And how exactly will you do that? Means testing?
The fact is that the difference in providing for primary kids universally as opposed to going through a pointless process (wasting other resources) will end up being negligible.
But we can’t have any hope for the kids can we? As long as we keep the fiscal rules happy.
This is actually a fair point, there possibly is an admin burden on deciphering which kids would get it and those that don't which may eat into any cost savings it would intend on achieving. Probably going off on a tangent here but I also think it helps improve equality too and goes a small way of (for want of a better way to describe...) leveling things out from a social class perspective. I remember being the kid with free meals and I felt a little inferior to the kids with packed lunches as even then I knew it was because I was from a poorer household - and I also had to get my dinner separately from them and it wasn't an inclusive setup. Not looking for a violin
but reflecting on it, I think there's definitely wider benefits than just cost.
Sent from my SM-A346B using Tapatalk