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)

Of course parents should their children healthy food and teach good table manners but many don't. Where the happens it's great that the state is stepping in and giving the children a good start in these areas by give free infants meals. Plus parents can't give the group eating experience unless they have lots of cash for eating out. I overstate how good I think this policy is.

Sorry - I cannot overstate how good I think this policy is.

My Mum had free school dinners as did all the kids in her school. She says the kids didn't always like what they were given but ate it all as they were hungry after a morning in school(milk only and no snacks at break-time) It was always a proper cooked meal and a sweet which she says was always yummy. No childhood obesity in those days!
I think it's a great idea all the kids sitting down together. The only worry is that some of the kids won't eat the meal but that's almost the result of the type of society we now have and very tasty but unhealthy food being pushed at us from all angles. Give it a chance I say.
I once visited a school in Sweden where the children all sat down together to eat lunch together with the staff, choice of a hot meal or salad, pudding or yogurt. It all seemed very civilised so I am pleased we are now doing this.
As for there being more important issues to spend money on, what could be better than adequate nutrition, there are definite social benefits too.

Was a dinner lady - did not buy school meals for my girls, they had packed lunch - the meals were bought in warm, in big insulated boxes, kept warm - last sitting was up to 2 hours after the first one - so everything was tepid and congealed by then. Most of it looked beige....

The slops bucket was a monster to behold... people may think their kids are eating a nutritious meal at lunchtime, most of it ended up in a bucket. (and no- no-one made sure the kids ate it because there were not enough people available to do that.)

I don't have a problem with t., the dc's have always had school dinners and it'll save me £10 a week.

We're pretty healthy at home, mainly veggie, discovering the pleasures of allotment produce and only eating organic meat (couple of times a month). I'm not going to fret over school dinners not being perfect.

I grew up on fishfingers, chips and beans and I didn't grow a second head or become overweight.

My ds will get free dinners, this saves me money
my dd is KS2 so still needs a packed lunch; it helps me but TBH I think it should be better quality and subsidised like work canteens

agree puddings are old fashioned, fruit and yogurt and actually less choice so they can't make the unhealthy choice would help

I think school dinners have been great for DS. He has tried a couple of new things he said he didn't like at home, and his handling of a knife and fork has really improved. Last year he still had packed lunch a couple of days a week because we knew he wouldn't eat what was served on those days. He will probably do the same this year.

But that's all beside the point. We can afford to pay for his school dinners and would do so anyway. We don't need this benefit.

And speaking for our school, there was already a high take-up and there isn't a high proportion of FSMs so nothing much will change, except the kitchen has been modernised, with the contractors contributing half towards the cost, and the PP funding will probably decrease.

Our school is only infants which may make a difference but they are genuinely monitored to make sure they've eaten and they all eat within a space of about 45 mins. My DD says they have to go up and show their plate to the dinner supervisor who will make them sit down and eat more if they haven't made a reasonable stab at it before they can go out to play. They also have to eat some of everything so no all chips but no veg / meat.

parents can't give the group eating experience unless they have lots of cash for eating out

What utter nonsense!

Just sit down to eat together as a family. Or take turns inviting friends if you're single parents with only children.

OK - they can organise small groups but that doesn't compare to sitting down in a large group daily as happens at school.

Surely schools eat together anyway regardless of who pays for the meals?

Learning table manners, eating in public etc should all be taught by parents as they are basic skills.

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.

A voting gimmick by the lib dems that will just waste money that could have been put to so much better use.

My DD has a nut allergy so has always had packed lunch and in fact the school pretty much insisted on it. When I contacted the LEA to ask whether we would now get funding for her packed lunch they have suddenly decided that they can now 100% guarantee that the school dinners will not contain even a trace of nut! We won't be risking it.

In general though I think it is a bad idea as those kids from very low income families would have had free meals anyway so money is being wasted on families that don't need it.

School dinners are usually horrid anyway. They may have one healthy option but if there is also lots of junk what are most kids going to choose? DD1s secondary school sell pizza, bacon and sausage butties every morning break time. Unsurprisingly, these are very popular!

Yes but part of it is actually using the knife and fork and trying new stuff. A lot people wouldn't have done that had the meals not been free as they would have continued to provide packed lunch which can in the worst cases be very unhealthy.

It's a terrible idea. Money would be better spent on education and increasing the threshold so those who need it get it.

Dd won't be eating them when she starts. I learnt the hard way they aren't all they are cracked up to be and would much rather send a packed lunch.

All those in favour either can't see past the immediate benefit to their child or live in an area where eating the boxes it comes in would still be better than what the children they see bring in.

I can't see quality being maintained and it's going to cost schools a fortune in extra staff, extra training and kids will kiss out on large portions of play time waiting and queuing and I feel sorry for the last sitting as gid knows what they will end up with

Miss out

Ghoul but that happens regardless of free school lunches or not.

