Tuesday, 30 October 2012

Free Lunches Cause Delinquency

A recent Campbell Live investigation showed kids at schools in poorer areas went without lunch far more often than those in wealthier suburbs.

Research by the Ministry of Health shows roughly 20 percent of Kiwi households with children run out of money for food.

BUT Aotearoa New Zealand's Conservative Party leader, the christian millionaire Colin Craig , has now been reported on TV3 News saying that there should be "no free lunches" for children sent to school without any lunch of their own.

He would clearly prefer they starve, I suppose.

What our mean, nasty Mr Craig reckons is that the research showing children that go without lunch don't learn as well is "missing the point". He would prefer the "delinquent" parents be charged the "cost of rectifying their bad behaviour" (thereby adding to the income stress I guess).

"The issue is not whether lunchlessness is detrimental to learning," he says. "Rather the issue is a parents’ duty to provide for their children." Goodoh.

Furthermore the very rich Mr Colin Craig believes providing lunches in schools will encourage "delinquent behaviour"! Really! Oh I see, he means the evil, poor parents' delinquent behaviour, not the children.

"While free lunches sound appealing," he says, "they are actually a way by which the Government enables the continuation of delinquent parenting. Such proposals are an unwitting, well meaning, but destructive response."

Twenty percent of our nation's households are, therefore, according to him delinquent. I don't think so, Mr Craig. Rather they just don't have enough money. By the time they attempt to pay their skyrocketing rents and drip-feed the skyrocketing powerbills from their ever-diminishing wage packets and under-subsistence benefits, what happens is that there just isn't enough money for food.


  1. You mustn't set me ablaze. They said the same thing about opening schools up in the US for free breakfast. After it was noted that many children fidget away the morning because they are hungry, a breakfast program was proposed. Our conservatives said it would reward parents for staying in bed and not feeding their children, and, furthermore, the parents would likely spend the money on cigarettes.

    If there was ONE good thing that came out of judging schools by test scores it was that it gave school districts a big shove towards providing breakfast, as well-fed children do better on tests.

    It breeds dependence, it encourages lazy parenting, and bloats the already huge evil Big Government. All of this was said and I suppose that if the Republicans get in they will try to shut down the breakfast program as well as the lunch program. I tremble with anger.

    1. As I would be angry too. We wouldn't even expect our schools to provide the food, they are already severely underfunded due to government cuts and now they are severely stressed, teachers and kids alike by the governments plans to close down heaps of schools, merge some of them and then build new ones. Needless to say the schools most likely to be closed are in the most vulnerable areas, the new schools mooted are in more well off areas. We don't have enough money is the governmental catchphrase, but they are still subsidising private schools.

      That said, it is known that teachers and/or schools may often try to provide food for kids that they know are hungry. Locally the small agency I volunteer for has sometimes been asked to help with food for some children because we run a food bank. And just recently the Campbell Live programme ran a very successful appeal for money for food programmes being run by volunteers.

      Breeds dependence my ass. If the right wing parties really cared about people (which they clearly don't) they'd be working to truly improve our economies so that there were real jobs out there for people to be employed in, they'd be raising the minimum wage standard so that working people actually received enough money to pay their bills and feed their kids good nutritious food. And they's raise benefits in the meantime. And they would be putting money and resources into support systems for young families which actually help them to cope better rather than investing more and more money into building bigger prisons.

  2. I sometimes wonder why the hell so many rich people who, let's face it, despise public spending, look down on parents (unless they are rich), and despise children enough to let them go without breakfast can face themselves!

    How much money do they need? Why do feel so judgmental? And do they feel so removed from the common lot that they cannot imagine , if circumstances were different, they too might need assistance at some point in their lives? I know people like this millionaire hotshot and many of them would be NOTHING without the public (state) school system and living in a place with a strong public infastructure.

    1. The rich aka the don-Key-led government with Hekia Parata as chief education monkey (who are closing our state schools in the quake-ridden, lower-decile eastern suburbs of Christchurch), now see fit to 'bailout' the private Wanganui Collegiate. Suddenly there's enough money in the pot for this (3.8 million even, how stupid do they think we are)and we taxpayers will once again fund the rich while our own lives fall further into disarray and our own children and mokopuna have their lives disrupted.

      No breakfast, no lunch, would truly benefit some of our dis-respected leaders, namely the (dis)Honourable Gerry Brownlee, the (dis)Honourable Paula Bennett, both of whom seem to get fatter even as we watch.

      Imagine if that 3.8 million was spent feeding breakfasts or lunches to hungry kids instead of saving the rich kids school.

  3. As the Jimmy Savile affair in the UK shows most of the ruling elite and many of their court jesters are paedophiles, monsters and psychopaths... they hate children, indeed they hate people in general.

    I suggest a bit of invetigative journalism to discover what made Colin Craig the scumbag he is today ...discover his secrets and 'out' him.

    Expose the bastard, deconstruct him, find the skeletons in his cupboard (anyone as anal as this is bound to have plenty) and paint his crimes on his garden fence, dig the dirt....destroy him... its the only way for civilisation to survive!

    Anyone who gets as worked up as he does about 'gay rights' has unresolved personal issues which could be a fertile place to start his deconstruction....check him out....keep him under suveillance... he is obviously a highly suspect individual!

    We always find character assassination is the most effective remedy for bigotry here, its only a matter of time now I'm sure :-)

    1. He assassinates himself from his own lips I reckon. He exposes himself as a bigot and a fool who only heads a political party because he created it with his own money, even spent $4,500 funding a protest march! which shows a very cynical attitude to grassroots protest. But then he wouldn't know what grassroots meant if it jumped up and bit him. A gay dog I hope.

  4. Good to see you've picked up where you left off with Multiply...

    1. Kia ora Ron.

      I'm posting on 3 sites now, here obviously, http://www.blogster.com/irianiinaotearoa/ and http://www.ipernity.com/home/irianiinaotearoa

      No more putting all the eggs in one basket. Nice to see you here.