What’s your most controversial opinion? **Read OP** **Mod Warning in Post #8023**

I actually wouldn't mind national service. Not some kind of bullsh1t national service where connected people either get exceptions or tend to go in as people giving orders. Genuine training to teach skills in case they're needed to defend the country.

And I'm not turned on by the idea of young people being shouted at for 2 years and 'whipped into shape' as the Tory pary suggested before the last UK election. That was an appeal to older people who like the idea of young people being shouted at.

If it was genuinely useful to the recruits, the country and they were paid well, then I'd be in favour of it.

Of course I realise some things could be done more efficiently. But here we are. So when someone says they want to to to spend more money on something like defence, and they reply they want to be more efficient with the money they arllrrady pay, they're saying they aren't willing to pay anything.

I get that it's a lovely neat answer but it's just not a serious answer. So the answer is they don't actually want to put their money where their mouth is and they just want to complain without taking any action.

The money would be better spent focused on the tiny minority if children who aren't being fed enough food and living in genuine poverty. A school meal won't do much for them if living in poverty. I would rather the 288m is entirely spent on such children than being wasted on kids who don't need it, which is probably over 99% of children in the country. Also, a huge proportion is dumped in the bin each day.

Improving efficiency is realistic, it's not suff of fantasy, it can be done.

Right. Well, if you volunteer to cut the services in your area, then you could make a start straight away.

I'm sure your local school could have the children budge up and bigger classes could reduce teachers. Patients in your local hospital could cool their heels on trollies in corridors for a few hours longer and they could save sone money on medical staff and close down some wards. You wouldn't mind your family travelling further for cancer treatment, right? And if you don't mind a few more potholes here and there, your local area could save on road maintenance.

That's a decent start right there.

You used the funding to set up a program and task force to identify children living in poverty or living with parents who are incapable or unwilling to property look after their children. You find good homes for the children and support the parents rehabilitation while doing so. 288 million per annum could fund such a program.

Whwn it comes to having children, the cost of housing is the biggest inflationary element.

As a teenager during the boom, I watched house price increases being celebrated as houses were pushed further and further out of my reach.

Now I have recently bought a house and had one child at 40. The reason I don't have 2 children is because I think I can live frugally and save enough to help one child through uni or getting on their feet on a career, and save enough to give them a step up on the housing ladder. I don't think I can do that for 2 children, so I haven't had 2 children.

Anyone who worries about the falling birth rate, the cost of housing is your biggest problem. If we sort it out for the next generation, then there might be a chance of increasing birth rates.

I never said anything about throwing money at Tusla. I wouldn't give money to Tusla. A new programme could be set up specifically focused at identying children living in poverty.

The school meals program is the perfect example of throwing money at a problem.

Most of that annual 288m is wasted. That is money that could be focused disabled children, or many others who would get the full benefit of it, rather than 99% of it being wasted. The government is spending 288m to get 3m worth of real benefit to make an approximation. They should be getting 288m worth of benefit from 288m expenditure.

The money could also be spent on improving school infrastructure rather than wasting it on food that either isn't needed or is thrown in the bin.

A food voucher program could be set up as well. Whereby those who qualify are given vouchers for nutrious food.

These are just some ideas, there are countless ways to get better value from €288m per annum.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2025-06-10/913/

The link I provided says that the 2025 budget for the school meals programme is €300m.

Regarding the 99%, I don't know what the exact figure is. It's very low though. We live in one of the wealthiest economies in the world with a generous social welfare programme. Very few children are malnourished through lack of resources, you can buy a 1kg bag of potatoes in Aldi for 1.39. It's not that expensive to children in Ireland.

Ah ye, give the kids a bag of spuds for their lunch everyday, you've solved the issue.