Is that picture of the lunch before or after it was consumed?

I have composed a tribute in song for the new school lunches.

On the twelfth day of slop lunch,
My Seymour gave to me
Twelve ACT dismissals,
Eleven late containers,
Ten stale cheese sangers,
Nine runny mashes,
Eight furry grey lumps,
Seven missed deliveries
Six maybe carrots?
Five allergens
Four pitas sweating
Three ham halal meals
Two butter chickens
and a cold greasy Mac and Cheese

Mouth, meet foot.

From the Master Communicator, who seem to have attended the Marie-Antoinette School of PR, and obviously read the entire book How to Win Friends and Influence People:

What a piece of crap. What a spineless example of human being. This is not complaining. This is food for school children whose parents aren't in condition to give them enough. Not everyone can eat at Bellamy's in Parliament.

You beat me to it, I was just about to post this.

He really is tone-deaf, isn't he? So he'll be having a Marmite sandwich and apple for lunch each day himself now, as well? No, wait, he still gets his own cushy taxpayer-funded lunch as well. Just like David 🙄

Also this story: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/543654/collective-nightmare-school-lunches-with-melted-plastic-investigated

[Murchison Area School principal Andy] Ashworth says while economies of scale may work in some areas, there was "no way" the meals were coming all the way from Hamilton, via Tapawera where they were reheated, to be delivered to his tiny school more than an hour and a half from Nelson at a cost of three dollars.

I know where Murchison is (I have family there) and there is no way that a meal transported from Hamilton to Nelson to Murchison is being done for all of $3. Not in a million years.

Seriously, Seymour, you aren't going to win this one - the harder to reach places are not going to be saving you any money with your new! improved! scheme.

I pity the poor pupils in more remote places like Haast by the time they get their school lunches delivered (if they get them there or not).

Then some story about meals appearing in donation boxes. There's always some left over. No harm in giving to people who need.

But I'm sure Seymour will say this is evidence kids don't need the food, and propose to scrap the whole programme.

Reading the NZ Herald article ‘Go make a Marmite sandwich’: Luxon responds to school lunch backlash now. Holy shit, the Prime Minister is deaf as a door. He can't read the room:

 

Luxon told Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hosking if parents continue to be dissatisfied with the lunches, they should pack them themselves.

 

“If you really are unhappy with it, for God’s sake, go make a Marmite sandwich and put an apple in a bag just like you and I had.”

 

Luxon said he would rather the state not have the responsibility of feeding students.

 

“I think parents should take responsibility for feeding their own kids, I’d rather the state not have to do so, it should be a parental responsibility.

 

“The fact is that kids are actually coming to school with no lunch and I’m not willing to let them go hungry.”

 

This Prime Minister is obviously not seeing the same New Zealand as we are. What a doofus.

After that, I just had to email him and send him the whole song. Suitably edited to 'My PM gave to me ... Ten marmite sangers' etc. of course.

https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/1j2r85a/luxon_on_school_lunches_make_a_marmite_sandwich/

Some of the comments on here about what he said this morning are absolutely brutal.

"Somewhere this morning, there's a political PR specialist refreshing their CV and inventing a sabbatical."

For his part, how did Hosking respond when Luxon said that? (I haven't heard the interview)

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/543733/school-lunches-david-seymour-aims-to-fix-issues-by-term-2-starting-in-tip-top-shape

Oh good, now kids getting butter chicken for 11 days in a row just have to wait until Term 2 for all this nonsense to be sorted out. Yay 🙄

[Seymour]: "The practical issues we're facing now, it's a matter of weeks. I expect to start term 2 in tip top shape but I also just point out there will always be people who criticise.

Well of course people are going to criticise - you had a system that was working reasonably well and cut it back just so landlords can get some un-necessary tax cuts? What were you expecting? Praise, plaudits and medals?? Spare me.

"People said we couldn't deliver on time, we're now delivering on time 100 percent of the time. There's some complaints about some of the quality of the food, we're working to overcome that. Where we get to in the end is delivering in full, on time, with the quality promise."

However, he said he had no intention to stand down if there were still issues.

