All pupils in families on universal credit to be entitled to free school meals
All pupils in England whose families claim universal credit will be eligible for free school meals under an expansion of the Government-funded support.
Hundreds of thousands more children across the country will be able to access means-tested free school meals when the provision is extended from September 2026, the Department for Education (DfE) has said.
Currently, households in England on universal credit must earn below £7,400 a year (after tax and not including benefits) to qualify for free school meals.
But the Government has announced that every pupil whose household is on universal credit will have a new entitlement to free school lunches from the start of the 2026/27 academic year.
The move comes after campaigners and education leaders have called for free school meals to be extended to all children whose families are on universal credit to ease pressures on young people living in poverty.
Nearly 2.1 million pupils – almost one in four of all pupils (24.6%) – in England were eligible for free school meals in January 2024.
The DfE has said more than half-a-million more children are expected to benefit from a free meal every school day as a result of the expansion, and nearly £500 will be put back into parents' pockets every year.
It suggested that the expansion will lift 100,000 children across England completely out of poverty.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said: 'Feeding more children every day, for free, is one of the biggest interventions we can make to put more money in parents' pockets, tackle the stain of poverty, and set children up to learn.
'This expansion is a truly historic moment for our country, helping families who need it most and delivering our Plan for Change to give every child, no matter their background, the same chance to succeed.'
The DfE is due to release data on Thursday morning showing the number of state school pupils in England who are eligible for free school meals.
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said: 'It is the moral mission of this government to tackle the stain of child poverty, and today this government takes a giant step towards ending it with targeted support that puts money back in parents' pockets.
'From free school meals to free breakfast clubs, breaking the cycle of child poverty is at the heart of our Plan for Change to cut the unfair link between background and success.
'We believe that background shouldn't mean destiny. Today's historic step will help us to deliver excellence everywhere, for every child and give more young people the chance to get on in life.'
The Government's child poverty taskforce is due to publish its 10-year strategy later this year.
Nick Harrison, chief executive of the Sutton Trust social mobility charity, said: 'This is a significant step towards taking hunger out of the classroom.
'Children can't learn effectively when hungry, so this announcement not only helps to tackle the effects of child poverty, but will also likely help improve education outcomes for disadvantaged young people.
'Giving free school meals to all families who are eligible for universal credit is also easier for parents to understand, so has the potential to increase take-up rates.'
Kate Anstey, head of education policy at the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) charity, said: 'This is fantastic news and a game-changer for children and families.
'At last, more kids will get the food they need to learn and thrive and millions of parents struggling to make ends meet will get a bit of breathing space.
'We hope this is a sign of what's to come in autumn's child poverty strategy, with government taking more action to meet its manifesto commitment to reduce child poverty in the UK.'
Pepe Di'Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said: 'There's some detail to be worked through on exactly how this transition will work and we look forward to talking with the Government about that.
'But, certainly, expanding free school meal eligibility in this way is absolutely the right thing to do.'
Daniel Kebede, general secretary of the National Education Union (NEU), said: 'We join families and schools across England in welcoming this necessary and overdue first step in expanding free school meals eligibility.
'The existing threshold had been unchanged since 2018, meaning hundreds of thousands of children in poverty were missing out on the nutrition they need to thrive.'
But he added that many children in families who just miss out on being eligible for universal credit will also 'miss out on a hot, healthy school meal'.
Mr Kebede said: 'Ensuring that a free school meal is available to all children is the next urgent step that must be taken.'
The Liberal Democrats said the change was a 'victory for thousands of passionate campaigners' but was 'only a first step' towards helping children in poverty.
The party's education spokeswoman Munira Wilson MP said: 'Liberal Democrats have been pushing hard for this crucial change for years. It's a victory for thousands of passionate campaigners that the Government has finally listened.'
She added: 'To end the cost-of-learning crisis, the Government needs to commit to auto-enrolling eligible children for free school meals, lifting the two-child benefit cap, and capping uniform costs to truly change the lives of children in poverty. We'll hold their feet to the fire to make sure today's change is just a start.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
40 minutes ago
British government reverses policy that limited home heating subsidies for retirees
LONDON -- The British government on Monday reversed its unpopular plan to end winter home heating subsidies for millions of retirees. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer had signaled the u-turn last month after a loud outcry from the public and some members of his Labour Party who thought the relatively modest 1.5 billion-pound ($2 billion) savings were too politically costly. Treasury chief Rachel Reeves, who canceled the payment for home heating on all but the poorest retirees after Labour came to power last summer, said the benefit would be restored to 9 million people, or three-quarters of pensioners, in England and Wales whose incomes are below 35,000 pounds ($47,500). Reeves said the move was necessary last year because the previous Conservative government had left public finances in a dire state. 'Targeting winter fuel payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government," Reeves said. 'It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest.' The payments are worth between 200 and 300 pounds ($271 and $406) a year. The reversal will cost the government 1.25 billion, Reeve said. Canceling the payments for most people last winter was blamed for contributing to Starmer's swift decline in popularity after his party came to power in a landslide. He was blamed for punishing elderly people on limited incomes who struggled to make ends meet during a cost-of-living crisis. Labour fared poorly in local elections in England last month, with many party representatives blaming the removal of the winter fuel payment. Kemi Badenoch, leader of the main opposition Conservative Party, quickly pounced on Starmer's about-face. 'Keir Starmer has scrambled to clear up a mess of his own making," she said. 'This humiliating u-turn will come as scant comfort to the pensioners forced to choose between heating and eating last winter. The prime minister should now apologize for his terrible judgment.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Is Peter Kyle Labour's David Brent?
