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)

Oh and in my sons school because the meals are pre selected the kids get coloured wrist bands so that the dinner ladies know what options their parents have chosen for them.

raven Parents who prefer to send their children in with a packed lunch can still do so expecpt for in a handful of schools (I think making it mandatory is appalling BTW but it's not a part of the policy, the government isn't anticipating or budgeting for 100% take up). Yet it turns out, when there is the offer of a free meal from the school parents don't prefer to do so.

Cooking on site would be a good thing, but from what posters are saying it's having the hall space that is the issue. I totally agree that the roll oout of this policy has been very poor and the competency of the DfE is questionable in this and numerous other areas. But why on earth would it not be a priority to raise average academic performace by 2 months - which is what this policy is anticipated to achieve?

There's been no issues with the roll out at my DCs school. They use caterlink and the menu was already nice imo. I couldn't wait for DS to get free meals as a working lone parent. Shame DD age 7 isn't eligible too!

The only thing was the school want the children to either opt in or opt out. No inbetween.

Haven't rtft tbh but I don't have time to wade through all the replies but that's my feedback for mnhq.

It is an absolutely stupid idea and and incredible waste of money. Everything is arse about tit over FSM anyway, If you get WTC you dont qualify, but can have income up to about £16,000 and still get FSM..

There are some very well off parents who will get FSM and this is a joke

If the government has cash to spare it could spend it on (for example) improving mental health services for children and young people, which I understand are chronically under-resourced. Why should parents who are well able to pay be subsidised by the state?

I don't want FSM but our school has made them mandatory. I think the money would be better spent elsewhere.

I think it's a little unfair. My dc don't qualify due to age. My friend's child does. Her family income is £70k mine is £13k. Doesn't feel right.

BoomBoomsCousin

'when there is the offer of a free meal from the school parents don't prefer to do so.'

If mine were the casting vote, we would be! Dh is - or certainly was - enthusiastic about this policy & less cynical about the provision than I am. He's seen the menu, thought it adequate, & refused to believe me assuring him of the gulf between menu & plate. Dd2's description of the food actually served to her has not surprised me one iota (I'm a teacher), but it's silenced dh....

Also, dd2 was extremely keen to have school lunches alongside her mates.

To be fair, dd2 is an entirely happy camper - she's loved her week of gunk. I feel a bit like I'm inflicting a dubious experiment in shite eating on her, though.

Dh & I had agreed to give it till half term, but I think he'll crack long before then. At which point I'll just go back to making 3 packed lunches instead of 2.

'why on earth would it not be a priority to raise average academic performace by 2 months - which is what this policy is anticipated to achieve?'

well, I cannot see any reason whatsoever an overdose of cheese pie & custard would raise my 6yo's academic performance, so if the average for children her age is going to be a 2 month hike, that's going to need to be a truly spectacular & measurable impact made on the performance of the small minority of her classmates who were not previously either eating a paid for school lunch, already receiving a FSM one, or eating a packed lunch which was nutritionally superior to the lunch provision.

I'm not saying the kid doesn't exist who'll be eating better this term; & that child might well enjoy a 2 month raise in attainment.

However, I'd like to see some credible supporting evidence for your assertion above re: 'anticipated' effect of attainment. I'm afraid I smell Bad Science atm, & Bad Maths also.

I have a huge problem with free school meals because ...

1. it's a political plan rushed through with little thought. Big promises that have taken money from elsewhere. The government should have instead provided firm lunchbox rules for schools to carry out (must be free of refined sugar and crisps/pastry) and properly healthy cooked meals for the poor

2. the meals are unhealthy rubbish on so many levels are money driven rather then nutritionally driven. This has resulted in ...

• nutritionally void white wheat being used as a substantial part of every meal (ie macaroni cheese served with garlic bread and with sponge for pudding).

• No whole grains at all, no alternative grains and the odd alternative carb in any meal tends to be chips/the odd jacket potato

• the meat/fish is processed and covered in white wheat.

• menus are low in protein and quality protein has been replaced with nutritionally void white wheat

• there is an unhealthy pudding every day. Mostly they are nutritionally void puddings centring on white wheat pudding

• my lunchbox are far healthier. Why would I choose to give my kids rubbish school meals?

