https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine. >Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail.
Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I would >have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if you >do not need it.
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:The issue seems to be two-fold.
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine. >>Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail.
Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I would >>have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if you >>do not need it.
and see also >https://thestandard.org.nz/seymour-is-wrecking-the-school-lunch-program/
If Seymour thinks about it objectively, and decides that his
performance is so bad that he needs to resign as Associate Education >Minister, will Luxon congratulate him on a justified but difficult
decision?
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:The issue seems to be two-fold.
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine. >>>Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail.
Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I would >>>have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if you >>>do not need it.
and see also >>https://thestandard.org.nz/seymour-is-wrecking-the-school-lunch-program/
If Seymour thinks about it objectively, and decides that his
performance is so bad that he needs to resign as Associate Education >>Minister, will Luxon congratulate him on a justified but difficult >>decision?
The main one is poor performance by the contractor, the minor one is some >principals taking the opportunity to make political statements, and people like
you that do not understand what is really happening but love to spout your >rhetoric.
The government cannot fix this at a stroke, it will take time but they need to >hold the contractor to account. I bet those talks are happening. That is all.
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 03:37:19 -0000 (UTC), TonyBoth political opinions and therefore as biased as you are. And equally wrong.
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:The issue seems to be two-fold.
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>>>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine. >>>>Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail.
Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I would
have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>>>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if you
do not need it.
and see also >>>https://thestandard.org.nz/seymour-is-wrecking-the-school-lunch-program/
If Seymour thinks about it objectively, and decides that his
performance is so bad that he needs to resign as Associate Education >>>Minister, will Luxon congratulate him on a justified but difficult >>>decision?
The main one is poor performance by the contractor, the minor one is some >>principals taking the opportunity to make political statements, and people >>like
you that do not understand what is really happening but love to spout your >>rhetoric.
The government cannot fix this at a stroke, it will take time but they need >>to
hold the contractor to account. I bet those talks are happening. That is all.
An Associate Minister that clearly has little experience with project >management, who decided that throwing out something that was working
right around the country was best done all at once, with no trial of a
new system while existing arrangements continue elsewhere for a short
time. The arrangements cover the poorest schools in the country, where
the parents of the children involved have seen their ability to look
after their children diminish as a result of the ACT1stNat policies -
miss a day and they miss a meal. Then he has been tone deaf of
dietary requirements - many children have allergies or medical reasons
and need special meals - and clearly Seymour did not understand the >strictness of religious observance for some that need to be absolutely >certain that their meals have been prepared in accordance with
religious requirements. I am sure it has been a quick learning process
for Seymour, and to give him credit he is not trying to hide the
reality that there is virtually nothing that he can point to as having
been a success - although he pretends that he is getting calls that
are making positive noises - naturally for privacy reasons he cannot
identify any of those people . . .No. That is wrong and you know it.
For another view, see here: >https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
and here: >https://werewolf.co.nz/2025/02/gordon-campbell-on-school-lunches-and-the-coalition-government-eating-the-young/
What is also of interest is that the Prime Minister, who isSo you say but again you are wrong. You wouldn't have a clue what is happening, you never have had.
laser-focused on meeting targets (albeit they are seldom specified)
appears to be adopting a <let him sink> policy regarding this project
of Seymour's - he knows that Seymour cannot be sacked, so he is giving >Seymour room to learn . . .
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 03:37:19 -0000 (UTC), TonyBoth political opinions and therefore as biased as you are. And equally wrong.
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:The issue seems to be two-fold.
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>>>>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine.
Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail. >>>>>Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I would
have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>>>>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if you
do not need it.
and see also >>>>https://thestandard.org.nz/seymour-is-wrecking-the-school-lunch-program/ >>>>
If Seymour thinks about it objectively, and decides that his >>>>performance is so bad that he needs to resign as Associate Education >>>>Minister, will Luxon congratulate him on a justified but difficult >>>>decision?
