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)

waste of money

It has cost our school loads, not all of which has been paid for by government.
We have had to extend the hall, and the kitchen.
It has repercussions for TA jobs, as many of them doubled as dinner ladies, but the new system the dinner time has to be staggered so the class TAs can't do it.

The knock on effect is also that fewer families will apply for and register with the school as being entitled to FSM, which means the school can't claim Pupil Premium, which has a knock on effect on school budget.
as an example, a one form entry school in a mixed housing area may receive around £65,000 per year from Pupil Premium, which is now at risk.

The hot dinners are fine, not amazing, but fine. Mine will eat them, but not all of them. They have FSM anyway, so ds (now year 7) ate 1 or 2 meals per week because I said he had to, dd1 and 2 will eat 3-4 meals per week.

I don't think that most children will eat a healthier lunch, because most hot dinners aren't that good, and most packed lunches aren't that bad. Also most kids have some choice and then end up choosing a less healthier option than on the menu sheet (eg choosing pasta and bread, so carb heavy)

I cook anyway in the evening and we sit down as a family for a meal. My kids don't need 2 cooked meals and I don't want to provide 2 different evening meals.

I would much rather that the threshold for FSM had been raised to allow more families to access them if they wanted/needed to.

Really annoyed it's only KS1. So no issues in KS 2 then?

It is a good thing because it is universal. Removes the stigma of free school meals (for parents really than the kids at that age).

Also being universal you're more likely to get pushy mums like me complaining if the food isn't up to scratch.

I feel for the schools who lack facilities though. This is blatantly a vanity project for Nick Clegg - he can point to a policy then wash his hands of the fact that there aren't enough funds to implement it properly.

MrsTittleMouse - the fish option being classed as vegetarian is one of my concerns as well.

We're no longer living in the UK, so thankfully it isn't an issue for us, but I know other vegetarian families who are worried about this.

Our friends' daughter is starting Reception in a school, where the free meals are compulsory, and ever since the mum saw a neighboring school list a fish dish as 'vegetarian' on its menu she has been concerned. Well both her and her husband are concerned. They're worried that if their 4-year old daughter is told something (i.e. a fish dish) is vegetarian by a teacher, someone we tell our children to trust, she'll likely eat it.

My niece and nephew's school also tried to make the meals compulsory, but backed down after some rather fierce opposition from parents, led by my SIL. My SIL is a registered dietician (RD), and I remember her saying to me, "how dare they tell me, a dietetics and nutrition professional, that they can feed my children more nutritional food than I can!"

The knock on effect is also that fewer families will apply for and register with the school as being entitled to FSM

Again another reason this is not well thought through. Perhaps the government should continue the premium based on an understanding of the pupils.

Or give more money full stop.

I was told there was no extra money given for this so it is money simply coming from school budget ..If what I am told is right no I don't agree with it at all.

Not particulary in favour regardless though

Oh and one more point on the vegetarian issue, if schools want to make the free meals compulsory, they need to make sure that vegetarian are guaranteed a proper meal (i.e. by keeping them back, labeled with their names).

I once approached my son's old school, about them possibly keeping back a vegetarian plate for him, as when his class was last/second to last in the dining hall, often the veggie option was gone (and he was given a cheese toastie instead). The HT told me, "we keep individual plates back for dietary requirements, but not for lifestyle choices."

Complete waste of money. Far better to divert this money into changing the threshold for FSM, to make them more available to families who really need them.

Am also annoyed at more nanny state interference. Yes, there are families who do not know how to feed their dc properly, or do not make the effort to do so, but why should I be penalised because of that? I see interfering in how I feed my dc - and I do make the effort to feed them well, and I feed them higher quality food than school dinners provide - as penalising me.

I would far rather that my taxes go towards those who struggle to feed their dc than to a universal benefit for those who do not need it.

PartTimeModel I agree with you, I have just taken my dd off school meals due to the fact that a huge stodgy pudding was provided every day. Now, it was alongside fruit and yoghurt, but in my children's school the fruit regularly ran out and my dd just couldn't make a healthy choice anyway, as the lure of the sweet stodgy pudding was too much for her. Coupled with pasta twice a week (so 2/5ths of the offering) with chips once a week, it just was a lot of cheap fattening carbs especially as she wouldn't eat the protein, just eating rice, pasta, whatever.

She has lost weight since coming off school dinners.

My other child makes healthier choices, eats the whole dinner and is happy on them.

I don't think this is a healthy eating initiative myself unless they drop the daily puddings.

But the reason they don't drop the daily puddings is that the children would be very hungry indeed on the measly portions provided (roast = one slice of cheap beef roll stuff, two microscopic potatoes, equivalent to 1/4 baked potato, one floret broccoli). Portion size might be ok for infants though, it's as you approach the top of primary it becomes a real issue.

