I have always been a passionate believer that short (ie. minimum 30 minutes) lunch breaks effectively damage some children's ability to socialise with peers (and learn social skills) in a day and age where pretty much every lesson has to have a non friendship group based seating plan. When I was in secondary in the 1990s, only ONE teacher imposed a seating plan on us! Given the pressure on teachers to cover content and show that progress has been made, kids can't 'socialise' in lessons like we used to! I have always said kids should get 1 hour. I know what the opponents will say, 'we would finish later' is the most common, often followed by a childcare argument (Which, as a single male I know it is easy to criticise!) Or 'behaviour deteriorates in a long lunch break! (So as a teacher you enjoy teaching 5 hours with 5 hours 45 minutes to do it in and that's before break duty and detentions etc?) Now I'm not suggesting we adopt the ways of certain continental neighbours, we do not have the climate for a siesta break from 12 midday to 4-5pm and I'm not suggesting a protracted lunch where the vin rouge is popped out! (please forgive the stereotypes, they are for humour only and I intend no 'national racism.') But in a world where kids are on PS4/tablets when at home and not building dens in the woods, schools should afford them a decent social break?