Few more points ...

• I've heard the meals cost only 37p to produce.

• school meals make up about 1/5 of a child's entire yearly meals.

• Schools should be creating a healthy food culture, not an unhealthy food culture in a bid to resolve adult obesity and diabetes which take a huge amount of the NHS budget.

• free school meals was a chance to really make a difference with the nations health but it's not living up to its full potential

Lastly even the supposed healthy puddings like yogurt are full of sugar.

Both manners and social skills develop with what ever meal children have.

Another valuable point noted is that the food has been sat around for hours and is kept warm because it's often cooked miles away off site. It looks tired and unappetising. Does cooking this way effect nutritional values?

I'm sure this doesn't apply to your child/ren but we discovered less than one child in twenty could use a knife and fork to eat their lunch, a social skill you don't develop with a packed lunch. We had one mother who wasn't ashamed to say her two children ate everything including mashed potato and gravy with their fingers ... It's easy to forget all families aren't like yours!

I don't think it's a bad thing

Our dc will be trying the school meals. I have a good suspicion dc2 will be back on packed lunches in a week as he isn't very into trying new things.

A lot of what's being said on here doesn't match up to my experience. Food is cooked on site at my DCs school and is very healthy. It's making me appreciate how lucky their little CofE school is.

Should have said food is cooked daily on sure at our school too

Has parenting really got to the stage where people don't feed their children or show them how to use a knife and fork? Of so, then it's not free meals that are needed but intervention at home via the system.

Not all parents know how to use a knife and fork.

I worked with a girl whose fist encounter with a knife and fork was at a dinner with her bosses and they served melon, already sliced but still in the skin ('twas the 80s).

She had sandwiches for lunch at school and at home her family (parents were immigrants from Pakistan) used wither fingers or a spoon.

I have adult friends who cannot use a knife and fork properly. It is a life skill and it is good that it is taught.

I had to re-educate one of my dc after the dinner ladies 'taught' him how to use a knife and fork.

He knew how to eat with cutlery, but was - is! - a stubborn little so-and-so and refused to do it. Never mind, I thought, he'll have to use cutlery at school, and he'll get into the habit. But the method he was taught was appalling! Fist-stab fork downwards into food, saw off chunks with knife, put knife down and transfer fork to right hand, use overhand fist-grip to scoop chunks of food onto fork.

Of course ds could have been making it up, but he was insistent that Mrs Thingy had taught him to use cutlery.

raven you want evidence? Have you bothered to read the report on the pilots? An average two month hike in academic performance was what they got at the schools that introduced universal FSM. That hike applied more to children from more disadvantaged backgrounds, but overall the average was 2 months. It's one of the very few educational policies that actually narrows the achievement gap - maybe that's the real reason there is so much antipathy towards it here. They did not see that rise in the schools that simply extended FSM provision to those who were a bit above the cut off before. So there is more to it than simply providing more food to children from poorer families. Universal FSM were more thoroughly tested than many educational policies that get a national roll out. Our council are funding FSM through Yr6 on the basis of the academic benefits.

What happens to that progress from year 3 onwards though?

How much of that progress will happen with funding being taken from educational resources to pay for it?

What was the quality of that food like? I am guessing much better than the shite being served up in a lot of areas

In the pilot studies the free entitlement was for the whole primary stage and it's a huge pity that isn't the case.

Boom it was what 1.9% or something hardly groundbreaking and only those from disadvantage families who will continue to feed shite at home.

Seriously with the money they're investing they should ensure all schools are provided with the same food and portions as those in the trial.There are clearly wide variations in content,quality and portion size thus negating any point in the trial to begin with.

Also if using knives and forks are important which they obviously are a few PSE lessons would sort that out.Providing masses of variable quality free food to families the maj of whom don't need it to get a few cutlery skills and percentage points is kind of like a sledgehammer to crack a nut(rather like the holiday fines on families whose kids don't truant).

It should be all kids in primary and secondary or more of the poorest in primary and secondary.

There are 6 out of 60ish who have not taken up the free school meals in KS1 at ds's school.