entry 1936 british school lunches

thats not the reality of the story. this is the reality of the story.



this story was here about a month ago, they werent selling the food to their kids, and its not junk food,not all of it, its food thats better than school dinners

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-2364180.html

For the past two weeks, Julie Critchlow and Sam Walker have been taking orders for up to 60 meals in defiance of the school’s decision to ban pupils from leaving the premises during the lunch break

On each side, the battle lines are firmly drawn. Mrs Critchlow and Mrs Walker have cast themselves as standard-bearers for freedom of choice in an age of food fascism. Their bête noire is Jamie Oliver, whose high-profile television campaign to improve the quality of food served in school canteens has resulted, they claim, in their children being forced to eat “disgusting, over-priced, low-fat rubbish

Mr Beaumont said he could accept that some local residents were unimpressed by the mothers’ decision to stand each day in the grounds of the cemetery which adjoins the school to take and deliver orders for pupils. But he added that this did not justify the actions of one woman who pulled her car alongside a female member of his staff before accusing her of “taking blood money” and “demanding to know how she could sleep at night”.

He said: “It’s all got out of hand. There’s people dying on the front line in Iraq, yet people are going crazy because of two ladies passing sandwiches through the school railings.”

and this

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2360040.html

and this the kids themselves decided and told their parents the food was vile.
does this matter or are kids just stupid and should be forced to eat thing that they find disgusting

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-2371819.html

The trouble began at the start of term when Rawmarsh community school in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, banned pupils from leaving the premises during their lunch break. Even more incendiary, the school then started peddling a Jamie Oliver-inspired school dinner menu of “healthy” fare, such as ratatouille pancakes and salad.

Unlike the grateful urchins who feature on Jamie’s School Dinners (Oliver’s fiercely popular television crusade for better food in schools), the Rawmarsh children came home complaining of overpriced baked potatoes, yucky tomatoes and not enough chips. Some of the mothers began delivering them fast food in the lunch hour, first to their own children, then to 60 or more of their friends. The school freaked out and tried to ban the mums. The mums screamed bloody murder. The police were called and, last Monday, a very uneasy peace was reached

“None of this would have happened if he hadn’t locked these kids up,” she says. “I don’t have a problem with the school not selling them fatty food. My problem is that some of these kids are 16 and they’re not allowed to choose what they eat for lunch.”

“Next they’ll be going through our cupboards telling us what we can feed them at home,” says Hamshaw, who has two children, aged 13 and 16, at the school. “But we know how to give our children a proper meal better than any school.”

Er, weren’t you taking them chips every day for lunch? “That is such a lie,” says Critchlow. “We were taking all sorts — baked potatoes, salads, tuna sandwiches. You try getting teenage girls to eat a hamburger every day. Most of them won’t touch the things.”


“There were a few chips,” admits Walker, mother of an 11-year-old and 16-year-old, “but any nutritionist will say that a little bit of fat now and then isn’t the end of the world.”

In fact, they say, the school’s food laws are promoting bad habits. “All kids are fussy eaters,” continues Hamshaw. “If they don’t like something they won’t eat it, so lots of the kids take one look at what’s on offer at lunch and then eat crisps.

“Every mother knows that it’s an art to get your kids to eat good food, like I know my Gary won’t eat greens but will eat carrots. This ‘we know best’, one-size-fits-all attitude they’ve got at the school definitely means he ends up eating more rubbish.”

Sonia Sharp, of Rotherham council, insisted that the food at the school is very nice and cheaper than anything else on offer, and pointed out that uptake of school meals has risen from 350 to 600. She conceded that this might have something to do with the fact that the school has now got a captive audience.

More than food, what grates upon the Rawmarsh mums is the feeling that their choices as parents are being undermined by their government. “This country is turning into big brother,” sighs Hamshaw, “and it’s not like we need a nanny state. We nanny our kids quite enough on our own

*********************************************************************************************************************************
I just post the stories, for interest.. for everyone

Lord, what fools these mortals be!
- A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Act III, Scene ii

Voltaire said: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

H.L.Mencken wrote:"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. Albert Einstein

I have a feeling that the school started serving healthy alternatives because parents were screaming about Junior and Princess getting fat.

If the school lunches are so goddamn vile, why can't the kids take their lunch in a bag like normal people do when cafeteria food is disgusting and overpriced? Oh wait, that's right - this would require effort, which is something that is not needed to order a Happy Meal. I'm sure when the kiddums end up weighing 300 pounds when they graduate, parents will be pushing a lawsuit claiming that the school left them no choice but to feed the kiddies fast food because the school insisted on selling "low fat rubbish".

