No child in the UK should go hungry

[Nick]

I fail to see how the state is responsible for providing free school meals during holidays. Children are the parent's responsibility, not the state.
We already provide parents with child allowance to help provide for children.

Totally agree, it's down to personal choices and some parents put their fags and booze first. It isn't up to the state to mop up after bad parents.
Start giving out food vouchers instead of money, that way they have to buy food.

[patman post]

Well that is of course an interesting point.

As Maggie said, there is no such thing as society....

I believe Maggie actually said: There is no such thing as society: there are individual men and women, and there are families.
And that's my point — individuals/people are closer to those in their communities needing assistance than the government or its state agencies...

[Sheepy]

LOL I am liking it, but what about extraordinary times?

[Barry]

Unfortunately many right wing and Conservative MPs and voters believe that children should be left to go hungry in order to punish the mistakes of their parents. 

Utter tosh.
The assumption that children will go hungry if the state does not feed them in the school holidays is erroneous.
Footballers have always been good at whipping up the crowds, usually by taking a dive. Seems some similarity here.

[cromwell]

 

Shhhhhh — the Milk speech...

Ahh yeah right,well I'm not the Pope so therefore not infallible. 

[T00ts]

I have listened to umpteen pundits, read this thread etc and I find it hard to believe that any MPS seriously voted against feeding children. We have another hysterical campaign for no other reason than some feel that the government is on the ropes. Children whose parents will not care for their children in normal times still won't in bad. They are generally known. Those who normally care for them will go to great lengths to see that they are catered for.

In recessions of the past, the extras go first. Extra curricular lessons, Mum's coffee mornings etc. are all cut back before they stop eating. We as a country are doing as much as possible to soften the fall, but we can't keep lifestyles the same. Our backs are against the wall, we need to stop running about like headless chickens and start a more sensible self reliant attitude. Not everyone has that capability it's true, but the majority can and should stop looking to government as if it's a benevolent God parent.  We need some resilience,  we don't need to be persuaded that we are in danger of mental breakdowns every day. It's time to grow some backbone in case things get worse before they get better.

[johnofgwent]

Is this is something the wider community should generally be funding directly rather than always relying on central govt handouts...?

Well that is of course an interesting point.

As Maggie said, there is no such thing as society....

[johnofgwent]

I am staying away from this thread because I am so disgusted at Tory MPs, and the usual suspects I will get barred in a flash if I respond to them.
Thankfully in Cornwall the Tory MPs have been shamed by the public response in making sure children are fed.
(A charity has been feeding around 400 children in Helston during school holidays and weekends for several years anyway.)
It come as no surprise the Tory MP still can't be found.

So if you are staying away from this thread, why come here to express your opinion in it.

You're not "staying away from the thread". You came here and left your opinion in it. That is the most bizarre definition of "staying away from this" i can think of.

[patman post]

Shhhhhh — the Milk speech...

[cromwell]

Well not quite. That speech was made in 1943 and was part of a broadcast announcing reforms to the National Insurance system and the establishment of the Welfare State that gave your mum a job.

What? The blood toil tears and sweat speech was made in May 1940

[patman post]

Free milk for children began nationally in 1946. The NHS was formed in 1948. Attlee was PM for both. I reckon actions count more than words, especially after Churchill was dumped so unceremoniously in '45.

Before that, local authorities and other bodies were able to take care of school milk and health...

[Borchester]

But he had nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. So he left it to Labour to do...

Well not quite. That speech was made in 1943 and was part of a broadcast announcing reforms to the National Insurance system and the establishment of the Welfare State that gave your mum a job.

[patman post]

But he had nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. So he left it to Labour to do...

[Borchester]

Regardless of individual circumstances, I think we should prioritise making sure these children eat, and worry about the rest later.

Of all the things a state can put its energy in error, I think feeding children would be remarkably far down the list.

As Churchill once said, the most important thing is that governments put milk into babies.

[patman post]

And in response to @patman post , in the ideal world, of course we would hope that the family and friends of those in need would help them.  However, if that doesn't happen, which is sometimes the case, that's where many people think there should be some kind of safety net to ensure that in the 5th richest country in the world, there are not children who don't have anything to eat.

I was raising the question whether every safety net should be govt funded. Hospices in the UK, for example, raise the bulk of their funding through support from their local communities.
Charities involve the community more directly. Local and national fundraising, charity shops, legacies, lotteries, investments, poppy days, etc, consistently keep up awareness of our responsibilities to each other.
Pushing the needs of others on to govt with the excuse the UK is "the 5th richest country in the world" to get out of actually doing anything seems too easy...