If you can’t afford to feed your children you shouldn’t of had them.

Well that is, actually, bollocks.

Running my own small business, when we had our kids I earned decent money. Last year we would have been entitled to free school meals, such were the size of our profits.

So, how exactly does one ‘budget’ for children in a scenario like that? Or should we not have had any in case I had subsequent lean years?

BTW, this year I am a high rate tax payer. But we will still get the free meals next year now 🙂

Say what you think, Coyote, don’t hold back 🙂

(glad things have worked out…)

Hah Coyote – another good example of what a daft comment that was.

Just think, if he’d had free school meals when he was younger he might have been able to hav thunk that through more betterer.

Wouldn’t let my kids eat free school lunches. Guaranteed to be some nasty processed food which is not very good for them.

Get with the program LHS! I think you’ll find that was in the dark, terrible pre St Jamie days. He’s going to kill this instead, for a Mexican rice with chipotle pork & avocado salsa, for the little dears….

Wouldn’t let my kids eat free school lunches. Guaranteed to be some nasty processed food which is not very good for them.

Is that, like, an actual guarantee or just you hypothesizing? Have you actually seen what school meals can be like these days? Do you have any reason to think that having them funded for the first three years of education will mean they will reduce in quality? Will there be two sets of kitchen staff – one preparing ‘good’ food for those that pay directly and another regurgitating the processed crap the Government pay for?

Bloody hell. 🙄

Ok, what about tax breaks for childless couples?
No need to spend on education or health.

And another one drifts in.

OK. Tax breaks for childless couples so you don’t pay into education or health. No problem with that as long at the childless couples signing up for the tax breaks also agree that when they become old and infirm they just get tossed into a lime pit. After all you didn’t pay to educate the doctors and nurses…

It’s got nothing to do with who can afford what, it’s about what’s good for children. In three pilot areas where free meals were available to all children in that age range, the result was that they were on average two months ahead of where they would otherwise have been.

If the scheme helps children achieve higher standards of education and also helps to maintain healthy lifestyles, including helping to nip in the bud some childhood obesity issues, then it might well be self-financing.

Is that, like, an actual guarantee or just you hypothesizing?

Guarantee

Have you actually seen what school meals can be like these days?

Yes, processed, packaged, mass produced crap.

Do you have any reason to think that having them funded for the first three years of education will mean they will reduce in quality?

Tongue in your cheek there?

It’s a personal choice, but for far far far less money i can give my kids fresh, unprocessed food every day.

The same result could be achieved by making school meals compulsary though with those parents who can afford them paying for them. Bear in mind that any cost increase for the parents who currently do not buy a school meal would be at least partially offset by them not paying for their current lunch.

Don’t parents on benefits/low income already get free school meals for their kids?

Wouldn’t let my kids eat free school lunches. Guaranteed to be some nasty processed food which is not very good for them.

The quality of school food is far more rigourously regulated than anything you’d buy in a supermarket.

My point is that yet again money will be taken out of so many peoples pockets to fund this ridiculous idea giving us all less bottom line cash at the end of each month.
This is hidden by that pratt Clegg force feeding a scared kid grapes on the news saying they are saving everybody money.
For childless couples that really is not an easy pill to swallow.

The quality of school food is far more rigourously regulated than anything you’d buy in a supermarket.

Really? Proof?

Don’t parents on benefits/low income already get free school meals for their kids?

Not necessarily.

But on benefits they do.
If you’re out of work definitely.
My cousin’s 5 kids do.

If you lot without kids can do things like swan off to the pictures of an evening, actually ride your bikes at the weekend, go on holiday outside a hideously priced 6 week window, have a lie in on a Sunday if you fancy, and enjoy a disposable income, then surely a few school meals isn’t too much to begrudge us

You bastards!!!!

😀

I’ll happily buy your kids a happy meal every day. Why? Because I can afford it… 8)

Good point though about having the ‘luxury’ of being able to take holidays outside school break times. Our trip abroad soon will be considerably cheaper than in peak season, plus we’re getting a massive discount for not bringing house-wrecking children with us. We can happily get sloshed on cheap local wine each night, or go to a local restaurant without having to leave our young children unattended in a hotel room from where they can be abducted.

