THE UK Government’s Education Secretary has suggested cutting school spending by £500 million and ending universal free meals for infants in England ahead of the Spring Statement.
Bridget Phillipson has also offered to axe funding for free period products in schools as well as dance, music and PE schemes as part of potential savings.
The controversial proposals are part of a package of measures being put forward by Phillipson as the Treasury prepares for Wednesday’s spending review, with reports Chancellor Rachel Reeves is set to announce £1.5 billion in cuts to the civil service budget.
[…]
Government sources said Phillipson had suggested making it means-tested instead, as free school meals for older children already are.Education is devolved in Scotland – all pupils in primary one to five receive free school meals, as well as those in P6 and P7 who receive the Scottish Child Payment.
Other suggestions from Phillipson included ending the provision of free period products to girls and women in schools, stopping the junior ISA for children in care and ending the subsidy that provides some parents with wrap-around childcare.
Bridget Phillipson Insiders told The Times that some of the measures had been presented as potential cuts because they would be too politically difficult to get rid of.
Labour doubling down on “Sir Kid Starver” is certainly a look.
Hey infants, fuck you for being born poor, and girls, fuck you for being born female. Ooh, and fuck all of you for wanting physical health, and joy in arts.
- that’s the real message
I think they’re removing free school meals for those who can afford it, as P1-5 seem to all get them. Which is how it works in the rest of the UK. You only get them if you need them (the criteria from my experience has been quite wide, there was a time I was eligible for it but my mum didn’t feel like it was the morally right thing to do because we could actually afford it)
However removing the free period products is disgusting
for those who can afford it,
Yeah 2 issues with this.
Free school meals was not restarted as a fiscal support measure. It was designed to help ensure children get at least one healthy meal a day. Unfortunatly having an income in no way ensures parents know how to provide healthy nutrition. Infants being the age where healthy growth is most dependent on such things.
Second while above is true. It is also far from unheard of for young inexperienced parents to be above poverty income wise but suffer debt issues etc.
Old farts like me. Remember news of research from the 1950s to 80s, when all under 10yo children were given free meals at schools. Then this was cancelled in the 80s by thatcher. It was learned that the number of children not having a healthy meal in a day increased. This lead to nutrition issues and health issues in a sizable number of children treated by the NHS.
That’s a good observation, actually.
Why do they always go after the most vulnerable first. Sickening.
love how this came out the same day rachel reeves admitted to accepting free sabrina carpenter tickets
I presume they will lumber on for however many years or decades, but they were done a long time ago.
Offering nothing but a fake opposition to neo-liberals is just harmful. They won’t just merge with the Conservative party, but that is the honest thing to do.
And now we have Andy Burnham, literally an officer of the conservative party until he left college now being touted as the next leader of the Labour party. There is literally no option for people to vote for. Implicit in the acting of voting is the giving of consent. If you give consent to this fake Tory v. Tory choice you do not have a right to complain when you get neoliberalism playing out, more cuts, and the UK steadily falling down the ranks of wealthy nations.
Fuck Labour.
This strikes me as bluffing between the DfE and Treasury.
“Oh, you want me to make 15% savings cuts do you? Here’s what that looks like:”
In the hope that the Treasury backs down to at least some extent.
Just a correction. That particular15% demand. Was ordered to come from administrative costs. Basically firing civil servents. Not cuts to services provided. Reeves is still trying to deny its austerity. By taking direct decisions on cuts to actual services provided to the public.
The gov is claiming employment os civil services expanded drematically since covid. No idea if that is true. But the desperate attempt from 2 govs in a row to redefine words like austerity dose not fill me with trust. I feel the urge to disinfect anything that comes out of their mouths atm.