In a perfect world, every child would have access to the food they require which allowed them to lead a nutritional, healthy life. Parents would provide that food, time would be devoted to cooking and all children would be attentive and ready to learn. Unfortunately, we are not in that perfect world.
I’ve found it amusing how utopian parts of the right have become over free school meals. You may aspire towards absolute parental responsibility to financially feed their children. You may aspire towards no child needing to rely on free school meals. But believing it to be the reality is a form of delusional. An individual is doing something they would probably accuse the left of: seeing the world as they want it to be, rather than how it actually is. So, what is the world we are in? A pandemic that has little chance of every going away. Even with a vaccine, not everyone would be adequately protected. Vast unemployment, even with the government’s support. Economic collapse. A mental health crisis. Attendance at food banks - which was high before the pandemic - continuing. The role for the state has never been larger. Indeed, it was the state who took on that responsibility when they ordered businesses to close and people to remain at home. The ‘Just About Managing’ groups Theresa May used to speak about may no longer have been managing. Previously just financially secure enough to manage, their situation will have gone completely out the window. Given it was the state who told people to remain at home, which will have invariably damaged businesses and furthered unemployment, the state should financially support those who are struggling to feed their children. A society in which children are starving is one that needs to be changed. Society has always been willing to accept the need for Free School Meals in term time. A child is guaranteed at least one hot meal, which provides nutritional and health protection. Furthermore, they are far more likely to concentrate in class. The poorest and vulnerable still need food like the rest of us outside of school hours. It is clear, from Marcus Rashford’s campaign, that some are unable to access what they require outside of school hours. The pandemic will have made this even harder. Unable to attend food banks, higher unemployment invariably means receiving the nutritional food they require will be harder. This campaign is perhaps most powerful because it has returned economic divisions to the heart of political discussion. Though the economy was often discussed during the Brexit division, cultural divides and a desire for greater sovereignty ultimately triumphed. While austerity and a long term economic plan dominated David Cameron’s government, it has receded in significance. Free school meals have bought this back to the public agenda. It remains to be seen what significance coronavirus will hold by the time of the 2024 election. Debates over the economic consequences, excess death and overall lost opportunity costs are likely to drive arguments, even if a vaccine is available. Many thought the Dominic Cummings’ moment would ruin the Conservatives. They rode through that storm and got over it. Free school meals may create a different situation. Tuition fees are still associated with the Lib Dems long after the vote had taken place. Could the same be the case here? Polling needs to be done on the exact kind of former Labour voter in a former Labour safe seat who swung behind the Conservatives. Likely to be socially Conservative, pro-Brexit and anti-Jeremy Corbyn, it is unclear what their precise views would be on economic policy. Many Conservative MPs are fundamentally Thatcherites who believe in a small state. This could differ from their newfound voters. If Brexit was about the state taking back control, it involved economic intervention from the governments which had been left behind by Margaret Thatcher. Indeed, before the pandemic, Boris Johnson recognised this by campaigning for greater investment in the 2019 election. It was tricky for Labour to outdo the Conservatives on spending. That has become even more pronounced since the pandemic. Whatever its many flaws, the furlough scheme was widely regarded as extremely popular. Limiting access to Free School Meals outside of the school period - not least given the economic situation - doesn’t look so popular. It looks like being anti-working class and anti-vulnerable. While that might retain votes among safe seats that the Conservatives will always hold, it could cost them in seats so pivotal to delivering Boris Johnson the majority he needed. The argument for delivering free school meals is as much an economic one as it is a moral one. If children are adequately fed, they are more likely to be attentive and concentrate. In and out of school, this makes them far more likely to perform well academically. In the long term, that will guarantee them a higher paid job, in which taxes are repaid to the exchequer. Such spending is therefore an investment, no waste of government money and - given the size of government spending - pittance. Free school meals are, of course, only one part of this. A far wider strategy is needed to try and reduce economic inequality and boost equality of opportunity. The accidents of birth shouldn’t determine how far someone is able to go in life and their wider chances. While charity is amazing and helpful, the state sometimes has to step in. Fundamentally, people should be encouraged to help themselves. For those that can’t - whether it’s their fault or not - the state must intervene to help them help themselves.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Author:Noah enjoys writing a blog and drinking tea Archives
September 2022
Categories
All
|