Callistemon21
You are missing the point entirely.
The whole point of advocating free nutritious school dinners for all state pupils is so that every child has a good, balanced meal each school day and there is no discrimination shown to those who have free school meals.
It is up to their parents to see that they have a balanced diet overall
I'm sure they would like to but not all can do this.
I don't think so, the difference between what I am saying is that if you are advocating a free nutritious school dinner for all state pupils, then you can offer that without it having to be cooked and you can include bread as long as the meal is balanced.
Whether that is up to the State or not is an entirely different argument. I am firmly of the belief it is not a matter for the State because I think if you are in a position of your own making that you cannot provide the basic essentials for your children, you shouldn't be having them. If you are in a position not of your own making then of course that is a different story and help should be available. As far as I am concerned, it would be better for those who can pay to pay more to get good food and for better food to be provided for those that "need" it than shove everybody in a cheap food melting pot. Quite frankly, rather than lunch, I'd like to see a good breakfast as a lot of the kids I taught didn't have breakfast and were then starving by lunchtime. How we provide that is another thread!
When I was at Secondary school, we all had tickets for lunch which we handed over at the door. These were handed out in the classroom at the beginning of the week and as money was paid directly to the office, there was no distinction between free school meals and paid for meals as far as the kids were concerned.