It is very worrying that the SNP, Marcus Rashford, and public sector organisations have allowed themselves to be taken in, or taken for a ride even, over this question of meals for children.
Look at it this way: if the children have no meals then presumably their parents don’t either? In which case the need is for a combined meals package for the whole family, adults and children included. When a special appeal is made for children my suspicions are raised I am afraid. Again, it would seem that if children have nothing to eat, then presumably they are freezing as well because their parents can’t afford the fuel bills?
I suspect this is sometimes a case of child neglect in certain families and not a true shortage of meals that should constitute a general appeal for children’s meals. For if the parents are eating then surely the children are too? And if the adults can afford some fuel bills, and food for themselves, then surely they can afford some basic food to keep the children going for the time being.
It is very worrying that the SNP are promising breakfast as well as lunch for Scottish children. Surely there is no true need for this? You would have to look at some research very carefully before forking out for two sets of meals a day for all school children. This is almost certainly an excess because in practice many parents can afford these children’s meals, and yes, most children do eat breakfast before they leave home for school. So to offer them breakfast as well at school, means a pretty good state contribution to the child obesity crisis longer term.
So all claims for children’s meals need to be looked at very carefully. The problem is almost certainly something different from what is given to us at face value to swallow.