Guest post: 'Offering every infant child a healthy school meal has just become a reality'

[MumsnetGuestPosts]

With school cooks, head teachers and caterers gathered in Whitehall to celebrate the launch of 'Universal Free School Meals' last night, the deputy prime minister pointed out in his speech of thanks, that we don't need university based studies and hoards of scientists telling us what we intuitively know - that school children work better in the afternoon with a healthy, balanced lunch in their tummies versus a jam sandwich and sugary drink.

But the good thing about the free school meals is that, actually, we do have the research to prove just that, in the form of a pilot study carried out in Durham and Newham between 2009 and 2011.

It showed that children who were given healthy, free school lunches were two months ahead academically compared with their contemporaries, as well as revealing an almost 25% increase in vegetables being eaten, an 18% reduction in crisps and a fall in consumption of sugary drinks.

The lunches also led to children eating together. Socialising around the lunch table. Trying new foods. Experiencing new tastes. Having a go with new textures.

Universal free school meals for primary school children were a key recommendation in the independently produced School Food Plan, published by Henry Dimbleby and John Vincent in July last year.

To the astonishment of most people in the ‘business’ of delivering school dinners - from the civil servants to the school cooks, the local authorities to the head teachers - together they have virtually pulled off this vision for children from reception through to the end of year two.

However, many questions have been raised. Questions like ‘why stop at year 2?’, ‘how do we know standards will be kept up?’, and 'what about the hundreds of schools who haven't been able to get the service up and running?’ In spite of much-hyped horror stories of teachers trekking to the local pub to buy in sandwiches, the vast majority of schools are on board and able to offer free school meals, and for those who are struggling, a further £150m and a dedicated support service has been set up to offer advice and help to make the grade.

And now that the majority have signed up, the task is to maintain standards. How do we stop schools going off-piste? This will partly be down to parent-power, but from January, school cooks will be preparing lunches to comply with food-based regulations such as limiting fried foods and pastry-based foods to twice a week and using low fat milk.

These food-based regulations are much easier for cooks and parents to understand. If, as a parent, you look at the school lunch menu and think ‘hang on, there are more chips and chocolate sponge pudding on the menu than there should be’, then you can go to your school and lobby to get things on track.

People have questioned why parents who can afford to pay for school lunches should benefit - isn't it a waste of money? I don't think so. Beyond the fact that parents who are struggling will no longer be landed with a £400 bill every year, the scheme means that everyone - whether their parents could afford that bill or not - is eating and enjoying food together.

A friend of mine's little girls tried school lunches for the first month in reception last year. A combination of being frightened by the size and system in the dining room - as lots of reception children are - and her best friend having sandwiches in another part of the hall meant she was crying into a jacket potato most days, eating virtually nothing and falling out of school at 3.20pm white as a sheet and with her concentration levels long since blown to smithereens.

Now, her best friend is having the free school lunch, which in turn has given my friend's daughter the confidence to have them too. This is great for her, but also good for the school lunch system - now she's in it, she’s likely to stay in it, and be a crucial ‘customer’ to the end of her school years.

The bottom line is this: we know that a healthy school lunch can improve a child’s academic performance - and we also know that, according to research, only 1% of packed lunches meet the nutritional guidelines that currently apply to school foods. Having everyone eat together can also help embed social skills around the dining table. The goal to offer every infant child a healthy, tasty school meal has just become a reality, and surely this should be celebrated.

Dance - you're missing the point. Every food is actually a carb. Kids need calories/carbs containing nutrition, not empty calories. No child needed nutritionally void white wheat and sugar. They need whole grains, healthy alternatives to grains, lots of protein (a palmful per meal) and lots of veg.

Dance. My children have packed lunches and also eat anything. You name it they will eat it - mussels, curry, radishes, stir fry etc. Their lunch boxes are varied and balanced.

I'd like to see a new research project - three schools in different areas. The aim would be to replace white wheat with whole whole grains. I think most children will initially try and get used to whole grains with a little help (rewards, time, projects about healthy food). For example a pasta bake or lasagne with whole wheat isn't going to taste much different to the white wheat version.

Dance - If you research how school dinners effect academic performance, it only makes a big difference with poorer families.

I know lots of parents who have raised concerns about their school meals but the problem is the governors, head, staff etc have a very poor idea of what's healthy.

As I'm rarely on MumsNet I just saw this article and threads. I have to say it is shocking how many of you that seems to absolutely miss the point regarding the Free School Meals. A few years back my husband was unemployed for a year. At the time our two children were both under the age of four and I was pregnant. We had no savings so our only income was basic state benefits, which at the time was around £10 per day per family in terms of cash-flow.
Had one or both of my children been at school at the time I would happily accepted a free meal. Even if quinoa or organic produce wasn't on offer.

Because the reality is there are families out there can cannot AFFORD to be choosy, that perhaps need to settle with not the ideal, but acceptable.
This scheme offers a FREE meal for young school children. (Which is optional by the way). I am struggling to see the negative in this. All schemes/projects etc have teething problems and I'm sure there's always room for improvement. However a free meal is a free meal and for some families a great help.

Tinyflat - if you were on benefits, you would always have been entitled to free school meals, and quite rightly so. FSM have long been a very important way of ensuring that children from deprived families get a decent meal at lunchtime (though some schools/local authority areas have always done better than others in terms of quality of meals). And of course your children would have been entitled to the meals no matter which school year they were in, not just in the first three years of primary school.

The problem with the new system is that it 1) wastes money on providing free meals to children whose families could afford to pay, and 2) has been rushed into without the funds, infrastructure and resources to do it properly, so schools without proper kitchens or big enough halls or adequate budgets are struggling to suddenly provide a meal to vastly increased numbers of children - and the end result is very far from the ideal of a healthy, nutritious, appetising meal for all 4-7-year-olds.

I would rather provide a healthy packed lunch daily than allow ds to eat school lunches which include sausages, red meat and also puddings everyday and the option of fish once every couple of weeks.

His lunches are far healthier, often with three or four portions of vegetables and a portion or two of fruit. we tend to eat ten a day as a family. he also gets fish regularly.

School do provide wholemeal bread but there is no indication that they provide wholewheat pasta or brown rice.

As the mother of a year 2 who is entitled to free school meals but also a year 10 I would like to suggest a better return on investment would have been to invest in food in secondary schools. My ds (15) has given up on school dinners as they are of such a low quality. I try hard to provide healthy lunchboxes but after 10 years I have run out of tricks to make healthy food appealing. It would be helpful if the school cafeteria could make a bit of an effort. Frankly it's a doddle to get my 6 year old to eat her 5 a day. It's mission impossible with a teenager. The government really should give this age group far more attention