Free school meals for all infant children

[Scarletbanner]

What do you think? I think it's a great idea.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24132416

not sure why public sector workers have to put up with job losses and pay freezes for fucking years whilst we give free school dinners to the children of the rich

i am seriously wondering
what
the
actual
fuck

In two minds. I like having an element of control over what my twins eat and they do enjoy their packed lunch. Plus it costs a lot less than £80 a month. So, if they were free then why not? Would depend on menu though as they have halal diet, though this shouldn't be a problem in their school. Carb heavy woud just mean a lot more exercise so not a bad thing either. Would not make me vote for them though.

We are borderline too manitz and I just gave it up. I would rather have that back thanks, considering we are a single income household (we have a severely disabled child)

I would rather they would spend the money on more one to one teachers and what about the Juniors. Why should parents with infants benefit, but not those with juniors.

Sorry, but I do believe only low income families should be allowed school dinners. I also think the quality of the school dinners will suffer if they are paid for by the government because they will continuously apply pressure to drive the costs down.

I suspect this is a reaction to poor Daniel's passing and trying to win votes for next election.

plus I only have one young child... and he goes to lower school, not infants

I am getting more and more wound up by this.

I have found out today that our local GP surgery is now unable to do (large raised) mole removal - even though it is on a child, bleeds regularly, catches in a zip etc because the doctors (apparently) are now not paid to do so due to cuts in NHS. She (the doc) said we can go private and it will "only" cost about £250!

But we as a country can afford to pay for FSMs for the rich and famous (as long as they attend state school).

FFS.

I see it as a gimmick too.

We have been lectured, ever since the crash, that "there is no more money", hence, CB had to cut, tax credits lowered, a bedroom tax introduced and the imminent introduction of Universal Credit. Most of us have begrudgingly accepted these cuts because, financially, Britain is in the shit but low and behold, we have £600million so even rich people's children can get a free lunch.

What a crock of shit.

frogwatcher mole removal - demand a dermatologist consultation. GP is incorrect if its at risk of infection.

Who on the earth in the gov advisors, thinks that the public will be swayed for a vote on either a married person allowance of £3 week or FSM for all little ones.

As crackfox says, we have had it drummed into us for years that we are in dire straits as a country financially. It makes the current gov look very foolish if they suddenly find millions to once again give non means tested 'benefits'. Most people will surely think that this means they have been fooling us about the need for the cuts to NHS, benefits, etc.

I only found out today that whilst kids HAVE to stay on at school (by law brought in by Cameron I think) (assuming no apprenticeship) for an extra two/three years, they do not get free bus travel like they do for high school. In our rural area this means that whilst the kids have a legal duty to attend the school or sixth form, both are 10 - 20 miles away. But parents HAVE to pay bus fares regardless of income. I think this is between £300 and £400 a year.

But thats ok because you can get a FSM if you have a young child regardless of income.

Breathe Breathe.

Oh god I get that all the time frogwatcher - though not regarding moles. I get 'we encourage you to use your DLA to pay for x/y/z'
My daughters DLA barely covers bedding and continence products (and yes, NHS do provide 'some' continence products but they do not supply enough and the ones they supply are rubbish, leak and cause more problems, so i don't use them oh wasn't that one of Dave's voting policies as well? i wonder whether he knows

I wasted £12 a week for 3 weeks trying to get DD to eat the school dinners. From reports she either ate plain pasta or a jacket potato or refused to eat. Now the govt are going to waste £12 a wk on my behalf. It's nice to see the Lib Dems consider this their most important priority: how about addressing the welfare reforms and the now crappy T&cs and pensions for public sector workers? It would have been better to raise the FSM threshold.

Talkin - apparently she considers that it is not an infection risk even though she has been told it bleeds regularly.

A surgery round here is bringing a charge in for 'private small surgery' at the GP practice, which apparently will be around the £150 mark for mole removal.

I expect our GP will do the same soon so will go back then - at least it is £100 cheaper than the private clinic.

frogwatcher, it's £40 a month here per child for travel (also rural area) we get it free though as we have no footpaths on our road...but I presume we will have to pay when over the age of X (16?)