I think this plan is an excellent idea. I’m happy to see my taxes go towards paying for it. To put the cost of the plan into perspective; how much is the planned Trident missile replacement scheme going to cost us? Something from which none of us will ever benefit. And that’s just one of many things our taxes are wasted on, which are of no benefit to us as a society.

Can’t believe that anyone would think that feeding children is a waste of money.

If you can’t afford to feed your children you shouldn’t of had them.

Shouldn’t have had them.

I would elaborate on just how stupid such a statement is, but I fear it would be a waste of intellectual effort.

My point is that yet again money will be taken out of so many peoples pockets to fund this ridiculous idea giving us all less bottom line cash at the end of each month.

The whole scheme is costed at £600 million a year. In the grand scheme of things, thats eff all. And will actually achieve quite a lot. I think its exactly what we should be spending taxpayers money on. Something that benefits society. I’m going out on a limb here and assuming that you share Thatchers verdict on that particular word?

Ultimately, the cost is probably half what the government will give some London consultants for privatising the Royal Mail. Or what the MOD lost down the back of the sofa last month

For childless couples that really is not an easy pill to swallow.

I don’t know why you keep going on about childless couples, this scheme will only affect children of the age of 5, 6, and 7. Couples with children above the age of 7 will not benefit anymore than childless couples.

Take that into account when speaking on behalf of all childless couples in England.

This is electioneering at its worst, the Lib Dems trying to buy Middle Class votes.

To be fair to the Lib Dems, this isn’t electioneering at its worst, this is evidence based policy being actually quite good.

The story behind it is:

The (previous) government, commissioned pilot schemes, where they trialled universal free school dinners.

The result of the pilot schemes was that kids did better at school. And that the effect was greatest amongst poor kids, even those who would previously have had access to free school meals, so it possibly can help reduce inequalities between poorer and richer kids which is nice too.

You can read all about it here (search for the executive summary)
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/184047/DFE-RR227.pdf

They say that as an educational intervention, it offers better value for money than some directly educational things like the ‘every child a reader’ program.

Essentially, the underlying aim is the same as if they’d said “we’ll spend x amount of money on buying some books for every school”, it’s just that because it is a free lunch, people get up in arms about it.

Don’t parents on benefits/low income already get free school meals for their kids?

Yes, 400,000 is quoted in the Guardian at present. Free meals will increase that to 1.9 million.

“If you can’t afford to feed your children you shouldn’t of had them.”

Hopefully well fed pupils will concentrate and learn the difference between of & have. Have a gold star for use of apostrophes though.

For everyone on here saying “school meals are crap, my child gets a good lunch from me” I see a kid who buys a monster energy drink & a jumbo bag of crisps on the way to school.

The whole scheme is costed at £600 million a year. In the grand scheme of things, thats eff all

That’s why we’re broke. £600M is actually a lot when you don’t get enough money in to pay for your current outgoings.

Stop spending money you don’t have. It’s not a hard concept to grasp even if it’s other peoples money (that you don’t have) that you’re spending.

If kids who’s parents are on benefits/out of work/low income get free meals already but there is a section of kids who’s parents struggle for genuine reasons why not just relax the free school meal criteria rather than include everyone? Or would that cost more to implement ? Bit like what they did for child allowance you have to opt in if you meet the criteria.

ernie_lynch – Member
It’s got nothing to do with who can afford what, it’s about what’s good for children. In three pilot areas where free meals were available to all children in that age range, the result was that they were on average two months ahead of where they would otherwise have been.

If the scheme helps children achieve higher standards of education and also helps to maintain healthy lifestyles, including helping to nip in the bud some childhood obesity issues, then it might well be self-financing.

You’re looking ahead and thinking of the long term implications. That’s not the done thing ernie, you should know that by now!

I see a kid who buys a monster energy drink & a jumbo bag of crisps on the way to school

That’s because the school meals are so bad.

