Free school lunches for infants - what do you think?

[KateSMumsnet]

Starting this month, in accordance with plans announced last year, all pupils in English primary schools up to the end of Year 2 will be eligible to receive free school meals.

How do you feel about the changes? Is it money well-spent, or could the funds be put to better, more targeted use? Has your school had to make any changes such as building new rooms or using classrooms? Are you glad to have lunches taken care of, or would you prefer to make your child's lunch? Have you seen the new menus, and are you happy with them? Will any of you be opting out?

We'd love to hear what you think - do let us know below. And keep your eyes peeled for a guest post on the nutritional value of school meals, coming later this week.

p.s For those of you still making a pack-up every morning, try out this recipe for the perfect lunch box bars (you can still make them even if your DC are at Uni, we won't tell)

I don't mean to single you out mrz, diets are generally not great for some kids. But actually they are good for lots. Its the assumption that teachers know best that galls. You don't. You see a %. And those of us that see a larger % can't imagine another way. And if this is the real issue, for those children, crappy white carbs is continuing their nutritional deficit. Put £ where mouth is, up the protein and veges properly.

Of course they do, the head can say I'm not serving this crap instead of toeing the party line. You can outsource catering and be innovative if you really care.

I feel the government gives with one hand (free school lunches) and takes away with the other (loss of child benefit). I think I would have preferred they put the money into something more targeted that could have greater benefit, rather than introducing something that has often been quite difficult to administer (e.g. schools not having kitchens). It also takes choice away from parents - OK they don't have to have the lunch (I presume) but then they are paying for something they're not using.

DS doesn't start nursery until next year, so I can't comment on the benefits of it in that sense, and I don't know how healthy the meals served are. At the moment I doubt he would eat anything other than a cheese sandwich.

What about parents who can't afford to have a school lunch for both children? An older child could be at school watching his or her younger sibling have a free lunch that they can't have.

^^Reception until next year.

I detest the whole idea. A complete indulgence for Nick Clegg which has not been properly thought through.

I really resent the fact this "universal" aspect, where people who have an interest in what their DCs consume are being engouraged to let them eat crap because other parents don't seem to care. Is the government going to provide all kids with designer trainers because not everybody can afford them? Parents should be responsible for what their children eat surely to. God. There was a thread on this before which I remember getting very heated but completely agreed with many on there who intended to continue with packed lunches.

Those lucky enough to be served by schools serving organic and nutritious meals are clearly going to be in the minority, leaving the rest of the country's kids to be fed processed shite which has travelled miles and handled by umpteen people. I just cannot see the value in this at all.

If there is money available I would far rather see it spent in more logical and effective methods regarding how we eat. Subsidising foodbanks for those struggling to achieve a balanced and nutritious diet would be a great start.

I hope it is of benefit to some but I have doubts that those benefits will justify the cost of implementation. I would rather children were taught how to cook at school from a very early age so they could learn how to feed themselves easily, cheaply and healthily. This is impossible at DC's (primary) school as there are no kitchen or cooking facilities the kids can use.
Might be my sour grapes though as DD has always refused to try school dinners and has refused this term too and there is no swaying her!

Think it's fab. My dd has school meals any way (just started year 1) and they seem the same. I think we have good provision where we live but it is the same as other local schools. They have one company but cook it at the schools.

But it isn't Nick Cleggs idea but the brainchild of the previous government which was scrapped by Michael Gove when he became minister for education.

The LEA controls the contracts for school meals Pique the school has no say in the menu

I also totally totally don't believe any child will become more likely to become obese because they are having school dinners

My dd has certainly lost weight since I took her off school dinners. She hated the mains so mainly ate the carbs (rice, pasta) and then the huge pudding (cake, giant biscuit) never the fruit.

Now, of course, if I kept her on minimal food without biscuits, cake etc at home, this might just have been ok, but it proved very difficult to do this- they go in and out of each other's houses having biscuits/cake, or granny would bring a treat, there was something most days and it got to the stage where I was leaping on her shouting 'don't eat that' when she went for yet more stodgy carb food such as cake at parties/events/if people called over.

I'd rather she ate a wholemeal bread sandwich, some veg, a piece of fruit as she does now, so we can relax slightly at home, instead of having to police their diets, knowing they've eaten their entire day's sugar allowance already by midday.

Has anyone read the findings from the pilot study?

Snap napoleon

Well not so much weight loss but certainly dd lost the bloating.