I just looked on local authority site and it is a lot of money starting after the GCSE year (when they used to beable to leave).

It is so unfair (doesnt actually affect me but ...). Surely if there is money to spare then if you make a law that kids have to extend their school life and don't have an option to leave and stay at home, then you should continue to provide free transport as they get leading up to that age due to the requirement to go to school. I am intrigued as to what happens if the parent refuses to pay so child doesn't go to school aged 16-18?.

You don't give every married couple (why???) £3 or every young child FSM regardless of income.

i agree. it's a total gimmick, those who need school dinners are likely to be covered by the current system. OK some people who have a reasonable income and are not currently entitled to fsm may give their kids crisps but my daughter often chooses sandwiches when i have given her a school meal instead of packed. school dinners at all my kids schools have not been a particularly healthy choice.

owllady, i can't give cb up just because then they will have won, I resented us losing it - although it turns out we dont lose a lot. I think it was a great thing that differentiated between a person without kids on a similar income and one with extra costs (I accept that it's my choice to have kids) and I felt it was for women so that those without fair home situations had some income for them and kids. We are also now single income so was also annoyed at teh discrepancy with double/single income households. I am annoyed that we are considered together for child benefit (ie i lose cb because of his income) but singly for pension payments (ie his are taken off gross salary but mine are not) so many things are unfair about how they brought the system in. However we are not currently on the breadline and i realise that many people have more to worry or complain about in their lives so I shut up and put up. But it still irked me

Now I will be able to make one less packed lunch in the morning which means that the unit cost of my packed lunches goes up, I do not see any particular benefit for my household AND public funds will pay for it. The main reason appears to be so that someone gets a good headline which they hope will translate to votes. woopdedoo

I am happy for my taxes to go towards providing FSM for those children
who have parents on low incomes. I am NOT happy to be paying for FSM for all of the little blighters!!

However, there are so many people on this site saying their little darling
will only eat x,y, and z - well they need to start being firmer and only offer their kids balanced meals - if there is no medical reason why they can't eat other foods then some one needs to sort this out if the parents
can't (won't).

Just shows what a slimy little shit Clegg is.

Lie to us over tuition fees,take away CB whilst patronisingly telling us we're wealthy so can afford to give it up(I don't earn £600k a year like his wife)then give rich people help with childcare and free school meals whilst rubber stamping married tax allowance something he is against to get his way.

He's got the morals of an alley cat.

allmycats - but FSM won't sort the problem as I have seen first hand that the kids only eat what they like on the plate anyway. They find ways of getting rid of the rest - either somebody else eats it or they mash it up so it looks like they attempted it.

Certainly our school does not have enough staff in the canteen to sort this out - they have one walking around with gravy, custard etc and one scraping the plates. One other if you are lucky. They certainly cannot keep an eye on all the little ones - they use the bigger kids as table leaders and they are not going to enforce the 'eat your carrots' rule!!

Not happy with libraries being closed and a whole host of other cuts so he and Miriam(along with Dave and George) can have free school meals.

Retropear - you are right. I was a broad supporter of the libcons at first.

This is the nail in their coffin as far as my vote is concerned. And I would potentially benefit a little from at least one of their proposals!!

DH suggested that everytime whose dc gave diagnosed dietary requirements (like our DD) get supermarket vouchers to make up for the fsm they won't get...

Which made me wonder what happens with those dc who already get fsm but can't eat them due to allergies?

I'm interested in the pupil premium question, would absolutely need to know the answer to that.

If any changes were made to fsm as they currently are I would like them to be made available to more families - no only eligible if you get x benefits + y malarky just available to everyone with an income of less than whatever amount.

allmy that's a very ignorant post!!!

I don't call a child who just wants some seasoned food and some vegetables with a bit of bite fussy. I call them normal.

I don't agree with this. Yes I don't mind my taxes going to those less fortunate and feeing children who need a hearty meal a day because they live in low income families. I object to my taxes paying to feed other people's children when they are more than able to.

allmycats I don't think that anyone has suggested a non-medical reason why their kids' diets are limited.