//True, and most of it was knee jerk pro-gov / anti poor reactions and when posting opinions suddenly realised they were exposed for not having a scooby about the issue such that they have now (for the most part) shrunk and shriveled back into their caves.//
I've not shrivelled back into my cave. I've been having a G&T and my dinner.
The issue here is whether parents should provide the funds (or more preferably the food) to feed their children during school holidays. Yes, there are a very, very few people who strike hard times. They need help. But the idea that so many people who receive benefits (whether in-work or out-of-work) should have their children's food provided or funded is ridiculous.
The principle that Mr Rashford, MBE, wants to see extended is the provision of free food provided by schools during term time to continue to be funded when schools are closed. The original idea of school meals in day schools was to provide food for pupils who were unable to get home for lunch or whose parents were not available to provide for them. They were paid for. It has moved on since then and now large number of pupils qualify even though their parents may well be at home and the children may be able to easily get there for their lunch. The schools are now acting in loco parentis, often providing breakfast as well.
In school holidays many children will receive their daytime food from somewhere like McDonalds or Dominos. There is no reason whatsoever why taxpayers should fund that. If you are so intent in seeing the funds provided for children's nourishment extended in such a way perhaps you and Mr Rashford, MBE, could launch a fund so that people with a similar conscience to yours could contribute towards feeding other people's children. Those of us who are uncaring uncharitable *** can continue to do nothing (except pay our taxes and NI) and slink back into our caves.