I am saying they need to come up with a better plan then they have. There are headteachers already complaining the free meals stopping and free breakfast for a certain age group the Tories want to bring in will cost even more money then the free meals. Some schools are also saying they have spent loads on kitchens etc to deal with free school meals so will now lose money. So people losing their jobs and schools lose more money having to be bought in isn't a good thing. Also your post response to SIS makes you look a bit like a moany bastard.
Same here, everyone ate together. You payed your dinner money on a monday or you didn't, & nobody knew any different. I'm ashamed to say I sometimes spent my dinner money on cigarettes, and a couple of times I snuck in to the dinner hall expecting to get chucked out, but that never happened.
I'm not being a twat at all. We're talking about the government policy of providing free hot meals to all KS1. That policy is just for infants. Once you get to year 3 (KS2) aged 7/8 then the "qualify" bit comes back in and those who don't qualify have packed lunch from home or pay £2.50 a day for the hot meal. I didn't realise you were talking about secondary school. The policy is just for reception Y1 and Y2 in infants school/primary! To be honest (and yes this is honest) I noticed nothing about who got what at secondary school. I remember the free school meals at Primary because they were lined up on a table to the right with your name on. Not hot though they were sandwiches, crisps a yoghurt and a choccy bar with one of those squash cups you poke the straw through the film lid. I was quite jealous of those because all I got was sarnies and a piece of fruit so I pinched a free meal once in primary. Of course one kid then didn't have a lunch, I was found out and the headmaster called me to the stage where the teachers ate their meal, shouted at me and then lifted me off the ground by my ears!!! ouchy. I never again even thought about doing that again.
To be quite honest the control is still there if wanted. I am more asking why the policy is providing free meals for all rather than targetting those who need it. My daughter takes a packed lunch like her brothers. So we don't fill the hot meal form in and therefore it doesn't get ordered. Hopeully that means that it doesn;t get charged either. Apparently there are a few others that do the same. However there are many many parents that aren't needy that take full advantage of it. Maybe I see far too black/white on these issues but it just seems another policy sold as helping the needy that actually deprives the needy because that money could be spent elsewhere.
Totally agree on coming up with a better plan and the breakfast idea is mad. Free meals for those that need free meals. Simple idea. I am a moany bastard. What's wrong with that. Every party is playing who's got the best soundbite rather than actually coming up with good policies. Hurrah for the modern social media age where a tweet shared is worth more than a detailed well targetted policy.
What im saying is you can tax the rich the amount extra of their meal and provide it for them as a school meal, or have them pay for their own meal and just tax them less to just help pay for the poor but whichever you do the cost is the same. not counting for efficiency etc. Both the poor and the rich pay the same. its still targeted. Thats a simplified answer to get what i'm trying to say across. I'm not saying its that simple.
public transport subsidies? Everyone has to apply to one of their nearest 3 schools now. If you choose to apply for a school not one of the nearest 3 then you get no help with transport. If your choice of the nearest 3 is less than 3 miles you get no help with transport. Where does the subsidy come into it? At primary and secondary (I have kids at both) over half are in cars, the majority of the rest are walking and a bare minimum by bus. At my son's secondary the majority of those on the bus have to pay for it because they chose a school that wasn't one of their 3 nearest!! So whether you agree with grammar or not selection is going on here. This secondary hits mega results in passes and everybody who wants their kids in there has to pay to get them there!!!
Yep. Deliberately targetting the Labour voters who defected to Ukip. She knows that a lot of Labour's natural supporters are basically a bit racist - albeit in a polite, British sort of way
I agree. I've seen a lot of Labour manifestos over the years, but this is the first time I've agreed with practically every word. Thorough, thought-through, fully costed, and coherent. If you read the whole thing you realise what a brilliant conception it is, to have been produced in such a short time. You can read it here: http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/Images/manifesto-2017/Labour Manifesto 2017.pdf
The policy itself is not a good policy if you have huge doubts about being able to achieve it. The whole "tax business and the rich more" aspect is fine but does anyone really believe that the rich will allow it to happen? Meaning will they just stump up the extra or take other measures to avoid it? The target Labour are aiming at I agree with. Their belief they can achieve it I doubt a lot and therein lies the problem. The concept being good does not mean it will work.
Meanwhile the conservatives have consistently proven their ability to meet their key economic target of balancing the books and reducing debt
That is besides the point when Labour say they will wipe out the deficit in a term despite huge borrowing and nationalisations that are not included in that borrowing and they haven;t even mentioned the £100bn that McDonnell said he would borrow to fund his national savings bank! Their whole manifesto relies on business and the rich just stumping up the money with no-one jumping ship no-one shifting more into their pensions and no-one deciding to retire earlier to avoid paying tax on earnings. It also assumes that we are immediately going to have a 5 year super growth period to support being able to wipe out the deficit. They aren't leaving any room for adjustments and basing the whole manifesto on a "rose tinted" vision of everything being perfect. This in a period where they want to paint a picture of Brexit being doom and gloom yet here they are painting a rosy vision for the future while saying Brexit WILL happen under them. So if they think Brexit is going to be really really bad yet they commit to leaving the EU how can they then assume that with them in control the UK is suddenly going into a boom period to support their rose tinted manifesto's vision? Have you seen the fullfact breakdown? https://fullfact.org/event/2017/May/16 And when they say the Tories aren't taxing the rich what do you make of the IFS actual tax graph of how the current tax system actually works? please log in to view this image
You should stand as an Independent candidate in the next round of local elections, build up a core of supporters then try to become an MP! Pity there are very few independents in this election. The only one I can think of is Lady Hermon in Northern Ireland, and I hope she is re-elected.
Lol. How far would I get? Someone would sell their story to a red top that I used to like to dabble in all sorts of drugs and that I spent my whole twenties either pissed, asleep or at work with a hangover I doubt my tales of reality would wash. People don't seem to realise that if you tax windows then people will board them up. If you make it illegal to board them up then people will move to a new home built without windows Everybody wants more yet doesn't want to give anything up. We pay much less total into the system from the bottom up yet all want our standard of life improving. please log in to view this image
Serbia now is a bit like I imagine the UK in 10 years time. Average wage 300 Pounds a month, average rent for a flat 200 Pounds. The unemployed going through bins all week to find something to sell at the market at the weekend. Staple diet, bread (rich people hang their stale bread on the bins for the others) Everyone has to do something a bit dodgy to pay for electricity and food. If you have a State job, you vote for the President or you won't have it for long and therefore won't have a pitiful pension. Yet if you look out the window there are a multitude of big black German cars driving past (and none of the drivers has an actual job!) Then you see those drivers sitting in cafes most of the day in their Armani suits shooing away the beggars, working on the next deal and ducking every time an unknown big black German car slows down in the street. True life (except it's too cold in the UK to sit outside in cafes)
