[AnnieK]

This will drive the numbers of working class kids out of private education and back into state education therefore not saving money as the number of primary state school places will need to increase, therefore making more mouths to feed. Also, children who are in need of free lunches already get means tested free lunches.

I went to a private school, my parents were working class, I didn't go abroad till i was 18 and could pay for myself, non-uniform day was a nightmare given the number of wealthy kids but hey ho....that's the education my parents absolutely skinted to provide for me....to deprive working class families of having that option by further increasing school fees is detrimental to those kids.....who's going to fix that?

[user104658]

They get free meals up to P3 here and... I have to be totally honest... they feed them utter ****. Just... garbage. Cheap frozen pizza, cheap sausage rolls and chips, etc. Bleugh.

On the other hand I do let my daughter have them more often than not because A) she wants to sit with her friends (packed lunch kids sit at the other end of the hall to school lunch kids) and B) I'm rly lazy

But she's P3 now so will likely be almost always packed lunch from next year (and I imagine her friends will be too, so solves the main issue). I don't mid her eating that stuff really, it's not her main meal of the day and she has a decent breakfast and dinner so it's just to tide her over really... but I would certainly begrudge paying £2 a day for 3 fish fingers and a handful of chips worth at most about 50p.

[Kizzy]

There was no backlash when council tax was hiked to pay for adult social care.... how is this proposal any different?

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

There was no backlash when council tax was hiked to pay for adult social care.... how is this proposal any different?

It's probably in order for the Conservatives to do what they like Kizzy.
No matter the hardship that may bring or how heartless it may be or who it affects.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

There was no backlash when council tax was hiked to pay for adult social care.... how is this proposal any different?

Probably because kids that actually need free meals already get them.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

There was no backlash when council tax was hiked to pay for adult social care.... how is this proposal any different?

Possibly because that was hiked for everyone - not a targeted select group some of whom are already pushed to the limit to try and provide for their children in the best way that they feel possible.

Those who already qualified for council tax relief still got it and extra help was provided where needed.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

There was no backlash when council tax was hiked to pay for adult social care.... how is this proposal any different?

Because money would be wasted on children who don't need it. Those that do already receive free school meals. He said it would be provided for all children.

There is a lack of money and it shouldn't be spent on meals that are not needed. It is manipulative and intended to tug at the heart strings of those gullible enough to think children are going hungry at school.

[Northern Monkey]

Fixing a 'problem'that doesn't need fixing and creating more problems.Sounds about right.

[DemolitionRed]

For all of you up in arms about putting VAT on private school fees, the Conservative Government have already announced they are going to do this (back in February). The only difference between Corbyn's and Goves suggestion is, Corbyn wants to give that money back to poorer students and the Conservatives want to use it to to pay the deficit.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

For all of you up in arms about putting VAT on private school fees, the Conservative Government have already announced they are going to do this (back in February). The only difference between Corbyn's and Goves suggestion is, Corbyn wants to give that money back to poorer students and the Conservatives want to use it to to pay the deficit.

Good point.

[Ammi]

...it's hard to think of any positives with this, it seems like such a strange proposal by the Labour Party...since the introduction of Universal Free School meals for Key Stage 1 children by the present government, it's meant a huge cut to school's budgets because for each pupil registered as eligible for free school meals, each of those pupils received pupil premium funding to help with their attainment...this funding is vital to also enable schools to be able to subsidise so many things for families who otherwise would have their children missing out and therefore not having the same opportunities as other children have..with the present system of Universal Free School meals for the first 3 years of a school life, it's meant that families no longer need to apply so therefore the funding for their children is not given in the absence of an application....what is being proposed here is to extend that 3 years to 7 years, a child's entire Primary School time...?...so saving many millions of pounds I presume with that alone...?...and that saving and that revenue being taken directly from the families who need it most....just crazy as and an awful proposal that really needs serious thinking about....

[Ammi]

..and that's without the revenue from the tax on private schools...

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...it's hard to think of any positives with this, it seems like such a strange proposal by the Labour Party...since the introduction of Universal Free School meals for Key Stage 1 children by the present government, it's meant a huge cut to school's budgets because for each pupil registered as eligible for free school meals, each of those pupils received pupil premium funding to help with their attainment...this funding is vital to also enable schools to be able to subsidise so many things for families who otherwise would have their children missing out and therefore not having the same opportunities as other children have..with the present system of Universal Free School meals for the first 3 years of a school life, it's meant that families no longer need to apply so therefore the funding for their children is not given in the absence of an application....what is being proposed here is to extend that 3 years to 7 years, a child's entire Primary School time...?...so saving many millions of pounds I presume with that alone...?...and that saving and that revenue being taken directly from the families who need it most....just crazy as and an awful proposal that really needs serious thinking about....