We don't yet know if, when the Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle finally reveals to the Commons his new plans to regulate social media usage for children, he will choose to wear a baseball cap round the wrong way or if he will straddle a backwards-facing chair, his arms folded on its back like a 1980s 'cool teacher' seeking desperately to get down wif da kidz. In reality he risks looking like David Brent. For Kyle is the cabinet minister tasked with being a 'fun dad' to all those rebellious teenagers who spend all their days on their smartphones instead of, as his department undoubtedly would prefer, spending time playing ping-pong at the local church youth club while drinking fizzy pop. He wants to respond to mounting concern from parents about how much time their precious offspring waste on browsing social media – a recent YouGov poll suggested that nearly a quarter of children aged between eight and 15 spent more than four hours a day using an internet-enabled device with a screen, such as a computer, phone, tablet or gaming console. Who knew Pac-Man would still be so popular after all this time? The task facing Kyle is a challenging one. As part of a government and a party that believes instinctively that it knows better than we do how we should live our lives, it is incumbent on him to legislate for anything and everything that annoys certain newspaper leader writers. And the potentially catastrophic obsession teenagers in particular have with social media apps qualifies as a priority. But Kyle has begun by ruling out a complete ban on social media apps for young people, presumably on the basis that such a ban would be unworkable. As any parent who has tried installing filters and Wi-Fi blockers on home networks to restrict smartphone usage for teenagers, the annoying little buggers can always find a way to outsmart us. Kyle's latest suggestion of a two-hour 'app cap' on social media probably sounded like a reasonable compromise, but to the black heart and demented mind of your average British teenager such aspirations are laughable. Which is a pity, because there can be little doubt that over-exposure to social media is unhealthy, for adults and parents as well as for our children. But since adults have already ruined our lives by staying up late to argue with complete strangers far too frequently, we hold out some hope that our children might be persuaded to avoid the same mistakes. Causality is not causation, but no one makes the case that over-exposure to TikTok and Instagram is at all healthy. Nevertheless, is it the role of the Government to regulate such activity, and if it is, do ministers even have the tools to implement restrictions effectively? It feels like another one of those areas where parents' responsibilities are being usurped by a state that believes it knows better than them. Which is not to say that there is no role at all for the Government when it comes to access to smartphones in schools. But extending that jurisdiction to the home and making judgements about how teenagers should spend their free time feels like government over-reach. Maybe Kyle needs to take his cool ghetto blaster on the streets, indulge in some wicked break-dancing moves to impress his young audience, start fist-bumping some school kids and sparking some actual conversations with them about why they want to spend so long reading and responding to celebrities' and friends' latest earth-shattering updates on music, fashion and filters. No, minister, not coffee filters. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
British government reverses policy that limited home heating subsidies for retirees
LONDON (AP) — The British government on Monday reversed its unpopular plan to end winter home heating subsidies for millions of retirees. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer had signaled the u-turn last month after a loud outcry from the public and some members of his Labour Party who thought the relatively modest 1.5 billion-pound ($2 billion) savings were too politically costly. Treasury chief Rachel Reeves, who canceled the payment for home heating on all but the poorest retirees after Labour came to power last summer, said the benefit would be restored to 9 million people, or three-quarters of pensioners, in England and Wales whose incomes are below 35,000 pounds ($47,500). Reeves said the move was necessary last year because the previous Conservative government had left public finances in a dire state. 'Targeting winter fuel payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government," Reeves said. 'It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest.' The payments are worth between 200 and 300 pounds ($271 and $406) a year. The reversal will cost the government 1.25 billion, Reeve said. Canceling the payments for most people last winter was blamed for contributing to Starmer's swift decline in popularity after his party came to power in a landslide. He was blamed for punishing elderly people on limited incomes who struggled to make ends meet during a cost-of-living crisis. Labour fared poorly in local elections in England last month, with many party representatives blaming the removal of the winter fuel payment. Kemi Badenoch, leader of the main opposition Conservative Party, quickly pounced on Starmer's about-face. 'Keir Starmer has scrambled to clear up a mess of his own making," she said. 'This humiliating u-turn will come as scant comfort to the pensioners forced to choose between heating and eating last winter. The prime minister should now apologize for his terrible judgment.'
