Clydebank Post | News | £65 to feed a child one meal

Thursday, 20th November, 2008

Published: Wednesday, 17th October, 2007 10:00

£65 to feed a child one meal

By Andrea Fraser

Staggering costs of summer scheme revealed

A PILOT scheme to give kids healthy school meals during the summer holidays was so unsuccessful that it cost a staggering £65 a meal.

West Dunbartonshire Council’s summer meals pilot programme, which operated in eight schools, cost taxpayers £80,000.

But because only 100 kids turned-up, out of a possible 466 who are entitled to free school meals, it cost a massive £800 per child for 12 days.

The scheme was aimed at making sure children had nutritious meals every day, whether they were at school or not.

Launching the initiative before the school holidays council leader Iain Robertson said: “During the holiday break the summer food service programme will serve what may too often be some children’s only nutritious meal of the day.

“But they need to get good, healthy meals throughout the summer so they can continue to grow, play and learn even when they don’t have access to regular school lunches and breakfasts.

“I hope that people will take advantage of this important service.”

Linnvale and Whitecrook primaries both took part in the scheme, which also included two hours of organised activity.

But with so few kids taking up the offer, the council could have sent the children to some of the country’s top restaurants.

The revelation comes during a contentious time for the council which has announced some services, including libraries and community centres, could be axed to cover a £10.5m funding defecit.

A spokesperson for West Dunbartonshire Council said: “The children who attended the summer activity and lunch pilot scheme benefited from a healthy lunch during the summer holiday period and were able to experience a wide breadth of artistic activity and healthy sports and games.

“Feedback from the children indicates that the programme was a success for those who attended.

“However, the low uptake meant there were limited economies of scale making the programme less cost effective than anticipated.”

Social Bookmarking What are these?