In any case, there will never be a time when the parents are fully satisfied - nothing will ever be good enough for their precious widdle angels. If school food is so horrible, perhaps the parents should withdrw their kids and home school them - that way, they can make sure Junior is only learning "important" things while chowing down every day on a Big Mac.

well yes it would work... apart from one tiny thing, there is a story about a kid in school, and the lunch box was searched "bad" food and one kid had one extra snack and was forced to go eat in the headmasters office.

so there is food police. at least in one school.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/14/nlunch14.xml

A boy aged 10 has been banned from his school dining hall because his packed lunch broke the government's healthy eating guidelines.

The father of Ryan Stupples is protesting after his son was forced to eat in the headmaster's office at Lunsford primary school, Larkfield, Kent, because his lunch contained two snacks, instead of one.

Ryan's lunch consisted of a sandwich, fruit, fromage frais, cake, mini cheese biscuits and a bottle of water. The cake and the biscuits broke the snack limit. They were discovered when a teacher checked his lunch box.

Michael Stupples, 41, said: "What 10-year-old boy won't get upset when he's out of a dining hall in front of everyone and made to eat his lunch in the head teacher's office?"

Malcolm Goddard, the headmaster, said: "We take healthy eating very seriously and everyone is aware of our new policies."

*********

the food there are according to the kids vile, and they arent eating it. they spend 50p on a meal per day, prisoners get more spent on their meals,

at least give the kids a choice,

*********************************************************************************************************************************
I just post the stories, for interest.. for everyone

Lord, what fools these mortals be!
- A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Act III, Scene ii

Voltaire said: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

H.L.Mencken wrote:"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. Albert Einstein

The problem is that some sort of twit of a chef (who is gaining several chins recently - obviously not practicing what he preaches) came up with a good idea that the Government/Education Service would pay him a massive amount of money to re-design the school dinners system. He brilliantly came up with what the kids won't eat and it turned out to be very much more expensive to produce.

If children were to eat only three meals a day at regular times then there would be no problems. Instead they are stuffing their faces from first thing in a morning to last thing at night and sitting in front of TV's, game machines and computers as well.

The parents were putting the food through the fences because their children were hungry. Nothing has been said that the schools have been locking the gates and not allowing the children to leave the school premises and only allowing 30 minutes to queue up and eat it.

Surely it is preferable that the parents handed the food to them instead of them eating nothing.

How dare the school system act as a nanny state by dictating what pupils eat. It is there job to teach not to be involved in choices. That is down to the parents to decide.

Why Euros are so damned passive and giving into this bureaucratic bullshit is beyond me! Yeah, the moos and duhds brought it on themselves by feeding their kids shitty food and making them obese, but the Nanny-State bullshit is now completely out of hand.

Any government shithead who tried to tell me how to live my life would get the shit seriously beaten out of him. Good.

School food has been the bane of students since the dawn of time. It's always been bad and we all lived through it. However, this is ridiculous! Kids eat one meal per day at school. One meal is not going to make a child obese. The gov't. has no business telling anyone, except prisoners, what they can eat, and how much of it.

I am very much in agreement that the government cannot play Big Brother and tell the people what they can or cannot eat. However, the schools have the right to serve what they deem fit in the cafeteria but the parents have the right to send a bagged lunch with cr*p if that is what they want their coddled children to scarf down. If they want unhealthy kids, that is their right but we all know the breeders will demand that Government take care of those health needs while demanding the same government to not butt into their lives. People cannot have it both ways...

As for the 30 minute lunches in schools and waiting in line, my generation survived it. Not many of us turned out too maladjusted because of hurried lunches. Many jobs only allow a half of an hour for lunch break. When I worked at a call center, that was all we got for this one account I was on. It was a mad rush to the breakroom to try to get a microwave as the place was FULL of employees. Then, we had to quickly eat and then use the washroom before being back at our stations to log back on. That is Life in the Big House. The children better get used to it.

Oh, I almost forgot to add: In my day, we were not allowed to leave school for lunch due to the liability issue. Kids were the county's or the city's responsibility until class let out for the day. These little darlings will survive...boo-hoo! :bawl

Sorry but schools are there to teach not to feed. The concept of school meals only came into being when in WW2 some of the children had fathers in the forces and mothers working on munitions and the war effort. Prior to that they did not exist. Mothers were expected to make arrangements for dinner. As well as paying and arranging for their own childs hobbies and interests and not expect others to pay for that as well as they now do.

The fact is that it is not up to Government nor Education Authories to waste time and money on this nonsense. We already prioritise children in society rather than the people who have contributed to the structure of our country.

Next thing they will be advocating a system such as Sparta - whereby children from the age of three years were removed from families and totally brought up by the State and we all know what monsters that created.

If you don't want to rear, feed and nurture your own children you shouldn't bother at all. They already get Family Allowance, Tax Credits and the Birth Allowance of £200.00 for every one of them born with additions made throughout the childs life. Where the Heck do they think this money is coming from. Other people.

