Are you watching Jamie Oliver's school dinners?

[MunchedTooManyMarsLady]

Jamie's being given a run for his money. Loving it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I just think he is trying to do two things at once.

Either he is doing a TV programme where he goes along to a school and tries to get them to eat JO's adventurous, well-cooked food, or else he is really serious about a campaign to put healthy food into school canteens. If it is the latter, I still think he should have been better prepared and enlisted the help or ideas of some of the schools which have already turned their meals around.

I think it is too much about the TV programme and not enough about a genuine thought-out campaign. I guess I am resentful that he will get the credit for all of this. And also feel as though I am being patronised. I don't want to be lumped into the category of parent who thinks it is OK for a) my children to eat that crap and b) allow the school to get away with serving that crap.

But then I wonder why hasn't such a campaign come from the parents? Perhaps most, however well educated, don't really care that much about it.

In my school (so long ago!) the food was dirt cheap but we still only got chips once a week. If they were there every day we'd have eaten them every day!

Not talking about anyone here of course

Beatie I agree with you that a genuine and well thought out campaign is required, but I guess it takes a LOT of time and effort to influence such a massive institution as school meals / childrens nutritional education. There are currently many people working in schools to improve the situation but it does not seem to be coordinated enough which would make changes a bit easier. For example Rose Gray of River Cafe (where JO trained) has set up Cooks in Schools campaign, but there has been much less publicity. There is also a campaign called Food for Life (foodforlifeuk.org). If all these campaigns could be campaigned, us parents could be better informed about them and I'm sure they could be more effective, especially at influencing government policy and spending.

also, this is not new ... times article

i think this link has been posted before, but what interests me is the claim that JO cannot get sponsorship even from his own publishers (who have made millions out of him) to distribute the meal-plan packs to schools. So maybe there is a genuine thought-out campaign behind this but we're just not going to see it because no-one will stump up the cash?

I just think it's easy (and maybe fair enough) to pick holes in the programme, but it doesn't look as if anyone else is putting their money where their mouths are so, swearing or not, I still say good on him.

Jamie's School Dinners

Interesting that in the Times article, the budget was £1.20 in that school. As opposed to 37p at Kidbrooke.

Yes it's annoying that you can only get something done if a celebrity puts their name to it, but that's not JO's fault. Lots of parents do care, but there's been no outlet. A bit like homework for 4 year olds - most parents (that I know anyway) are totally anti it, but there's no outlet for their disagreement. What JO is doing is providing an outlet about the school food issue. That can only be good.

I think I agree with Issymum. There is a story to be played out here as well as the ulitmate objuective which is to improve the food the kids are eating at school.

The story is only just at the beginning and it will unfold as the weeks go by. If it had all worked out perfectly on day 1 then there would only have been one episode!

JO is not a hapless planner - you couldn't run a restaurant in that manner. He is playing up for the sake of the story - but also to give some credibility to how hard the job of a school cook is. If he'd walked in and run it like a professional kitchen from day 1 then half the staff would have walked out.

I actually don't think that Nora was doing a good job at all - she was a packet opener and no more. To my mind that doesn;t make a good cook. To the point where I would say that the way she was feeding the kids was a complete dereliction of her duties. She was a very interesting character though and will be the star of the show I'm sure.

I don't think JO should be making the stuff look like and taste like the crap they are currently eating. I think all elements of junk foods should be removed from the menu so that they are forced to eat decent food. In fact in the primary schools that JO has been working with this is what has happened. 2 main courses one veg one not, both 'proper' food, and fruit or youghurt for pud. In any event I suspect making healthy versions of junk food is way way too expensive for the budget.

I think the budgeting aspect of this issue is by far the most interesting one. It would seem almost impossible to provide good nutritious food for 37p a day. The money will have to be found to safeguard the future health of our children - surely!

Ah, I have to stick up for Nora here. She isn't a cook because nobody will pay for her to be a cook. On a budget of 37p a day, with probably no professional training about nutrition issues, her job as she sees it is to serve food kids will eat.

No-one's ever suggested to her that if the little buggers don't eat it and are hungry, that is no worse for them than eating crap. We still have this hangover from a time when food was scarce, that kids have to eat at mealtimes and if they don't, they aren't being looked after properly.

We need to learn that giving them crap to eat in a society where food is plentiful, is a worse lack of care than not feeding them at all. I think that's where Nora is going wrong - the horror of a hallfull of kids who haven't eaten is much greater for her than the horror of kids who've eaten a load of crap. And I don't think it's her fault she has that attitude - it's widely shared (I have to consciously fight against feeling that way myself when my kids won't eat the food I give them) and nobody in her workplace has ever felt it was enough of a priority to train her out of it.

agree with caligula, nora didnt' try to force feed 15's customers with reconstituted fishfingers...and was v open to learning new things.

I agree with issymum and sopabox (both eloquent!) And I still think Jamie's great. LOL @ whoever said he swears too much and the kids at the school won't be able to watch it - I'm guessing you haven't been around secondary school kids much lately ? I even found the bit with the "genitalia" funny - I know, I'm very immature...

Sorry for calling you sopabox, soapbox!

I also agree with lots of what Issymum and Soapbox are saying!

And I fought very hard about whether I found the dog willy bit funny or completely moronic! Still can't make up my mind!

