer per capita than the UK (actually was very surprised by that, I assumed Finland was poorer, I'm sure it always was before, but actually Finland had free school meals for all even when it was very poor, and during the terrible recession of the 90s) and can afford it. Its not just about making sure children from poor families get to eat, its about making sure every child has at least one healthy meal a day, at school where they need to eat to focus in class, and it also helps instil good eating habits as it doesn't allow for fussiness - everyone eats the same and peer pressure helps them eat it even when they don't like it.

We used to have places called, 'Sure start' they were a one stop place for new parents to get help and advice. They should not have been closed.

For me the bottom line is that there are children arriving at school hungry, if there are given food it is easier for them to learn and easier for the teachers to teach.

For me it isn't about parents being feckless, lazy, too busy, whatever children learn better when they are not hungry.

Agree that Sure Start closing was a very poor decision.

Children arriving hungry have always been given food by the school. The government doesn't acknowledge that this has always happened.

I don't disagree that hungry children for whatever reason need feeding
But I thought one of the reasons sure start centres were closed as they were not really being utilised by the people they were aimed at ,you can lead a horse to water etc
Feckless parents are unlikely to access the groups sure Start put on.

But I thought one of the reasons sure start centres were closed as they were not really being utilised by the people they were aimed at ,you can lead a horse to water etc
Feckless parents are unlikely to access the groups sure Start put on.

This is true. My mum taught in a deprived area and one was opened within her school site.

Despite every incentive/encouragement going, the families whom they most wanted to reach simply weren't interested in using it.

And in many other areas they were well used which would suggest the successful groups had something to teach those with low take up.

However the reason for the closures was nothing to do with usage or success rates - it was a policy decision under the austerity cuts.