No more free school meals for youngest pupils.

Conservative priorities ....take food away from kids who need it...but keep subsidising food and expensive champagne etc for the houses Of Commons and the Lords .Well they only get paid £300 a day ...you cant expect them to pay for their OWN food can you?VOTE TORY and watch old old people sleep through the day in the Lords and feast on taxpayers money ..poor children..what are they?Makes my blood boil !!

Just occurred to me that when Mrs Thatcher took away free school milk we called her Thatcher the Milk Snatcher, can we now call Mrs May Theresa the Meal Stealer?

How would I describe what?

Exactly harrigran.

PS.My children had free school lunches for a while when they were at primary school, but never felt stigmatised. Primary school meals are usually paid for in advance and no cash changes hands when the meals are served. It's not rocket science to devise a system, in which no pupil knows who's paid or not.

My son then had free school lunches when he was at secondary school. The school loaded money on to his swipe card. Again, no pupils knew whether had been loaded by their parents or the school.

But what do I know? According to anya I know nothing!

How would you describe then dd?

Youngest GD is an infant and is entitled to a free meal, it does not mean she will eat it. Parents assuming child has had a hot meal may not give them much at home.
I think it would be a very lucky child that got a cooked breakfast before leaving home, cereal and yogurt is more likely in a family where both parents work.

Talking about useless parents is a bit patronising.

Yoghurt and fruit are usually served cold.

Anya "I thought your statement about free school meals not helping children sounded like one of those statements people just throw into an argument to bolster their opinion without knowing the facts DD or even make up."

I don't throw unsubstantiated statements into an argument, nor do I "make things up" to support my opinions.

Take your pick from these articles:

www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9202

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-views/free-breakfast-disadvantaged-children-would-be-better-universal-free

educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/news/breakfast-clubs-found-to-boost-primary-pupils-reading-writing-and-maths-res/

www.equalitytrust.org.uk/beware-free-lunches

Your apology is taken as a given.

I wrote this a few days on another thread:
I'd like to know how the costing of the change from free school lunches for three primary years to free breakfasts for seven primary years was done, supposedly to free up money to be spent elsewhere in schools. The infrastructure and staffing for the extra lunches is now all in place, having been extremely difficult to achieve for many schools. So now, three years on, are they expected to make yet more changes to kitchen and supervisory staff hours, switching them from lunchtime to early morning? Presumably get the morning cleaners in even earlier and pay someone to set up the halls for eating, then clear and clean them again before morning assembly? Assuming that is that we're talking half decent breakfasts and not a bowl of cereal at the desks, which is what any school provides for children who need it anyway. I can't see a massive saving here, just a massive disruption for most primary schools.

Since then it seems to have been confirmed that the breakfast is to be a cold one, so yes, a bowl of cereal at the desk. Shameful. And probably a backward step in child nutrition. I can see children wanting to go in to eat sugary cereal with their friends at school instead of having a decent breakfast at home.

Yesterday on radio 4 we were told by some educational academic that there was a great deal of evidence to show that children were performing better since the introduction of free lunches.

But it isn't just about educational performance is it? It is about the health of our children, instilling good eating habits and nutrition to those whose parents are either too useless or too poor to give them a proper diet.

900000 poor children to have their meals taken from them by the Tories.

Compassionate Conservatism? Dead and firmly buried.

"DD If you knew anything about schools..." Nah! I know nothing about schools! Why should I? I was only a teacher for 30 years and had children at school for 19 years.

I'll find the more recent report which doubted the value of free school lunches, but I haven't had my wake up coffee yet.

Originally though, schools did have kitchens didn't they. The introduction of FSM and the campaign by Jamie Oliver to improve the quality of school meals had a positive impact.
Many local schools in areas of high deprivation run breakfast clubs, some have volunteer staff alongside school staff. For some children the toast, fruit and drink they get at the breakfast club is the first meal they had since their school dinner the previous day. I'm assuming that some children will continue to qualify for FSM and we'll be in the situation where they're given a chit to hand in, ensuring everyone knows their circumstances.
It's beginning to feel like Narnia, always winter and never Christmas - as was the case when Maggie Thatcher was the Ice Queen.
Compassionate Conservatism? I think not.

daphne - no, no kitchen! Hence having to ship meals in.

Free school meals DO boost attainment

I thought your statement about free school meals not helping children sounded like one of those statements people just throw into an argument to bolster their opinion without knowing the facts DD or even make up.

I think you'll find this is the case if you read my link and the provision of a FSM is especially beneficial for those from disadvantaged backgrounds, no surprise there then

DD If you knew anything about schools you'd know that schools had hot school lunches brought in from an outside source pre September 2014 which is when the universal FSM for Key Stage 1 was introduced.

I'd like to see your evidence re school dinners too.

It seems the young and the old are fair targets whilst the tax dodgers are getting away with robbing the country soft. Makes you think about placing that cross on the ballot paper doesn't it? Well it should.

It's make your mind up time soon. Maggie took their milk and Tessa is going to take their lunches.

Hard isn't it LL when you're convinced that a possible leader is a pathetic joke, only to find the person you rate as a leader is proposing to do things even Maggie shied away from?

Schools will have to open earlier, employ more staff to see to this bowl of sugary cereal and milk, for sure its not going to be a fully cooked breakfast, certainly won't help the children whose only cooked meal is lunch. Where is the money coming from for the staff? Schools are already stretched. What worries me is that I can see means testing coming back, how humiliating is that for people already struggling. I remember at school, the way those tickets were given out to pupils whose families couldn't afford the meals. It was awful. I was lucky, went home to lunch. People have their pride whatever their circumstances. I could never vote Corbyn, he is a pathetic Joke, but very disappointed in this initiative of Theresa hitting the vulnerable young plus older people who do, surprise, use the winter fuel allowance for just that.

Nope! It hasn't been proven, although there's research which has shown that a decent breakfast and getting all children to school on time is a winner.

It's a bit late now and I'm dropping, but I'll find the links to the research, if you want.

I thought it was proven that a decent meal at lunchtime aided not just concentration but grades,and the run a mile every day thing that all our local primaries do,is said to help with behaviour issues .So a win win situation where educating young children surely?Primaries 1 -3 get free lunches here and most schools have breakfast clubs ,

Ginny Presumably they bring a packed lunch or buy a school lunch.

To be fair there's been research showing that free school lunches don't raise attainment, but free universal breakfasts do. Pupil premium funding can be used for breakfast clubs, but not for school lunches. It's not all about feeding hungry children, but ensuring that pupils start the school day punctually in the right frame of mind, not just with full tummies.

I'm seriously not going all Conservative, but I prefer evidence-based initiatives.

So presumably there was a kitchen of sorts. I'm curious. That's all.

It is such a small school that there were only a couple with FSMs to be dealt with - it all got more complicated when all reception and class one had to be catered for.

My point Ana is that these central diktats look fine on paper, but are sometimes very difficult to put into practice; and that insufficient funds follow the great idea.

Am I missing something here? If the children are given breakfast at school as an alternative to providing a lunch, what are they going to eat at lunchtime?