🙄

I can’t think of anything I’d rather see the government spend money on. Kids going without is a f***ing scandal so it’s about time the problem was dealt with.

Really? Proof?

If I could, I would post copies of the inspection reports on the canteen in the school at which I’m a governor. It is even asked of parents & pupils in the regular surveys undertaken regarding the school.

Both internal and external catering is monitored regularly with minimum standards which are similar to those previously proposed by the FSA to the supermarkets which were summarily rejected.

Edit: Food Standards in Schools

even if it’s other peoples money

it’s not your money.

Only read some of the comments in the first page …

How about those people who work but without a family i.e. single working person.

Does that mean they too have to contribute to something they do not have/use? Is there a possibility to opt-out?

🙄

That’s why we’re broke

We’re not broke ffs 😀 Only a couple of weeks ago as the 5th wealthiest nation on Earth we were thinking of sending cruise missiles to Syria at a million quid a throw.

And if money is[/i] in short supply, then we should spend it wisely. What better thing to spend money on than children and their health and education ?

BTW 30% of children between the ages of 2 and 15 are obese, the total cost of obesity to NHS is £5 billion a year, helping to tackle this problem makes sound financial sense.

I see another stealth tax coming?

ernie_lynch – Member

That’s why we’re broke

We’re not broke ffs Only a couple of weeks ago as the 5 wealthiest nation on Earth we were thinking of spending cruise missiles to Syria at a million quid a throw.

Yes, we could be 5th wealthiest but we also rank 3rd in the world with external debts.

External debts from good old Wiki …

But on benefits they do.
If you’re out of work definitely.
My cousin’s 5 kids do.

I was on job seeker’s allowance for 6 months. My children didn’t get free school meals. I can’t speak for your cousin, their children or their circumstances however I can assure you that all people on benefits do not get free school meals. I speak from first hand experience, not anecdotal nonsense read in the press.

That’s why we’re broke. £600M is actually a lot when you don’t get enough money in to pay for your current outgoings.

Stop spending money you don’t have. It’s not a hard concept to grasp even if it’s other peoples money (that you don’t have) that you’re spending.

The thing is that we live in a democracy. And political parties put forward what they think they should be spending our money on.

So the Lib Dems have come out and said that they will spend £600 million on providing school meals for all children under 7.

This week they have also said they’d slash the obscene amounts of money being spanked on a completely pointless nuclear detterent

I can hazard a guess from your general tone which party your cross goes next to. In fact, I suspect you may actually be George Osbourne. Are you? But I digress. What I’m saying is that looking at these policies, this sounds more appealing than anything I’ve heard from either of the other lot. I very much doubt that will change much over the next couple of weeks

Won’t somebody please not think of the children

If kids who’s parents are on benefits/out of work/low income get free meals already but there is a section of kids who’s parents struggle for genuine reasons why not just relax the free school meal criteria rather than include everyone? Or would that cost more to implement ? Bit like what they did for child allowance you have to opt in if you meet the criteria.

Cos they tried that in their pilot studies and it didn’t work.

You can read the report on it here (search for the executive summary)
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/184047/DFE-RR227.pdf

We’re not broke ffs Only a couple of weeks ago as the 5th wealthiest nation on Earth we were thinking of sending cruise missiles to Syria at a million quid a throw.

Need to get rid of them, past their use by date, bit like free school meals, just with less mould.

That’s because the school meals are so bad.

And the last time you ate one was?

A point that was raised on the recent “how much are your school dinners” thread is that there is already a growing number of families that send their kids to school with no lunch nor any money as they know the school are compelled to feed the kids. This practice is already costing schools/tax payers a fair amount and it doesn’t show any signs of slowing.

Can’t the parents starve instead in order to feed the children?

Put it this way fasting is good for the parents … adult should eat less after all they have stopped growing and the only growing adult do is side ways.

Try it and see the difference.

I blame the parents for eating the children’s share of food … nom nom nom …

Parents please eat less and think of the children.

If parents find it difficult then they are really eating way too much …

😆