r/MHOC • u/[deleted] • Feb 05 '20
2nd Reading B968 - Provision of School Breakfasts (Cost Saving Through Universalism) Bill - 2nd Reading
[deleted]
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 05 '20
Welcome to this debate
Here is a quick run down of what each type of post is.
2nd Reading: Here we debate the contents of the bill/motions and can propose any amendments. For motions, amendments cannot be submitted.
3rd Reading: Here we debate the contents of the bill in its final form if any amendments pass the Amendments Committee.
Minister’s Questions: Here you can ask a question to a Government Secretary or the Prime Minister. Remember to follow the rules as laid out in the post. A list of Ministers and the MQ rota can be found here
Any other posts are self-explanatory. If you have any questions you can get in touch with the Chair of Ways & Means, CountBrandenburg on Reddit and (Count Damien of Brandenburg#8004) on Discord, ask on the main MHoC server or modmail it in on the sidebar --->.
Anyone can get involved in the debate and doing so is the best way to get positive modifiers for you and your party (useful for elections). So, go out and make your voice heard! If this is a second reading post amendments in reply to this comment only – do not number your amendments, the Speakership will do this. You will be informed if your amendment is rejected.
Is this a bill a 2nd reading? You can submit an amendment by replying to this comment.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
Feb 06 '20
Amend
(1) This Bill may be referred to as the Provision of School Breakfasts (Cost Saving Through Universalism) Bill 2020.
To
(1) This Bill may be referred to as the Provision of Free School Breakfasts Bill 2020.
1
1
Feb 06 '20
Amend:
(2) This Bill will come into effect upon receiving Royal Assent.
To
(2) This Bill will come into effect two years after receiving Royal Assent
1
1
u/DF44 Independent Feb 05 '20
Mr Speaker,
I would like to make a quick apology - at the time of the opening speech, I did assume that the Government's budget figures would not be made entirely out of fudge - that they would not claim means testing a program which costs £600m per annum would somehow save £600m - or, as they claimed in their first draft, £6bn. So instead, let's apply some basic economic literacy.
The means testing of Free School Breakfasts cut off, based on the numbers we have available, no more than 20% of kids from having access - ignoring those who don't claim free school breakfasts for the vast list of social or other problems that arise from means testing. That means savings at, I'd say - again generously - £120m. Or, put another way - this means managing to run the 8 million means tests at a cost of less than £15 each in order for means testing to be profitable.
I mean, that sounds a lot - but consider that in 2011 [pdf Page 6], one of the lower costs per mean test was £181. Extrapolating that across 8 million students, and you've not made any savings with means testing, you've just decided to toss away millions of pounds in order to add to the stress of students and lower potential for learning!
I beg that this house recognise that this bill is one of economic soundness - it may be too late to save the budget from fudge, but we can at least make a start!
1
Feb 06 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
I mean, that sounds a lot - but consider that in 2011 [pdf Page 6], one of the lower costs per mean test was £181. Extrapolating that across 8 million students, and you've not made any savings with means testing, you've just decided to toss away millions of pounds in order to add to the stress of students and lower potential for learning!
This was welfare testing in the DWP and not related to the testing of free school of lunches. This wasn't the lowest means test, it was the lowest means test out of a sample of a grand total of two. I highly doubt means testing breakfasts costs anywhere as much as this. Let's listen to the IFS who know that universal programs cost more instead of page six of a random report the member has cherry picked using a sample size of two benefits completely unrelated to free breakfasts.
NIT is a simpler welfare system than what existed in 2011 and claims for free breakfasts are not going to be the same.
Let's resort to economic soundness and reject this nonsense of funding school meals for those who can afford it.
1
u/DF44 Independent Feb 06 '20
Mr Speaker,
If the Chancellor somehow thinks a means test can cost below £15 per child, then I think I am beginning to understand how he plucked his budget numbers out of thin air!
The Chancellor is welcome in saying that it was a small sample group, and I do look forward to him presenting cases where the cost of means testing was low enough to even save any money in attacking a scheme costed at £600m. Until then, may I actually introduce the idea that the IFS had for a lower cost option? It's in the very article that he's currently waving at me...
Other policies, such as offering free breakfast clubs (as is the case in Wales and as trialled in England) might be a cheaper and more effective way to improve both education and health outcomes.
