Skip to main content

Parents back calls for all UK academies and free schools to meet same healthy food standards as state schools



As children across the UK settle back into school, a new online survey from the BMA reveals that the majority of parents (77 per cent) back calls to ensure food served at academies and free schools meets the same healthy standard as other state schools.

Despite strict food regulations for local authority schools in England, more than 3,500 academies and 200 free schools do not have to meet the same standards, raising concerns that children in these schools are more likely to be served poorer quality food.

In the survey of 2,000 parents of children aged four to 16 across the UK, eight out of 10 (79 per cent) also support calls for a free, daily piece of fruit or vegetable to be provided to UK school children up to the age of 114.

This comes amid accusations of a government U-turn over plans to tackle obesity, and as the government cuts another £200 million from the public health budget which will undermine efforts to protect and improve the nation’s health and wellbeing.

The survey follows the recent publication of the BMA’s ‘Food for Thought’5 report , which also included recommendations to prohibit the marketing of unhealthy food and drink in schools, and called for local authorities to work with schools to promote healthier diets.

Commenting on the findings, Professor Sheila Hollins, BMA board of science chair, said:

“Doctors are increasingly concerned about the impact of poor diet; a significant cause of ill health, leading to around 70,000 deaths annually and costing the NHS £6 billion every year.

“It’s incredibly concerning that a third of UK children leave primary school overweight or obese. Eating a balanced, healthy school meal helps pupils to learn, improves their academic performance, and uses the closed school environment to promote healthy behaviours in young people.

“Worryingly, other research suggests that pupils in academy schools may be consuming significantly higher levels of fat, calories and saturated fatty acids, compared to those at other state schools, highlighting the importance of a whole-school approach to promoting healthy diets, with food standards an important aspect of this.

"We also know that the majority of people in the UK, particularly low income households, are not consuming enough fruit and vegetables, so providing them free to primary school children across the UK is an important way to support healthier diets.”



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

His way or none? Why I can't vote for Jeremy

There is an assumption that all would be well with the Labour Party if people hadn't expressed their genuine concern with what they consider the inadequacies of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership. If only, it is said, the Parliamentary Labour Party and his Shadow Cabinet had supported him, instead of undermining him, all would have been fine. If they had been quiet and towed the line, then the party would not have been in the mess it is in. So, should they have stayed silent, or speak of their concerns? There comes a point when the cost of staying silent outweighs the cost of speaking out. This is a judgment. Many call it a coup by the PLP. They paint a picture of a right-wing PLP out of touch with the membership.  This is the narrative of the Corbyn camp. But Jeremy Corbyn, over the decades he has been in politics, showed the way.  It was Jeremy Corbyn who opposed almost all Labour leaders and rarely held back from speaking out, or voting time and again against the party line. As

Mr Duncan-Smith offers a disingenuous and divisive comparison

Some time ago, actually it was a long time ago when I was in my early teens, someone close to me bought a table. It was an early flat pack variety. It came with a top and four legs. He followed the instructions to the letter screwing the legs into the top. But when he had completed it the table wobbled. One leg he explained was shorter than the other three; so he sawed a bit from each of the other legs. The table wobbled. One leg, he explained, was longer than the other three. So, he sawed a bit off. The table wobbled. He went on cutting the legs, but the table continued to wobble. Cut, cut, cut! By this time he had convinced himself there was no alternative to it.  He ended up with a very low table indeed, supported by four very stumpy legs and a bit of cardboard placed under one of them to stop it wobbling on the uneven floor.  Mr Duncan-Smith argues that we need a 1% cap on benefits to be 'fair to average earners'. Average  earners have seen their incomes rise by less tha