2 weeks Ago
TEACHERS AND HEALTH experts have voiced concern over the kind of food being served to children as part of the hot school meals programme, which the next government intends to expand. As well as the nutritional content, experts have taken issue with the origin of the ingredients and the waste produced by the scheme, which they say was “thrown together” too quickly. As of September, almost 2,200 schools were availing of the programme – the equivalent of around 345,000 primary school children.
Each day, suppliers deliver the pre-portioned meals and they’re served at lunchtime to children. Each child or their parent can look at the menu in advance and opt-out of certain days if they wish. A for the programme has meals like macaroni and cheese, beef stew and cocktail sausages.
The Department of Social Protection said the nutrition standards were developed by a technical working group led by Health and Wellbeing Programme, in consultation with Safefood and the Healthy Eating and Active Living Programme in the HSE. It said they follow the Food Safety Authority of Ireland dietary recommendations. The that processed meat products, fried foods, foods cooked in batter or breadcrumbs or foods containing pastry, “should only be provided once a week maximum, if at all”.
This, it says, includes bacon, ham, sausages, and chicken nuggets. It stipulated that on the day when processed meat is served, schools should aim to provide a healthier alternative. Processed foods are those that go through any level of processing, such as milk being pasteurised.
Ultra-processed food are those that have additives like emulsifiers, colourings or preservatives. Ruth Hegarty, a food policy consultant, is concerned that children regularly eating processed food could result in an addiction to certain additives. She believes there’s no need for any school meals to be highly-processed.
“These are hot meals that are going into schools every day. So there’s no reason why they would need to have an extended shelf life. “This is really about producing food cheaply .
” The budget for the programme is to surpass €300 million once it’s expanded. On the cost, Hegarty says the government must “reimagine” how it uses such a sizeable budget, which currently allows for €3.20 per portion.
“Because of the system that’s been put in place, every meal is going in single-use packaging every single day. So there’s a proportion of that €3.20 that’s going on a disposable container and lid.
“Then the providers are obviously all external to the schools, and some of them are quite far away from the school, so you can imagine the cost that’s involved.” The Department conducts regular inspections of the programme in schools Under the existing audit process, 400 schools are inspected annually. It said that when schools are applying for the programme, they have to send a sample menu, and if it doesn’t meet standards, their application will be denied.
“Adherence to the agreed menu options is also monitored,” a spokesperson for the Department said. The government should look at how the service could be provided in-house in future, Hegarty says, and a focus should be put on Irish producers rather than importing ingredients such as meat from abroad. One of the major issues voiced by teachers is that the same size portion is given to every child, from junior infants to sixth class.
Shaun Conaghan is a clinical nutritionist and teacher in St David’s Boys’ School in Artane, Co Dublin. He says the programme “doesn’t seem like it was thought out”, with some children getting innapropriate portions for their age. “In their school time alone, they’ve already gone way over their calories for the day .
.. They’re on a crash course for high blood pressure, for heart disease, for developing obesity just by what they’re eating in the school.
” Donal O’Shea, the HSE’s Clinical lead for Obesity, said feeding children ultra-processed food is a “slippery slope”. “Once ultra-processed foods are an option, most people will choose them. “If they do it a little at the start, they’ll do it increasingly as time goes on.
” He also said that the State should get more bang for its buck, expanding the programme to be an educational experience. “It’s not doing anything to develop kids’ cooking skills and when they’re investing that kind of money in food, I think you should be developing kids’ basic skills.” There is a “huge amount of waste” in the programme, according to Conaghan, but principals “don’t want to admit that” for fear of the meals being taken away.
On the FAQ page of the school meals scheme section of the Department’s website, it says the school decides the supplier and the supplier “should make all reasonable efforts to minimise the environmental impact”. Hegarty said: ”Some teachers who have contacted me are just so appalled at the amount of food waste that that is being generated by this programme.” The draft Programme for Government says it will improve the programme and ensure that suppliers adhere to “robust guidelines” on the nutritional value of meals, taking into account the dietary requirements of students.
It also states its intention to reduce food waste and make suppliers use recyclable packaging. Conaghan said that the narrative that the programme is “better than nothing” is “really disrespectful”. “Especially for children in disadvantaged areas, this is a huge opportunity to get one really good meal into them each day.
And what are we doing? We’re providing them the very foods that we know drive up obesity risk and disease risk.”.
