withdrawal of free school milk, adverse media coverage, reinstatement of free school milk

[fabsoopergroovy]

LOL...... government policy in action!!!

Just watched Andrew Marr Show - very very funny - these people are running our country!

What happened on Andrew Marr?

what's happened?

Ah, the Beeb now has this.

The words 'piss up' and 'brewery' come to mind. Maybe 'ice cream sundae' and 'dairy'?

On a less humorous note, looks as if all their cuts are targeting the poor, women and children.

This seems to me to be a deliberate ploy to boost the Lib Dems and help hold the coalition together. Many pundits have speculated that exactly this sort of a plan will have such contours.

Margaret Thatcher, by dint of her surname, got known as the milk snatcher, despite the fact that Labour governments "snatched" far more school milk than Tory governments ever did.

Anyway, "milk snatching" is now synonymous with Thatcher in the minds of the left-wing Islington dinner-party-set media elite. So what better way to get the once-lovable Lib Dems to bolster their falling poll ratings by moderating the basest instincts of the evil Tories?

Look for media leaks soon that only Nick Clegg stood between nursery milk and millions of brittle infant bones for lack of calcium.

For what it's worth, I expect a similar pattern to emerge over council houses. The plan for leases instead of permanent tenure will be shelved "because of" Lib Dems like Simon Hughes.

"left-wing Islington dinner-party-set media elite"

And the winner of this year's how many internet cliches can you fit into one sentence award goes to this thicko.

Like there are any left wingers in the Labour party...Just another bunch of hard right war criminals, ditto the Tory scum.

If the Govt was cutting free school milk (which I think it should, btw), you'd all be bleating about it - seeing as they're now not going to be, you're having a go at their taking into consideration the views of people like you.

Most bizarre

I think the government should cut universal free milk too.

I am unsure about the philosophical merits of universality versus means testing of state largesse - but given Labour's massive deficit, surely the economics dictate there must be far more means testing and copayments throughout public service. It is a shame that it probably isn't practically feasible for Iain Duncan Smith's mooted universal withdrawal rate for benefits to apply more generally to non-direct state activities (for example prescriptions, eye tests, school meals, etc).

this is all very strange to me.

"It is a universal benefit because every child needs to have milk in their diet."

No they don't. Children in many cultures positively thrive without (cow's) milk in their diets. Calcium is easily got in a balanced and not-so-balanced diet.

This is more about continuing to subsidise an inflated (bloated?) dairy industry than it is about getting calcium into children.

I would also support cutting it - especially if it's true that part of the proposal was to increase healthy start vouchers for low income families instead (read in an article)

I think that would have been a far better use of the money. Especially as they can be used for veg and not just milk, which I believe many of us use far to much of.

Actually fairly basic economics dicates that means-testing is a waste of time. Far more expensive than just providing universal benefits such as child benefits.

Would you rather spend the money on, for e.g. children or on administration? Because if you go for means-testing, you are making a choice to spend the money on admin.

Is there any proof that school milks make a difference to children's health? A bugbear of mine at my school is the weekly 300+ cartons that go straight into landfill because there is no local tetra-pak collection.

edam That is only true if administration costs more than the difference between universal and means-tested benefits. Sometimes it will; sometimes it won't. If the admin costs must less, then means-testing is fairly efficient.

We already means test children in schools, by testing eligibility for free school meals. The extra admin costs involved in extending this means testing to nursery age children would be pretty minimal, as all the systems are already in place.

Of course, admin costs are always "wasted" because they do not contribute directly to the front-line delivery of public services - obviously, they should be as low as possible. I don't think anyone disputes that!

it's not really free school milk as it is only for children under 5. Therefore alot of children aren't entitled as they are 5 soon after starting school.

IMHO the school milk scheme - which is supposed to be subsidised by the EU is extortionately priced.

I pay 20p for 189ml = approz 60p a pint. What exactly is subsidised about that?

"Actually fairly basic economics dicates that means-testing is a waste of time. Far more expensive than just providing universal benefits such as child benefits."

But it would be transferring the money to already means tested families - different completely to setting up a scheme to means test milk in nursery. The way I read it it would simply be increasing the value of the tokens already being given to low income families to help cushion them from cuts/VAT increase etc. So it wouldn't be an increase in admin expenses because they already get, or are tested for and don't currently get, tokens.

Fair point Anastasia, but a. I wouldn't trust politicians to make sure the value of food vouchers keeps up with inflation and b. wouldn't it risk stigmatising poor children? Like the bad old days when kids who were entitled to free school meals had to be in a separate queue? And c. there's usually a poverty trap in these things, where people who are only just over the cut off point still can't afford to pay the full price.

The children in ds's school had free milk in reception, IIRC, it was only when they went into Year One that we had to start paying. Possibly because reception is part of the Foundation Unit with nursery?

Our cut off for free milk is the term after the children are 5. So some reception children will get it free until Christmas and some will get it free for the whole reception year. The free milk is full-fat and the paid for milk is semi-skimmed. As soon as you are 5 you need to start watching your weight apparently!

I think they should cut the free milk. DS's nursery always gives it to parents for free. They constantly seem to have too much. We can easily afford our own milk but I always take some, otherwise the nursery tip it away, which seems a complete waste.

Why would it stigmatise poor children? I'd imagine nurseries would continue to serve snacks in exactly the way either absorbing the small extra cost, passing it on to fees or perhaps adding an optional charge if you want your child to have milk. Or they could all drink healthy water and have the milk or other calcium source at home where the low income families have a bit more shopping money.

Your other point is a concern, it goes for all state assistance though I guess, and needs public scrutiny and pressure to make sure governments don't weasel out of supporting those who really need it.

For goodness sake, there are free school meals available. Why do we need free school milk too? The state is not a bottomless chuffing pit for goodness sake. There's limited money around and this is not an ideal world. Would people just get that please and stop ponsing about like it is!!!