Free School Meals

Once again the Tories are under fire for voting in changes to limit eligibility for free school meals (source: https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2018/mar/13/one-million-children-hungry-new-plans-free-school-meals), here's my take.

I was on welfare for many years and my kids, at times, received free school meals. Obviously this was now some time ago and that is important for my POV.

In the Guardian article cited above there's a really important paragraph early on which reads:

While the rollout of universal credit has got underway,

the children of parents who receive it have been entitled to free school meals.

Were this to continue, it would have ensured almost all children

living in poverty, including those in low income working families,

would have received a guaranteed school lunch every day.

However, the government now intends to introduce a net household earnings threshold of £7,400 (£18,000 to £24,000 a year including benefits).

This tells us that the 'cuts' are actually a reintroduction of means testing which was temporarily suspended during the changeover to Universal Credit. Universal Credit is an umbrella benefit covering many top-ups that were NOT an eligibility for free school meals beforehand; when benefits were separate the entitlements varied, the introduction of Universal Credit has served to confuse this. This is a return to how things had been before, including during Labour's 1997-2010 leadership, and the people who are going to 'lose out' were not previously entitled.

It also tells us that household earnings can reach £7,400 p.a. before free school meals are withdrawn. Perhaps that threshold is 'too low' but the line has to be drawn somewhere, otherwise you end up with a mockery of everyone who is paying their own way.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbin tweeted his position on the subject (https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/973645957773619201):

I would say that Northern Ireland as one of the most deprived areas of the UK is not unworthy of an exemption (parts of the UK already get stuff like free prescriptions) but "playing politics with the health of our children"??? Er...the health or 'our' children is gov't responsibility when it comes to access to healthcare and safeguarding children from abuse but day-to-day feeding them is surely not? The gov't is not responsible for you feeding your kid, or you changing their bum, or you teaching them right from wrong.

I HATED being a parent but this honestly makes me so mad. I know Corbin will never pass up a chance to attack May but this really is ridiculous. Why is it acceptable to pass the buck and not provide your own child basic care, expecting the tax-payer to do your duty?! Free school meals will continue to be available for families considered most in need and the cuts apply to those best able to shoulder their own responsibilities.

My situation was this: I was pushed (by a Labour gov't) into part time work in 2010 which meant I was no longer eligible for free school meals or Council Tax Benefit...despite the fact I was earning less than this new threshold. In fact, until I came off welfare completely in 2017 I only earned more in a year TWICE - £7476 in 2013 and £7472 in 2017.

Did I begrudge having to pay for my kids' food? No. I had already had to do this when home-schooling and when one of my kids attended a school where the free meals where wholly inadequate. Not only that but I accepted that feeding MY KIDS was entirely MY RESPONSIBILITY.

I resented the loss of Council Tax Benefit which was far more useful to me, and I resented the fact that my children's educational attainment no longer counted in the category they had been raised in - because that is assessed by entitlement to free school meals. My kids got GCSEs, A levels and went to university and I think that should be counted in the statistics for low-income families.

I also want to point out that benefits are, in most if not all of these circumstances, already calculated to cover the cost of feeding dependent children either within the benefit payment itself or from the parent/s earnings. You do not get any more money when your kid is out of school - for the holidays, under exclusion or if you are home-schooling. The buck stops with PARENTS not schools or local authorities or centralised government.

Over and over I see comments like "this may be the only meal that child gets" ...if that is true the parents should be prosecuted and the child removed from their care! If parents are so irresponsible to not feed their kids with their earnings / welfare cheque then that is their fault! 

"One mum told us that after she’d started work,

and lost free school meals for her son,

she sometimes had to send him to school

with just a bread roll for lunchtime."

I'm sorry but WHY?! That's just disgusting... If she's working part time she's most likely receiving benefits to top-up her wages. Where are her wages going?! Maybe there's a really good explanation  for this mum's finances but I can't begin to imagine although, as I say, I've been on welfare and am low income. My kids went without a lot of things but they were ALWAYS fed.

I do feel sorry for people who are low income and don't have an entitlement, especially those who are in much less fortunate situations, regards rent and other expenses, than I was, but at the same time, where do you draw the line???

There are people earning less than £18-24,000 a year who get NOTHING in benefits so why should those on welfare get more?! Why should families with far higher incomes get yet more help? I don't understand... It makes no sense that it's better to be on benefits than in work! This cap is there to level the playing field, to ensure those most in need get extra help.

I'm currently earning an estimated £8000 per year off welfare as my kids are now adults but I am still expected to support my at uni daughter to the tune of £3000 per year - if I had a school-age child I would be entitled to nothing. 

Cookie Cutter Culture

This week I read a very disturbing article about Cookie Cutter Culture (hereafter refered to as CCC) - by which I mean the one-size-fits-all approach adopted through so many aspects of life.

The article dealt with complaints from charities that they are losing many of their best volunteers to the British Government's Welfare-To-Work programme.

"What's wrong with that?!" I hear you cry. "If someone can volunteer they can get a job!"

Well, that's the problem. Welfare-To-Work isn't about employment, it's about crunching numbers and ticking boxes.

From my own experience I know that the staff at the JobCentre aren't interested in helping you, or getting you into worthwhile employment. They're not interested in your qualifications or skills or aptitude. They want you to take any job that means they can tick you off their list, no matter how unsuitable it is. If you're back in a month cos it didn't work out they don't care.

I was stressed out of my mind dealing with the JobCentre. My "advisor" was just a bully to whom I was another worthless dole-scrounger. I had genuine concerns about returning to work which were well founded. Their "help" was non-existent and fortunately I found a job without their interferance...although they still took credit for it!

So back to the point...these charity volunteers are often well educated people, university graduates even. Often they are volunteering to get experience in their chosen sector, waiting for a window of opportunity to allow them to get their foot on the ladder.

The article I refer to drew on cases of such people who, under Welfare-To-Work, were unable to continue volunteering as they were instead made to take degrading classes in 'how to write a CV' or forced to take minimum wage dead-end jobs like shelf-stacking. Who does this help? These people need plenty of additional financial support to make ends meet - it's hardly being off the dole! These people aren't improving their employment prospects, they're not using their potential. Also, these are low IQ jobs that are being denied to genuinely low IQ job seekers!

The Welfare-To-Work programme is based on one very flawed system - not the benefits system itself but CCC. Everyone is expected to fit a certain stereotype and the solution ONLY fits to them. They expect people on benefits to be lazy and ill educated and they have no flexibility for anyone who doesn't fit that criteria.

Imagine being a university graduate who is being ordered to take a class aimed at the barely literate. Being put on a 'work-preparedness' course - whatever that is supposed to mean - which ends in the chaos of a bunch of heavily tattooed ex-cons discussing bank robbery! I kid thee not. It's insane!

CCC is infecting every part of our world. Such as schools that don't encourage bright children but who hold them back - segregated into classes by their age not ability. Such as doctors hounding or criticising patients who don't want to be prodded and poked and tested for the zillion and one things that could be wrong with them but probably aren't, or for refusing to take the "precautionary" meds that have a list of side effects as long as your arm...

Would it really be so difficult to match people to available jobs by aptitude and credentials? Or to offer them the back-to-work help most suited to their needs? Or to move a smart child up a class or two at school? Or to lay off the "patient" who feels fine and doesn't want to see the doctor (and lets face it, if YOU want to see the doctor it's a whole different ball game)?

Personally I shouldn't have thought any of these things would be so very hard.

At the end of the day it is your life and your choices but I beg of you to at least consider, where you come up against CCC COMPLAIN! REBEL! REFUSE TO CONFORM!