I think our lunch periods were 25 minutes or less. Our cafeteria ladies were incredibly efficient at slinging the hash!

too much nannying Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry but schools are there to teach not to feed.
> The concept of school meals only came into being
> when in WW2 some of the children had fathers in
> the forces and mothers working on munitions and
> the war effort. Prior to that they did not
> exist. Mothers were expected to make arrangements
> for dinner. As well as paying and arranging for
> their own childs hobbies and interests and not
> expect others to pay for that as well as they now
> do.

I definitely do not argue that fact at all. The schools can barely teach due to the mooing of most parents who will not discipline their kids at home and then expect their sprogs to be able to cause problems in the classrooms. If the breeders and brats do not like what is served in the school cafeterias, then food service should cease to exist. Let moo pack her offsprings' lunches with all sorts of cr*ppy food if that is what they all want to eat. The schools are not required to serve an array of fast-food to appease these children's tastebuds.

but if the kids arent eating the food prepared in the school, and eating nothing at all, how is that better that eating so called junk food.

*********************************************************************************************************************************
I just post the stories, for interest.. for everyone

Lord, what fools these mortals be!
- A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Act III, Scene ii

Voltaire said: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

H.L.Mencken wrote:"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. Albert Einstein

mercurior Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> but if the kids arent eating the food prepared in
> the school, and eating nothing at all, how is that
> better that eating so called junk food.

I totally hear you, Mercurior. Like the "nanny" person stated, the school is there to teach rather than be the food police. Yet, I do believe the schools have the right to serve what food that the administration deems fit. The sprogs do not have a "right" to have THEIR kind of meals served. The moos can pack lunch for their offspring if nutritious food will hurt their self-image. Let the tax dollars go back to educating rather than the school also being a restaurant.

Kids should be learning some sort of respect for authority while in school. This includes eating what they are served at lunch. Their parents are undermining this by bringing the kids junk food because they are so "starving". And I agree with the post above - why the hell can't they just take a sack lunch to school if they don't like what is being served? Is it because it would actually take EFFORT and planning for mom or dad to pack a lunch? I don't get it.

This crap where kids get to dictate everything has got to stop.

My parents taught me that once a kid gets hungry enough, it'll eat just about anything, even those nasty ass lima beans.

There is no law, in the U.S. at least, that says you HAVE to eat what the school serves. I remember many instances of throwing out coagulated tater-tots, soggy hotdogs, and whatever else passed for school food and going hungry for the rest of the day. School food has always been nasty, so I'm not sure what the big deal is now.

The only problem I have is the school monitoring what a kid brings in it's lunch. A. It's one freaking meal out of a three meal day. B. Who the hell cares if parent A decides their kid can handle two sugary snacks as opposed to one? If the parent is packing the lunch, they should be able to pack whatever they feel is appropriate for THEIR kid to eat. I would think a school would prefer for a parent to pack the lunch, it is cheaper in the long run, the kid will probably actually eat it, and the school can no longer be held responsible for the nutritional health of the child.

"It truly is the one commonality that every designation of humans you can think of has, there's at least one asshole."
--Me

Hey...I like lima beans but I was a strange sprog and an even more strange adult. I do agree that the schools have no business telling a student what can be BROUGHT IN for lunch in their own lunch boxes. The parents screaming about what is served in the cafeteria is a different story. In my day, we brown-bagged it if we did not like what the cafeteria served.

It is what Green Grass said about children not being taught to respect any type of authority. Questioning is not a bad thing but today's bratlings feel that they are not accountable to anyone or anything and that everything must be adjusted to their will. When I was growing up, not much was adjusted to fit a child's demands unless a kid was horribly spoiled which was odd back then.

A letter writer to the New York Times basically stated that we need to return to the days where children *did* eat what was put on their plates. My generation did that and we did not turn out to be horribly maladjusted adults. Society needs to get over this business of catering to these young little tyrants. We need to go back to the "take it or leave it" attitudes towards sproglings.

But what you guys have to remember is that what kids eat for lunch affects them far after they've eaten it. Parents give in and pack 2 snacks for their whiny brats because they don't want to have to deal with the grief they get when they don't cave in to their demands. But they don't think about how it's going to be for the teachers who have to deal with the over-sugared, under-exercised, super-hyper kids - especially since they're most likely already diagnosed with ADD, ADHD or whatever other cop-out crapola people use to excuse bad behavior.

Parents are always complaining about the education system, but when the folks in charge try to change something to make a more stable, efficient environment for teaching they still bitch.

The more time schools spend in interferring in a childs food the less time it has to teach lessons and even some social graces, which the child should have been taught long before it started school anyway.

Schools are not a restaurant, nor a feeding station whatever you want to call it and it should get on with the job they are supposed to do.

And I hope they all end up morbidly obese, with Type 2 diabetes and high cholesterol, THEN we'll see how smug they are.

Oh, but of course, it will be the school's fault for allowing them to sell the junk food through the school's fence.