The main one is poor performance by the contractor, the minor one is some >>>principals taking the opportunity to make political statements, and people >>>like
you that do not understand what is really happening but love to spout your >>>rhetoric.
The government cannot fix this at a stroke, it will take time but they need >>>to
hold the contractor to account. I bet those talks are happening. That is all.
An Associate Minister that clearly has little experience with project >>management, who decided that throwing out something that was working
right around the country was best done all at once, with no trial of a
new system while existing arrangements continue elsewhere for a short
time. The arrangements cover the poorest schools in the country, where
the parents of the children involved have seen their ability to look
after their children diminish as a result of the ACT1stNat policies -
miss a day and they miss a meal. Then he has been tone deaf of
dietary requirements - many children have allergies or medical reasons
and need special meals - and clearly Seymour did not understand the >>strictness of religious observance for some that need to be absolutely >>certain that their meals have been prepared in accordance with
religious requirements. I am sure it has been a quick learning process
for Seymour, and to give him credit he is not trying to hide the
reality that there is virtually nothing that he can point to as having
been a success - although he pretends that he is getting calls that
are making positive noises - naturally for privacy reasons he cannot >>identify any of those people . . .No. That is wrong and you know it.
For another view, see here: >>https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
and here: >>https://werewolf.co.nz/2025/02/gordon-campbell-on-school-lunches-and-the-coalition-government-eating-the-young/
So what is going on that is not covered in your post and the threeWhat is also of interest is that the Prime Minister, who isSo you say but again you are wrong. You wouldn't have a clue what is happening,
laser-focused on meeting targets (albeit they are seldom specified)
appears to be adopting a <let him sink> policy regarding this project
of Seymour's - he knows that Seymour cannot be sacked, so he is giving >>Seymour room to learn . . .
you never have had.
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 08:02:02 -0000 (UTC), TonyYou show how they are correct.
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 03:37:19 -0000 (UTC), TonyBoth political opinions and therefore as biased as you are. And equally wrong.
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:The issue seems to be two-fold.
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears >>>>>>
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>>>>>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just >>>>>>fine.
Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail. >>>>>>Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I >>>>>>would
have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>>>>>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if >>>>>>you
do not need it.
and see also >>>>>https://thestandard.org.nz/seymour-is-wrecking-the-school-lunch-program/ >>>>>
If Seymour thinks about it objectively, and decides that his >>>>>performance is so bad that he needs to resign as Associate Education >>>>>Minister, will Luxon congratulate him on a justified but difficult >>>>>decision?
The main one is poor performance by the contractor, the minor one is some >>>>principals taking the opportunity to make political statements, and people >>>>like
you that do not understand what is really happening but love to spout your >>>>rhetoric.
The government cannot fix this at a stroke, it will take time but they need >>>>to
hold the contractor to account. I bet those talks are happening. That is >>>>all.
An Associate Minister that clearly has little experience with project >>>management, who decided that throwing out something that was working >>>right around the country was best done all at once, with no trial of a >>>new system while existing arrangements continue elsewhere for a short >>>time. The arrangements cover the poorest schools in the country, where >>>the parents of the children involved have seen their ability to look >>>after their children diminish as a result of the ACT1stNat policies - >>>miss a day and they miss a meal. Then he has been tone deaf of
dietary requirements - many children have allergies or medical reasons >>>and need special meals - and clearly Seymour did not understand the >>>strictness of religious observance for some that need to be absolutely >>>certain that their meals have been prepared in accordance with
religious requirements. I am sure it has been a quick learning process >>>for Seymour, and to give him credit he is not trying to hide the
reality that there is virtually nothing that he can point to as having >>>been a success - although he pretends that he is getting calls that
are making positive noises - naturally for privacy reasons he cannot >>>identify any of those people . . .No. That is wrong and you know it.
For another view, see here: >>>https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
and here: >>>https://werewolf.co.nz/2025/02/gordon-campbell-on-school-lunches-and-the-coalition-government-eating-the-young/
Really? How are they wrong, Tony?