Children eat lunch in the hall in big groups, whether they are eating a packed lunch or school dinner.

when there are 520 pupils and a hall big enough for 70 to sit at tables - no, they do not all eat together.

there has to be a rolling lunchbreak where kids come in in their classes when there is space, packed lunches get eaten in the field (undercover if wet) and as it is now with only around one quarter eating school meals, not many of those infants - it can still take well over an hour to get through all the kids...

How long will you expect a reception child to be able to stay in the hall eating their lunch - there are 87 of them this year - they cannot all eat at the same time - and there will be 2 dinner ladies available to help them, the other 2 will be outside with those who are waiting to eat. If you allow them to take as long as it takes, is it ok for the year 6 kids to take their meal home with them at 3?

If I was a parent of a child still at primary/infants I would be making sure they have some food with them 'til all the teething troubles have settled.

It is an absolutely appalling waste of money, and I hate this attitude of "its great because we are getting it and it suits us!" Look at the bigger picture!

All over this country meals on wheels (which weren't free) have been scrapped. That means thousands upon thousands of old people aren't getting a hot meal at all, ever. This money would have been better spent there.

When text books, reading books and school equipment isn't replaced because there isn't the money, that meal of shit, processed food that was given out for "free" won't look so good then. When the kids who need extra help, but don't get it I wonder why that will be?

There wasn't £600 million in a drawer gathering dust, the money has come from elsewhere. The LibDems were allowed this one, as a vote buyer, and so they would let the Tories carry on with their brutal, inhumane cuts.

It's certainly not buying my vote!

I'm not going to say no to free meals for DD1 but it does seem ridiculous that families living in half a million pound houses get free meals. Surely it would have made more sense to raise the threshold for FSMs instead?

I think it's a ridiculous waste of money and can't possibly be sustainable. A fortune has been spent on equipping school kitchens to cope with the extra numbers and within a few years it will all be obsolete, when the policy has to be reversed.

I also think, that for a lot of children, it will actually have an adverse effect of the quality of their nutrition. Parents will understandably believe that their children have already had their main meal and that only a "tea" is needed when they get home. The menus are in most cases very impressive but in almost all schools the quality of the ingredients and the portion sizes don't match up with a proper home cooked meal at all. e.g roast turkey, roast potatoes and veg actually means processed meat and tinned veg. "Homemade" bolognaise will have a tiny amount of meat in it, so that they can use cheap meat and still keep within low fat guidelines (which are nonsense for little children anyway)

Improving the quality of free meals for those who need them and (maybe) subsidising better quality paid school meals would have been a far better use of the cash.

I think it's a great idea. When DD1(18) was at primary we had universal FSM for primary children in our town. Now her school did cook offsite but DS's school didn't and he benefitted enormously from the free meals, especially as due to his autism he was eating 2 full meals a day. I couldn't afford to give him enough pack up to satisfy him but the school were accommodating for him.

DD3(4) has just started and her and her dsis are a combination of hot and pack up. They don't have a preference but when the menus come out they will sit and decide which days offer meals they don't like, DD2 never liked fish so had pack up Fridays. Their school also cooks on site and offers a tasting day so we can taste the food which was really good and freshly cooked. It wasn't restaurant quality but still as good as what I would give them on an evening.

To the pp who say the school will miss out on the FSM premium then get the school to work a bit harder at getting the forms filled. Our HT spoke for about 15 minutes at the taster session about FSM and the premium and asked everyone to fill in forms. In fact she didn't let us leave until she got the forms back and had discussed with parents the importance. There was no singling out of benefit families as she told us 'I've printed these forms out already so please fill them in regardless of your income or your dinner choice so we can get more money'
Most parents did but I had to sit and explain to a few who just didn't see the point as they would have pack up instead

Waste of money imo. Have doubts about quality of food delivered as no on-site kitchen.
Also have a v fussy 5 year old who eats a restricted list of healthy food (and even that can be eaten grudgingly) and know no-one will keep an eye on / encourage what she eats . Also pudding with every meal regardless of how done with main (which goes against home rules and will not help reluctant healthy-food eater).
Dd is signed up, but expect to return to packed lunches after a month or so once the hunger / bad tempers / tiredness from lack of food kick in. At least I can pack a few things she will eat that are healthy-ish (if she didn't eat them all the bloody time) in a packed lunch. She will not follow the crowd and eat as everyone else. Not her nature.
Agree should have kept meals on wheels. Was invaluable to my mum when she had them.

Why turn one non means tested benefit into a means tested benefit and then introduce another non means tested benefit, if you get what I mean? I have lost my child benefit as dh earns too much but now I get free school meals!?clearly I am taking them as my son is ks1 but I do think the money could be better spent.