Not sure it will make an awful lot of difference, what about the older children? Are we saying their dietry needs are not as important? It does seem a bit mad that I had my child benefit taken away only to be given it back in free meals and childcare savings through tax. I agree in means testing benefits and losing our child benefit has not in all honesty made much difference to us so I cannot see the value in getting free meals for my children when we are perfectly capable of paying to feed them ourselves! Presumably children from lower income families already get free meals, perhaps the money would be better spent extending this to all ages of children from families on lower incomes that are struggling but don't currently qualify for free meals?

I'm a simple soul-I'm glad to let my dc have school lunches and now it costs me half what it did last year. They are neither organic, whole grain and sugar free nor turkey twizzlers and coke. I give them a healthy tea too. I think their packed lunches are marginally healthier, but overall I'm happy.
Higher take up may lead to economies of scale.

I think it is a colossal waste of money, what should have happened is someone working out how to support those families who do get free school meals through the long holidays when all of a sudden they have to find 3 meals a day instead of 1 (or 2 with schools who don't have breakfast club).

It's a terrible idea.
I don't want or need free school meals ( although I appreciate some might)
I am worried about the quality reducing and the variety and amount not being enough either. We have had a letter about " changes to the menu" due to the introduction of free school meals and I doubt it's for the better.
I also wonder how this is being paid for

For us personally, at the moment it's great. DH has been unemployed for coming up 6 months so any saving is great news.

However, normally I would think nice idea but isn't there somewhere better in schools to spend that money?

Hissy99 puts it very succinctly. They've taken away one non-means tested benefit and replaced it with another. Presumably it will cost the state less but politically the Govt is making itself unpopular with families.

The knock on effect is also that fewer families will apply for and register with the school as being entitled to FSM

Yes, this does potentially mean considerable financial loss for schools, and obviously for those pupils who benefit from the extra funding. We will have to try other ways of incentivising those eligible for PP to inform the school, free PE kit or something. It illustrates the Govt's lack of joined-up thinking perfectly though.

a bloody waste of money

I want my taxpayers money going on people that NEED help

more nurses
better foster carers
foodbanks etc

this annoys the shit out of me TBH

Steppemum and Iggly - the cynical part of my wonders is that's why the Tories have let this get through. It's hard enough at the school my two attend to get parents to sign up to FSM; if you remove the meals, then I doubt anyone would, and the school would lose the extra money. Massive savings to be made there, and who cares if it increases the gap between the life chances of the rich and poor even further? And of course, for a lot of schools they don't have the resources and have to out-source to a private company who will be thrilled to get a government contract (and I'm sure had nothing to do with this decision).

starlight - the money for children who already qualify for FSM goes through as normal, and then the government gives £2.30 for each meal for each child according to this-
www.gov.uk/government/publications/universal-infant-free-school-meals
The trouble is that a lot of schools are having to build new dining halls, employ new people to supervise etc. and that's costing them a lot of money that should go on other things.

DS is starting school next week and will be taking packed lunch. I am not convinced about the quality of food or the capability to deal with producing so many extra meals

It is a criminal waste of money which should be spent on children's education; the money needed to maintain this system will come out of school capitation and will result in fewer books and school equipment. Plus all the money spent on building kitchens, dining halls and extra staff.
Poor manners and obesity are genuinely problems in this country at the moment. These come from the parents.

I live in one of the trial areas, so we've had this for a while. The data indicates that it is money well spent, though I'm not sure they've taken into account side effects like the much lower registration of FSM and the impact of lower funding for schools in areas of high deprecation.

For my own children I'm not enthusiastic - I've been in and the meals are terrible. I wouldn't want to be paying for them directly. But this just leads me to think that if such poor quality lunches have a good and measurable impact on children's health and school performance, there must have been a lot of children who have such poor nutrition - either because their parents pack them very poor food or because the cost of lunches is so high for some families' budgets. Given that, I think it is an important thing to be doing.

I think its great.

I will be sending my son, who starts reception next week, in with a packed lunch. They had typical school lunches laid out at an open evening and they looked disgusting. There is little menu variation, there is a roast twice a week and fish and chips every Friday. I have no idea how they are going to serve school lunches when they already do shifts in a small hall and have had to take a bulge class in reception this year. I am completely underwhelmed with this policy.

My son has always had school lunches anyway, so for us it's simply a saving of quite a bit of money and the faff of sending in a cheque (no parent pay at his school). Suits me. The money will go towards the increase in guitar lessons for DS1.

I'd rather they just lowered the price of school dinner tbh. £2.20 per day for one child is extortionate if you ask me. My dh used to pay less for a three course meal where is was based. A lot better choice and quality too.