Nothing to do with what I wrote, just more of your rhetoric.So what is going on that is not covered in your post and the threeWhat is also of interest is that the Prime Minister, who isSo you say but again you are wrong. You wouldn't have a clue what is >>happening,
laser-focused on meeting targets (albeit they are seldom specified) >>>appears to be adopting a <let him sink> policy regarding this project
of Seymour's - he knows that Seymour cannot be sacked, so he is giving >>>Seymour room to learn . . .
you never have had.
url's I posted?
Here are a few more: >https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360590296/joy-and-nourishment-gone-hidden-impact-new-school-lunch-programme
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/543110/schools-slash-lunch-orders-as-meals-go-uneaten
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/543077/mpi-investigating-complaint-over-school-lunch-programme
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/nutritionist-finds-list-of-issues-after-visiting-auckland-schools-delivering-lunch-programme/DMWTDYYM4ZD6ROHQ46KKZXSQ7Y/
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/education/school-lunch-woes-principals-want-to-revert-to-old-system-after-month-long-teething-issues/ALAKE4JTBVF6NBTYSC5JMJENOE/
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/school-lunches-students-given-vegan-meals-containing-beef-mince/RGP3GDPFSNBFDMTFVKTWI7DQCY/
https://www.healthcoalition.org.nz/government-school-lunch-provider-need-to-act-urgently-to-fix-programme-failures/
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/543155/david-seymour-responds-to-school-lunch-programme-controversy
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360595750/principals-federation-says-time-has-now-come-revert-previous-school-lunches-arrangement
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/542797/what-the-ministry-of-education-is-being-told-about-school-lunches
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/542843/nutritionist-finds-list-of-issues-after-visiting-auckland-schools-delivering-lunch-programme
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/parents-upset-over-unidentifiable-school-lunches-after-scheme-shakeup/V7EE77KRYNCFJFYW5GCRKC7TIM/
Do these articles give you a clue, Tony?
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine. >Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail.
Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I would >have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if you >do not need it.
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Any article with a headline like that is intent on scoring a political
hit on Seymour - school lunches is just the vehicle, the subject of
the article is a contention that Seymour is incompetent.
The focus of the article (and of many others in various news media) isOver the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine. >>Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail.
Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I would >>have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if you >>do not need it.
Ignoring the article and focusing on the subject of the Government's
school lunch program, this needs to be reviewed as per contractual >commitments of the provider (I recall reading that a review is due at
the end of term 1) and actions taken.
One option is to cancel it and tackle the problem of hungry childrenIs that what you would recommend, Crash?
in other ways.
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:11:11 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d>Supposition and political rhetoric.
wrote:
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Any article with a headline like that is intent on scoring a political
hit on Seymour - school lunches is just the vehicle, the subject of
the article is a contention that Seymour is incompetent.
It does seem to be a common perception - targets being missed all over
the place - will the Prime Minister get involved?
I doubt it is true, sounds like a Rich guess.The focus of the article (and of many others in various news media) is
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine. >>>Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail.
Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I would >>>have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if you >>>do not need it.
Ignoring the article and focusing on the subject of the Government's
school lunch program, this needs to be reviewed as per contractual >>commitments of the provider (I recall reading that a review is due at
the end of term 1) and actions taken.
the Governments school lunch programme. I have not previously known
that corrective action was not possible for non-compliance with
contract provisions until the end of term 1 - that does appear
unusual.
Is that what you would recommend, Crash?
One option is to cancel it and tackle the problem of hungry children
in other ways.
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:11:11 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d>
wrote:
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Any article with a headline like that is intent on scoring a political
hit on Seymour - school lunches is just the vehicle, the subject of
the article is a contention that Seymour is incompetent.
It does seem to be a common perception - targets being missed all over
the place - will the Prime Minister get involved?