I felt really bad that I didn't take her off them sooner , she became very pale and bloated and because she was so full it was impossible to cram in the fruit and veg that she lacked because she would be touch the over cooked veg served at school. She hasn't got a large appetite and two main meals is too much fir her. She dies much better on packed lunches and has much more energy. Her eczema and asthma have improved greatly since she's come of them. Obviously there are other factors that contribute to that it's not just dietary but it all helps. I won't be putting dd on them after seeing how dd ended up

This is a daft idea. Poorly thought out, other than to gather votes, and deflecting money from where it is needed more.

We are now in a ridiculous situation where our infant school asks for a weekly contribution for snacks, yet school meals are free!

We are lucky in that the food is planned, purchased and prepared on site. The meals are pretty good and my dc like them. I'm sure the uptake will be high, but I've no idea how this will affect the school.

My dc are in Juniors now so not eligible. I would have opted in because it would have saved me money, but would I have felt guilty.

Similar experience to above posters re: carby bloating in an older child. The food did ds no good at all.

I agree that some packed lunches are also unhealthy, & again usually because they are too reliant on carbs& ssugar without enough in the way of fruit & veg. So why not provide a 'free' salad & fruit bar, which both children having a school dinner & those bringing a pack up could access?

This pisses me off. My its started school in 2002 and my last left infants last year, so I have missed out completely.

I have mrz. That's why, despite not particularly liking what is served for lunch, and not being in need of the subsidy, I'm in favour of the scheme. Though I think it needs to be evaluated when rolled out nationally to ensure it provides teh expected benefits.

Sorry, I haven't read the whole thread, but this policy makes me so mad!!

There is no need whatsoever for the government to fund free school meals for all families. The vast majority of families at our school are affluent and can afford their own lunches. It would have been so much better to extend the right to free school meals for children of all ages for families on lower incomes who don't currently qualify. An 8yo from a family just above the threshold for FSM at present probably needs that lunch far more than the 5yo child of wealthy parents.

As it is, our school has spent around £40k on preparing for the introduction of this stupid policy - money that could have been much better spent elsewhere. They have also been forced to cut down lunch breaks for the older children as they can't now afford the staff to supervise them as well as the extra staff needed to staff the KS1 lunches, so the older children no longer have much time to run around and play.

I think it's silly giving free school meals to families who can afford to pay for them. The money would have been better directed towards improving school provided food and healthy eating at secondary schools (this seems to be completely neglected imo).

whatwillhappennext under the new curriculum children have to be taught to cook from an early age so your DCs school will have to get themselves sorted ... one new thing that's definitely positive at least!

I'm quite thankful for it actually. Lunch boxes are the bane of my life, and we get to choose from the menu plan what our kids will get to eat.

I can afford to feed my children but it will be lovely to have a couple of years without having to factor in lunch boxes. Thanks government!

Waste of money.

Anyone who's interested in how this wasteful, showboating and deeply impractical policy got rushed through (thanks, Cleggy) might enjoy Dominic Cummings' insider view of the story. In his view (and mine) it's a perfect example of the short-termist, disjointed and chaotic approach to government that we get when policies are designed with soundbites rather than sensible long-term strategies in mind.

A poster upthread wondered whether the 'the Tories allowed it through' because it did away with the FSM measure for the pupil premium which in turn would allow those evil poshos to find new ways of screwing the poor. As though there is actually the capacity and organisation for that level of calculation in the government! Sadly, no, it's just a mess.

IHMO somebody's going to put a lot of money into their pockets. Most of the kids would not eat the crap the school usually provide unless they forced (like having no breakfast) so parents who could afford will be back to the packed lunch (I won't even start it, I know - mine won't eat most of it) but the funds are already "given". So the big question - where does it go. Not to the parents. And school won't get it definitely...

Terrible waste of money. My DC's school is cutting down on TAs in order to be able to afford it and to provide a decent quality meal for all the children - the money allocated to them is not enough to do it without making cuts elsewhere in the school budget.

This is a school which has a very low % of children on FSM previously, and most of the parents can well afford to feed their children, and it is outrageous that teaching staff are being cut in order to fund it.

My DC are unlikely to eat much, if any of it, and I expect we will have to go back to packed lunches so I can ensure they are eating a proper healthy lunch, as they will most likely pick at the main meal and only eat the pudding.

Totally ridiculous.

Makes no sense - remove 'high earners'' child benefit (but that's another thread!) and then provide everyone's infant children, regardless of 'wealth' free meals