Are free school meals going to be included in benefits cap?

BigAunty

According to the article, one of the reasons why schools like breakfast clubs which they regard as improving class behaviour, is that also helps to reduce lateness in the pupils.

So incredibly, those that turn up to class hungry often turn up late....

This is a parenting issue.

MissMoneypenny

BigAunty wrote: »

According to the article, one of the reasons why schools like breakfast clubs which they regard as improving class behaviour, is that also helps to reduce lateness in the pupils.

So incredibly, those that turn up to class hungry often turn up late....

This is a parenting issue.

I feel so very sorry for these children. Still, as long as their parents' can get their tax credits in cash, what does it matter; the state can give their children a free breakfast and dinner :mad:

Sixer

I agree with a great deal of what you guys are saying.

But I do think some of you get a bit over-excited with the view of the "long cold arm of the state". It's not always cold!

This is also a cultural issue. French people, for example - and many other continentals - would be aghast at the pap we serve up to kids in schools AND expect parents to pay for. Or that high quality and free wraparound care on the school site doesn't even exist, let alone be provided for ALL parents, not just the poor and/or f-eckless. France in particular has many fewer workless single parents. And those it does have receive far less in benefits. But it does provide high quality food at school and free or next-to-free onsite wraparound care. It works there.

Sixer

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

I feel so very sorry for these children. Still, as long as their parents' can get their tax credits in cash, what does it matter; the state can give their children a free breakfast and dinner :mad:

In my world, CTC would be much smaller than it is now. But services would be higher quality and have deeper penetration.

Prinzessilein

I would include school meals. I used to teach, and I know that for many pupils this was their only real meal of the day. I don't want to see children suffer because their parents can't/won't provide a midday meal.

However, I would alter the system.

Firstly, cut the choice of meals. I would have one meal on offer. If it was vegetarian (put included pulses for protein) then it would eliminate the debate over Halal meat.

Secondly, the meals would be compulsory! No packed lunches, no going home...all children would eat the meal. (No peanuts in the meal...) The first week or two there would be kicking and screaming, but they would soon settle down and eat.

Thirdly, I would employ dinner ladies - not just to cook the food but to patrol the dining area. They would have the remit to ensure that the meal was eaten, not played with. They would also ensure that the meal was eaten decently - using cutlery!

This is how I remember school dinners. One healthy, cooked meal that everyone ate. No complaints about 'but I don't like that!'...no option of pizza, nuggets of undefined by-products of the meat industry. or chips...just good wholesome food.

clearingout

Sixer wrote: »

I agree with a great deal of what you guys are saying.

But I do think some of you get a bit over-excited with the view of the "long cold arm of the state". It's not always cold!

This is also a cultural issue. French people, for example - and many other continentals - would be aghast at the pap we serve up to kids in schools AND expect parents to pay for. Or that high quality and free wraparound care on the school site doesn't even exist, let alone be provided for ALL parents, not just the poor and/or f-eckless. France in particular has many fewer workless single parents. And those it does have receive far less in benefits. But it does provide high quality food at school and free or next-to-free onsite wraparound care. It works there.

As a single parent, I would love to see free wraparound care for my children. I can send them with decent packed food, I am not so bothered about them being fed, but the childcare element is very important.

I have three young children - all born within a marriage that went horribly wrong and all of whom were much wanted and who were 'affordable'. I can't afford them now - a horrible thing to have to say about them, but very much the truth. I am now working - it took a while to work it all out - but free childcare would make a huge difference and I would gladly take a huge hit in the tax credits to fund it. As it is, I run around like a nutter and am in the process of employing an au pair to do that running around for me - not that I can really afford it but I have no choice. Frustratingly, the CSA is so far unable to get any money out of my self employed ex so I am very much on my own with it all.

Middle and low income single parents need this kind of support. As I suspect many other families do - those who have one shift worker, army families, those with one parent who travels for a living....Don't knock the idea until it's been proven not to work!

gingergee

Doesn't the usa have free childcare? Im super lucky to get free childcare. Maybe instead of including dinners in the cap, those on benefits could get a discounted meal instead? Kinda meeting in the middle sort of thing? x

MissMoneypenny

Prinzessilein wrote: »

Firstly, cut the choice of meals. I would have one meal on offer. If it was vegetarian (put included pulses for protein) then it would eliminate the debate over Halal meat.

I would offer meat as it is healthier to eat low fat meat; but I would offer pulses as an alternative protein for those who didn't want the meat. You can bulk the meat out with some pulses anyway and they are much healthier than potatoes. Mexican food (steamed veg, black beans and meat) is another healthy option that children would enjoy, with extra black beans and veg for those that didn't want the meat.

Perhaps also offer cooking lessons at school, so the children learn to cook low cost, healthy meals for themselves if their parents are unwilling to provide these meals. Try and break the cycle.

Sixer

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Try and break the cycle.

I couldn't agree more.

I do think the answer lies in factors outside the home - education generally, access to good food, good books, rational and intelligent conversation, etc etc - rather than trying to lift child poverty by throwing money at failing homes. And I do strongly feel children shouldn't be punished for the failures of their parents.

And although "the state" doesn't always succeed, it *is* well-placed to make these differences. If we were only better at making it dynamic and successful!

Vejovis

Sixer wrote: »

I agree with a great deal of what you guys are saying.

But I do think some of you get a bit over-excited with the view of the "long cold arm of the state". It's not always cold!

This is also a cultural issue. French people, for example - and many other continentals - would be aghast at the pap we serve up to kids in schools AND expect parents to pay for. Or that high quality and free wraparound care on the school site doesn't even exist, let alone be provided for ALL parents, not just the poor and/or f-eckless. France in particular has many fewer workless single parents. And those it does have receive far less in benefits. But it does provide high quality food at school and free or next-to-free onsite wraparound care. It works there.

the french eat frogs legs and snails, 'nuff said