No more free school meals for youngest pupils.

Food has been served in what you describe as"prison trays" for at least 15 if not 20 years grannypiper so no need to be in a lunch hall at all recently. They are practical, enable even very young children to have choices and carry their own food and are long lasting. Plastic cups are in common use. My GCs use them. How does the sort of equipment used prevent it being relaxed?
It's relaxed because the children sit together, interact with each other, chat and eat as they do so. No-one is pressurising them to eat, although they are usually encouraged to do so. It is certainly more relaxed than some homes

This is an extract from one of the links I posted about the 2012 trial and rolling it out nationally:

Broadening the benefits?

The pilot found that Year 6 students in areas of universal provision made an additional two months’ progress over the course of two years relative to similar students in other areas. These are significant effects, roughly the same size as the benefits from national programmes such as the “literacy hour”. However, it’s far from certain that universal free school meals would be as effective if rolled out nationally.

One reason for caution is the difference between the pilot areas and the average English local authority. Both Newham and Durham are relatively disadvantaged. If pupils in better-off areas are more likely to pay for school meals or to have healthier packed lunches, the gains from making school lunches free to all students are likely to be smaller.

Further, while the pilot study found that universal free school meals improved test scores, it wasn’t able to pinpoint how these improvements came about. Evidence from other countries suggests that Without understanding what’s driving the headline academic gains, it’s difficult to know whether the relationship between free school meals and test scores would be the same in other areas with a different local context.

Rather than providing free school lunches for all children, policymakers wanting to tackle student hunger could support school breakfasts instead. IFS research has found that support for a one-year breakfast programme in disadvantaged schools delivered similar academic benefits to universal free school meal provision (though the gains were higher in Year 2 than Year 6). The breakfast clubs also significantly improved behaviour and concentration, and reduced absences – and did so at around one-tenth of the cost per pupil of universal free school meals.

Extending free school meals to all primary school children would cost around £950 million each year. It would not directly benefit the poorest children, who are already entitled to free lunches. While there is some evidence it might raise attainment overall, we don't understand how or why, and so the effect of extending this nationwide is uncertain. In the context of constrained public resources it is important to be much clearer about effectiveness before spending a large amount of money on a new universal entitlement.

www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9202

No free school meals where my DGC go to school but school lunches are 'shipped in' from a larger primary; some are hot, some cold. The menu is available online and they can choose in advance how many meals they would like (mix and match with packed lunches) so I think that cuts down on waste.
There is a free breakfast club which is popular, they use it very occasionally if the need arises.

How does that discredit the trial in Durham, daphne?
Makes sense to trial in areas of poverty, don't you think?
"Wasn't able to pinpoint how these improvements came about".
Wow. Surely the fact that they did is what matters, not whether you can pinpoint exactly how it happened.
I don't fancy brain scans on all children to find out which bit of the brain improves after free school meals.

What your post does is show that they don't want to spend the money on it, and neither do you. It doesn't discredit it at all. It's like Nice trying to work out whether cancer drugs are effective or not.
It's about cost effectiveness, not whether it works or not.

'What your post does show us that they don't want to spend the money on it, and neither do you.

That's it exactly DJ

Surely the sad thing is all those young children being shipped off to school for breakfast. Whatever happened to the days when the whole family sat and had breakfast together? Work has taken over our lives to such an extent now that children are just one more complication to be dealt with.

I agree with that, Deedaa. It's like it's normal these days for both parents to work.

Did anyone else see Dominic Raab saying this morning that people don't go to food banks because they are poor, but because they have a cashflow problem!
I can just see them turning up at their GPs saying they've got a cashflow problem.

For those who never saw Dominic Raab. I think he might have lost himself a few votes.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/29/tory-mp-dominic-raab-jeered-over-food-bank-comments

I went to work - I didn't realise it was something new. Somehow I managed to get breakfast down all the DC before we went out (even a cooked one sometimes!) but if parents have to be at work at a certain time a distance away from the DC's school, breakfast clubs are a wonderful idea.

dj everyone I know that is family, friends and neighbours all work with children. The cost of living is very high here in SE.

It's like it's normal these days for both parents to work.

ps DH worked as well - had I had to leave for work at the same time as he did (7 am) breakfast clubs would have been a godsend for us.

Deeda did that ever happen? My dad left for work very early so had breakfast first, my mum worked all her life so was either getting ready or on her way out. My brother was at the grammar school and had to leave early as well (on his bike). I sometimes had breakfast on my own and left for school after everyone else because it was just around the corner.
My ex worked flexi time so DSs and he had breakfast after I had left. Later they went to childminder and had breakfast there.
Breakfast clubs would have been great.

My mum and dad both worked shifts. Sometimes they clashed, so the four of us were home alone. I can remember pushing my sister in a pram to meet my mother from the hospital, so I must have been ten or eleven. This was ten o'clock at night.

Didn't we want something better for our own kids?
What happened to the extra money and leisure we were promised because of machines taking over the work?

I have my grandkids here at 8 am., take the youngest to school, pick her up at the end of the day.
Her parents would much rather work shorter hours, but they've both had less than a 1 percent pay rise since this government has been in power, so can't afford to work shorter hours. Their mother has two jobs. It's wrong.
Wrong to say it happens, too. We shouldn't be accepting that both parents have to work all the time, even when their kids are young.

Going to work sure beat staying at home tidying up everyone else's crap untidy rooms.