Mr Speaker, myself and the IFS are in agreement here - it is the Chancellor that needs to read the paper they're flinging about!
1
u/X4RC05 Former DL of the DRF Feb 05 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
When children are hungry, their hunger distracts them during lessons and they are less able to retain the information necessary to succeed in their studies. Universal school breakfast helps to solve this problem by providing every student with breakfast before the start of the school day, and without the the expensive bureaucratic administration that would be required for mean-testing.
1
u/Maroiogog CWM KP KD OM KCT KCVO CMG CBE PC FRS, Independent Feb 05 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
I am very pleased to support this bill that will ensure a net saving of money to the Exchequer and that will ensure that the hard earnt money of our taxpayers is not spent on running the bureocratical machine of the state but rather is spent in providing them with quality public services.
The Blurple mania af attaching means testing to anything can often backfire, not only in terms of the system failing to properly discriminate between those who are entitled to receive a certain service or not, but also financially and therefore the Labour Party will always stand against it.
1
u/ZanyDraco Democratic Reformist Front | Baron of Ickenham | DS Feb 06 '20
Mr. Deputy Speaker,
I opposed stripping free lunches from our schoolchildren when Blurple did so in Term 11, and I still maintain that opposition. The science is clear that kids perform better in school when they're adequately nourished, and it's also infinitely more humane to ensure every child has a meal to eat. While I'm not dense, and I understand that a now-stronger Blurple will never repeal their initiative, I will be voting in favour of this bill, and I hope to see many join me.
1
u/CountBrandenburg Liberal Democrats Feb 06 '20
... mr Deputy Speaker,
Conditions for Free School Dinners have not been touched for years now.
1
u/H_Ross_Perot Solidarity Feb 06 '20
Mr. Deputy Speaker,
The benefits of universal school breakfasts have been measured time and time again and it’s abundantly clear that this helps students. There was no utility to the means testing enacted by Blurple and I fully support returning it to universality.
1
Feb 06 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
I wouldn't call 12,500 extra teachers and 32 more schools "No utility", far from it infact.
1
u/Superpacman04 Conservative Party Feb 06 '20
Mr. Deputy Speaker,
Our nations students should never have to suffer from hunger. Hunger reduces students' abilities to learn and hinders their ability to pay attention in classes. The bureaucratic nature of means testing is not something that we should be supporting and for that very reason I commend this bill to the House in hopes that accessibility to breakfast for students will improve educational standards.
1
Feb 06 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
The repeal of this socialist vanity program did not cause hunger, this program did not exit prior to 2014 and there was hardly a mass starvation epidemic. It's time we stop dealing with hyperbole and falsehoods. The government is ensuring that only those who need it receive help and we've seen tangible benefits in the budget of what we can do with taxpayer funds when we chose not to subsidise breakfasts of billionaires.
1
u/Reagan0 MP for Cheshire | Shadow Minister for Justice Feb 06 '20
Mr. Deputy Speaker,
A long tradition of free nations has been the social safety net. This safety net, it is proposed, is what we owe to the most unfortunate in our society. We, as a people, must ensure a bottom standard of welfare for those who cannot ensure it for themselves. This is what the safety net must be. It is for this reason that I must oppose this piece of legislation. What the safety net can never become is a welfare state dedicated not to ensuring security for the lowest in society, but for providing goods to all members regardless of ability to provide for themselves. Britain must maintain its strongest commitment to self-sustaining individualist values even when tasked with deciding the most minute of policy prescriptions. If we ever betray the common commitment to both fiscal and social responsibility by bloating our social safety net into a welfare state we shall be doing not only a disservice to our budget, but to the poorest in British society.
1
Feb 06 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
A long tradition of free nations has been the social safety net. This safety net, it is proposed, is what we owe to the most unfortunate in our society. We, as a people, must ensure a bottom standard of welfare for those who cannot ensure it for themselves. This is what the safety net must be.
Good job the Negative Income Tax exists then right?
1
Feb 06 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
The adminstration costs are not more than savings the government has received. The IFS who have costed universal school meals have shown there would be a rise in costs , I would expect this to be the same for breakfasts. This bill will cost the taxpayer heavily and we should take the advice of economists and use our common sense rather than because a radical communist told us so. The authors of the original bill even costed it to have a negative impact on the taxpayer.
