Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that breakfast clubs shouldn't be free?

183 replies

Undercovamutha · 22/02/2010 13:24

I have just found our that our local school's breakfast club is free of charge. Apparently this is due to an initiative that is designed to ensure that children (especially those from low income families) eat healthily at breakfast time, and learn that breakfast is an extremely important meal.

I totally agree with this BUT my DD is not from a low income family (although we are by no means wealthy), and the reason we will need the breakfast club is due to work/school start times being difficult to manage. When I was asking the school about how the breakfast club works, they admitted that ALL the parents who send their children to the club do so for the same reason as I will be. Therefore, it is not doing what the funding is there for.

Now I DO NOT want the breakfast club to close as it is essential to me and many others, but surely it should be acknowledged why it is actually in existance - which is not to ensure low income kids eat well, but to ensure that working parents can drop their kids off at 8!

Whilst I haven't exactly got pots of money to spare, I certainly wouldn't mind at the very least paying the cost of the breakfast.

OP posts:
Morloth · 22/02/2010 13:49

I still don't get it.

I think it is the lesser of two "evils" to feed some kids who don't need it in order to get to the ones who do. Rather than exclude the kids who need the breakfast by making it so only those who don't need it can use it.

Obviously parents should be feeding their own kids, that is a bit of a no brainer. But the point is that they don't all do so (whether through lack of funds, lack of brain, lack of love).

So if your goal is to get breakfast into kids isn't it better to feed some extras than not enough?

Original poster
Undercovamutha · 22/02/2010 13:49

Swanandduck - exactly my point! And it wouldn't at all surprise me if the funding runs out (given the current economic climate) and they shut the club. Whereas they could have made it financially sustainable by charging parents who are dropping off early due to work commitments, and stretching out the funding by keeping it for those with the most need!

OP posts:
swanandduck · 22/02/2010 13:51

Mumcentreplus

There is only so much tax to go around all the various needs. Why on earth should taxpayers money be used to feed other people's children even when their parents are well able to feed them themselves, thereby taking money away from some other needy cause. Do you think taxpayers should also pay for your children's clothes and birthday presents and haircuts as well.

twotimes · 22/02/2010 13:51

So what do you propose they do. I need to use the breakfast club for my two children (next year not at the mo), but what happens, only the children whose parents are on benefits are allowed are allowed to attend? or you have to fill in some kind of income questionnaire to find out if you are broke enough to use it? Or do you separate the children when they're in the club into the haves and the have nots? What about if parents are not on benefits but their children do eat jam sandwiches for breakfast?

What do you propose the criteria is to attend these breakfast clubs?

p.s. I actually don't mind paying for breakfast clubs, I've been a childminder in the past and believe childcare is childcare, however, I just don't get seriously, what the problem is. Is it because you don't want to be labelled as having children who need to go to a breakfast club.

swanandduck · 22/02/2010 13:52

ps totally agree undercovermutha.

twotimes · 22/02/2010 13:54

undercovermutha surely then we would get some mumsnetter posting - AIBU to not want to pay to feed other people's children - isn't that their job?

diddl · 22/02/2010 13:54

Surely those who can pay should, as with lunches?

edam · 22/02/2010 13:59

Thing is, means testing - which is what you are suggesting re. the breakfast club - actually costs MORE money in complicated admin than it does just to provide the same service for everyone. It also avoids stigmatising people, putting off those who most need a service from using it. And in many areas (not this one, admittedly) encourages people from different backgrounds to mix.

Restricting spending to those you want to target feels like it should make sense, but actually it tends to be a waste of time and resources. Much more effective just to provide the service to anyone who wants to use it.

BAFE · 22/02/2010 13:59

Breakfast clubs should be for working parents or parents who need to drop their children off earlier than usual due to appointments or siblings being at other schools.

I don't think they were ever intended for feckless parents to get free food into their kids. More money for cans of stella then, I suppose.

Have some dignity and feed your own bloody kids fgs.

(I don't mean children who are entitled to free school meals, of course)

TrillianAstra · 22/02/2010 14:00

It's possible that the paperwork and hassle required to charge some parents and not others would outweigh the cost of giving every child a bowl of cereal and a glass of juice for free.

Original poster
Undercovamutha · 22/02/2010 14:01

Twotimes - you have got my position wrong. I have no problem with my children attending breakfast club due to any social stigma (tbh it had never even occurred to me!).

