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

the packed lunches I make are healthier than the school dinners provided. and balanced to their individual dietry needs. they get a wider range of fruit and vegetables. i would like the option to choose whether to send ds with packed lunches or not. it is vital that he gets the right amount of food to keep him even tempered during the afternoon.

however, I have also seen the contents of lunch boxes in the past.... so they are healthier for some.

Leafmould [great name!] I think they probably aim long term to roll it out to the whole of primary but this was a fiscal compromise to get things moving. I think the important thing is that children in peer groups learn the eating thing together.

There is no suggestion that you won't be able to choose to use packed lunches!

it's good to know that the women of England are making a competitive sport of nutritionally balanced packed lunches and proving that they're better than the dinners option. Yes I try to do this myself but there are only so many hours in the day, income to earn, other kids, a life to lead, issues to sort etc...

Good idea. For some children this will be the only decent meal they get

Any of you school dinner refusers going to donate me your free school meals?

Good for familes that go just above the means test for FSM / income fluctuates below / above FSM threshold but apart from that I think it is an expensive pre-election bribe. Also means parents and children will get used to receiving lunch for no extra cost (I won't say free because most people are paying through their taxes) /hassle (no remembering to buy all the ingredients for packed lunch & make it) and when they hit year 3 the parents will have to pay, which they won't be used to, and / or the children may have to give up school lunch.

I am, however, very pleased about extending means tested FSMs to sixth formers from low income homes in all settings (sixth form colleges and FE as well as school sixth forms) - that should really help poor families & support social mobility.

It does annoy me though that whilst I pay significantly more for my weekly shop than average to account for ds2's allergies (whilst ensuring meals are nutritionally balanced), the free school meals will be unmanageable for him and so I can subsidise the free school meals of others through my taxes, whilst still having to provide packed lunches for ds2 from my own purse.

Why not just increase child benefit? (Or even better, make that non-means tested again). Then we can decide how to spend the money ourselves..... Oh no, I forget, we are all too stupid to do that....

Well I guess one way they could pay for it is to raise revenue and make child benefit based on family income. I am still hugely aggrieved that my sister who with her husband earn tens of thousands more than our single earner sahm family does gets the full entitlement and we get nothing. It is hugely unfair.

And yes I will never forgive the Lib Dems and Torys for their continued attack on families. To me this is just another one as it excludes half the primary school population so some benefit and some don't and it is just sods law and hey ho well you still have to fund it in your taxes if you don't
Like cb it is all so arbitrary, ill thought through - fine if you are in the criteria but two fingers up to you if your not - so to a large number of families and voters alienating and totally counterproductive to what they wanted to achieve

And yes I will never forgive the Lib Dems and Torys for their continued attack on families. To me this is just another one as it excludes half the primary school population so some benefit and some don't and it is just sods law and hey ho well you still have to fund it in your taxes if you don't
Like cb it is all so arbitrary, ill thought through - fine if you are in the criteria but two fingers up to you if your not - so to a large number of families and voters alienating and totally counterproductive to what they wanted to achieve

Absolutely. Household income would be fairer. Or, if they can afford non-means tested FSM, they can afford to go back to non-means tested cb too.

See im so pissed off I posted twice woops

I haven't read the whole thread but I think this is a knee jerk responce to what happened to Daniel Pelka. Sadly this is not the only answer to help children in such circumstances.

It seems odd to me that child benefit was removed and they are providing free meals to all infant school children. They don't suddenly stop being hungry at 7.