The focus of the article (and of many others in various news media) is
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine. >>>Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail.
Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I would >>>have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if you >>>do not need it.
Ignoring the article and focusing on the subject of the Government's
school lunch program, this needs to be reviewed as per contractual >>commitments of the provider (I recall reading that a review is due at
the end of term 1) and actions taken.
the Governments school lunch programme.
I have not previously known
that corrective action was not possible for non-compliance with
contract provisions until the end of term 1 - that does appear
unusual.
Is that what you would recommend, Crash?
One option is to cancel it and tackle the problem of hungry children
in other ways.
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:I was commenting on a post from Crash that outlined an aspect of
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:11:11 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>wrote:Supposition and political rhetoric.
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Any article with a headline like that is intent on scoring a political >>>hit on Seymour - school lunches is just the vehicle, the subject of
the article is a contention that Seymour is incompetent.
It does seem to be a common perception - targets being missed all over
the place - will the Prime Minister get involved?
I doubt it is true, sounds like a Rich guess.
The focus of the article (and of many others in various news media) is
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>>>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine. >>>>Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail.
Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I would
have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>>>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if you
do not need it.
Ignoring the article and focusing on the subject of the Government's >>>school lunch program, this needs to be reviewed as per contractual >>>commitments of the provider (I recall reading that a review is due at
the end of term 1) and actions taken.
the Governments school lunch programme. I have not previously known
that corrective action was not possible for non-compliance with
contract provisions until the end of term 1 - that does appear
unusual.
As stated previously I expect there are talks going on with the contractor and >obviously they will not be public until there is an agreed direction. >Meanwhile you and your ilk will use it as political leverage.Most people just want the children in these low decile schools to get
Is that what you would recommend, Crash?
One option is to cancel it and tackle the problem of hungry children
in other ways.
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 21:39:08 -0000 (UTC), TonySo, you point is?
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:I was commenting on a post from Crash that outlined an aspect of
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:11:11 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>wrote:Supposition and political rhetoric.
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears
Any article with a headline like that is intent on scoring a political >>>>hit on Seymour - school lunches is just the vehicle, the subject of
the article is a contention that Seymour is incompetent.
It does seem to be a common perception - targets being missed all over >>>the place - will the Prime Minister get involved?
I doubt it is true, sounds like a Rich guess.
The focus of the article (and of many others in various news media) is >>>the Governments school lunch programme. I have not previously known
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>>>>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine.
Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail. >>>>>Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I >>>>>would
have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>>>>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if >>>>>you
do not need it.
Ignoring the article and focusing on the subject of the Government's >>>>school lunch program, this needs to be reviewed as per contractual >>>>commitments of the provider (I recall reading that a review is due at >>>>the end of term 1) and actions taken.
that corrective action was not possible for non-compliance with
contract provisions until the end of term 1 - that does appear
unusual.
contractual arrangements that I had not been aware of.
Indeed most do, you however just want to make political capital out of that misery. Shame on you.As stated previously I expect there are talks going on with the contractor >>andMost people just want the children in these low decile schools to get
obviously they will not be public until there is an agreed direction. >>Meanwhile you and your ilk will use it as political leverage.
lunches , and see an end to the waste.
Is that what you would recommend, Crash?
One option is to cancel it and tackle the problem of hungry children
in other ways.
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:That I was taking the comment from Crash as likely to be true - a
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 21:39:08 -0000 (UTC), TonySo, you point is?
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:I was commenting on a post from Crash that outlined an aspect of >>contractual arrangements that I had not been aware of.
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:11:11 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>>wrote:Supposition and political rhetoric.
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears >>>>>>
Any article with a headline like that is intent on scoring a political >>>>>hit on Seymour - school lunches is just the vehicle, the subject of >>>>>the article is a contention that Seymour is incompetent.
It does seem to be a common perception - targets being missed all over >>>>the place - will the Prime Minister get involved?
I doubt it is true, sounds like a Rich guess.
