I wholeheartedly disagree with the Conservatives’ pledge to abolish universal infant free school meals (UIFSM). If acted upon, this manifesto promise would be a disaster. And there are countless experts, scientists and — crucially — teachers, head teachers and other parents who agree with me.
School meals are a vital weapon in our nation’s fight against diet-related disease, which costs our already struggling NHS around £6 billion every year. With one in three children leaving primary school overweight or obese, it’s not hard to see why.
If free meals for the first three years of primary school are removed, up to 500,000 children in England alone will miss out on a hot lunch. Yes, those living in the greatest poverty will still qualify, but the parents of a huge number of children will struggle to pay for the service.
One of the key points that has been missed in much of this debate is that take-up is essential to the success of school meal providers. UIFSM schemes work because they enable kitchens to run properly, on a large scale, and caterers can invest in decent ingredients. Whatever the numbers, there are always going to be fixed costs associated with running a kitchen. Just as in a restaurant, most costs — utilities, staff, insurance and so on — will stay the same whether you feed ten children or 100. It’s all about economies of scale: the more mouths you’re feeding, the better ingredients you can buy.
Alarmingly, what we’re hearing from the front line is that to retain standards many caterers will either have to put their meal prices up (pricing even more families out of the system), or they won’t be able to continue at all. This not only affects our children but means job losses in the catering industry too. The Lead Association for Catering in Education estimates that almost 17,000 jobs could be lost if this pledge goes through.
Advertisement
A trial, commissioned by the government, showed that when you offer all infants a free school lunch, take-up does increase. It means there is increased consumption of vegetables and less consumption of crisps and soft drinks. This in turn leads to a boost in academic attainment. Research has proved that it is the most disadvantaged kids who make the most significant academic improvement when free lunches are in place. When children eat with their peers they also have the chance to be sociable, and behaviour improves.
I urge Theresa May to review this misguided decision before it’s too late.
Jamie Oliver is a chef and campaigner