Personally I think all children should revive free meals in school.

long story, the healthiest meals i provide for school are the quickest to prepare....I scoop bit of tea out of the pan the night before. i cook with wholemeal pasta, which beats their white pasta option and there is a few different veg thrown in. (fresh and or frozen) which gives more variety than the 3 or so provided in school

oh and given there are two deep fried options a week and processed meat a couple of times a week it is not that difficult to get a healthier packed lunch! whack in couple of slices of cucumber and couple of tomatoes and you have their equivalent of salad. add bit of onion, spring onion, sugar snap peas, carrot, beetroot, pepper according to what you child eats, and again you beat the school in variety. (not that dd eats that) school lunches used to 2 slices of apple and 2 of orange as the fruit option. not difficult to beat that then either.

it takes no more effort to use wholemeal bread/wraps than white. or wash an apple or pear instead of putting in a pack of crisps.

the point is that the nutritional standard of the least healthy options on the menu (the ones ds would choose) are not that high, even if higher than a pack of crisps, a fruit shoot, sausage roll and chocolate bar.

Feelthis sooooo agree with you.

You're exactly the same as us.

Better of sister gets higher wages,CB,double TA threshold,her 1 day a week nanny paid for,free school dinners- we get nothing on a lower income.

She's a lovely sister who thinks it as unfair as me but it still hacks me off.

If you moan the alright Jacks say some you win,some you lose.Well I'm fed up with losing thanks.

Tell you what it makes you listen to the other people voicing unfairness in other ways though.I have a whole new opinion on bedroom tax now.I had no idea previously.

for the good of the country i didn't mind giving up my child benefit. BUT i do object if the money is going to be squandered....rich people should provide their own children's food.

The priority at school should be to teach our children and enable them to pass exams so they are prepared for the world of work. There is still a lot of work needed to fix this without looking at irrelevant gimicks. But this is the sort of thing i would expect from the Lib Dems. when i read about it in the paper i had to check it wasn't April 1.

So agree with you dreamingofsun. It feels like sucha gimmick to me. So the same people who have given up their child benefit can now receive free school meals for their children? It doesn't make sense to me at all!

The families who receive free school meals at the moment do so due to financial issues. I think it would be far better to raise the level of income (and not just being on benefits) to low income earning families. It would be far better distributed.

I volunteer at my DD's school and see the fruit left after the little ones can't possibly eat all that is sent. It's then shared out or would be wasted. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

My DD loved her milk and her fruit but I remember throwing away my free milk every day because I couldn't stand the taste.

I do agree with dreamingofsun that schools are about education and preparing children for the world of work and society. I would have been far happier with the money spent on more resources or extra classroom assistants.

Also, how will they organise the educational finances if everyone in the infants is on free school meals? How will they determine which schools will require more resources for children not yet identified or diagnosed with SEN? It took 2 years for my DD to receive her full statement and at 7 she was finally diagnosed after 2 and a half years since referral. If the extra resources went on statements it could be years before resources appear.

More likely to save money for the Government!

Personally I am really happy with the idea as it will save us a fortune, however I have huge concerns..

How they going to ensure quality and consistency with 'mass catering' across such a huge area.
Many schools don't have kitchens anymore and one school near us tried getting it brought in but found it unmanageable (poor excuse if you ask me though)
As others have said why introduce this non-means tested benefit when they have taken away Child Benefit. I would rather they expanded the people who can get free school meals based on income
My DS used to eat with his fork in his left hand until he went to school and now has to be nagged not to shovel his food using his right hand like his peers do at school.
How are they going to staff these 'idyllic' social lunch times ensuring good manners when budgets are already tight.
How are they going to decided who gets 'pupil premium' when all infants are getting free school meals.

If schools and catering companies are given the adequate funding and monitoring to ensure high quality, good choices, good supervision, etc then this is a great idea but I personally think it is a gimmick that is meant to be a 'vote winner' but as with so many policies they have just taken CP with one hand and given free school meals with the other.