Caligula - I do half agree with you

I would totally agree with you if she was much younger - but she is of an age where she must of been brought up with some understanding of good nutrition or at least examples of what good fresh foods children will eat and used to eat before junk food became the norm.

She's a good bit older than me and when I was a child there wasn't pizza, chicken nuggets and burgers around all the time. A trip to a wimpey bar was a real real treat - partly because it was a relatively expensive option.

School dinners would have been shepherds pie, casseroles, sausages (maybe), fish (real fish) in batter, chips only on a Friday, horrid mash potato (like smash), and watery veg. By no means perfect but not junk, junk and more junk!

Where did she get the idea from then that the food she is serving up is acceptable? She wouldn;t have grown up with it!

Well, after a bad day and couple of glasses of wine, I found it hysterical

Marthamoo - I know exactly what secondary school kids are like and how colourful their language is, but it doesn't mean that someone like JO should be doing the same on TV on a programme promoting healthier school dinners. It's not necessary and if I had a kid at that school I wouldn't be very happy about it. JO didn't swear when he was in the head's office did he, so why does he think it's acceptable to swear in front of the dinner ladies.

And I do have to say it - but the first chnage I would have made in that kitchen is to ditch the ashtrays and cut out the fag breaks!

I can't think of any place of work, not least around food, that lets its staff sit around puffing away like that!

I too found the genetalia thing funny

I found the swearing a little unnecessary but nothing like as gratuitous as Gordon Ramsey!

Though I don't blame Nora. She's probably poorly paid (what's the going rate for a head dinner lady?) and, ostensibly, she was doing what she was asked to do: providing the children with a hot meal, moreover a meal that gets eaten; to a budget; and on time every day. That's her job. In her position I would probably be doing the same thing - she's institutionalised. It's very hard to spontanenously change the way you do everything - particularly if no-one has asked you to and it's been "working."

Have just realised I said I agreed, then went on to point out where I disagree...oh well

What I can't understand though is why after all teh pontificating by govt etc why there are no guidelines that people like Nora are supposed to follow.

Wht are there not set policies like no chips, no burgers, no chicken nuggets, no pizza, no fizzy drinks, no crisps, etc etc etc that mean that the 'institutionalised' have to raise their game?
I think children are being very badly let down

But of course you can have all that crap but don't dare add salt to the veg - ludicrous!!

I do see your point, sandyballs - if he can turn it on and off at will (and I assume he doesn't swear like that in front of his dd's) then he should make more of an effort. I'm terribly inconsistent because I do object to hearing people effing left right and centre when I'm out - but I don't find it offensive when he does it. Don't know why that should be.

Well there used to be guidelines, but Mrs Thatcher swept them away in the early eighties because they were another unnecessary bit of red tape. There was also that complacent feeling that we no longer needed to worry about food - there was plenty of it, all the rules and regs were just a hangover from the war and rationing, and we didn't need all that guidance anymore. So away with the guidelines and in with the chips. It happened almost overnight (I remember the sudden change in school dinners when we suddenly got a canteen at school).

"I don't think JO should be making the stuff look like and taste like the crap they are currently eating"

Just wanted to clarify that I never suggested the food should look or taste like the crap food. Homemade hamburgers do not look or tatse like the paper-thin, grey, yuck that the school was serving.

When I worked at a school the variation of food was better, pasta bakes, fish pies, curries but the qaulity of the ingredients were so suspect.
I don't think you can get quality ingredients of any kind to feed a person on 37 pence per day so I will be intrigued to see what he comes up with and in what areas he makes compromises.

Anyway, to clarify, I don't think it matters whether the children are eating a hamburger or a thai green curry - what counts the most is that it is made with good quality, nutritious ingredients.

I read somewhere that school cooks get an average of something like £85 per week (for a 3 hour day) so it's pretty much minimum wage.

Nora did at one point say that she used to cook, rather than reheat things, and started to say why it changed, but never finished the sentence. And I don't know how old she way (guessing late 50's) but sending kids home hungry DID used to be the biggest crime in the world at one time. Don't any of your mums or grannies try and stuff food down your kids necks whenever they'll accept it? Nora is paid to do a job and she does it. Until you pay her to think about how to do it better, you won't get anywhere. It may be an institutionalised mentality but on a wage that low you do just what you need to and make sure you take your breaks (re the bit when she couldn't take her fag break in Fifteen! Priceless! Glad she got it later.)

I think the most illuminating part of the programme was Nora's face after her day at Fifteen - she was so enthusiastic and inspired!

But your run of the mill chef is extremely poorly paid and works hideously long hours.

The difference is that the expectation of what they will produce is different. As adults eating in a restaurant we would walk out if our expectations weren't met - our kids can;t just up and walk out on school though. Somehow the expectations have to be raised so that our kids are getting consistently good healthy food.

The reason why I'm a bit anti the food that looks like junk but isn't is that it won't change the kids taste for junk food. They will still leave thinking that a McDonalds burger is the epitomy of good tasty food. Therefore that is what they will eat out of school and in the longer term is what they will choose to feed their children on. Not that the food is unhealthy per se.

If we extend the range of foods that they enjoy eating, maybe, just maybe, they will choose to cook that kind of food for themselves out side school!