Healthy school food only works if children want to eat it
Even the healthiest menu in the world is a failure if children don't want to eat it, writes Brad Pearce
Many of the changes set to be introduced in the Government's new School Food Standards have long been called for by people working across the school food sector.
Listen to this article
Healthy school food only works if children actually eat it
Anything raising the quality and variety of the food available to children at school deserves serious support.
But there is one basic, fundamental, glaringly obvious point we cannot lose sight of: children actually have to eat the food.
Our members are the people working in school kitchens and dining halls every single day. They know that you can design the healthiest menu in the world, but if pupils do not want to eat it, then the policy has, to be blunt, failed.
That is particularly important in secondary schools, where students often have more choice about whether they eat in school at all. If the offer becomes too restrictive or too unfamiliar too quickly, some will bring food from home, buy something on the way in, or simply skip lunch altogether. Good food helps children concentrate, and over time that ability to focus and learn can shape educational attainment, qualifications and ultimately the opportunities open to them later in life.
So as these standards are introduced, Government needs to keep a very close eye on uptake.
There are also some practical issues to deal with. School caterers are already working under significant pressure. Food costs have risen, staffing is difficult, and many schools are working with old kitchens, limited equipment and dining rooms that were not designed for the numbers they now have to serve.
If we are asking schools to do more, the funding must follow.
And this isn’t just about the ingredients, though of course high-quality foods do cost more; it means making sure schools have decent kitchens, enough staff, proper training and the time and space to serve children well.
We also need to be sensible about packed lunches. Banning them is not realistic, and it is not something we support. Parents need choice, and some schools simply do not have the capacity to serve every child a school meal.
But there is an obvious inconsistency here. School meals are required to meet nutritional standards, while packed lunches are not. Schools should be supported to publish clear packed-lunch policies and give parents straightforward guidance about what a balanced lunch should look like.
Above all, we need to remember that school food is not just a nutrition policy. It is part of the school day.
Children need enough time to eat. Dining halls need to feel welcoming. Meals need to look and taste good. And pupils should have a say in what works.
We welcome stronger monitoring of the School Food Standards, and greater transparency around menus and school food policies. But monitoring should be there to help schools improve, not simply to catch them out.
These reforms are a real opportunity.
But in the end, success will not be measured by what is written in a regulation. It will be measured by what happens at lunchtime: whether schools can afford to serve good food, whether catering teams have the support they need, and, most importantly, whether children choose to eat what’s on the plate.
____________________
Brad Pearce is Chairman of The School Food People.
LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.
To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk