Free school meals: how to pay down the debt the Lib Dem way

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ph...e-lib-dem-way/

Free school meals: how to pay down the debt, the Lib Dem way

No sooner had Danny Alexander, the Treasury chief secretary, warned Lib Dems that austerity needs to continue to pay down our £1.3 trillion debt, than up pops Nick Clegg to pledge free meals for hundreds of thousands of primary age schoolchildren. The cost: a mere £600m a year. Pupils from poor backgrounds already qualify for free meals so this proposal is to give them to children from families who can afford to pay for them. Which bit of “we haven’t got any money” has passed Mr Clegg by?

Mr Alexander told Lib Dems in Glasgow: “We’ve taken tough decisions to get the deficit under control … But that doesn’t mean the country can then go back to bad old habits. There’s no spending bonanza round the corner.”

But no one told Mr Clegg, it seems. His plan (endorsed by Michael Gove) is said to be a quid pro quo for letting the Tories announce transferable tax allowances for married couples. But the difference is that one is a spending commitment, the other is a tax break. The free school meals are apparently being introduced to improve the quality of school lunches since many youngsters bring in their own food which is lacking in nutrition. This may well be true but unless they are going to be compulsory, the chances are the kids will still want their own. Are they to be banned?

It is argued that families on relatively low incomes give their children packed lunches because they don’t qualify for free school meals, and the cost of a school dinner is prohibitive. That may be true but this is an expensive way of rectifying a cultural problem.

More than that, some secondary schools don’t have the canteen facilities any longer, though they could always bring the food in from outside caterers. There will need to be significant additional investment if all schools are to avoid long dinner queues.

And what about those children whose parents already provide them with a perfectly good cooked meal when they come in after school: why should they eat another at lunch time as well? Will those children be allowed to bring in a packed lunch or be given the money in lieu?

You have to wonder sometimes whether or not your living in a reality as opposed to a parody. We are up to our eyeballs in debt and yet silly vote-buying schemes like this are shoved infront of the masses in a shallow attempt to appear 'caring' to the public. It was just like Chancellor Brown with the 'baby bonds' that he brought in, or when you hear of 'EU grants' - it's your own money being presented back to you as a gift.

There's the famous quote or saying that democracy ultimately is doomed as people will simply vote themselves more of what is unaffordable and thus the state then unravels from that. And one quote I do remember is one the famous economist Milton Friedman once stated: that there's no such thing as a free lunch. It's still true.

I will say this though - at least the money is for once being spent at home rather than being sent away in foreign aid/EU payments.

Thoughts?

[Rozi]

I'm very very very happy that there has finally been a measure put in place by this government to actually attempt to help alleviate some of the increasing financial burden put on families.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm very very very happy that there has finally been a measure put in place by this government to actually attempt to help alleviate some of the increasing financial burden put on families.

And where does the money come from?

[Rozi]

And where does the money come from?

Our taxes, and I am hugely happy for this to be a result of where my taxes go. This country is always always going to have debt, I'm not really sure where your issue with this comes from? Where would you prefer it to go if not to increase the quality of life for a fairly huge proportion of our society?

[lemons]

i think it's a good idea and will probably get more kids eating healthier school food than packed lunches

[MKR&*42]

I'm just concerned by the fact that not all schools are actually promoting healthy lunches. I know my primary school (yeah ok not a preschool but w.e.) had really poor meals in terms of nutrition and didn't really improve much in the past few years.

I just don't want any taxes to be spent so a 3yr old can fork down chips and not have a decent diet.

[Rozi]

I'm just concerned by the fact that not all schools are actually promoting healthy lunches. I know my primary school (yeah ok not a preschool but w.e.) had really poor meals in terms of nutrition and didn't really improve much in the past few years.

I just don't want any taxes to be spent so a 3yr old can fork down chips and not have a decent diet.

It's only going to be 5-7 year olds which seems a bit weird anyway so only infants. But yeah I agree, but I'd rather have kids had the option of having a healthier meal (which there will always be an option for) rather than never have a choice.

[FlyingJesus]

SEND THEM TO THE WORKHOUSE idk it's a nice idea but the quality of school meals has historically been crap let's face it, and I know people who have actually been put off vegetables just because of how awful the mush they were forced to eat at school was. Should really be down to the parents to feed their children properly, it is rather part of the package when you choose to have kids

[Inseriousity.]

SEND THEM TO THE WORKHOUSE idk it's a nice idea but the quality of school meals has historically been crap let's face it, and I know people who have actually been put off vegetables just because of how awful the mush they were forced to eat at school was. Should really be down to the parents to feed their children properly, it is rather part of the package when you choose to have kids

Isn't that much of a misconception nowadays though and people just assume school meals are crap because they were 'back in the day' and that generally school meals are of good quality (although there are bound to be exceptions!)? Pretty sure I read that somewhere lol. As for free school meals for more children, it's unfair to say that it's giving them out to parents who can afford them simply because they don't qualify for it now. If the government is going to waste money I'd rather it was on this than some of the other wackpot schemes they do.

PS. Is this actually going to become government policy or are people just discussing ideas with no intention of ever doing them (which seems to be the norm at party conferences)? Would make the whole piece rather redundant imo.

[Eoin247]

This proposal does seem to be over the top. If the kids bring junk into school now this probably wont change much as they'll prefer the junk, as kids do. Only now every kid is provided with a free meal whether they eat much/any of it. I see a lot of waste coming from this.

I used to live in a boarding school and the waste of food there was terrible, and even then our families were paying for it. Can't even begin to think how much more waste there would be if it was free.