As the parent of a Reception child, I was invited into school on Monday to have a hot lunch with my son to sample the "fantastic food" offered by the local company who deliver hot meals to over 100 schools in the area. Well, if the standard of that food was anything to go by, then my son will be going very hungry if all he is to have is a hot meal, rather than a packed lunch (I am sure I read that packed lunches would not be banned but other articles seem to imply they will). The portion size was tiny, same portion dished up to all ages (my daughter is in Yr 3 so not an infant but would never survive the afternoon on the tiny amount dished up). The vegetables were virtually raw - cauliflower, carrots, cabbage and huge cubes of swede. I like my veg with a bit of crunch, but it was a joke. The cabbage was hard white cabbage and all the veiny bits I would normally compost. And swede is not a vegetable to serve half cooked. Not a single child ate their vegetables. During the main course we were served with half slices of bread, so the kids all filled up on that, which defeats the point of a healthy and filling hot lunch. Pudding was undercooked banana and chocolate bread with chocolate custard and I felt sick all afternoon after eating it. I am Chair of Govs at the school and have heard grumblings from parents for a while about the quality of the meals (under cooked baked potatoes were delivered a while ago, and the only food available to offer the kids was a load of cereal from the breakfast club store, and pasta sauce was once delivered, but no pasta so the staff went to the village shop to buy bread and cheese). My heart sank when I read that free meals were to be provided to all infants, as my son will be very hungry. The companies who provide hot school meals will be rubbing their hands all the way to the bank while still providing crap food. We have a meeting with the company next week to kick some serious butt.

Sounds like our school- which has some reward for it's food.

They don't make kids choose veg,let alone eat it and my dc filled up on bread.The salad option goes untouched and in the bin(now at tax payers expense I guess) along with the bins groaning with free fruit.

I put the veg my kids like in their packed lunch which I make them eat on their return home if it hasn't been finished.

Another one who's dd filled up on bread.

I can't begin to tell you how ill she started getting after being on school meals. Her asthma flared up her eczema flared up, she was constantly bloated from all the carbs and she looked like a heroine addict all white with grey eyes. Needless to say I stopped paying and now my dd actually looks healthy.

I think it's great.

My child has just started school and the school lunches look really good and healthy. It's a shame if some schools don't have the same standards as they really should. Perhaps government should address this before bringing in the free meals. I do sometimes worry that the companies are making too much profit out of the meals.

Anything that encourages more parents to opt for school lunches rather than a packed lunch is a good move. It causes a real division when some children are eating a packed lunch rather than the school lunch and then you have children coming home saying they don't want school lunches to be like their friends.

There's a private school nearby that DD's friend for nursery goes to where school lunches are obligatory and I'd be all for that.

I agree it would be great if they extended it to the juniors though. Must be annoying if your children will just miss out.

I am not a strict parent generally but I really don't hold with fussy eating - children have got to be encouraged to eat everything and the best way to do that is to keep putting it in front of them. If your child is fussy, then you might find they eat things at school when their friends are having it that they wouldn't at home.

A cooked lunch that contains all the necessary food groups is bound to be better than anything one could come up with for a lunch box, and then you know they've had a hot meal at least once in the day, taking the pressure off dinner times when they might be tired.

The only good reason I've heard for not opting for school lunches is that they are expensive (£2.15 at DD's school, which I admit must be a lot for some) so I thing this is really positive.

As my children are no longer in primary school, we are not going to benefit from this at all. I would much rather have my child benefit back. My children have always preferred packed lunches anyway. I think there are much better things to spend our taxes on.

Something doesn't add up here though does it?

The idea that it would not be cost efficient to means test the FSM does not really stack up when you see that they have a means tested child Benefit policy now in place. Why not simply use the same strategy for FSM? If you get CB then you get FSM.

I can afford to pay and am very, very happy to do so if I thought those who struggled would be getting the help they needed.

Also, where has this idea come from that a packed lunch is unhealthy and somehow the temperature of a meal influences how good it is for you?!

The school dinners at the DSs school are vile. Only 1 choice and the DSs are not terribly fussy but there are some things they don't enjoy. If they take a packed lunch on the days when I know they simply won't eat the meal does that mean the food is wasted? I don't like that idea.

On a random note, I am NOT liking the new IOS on my ipad.