I have 2 problems with it:

Firstly was best summed up by by Swannanduck:
'It is taxpayers' money which is meant to be used for underprivileged, undernourished children, but is actually going to comfortably off, well fed kids because their parents need to drop them off early at schoold to get to work. That is plain wrong.'

Secondly, I am worried that when the money runs out the club will close.

And I've just thought of a thirdly - the school (funding body/LEA/government)needs to recognise that a breakfast club is often essential for working parents (whether you agree with it or not). By not acknowledging one of the true purposes of the exisitng club, they are failing to acknowledge the childcare issues that working parents have.

OP posts:
Mumcentreplus · 22/02/2010 14:01

swan but in some circumstances we do all those things already dear.

so some children get breakfast and they really dont deserve it ..big whoop it will not change the fact some of those children need that meal and some of those parents need childcare..perhaps seperate rooms for the paying and non paying

BAFE · 22/02/2010 14:02

I agree, the cost of means testing would be more than the cost of providing it to everyone.

But honestly, it's just a cynical voting ploy anyway.

GypsyMoth · 22/02/2010 14:04

children who are entitled to free school meals will be the children targeted in this initiative BAFE..

and who says breakfast clubs are just for working parents??

FioFio · 22/02/2010 14:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

twotimes · 22/02/2010 14:04

i think free school meals are entirely different to this breakfast club. Breakfast is hardly the most expensive meal of the day. It isn't much for some toast, cornflakes and milk and I think that's pretty much standard fare imo.

Original poster
Undercovamutha · 22/02/2010 14:05

But anyway my initial point was also based on the fact that the school implied to me that ALL the parents who use it are using it for childcare purposes.

Also, I don't know anything about free school meals, but couldn't they just have a charge for the club, and then tell those with free school meals that they can attend the club for free?

OP posts:
Poshpaws · 22/02/2010 14:05

Isn't this the same argument used in relation to Children's Centers - they were set up in the main so that low income parents could have access to actvities for children that would normally cost money. Yet is it the well off parents that use them (well, in the LA I work for anyway).

I can see what the op is saying. Can you not pay for it anyway if you feel this strongly about it?

amber1979 · 22/02/2010 14:06

erm.... hang on....

"Low income" does not just apply to the unemployed! There are people on minimum wage, people who are studying to better themselves to whom a bit of free child care may be a godsend.

Means testing never bloody works - there are always mistakes/people missing the threshold by a matter of £1 etc....

What a nasty, disingenerous OP.

Original poster
Undercovamutha · 22/02/2010 14:06

Fio - totally agree. I only need the club for childcare purposes - would happily feed the children before they went tbh!

OP posts:
weegiemum · 22/02/2010 14:08

Our school (in fact the whole council) has a free breakfast club in all schools.

At our school, most kids come in buses. So they get to school some time between 8.35 and 8.50 and get taken by staff into the hall, where they can get breakfast - then on out to play before school starts.

We could afford to pay if we needed to. But its nice not to have to. Our children have to leave on the bus at 8, so get up and have breakfast about 7.15. Therefore, bu 8.40 they are ready for more toast/cereal/milk/yoghurt/fruit etc. The head reckons that giving them all something when they arrive (many children have early starts) means that they all do better all morning at school.

misdee · 22/02/2010 14:09

we are low income with one parent working, and dont qualify for free school meals.

swanandduck · 22/02/2010 14:09

Yes Mumcentreplus, when children are from families that qualify for benefits they are supported by the taxpayers. But why should children from comfortably off families also be subsidised (often by taxpayers who may be earning less than the children's parents). Where do you draw the line?

twotimes · 22/02/2010 14:11

undercovermotha i actually understand your position I just don't fully agree with it. I'm a taxpayer so why shouldn't some of my money go back to my children. I think the problem and maybe you'll agree is the name and purpose of the club. Maybe they should use taxpayers money to fund wraparound childcare although I am aware of tax credits this would be an easier way to do it may be.

Original poster
Undercovamutha · 22/02/2010 14:12

Amber - apologies for any offence. Didn't mean anything against low income families - in fact just the opposite. Was trying to get across that I felt bad about benefitting from funding that I didn't need. Should have put a disclaimer in my initial OP stating that I had no problem with those in genuine need benefitting.

OP posts: