End child poverty

[Bentley Bullet]

No, people in financial need don't become better off during the holidays. They never have done.

[IDM]

So you agree with me then.?

The extension of an existing provision which will cost peanuts to the government in the bigger picture isn’t really a debate is it.?

FSM and eligibility in general is another issue, but that isn’t what this is all about.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Over the summer the taxpayer subsidised families, however wealthy, going out for a meal via the Eat Out to Help Out Scheme.

Taxpayers subsidise the cafes and restaraunts in the HoC where MP's earn £80 000 a year.

Why is it the country can't provide meals for children whose parents have been made redundant, or had their wages cut due to no fault of their own, over the half-term holidays again?

Why can't councils use the funds they receive for unused school meals and keep at full profit?

Because they are not allowed. Neither are schools. That's what yesterdys vote was about that the Tory's voted against - extending provision of a service.

There is no left-over money anyway. Our school precept is decided by a number of criteria and the number of children on roll entitled to FSM is one of them. We then allocate the budget on that. It doesn't matter if the children eat the meals or not - or even leave - the money has been and gone before the year even starts.

How have Doncaster managed it then?

I have physically seen and been involved in the conversations to look at how much can be made out of FSM.  As an example those on FSM will get an allowance each day. If that allowance is unused the allowance is removed from the account of the child. Where is that money going?

Also for those that do pay how is it right that profit is added in some cases by 4 different entities before a child is charged?

I am on the finance committee of our school and it is our task to agree the budget for this year. I have it here in front of me

We have two income lines, one is a lump sum allocated by the council based on numbers on roll (which takes into account FSM), the other is Pupil Premium which is based entirely on how many disadvantaged children (FSM) are on the roll.

We have about 30 expenditure lines - by far the largest is staff costs. The Pupil Premium money, which has to be accounted for in detail, most of that gets spent on extra staff and resources - because these children require extra resources to 'catch up'.

There is no money left. It doesn't matter whether the children have meals or not, the money is allocated already and its gone. The only 'extra' we can make is by hiring the facilities after hours, which ain't happening.

How Doncaster and the other councils have managed to fund the holiday schemes I don't know - it certainly hasn't come from education budgets.

Authorities will manage it in different ways of course as will various academies etc.  Certainly in my experience 4 years ago in very different authorities it was very different to your scenario and many of them dealt with it differently aswell, which is a strange thing isn't it.


I can't speak for you area but some of the things I've seen authority schools spending on is laughable at best.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

What some folks on here seem to forget is that Rashford isn’t campaigning for FSM, period - ie which people should benefit or not in general. 

It’s about extending the existing scheme from term time to school holidays.. 

Do people in financial need suddenly become better off during the holidays.?

You raise an interesting point here.  Why as a society don't we offer free meals for all kids at all times through vouchers etc?  I don't know the costings this being the problem.

I do find it odd we means test this, same with child benefit (which I get and have to then pay back in tax and I have a big problem with that as I've said before), it's for the kids not us.

As for the ridiculous comments on where it goes, that's just a stupid mp not understanding the basics. Issue it in vouchers specific for this as they have done prior and it's solved.

The downside of this will be those who have decent money etc who will be taking advantage of the charity of restaurants etc, that's very sad.

[wilts rover]

What some folks on here seem to forget is that Rashford isn’t campaigning for FSM, period - ie which people should benefit or not in general. 

It’s about extending the existing scheme from term time to school holidays.. 

Do people in financial need suddenly become better off during the holidays.?

Not quite. What Rashford is campaigning for - and 322 Tory MP's voted against - is to extend free school meal provision through holiday periods during a pandemic that has caused serious financial problems for many of those families affected.

That's it, that's all he is asking for.

£ billions of government money has been lost throught fraund, incompetence and dodgy contracts, £ millions were given to subsidise perfectly wealthy families eating out. MP's have subsidised meals all year round (and retain use of the facilities even when they have left parliament).

Yet we can't fund meals for children in financial hardship through no fault of their own.

[IDM]

That’s kind of what I meant - more kids have been put into a position to need FSM because of the pandemic which they can get in term time..  the big deal at the moment is extending this into the holidays.?

[tyke1962]

No such problems for the well off of course , one rule for us and one for the traditional tory voter .

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/oct/24/how-londons-top-restaurants-are-skewering-the-covid-rules

[Donnywolf]

UKIP could have been been in power under PR, would it have been more accepted?

UKIP could have got 83 MPs in 2015 and Conservatives 244  thats 327 if they formed a Coalition. DUP would not have had 10 Seats though probably 2 for 329 out of 650 some of who do not take their Seats (Sinn Fein for a start)

So in the UKIP surge they would have got 83 and a bigger voice but cant guess if they would join with Tories or what might have happened if they did and they tried to get votes through the Commons - where less defectors could "thwart - great word" any Bill they didnt like more easily

Suppose looking at the Maths one of the big 2 would probably still win but would have to drive hard bargains with potential partners which didnt work with Cameron / Clegg in partnership as Lib Dems got agreements for Tuition Fees for one and a PR sytsem (I seem to remember). Cameron then hung his out to dry and they had to ditch Tuition Fees and a very watered down PR system failed (I cant remember the details of that so may be wrong)

It would certainly have been tighter 

[MachoMadness]

https://twitter.com/DBanksy/status/1319955251286466560?s=19

Another Tory MP who's been taken "out of context" by someone sharing her whole statement verbatim. Strange how this keeps happening.

[albie]

Never mind starving kids....the Government could do so much more to help these distressed gentlefolk;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHdzkBhyweY

Priorities, innit?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Excellent efforts by everyone who is keeping this issue in the spotlight.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54678082

I sense a Govt climbdown is imminent.

[MachoMadness]

Genuine question - is the government able to reverse something even though a majority in Parliament voted against it?

[BillyStubbsTears]

No it's not. But it's a bit more complicated than that.

A parliamentary vote can stop a Govt enacting a policy. But it can't force the Govt to enact a policy.

[selby]

  Billy, if the government do an about turn they will only take the money back off say local government to pay for it and say they have already given it to them for emergencies.
  And it will be distributed by vouchers.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

  Billy, if the government do an about turn they will only take the money back off say local government to pay for it and say they have already given it to them for emergencies.
  And it will be distributed by vouchers.

Which frankly is what they should have done in the first place.

[EasyforDennis]

This government and PM must be the most stupid in history.

Who does their PR? Let me guess. It's decided by a certain Mr Cummings.

Why oh why doesn't Doris get rid of him. It is one disaster after another. How many u turns have we had so far? and we can all see the next one coming very shortly.

I know Johnson doesn't need any help making himself look a fool but to continue to have Dominatrix Cummings as his advisor has to be the biggest PR disaster ever.

[BillyStubbsTears]

  Billy, if the government do an about turn they will only take the money back off say local government to pay for it and say they have already given it to them for emergencies.
  And it will be distributed by vouchers.

No. Absolutely not. In the current circumstances, the Govt can ( in fact MUST) borrow or print as much money as it needs to. That's textbook economics. There's no need to rob Peter to pay Paul.

[Filo]

I see Hancock lied about Rashford and Johnson being in communication on TV this morning, later this morning Johnson confirmed he hadn’t spoken to Rashford since June, lie after lie after lie!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hancock is beyond belief. Right from the start of this crisis when he said the Govt had been discussing food deliveries to the shielded with supermarket bosses, he just lies instinctively when he's asked a question. They aren't even vital questions. And the lies are about matter that are easily, independently checked. It's a ridiculous approach, and frankly very unsettling.

[Ldr]

Vouchers wouldn't alleviate anything, always find a corner shop willing to sell cigs for surestart milk vouchers up here

[wilts rover]

Good piece here from Newsnight if anyone is seriousy interested in the actual facts on child poverty in the UK. The main stats from it are:

4.2 million children are in relative child poverty (2.4 million of whom in absolute poverty, 3.7 million in absolute poverty after housing costs)
72% of kids living in poverty are in working households.
2.5m live in food insecure households.

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1320725467725484032

[Donnywolf]

Hancock is beyond belief. Right from the start of this crisis when he said the Govt had been discussing food deliveries to the shielded with supermarket bosses, he just lies instinctively when he's asked a question. They aren't even vital questions. And the lies are about matter that are easily, independently checked. It's a ridiculous approach, and frankly very unsettling.

He dug himself into a hole by pronising 100000 tests by the end of (was it) May and looked to have no chance of doing it.

They then "baled him out" by posting that huge amount of Test Kits. Even then he hadnt really done wht he promised because they probably tested only 60 thou that day - and those were probably double swabbed so 2 tests on 1 person

Question is WHY ? Why did he have to promise to do something like that when there was no pressure on him to do so ? And my perennial question WHY? Why did he and the rest of them lie. Why not just come clean and say sorry it proved difficult but we will continue to "ramp up" (god I hate that phrase) testing until it covers our needs as a Country

[BillyStubbsTears]

Fascinating interview on R4 PM programme today, with Tim Montgomerie, who I always thought to be quite far to the right in the Tory party.

He was an adviser to Johnson on dealing with social inequality. He said he left the post because of his moral stance on how the No10 team (read: Cummings) was dealing with the issue. He said they'd identified poor working families, who traditionally vote as ones that could be persuaded to be support the Tories. And they had aimed all their policies on benefits at them. That was the whole Red Wall strategy.

He said there was a total lack of interest in what he called the "broken poor" who had become detached from society, often (Montgomerie's words) through bad luck, not through any fault of their own. He said the broken poor are the real societal problem, but No10 wasn't interested because they don't vote.

Very, very depressing interview.

[SydneyRover]

pants on fire ....

''Treasury rejects claims it refused extra £150m for free school meals
Education secretary Gavin Williamson did not ask for funds for half-term, say officials''

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/oct/26/treasury-rejects-claims-it-refused-extra-150m-for-free-school-meals