Try Committees

Then things got a little worse for we ‘poor students’. When the lunch rules were changed. They (the school) gave permission for students to be able to buy their lunches from the ‘local store’, or the tuckshop. We, the poor students’ as was pointed out many times, could not afford the local store at the prices it charged for a simple sandwich, and the amazing cakes and sweet treats they offered. We were forced to remain with the ‘budget priced’ tuckshop and its simple fare. Actually, it was probably some decision by that external group known as the P and C. I thought it was a group made up of the parents and teachers, who acted as an advisory committee, but the letters, P and C do not stand for that (at least when I went to school they didn’t). No doubt it was the run off effect of some internal power struggle between those who worked on the tuck shop, and those who didn’t want to.

I say didn’t want to because of the difference between the types. Those, who felt they were too busy with their lives, to be able to volunteer at the tuckshop, for a few hours a week. Have you ever noticed that? The mums who usually work at the tuckshop, ensuring kids are actually getting food and some nutrition, are not the ones in charge of the committees who make the decisions. They are the ‘wonderful women in the tuckshop’ referred to in the committee meeting notes. Not the committee presidents etc. There’s no status in being a ‘tuckshop mum’, compared to being the secretary, president or treasurer of the P&C committee. Once again, being seen to be doing, rather than the doing.

While the local store was on the main street, about 50 metres from the front gate of the school and we were not allowed to generally go along the main street in school hours (in fact in those days, you were not allowed to even leave the school grounds without a parent during school hours, unlike today, where some students are seen wandering the stores in the middle of the day). It was of course realised you could access the store by the side gate from the school, walk down the side road and be at the front, without having to actually walk along the main street. It seems it was the main street that was of concern to the school. Traffic was it seems, the primary concern. Students could (obviously) just walk out into traffic (as they do), even though there was no need to go near the road to reach the store. But someone in charge had considered that was too dangerous. Or perhaps it was the Parents and teachers committee? Knowing how careless children could be. So it was initially argued, that the local store was not allowed to be attended during school time, by one group or another in charge. No one asked us. Then at some stage decisions were made and things changed. Was it due to business complaints from the store? Or was it because their children started attending the school?

(Continued tomorrow)