Of course he won't stand down, Luxon needs him more than he needs Luxon. I hope Erica Stanford gives him an earful for this crap, however I suspect Luxon will probably try and over-ride her, which is a pity, as she seems to be a bit more clued up about the situation. Certainly moreso than the PM.

Also: https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360601709/prime-minister-sides-david-seymour-while-erica-stanford-shows-concern-over-school-lunches

He [Luxon] repeated that Marmite line in multiple interviews and under questioning in the House on Tuesday.

Speaking directly to question time viewers, he said: “I just say to parents that may be listening to this, feel free to prepare a Marmite sandwich.”

“It’s not an unreasonable ask,” he said.

Many National MPs cheered in support. Simeon Brown called the comment “spot on”.

Of course he would cheer, it's something good cut back that means he now has more money to spend on his beloved roads 🙄

quickymart:

 

Many National MPs cheered in support. Simeon Brown called the comment “spot on”.

 

Of course he would cheer, it's something good cut back that means he now has more money to spend on his beloved roads 🙄

 

No, Simeon will be cheering and calling the comment "spot on" as it's another nail in Luxon's coffin, and Simeon will be waiting to take over after the inevitable leadership roll.

I get where the comment came from (how many of children of the 70s - 90s "survived" school lunches consisting of marmite / jam / peanut butter sandwich's?), but at the end of the day, its a hungry child which isn't right, regardless of circumstances of the parent(s).

Our finance minister is going to have to have quite the bag of magic tricks come this budget to start showing a way forward for multiple elements of the economy.

I do remember it being drummed into us from primary school that we need to be telling pairents to give us a big bacon and eggs breakfast. I got a bit of a grilling from the health nurse saying I had cereals and such with a note to mum to go buy some & bacon eggs at least. Note to self never volunteer information.

We did have the mandatory small bottle of milk at school as well.

So maybe the thin sandwiches for lunch were known to be not enough and they wanted us to bulk up.

It was presumed that dinner would be a big affair as well.

Then we got to intermediate and no longer a problem as tuck shop had sweets and ice-cream galore at breaks and lunchtime. 
Teeth really appreciated that. 

ezbee:

 

I do remember it being drummed into us from primary school that we need to be telling pairents to give us a big bacon and eggs breakfast. I got a bit of a grilling from the health nurse saying I had cereals and such with a note to mum to go buy some & bacon eggs at least. Note to self never volunteer information.

 

We did have the mandatory small bottle of milk at school as well.

 

So maybe the thin sandwiches for lunch were known to be not enough and they wanted us to bulk up.

 

It was presumed that dinner would be a big affair as well.

 

Then we got to intermediate and no longer a problem as tuck shop had sweets and ice-cream galore at breaks and lunchtime. 
Teeth really appreciated that. 

 

It must be remembered that in theory the Government is paying a significant proportion of the parents via various means (working for families, benefits etc) to provide their children with food. Surely that is sufficient. Not sure why such a large scale lunch programme is required when not every child needs food. I would have thought it would be cheaper to provide sandwiches rather than hot food.

Bluntj:

 

It must be remembered that in theory the Government is paying a significant proportion of the parents via various means (working for families, benefits etc) to provide their children with food. Surely that is sufficient.

 

*speechless*

Bluntj:

 

ezbee:

 

I do remember it being drummed into us from primary school that we need to be telling pairents to give us a big bacon and eggs breakfast. I got a bit of a grilling from the health nurse saying I had cereals and such with a note to mum to go buy some & bacon eggs at least. Note to self never volunteer information.

 

We did have the mandatory small bottle of milk at school as well.

 

So maybe the thin sandwiches for lunch were known to be not enough and they wanted us to bulk up.

 

It was presumed that dinner would be a big affair as well.

 

Then we got to intermediate and no longer a problem as tuck shop had sweets and ice-cream galore at breaks and lunchtime. 
Teeth really appreciated that. 

 

 

It must be remembered that in theory the Government is paying a significant proportion of the parents via various means (working for families, benefits etc) to provide their children with food. Surely that is sufficient. Not sure why such a large scale lunch programme is required when not every child needs food. I would have thought it would be cheaper to provide sandwiches rather than hot food.

 

The same government that is trying really hard to prevent people from getting benefits?