News3 mins ago
Universal Free School Meals
What do you think of this scheme?
http://
I think it's a great idea, but then there are others who might think that free school meals don't make sense for those who can afford to pay.
http://
I think it's a great idea, but then there are others who might think that free school meals don't make sense for those who can afford to pay.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
So if I've got this straight, sp, providing free school meals is going to educate children in matters nutritional, stop them stuffing rubbish down their necks and end obesity.
Yeah, right.
Thusfar free school meals are going to improve education, improve child health, improve life chances, end obesity. Shall I add "end all wars" and "eliminate world famine" to complete the set? Or does that come next month?
Yeah, right.
Thusfar free school meals are going to improve education, improve child health, improve life chances, end obesity. Shall I add "end all wars" and "eliminate world famine" to complete the set? Or does that come next month?
It's an ill thought out idea - those that were eligible for free school lunches could have just claimed them. Our school (for practical reasons I presume) have made reception and KS1 meals compulsory (for those wishing to call me a liar, I haven't challenged this). Just made things a bit tricky for me, waste of money IMO.
You're quite welcome, Kromo. Always helps, I find, to inject a few facts into the debate even if it sometimes spoils the arguments :-)
I'm certainly not suggesting you are telling porkies, sheerardk, but when you say "...have made reception and KS1 meals compulsory " What exactly do you mean? Are they force-feeding the children? Or have they refused to allow them to take packed lunches? If they have it needs to be challenged because there is a world of difference between providing free lunches for those who want them and preventing children from eating what their parents have provided for them. Now that I really do take issue with. The State has no right whatsoever to prevent parents from feeding their children in whatever way they see fit and to prevent them taking a packed lunch to school is, I would suggest, somewhat overstepping their remit (unless someone can explain it to me).
I'm certainly not suggesting you are telling porkies, sheerardk, but when you say "...have made reception and KS1 meals compulsory " What exactly do you mean? Are they force-feeding the children? Or have they refused to allow them to take packed lunches? If they have it needs to be challenged because there is a world of difference between providing free lunches for those who want them and preventing children from eating what their parents have provided for them. Now that I really do take issue with. The State has no right whatsoever to prevent parents from feeding their children in whatever way they see fit and to prevent them taking a packed lunch to school is, I would suggest, somewhat overstepping their remit (unless someone can explain it to me).
NJ - I wasn't referring to you with my comment about lying.
At our primary, where parents have said their child doesn't want the hot meal option they were then told they would get the packed lunch option - I don't know of anyone who has challenged this. I have decided go give it a go for half a term but if my children start complaining that they don't like the food/aren't eating their lunch then I will go back to packed lunches.
At our primary, where parents have said their child doesn't want the hot meal option they were then told they would get the packed lunch option - I don't know of anyone who has challenged this. I have decided go give it a go for half a term but if my children start complaining that they don't like the food/aren't eating their lunch then I will go back to packed lunches.
Of course it is also good that children get a break now and again so I shall look forward to them getting free vacations to the Seychelles for a fortnight each year, courtesy of the tax payer.
They should also have clothes so maybe the government can come to an arrangement with Saville Row too.
They should also be clean so annual refits of bathrooms everywhere for those with kids. Yippee
etc. etc. etc.
Meanwhile isn't there a thread here about how one might need to rob benefit from pensioners in order to fund care systems ? Well no problem the tax payer will have plenty left over still to give once all the kids have had their fill.
They should also have clothes so maybe the government can come to an arrangement with Saville Row too.
They should also be clean so annual refits of bathrooms everywhere for those with kids. Yippee
etc. etc. etc.
Meanwhile isn't there a thread here about how one might need to rob benefit from pensioners in order to fund care systems ? Well no problem the tax payer will have plenty left over still to give once all the kids have had their fill.
No, I know you were not referring to me, sherrard. I simply didn't want my question to you to look like I didn't believe you.
I most certainly do think the compulsory lunch thing should be challenged. Some schools seem to have strayed into the misunderstanding that they should control what children have to eat. All well and good for meals provided by the school, but if that option is declined I cannot in my wildest dreams see how Head Teachers would get away with denying a child the food that its parents have provided. It seems just a further step towards the State taking over all the responsibilities that parents have in raising their children. It is not a matter for schools to control what children eat for their lunch (except as I have described, where they are providing it).
I most certainly do think the compulsory lunch thing should be challenged. Some schools seem to have strayed into the misunderstanding that they should control what children have to eat. All well and good for meals provided by the school, but if that option is declined I cannot in my wildest dreams see how Head Teachers would get away with denying a child the food that its parents have provided. It seems just a further step towards the State taking over all the responsibilities that parents have in raising their children. It is not a matter for schools to control what children eat for their lunch (except as I have described, where they are providing it).
Like I said earlier, sherrard, these meals are provided by contractors to a price, not to a quality. That's why I also suggested that retrochic's menu may look and sound nice. However...
WE seem to have moved, in a very short space of time (politically anyway) from providing school meals at a cost to parents as an option, to providing them free for all and now, it seems in some areas, to providing them free for all with any alternatives outlawed. I thought I was joking when I mentioned forced-feeding. Now I'm not so sure !!!
WE seem to have moved, in a very short space of time (politically anyway) from providing school meals at a cost to parents as an option, to providing them free for all and now, it seems in some areas, to providing them free for all with any alternatives outlawed. I thought I was joking when I mentioned forced-feeding. Now I'm not so sure !!!
