The case for universal free school meals – and why Labour should adopt the policy


Fiona Twycross AM is a Londonwide Labour Member of the London Assembly; for details of the consultation on food poverty in London go to www.London.gov.uk

It’s time for Labour nationally to be bold and ambitious on the issue of healthy universal free healthy school meals. There are strong examples of councils – such as Southwark and Islington in London – leading the way and demonstrating that where there’s a will there is a way, even in a time of austerity.

School-mealsThe report “A Children’s Future Fund” (pdf), launched by the charity Sustain and backed by 61 organisations, provides a model whereby food duties could be predicated to provide the funding:

“…to improve children’s health and protect the environment they will grow up in.”

It stresses the need for free and high quality meals in primary schools and increased food education and skills, access to fruit and drinking water in schools. It demonstrates the kind of ambitious approach needed to tackle future health time bombs.

It would also address hunger in schools which is a scandal we need to tackle now.

It is the sort of ambitious tangible policy we should be adopting as a party if we are to demonstrate we are prepared to take bold decisions to tackle difficult issues such as obesity. We need to be prepared to take on the vested interests of the food industry for the public good.

Attainment levels rise where free healthy school meals are introduced and the policy would, therefore, arguably be a more effective way of increasing educational attainment than a structural reorganisation or tinkering of the curriculum. The policy – by removing the cost of lunches for children during the school week – would also place Labour firmly on the side of hard pressed families.

Pilots funded by the former Labour government demonstrate that extending eligibility doesn’t extend take up of free healthy school meals significantly. The only way to dramatically increase the take up is through universal provision which creates equality in the school canteens.

Free school lunches don’t address children not eating breakfast and it doesn’t address their diet at home. The policy would, however, go a long way towards ensuring the billions spent annually on diseases such as diabetes – which put a massive and unsustainable strain on NHS resources – don’t rise indefinitely.

It is also a comparatively cheap policy – the report on the pilots estimated the cost to be around £220 per Primary school pupil over two years.

The Labour Party currently has a policy review on “Children, Food and Obesity” (pdf), and when Andy Burnham, Shadow Secretary of State for Health, recently started a debate on whether there should be legal limits of fat and sugar in children’s food, he drew on the frightening statistics about childhood obesity in the UK to illustrate why this is a serious issue we need to tackle.

The OECD has claimed more than a quarter of girls in the UK are obese (26.6%), with boys not far behind (22.7%) – [see OECD Obesity Update 2012] – and the National Child Measurement Programme says more than a third of children are obese or overweight by the time they leave primary school.

Legal limits of fat and sugar in children’s food sound sensible and it’s an important issue to debate. However, although some foods are clearly aimed at children through the packaging and contents, there isn’t a neat category of products.

You would need blanket legal limits on contents of processed food for the policy to be workable and it would be a brave politician who would introduce legislation that must surely lead to a ban on traditional sausages. A much neater way of managing a healthy diet and storing up both good health and good habits for the future would be through managing children’s diets at school.

If Sustain are genuinely expecting the current government to take up the suggestion of food duties for free healthy school meals, they are probably going to be disappointed.

The Responsibility Deal has not proved itself effective yet. The level of praise heaped on soft drinks companies by government ministers last week for reducing the sugar levels from ‘a huge amount’ to ‘a lot’ shows this government is unlikely to dramatically increase the moral or fiscal pressure on the food industry.

The report also provides evidence for those who instinctively know the answer to the question ‘how can we afford to provide universal free healthy school meals?’ is ‘how can we afford not to?’

It would be nice to think the chancellor would listen to the arguments made by the report and in March we would see a dramatic change in the government’s policy towards free healthy school meals. Failing that, adopting the proposal as a future Labour policy seems like both a sensible progressive and ambitious step.

See also:

Blackpool council leads the charge on free school breakfastsJanuary 9th, 2013

Breakfast clubs axed, teacher handouts…. the scandal of hungry children in our schoolsOctober 26th, 2012

Survey reveals huge increase in number of pupils coming to school hungryOctober 16th, 2012

IFS: Free school meals for all increased attainment in disadvantaged areasJuly 26th, 2012

Two children in every classroom go hungryJuly 5th, 2012

Hungry pupils? Well, the government did scrap plans for 500,000 free school mealsJune 20th, 2012

Failure to extend free school meals will cost poorest families £600 a yearJune 10th, 2012

This entry was posted in Good Society and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
  • LB

    Paid out of people’s pension contributions.

    5,300 bn of debt off the books. Nothing like putting people into poverty is there.

  • Newsbot9

    Yes, you’d know all about putting people into poverty, with that much off your books, Politician,

    The UK, unlike your banana republics, pays pensions out of current funds and has it’s debts firmly known. Go back to your home country and stop trying to kill the poor here.

  • Newsbot9

    In this case, I’d go with *offered* universal provision. Make it an opt-out checkbox on the admissions form. Some parents are not going to want their kids eating the food for various reasons (be they related to health or religion, for instance) and you do need to know how many will be eating.

  • robertcp

    I totally agree in principle but will it be affordable? Voters might just think that Labour will bankrupt the country again. It is also starting to look like the deficit will still be very high in 2015.

  • http://twitter.com/BritSoftDrinks British Soft Drinks

    The Responsibility Deal is having more effect that you might realise – the calorie reduction pledge was only launched a year ago – and soft drinks companies have made commitments including, for example, reducing the sugar content in their products and introducing smaller packs.

    This is against a background of falling consumption of soft drinks containing added sugar – down by 9 per cent in the last 10 years – even while obesity rates have gone up by 15 per cent. More than 60 per cent of soft drinks now contain no added sugar, up from 30 per cent 20 years ago.

    It’s absolutely fine to enjoy soft drinks as part of a balanced diet, where calories in are matched by calories out. Let’s hear more about how people can take more exercise and follow more active lifestyles.