The focus of the article (and of many others in various news media) is >>>>the Governments school lunch programme. I have not previously known >>>>that corrective action was not possible for non-compliance with >>>>contract provisions until the end of term 1 - that does appear
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved >>>>>>school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just fine.
Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail. >>>>>>Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I >>>>>>would
have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been >>>>>>sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if >>>>>>you
do not need it.
Ignoring the article and focusing on the subject of the Government's >>>>>school lunch program, this needs to be reviewed as per contractual >>>>>commitments of the provider (I recall reading that a review is due at >>>>>the end of term 1) and actions taken.
unusual.
I abhor the misery - you appear to accept that it is acceptable fromIndeed most do, you however just want to make political capital out of that >misery. Shame on you.
As stated previously I expect there are talks going on with the contractor >>>andMost people just want the children in these low decile schools to get >>lunches , and see an end to the waste.
obviously they will not be public until there is an agreed direction. >>>Meanwhile you and your ilk will use it as political leverage.
Is that what you would recommend, Crash?
One option is to cancel it and tackle the problem of hungry children >>>>>in other ways.
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 03:17:56 -0000 (UTC), TonySo irrelevant then?
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:That I was taking the comment from Crash as likely to be true - a
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 21:39:08 -0000 (UTC), TonySo, you point is?
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:I was commenting on a post from Crash that outlined an aspect of >>>contractual arrangements that I had not been aware of.
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:11:11 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>>>wrote:Supposition and political rhetoric.
On 25 Feb 2025 02:07:03 GMT, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
https://mountaintui.substack.com/p/new-school-lunches-waste-appears >>>>>>>
Any article with a headline like that is intent on scoring a political >>>>>>hit on Seymour - school lunches is just the vehicle, the subject of >>>>>>the article is a contention that Seymour is incompetent.
It does seem to be a common perception - targets being missed all over >>>>>the place - will the Prime Minister get involved?
I doubt it is true, sounds like a Rich guess.
The focus of the article (and of many others in various news media) is >>>>>the Governments school lunch programme. I have not previously known >>>>>that corrective action was not possible for non-compliance with >>>>>contract provisions until the end of term 1 - that does appear >>>>>unusual.
Over the last month there has been many reports that the new and improved
school lunch programme are not working.
Government not collecting the feedback while spouting that it is just >>>>>>>fine.
Have to say that this is a bit woke.
Leaving aside the political aspect of it, we are left with a fail. >>>>>>>Fair enough to allow for some teething issues at start up but by now I >>>>>>>would
have expected some improvement by now. Looks like the Government has been
sold a pup.
As the saying goes, No matter what the price is the price is too high if >>>>>>>you
do not need it.
Ignoring the article and focusing on the subject of the Government's >>>>>>school lunch program, this needs to be reviewed as per contractual >>>>>>commitments of the provider (I recall reading that a review is due at >>>>>>the end of term 1) and actions taken.
formal review at the end of Term 1 is likely, but most people having
let out a contract would endeavor to get the contractor working
largely to specifications right from the start.
Bullshit, you love the misery, you find it delicious.I abhor the misery - you appear to accept that it is acceptable fromIndeed most do, you however just want to make political capital out of that >>misery. Shame on you.
As stated previously I expect there are talks going on with the contractor >>>>andMost people just want the children in these low decile schools to get >>>lunches , and see an end to the waste.
obviously they will not be public until there is an agreed direction. >>>>Meanwhile you and your ilk will use it as political leverage.
the current government. See the difference?
Is that what you would recommend, Crash?
One option is to cancel it and tackle the problem of hungry children >>>>>>in other ways.
One option is to cancel it and tackle the problem of hungry children in >>other ways.
Is that what you would recommend, Crash?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 05:24:35 |
| Calls: | 12,100 |
| Calls today: | 8 |
| Files: | 15,003 |
| Messages: | 6,517,908 |
| Posted today: | 1 |