Not that we actually believe their analysis for a moment but assume, arguendo, that it's true, the solution is obvious:
The number of children who are going hungry at home has reached "heartbreaking" levels, the main teaching union has warned.
Four out of five teachers reported a rise in "holiday hunger" among children on free lunches whose families struggle to afford to feed them three meals a day through the holidays, a survey by the National Union of Teachers (NUT) found.
More than one-third (37%) said they saw pupils returning after the school holidays showing signs of being malnourished after starving for extended periods.
We simply do not believe reports of starvation or even malnourishment in Britain today. Sorry, that is to demean the meanings of those words. Absent serious mental health or addiction problems those two don't exist. Being hungry most certainly does but as we say, to equate he three is to not be serious about the meanings of the first two.
But let us assume that it is true. What should we do?
Well, quite obviously, schools should run for 52 weeks of the year therefore. Yes, agreed, this is to diagnose the adults of modern Britain as so ludicrously helpless that they need communal feeding stations as if this is Mao's China. And we think it might end up working about as well too. But if it is true, as the NUT is stating, that only children fed in school are children being properly fed then full year, year around, is the only solution, isn't it?
Both teachers and the students can have four weeks holiday just like everyone else and take it on a rolling basis across the year just as all of the rest of us do too.
We look forward to the NUT explaining this to their members. But no need to thank us, it's obvious to everyone that this would be the only valid solution to the problem as stated, isn't it?