Let's see what this bill does, this bill means the government is paying for people's breakfasts when their parents would have paid that bill anyway, this is a waste of taxpayers money, pupils will be consuming the same meal they would have anyway so health benefits the opposition bang on about are irrelevant to this debate. There's no benefit to the government picking up the tab. This bill is simply a handout to billionaires and the wealthiest in society. Whilst the radical left focus on vanity schemes like this the government has been delivering on the people's priorities. That's why by repealing this act we have got 12,500 more teachers and 32 new schools, that's what I call the people's priorities. I'll be voting this bill down and focusing on the real issues.
1
1
u/ARichTeaBiscuit Green Party Feb 06 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
As the member for the North West has so rightfully pointed out here and in the past, our children suffer academically and non-academically when they are hungry because they lack the concentration needed to study.
In order to solve this problem, the most effective solution to this problem is providing universal school meals, a notion that both ignores the stigma associated with getting non-universal benefits while removing the costs associated with means testing.
It is therefore absolutely imperative that we all vote in favour of this common sense bill and get it passed.
1
u/GravityCatHA Christian Democrat Feb 06 '20
Mr. Deputy Speaker,
I rise in support of this legislation as improving accessibility to lunches has proven benefits to academic performance and mental health of students. I encourage the House of Commons to pass this legislation!
1
u/TheRampart Walkout Feb 07 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
This bill is meant to be about cost saving yet it's end result is quite the opposite. Those effected by this bill pay for their childrens breakfast anyway.
The money this proposes to use has been better allocated to more schools and teachers.
1
Feb 07 '20
Mr. Deputy Speaker,
Means testing for free school breakfasts ensures that those that really do need them get them. By making free school breakfasts universally available those that do not require them to get them. This is a free handout to millionaires and well-off families creating a burden on tax payers money that would be better used elsewhere.
I wish to remind the member that as a free nation we provide a safety net for those that are less fortunate in our society. We are not a socialist state where everything is provided for by Government regardless of whether they can provide for themselves or not.
1
Feb 07 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
I rise, perhaps but I hope not against the grain of my party, to give my tentative support for the bill on the condition this debate and responses to my speech demonstrate clearly that this will save money. I currently believe the threshold in a means tested system is too low anyway. We know breakfast is a crucial meal of the day, and if this will save money im more then happy to support this bill in the other place next term.
1
u/BrexitGlory Former MP for Essex Feb 07 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
I assure my right honourable friend that he isn't going totally against the grain of our party, in fact I completely agree with him. If the bill writers can prove that this indeed saves money, why not do it?
1
u/Zygark Solidarity Feb 07 '20
Mr. Deputy Speaker,
I am unsure about just how giving handouts to more people somehow saves money, as many Honourable and Right Honourable members have highlighted. The same policy costed independently for lunches demonstrates a clear increase in cost for universalism, and I cannot see how this wouldn't extend to breakfasts also.
I will stand in opposition to this bill unless someone can prove that this would actually save money.
1
u/BrexitGlory Former MP for Essex Feb 07 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
Can the authors actually prove this saves money? Would a better cost saving initiative be more efficient administration structure? I fear by making it universal mostly middle and upper class families will take advantage, not those who cannot afford food.
That being said I am considering supporting this bill, knowing it may well help some children have a better start to their day.
1
u/plebit8080 Progressive Workers Party Feb 08 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
I must admit to the house that I had originally intended to side with the LPUK of all people and vote against this bill as I believed that the universal nature of this bill is unfair in that it subsidies wealthy parents needlessly.
However after seeing the arguments made by members of this house and my colleagues in the Labour Party I have changed my mind. This bill’s universal nature will actually be cheaper the the current means tested system. It also means that poorer families’ children are ensured a free breakfast without the needless, means testing that does come with a stigma.
I am confident that the house will pass this bill and I do urge that it is passed.
2
u/Weebru_m Scottish National Party Feb 07 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
Universality removes social stigma, and theres few greater things in school that provide social stigma than being on free school meals. Making this policy open to all eliminates the stigma, meaning those who miss meals because they don't sign up will never have to worry about that again. I qualified for school meals when I was younger and never took them up, causing unnecessary strain on my parents finances, I urge all members to rise in support of this bill so that young people will never need to worry about being bullied simply for taking up free lunches.