Parents urged to check school meal support ahead of summer holidays
How to apply for Tax-Free Childcare and 30 hours childcare
Parents across Scotland are being reminded by a charity that they could be eligible for extra payments over the school holidays to cover the cost of meals for their children this summer.
National advice agency Advice Direct Scotland is urging households to check if they qualify for support before schools break up for the summer later this month. Households normally eligible for free school meals during term time should automatically start receiving payments of £2.50 or £4.80 per day, per child, during the holidays, depending on the child's age and where they live.
While exact holiday dates vary by council, a household with two children could be entitled to between £150 and £288 to help cover meal costs o ver the course of the six-week summer break.
Parents who have not yet applied for free school meals, or who might start claiming benefits over the holidays due to a change in circumstances, are being urged to take action now.
All children in P1 to P5 at schools run by local councils currently receive free school lunches during term time, regardless of their family circumstances.
Children in P6 and above continue to qualify only if they come from low-income households.
Over the summer and other holidays, support is available to those who normally receive free school meals.
Payments are set at £2.50 per day, per child, for each weekday during the holidays, excluding weekends.
However, some councils, such as Midlothian, offer higher rates of £4.20 per primary school pupil and £4.80 per secondary school pupil.
This means summer payments will be around £75, £126, or £144 per child, depending on the rate and school stage.
Rebecca Fagan, benefit and welfare information officer at Advice Direct Scotland, said: 'With the summer holidays approaching fast, it's crucial that families know about the support available to help provide healthy meals for their children. Many Scots are facing financial difficulties due to the cost-of-living and energy crises and will be worried about holiday-related expenses on top of rising bills.
'For families with children eligible for free school meals, payments are available throughout the summer, so we encourage anyone who might benefit to apply now. Remember, once your application is approved, payments will start promptly and will also be available during other school holidays.
'If you're unsure about your eligibility or need help applying, our team at advice.scot offers free, confidential support to everyone, regardless of personal circumstances.'
How to qualify for free school meals
To qualify, people must be in receipt of one of the following benefits:
Universal Credit (where monthly earned income is not more than £850)
Income Support
Income-based Job Seeker's Allowance
Income-based Employment and Support Allowance
Support under Part VI of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999
People who are not currently eligible but start receiving one of the above benefits during the summer holidays can apply for the extra support immediately.
Applications can be made through councils or online at mygov.scot. Those unable to fill out the application can contact the team at advice.scot for help, over the phone or online.
The form takes around 20 minutes to complete.
Applicants will need the dates of birth of any children they have, their partner's details if applicable, and their bank details.
Advice.scot provides free, practical advice and information on any topic, including access to benefits and whether households are claiming all the support they are entitled to.
The team can be contacted on 0808 800 9060, Monday to Friday, 9am–5pm.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
41 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
King presented with keys to Edinburgh at start of Holyrood Week
The King has been presented with the keys to the city of Edinburgh in a ceremony marking the start of his official stay in Scotland. Charles attended the traditional Ceremony of the Keys in the gardens of the Palace of Holyroodhouse, his official residence in the Scottish capital. The ceremony took place on Tuesday morning, shortly after the King and Queen had arrived at the palace by helicopter. Each year the monarch traditionally spends a week based at Holyroodhouse, an event known as Holyrood Week or Royal Week in Scotland. The King was presented with the keys by Lord Provost of Edinburgh Robert Aldridge, who held them out on a red cushion, which Charles symbolically touched. Mr Aldridge said to the King: 'We, the Lord Provost and members of the City of Edinburgh Council, welcome Your Majesty to the capital city of your ancient and hereditary kingdom of Scotland and offer for your gracious acceptance the keys of Your Majesty's good city of Edinburgh.' In return, Charles gave the traditional reply: 'I return these keys perfectly convinced that they cannot be placed in better hands than those of the Lord Provost and councillors of my good city of Edinburgh.' Before the ceremony, the palace's garden was transformed into a parade ground and the King met senior military figures. He then received a royal salute and inspected a Guard of Honour of soldiers from the Royal Company of Archers, who serve as the King's ceremonial bodyguard in Scotland – a role first created in 1822 for King George VI. Also lined up was the Palace Guard made up of soldiers from Balaklava Company, 5 Scots, and the High Constables of the Palace of Holyroodhouse. The Band of the Royal Regiment of Scotland and the Pipes and Drums of 2nd Battalion Royal Regiment of Scotland provided music for the occasion. The 32nd Regiment Royal Artillery also fired a 21-gun salute at Edinburgh Castle to mark the King's arrival at the palace. The King walked past the Guard of Honour, casting his eye over the service personnel and stopping to talk to some of them.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Starmer abandons key welfare reforms in face of Labour revolt
Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to abandon a key plank of his welfare reform package in the face of a Labour rebellion. The Government has shelved plans to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip) and any changes will now only come after a review of the benefit. The climbdown came just 90 minutes before MPs were due to vote for the first time on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill. It will cause a major headache for Chancellor Rachel Reeves as the welfare squeeze was originally meant to save £4.8 billion a year, which was subsequently reduced to £2.3 billion when the Bill was first watered down last week. Postponing any changes to the eligibility criteria for Pip means it is now uncertain how much the reforms will save from the soaring welfare bill. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch accused ministers of 'utter capitulation' and said the legislation was now 'pointless'. She said: 'They should bin it, do their homework, and come back with something serious. Starmer cannot govern.' Some 39 Labour MPs have signed an amendment which would see the Bill fall at its first hurdle in the Commons. Rebel ringleader Rachael Maskell said: 'The whole Bill is now unravelling and is a complete farce. 'What it won't do is stop the suffering of disabled people which is why we are determined to go ahead with the reasoned amendment and attempt to vote down the Bill at second reading.' A previous effort to kill the Bill had attracted more than 120 Labour supporters, but was dropped after the first partial U-turn on the legislation last week, which restricted the Pip changes to new claimants from November 2026. That date has now been abandoned in the latest climbdown, with any changes now only coming after disability minister Sir Stephen Timms' review of the Pip assessment process. Sir Stephen announced the climbdown in the middle of the debate on the legislation. He acknowledged 'concerns that the changes to Pip are coming ahead of the conclusions of the review of the assessment that I will be leading'. He said the Government would now 'only make changes to Pip eligibility activities and descriptors following that review', which is due to conclude in the autumn of 2026. The concession came after frantic behind-the-scenes negotiations in Westminster involving the Prime Minister, his cabinet and wavering Labour MPs. It appeared to have won round some Labour doubters. Josh Fenton-Glynn, who was one of the 126 Labour MPs who signed the original rebel amendment to the welfare reform Bill last week, described the move as 'really good news'. He said he wanted to support the Government at 'every opportunity' and was glad changes to personal independence payment eligibility would be delayed until after the Timms review. But other Labour MPs appeared exasperated, with one telling the PA news agency that no-one 'knew what they were voting on anymore'.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
There is one clear winner in the welfare debate… and it isn't Liz Kendall
Poor . No doubt Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves had irresistible reasons of state for not being on the front bench to support her during the second reading of her Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill. But their absence rather underlined the loneliness of her task of beginning the very debate which posed the biggest challenge to the prime minister's and his chancellor's authority since they came to office a year ago: Welfare cuts. Nor was it that surprising that the Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch pulled rank on her own work and pensions shadow secretary, Helen Whately, by leading for the opposition herself. Hers was hardly one of the great parliamentary performances, to put it mildly. But sensing an easy wicket, Badenoch made a reasonable job of navigating between the (in reality, irreconcilable) goals of joining the Labour rebels in opposition to the welfare bill, and the fact that all her instincts would be for something far more draconian than even this government has so far contemplated. Even if Badenoch's crack at the 'ambitious backbench bootlickers' – who had gone on the airwaves to support the original unamended bill and had now 'been hung out to dry' after the eleventh hour concessions designed to prevent a government defeat – did not strike a chord on the benches opposite, her self-evident proposition that the bill was rushed job to fill a hole in Reeves' fiscal figures certainly would have done. Alas, it was neither Kendall nor Badenoch, but Labour's Rachael Maskell (never less than courteous but the polar opposite of a 'bootlicking' back bencher) who stole the show. It must have seemed to Kendall an age before Meg Hillier – who had originally been a rebel, but was now persuaded by the concession to back the government – gallantly rode to what Kendall could only hope would be her rescue. But Maskell, who proposed the 'reasoned amendment' designed to stop the bill in its tracks, doesn't do jargon or hollow leftist rhetoric. Indeed, it was almost in passing that she made the wholly reasonable point that if the government can afford not to introduce a wealth tax, or equalise capital gains tax with income tax, then it could surely afford to pay Personal Income Payments (PIP) to disabled Britons. Her argument that these ' Dickensian cuts belong to a different era and a different party' seemed to sum up what is surely the greatest of several mistakes made by a government, which applied so little of the expertise it showed in winning a mandate to planning properly what to do with it. Starmer explained to The Sunday Times last weekend that he had his eye off the ball in the run-up to the debate because of his preoccupation with international affairs: 'I was heavily focused on what was happening with Nato and the Middle East all weekend. From the moment I got back from the G7, I went straight into a Cobra meeting. My full attention really bore down on this [last] Thursday. At that point, we were able to move relatively quickly.' Though ready to be corrected by more erudite readers, I can't remember a previous prime minister using such an excuse for a domestic snafu like this. Not Thatcher or Blair, surely – both of whom had a few foreign policy challenges to deal with. But even if that were justified, Starmer was explaining away his failure to understand how the rebellion he unwisely called the 'noises off' were spreading like wildfire; and not the failures inherent in the original bill itself. And in the end, the buck for legislation stops not at the works and pensions secretary, who, by all accounts, did at least try to create support for bringing claimants into jobs a higher priority in the bill; nor even with the chancellor – but the prime minister and first lord of the Treasury himself. Of course, the huge costs of the welfare state have been a headache for every government. And maybe Starmer thought he was being politically 'brave' by trying to radically transform social security as none of his predecessors had done. However, while casualties are inevitable with any kind of reform, it needn't have disproportionately affected disabled people on the lowest incomes, who are already struggling with a cost of living crisis. What would have genuinely been brave is if the prime minister – to cite just one example – risked losing the support of asset-rich and frequently high income homeowners at the top of the scale, by reforming hopelessly outdated and inequitable council tax bands. But while this has been seriously damaging to Starmer's authority, it's not all bad. As an exercise, this has been good for democracy. For the rebellion, which forced the government into concessions (still not enough for many backbenchers) was rooted mainly not in ideology or factionalism, but its sense of fairness and in what MPs were being told by their constituents. And that in the end, that is what the parliamentary system should be – but all too often isn't – about.