QUEEN

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...it's hard to think of any positives with this, it seems like such a strange proposal by the Labour Party...since the introduction of Universal Free School meals for Key Stage 1 children by the present government, it's meant a huge cut to school's budgets because for each pupil registered as eligible for free school meals, each of those pupils received pupil premium funding to help with their attainment...this funding is vital to also enable schools to be able to subsidise so many things for families who otherwise would have their children missing out and therefore not having the same opportunities as other children have..with the present system of Universal Free School meals for the first 3 years of a school life, it's meant that families no longer need to apply so therefore the funding for their children is not given in the absence of an application....what is being proposed here is to extend that 3 years to 7 years, a child's entire Primary School time...?...so saving many millions of pounds I presume with that alone...?...and that saving and that revenue being taken directly from the families who need it most....just crazy as and an awful proposal that really needs serious thinking about....

Hello Ammi welcome back

Was thinking do schools have to factor in the costings of school meals provision into their annual budget, if so would that then be be freed up for other things with that debt removed?

[AnnieK]

And I for one am as against any party doing it....nothing to do with who has said what...I'm not blinkered or biased by politics in that way.

[smudgie]

So does EX Educations minister Gove run the country, or the Tories?
The fact that he wrote what he thinks about it in the paper doesn't mean the Tories intend to grant him his wishes..surely.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by smudgie

So does EX Educations minister Gove run the country, or the Tories?
The fact that he wrote what he thinks about it in the paper doesn't mean the Tories intend to grant him his wishes..surely.

No but then Corbyn isn't PM either.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

No but then Corbyn isn't PM either.

No, but he is touting it.
As leader of his party.

[arista]

Nice to have you back Ammi

[user104658]

OMG AMMI omg omg omg

omg

[joeysteele]

Absolutely Livia, I see some merits to the policy but I do feel the plan of funding it,is being planned from the wrong source.
I'd hope it is looked at.again and the funding raised from elsewhere.I

[Livia]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Absolutely Livia, I see some merits to the policy but I do feel the plan of funding it,is being planned from the wrong source.
I'd hope it is looked at.again and the funding raised from elsewhere.I

And you know, for the record... I don't think Corbyn is a bad man. I think he has some very honourable intentions. I do think he is going about it the wrong way. He needs to engage the core Labour voters which he doesn't seem to be doing right now. We do need a strong Labour party... we need a strong opposition to hold the government to account but they're so wrapped up in their own mess at the moment it's not happening. I hope they sort themselves out.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Livia

And you know, for the record... I don't think Corbyn is a bad man. I think he has some very honourable intentions. I do think he is going about it the wrong way. He needs to engage the core Labour voters which he doesn't seem to be doing right now. We do need a strong Labour party... we need a strong opposition to hold the government to account but they're so wrapped up in their own mess at the moment it's not happening. I hope they sort themselves out.

Totally agree

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Livia

And you know, for the record... I don't think Corbyn is a bad man. I think he has some very honourable intentions. I do think he is going about it the wrong way. He needs to engage the core Labour voters which he doesn't seem to be doing right now. We do need a strong Labour party... we need a strong opposition to hold the government to account but they're so wrapped up in their own mess at the moment it's not happening. I hope they sort themselves out.

I think it is a good thing no early election is likely forthcoming for Labour.
I don't believe Jeremy Corbyn will lead Labour in an election in 2020.

I do believe Corbyn's best legacy now would be the cementing of some of his main policies,which do seem to have popular support from good numbers.

However he is not reaching the voters vitally needed, you can hold the undying loyal support of those around you for sure but not gathering that much needed new support from voters, leaves no room to progress.

Very sad is the way I look at UK politics right now.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I think it is a good thing no early election is likely forthcoming for Labour.
I don't believe Jeremy Corbyn will lead Labour in an election in 2020.

I do believe Corbyn's best legacy now would be the cementing of some of his main policies,which do seem to have popular support from good numbers.

However he is not reaching the voters vitally needed, you can hold the undying loyal support of those around you for sure but not gathering that much needed new support from voters, leaves no room to progress.

Very sad is the way I look at UK politics right now.

I have it on good authority - ie gossip from the Tories I used to work with - that the consensus of opinion in Matthew Parker Street is that Theresa is keen on calling an early election while they're unexpectedly doing well in by-elections and while Labour's ratings are low. I really, really think that would be a mistake all round.