[Ammi]

The Lib Dems have suggested they secured funding for free school meals in exchange for Conservative plans for a marriage tax break.

Nick Clegg has announced that every child in England between reception and year two will get free school lunches.

Asked if they got "anything back" for the Tories pushing through a tax allowance for married couples, a Lib Dem spokesman said: "This."

He added: "They want to spend the same amount on marriage tax."

The Lib Dem announcement will prompt speculation that Conservatives are likely to give more details of a tax break for married couples at their conference, and that the Tory plan would be worth an equivalent £600m.

In his speech on Wednesday, Lib Dem leader Mr Clegg will compare the two policies. He is due to say his priority is free school meals, while the Conservatives' is a tax break for married couples.

The free school meals policy will begin in September next year and will be worth about £437 per child to families.

The full financial detail of how it will be funded is not expected to be unveiled until the Autumn Statement.

Three pilot studies were run in Islington and Newham in London and in County Durham. The Liberal Democrats argue 3-5% more children reach key stage one attainment levels as a consequence - on average putting children two months ahead of where they would otherwise have been.

The party says the move would provide a bigger boost than the introduction of the literacy hour - brought in in 1998 to guarantee a daily amount of literacy teaching.

Four in 10 children living in poverty, the party says, do not get free school meals - either because they are not eligible or because their families do not claim them.

The Lib Dems will abstain on a budget resolution to introduce a transferable tax allowance for married couples, as set out in the coalition agreement

[Cherie]

yay for a marriage tax break, there used to be something similar on mortgages some years back but it was scrapped. I'm all for paying less tax, and very good news that all children are to get free school meals.(well up to year 2)

[zakman440]

if only they had brought this in years ago.

[joeysteele]

I agree with the move but don't fully agree that free meals will be given regardless of the income of the Parents.
So whether really rich or poor these meals become a right,I would prefer them to be targetted.

I would 'never' stay for school dinners anyway. Ugh.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I agree with the move but don't fully agree that free meals will be given regardless of the income of the Parents.
So whether really rich or poor these meals become a right,I would prefer them to be targetted.

I would 'never' stay for school dinners anyway. Ugh.

It is an unusual decision given the same government have capped child benefit, still I think it is a good move, I agree on school dinners the quality is not always good.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I agree with the move but don't fully agree that free meals will be given regardless of the income of the Parents.
So whether really rich or poor these meals become a right,I would prefer them to be targetted.

I would 'never' stay for school dinners anyway. Ugh.

The problem with that is that young children especially aren't going to understand the importance of eating a meal during the school day and are often to embarrassed to reveal that they are "poor" by claiming their free meal. Considering the cost if a year's schooling for one child (several thousand), this small amount per head on top of that doesn't cost a lot.

that said, i agree about school meals in general, the quality of the food is awful and my own kids will definitely be taking food with them rather than eating that muck, we eat completely unprocessed foods and mainly organic here and I'd not be confident that they wouldn't be being fed the cheapest mass produced foods possible in a school dinner.

The claim that parents can't afford to feed their kids properly really bothers me, too... it's simply not true. Any household can afford to send a child with decent food, every day. It's not expensive really. The only explanation can be that the parents would rather spend the money on something else :/.

This is what also leads to the misconception that benefits levels are too high, "if people can afford x, y, z"... They're NOT too High, theyre at the right level for people to eat healthily and raise healthy children. unfortunately, some "parents" CHOOSE to spend that money selfishly on crap for themselves, and their kids go without, living on nuggets and chips.

[Livia]

I don't see why it has to be an "either/or" situation. Let's have both. Let's cut something else. Overseas aid, for a start. Not saying that it should be cut completely, but it needs an overhaul. If we clawed back a bit from countries we're giving to, who just don't need it, maybe more of our own citizens could live a little easier.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Livia

I don't see why it has to be an "either/or" situation. Let's have both. Let's cut something else. Overseas aid, for a start. Not saying that it should be cut completely, but it needs an overhaul. If we clawed back a bit from countries we're giving to, who just don't need it, maybe more of our own citizens could live a little easier.

I don't think it is an either / or... I think it was an agreement trade? Lib dems didn't really want a marriage tax break and cons didn't want free school meals (this is the Tories of course... They'd be dishing out gruel to kids on benefits if they had their way) but they basically said "OK, we'll sign off in the kids meals if you sign off on the marriage break".

I dont know why they need such schoolyard tactics to be fair. A ridiculous way to run a country really.

Both aren't bad policies and neither are costly... so no need for such drama! Allowing couples to combine their tax band allowance makes a lot of sense. currently we have a situation where one person earning 40k with a stay at home partner end up with a significantly lower household income than a couple who both work and bring home 20k each. Which is stupid. It encourages two parents to enter a saturated work market and farm out their kids to childcare, rather than to have a similar lifestyle but with one parent actually raising their kids.

We live in a society where kids are being raised by teachers and childcare services and only see any real parenting at the weekend. It's a shambles.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I don't think it is an either / or... I think it was an agreement trade? Lib dems didn't really want a marriage tax break and cons didn't want free school meals (this is the Tories of course... They'd be dishing out gruel to kids on benefits if they had their way) but they basically said "OK, we'll sign off in the kids meals if you sign off on the marriage break".

I dont know why they need such schoolyard tactics to be fair. A ridiculous way to run a country really.

Both aren't bad policies and neither are costly... so no need for such drama! Allowing couples to combine their tax band allowance makes a lot of sense. currently we have a situation where one person earning 40k with a stay at home partner end up with a significantly lower household income than a couple who both work and bring home 20k each. Which is stupid. It encourages two parents to enter a saturated work market and farm out their kids to childcare, rather than to have a similar lifestyle but with one parent actually raising their kids.

We live in a society where kids are being raised by teachers and childcare services and only see any real parenting at the weekend. It's a shambles.

Yes I understand that, but I don't think these are the things they should be trading. I work with Conservative MPs right now (and while some may fit your "feeding kids gruel" description, by no means do they all think like that) and I think they should be both giving married people tax breaks and helping people with kids. This way they can stop making charity cases of our own population while being one of the top 10 richest countries in the world. It's obscene. And trading off a marriage tax break for school lunches is just hopelessly out of touch and ill thought-through.